Cantemir – politician of his era
Elements of analysis, political action and Pontic geopolitical projection early in life and work of Cantemir
Article published by the Director of the Institute for Security Studies “Dimitrie Cantemir” from the Faculty of Political Sciences – University “Dimitrie Cantemir” genre. (R) prof. Dr. dr. Constantin DEGERATU in “REVIEW STRATEGIC UNIVERSE” magazine ROMANIAN UNIVERSITY OF SECURITY STUDIES, WITH quarterly publication, Year 1, no. 3 September 2010, ISSN 2067-7464, EDITOR: University “Dimitrie Cantemir” INSTITUTE FOR SECURITY STUDIES
Moments anniversary devoted great personalities are always opportunities suitable for any attempt to decipher the meanings Spiritual new or incentives to new horizons of knowledge and action.
Reported from his era, the late Renaissance or Enlightenment of mirror saw more of the Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic [in the hope that the time will not cause any apprehension of de-motivating start], Scierie Cantemir not appear to be simple historical works fold geographical but encyclopedic special type of multidisciplinary analysis – political, sociological, economic.
We refer mainly to works like age Chronicle of Roman Moldovan-Vlachs, History of the rise and fall of the Ottoman court, Life of Constantine Cantemir, Mohammedan religion, short story about the extirpation of Brâncoveanu and Cantacuzino family or memoirs by Peter the Great works which – by their informative content, accuracy and sharpness by many observations and analysis by conclusions – together contribute to the genesis of European embryo of scientific disciplines in the category called today: political science and policy analysis; sociology of war; international relations; geopolitical; rational choice; crisis management etc.
Equally, his philosophical texts, historical, geographical, literary, artistic, religious are often imbued with political substance so that the difference between the sexes has no meaning and no utility. We speak, of course, often, political philosophy, but it does not lead to a deeper and their appropriate definition. Like Hobbes and Machiavelli, the Cantemir usually the man in its state socio-political individual as a relatively autonomous entity capable of making their own decisions and choices and responsible for his actions.
It is difficult to know to what extent future Lord in positions of hostage luxury with substantial access to culture and science (but also real and persistent personal inclination in this direction) experienced major cultural and scientific acquisitions of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment Western Europe, but, certainly, and it must be concluded that, although there can be a perfect kingdom, human nature is perfectible and therefore the formulation of a political project capable of serving his nation’s destiny (determinism identity) may be a rational approach, realistic and desirable. Although the examples – many, in fact – of the negative traits of many of his peers, Cantemir believe that every humanist convinced that both individuals spiritual depth of his people and in the society and the state, there were enough forces of good, moral goodness and charitable feelings – Christian or general human. If it were not so, it might explain, for example, the insistence with which many of his writings, is trying to convince his contemporaries (or leave future generations testimony) that his father did everything made to stabilize and reform the state – deeply affected by the crisis – animated by noble goals, rational and realistic.
At the same time, and probably not an excuse, nor as an explanation for its possible future failures, Cantemir seems convinced that such forces can not always be anticipated and / or practice favored by political action (accepting that divinity can play and play often / sometimes? determinant role in the production / triggering of events. On a larger scale, Cantemir’m convinced that both within the human being and of society, there are numerous spiritual sources and numerous motivations of various kinds which, however, does not They could be harnessed correctly and efficiently any philosophical perspective (in the thinking underlying the decision politician, for example), or in terms of political action. And the ideas of this type are not perch.
Without explicitly theorize, and without being a theologian in the true sense of the word, Cantemir – unlike Machiavelli’s firm position that rejected the Christian political philosophy – proves quite convincingly important contribution of religion to the genesis of modern European culture. That culture released so utopian visions and those of Darwin. Medieval Christianity, however, is a more complex feneomen escaping schematic simplistic good-bad, positive-negative, progress-regress. At the same time, and inevitably (as a result of major political impact on the evolution of Ottoman power and security of Eastern Europe, southeast and central, can not ignore the impact of Ottoman culture – culture genesis purely religious (Islamic) on the European one.
It alminteri, to understand why the philosophy of power and philosophical analysis of power outlined in the years that followed the fall of Constantinople, it was admitted that gradual and progressive emergence and rise of Islam in Mediteraneano-Pontic Basin radically altered the balance of power and perception about the origin of power in the region: in a first phase (of the Greek and Roman civilization) philosophy prevailing power concepts were rationalistic, secular, based on human understanding the socio-political animal; Christianity brought the predominant approach, the divine origin of power, political power stored in the person of the monarch (“the anointed of God”) – king, king, prince, etc., projecting on its scope of authority – the State; Islam, monotheistic religion with roots close to those of original Christianity, has designed a concept relatively similar over the area – the divine origin of power (obviously created by a deity, as unique and powerful, but obviously different) . As a student interested in the humanities, Cantemir experienced certainly many classical writings about the different forms of political organization specific European civilizations monarchy, tyranny, dictatorship (despotism), aristocracy, oligarchy, democracy.
