Austria-Hungary Romania

[ccj]

Why would Romanians serve in the Austria-Hungarian army in WW1? The Romanians were the enemy of the Central Powers.

Another question; Why would Romania allow officer's who served in the A-H Army to join the Romanian Army after the war?

[Guest Rick Research]

The borders were changed by the Treaty of Versailles.

The senior ranking officer I can think of was the later- Waffen SS Obergruppenf?hrer Artur Phleps (1881-1944)--

Austro-Hungarian army 1900-1918 (Lieutenant Colonel in the General Staff)

Rumanian Army 1919-1940 (Lieutenant General and retired primarily due to age-- 59 then)

Waffen SS 1941-44 (Brigadier General to full "General of Mountain Troops" equivalent)!

MANY people who never moved from their home towns changed "nationalities" 3 or 4 times between 1918 and 1945 as borders ebbed and flowed based on who was winning or losing at the time!

[ccj]

The borders were changed by the Treaty of Versailles.

The senior ranking officer I can think of was the later- Waffen SS Obergruppenf?hrer Artur Phleps (1881-1944)--

Austro-Hungarian army 1900-1918 (Lieutenant Colonel in the General Staff)

Rumanian Army 1919-1940 (Lieutenant General and retired primarily due to age-- 59 then)

Waffen SS 1941-44 (Brigadier General to full "General of Mountain Troops" equivalent)!

MANY people who never moved from their home towns changed "nationalities" 3 or 4 times between 1918 and 1945 as borders ebbed and flowed based on who was winning or losing at the time!

Rick,

Thanks for the reply. With the territories changing hands I would think there would be reluctance of some to serve in other armies or for government to accept soldiers changing loyalties.

Phleps came to my mind as well. He has a vast array of awards in the photos of him wearing the uniform of a W-SS general. Does anyone have photos of Phleps wearing Austrian uniform or Romanian uniform?

[Guest Rick Research]

Another example would be the Yugoslav navy. Since Serbia had no seacoast in 1914, when they suddenly acquired one in 1919, the only available officer pool was made up of former Austro-Hungarian navy members.

The Czechs and Poles swung back and forth over preferences. After all, in Poland Marshal Pilsudski had fought on the AUSTRIAN side, while the Czechs favored those who had served in French or Russian "Legions"-- thus alienating the Sudetenlanders who became 2nd class citizens.

[ccj]

Another example would be the Yugoslav navy. Since Serbia had no seacoast in 1914, when they suddenly acquired one in 1919, the only available officer pool was made up of former Austro-Hungarian navy members.

The Czechs and Poles swung back and forth over preferences. After all, in Poland Marshal Pilsudski had fought on the AUSTRIAN side, while the Czechs favored those who had served in French or Russian "Legions"-- thus alienating the Sudetenlanders who became 2nd class citizens.

Interesting stuff. I need to do some reading to learn more about the post Great War years. It seems there's some very interesting stuff to learn about southern europe.

[ccj]

Interesting stuff. I need to do some reading to learn more about the post Great War years. It seems there's some very interesting stuff to learn about southern europe.

Phleps in Romanian Uniform. I think the rank insignia is for a general.

[Carol I]

Why would Romanians serve in the Austria-Hungarian army in WW1? The Romanians were the enemy of the Central Powers.

Up to WWI, there were many Romanian living in the Austro-Hungarian empire. In fact they were the majority of population in Transylvania (a province that briefly became part of Hungary following the Austro-Hungarian agreement of 1867). Thus there is no surprise that many Romanians were conscripted into the army as were the Croats, Czechs or Serbs. Some of the officers even won the MMThO like Major Urs (1859 & 1860), Colonel and later General Boeriu (1918) or Major Popovici (1921).

Another question; Why would Romania allow officer's who served in the A-H Army to join the Romanian Army after the war?

There are many reasons for this. First of all, most of them were ethnic Romanian. Furthermore, following the union of Transylvania with the Old Romanian Kingdom, they all became Romanian citizens (even the non-Romanians). It is true though that most of the officers who joined the Romanian army following the war were Romanians. As a side note, some joined the Romanian army even before WWI, like General Dragalina.

For these officers there was no problem with the allegiance to the Romanian state. In fact during WWI their allegiance to the empire was questioned since the tough Hungarisation policy of the end of the 19th century did make them feel second category citizens. Romania's entry into WWI offered them another opportunity to fight for their rights with more concrete results. Indeed, many ethnic Romanians from the AH Army who fell prisoners to the Russians early during the war eagerly joined the Romanian Army in 1917. Even active officers risked their lives to cross the lines to the Romanian side, some of them being unfortunately caught and executed, as Lt. Emil Rebreanu, brother of the Romanian writer Liviu Rebreanu (the latter was a graduate of the Military Academy in Budapest who resigned the AH army and settled in Romania in 1909, but without joining the Romanian army).

In spite of some difficulties for the former AH officers (mainly related to age issues), some of them even became chiefs of the general staff or ministers of defence in the inter-war period (as General Ilcuşu or General Iacobici). In fact many Transylvanians became prominent personalities in post-WWI Romania (politicians like Iuliu Maniu and Alexandru Vaida-Voevod, religious leaders like Patriarch Miron Cristea or Bishop Iuliu Hossu and many others).

[ccj]

Up to WWI, there were many Romanian living in the Austro-Hungarian empire. In fact they were the majority of population in Transylvania (a province that briefly became part of Hungary following the Austro-Hungarian agreement of 1867). Thus there is no surprise that many Romanians were conscripted into the army as were the Croats, Czechs or Serbs. Some of the officers even won the MMThO like Major Urs (1859 & 1860), Colonel and later General Boeriu (1918) or Major Popovici (1921).

