THE STATUS OF THE HISTORIOGRAPHER IN THE FIRST
STAGE OF THE COMMUNIST REGIME FROM ROMANIA
(1948-1965). CASE STUDY: IOACHIM CRĂCIUN
The instauration of the communist regime in Ro-
mania meant a moment of crisis for the whole Ro-
manian culture, and things were the same bad for
historiography, both from the point of view of the
historical discourse, which adopts new tones, de-
veloped by a party which wished its identity to be
justified politically, but also from the perspective
of the specialists who underwent denigration pro-
cesses by induced psychic terror and even physi-
cal1. The new political realities from after 1948
had a negative impact on the Romanian histori-
ans, great part of them being caught in the ma-
laxator generated by the events, which moulded
many destinies2 fatidically. During the beginning
period of the communist regime, the status of the
historian was a precarious one, the fact that one
was trained up and developed professionally in
the interwar period which was denied vehemently
by the new authorities, became a good reason for
incrimination within the new context.
To discover the defining lines of this status, I in-
sisted in my study upon the historian Ioachim
Crăciun, the promoter of the Romanian Biblio-
logical School3. Trained-up and well-known be-
1
Among the main specialized papers dedicated to the relation
between the communist regime and the Romanian histori-
ography in the totalitarian period we remember: Georgescu
1991; Kellog 1998; Ţugui 1999; Zub 2000; Mihalache 2003;
Müller 2003.
2
Year 1948 is considered by the majority of the historians the
year in which the communist regime was instituted officially,
in Romania, after, on 30 December 1947, the same time with
the dethronement of King Mihai, the popular republic was
proclaimed. The first communist constitution was adopted
on 13 April 1948, industrial, banking, insurance, mining and
transport factories being nationalized, the education was
restructured radically, a new law of cults was adopted (the
Greek-Catholic Church was abolished), but especially was es-
tablished the General Direction for the Security of the People,
the Securitate as political militia.
3
Ioachim Crăciun (1898-1971) native from a small village from
Transylvania, Dârlos, Sibiu County, is part from the first gen-
erations of Romanians who chose, after 1918, to attend uni-
versity in Bucharest. Being remarked ever since the last year
of high school in Blaj, by the outstanding Romanian historian
Nicolae Iorga, he enrolls prompted by the historian, to the
historical section of the Faculty of Letters from Bucharest,
in 1920. After graduation he returns in Transylvania, in Cluj
Tyragetia, s.n., vol. III [XVIII], nr. 2, 2009, 265-272.
Liviu Zgârciu
fore 1948, Ioachim Crăciun was part from the
category of the historians for whom the new re-
alities from communist Romania forced, at least
for the moment, the end of their professional ca-
reer. After the act from 23 August 1944, consid-
ered the critical moment by the new authorities,
Ioachim Crăciun shall continue his professional
activity both with the History Institute, but espe-
cially within the university from Cluj, where the
taught the course of General Historiography for
a short period. Even more, in 1947, he was ap-
pointed dean at the University from Cluj4. While
performing this function, he did his best to obtain
the necessary support for the financing of the sci-
entific publications, although sometimes he had
to face the opposition of the Senate of the Univer-
sity from Cluj5. All these problems, normal in a
Romanian historical school fully developed, were
all of a sudden “annulled” in the moment when
the ideological and political control of the com-
munists was instituted.
Starting with 1947, year in which were formulated
for the first time by Mihail Roller6 in the pamphlet
Probleme de istorie (Historical issues) the new
where he is hired both to the National History Institute, and
also to the newly established King Ferdinand I University.
Mostly preoccupied with bibliology, as auxiliary science of his-
toriography, he succeeds in a short time to create a famous
bibliological school in Cluj. In 1932 was founded within this
university centre the first university conference of bibliology,
which was transformed in a department in 1943, Ioachim
Crăciun being appointed a university professor. Next to the
bibliological preoccupations Ioachim Crăciun remarked also
in the Romanian historiography through his writings in which
he debated political history, manifesting a special attraction
towards the personality of the Wallachian Voivod, Mihai
Viteazul. Unfortunately there doesn’t exist at this moment a
monograph dedicated exclusively to the historian from Cluj,
but only a few articles and studies: Iancu 1983, 202-204;
Edroiu 1994.
4
Cluj County Branch of National Archives of Romania (DJ-
CAN), Cluj University Fund, dossier 412/1947-1948, f. 5.
5
Ibidem, f. 102.
6
Mihail Roller (1908-1958) Romanian historigrapher of Jew-
ish origin became the same time with the institution of the
communist regime in Romania the official ideologist, initiat-
ing the process of indoctrination and communist propaganda,
by the Soviet-Romanian textbook of History of Romania, pub-
