"Budapest" erased from triumphal arch

A revolting case

http://www.stiri.com.ro/stire-37553/cum-au...aghiarilor.html

It's not very clear, though, when did that happen (2008 Videanu or 2008 Oprescu)? And why is "spotted" now?

MMM, if you think that it's such a big difference between them (Videanu or Oprescu) you are naive! They are just some Romanian politicians as we see in the past two decades...
But it is outrageous to where they went with their flunkey manner...

I fully agree that historical monuments (like the Arch of Triumph) should not be altered due to (changing) political reasons.

But let me ask, what sort of "great victory" (Dintre toate numele de localităţi unde soldaţii români au obţinut victorii răsunătoare...) did the Rumanian army achieve in Budapest in 1919? There was no battle in/around Budapest, the Rumanians marched in unopposed, as the Hungarian government, let alone the army, had fallen apart days earlier.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on October 03, 2012 07:07 pm

Bucharest felt in 1916 in the same manner, unoposed to Central Powers, but this was not a reason for them not to present the fall of Bucharest as a great victory. Paris was taken the same manner by germans in 1940 and it's capture considered a great victory. Taking the main city of the adversary it is considered a performance, preceded or not by a battle, more or less serious.

Same happened in 1944 in Paris, Rome, Bucharest! No fighting in the city, yet huge propagandistic victory! I wonder what would be the reaction in any other country at such events...

This is OT, but there was a Battle for Bucharest, which was lost by the Rumanians, that's why they vacated the capital.

Also, despite Hungarian troops also entering the Rumanian capital in December 1916, I have not read that this was one of the 'glorious victories' they won...

Gen. Dénes

In 1916 Hungarian troops was not the main faction that led to the fall of Bucharest, it was the Germans.

Not the same in case of Romanian troops in 1919.

Denes, if you occupy an enemy state capital but he did not stop fighting nor stand to negotiations, there is no reason to celebrate anything! I have in mind French invasion of Russia in 1812, even if the parallels stop there!

True, that's why I wrote "also".

Anyway, my intervention was only to show that the occupation of Budapest in 1919 by the Rumanian troops was not a military battle won, a 'bright victory', but a political move, as the Hungarian army had already been beaten at the Tisza River. After that, the Hungarian soldiers (not an army any more, per se) were in complete disarray, without the capability to show any resistance.

Better, more accurate was if it was called the 'victory at River Tisza', but not Budapest, unless there was a political message.

Gen. Dénes[I]

This post has been edited by Dénes on October 04, 2012 03:33 pm

*** deleted by admin ***

This post has been edited by dragos on October 04, 2012 05:32 pm

I recall that the Arch was "defaced" first by the communists in the fifties. Does anyone know what changes did they make?

Are there any photos of the word "Budapest" on the arch? All photos I found only show the plastered inscription.

Radu

This post has been edited by Radub on October 04, 2012 05:50 pm

This is outrageous. Who allowed them to alter that monument? Based on what reasons? This should get more coverage and public pressure should build up on the authorities to undo the act of vandalism.

Of course, they covered or dismantled the bas-reliefs of king Ferdinand and queen Marie. I don't know about other changes.

Later edit: from Adevarul: "The commemorative plaque had a tumultuous life. It was plastered in the early years of Romanian communist regime and restored in 1953, after Stalin's death. During communist times, Arc de Triomphe was mutilated by the authorities, because of the antimonarchic regime. The proclamation texts of king Ferdinand were removed from the sides of the building, and the portraits of King Ferdinand and Queen Mary, made ​​by sculptor Alexander Calinescu, were destroyed from the south facade and replaced with some flowers. After 1989, there were mounted two bronze medallions depicting kings' faces, replacing the original ones."

(Plăcuța comemorativă a avut un destin tumultuos, cu atât mai mult cu cât același basorelief „Budapesta‟ a fost zidit în primii ani de comunism românesc și reabilitat în 1953, anul morții lui Stalin. În timpul comunismului, Arcul de Triumf a fost mutilat de autoritățile vremii, din cauza regimului antimonarhic. Textele proclamanților Regelui Ferdinand au fost scoase de pe părțile laterale ale construcției, iar portretele Regelui Ferdinand și al Reginei Maria, realizate de sculptorul Alexandru Călinescu, au fost distruse de pe fațada sudică, fiind înlocuite cu niște flori. După 1989, au fost montate două medalioane de bronz ce înfățișează chipurile regilor, înlocuindu-le pe cele originale.)

Later later edit: Here's another point of view (long story short, the plaque was covered in 1953 and never restored; it is unknown if the original letters are still under the mortar)

Here are some old post cards:

1973



uncirculated:


This post has been edited by bansaraba on October 04, 2012 07:12 pm

So "Budapest" inscription was covered in 1953 and not in 2008 as the newspaper article in the first post claims?