1848/49 in Transilvania, about those revolutionary years

Major Gal Laszlo was ordered in late October 1848 to start a punishment expedition against the romanian villages from western part of Arad, Zarand and Timiş counties. He had embeded the comisars of Pest hungarian government who were in charge with "tribunale de sânge", even if those were clearly illegal at that time. Gal was a professional military, but I doubt that many of his men were profesional soldiers. Most of them were hungarian national guards, transformed in so called army, the Honvedseg. The main difference between this hungarian troopers and romanian combatants from Arad and Zarand was that even if the hungarians were not profesionals, they received a partial training in the months before October 1848 and they had firepower superiority. In Arad county and in part of Zarand county, the romanian combatants were nothing but peasant hastilly raised under arms when hungarians aproached. This is in my opinion the main cause of the defeating of Chendi and Buteanu. When hungarians met organised resistance and partially trained romanian combatants they were quite often defeated and some hungarian comanders said that romanians fought better than austrian soldiers. At Guravăii Gak destroyed and routed the romanians oposing as they were untrained and poorly leaded. At Hălmagiu it is said that Chendi was captured by being cheated by a local hungarian lady whom he trusted. Another fact could be that he also had untrained men and was outnumbered. The same situation of outnumbering was at Poienari fight near Hălmagiu. At Târnava, it seems that romanians were getting well drunk a night before the battle and unable to fight next day. Even they outnumbered the hungarians, they were also poorly leaded and were indisciplined. At Brad, I dont know why Gal managed to win.

Csutak didnt had much fighting with organised romanians, he faced mostly guerilla type atacks from romanians. Csutak troops were almost completely raised from the ranks of civilians with almost no profesional soldiers. A good number of them were convicts from Oradea, as he says in his own memories. He had hard times keeping discipline in his troops ranks, as his men were more inclined to robery instead of fighting (he was concerned of keeping a fighting troops for his own survival, not for the wellfare of romanians he had to "pacify"). He had some fight with austrians in Lipova area if I rem well. He mainly ocupied his time killing the captured romanians who didnt managed to pay the ransome he asked or to sell for his own profit the cattles captured in the area. He was removed from duty for this deeds by hungarian authorities. At least a part of his memories are to be readed with caution. I have the memories of Csutak, in hungarian language, if you can read hungarian I can sent them by mail.

It will be great, thank you! You have my personal e-mail adress posted in ANDREAS forum adress. I forgot to mention the source of my posted informations: Atanasie Sandor -study over the events from 1848-49 in the Arad and Zarand counties.

I do not argue in terms of military training of many of major Gal men, but I insist on saying that there were regular formations as f.i. the small light cavalry force, which accompanied Gal troops, who came from regular imperial cavalry units (Chevauxleger Regiment Nr. 7 and Hussar Regiment Nr. 4). And I also mentioned the 1st Székely border guards battalion/14th Székely Regiment, that was, as the Romanian border guard units, a trained unit of the imperial army. I never expressed in any way, their effectiveness in fighting in front of trained units, but I tried to explain myself why in most of the battles waged in Halmagiu-Brad area, the Hungarian troops have won! This compared to the known failures of hungarian forces in fightings, in other parts of the Apuseni Mountains! This was what I wanted to explain (to myself and to others that might be curious), I think you understand now!
Because if we think better, in an open area, in the plaines, it's natural to expect, that a regular force (the Bem army f.i.) could win any fight with the romanian legions, in the mountains areas of Apuseni, the poorly trained and armed moti have won almost all battles that they took part!

I didnt contested that Gal and others have some profesional troops, I tried just to contest the general mith that romanians were fighting always against a hungarian profesional army. By comparison, of course that hungarians have a much greater number of profesionals than romanians and in open space they could defeat a romanian force, but this was not the only reason: hungarians had the firepower superiority and a significant number of canons and rocket bateries. When romanians were well organised, armed and led, they could face hungarians with success. It is the case of Alba Iulia fortress, manned almost entirelly by romanians in austrian army. From 2.500 men garisoned in Alba Iulia, almost all were romanians, including some oficers. Urban's troops were also almost entirelly romanian and Urban was regarded by hungarians as one of the best of their enemies not only because of his military skills, but also for his men. Please sent me the study you named if you can.

The study that I mentioned contains 57 pages, it being part of a much larger document written by the same author, Atanasie Sandor called "Nescari urme din intamplarile anilor 1848 si 1849" that can't be found at the County Library. I've read this study at the library reading room, so I can only copy it at xerox and send it to you trough the post, because I can't send it trough mail (since I don't have a scanner to my computer!) If you want it I can make a xerocopy and send it to you trough post!