lished in 1947.
265
 II. Materiale şi cercetări
directions of the historical discourse, illustrated
immediately by publishing the textbook of Histo-
ry of Romania, may be noticed a phenomenon of
adaptation to the new circumstances as far as his-
toriography is concerned (Roller 1947). The mass
of the historians begins to divide, some adhering
immediately to the regime’s requirements, oth-
ers remaining in expectation, and a small part are
even opposing. Attempting to adapt to the new
political realities, Ioachim Crăciun enrolls ever
since June 1945 in the Social Democratic Party,
and after the fusion of the socialists with the com-
munists he becomes a member of the Romanian
Workers’ Party7. The new regime, interested in
incorporating also a number of intellectuals, ini-
tiated different actions of verification in the sci-
entific environments, to identify persons liable to
such trust. Because of that, the authorities made
both a professional evaluation but especially po-
litical of all the professors from the King Ferdi-
nand University from Cluj, in 1947. Among these
was also Ioachim Crăciun, who being enrolled in
the right wing of the Social Democratic Party, was
not in the area of political interest of the commu-
nists (Müller 2003, 290).
1948 marked decisively the evolution of the his-
torical science in Romania, by the dissapearance
of all core institutions. Thus, while in June the
Romanian Academy is abrogated, being estab-
lished the Academy of the People’s Republic of
Romania, in July, the Institutes of National His-
tory from Bucharest and Cluj suffered the same
fate, instead of them being set up the History In-
stitute of the Popular Republic of Romania, with
a branch also in Cluj (Mândruţ 1998, 565-580).
As well, all specialized magazines are replaced
with the magazine of the new institute Studii
(Studies). The following seven years in the Ro-
manian historiography are marked by the pro-
motion of Mihai Roller as a member of the Pre-
sidium of the Academy of the People’s Republic
of Romania and chief editor of the main history
magazine, Studii (Studies). It is the moment
when to the interwar historiography began to
7
In an informative note from 1954 was stated that his enroll-
ing in the Social Democratic Party was facilitated by the his-
torian Ioan Moga and Minister of Education, Ştefan Voitec,
creating this way „a favourable situation”; as a consequnce
he was subsequently elected in the political bureau of the So-
cial Democratic Party from Cluj. The National Council for the
Study of the Securitate Archives (abbreviation A.C.N.S.A.S.
will be used in the continuation of the study), Informative
fund, dossier 3883, f. 16-17.
266
be attributed a series of errors, which had to be
remedied, because the party was trying to pro-
pose to the Romanians a new biography, which
these, obedient had to appropriate without hesi-
tations. It was reached a position in which old
historiography was denounced, following which
auxiliary sciences of history, such as bibliogra-
phy are in an evident decline. Under these cir-
cumstances the realizations of Ioachim Crăciun
in the field of bibliography were annulled. The
bad influences of these attitudes and measures
are realistically rendered today: “the great is-
sues of historiography from the communist pe-
riod – affirms Andi Mihalache – result from the
absence of some auxiliary sciences proper to the
domain, from the lack of interest to order infor-
mation and access to it, to elaborate some propi-
tious methods of reading the sources, not rarely
subjected to deliberate falsifications” (Mihalache
2003, 12).
In general, period between 1948-1955 is one in
which the party identified with the repressive au-
thorities. Consolidation of the new regime was
realized especially through its own coercive in-
stitutions, among which the Securitate had the
main part. In the field of historiography, the ap-
pearance of the Securitate marks a new stage, in
which the process of identification and purgation
of the historians trained-up and affirmed in the
“bourgeois-landowner” regime was intensified.
Having at disposal such an evil instrument, the
authorities proceed to a so called rehabilitation of
the Romanian historical science. Thus, historians
are pursued, terrorised, and the undesirable ones
couldn’t not teach or activate in the core institu-
tions, and were even imprisoned. Still, by com-
parison with what has happened in the Union
of Soviet Socialist Republics, extreme measures
were limited, not happening massive arrests in
this perimeter in Romania of the 50s. Imprison-
ment of great historians had a pedagogical, ad-
vertising character.
In the view of the new leaders, real historical writ-
ing should have been made according to Marx-
ism, and the only model and inspiration source
was offered by the Soviet science. Historians had
to accept Marxism-Leninism as the only capable
of assuring the scientific knowledge of the past.
Because of that, to raise the ideological level,
there are organized ever since 1949 courses of
Marxism-Leninism for all scientific collaborators
 L. Zgârciu, The status of the historiographer in the first stage of the communist regime from Romania (1948-1965)