From another perspective, the political philosophy of time is concerned, naturally, by the way, not only political but also religious connection that between religion and science; in fact, both forms of knowledge and human activity have also had the same purpose: finding the truth. From this perspective, all political philosophies were genuine, because the truth of this nature – really learned through various steps (religious – revelation, scientific – knowledge or reason / intuition, etc.) – always generated important implications for governance. In such a context, an important role was for rationalism, significant current thinking within the European Renaissance, but socio-political and pragmatic Islamic theology proper time. Let us not forget that, at the time, asserts itself Cartesianism spirit Descartes’s work is dominated by Hellenistic world vision, a vision in which reason prevails over revelation.
Without work to cover (so varied and volatile in terms of logical consistency unit) with one qualifying Cantemir doubt, we can still say that the politician, philosopher and scientist Cantemir seems rather a rationalist who understood the value and necessity of using religion in the political process rather than a follower of religious revelation as the primary source of political decision and action. The statement remains valid in its entirety, even if sometimes introduce Cantemir decision / divine intervention between the arguments of certain choices / options, or divine justice between the arguments of adverse events suffered by an opponent / enemy or close. It seems to be mostly about vision and pragmatic in equal / greater / somewhat consequential: in this vision, good and evil seem to be mere tools in the search for truth or objective (goal).
This review, an exercise in comparative and contextual analysis in the service of security studies occasion of the anniversary of three hundred years of spirit cantemirist has particular regard to the following works:
Description of Moldova (Descriptio Moldaviae): work written in Latin in the years 1714- 1716 when the period of exile in Russia; It is probably the most famous opera Cantemir’s flagship. Weather sources give as safe development of this paper said monographic character, at the request of the Academy of Sciences in Berlin.
History Ottoman Empire (History of the rise and fall of the Ottoman court) work originally written in Latin as “Historia incrementorum atque decrementorum auditorium Othomanicae” in 1714 – 1716. Besides the historical account of the facts that perhaps foretold the rise and decline of Ottoman power, Cantemir make an assessment of the causes of decline and disintegration of the Ottoman Empire prospects, stressing the opportunities offered them for release this decline of the European peoples under Turkish domination. The work was translated and published in English, French and German.
Chronicle of the Roman vechimei Moldovan-Vlachs: written during the period 1719- 1722, all in Latin. Like all Cantemir’s writings, The Chronicle was translated later by the author in Romanian. In substance, comprising Chronicle Romanian history from its origins until the birth of the Romanian feudal states of Wallachia, Moldavia and Transylvania, in turn XII-XIV centuries. Far from promoting ideas completely original take Cantemir allegations and argues extensively chronicles the common origin of all Romanians in the Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic.
Life of Constantine Cantemir: seemingly biographical work dedicated to the life and reign of his father, in a period of great turmoil, crisis caused deep erosion of state domestic political scaffolding and gain external interference; developed probably during the exile in Russia (but with enough probable previous sketching), about the same ideas and temporal context with the aforementioned work, work – substantial in terms of generating information and assessments sense – it seems to be oriented to the same primary goal of Cantemir: the acquisition and exercise of power on behalf of a political project undertaken.
Short story about the extirpation of Brâncoveanu and Cantacuzino family: all written in the same period and, largely enshrined the same political project, the paper explains much, but not that it was necessarily the intended purpose of copyright, internal causes of decay political (and major social and economic crisis) Romanian principalities: destructive conflicts between landowners large groups (political parties of the time); corruption, greed suicide of the governed; facilitating foreign intervention for gaining and securing personal power.
Memoirs by Peter the Great (1717-1719): Information and policy analysis documents prepared by the ex-ruler of exile that seems not yet abandoned hope that could play an important political role in the destiny of his nation that, without it does appear that intentionally, featured in an integrating vision.
Moldaviae is a work Descriptio broad, complex, containing vast encyclopedic and varied – a current acceptation – includes, according to the author’s intent, three parts that refer to physical geography of Moldova, political geography and human geography focus mainly on issues of language, religion, ethnography and folklore. Each party, however, and many of the chapters, has a historical overview (history is not it? – Geography in motion), but also by many other observations and comments considerations of general human nature, economic, legal or even philosophical.
