1848/49 in Transilvania, about those revolutionary years

Dragoş had a very personal benefit to go to convince motzes to give up arms: he was promised the position of head of Bihor county (comitat). Before him, it seems (but not very clear in documents) that a high ranking hungarian politician had peace talkings with motzes as Hălmagiu, but with no results. Eventually, Kossuth (Dragoş was a close friend of Kossuth) asked 3 romanian politicians from Hungary to accept to go to motzes. The first 2 men declined Kossuth's offer on the argument that it was too dnagerous and life risking. Dragoş was more ambitious and he accepted despite risks.

If he wrote that to Kossuth in 3rd of May, it is tricky, because he already offered amnesty to romanians in 25 april and even more! On 3rd May he should know what Kossuth offered, as imediatelly after 25 April he went to Debreţin to speak with Kossuth about what he spoke with romanian Landsturm leaders. Also, he should know at least partially Hatvani and his intentions, as in both his trips (24 April and early May), Dragoş went to Abrud from Brad, where Hatvani troops were deployed. It seems imposible that Dragoş didnt noticed atack preparations on 3rd May (Hatvani atacked on 6 May!). But, after all, I sustain my above cited sentence: Dragoş was not a spy. He might be a gambler, an idiot, a dreamer, whatever, but not a spy.

(Just as paranthesis, Dragoş was one of the authors of the political declaration of romanians from Bihor - another author was Emanoil Gojdu - which is in high favor for hungarian revolution and against the romanian Proclamation from Blaj. He was in total antagonism with the ideals of romanians from Transylvania and believed in hungarian revolution)

And just for you, Andrei, a new info (as we had long discussions yet not only here, and I hope will have others in the future): the 55th honved batalion was almost entirely made up by romanians (I presume from Bihor) most of them raised by force by hungarians.

Thanks for the informations, 21inf! They are really interesting!
I confirm that the 55th Honved Battalion was recruited from Bihor county, with the composition of 7 companies in early december 1848 (around 1.300 men) of which only half armed with firearms
- 2 companies (350 men) of this Battalion were send to strengthen Baron Baldacci brigade in 16 november 1848, who had the mission of defending the city of Cluj, threatened by the advancing Austrian troops (alongside the Romanian landsturm) from the brigade col. Urban.
- 4 companies (700 men) of this Battalion were part of the Czecz brigade within Bem's army in early december 1848. They were almost entirely armed with firearms!

This post has been edited by ANDREAS on April 30, 2012 06:35 pm

Its also interesting that, if it is the case, the Romanians from the 55th Battalion fought with other Romanians from the Imperial Army units and also from Romanian Landsturm in december 1848 -march 1849. As you have discovered well, the line infantry regiments no. 31 Leiningen and 51 Carl Ferdinand and the better known border guards regiments no. 16 and 17 were almost entirely composed by Romanians (except some officers and NCOs), units representing the core of the Austrian Army from Transylvania commanded by Gen. Puchner.

This post has been edited by ANDREAS on May 01, 2012 09:42 am

In 1848/49 in Transylvania were on the austrian side the following line regiments: Leiningen, Bianchi, Carl Ferdinand, Thursky (partial) and Uracca grenadier batalion. In 1847 they recruted 5.000 romanians and in 1848 another 3.500 romanians. Giving the war regulations, each regiment had to had 4.356 men under arms. That's make 3 full strenght regiments x 4.356 men each = 13.068 men. With the new romanian recruits from 1847 and 1848, these regiments had 65% romanians. Perhaps the percent is even greater, as the already existing men were also romanians, as the regiments recruited only from Transylvania. Also, Thursky and Uracca had probably the same percent of romanians.

The grenzer regiments 13 (Caransebeş), 16 (Orlat) and 17 (Năsăud) had almost 100% men as romanians. Each grenz regiment has wartime strenght at 3.162 me. There were also present companies from Bukowina border batalions, also raised from romanian ranks. So, there were almost 15.000 men in line regiments (I dont know the Thursky and Uracca strenght, so I suposed for them 2.000 men), more than 9.000 men in 3 grenz regiments and an unknown for me number of bukowina cordonists. That's make more than 24.000 men in imperial army, most of them romanians. Add to that about 60.000 men in romanian Landsturm (at it's high, but the numbers decreased abruptly after december 1848). So, almost 80.000 romanians were the strenght of "austrian" army in Transylvania.