of all institutes belonging to the Academy of the be explained also by the fact that one of the best
People’s Republic of Romania. methods of uninvolvment towards the official
discourse was the gathering as thorough as pos-
To maintain himself, Ioachim Crăciun tries “to
sible, over more years, of some sources, their
correspond” to the new requirements, by attend-
long ordering, but which was not followed by any
ing both the “meetings of the Marxist-Leninist
editorial concrete form. Ioachim Crăciun and the
Circle”8 where he “attempts to assimilate the
other researchers from Cluj who activated in the
Marxist-Leninist ideology”9, activating in AR-
History Institute are accused of these practices
LUS10 (Romanian Association for Strengthen-
in 1953, in a unsigned article, that appeared in
ing the Relations with Soviet Union) and even
the semi-official newspaper of the regime Scân-
translating to himself from Russian the specialty
teia (the Spark) and resumed in Studii (Studies)
bibliography necessary to the historiography
(About the activity of the Institute 1953, 31-36).
course that he taught. All these actions won’t
Also here was criticized the activity of the Insti-
save him, his political background and the fact
tute which: „appears rather poor compared to the
that he was married with the niece of Alexan-
conditions created for reaserchers from the field
dru Vaida Voievod were key points in his dos-
of history. This is mirrored also in the fact that
sier11. Following the verifications, accused that
in the Studii şi cercetări ştiinţifice (Studies and
in 1948 he would have opposed in his quality as
scientific researches) magazine (the organ of the
member of the Social Democratic Party to the
branch from Cluj of the Academy of the People’s
fusion between socialists and communists, he is
Republic of Romania), during the period between
removed from the Romanian Workers’ Party in
1951 and 1952 did not appear any history study”,
December 194912. This was the main reason why
but especially the attitude of the institution’s di-
in 1954 he was in evidence of the Securitate’s or-
rector, Constantin Daivoviciu. He was put on his
gans as “Social-Democratic suspect of right wing
guard subtilely that the Party didn’t forget his
orientation”13. The consequences were natural
past: „From 1945 onwards professor Daicoviciu
for those times, between 1951 and 1952 he was
hasn’t published anymore any synthesis work
removed both from the University and the Insti-
from which to may observe to what extent the
tute, where in 1949 he was head of a staff of 12
author revised his previous positions in the field
persons, charged with the study of Hungarian
of scientific research”. In the view of the article’s
bibliography of the XIXth century14.
signer or signers, the support that Daicoviciu had
Though, he maintains himself in the field, being given to his fellow colleagues, among who also to
employed by agreement, with the help of Con- Ioachim Crăciun, purged at that date by the com-
stantin Daicoviciu15, at the History Institute from munists from the university education, was con-
Cluj, where he continues his preoccupations with sidered as being the main cause of the disastrous
issues of bibliography, but for a short period of situation in which was found the Institute from
time he won’t publish anything16. This thing may Cluj: “The great privations and deficiencies in the
8
A.C.N.S.A.S., Informative fund, dossier 3883, f. 5.
scientific activity of the Institute are closely re-
9
Ibidem, f. 6. lated to its internal life, by the leading methods
10
Romanian Association for Strengthening the Relations that were utilized, the approached cadres’ policy.
with Soviet Union (ARLUS) was founded on 20 October 1944
by a group of Romanian intellectuals and gradually became an In this respect must be stated that, in the absence
instrument of Romania’s Sovietization. of a good cadres’ policy, there entered the Insti-
11
Alexandru Vaida Voievod (1872-1950) important Romanian tute and maintained a series of cosmopolite bour-
political figure involved directly in the events that led to the
act from Alba Iulia, from 1st December 1918. After the instau- geois-nationalist elements who promoted obsti-
ration of the communist regime in Romania he was arrested nately antiscientific conceptions, idealistic and
and imposed house arrest in Sibiu, where he also died. lacking the wish to make something positive on
12
A.C.N.S.A.S., Informative fund, dossier 3883, f. 5.
13
Ibidem f. 2. the field of scientific activity” (About the activity
14
Ibidem f. 6. of the Institute 1953, 37).
15
Constantin Daicoviciu (1898-1973) was a leading Romanian
historian and archaeologist, professor, rector of Babeş-Bolyai Attacks of this type were also registered in the
University from Cluj Napoca. immediate period, among the most virulent con-
16
Involved in the Romanian political life from the years of the
dictatorial regime of Carol II, Daicoviciu saved his career by testers of the collective from Cluj, being Ladis-
adhering to the new realities from after 23 August 1944. See lau Banyai, one of the official historiographers of
this issue debated to: Mărgineanu 1991.