Recite a modern range, Descriptio Moldaviae may be established, without fear of being considered excessive and artificial interpretation, as a comprehensive work early political and geopolitical analysis and evaluation of international relations at regional level, with substantial references to processes political era. Its informative value, value expertise to substantiate decision strategies increases substantially if comparative-addressed complementary in the context of similar analyzes of other works in the same generic category. This observation is not meant to be a circumstantial linked to an anniversary moment only the opportunity but also tries to highlight (not the singular and certainly not necessarily for the first time) an issue of substance – that of the creative contribution of the first Romanian European dimension to the foundation of modern European culture. At the same time, emphasis of such (possible) its size and political action Cantemir’s scientific work, does not want to be in any way a superficial plea (meaningless and practical purpose) for any claim protochronist, who would like to lie, for example, Cantemir among the founders of geopolitics. Not about such an approach is needed, nor any intention in this regard.
Conversely, critical approach to scientific work (on one hand) and political action (on the other) of Cantemir, we can understand both its synchronism with the cultural spirit of the time and any time differences arising from complicated circumstances of time and space. In analyzing some of these issues, we must not ignore the fact that none of the areas mentioned was not born, as a substance, never in one day or in a given year; on the contrary, each is the result of accumulation, often contradictory, of scientific or empirical observations of inductions and inferences, moral or religious judgments, analysis or synthesis. If we look, for example, the issue of emergence in the late nineteenth Geopolitics, we all agree that this trend appeared on the evolution of classical geography, the political geography, without, however, geopolitics is a superior form (derived consistent) by political geography.
If we look at the geopolitics of a now classic perspective – namely that it defines as the art and practice of using political power on a certain territory or influence the policy of a harsh geographic environment of international relations actor – we can not, surely, no to stop only at this one characterization, nor to ignore the fact that, in a geographical description reckoned, Cantemir be found through analysis, in a field eminently geopolitical. Of course, traditionally, the term aim, firstly, the impact of geography on politics (politics of the state is based on its geography, the victor of Austerlitz once said, namely that he had to write his memoirs exile on Elba Island), but its use in social practice, in practice political activity, gradually acquired a continued expansion of meaning and significance.
Note that since the Enlightenment was the relationship between the natural environment (geographical) and political interdependencies between them, were informed and integrated in practice, long before the emergence of the concept as such. For some, it geopoliticapoate be defined as the science of planetary struggle for space control (politically inspired a fight, of course) and this process can be fixed in time as the initial moment, the historical moment of the discovery of America. As a scientific discipline, but geopolitics arises only when in the process of evolving system of international relations, there are conditions to substantiate / explain certain foreign policy decisions in the light of theoretical concepts and synthesizing accrual upper knowledge and experience of the relevant human. This explains, for example, why – for long – the pioneer period and flowering of classical geopolitics, the question most frequently and intensely used was the one who assigned the space (environment) a leading role on policy decisions. According to some opinions expressed often theoretical and doctrinal character of the new instrument only emerged as the new theory, based on the correct understanding the real role that the natural environment plays in the dynamics of political processes, managed to assign geographical factor (the natural environment) for purposes of defining significance processes often unique role determinant, ie when politosfera could be presented more as a direct derivative of the geosphere than as an active factor and modeling of geosphere.
Multidisciplinary by genesis, nature, structure, and purpose, geo-politics includes all aspects of social sciences, with particular emphasis on geography, international relations, political science and territorial aspects of international law. Of course the reference to a particular territory commits, objectively, the issue of state sovereignty and its implications on human activity in that territory, as the issue of geographical location (geo-political significance, of course) an actor of international relations and the configuration hierarchy (interdependencies between) countries in the region and their interests; relations with these countries global power poles and / or systems that they generate; matters of interest and real interference of big powers in regional policy; vision various states of individual and collective security and the nature of relations between a country’s geopolitical actors; Civilization configuration of the area – from the perspective of ethnic, spiritual, cultural, religious, etc.
Human geography is concerned with the study of different spatial influences arising from political processes and the way in which political processes are affected by spatial structures themselves. Conventionally, the political geography adopts a three-dimensional analytic structure, in which the state (as paramount political entity) is the subject of the study; above it would be in the international relations (considered a widespread view, as being, in essence, geopolitics), and below the state level would learn geography localities, regions substatele localizable territorial entities.
The issue is considered from a specific perspective discipline which today we call political geography – specific approach human geography – which, in its early construction process aimed especially political and military consequences of the relationships between physical geography, states and territories state power . In particular there was a close association between regional geography (focus on the particular characteristics of each region) and environmental determinism exercised, with a special focus on geophysical environment on human activity.
Cantemir’s writings are not merely historical writings, but writings encyclopedic type of multidisciplinary analysis – political, sociological, economic. As examples, in a description with carcter be discussed in detail a history of economic and sociological issues with major implications for state security – endemic hunger, especially intensive in the years 1686-1687, the analyst mentions that deaspre 1686 occurred during the destruction and looting largest Turkish-Polish clashes that took place in Moldova, events that resulted in the great famine in spring 1687. In a such a circumstance, in April 1687 wrote to Constantin Cantemir Michael Apafi I (Prince of Transylvania) care about the death toll from famine apple “.