The 55th honved batalion also fought at Sibiu against imperial army (I dont want to call it austrian army, as it had so many romanians enlisted - practically Habsburg officers did their job with romanians and not with austrians!). I am just curious how many romanian "honveds" arived on the field, as they were recruted by force (most of them) and desertion was at high percent in this kind of batalions.

21inf, without the intention to argue, I mentioned only the Regiments no. 31 Leiningen and 51 Carl Ferdinand from the line infantry (except those two border guards that were clearly romanian, being national regiments) because I have read in a letter addressed by the Bishop Andrei Saguna to the new Emperor Franz Joseph I, that in autumn 1848 almost 9.000 Romanians served as soldiers in those two line infantry regiments. He shows through this, the contribution of the Romanian nation to the Austrian Empire from the military point of view. The letter was send on 6 february 1849 to Olmütz (now Olomouc, Czech Republic) where the Imperial Court and the Emperor stayed. I assume that the data mentioned in the letter had been collected from reliable sources, for not risking to discredit themselfs in face to the Emperor.

Indeed the 55th Honved Battalion (in the same incomplete structure of 4 companies compared to the regular 6 companies) took part in battles near Sibiu and later Simeria in January-February 1849, where, from the writings of Czecz, it has fought well!

An interesting element I found in the book "Der Winter Feldzug des Revolutionskriege in Siebenburgen" -Johann Nobili (Count, Imperial and Royal Lieutenant General, Chief of Staff of Windisch-Gratz Army) where are mentioned 3 companies from the 62. Turski Line Infantry Regiment and 2 companies from the 51. Carl Ferdinand Line Infantry Regiment who passed "with bag and baggage" to the Hungarians, in early october 1848, before the start of military confrontation with the Austrians and Romanians in Transylvania. Even if the author does not speak about the ethnic structure of this troops, it shall be assumed that they were Hungarian (both regiments mentioned had the area of ​​recruitment in central and eastern Transylvania). The author shows that the two companies of 51. Carl Ferdinand Line Infantry Regiment were included in the 11th Honved Battalion from Cluj, which was seen by the Austrians as the as the best organized, trained and equipped unit in the hungarian army from Transylvania in mid october 1848. The other three companies from the 62. Turski Line Infantry Regiment left the Zalau area where they stood, and moved to Oradea. Their fate is unknown, but it is likely that they become later part of the troops made available to Bem in december 1848.
In terms of ethnic composition of the Imperial Army in Transylvania, I have however some reservations about the hypothesis of a Romanian majority, because of this:
in early october 1848 were deployed in Transylvania the following units of the Imperial Army - 3 battalions from the 51. Carl Ferdinand Line Infantry Regiment; 3 battalions from the 41. Sivkovic Line Infantry Regiment; 3 battalions from the 63. Bianchi Line Infantry Regiment; 1 battalion from the 31. Leiningen Line Infantry Regiment; 1 battalion from the 62. Turski Line Infantry Regiment; the Uracca Grenadier Battalion (I mentioned only the line infantry units, without the grenzers and the cavalry!). Is quite doubtful that the 41. Sivkovic or 63. Bianchi Line Infantry Regiments who had areas of recruitment in Galitia (south east Poland and Ukraine today) could have had romanian recruits, but probably after recruitments in october from Romanians from Transylvania, they could have also Romanian subunits.

The pistols of prefect Ioan Buteanu (left) and prefect Simion Balint (right)


Weapons used by romanians in 1848-1849 revolution in Transylvania. The 2 swords on the bottom side of the photo belong to Avram Iancu.



The drills (man powered) used to made wooden canons by romanians in 1848-1848 revolution in Transylvania. They produced 3 meters long canons and 12-15 cm caliber.