267
 II. Materiale şi cercetări
the regime (Zub 2000, 73). The explanation for
this attitude may be deduced from the content of
the informative note from 1954, in which agent
“Lucreţiu” related to the Securitate’s organs
that historian Ştefan Pascu17 would have hold a
discussion with Ioachim Crăciun, in which he
stated that “Banyai is nervous lately, because it
restarted in Oradea the process of the teachers
from Bolyai, who wanted the autonomy of whole
Transylvania”18.
After 1955, things seem to return to a relative
normality, the same time with the beginning of
Rolle’s decline, victim of the process triggered by
Dej, a process of renewal and ethnicization of the
cadres leading the Romanian Workers’ Party. The
first signs of the decline were perceived ever since
the autumn of 1955, when that who was the men-
tor and ideological censor of the new historiog-
raphy was not included in the official delegation
that followed to represent Romania at the Xth
World Congress of Historians, which took place
on 4-11 September in Rome. With this occasion
there came back as present interest the old pre-
occupations of selecting, classifying, description
and annotation the historical writings made in
Romania, of course only for the period after the
institution of the communist regime. Thus, Petre
Constantinescu-Iaşi19 will hold in Rome a disser-
tation entitled L’apport des historiens roumains
a l’historiographie universelle depuis le 23 aôut
1944, which was in fact an inventory of the his-
toriographic activity after 1945 (Constantinescu-
Iaşi 1955). According to the practices of time, this
report had been adopted by Constantinescu-Iaşi
in the virtue of the functions that he held, al-
though it had been drawn-up by other historians
(Zub 2000, 133). Also, the first scientific session
of bibliology took place in Bucharest, during 15-
16 December 1955, to which Ioan Crăciun at that
time in disgrace, wasn’t invited (The first session
1956).
For the university centre from Cluj year 1956 was
of great importance, because important changes
took place in the leadership of the institution,
which were generated, it seems, by the events
17
Ştefan Pascu (1914-1998) Romanian historian, Permanent
Member of the Romanian Academy.
18
A.C.N.S.A.S., Informative fund, dossier 3883, f. 15.
19
Petre Constantinescu-Iaşi (1892-1977) historian and Roma-
nian communist militant, Permanent Member of the Roma-
nian Academy, at the beginning of the 30s he was a university
professor in Chişinău.
268
from Hungary. The appointment of Constantin
Daicoviciu as rector of the Victor Babeş Univer-
sity, made possible the rehabilitation of some im-
portant historians from Transylvania, hired again
both at the university or institute with the direct
support of the new director. Among these was also
Ioachim Crăciun, who made his comeback in that
year in the publishing world with a study whose
theme makes you think of what happened over
the western border of Romania (Crăciun 1956,
199-212), was supported by Daicoviciu, to return
to the university from Cluj. Thus, the new rector
interced with Miron Constantinescu, the Minister
of Education, for the acknowledgement of a del-
egation on the basis of which Crăciun might have
held courses of history’s auxiliary sciences (Mül-
ler 2003, 303).
From this moment on Ioachim Crăciun, like other
rehabilitated fellow colleagues resume the edito-
rial activity, but are closely supervised in continu-
ation by the Securitate’s organs. For example, Io-
achim Crăciun involved in the realization of the
annual bibliography of Romanian historiography
from after 1944, making with this occasion a team
composed from former students from the Bibliol-
ogy course (Ştefan Pascu, I. Domşa) or graduates
from the Faculty of History from Cluj (Gh. Hrist-
odol, Marcel Ştirban, Gh. Iancu).
Also in those years are finalised by the collabo-
ration to the treatise of Romania’s History (IInd
and IIIrd volumes), the preoccupations and re-
searches of the professor from Cluj concerning
the Romanian medieval manuscripts, printings
and libraries, the historian synthesizing now his-
torical information that he studied for four de-
cades.
At the same time the Securitate’s organs that
supervised him strictly, paid great attention to
the relations that Ioachim Crăciun had with the
historians from Cluj20. Informers, not only par-
ticipated in the discussions of Ioachim Crăciun
and his colleagues, but a part of them worked in
the Institute, perceptible fact from the tasks as-
signed by the Securitate officers to the inform-
ers: “…as being with him all the time where he
works in the same institute, to find out which his
connections are (…) other manifestations of his
20
A.C.N.S.A.S., Informative fund, dossier 3883, f.10, 12, 14,
21, 23.
 L. Zgârciu, The status of the historiographer in the first stage of the communist regime from Romania (1948-1965)
