lupta intre miraslau si aiud (romani si horty trup

There is an inherent "issue of credibility" when it comes to Romanian reports about "Tigers". This is like the story of the "boy who cried wolf" - they said it so many times that no one believes it anymore, even when Tigers were definitely involved. Maybe soldiers thought that they had a better chance to get a "Medalia de Onoare" (what a great film!) if they come up with a dramatic story?

As for the earlier dispute about "horthyst", "hitlerist", "nazist" etc... These tend to be post-war labels. After the war, some nations found themselves allied with erstwhile enemies. For example, Romanian historians in Communist Romania could not refer to "fighting enemy Hungarians" because "Hungarians" were allies and friends in Communist Romania. So in order to differentiate between "their" Hungarians and "our" Hungarians, Communist Romanian historians came up with the term "horthyst" to indicate some sort of illusory enemy that has nothing to do with "tara vecina si prietena".
The same happened with the Germans. How could Communist Romanian historians speak about fighting the "Germans" after 23 August when the DDR was a friend and ally? So, they conveniently came up with the perplexing term "hitlerist" to describe "their" Germans that were definitely different from "our" Germans.
The Americans had to come up with a similar way of differentiating "their" Germans (Nazis) from the "our" Germans who were allies, hosted American bases and even helped put man on the moon. Hence the "Nazi" term for "bad Germans".
The most bizarre and mind-boggling case of such manipulation is the way Communist Romanian historians dealt with the Russians. "Their" Russians whom Romania fought in WW2 were the same as "our" Russians who were in charge. So, how can you make a difference? Simple! No mention at all! As a result, the Romanian campaign in Russia was simply erased from history books. Clean slate! Tabula rasa! We never learned about it in schools. There were no books about in libraries. The "King Michael Cross" could not be shown in print. People never spoke about "that war" - you could get into trouble for uttering the unspeakable. Officially, it "never happened". Officially, the "war" began for Romania on 23 August 1944 when the Russians "liberated" Romania from "hitlerists" - that is what we learned in school.

It is the classic "huo ai lor, bravo ai nostri"!

Radu

Great post!

The only problem is that these labels are still kept being frequently used by Rumanian historiography after 1989 (occasionally even in this very forum)! One can still easily find reference to "Horthysts" and "Hitlerites" in books printed in the last 22 years. Funny enough, I've seen recently published books which refer to the Germans as "our German comrades" when speaking about the pre-August 1944 period, but about "Hitlerites" when dealing with the post-August 1944 period!

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on December 14, 2012 01:57 pm

OoT: really, Denes?! The same author? WHO?
Back to the Tigers issue: I suppose that somewhere in the German records should have appeared a mention about these tanks. Is there any German source?

I had some new informations regarding the tanks in Aiud on 26 august 1944 but from some reason I can,t post it. If somebody can help me I will post. I have it on mail. My email adress is tascip@yahoo.com.

Seems that nowone is interested in help me post . Any way in a book I found the information that in Aiud area from 26-31 august some 150 german soliders were captured , 2 german tank were setablaze and one was captured. The tanks belonged to the german 23 tank regiment( or it was the german 23 panzer division ) .From what I now 23 panzer division had Panthers tanks.

Help you post what? Photos? If you want to post photos, see here: http://postimg.org/ Its very simple, browse and select files in your computer and upload it! You'll get codes which you will copy/paste in here! Done! Of course, you also can specify the name of the book you quoted from ...

I will try to post . I have a problem with my computer this is way a ask for help.

Indeed Taz1, the 23. Panzer Division was present in the battles fought in the vicinity (Turda area) but from what I read only from mid september 1944, not earlier... but I'm interested to find out more!

I agree, Denes. But the labelling issue is older and more intricate than the "ad posteriorem" ideological tagging, much to my surprise. Thus, in the book Rebeliunea legionară în documente străine (germane, franceze, maghiare) [The Iron Guard Rebellion in Foreign Documents (German, French, Hungarian)] which included official archive documents, Henry Spitzmuller, the Vichy France ambassador to Romania and a career diplomat used the word hitlerite ("hitlerien") in his official dispatches, sent to the Vichy vice-president of the ministry council and secretary of the foreign affaires department - none other than the (infamous) Pierre Laval - before and during the events from January 1941.

I see only two possible explanations to that: either that the French diplomat was anti-German and this was also evident in his official positions (which was rather implausible), or that there was another, more realistical and neutral use of the term. After all, in a TOTALITARIAN regime, everything but the opposition and the most deep and unconnected to politics strata of the society was fatally more or less "hitlerite".

This post has been edited by Agarici on May 03, 2013 10:09 pm

OoT: really, Denes?! The same author? WHO?
Back to the Tigers issue: I suppose that somewhere in the German records should have appeared a mention about these tanks. Is there any German source?

Again, Denes: WHICH AUTHOR AND BOOK are you talking about?

I will not make his name public, because I don't want to get personal (I know him personally). Suffice to say that he is a well known aviation historian and author.
The point I made (call it 'historical schizophrenia') is still valid, though.

Gen. Dénes

Agarici, the fact that someone else also used this term, way-way before our days, does not diminish of the fact I was referring to, namely this peculiar terminology used currently by many (most?) Rumanian historians.

Gen. Dénes

Well, I entirelly agree with you about the mentioned contradiction: "German comrades" and "hilterites". I only wanted to point out that the entire question of labelling the components of a society run by a totalitarian regime is a rather intricate one.