Profound economic and social crisis resulting from foreign military incursions (Polish-Turkish conflict wore on the territory of Moldova robbery incursions of Tartars and Cossacks). Beyond the direct effects of looting the public wealth, military clashes and campaigns of prey had serious negative effects on the development of farming, which led to an acute shortage of food, an increase in cereal prices Explosion.
Cantemir notify major economic and social consequences (followed by the political consequences) of military conflict on the population, food security and demographic anticipation through analysis, studies sociology of war or conflict economy. Analysis is not abstract, but concrete aims explosive growth of prices (before, – says autorul- a lion could buy four measures of wheat, while, as a result of this damage, with a lion could just buy a As corn). Against this background, there was an acute shortage of cash, which made transactions to be made mainly in nature. At the same time, the earth had become very cheap, mainly because of lack of food, lack of money and lack of manpower. Labor shortages caused by the Turkish-Polish war in Moldova, had caused the fall in the price of land catastofală favoring speculative purchases and unnatural and alarming concentration of wealth.
Meanwhile, in the same context, the analyst highlights the major difficulties Reign Moldova to pay official duties of Ottoman Porte (obligations in money and products; logistical-military obligations) and semi-official obligations towards Tatars ( self-assumed obligation of good will – that kind of protection fee).
Incidentally, for example, Constantin Cantemir recognized that the country was “overcome by all infirmities” with obligations payable to “our masters Turks and Tatars” … the “Southern spăimâmtată country of thieves, from Orhei and Soroca Cossack “and” Lower Country Tatars “major difficulties requiring a significant number of” ministers of defense “maintained” at great expense “. Dangerous and unstable climate generated by the aggressive actions of foreign and domestic crime increased in 1692 raised the ruler (in writing his son biographer, historian and political analyst, his plea for supporting and strengthening public order forces had a definite practical purpose, because “the Lord called his subjects” … “have to help hard and the country’s need.”
Note that Prince Constantin Cantemir had to face a serious situation that had to protect and defend the state and statehood in a period of acute crisis. It is true that restore internal order was made at the cost of repression of extreme severity, characteristic – by expeditivitate and cruelty rather than Eastern Europe of his time.
In terms of political action Cantemir, we should note several stages in the evolution and characteristics. This is, firstly, the “political apprenticeship” that still lives in Iasi during 1685-1688, the royal court of his father, concerned primarily the study, but not foreign affairs reign of life complicated and full of political risks that are involved – then – the government in a country at the crossroads of the capital of all evils. The next three years (ie from age 15) meet imperialde Babylon to Constantinople already become predominantly Istanbul (without having lost all character of Byzantium).
The nature and inclinations, the years are devoted mainly to the study, but his later works show that time spent when the Ottoman Empire did not pass without bringing a dowry important knowledge of the mechanisms by which political Boyar families of the two Romanian Principalities, Wallachia and Moldova, as well as their relatives bureaucratic aristocracy of the time, promoted its interests on access to the throne, preserving and exercising interference Gate due to an increase in the internal affairs of vassals. The period during which you see the ruler of Moldavia already beginning to penetrate the mysteries of complicated relations, mainly by rivalry, but also, paradoxically, the necessary interrelationship among Wallachian and Moldavian dominant political families, both in terms of historical and through the personal experience of its parent.
Returning from Istanbul with a new horizon of culture, but also with a more acute understanding of the political machinations that conditioned the power and ensure their survival in the jungles of an era in which political mistakes, carelessness or lack of skill, or simply bad luck is paid head in the most proper sense, young Demetrius spend with his father, and close to public affairs, the last two years of the reign of Constantine Cantemir years that we find portrayed accurately chronicle family later. Time is not spent in vain political, because the second stage of the election results in political apprenticeship Demetrius, the boyars, courtiers and clergy senior superior to his father as ruler of Moldova, the young age of only 20 years. It is evidence of real political ability, but also a strong option for a career that seemed to be naturally gifted and cultivated programmatically. His attempt is not successful, because the work outsourced to acquire influence Istanbul – had not been made, so that high dignity backed favorite returns a match in Bucharest. Demetrius time had not yet come, and the young politician realistically accept their fate and Istanbul road again. Hard to know whether even then began to germinate the idea of a counter-force search for the suffocating influence of the gate weighting the Romanian principalities countries, but it sure Demetrius did not want to waste time, but took active surface processes and which provided a backstage observable in the battle for power.