and from whom receives eventually other news
or rumors”21.
Year 1955 marked as we have stated above a freer
period from the history of the Romanian commu-
nism, but this affirmation is valid if we report to
the massive releases of the political prisoners, or
to the communist leaders’ initiation of external
politics of distancing from Moscow. But to a great
extent things didn’t change, it was the same to-
talitarian regime, which looked to adapt its strat-
egy in accordance with the new realities. This
time also the Securitate remained the main in-
strument, but from this moment on violence and
brutality began to give up in front of more refined
measures, all having the same purpose, total con-
trol over population. In all this period the Secu-
ritate organs have intense measures of recruiting
a number as possible as big of informants. There
were had in mind those released from the com-
munist prisons and camps, but also those who
didn’t “enjoy” till then such privileges. Any per-
son that might have been blackmailed in any way
became a potential informant of the Securitate,
and unfortunately many Romanian historians
were in this situation22.
It is also the case of Ioachim Crăciun, who is re-
cruited in 1956, the Securitate forcing him to
accept by menancing that he will lose his job
again23. For the historian from Cluj years 1951-
1956 were the most difficult from his life, a pe-
riod that he would recall terrified later, because
then: “I starved, earning less than the minimum
of a modest existence”24. It is easily to assume that
confronted with such an alternative, one had to
possess a superhuman resistance to refuse. Ac-
cepting the status of the Securitate informant is
not to be blamed, in such conditions, more im-
21
Ibidem, f. 27.
22
The fact that the communist regime was one that focused
especially on beaurocracy, any decision or action had to be ap-
proved previously by a impressive series of decision factors,
made that today the reconstitution of the period had in view
in this study, to be somehow favoured by the existence of a
precious archivistic fund. Just because of that, documents cre-
ated by the Securitate are a documentary source of first im-
portance for any historian that pays attention to those times.
Although the Securitate archive was accessible to specialists
only after Law no 187/1999 regarding the access to the own
file and the deconspiration of the Securitate as a secret po-
lice was enacted. In Romania, the institution that received a
part from the Securitate archive is the National Council for the
Study of the Securitate Archives (C.N.S.A.S.), which functions
from 2000.
23
A.C.N.S.A.S., Informative fund, dossier R 178437, f. 2-8.
24
Ibidem, f. 83.
portant is the way by which one understands to
perform his „duty” towards the regime from that
time. Happily, Ioachim Crăciun was intelligent
enough to give informative notes, that only con-
tainted generalities25.
The recruit of Ioachim Crăciun was part from a
ampler operation of the Securitate which was
ran in the spring of 1956, and through which was
searched to join informatively as many of the
leaders of the Social Democratic Party released
from the communist prisons, following the gen-
eral amnesty from 1955. The fact that the histo-
rian was in close relationships with these was the
main reason why the Securitate organs turned
their attention to him. The characterization of his
activity as informer made by the Securitate, but
also the proper informative notes issued by him,
lead until this moment, to the conclusion that
Ioachim Crăciun issued information of general
character, thus avoiding to harm persons that he
was obliged to denounce. Even the Securitate was
often dissatisfied with the content of these notes,
their author being accused that “often is look-
ing to show that the elements from the actions
in which he is engaged are old and are not inter-
ested anymore in the political life, that the bour-
geoisie being coward by its nature won’t commit
itself to actions against revolution. He is stubborn
and presents an attitude of reservation in relation
with us”26.
Interesting is the fact that at the same time he
himself was supervised by other informants,
who fulfiled their “duty” with a lot of passion,
making such evil denunciations, that were ques-
tionable even for the authorities. For example, in
1955 the Securitate liutenant responsible for his
supervision manifests an attitude of suspicion
towards the account of one of the informants,
who accused the bibliologist from Cluj, that in a
discussion with the historian Pompiliu Teodor,
referring to the release from prison of Silviu
Dragomir and Ioan Lupaş, would have said the
following; „only now are realising them after
they had spent more than 5 years inprisoned?
Does Groza think that he will escape from what
expects him?/ here he made a gesture of a man
being hanged”27.
25
Ibidem, f. 9-10, 18-23.
26