The house in Câmpeni, Alba county, were prefect Mihai Andreica lived.


Tombstone of tribun Mihai Andreica, later prefect of Zlatna Legion after the death of prefect Petru Dobra, Câmpeni, Alba county


The house in Abrud, Alba county, where prefect Petru Dobra, comander of Zlatna Legion, was killed


Hungarian church burned in 1849 during fights in Abrud with major Hatvani


The house in Abrud where Nicolae Bălcescu met prefect Avram Iancu, comander of Auraria Gemina Legion, in 1849


Tombstone of prefect Simion Balint, comander of Auraria et Salinae Legion, at Roşia Montană, Alba county

Very nice pictures, appreciated your effort 21inf! More than so, as many locations would probably be unknown to many of us without a guide! Do you know if there are brochures indicating this locations that could help someone interested?

Of course I know! There are NO brochures indicating this places and NO indicators for most of them. Only some comemorative inscriptions for a part of the buildings (for example for the hungarian church there is no inscription, even if in this church was taken place the last discussions between Ioan Dragoş and Avram Iancu and other romanian leaders, only minutes before major Hatvani entered Abrud. The church burned on 10th of May 1849, after the city was taken by motzes. Most probably the romanians put the fire, as revenge, as they got drunk after 3 days of fight).

If one goes in Câmpeni, Abrud or Roşia Montană, if he doesnt researched deep before he goes there, most of the places cant be found, as they are not all on the main square or main streets.

A "funny" modern inscription on the romanian orthodox church on Roşia Montană says that near the church is the tomb of Simion Balint!!! Actually, he is buried in the yard of romanian greek-catholic church, some hundred of meters away from the orthodox church. One man, believing the modern inscription put by authorities, could search for days and find nothing, as the inscription is totaly wrong.

As for the tombstones, also no indicators or brochures or info (the only touristic info bureau I find it in Roşia Montană and it was ... closed!). The only indicators are in Roşia Montană, but unfortunatelly the purpose they are there is not quite orthodox: it doesnt had the purpose to inform the tourist, but to show how much Roşia Montană Gold Corporation is "investing" in the tourism in the area (5 years ago, when they were almost sure they will start mining, there were no indicators!)

I see on the tomb his name written as Simeon (something) Balinth. Why the difference in spelling?

Gen. Dénes

I see on the tomb his name written as Simeon (something) Balinth. Why the difference in spelling?

Gen. Dénes

Yes, on the tombstone it is written Simeon cav. de Balinth (Simeon cavaler de Balinth). It was very usual in the era (and even after that, at the begining of XXth century) in romanian language to spell the names in diferent ways, acording to the writer. The writing was also in a tranzition state, as romanians used both chyrilic and latin alphabet, sometimes both in the same text.

So, Simeon Balinth is the same as today Simion Balint. On the tombstone of Mihai Andreica you can also see diferent spelling, as it is written Mihai Andreika.

In his writings, Axente Sever named diferently in the same book the name of Sibiu city: he named it Sabiniu, but also Sibiu.

The name of Florian Micaş was spelled Micaş, Micheş, Mikeş, Mikes and rarelly Micheşiu. Alexandru Bătrâneanu was spelled Bătrâneanu, Betrâneanu or Baternay and the list might continue.

A rare photo of a "motz" fighter from Romanian Landsturm from 1848-1849. His name was Petre Gheorghe.



With red line I pointed the tuft that gave the name of this romanian mountain population, "moţ". With arrow I pointed the hairpin which kept the tuft on the right side of the head, as it was customary to them. This kind of hair dressing was still usual to motzes in 1920's-1930's.

This post has been edited by 21 inf on August 16, 2012 07:57 pm

Very interesting, 21inf! I had in my head the image of Horea (Vasile Ursu Nicola) who "motz" looks different (somehow similar yet different) but images can mislead! And I admit I'm not a connoisseur!

War scyhte used by both romanian and hungarian combatants, but also by austrian troops during sieges. (in the army was denominated as "siege scythe"). I have to say it looks quote impressive.