Period stay at the new Istanbul – a substantial one of its long activity (over 20 years) spend at the Gate – is also one of intense political activity, especially and as Ambassador and guarantor (hostage) for his older brother’s fidelity high – Antioch Cantemir – the ruler of Moldavia reached 1695. Resigned to wait their turn in the order of seniority in the family, Dimitri becomes more interested in politics and prospects Gate Ottoman Empire after the defeat in Vienna on 11/12 September 1683 It was past its peak and decline hired unrelenting slope. At that time, things did not seem so clear and yet deadly wound seemed Empire had resources and rearguard battles will last almost two centuries until the Asian power which threatened the very essence of Christian Europe would be reduced to the size and natural behavior of a normal state formations.
The presence and position in Istanbul in this period allowed access Cantemir political and diplomatic circles Porte opportunity to gain valuable information about the main events and trends in domestic policy and international relations of the Empire especially targeting the Black Sea region and Mediterranean, Eastern Europe, southeast and central Caucasus or the Caspian area. The marriage with the daughter of Mr. Serban Cantacuzino Highlander, Casandra, spent in 1699, seems to be beyond its mundane normality, part of a political project that strives to Cantemir not hide it completely; the idea of access – in this way – the throne of Romanian seemed, from this perspective, neither unrealistic nor singular, in an era in which, as later, kingdoms and empires configured and reconfigured not only by force of arms but with the încuscririlor and weddings. That was not to be, and added that the event rather more passionate rivalries between Moldova and Wallachia, that is another story.
Stay in Constantinople and his presence among the elite of the era politico-diplomatic and Cantemir’s allowed to participate in some military campaigns Porte different theaters of South East Europe, where the scroll, at the time, confrontation Catholic principal of a Christian Europe and the Islamic East – a veritable clash of civilizations, long before the term to be enshrined in Huntington. In such a context, the strategic military and political training, Cantemir is present in the Ottoman camp during the campaign in the Western Balkans. Military disaster suffered by Ottoman armies in the battles of Petrovaradin and Zenta, in confrontation with Serb forces supported the Habsburg Empire, Hungarians and other peoples in the area, seems to finally convince the young pretender to his throne yet Romanian Countries that historic clock High You called that after the increment is decrement, and that another force emerging from the Orient seems to emerge on the horizon: it was the Russia of Peter, but Orthodox Christian force – important detail, given that, although seemed quite familiar with Catholic environment of the West, Cantemir harbored a certain fear and political power reserves to Catholic Empire.
Stay in Constantinople in that period it turned out, however, extremely dangerous in terms of relations with the reigning house in Bucharest (respectively match Brâncoveni) existential conflict that marked him for life and made it almost impossible for any working relationship, even the conditions of the first decade of the new century.
Meanwhile, the political convulsions of eastern Europe have generated new problems of understanding and deciphering geopolitical realities and international relations affecting the security of the Romanian principalities. It’s heightened efforts to expand Russia’s borders to the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea and Danube, which generated strong efforts conflict with Sweden, Poland and the Ottoman Empire and of course with the Tatar Khanate of Crimea. The hopeful in terms of the fight against Ottoman rule and the idea panorthodox, the rise of Russia and its conflicts with regional powers mentioned, constituted Danubian principalities Romanian opportunities both historical and major sources of insecurity. So for example, after the crushing defeat suffered by King Charles XII of Sweden at the Battle of Poltava with the armies of Peter the Great, the conflict moved south when Swedish King refuge in Varniţa / Bender, the Dniester, the Moldova’s historical territory under Turkish occupation. Since the Porte given shelter and support Russia’s rival, Russia opened the conflict with the Ottoman Empire, conflict which threatens Moldova and its major obligations creates logistical and military support under specific Vassal obligations era.
Accordingly, to secure their flank and close firmly territory east of the Carpathians, the Sultan decided to appoint Prince of Moldova Dimitrie Cantemir, considered a safe and faithful ally under guarantees provided by the father and brother actionable His (both former rulers who had created problems loyalty Gate) and of course on the basis of a better knowledge ensured by prolonged Prince Cantemir Istanbul. It is, however, no doubt that the appointment of Cantemir in these complex circumstances and on the grounds there was decisive in his leadership qualities, because, under the pressure of events, the Turks had no time for a transition for too long, as happened with other previously appointed rulers, who were hardly accepted by political circles in Iasi. Cantemir, with proven experience previously seemed the right man in the right place. The appointment was made sometime in November 1710, because that year for Christmas holidays, new Sir is mentioned in some documents as already on the throne.
The political future, the strategic scale, his Cantemir, however, are astounding, utterly surprising, including in terms of specific time, places and proverbial fickleness of Romanians in inconvenient political commitments imposed. In the absence of certain documents of the time or subsequent testimonies of the protagonists, explanations Cantemir’s political actions can only be inferred from its analysis of the facts and the overall philosophy of his work.