Ibidem, f. 18.
27
A.C.N.S.A.S., Informative fund, dossier 3883, f. 24.
269
 II. Materiale şi cercetări
Ioachim Crăciun had also problems concerning
his activity carried out until 1947 next to Bibli-
ography of Historical Sciences, collaboration re-
garded now with suspicion, if we consider that
the anti-westernism theme was an important
motif of Zhdanovist28 discourse, standard for
the ideologists of the communist regime29. In
this way he was suspected also for an assumed
affiliation to the Romanian-American Associa-
tion established by more intellectuals in Sibiu, in
194530. Although in the same period was found in
Sibiu, Ioachim Crăciun didn’t have any connec-
tion with the association, reason why he wasn’t
indicted in the law suit against the members of
the organization, accused of espionage in favour
of the Americans. Also, the list of the persons
that participated in the setting-up gathering
does not include his name31. In his turn, Nicolae
Mărgineanu, one of the founders of the associa-
tion, doesn’t refer to the person of the former
professor from Cluj in his autobiographic paper
(Mărgineanu 1991).
From 1963, not being “registered with mani-
festations”, his evidence patern was changed,
from active to passive, becoming from that mo-
ment of minor interest32, for the Securitate. His
denunciations continue, but this time they are
determined by professional rivalries and even
personal grudge. Accusations of insuficient ideo-
logical preparation are replaced now with those
of bad proffesional training in the field of bibli-
ography.
The same time with the death of Gheorghe Gheo-
rghiu-Dej in 1965, there was registered an atti-
tude of official disinterest for the historical sci-
ence and its organization way, fact that allowed
historiography to develop and diversify as never
met until then (Georgescu 1991, 58-66). Connec-
tions with Occident are resumed, by participa-
tion in congresses and preliminaries, by helding
28
Andrei Zhdanov (1896-1948), Soviet politician, considered
the theoretician of the Soviet cultural politics after in 1934 he
fixed the norms of “socialist realism”. In 1947 he represented
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics at the conference of
the communist parties from Szklarska Poreba (Poland), where
was finalized the new Stalinist political orientation, known as
the Zhdanov Doctrine, which had at its basis the principle ac-
cording which world was divided into two antagonistic camps,
communist and capitalist.
29
A.C.N.S.A.S., Informative fund, dossier 3883, f.6
30
Ibidem, f. 11, 28, 29.
31
A.C.N.S.A.S., Informative fund, dossier 513, f. 57.
32
A.C.N.S.A.S., Informative fund, dossier 3883, f. 43.
270
conferences and courses abroad. Of this relative
tolerance tried to take advantage also Ioachim
Crăciun both for resuming old collaborations
with different specialized international institu-
tions, suddenly interupted after 1945, but also
to reintegrate himself within the historical edi-
torial circuit. Unfortunately time wasn’t patient
with him, Ioachim Crăciun died in 1971, leaving
behind an impressive scientific activity placed in
the service of history’s auxiliary sciences, such
bibliography.
Unfortunately, the natural evolution of his bib-
liographic preoccupations initiated in the in-
terwar period suffered a heavy blow after 1945,
when history was completly subjected to politics.
Even if the new realities perturbed and even in-
terupted for a moment his preoccupations, he
tried to adapt, and in the conditions in which
he was obliged to sign a contract with the Secu-
ritate, he made an attempt to perserve human
dignity. Supervised by the Securitate which was
interested in his connections with the historians
from Cluj, Ioachim Crăciun searched for a way
to detach from these problems. That is why he
had a distant relation with some of his colleagues
and collaborators, thus avoiding to get involved
in dialogues on political themes. The Securitate
organs saw in this attitude, “a certain technique
of isolation for not being involved in political de-
bates”33.
Truly, Ioachim Crăciun was, after the instituting
of the communist regime, in a difficult situation of
the historians obliged to appeal to different strat-
egies to may survive. Writing the obituary of the
famous bibliologist, historian Pompiliu Teodor
noted: “Ioachim Crăciun, professor and bibliog-
rapher died on 2 June 1971. Leading personality
of the superior Romanian school, historian of cul-
ture, is known in the country and abroad because
of his prodigious scientific creation. (...) Ioachim
Crăciun, the professor respected and loved by
generations of students, was one from the many
and chosen, who maybe renounced their own
projects to make known those of the others” (Te-
odor 1971, 433).
33
Ibidem, f. 17.
 L. Zgârciu, The status of the historiographer in the first stage of the communist regime from Romania (1948-1965)