There are many reasons for this. First of all, most of them were ethnic Romanian. Furthermore, following the union of Transylvania with the Old Romanian Kingdom, they all became Romanian citizens (even the non-Romanians). It is true though that most of the officers who joined the Romanian army following the war were Romanians. As a side note, some joined the Romanian army even before WWI, like General Dragalina.

For these officers there was no problem with the allegiance to the Romanian state. In fact during WWI their allegiance to the empire was questioned since the tough Hungarisation policy of the end of the 19th century did make them feel second category citizens. Romania's entry into WWI offered them another opportunity to fight for their rights with more concrete results. Indeed, many ethnic Romanians from the AH Army who fell prisoners to the Russians early during the war eagerly joined the Romanian Army in 1917. Even active officers risked their lives to cross the lines to the Romanian side, some of them being unfortunately caught and executed, as Lt. Emil Rebreanu, brother of the Romanian writer Liviu Rebreanu (the latter was a graduate of the Military Academy in Budapest who resigned the AH army and settled in Romania in 1909, but without joining the Romanian army).

In spite of some difficulties for the former AH officers (mainly related to age issues), some of them even became chiefs of the general staff or ministers of defence in the inter-war period (as General Ilcuşu or General Iacobici). In fact many Transylvanians became prominent personalities in post-WWI Romania (politicians like Iuliu Maniu and Alexandru Vaida-Voevod, religious leaders like Patriarch Miron Cristea or Bishop Iuliu Hossu and many others).

Thanks for the education. I'm very interested in this region and the history of Romania. Are the any english language books on this subject that are worth reading?

[Carol I]

Thanks for the education. I'm very interested in this region and the history of Romania. Are the any english language books on this subject that are worth reading?

You're welcome. Unfortunately there are few Engligh language books dealing with the history of Romania, but I think that two of Keith Hitchins' works are worth mentioning: "Rumania 1866-1947" and "The Romanians, 1774-1866". Doing a search on Amazon I have discovered some others that might be of interest for the history of the Transylvanian Romanians: "The Rumanian National Movement in Transylvania, 1780-1849", "A nation affirmed: The Romanian national movement in Transylvania, 1860-1914", "The Rumanians of Transylvania and the Ausgleich, 1865-1869", "Orthodoxy and Nationality: Andreiu Saguna and the Rumanians of Transylvaina, 1846-1873".

[ccj]

You're welcome. Unfortunately there are few Engligh language books dealing with the history of Romania, but I think that two of Keith Hitchins' works are worth mentioning: "Rumania 1866-1947" and "The Romanians, 1774-1866". Doing a search on Amazon I have discovered some others that might be of interest for the history of the Transylvanian Romanians: "The Rumanian National Movement in Transylvania, 1780-1849", "A nation affirmed: The Romanian national movement in Transylvania, 1860-1914", "The Rumanians of Transylvania and the Ausgleich, 1865-1869", "Orthodoxy and Nationality: Andreiu Saguna and the Rumanians of Transylvaina, 1846-1873".

Thanks, I'll try to find a copy of one of these if I can find one for a reasonable price. These books are expensive.

[Carol I]

Thanks, I'll try to find a copy of one of these if I can find one for a reasonable price. These books are expensive.

I did not look at the prices. The latter books are rather specialised works that could probably be found in a university library.

[ccj]

I did not look at the prices. The latter books are rather specialised works that could probably be found in a university library.

I'm planning a trip to the local library. It's possible I can request a copy to be sent on loan to my location.

[Gordon Craig]

ccj,

This is not my territory, more modern Hungary than WWI, but I found Paris 1919 gave a very good background on what happened after the Austro/Hungarian state disolved at the end of WWI. It helped me understand subsequent events during the post war years. In fact, since I live in Budapest, I see the results of what happened between 1918 and 1920 still affecting peoples lives today.

Regards,

Gordon

[ccj]

ccj,

This is not my territory, more modern Hungary than WWI, but I found Paris 1919 gave a very good background on what happened after the Austro/Hungarian state disolved at the end of WWI. It helped me understand subsequent events during the post war years. In fact, since I live in Budapest, I see the results of what happened between 1918 and 1920 still affecting peoples lives today.

Regards,

Gordon

Gordon,

Excuse my ignorance but what is Paris 1919? Is this a book, publication, or something similar?

[Gordon Craig]

Charles,

Sorry for not mentioning that Paris 1919 was a book. I've attached a photo of the softcover issue in my library. I covers what turned out to be the Peace Conference at the end of WWI. It also has sections on Rumania, Bulgaria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Hungary, etc. and how some of these countries came into being. Very good background information on what the map of Europe looked like following the war and the ethnic problem it caused that still haunt us to this day. It is very readable and not just a dusty history book. Well worth having if you are interested in the militaria of a European state.

Regards,

Gordon

Edited September 27, 2007 by Gordon Craig

[ccj]

Charles,

Sorry for not mentioning that Paris 1919 was a book. I've attached a photo of the softcover issue in my library. I covers what turned out to be the Peace Conference at the end of WWI. It also has sections on Rumania, Bulgaria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Hungary, etc. and how some of these countries came into being. Very good background information on what the map of Europe looked like following the war and the ethnic problem it caused that still haunt us to this day. It is very readable and not just a dusty history book. Well worth having if you are interested in the militaria of a European state.

Regards,

Gordon

Thanks Gordon,

I'm going to get a copy, it sounds like a heplful reference.