The fact is that in a very short type, and despite the poor infrastructure of its international relations or careful supervision provided at the gate of the prince, Cantemir firm decision to make a decisive strategic move, decoupling Moldova linkages vassal of the Ottoman Empire (and the implicit alliance that it engendered) and the complete switchover of the Russian side. The surprise was great not because such things were not happening at the time, or because ties with Russia would not have existed. As Wallachia, Moldova still managed to stay in the waiting times during the wars waged by the Turks against other regional powers; not once, two principalities refused, more or less explicitly to send contributions in money, materials and people not wearing required when participation was more effective than formal (Episode Romanian participation at the siege of Vienna is significant). Most often, however, the gentlemen to adopt an open attitude ducking supporting the opponent, and when they had made, they had paid with him or alive. Often, delays or denial were accompanied by numerous justifications and loyalty insurance, or subject to reasonable limits of vassal relations, which allowed some autonomy.
As regards relations with Russia, they had been able to be relatively significant in the time of Stephen the Great, but they never exceeded the appearance of someone removed the type of cooperation, especially since the place was barely Russia Black Sea beyond Crimean Peninsula and its accounts with the Tatars were not yet completed.
So it is surprising that its passage could Cantemir Russian boat ready so quickly and so detailed, formalized political-diplomatic language, in the absence of previous indications of modern communication means available and secure. And this, more so as, for Peter the Great, remained the main action direcţiestrategică north south theater is secondary only activated Swedish King refuge episode. It is therefore assumed that the strategic initiative (or at least show willingness strategic and confidential information known at) came from the Moldovan ruler. It could, of course, believe that during his stay in Istanbul Cantemir, there have been contacts in this respect with diplomats or agents of influence of Russia, but no historical evidence of this nature.
It is certain that next spring installation to the throne, in full military preparedness campaign of the war against Russia by Turkey, Moldova preparation in which it was for the major Cantemir negotiates and signs with Peter the Great of Russia Treaty Lutsk, 13 April 1711. The historical literature is considered a rule that the treaty, in a form very close to that which was signed, was developed directly by the Dimitrie Cantemir and sent by messenger directly Tsar Peter I who accepted as such and established by authority, subsequently turning it into a kind of credential awarded the Lord Moldova. An excerpt from the text of the treaty can be enlightening in this respect:
“[…] Too brilliant ruler and prince of Moldavia Cantemir, as a Christian believer and fighter for Jesus, a wise it is for the good name of Christ our Saviour, to toil with us and glorious liberation Moldovan people under’s government, which suffers along with other Christian peoples under the yoke of barbarians; also sparing the life and condition, we told the […] Desiring therefore be under the protection of our seas Czar, with the land and people of Moldova . Therefore […] we receive the prince in our defense too merciful and we consulted with the items proposed by him. ” Quote from Encyclopedia ROMANIA – Treaty of Lutsk
Treaty, which is in essence one specific era vassal, contained 17 articles in which content had the following major provisions: Prince of Moldavia with his people passed under the protection of Czar (to take under its control); Russia as a protective power, and guarantee the territorial integrity of the Principality undertakes not to meddle in its internal affairs; border between the two states established on the Dniester River; Moldova’s old boundaries are reestablished affected the Turkish conquests and Turkish rayas historic territory of Moldova were to be abolished; Moldova cease to pay tribute or other obligations Ottoman Empire and became autonomous in matters of foreign policy; in exchange for an oath of allegiance to the Prince of Moldavia, Russian Tsar undertook not to put foreign prince in Moldova, thus ensuring the rule of hereditary family (dynasty) Cantemir. The Treaty also provided that the entire state power will be exercised by the Lord, it has the sovereign right to trial throughout the country. A very important provision (and the only one practically materialized in time) refers to the fact that in case of occupation, Prince family will be eligible for asylum in Russia.
By treaty, Russia pledged to support Moldova against the Ottoman Empire and Moldova to join the Russian army to fight against the Ottomans. Russian garrisons were allowed cantonment in Moldova only in wartime. Russia pledged not to interfere in the internal affairs of Moldova both politically and legislative, and cultural, religious or linguistic. Russian landowners were forbidden to acquire land in Moldova and to uproot serfs here on Russian territory.
Interestingly, some provisions of the Treaty on both and Romanian Country (Wallachia / Muntenia) although it had not been party to the negotiations and to carry out the will. They refer to their autonomy in foreign policy, the termination payment obligations to the Ottoman Empire, to recognize the old borders and regulate the stationing of Russian troops on their territory only in wartime. These provisions, in conjunction with the “failure” of part of the political class Wallachian (including part of the royal family Brâncoveni) and a Wallachian army corps and a further appreciation of Cantemir events betrayal that would Wallachian prince it committed against the Russian Tsar (refusing to promise to join it in 1717 in the fight against the Ottoman Empire) seem to support the idea that larger project of political harmonization Cantemir two Romanian principalities or by Rated her union either via negotiated two entities under a foreign protectorate friendly.