Bibliography

Crăciun 1956: I. Crăciun, Răzvrătirea saşilor din Braşov în 1688. Studii şi Materiale de Istorie Medie I, 1956, 199-
212.
Crăciun 1965: I. Crăciun, Câteva amintiri şi precizări despre începuturile Bibliologiei la Cluj. Studia Bibliologica II,
1966, 31-147.
Constantinescu-Iaşi 1955: P. Constantinescu-Iaşi, Realizările istoriografiei române între anii 1945-1955 (Bucureşti
1955).
Despre activitatea Institutului 1953: Despre activitatea Institutului de Istorie din Cluj al Academiei R.P.R. Studii.
Revistă de istorie şi filozofie VI, 2, 1953, 31-39.
Edroiu 1994: N. Edroiu, Ioachim Crăciun (1898-1971) şi Bibliologia românească. Bibliotheca Bibliologica I, Cluj-
Napoca, 1994.
Georgescu 1991: Vl. Georgescu, Politică şi istorie. Cazul comuniştilor români (1944-1977) (Bucureşti 1991).
Iancu 1983: Gh. Iancu, Cum l-am cunoscut pe Ioachim Crăciun. Biblioteca şi Învăţământul VII, 1983, 202-204.
Kellog 1998: Fr. Kellog, O istorie a istoriografiei româneşti (Iaşi 1998).
Mărgineanu 1991: N. Mărgineanu, Amfiteatre şi închisori. Mărturii asupra unui veac zbuciumat (Cluj-Napoca
1991).
Mihalache 2003: A. Mihalache, Istorie şi practici discursive în România „democrat-populară” (Bucureşti 2003).
Müller 2003: Fl. Müller, Politică şi istoriografie în România. 1948-1964 (Bucureşti 2003).
Prima sesiune 1956: Prima sesiune ştiinţifică de bibliologie şi documentare – Bucureşti 15-16 decembrie 1953 –
Comunicări şi discuţii (Bucureşti 1956).
Roller 1947: M. Roller, Probleme de istorie (Bucureşti 1947).
Teodor 1971: P. Teodor, Ioachim Crăciun 1899-1971. Revista Bibliotecilor 7, 1971, 433.
Ţugui 1999: P. Ţugui, Istoria şi limba română în vremea lui Gheorghiu-Dej (Bucureşti 1999).
Zub 2000: Al. Zub, Orizont închis. Istoriografia română sub dictatură (Iaşi 2000).