Ok, Andreas, please copy it and I'll sent a friend from Arad to take it and sent it to me.

LE








This post has been edited by 21 inf on January 22, 2012 05:37 am

Ok, 21 inf, it's very good so!
I will send you a message as soon as I have the copy!
What do you think, is it appropriate to mention further the abuses and crimes committed against romanian civilians (mostly peasants) between July 1848 - August 1849 in Zarand and Arad counties, described in many details (including the names of the victims and the situations that created abuses or crimes) in the document that I mentioned? Or we violate certain sensitivities (some of our fellow forumists!), so we focus only on matters that didn't bother anyone?

Andreas, you shouldn't play the hypocrite. If there were trustfully documented war crimes, list them, mentioning the sources. But don't list only one side's, list them all! Bias is one of the most reprehensive approaches when dealing with history, and we have seen this attitude here, in this forum, occasionally.

The question still hangs on: what do you want to achieve by listing such gruesome details? What is your goal?

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on January 22, 2012 10:02 pm

Denes, according to this source - http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrite
hypocrite is:
1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.
which of the two fit me?
Instead, if I say about you that you are at least rude, I can demonstrate it! What do you say, should I do it or not?
Highlighting the truth, though painful, is always necessary, because lies and misinformation do not come to dominate! Generally speaking, not customize at all!
According to Atanasie Sandor -Studiu asupra evenimentelor de peste munti din anii 1848-49 cu nararea celor intamplate in partile Aradului- there were two series of abuses against the Romanian population and, to a lesser extent, Serbian population in Arad County : the recruitments for the Hungarian Army in june-july-august 1848 as a first, and the repression against the Romanians who sympathized (few have actually been organized and supported by the imperial army in Arad County) with the imperial army, in september -october-november 1848, as a second.
I point out, that in the book appears, as a figure more benevolent towards minorities, to whose wishes he payed attention, Nicolae Wesselenyi, it is mentioned the existence of a bill for nationalities promoted by Wesselenyi, but whose initiative was rejected by the dieta!
About the bed treatments, tortures and crimes on Romanian population in the County of Arad, in the period June-July 1848, the author mentions, with names and description of the context in which it took place, a total of 32 Romanians (peasants, craftsmen, priests and teachers) people imprisoned in the Oradea Dungeon, where 4 died. The charge that they brought, was refusing to incorporate in the Hungarian army!
Another sad moment was the passage of Szekler troops in the Romanian villages on the Mures valley, with numerous robberies, ill-treatments, and with 2 romanians killed in Sambateni village and other 2 serbians tortured in Arad city.
In august-september 1848 has developed a recruiting expedition in the romanian villages from Siria -Nadab -Sintea Mica -Cermei -Zarand led by Hungarians guardists from Arad accompanied and supported by a subunit of the Schwarzenberg Uhlan Regiment Nr. 2, also partially responsible for crimes. The result of the expedition - 8 romanians killed, 10 tortured and other 12 arrested and imprisoned (4 of them later released). The actions were accompanied by lootings and confiscation of goods and money!
I may continue, it's just the beginning!

Atrocities occured on both sides and most of them are quite well documented. I would suggest if one has interess to discuss them, to open a separate topic. Personally I would prefere to discuss here about everything linked to 1848-49 in Transylvania, but NO about atrocities. There were so many killings outside battles on both sides that the talking would last indefinetelly. The irony is both sides recorded better the atrocities that the military events and I'm interested in military aspects. Let's keep it on military, please!