It is interesting to note that, without any connection with any intent of the author, but – just for objective reasons arising from a particular geographic location natural – geographical area involved in the analyzes cantemiriste is located in the space, two centuries later, Mackinder will be defined as the Heartland – World Island, British geopolitician area which claimed that “World Island will ruler masters world.” Hard to believe, Cantemir’s time when Russia barely emerged – for the first time – the Black Sea, some politician or analyst could intuit the formulation of such a geopolitical concept. Interestingly, however, is that – based on their own observation of the state of the Ottoman Empire and on the analysis of this geopolitical actor (incrementum et decrementum), Cantemir timely and correctly identifies the great power, increasing space which will gradually dominate the next three hundreds of years. And not only predicts but also make a decisive political option like “life and death” ie one that modern political schools of thought today call “bandwagoning” (attachment) passes the Russian camp in the Turkish camp -a time when the Russo-Turkish conflict had been sliced as regarded mastery (domination over) Romanian territory Danubian states. Through his option, which – in terms of rate of change of options / strategic decisions – we can assume that they were born when they became publicly known but probably long before, Cantemir undertake future for many centuries Romanians . The solution for opting – in the context of a relentless security dilemmas that today we might categorize as a choice between two evils – Rejects the balance of power as probably unrealistic.
Seemingly simple choice (result of thorough political analysis, long-term and direct interest) not only took into account fluid dynamics of Russian-Turkish conflict, but the full range of movements from almost chaotic scene that evolved numerous other actors more or less significant in geopolitical terms. In fact, major strategic interests in the collision were not two but three: nearly two centuries, the area was the main conflict between the Ottoman Empire and Western Europe, political-military represented the Holy Roman Empire of Roman origin, and religious – of St. See. Tsarist Russia, the Russia of Peter the Great, with the two major Westernisers aspirations – and leaving the Baltic Sea to the Mediterranean – is the only newcomer, turning a bilateral conflict into a trilateral almost no possibility of combining together. It is not only faced three expansionary policies (natural genesis: three empires seeking final borders, territorial boundaries in an area where there is “more” compelling geographical) but also three blocks substantially different ethnic (Turkish-Ottoman, German , Slavic-Russian) animated three religions in history proved irreconcilable divergence centuries to come (European Extra-inspired Islam, Catholicism and Orthodoxy euro-western post-Byzantine Eastern Euro / Eurasian).
The picture contradictions, however, is a more complicated politician / political analyst / geo-Romanian politician of the era [terms should be considered in that are used today, but of course circumcised context era] called to decide for himself (to accede to power, to become strong, to exercise power, to lead the nation, to be a leader, to fulfill his destiny assumed) but also others without their (mostly) to express themselves on options . Active developments in the geo-political space Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic (synthetic and expressive name under substantial report, which I think can be attributed as a result of excessive use – even posthumously – any temporary political experience) numerous other actors geo- political smaller but no less often pests. These are:
– Tatar Khanate of Crimea – Late remnant of the Golden Horde – autonomous political entity, coupled strategic policy of the Ottoman Empire, and Nogai Tatars (Nohai) of Buceag that – without exerting an effective form of state domination, seriously affecting the autonomy principality and normal development of social and economic processes. For centuries, Tatars geo-political space reprezentaseră for Romanian an existential threat (or their incursions regular presence in this space is one of the reasons explaining the delay considered objective crystallization process of the Romanian state Carpathian space). At the time of Cantemir, ethno-political formations in northern Tatar Black Sea (including north of the mouths of the Danube) no longer represented a mortal danger, but still constituted a major uncertainty factor, is associated military actions of the Ottoman armies, or by incursions predatory carried out on their own, contrary to the obligations assumed protection of the Ottoman Empire.
– Kingdom of Poland: considered in the fight against Ottoman expansion, a natural ally, it acted often as any other expansionist power by ensuring that – beyond morality purpose (rejection of Ottoman rule) – to secure their own advantages. In this context, the frequent military confrontation with the Turks, held in Moldova, the local population caused the same damage as Tatar incursions. In addition, the Polish suzerainty could be no better than any other foreign rule (in this sense: the worship of Stephen imposing gentlemen, conflicts with Michael the Brave, etc.).