Statutul istoricului în prima etapă a regimului comunist din România (1948/1965).

Studiu de caz: Ioachim Crăciun

Rezumat
Pentru istoriografia românească instaurarea regimului comunist a însemnat un adevărat dezastru. A avut de suferit
discursul istoric, fiind din acel moment aservit partidului comunist, care căuta toate modalităţile să se legitimeze
istoric, dar cel mai mult a avut de suferit specialistul. Faptul că s-a format şi desăvârşit profesional în perioada
interbelică, renegată cu vehemenţă de noile autorităţi, devenea în noul context un motiv puternic de acuzare. După
1948, considerat anul în care regimul comunist s-a instaurat oficial în România, istoricii români au fost supuşi unui
proces denigrator de teroare psihică şi chiar fizică, parte din ei fiind închişi, măsuri care au dus la declinul istorio-
grafiei româneşti. Vidul care s-a format a fost umplut cu istorici agreaţi de regim, recrutaţi din diferite medii, dar
mai ales din rândul activiştilor de partid. Din fericire, din anul 1955 situaţia a început să se amelioreze, datorită
unor personalităţi precum Constantin Daicoviciu, care au reuşit treptat să convingă autorităţile comuniste să ac-
cepte reabilitarea şi reintegrarea generaţiei istoricilor interbelici.
Pentru a surprinde statutul istoricului în perioada anilor 1948-1965, considerată de specialişti primă etapă a comu-
nismului românesc, am ales ca subiect al studiului nostru pe istoricul clujean Ioachim Crăciun. Format şi afirmat
ca istoric înainte de 1948, Ioachim Crăciun s-a confruntat, asemenea istoricilor din generaţia lui, cu problemele şi
nenorocirile care au marcat statutul istoricului în România acelor timpuri.

Le statut de l’historien dans la première étape du régime communiste

de Roumanie (1948-1965). Etude de cas: Ioachim Crăciun

Résumé
Pour l’historiographie roumaine, l’instauration du régime communiste a signifié un véritable désastre. Le discours
historique en a souffert, en étant à ce moment-là asservi au partide communiste, qui cherchait tous les moyens
pour se légitimer du point de vue historique, mais le plus en a souffert le spécialiste. Le fait qu’il s’est formé et il
s’est perfectionné dans la période d’entre les deux guerres mondiales, une période réniée véhémentement par les
nouvelles autorités, cela a devenu, dans le nouveau contexte, une forte raison d’accusation. Après 1948, l’année
dans laquelle le régime communiste a été instauré officiellement en Roumanie, les istoriens roumains ont été
soumis à un processus dénigrateur de terreur psychique et surtout physique, une partie d’eux en étant enfermés –

271
 II. Materiale şi cercetări

des mésures qui ont mené au déclin de l’historiographie roumaine. Le vide qui s’est formé a été rempli par des
istoriens agrées par le régime, récrutés des differents environements, mais surtout du rang des activistes du parti.
Heureusement, dès l’année 1955, la situation a commencé à s’améliorer, grâce à quelques personalités comme
Constantin Daicoviciu, des personnes qui ont réussi graduellement de convaincre les autorités communistes à ac-
cepter la réabilitation et la réintégration de la génération des historiens d’entre les deux guerres mondiales.
Pour surprendre le statut de l’historien dans la période des années 1948-1965, considérée par les spécialistes la pre-
mière étape du communisme roumain, j’ai choisi comme sujet de mon étude l’historien de Cluj Ioachim Crăciun.
Formé et affirmé comme historien avant 1948, Ioachim Crăciun s’est confronté, de la même manière que les his-
toriens de sa période, avec les problèmes et les malheurs qui avaient marqué le statut de l’historien de Roumanie
pendant ce temps-là.

15.12.2008

Liviu Zgârciu, Muzeul Naţional al Unirii Alba Iulia, str. Mihai Viteazul 12-14, 510010-Alba Iulia, Romania, e-mail:
muzeulalba_relatiipublice@yahoo.com

272