Agree 21 inf,
To be honest, the mention of atrocities committed on civilian population in the county of Arad, was not a result of my "anti-Hungarian pulse", but the surprize to discover that (me, that until few weeks known almost nothing about the events) many military actions had started as "punishment campaigns" against the "enemy" civilian population! I do not excuse myself at all, just explained my reaction to what I read! Moreover, as noted previously, the Imperial troops participated initially, as I mentioned (Schwarzenberg Uhlan Regiment Nr. 2), in the punitive actions against romanian peasants of the Hungarian national guards. Later, the same unit fought, until the end of the war, against Hungarian troops!
In the book is also highlighted the major Laszlo Gal led campaign on the Crisul Alb Valley, started as a punishment campaign against romanians, after the retreat towards Timisoara of the Schwarzenberg Uhlan Regiment Nr. 2 from Siria, the main military threat to them! His group of forces included one honved battalion (well armed with rifles, it's written), some militia companies from Arad, Bekes and Szalonta (armed especially with forks and lances) and a small cavalry detachment from the imperial army (who sided with the Hungarians, it's written) and support of two cannons. Gal deputy commander was Stefan Dunyov, a bulgarian from Vinga village. The first clash took place in Siria proper, but the cannon fire of the Hungarians disorganized the small group of Romanian who wanted to rezist! 8 romanians were killed after the battle, because they had weapons and opposed the Hungarian troops, other 9 were imprisoned. The local priest was also cut but survived. Many other punishments followed the next days! The expedition had a distinct note of robbery (or seizure), they take money and goods from local population as they whished! As a interesting detail (I do not know if it's real or not) in the battle of Tarnava described in the book, it's written that the hungarian forces had some losses too, but tried to hide them by undressing their dead from the uniformes, to say that only romanians were killed.
A similar expediton took place on the Mures valley led by major Máriássy János (or, at least some of his forces) including the Debrecen-based National Guard Battalion (well armed with rifles, it's written) led by major Zurics Ferenc and some militia troops from Zarand area (armed only with forks and lances). They go along the Mures valley from Lipova to Zam, with actions similar to those undertaken by the troops of Major Gal in the Crisul Alb valley. They were no fighting reported!

I would like to commend you, 21inf, for trying to maintain the original purpose of this interesting thread, and not letting it derail yet again into a one-sided accusation of crimes, killings, torture, etc., etc., purpotedly committed by Hungarians against Rumanians (of course, without mentioning the other side's similar crimes).

There is a separate thread for such things, so anyone eager to highlight war crimes is invited to post there, without highjacking every possible thread dealing with Rumanian-Hungarian military activity.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on January 23, 2012 06:57 pm

Trying to find a military reasoning (which I do not know if there was or not!) in the punitive expeditions in the valley of White Cris and Mures valley, it's possible that the Hungarian Command was trying to ensure the security of his back (knowing already the start of a military organization of Transylvanian Romanians) and prevention of a Romanian military organization in the Zarand and Mures valley regions! It's a speculation of course, that could not be taken anyway as a justification for the atrocities committed.
A fact which remained unknown or unheeded is the role of militias that accompanied the hungarian military units themselves. The weak-armed militias (similar armed as our popular forces from the legions or ceturies) had a more important role than it seems at first sight! They provide the scouts, sappers and communications elements, security for the main forces, as well as responsible for logistics, supply, repairs and other needs for the honved forces. Perhaps in the campaigns of Transylvania and later in the Apuseni Mountains this role has not appeared so obvious, but certainly it existed!
21 inf, have you noticed, studying documents that have passed through the hands, something like this, or you have a different opinion?

Actually if I think better, in the fall of 1848 the imperial forces had started its military actions in Transylvania, and I think this fact was known in Partium, so in Arad county as well. But I found no source to confirm my assumption!

Today I purchased a 500-page, large format reference book on the 1848-1849 Hungarian revolution (my first one on the topic), which gives a day-by-day account of the events.
Time permitting, I will try to look up some of the details mentioned in this thread.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on January 24, 2012 09:14 pm

Denes, I am interested on the book you mentioned. Can you tell it's title and author, please?

Andreas: at least Gal and Csutak received orders to "pacify" the romanian "rebels" and were acompanied by political comisars. I suspect (and this is a personal opinion of mine) that at least these 2 expeditions were not based on military reasons but on political ones. At the time of the expeditions and on their areas of action the romanians were insuficient organised or completelly unorganised to represent even the smallest military threat. What I supose to be more military reasoned are Hatvani and Kemeny's atacks. They were not only aiming to destroy the better organised/trained Auraria Gemina Legion, but trying to ensure a safe back for hungarian army and the posible rockade (rocada) between hungarian line of comunications from Oradea-Cluj and Arad-Deva. However, the last hypothesis might be not a real option in 1849 due to the almost total lack of roads in Apuseni Mountains in that period, which made a rockade imposible for artilery and quite dificult for infantry and cavalry.

About hungarian national guards, some of them were better armed than romanians, some not. Gorgey shows in his memories that at least some hungarian national guards in southern Hungary were armed mostly with white weapons and that they refused to march if they dont received canons. Gorgey says that these national guards, receiving canons, returned almost all the time without them, loosing them to the enemy quite fast.

This post has been edited by 21 inf on January 25, 2012 06:07 am