– Kingdom of Hungary: dominant over Moldova’s statehood early stage, the Ottoman and the Habsburg under pressure then, lost much of their aggression but had not ceased to be a threat to statehood and territorial integrity of Romanian principalities outside the Carpathians. Periodic incursions – as had been the reign of Constantine Cantemir – aimed rich regions (the prey), strategic objectives – cities, capital (for political and / or military) or the capture of Mr. treasures, etc. Justified often the struggle against the Turks and Tatars, some of these inscursiuni occurred at the junction of the two Romanian principalities, from elbow to Galati-Braila Catpaţilor beyond that was really the center of gravity of Ottoman rule over the Romanian principalities – originating former Bessarabia (territory north of the Danube maritime mountaineers belonging sometime Basarabilor) with raialelele / Turkish cities become Chilia, Akkerman, Bendery and Buceag Tatar. Shares geopolitical significance of the formation of the Hungarian state, however, were more complicated because of the particular formation, evolution and existence of the powers in Transylvania that the group was characterized by ethno-political disharmony coexist with the Hungarian and Romanian, in a formulation May productive at local Germanic. As a result, forced by circumstances and a political prisoner – historically – it will prove bankrupt, Hungarian State party should take into account in formulating and pursuing its geopolitical goals, a number of conflicting requirements arising from the confrontation with the aspirations (legitimate ) of Romanians, which is manifested both internally (in Transylvania) and externally (in Romanian relations with the two countries).
– Ukrainian Cossack formations semptentrională and medium today, successively dependent Russians, Poles or Tatars, or are in an area characterized rather by the power vacuum, and sometimes being necessary ally role in Ottoman resistance, sometimes associated role Polish incursions participant’s or rejecting their efforts. From the prospect of local communities, these actions of the Cossacks are usually negative, and from the perspective ruler – a major source of concern and damage to treasury reign. Assessment is not depleting meaning or local perceptions (or exchange) of shares Cossack, in specific circumstances, could be seen as friendly or helpful.
Integrated such concerns, considerations on the concept of “The Third Rome” was, for many centuries, propelling factor expansionist foreign policy of the Russian Empire. “Mental mapping” of pan-orthodoxy has a strict hierarchy, with ancient Pentarchy at the highest level. Would apostolic churches (eg church or church Gergiană Cypriot) on the second level, and then in order of age celelte historical churches in acquiring autocephaly. Contrary to this rule, and visible political reasons, the Russian Church has gained a much greater practical weight and behavior verging often arrogance. Permanent and growing persecution of faithful Christians in the Ottoman Empire was one of the major arguments impulses, which conferred and strengthened the Russian Church (and imperial expansionist policy that it supported it organic) self-assumed status of The Third Rome . At the same time, an important contribution to promoting the image of Moscow as the Third Rome The Ecumenical Patriarchate has had in Constantinople, interested in political support rising new oriental empire. For its expansionist goals in the space of East and South-East European Tsarist Empire successfully used social and class contradictions in the neighboring states of the Ottoman Empire.
The reality of the events of 1711, consecutive Treaty of Lutsk was not consistent with geo-political project cantemirist. Russia’s military preparations were hasty, superficial and unsustainable, both because of the still limited resources of the Empire and because of the secondary theater still Ponto-Danubian Empire in St. Petersburg. A second major cause of an outcome disastrous (for Cantemir) conflict constituted a strong unanticipated reaction of the Ottoman Empire which, together with Tatar ally, was able to mobilize very short time corps of troops over five times more outnumber the Moldovan-Russian coalition; This report then explains the slowness forces completely unfavorable historic ascent of Russia’s military in the area, which it took over 150 years to gain military control Ponto-Danubian space. A third issue arose from adverse weather conditions – severe drought, high temperatures – which affected more severely lines maneuvering, communications and supply longer Russia’s weary troops and depriving them of resources. It was favored with such belligerent shorter lines with multiple points of support in infrastructure theater.
As a result, the battle which took place on 8-9 July 1711, the left bank of the Prut river, near the village Stanilesti Russian-Moldovan army was defeated, the Russian accept a humiliating truce. For Prince of Moldavia, however, the outcome of the war is the end of active political career and to lead Moldova’s dream (or perhaps as Michael, the Romanian nation) for independence from the Turks falling into a historical parenthesis final. Cantemir took refuge along with a large number of noblemen and courtiers in Russia where receive shelter established by the Treaty of Lutsk (according to his princely rank) and where (not to be forsaken dream) gradually engages in a career Active political adviser and expert in otomanologie, why not ?! – Alternative (possible) the reign of Moldova, but also safer in a prodigious scientific career that would make him an encyclopedic scholar known as the first Romanian European class.
Interesting to note, however, that when geopolitical whose protagonist was Cantemir will mark the next three hundred years, substantially, the destiny of the Romanian people. In this interval: the decline of the Ottoman Empire accelerated significantly beginning of the twentieth century marking the end of its definitive; Russia has become overwhelmingly the dominant power of the North-Black, managing, until the end of World War II, effectively master more than 60% of the Black Sea coast, because at the end of the Cold War, to return, formal, almost the size of his time Cantemir. After that, it seems to show signs of resuming historical pendulum amplitude oldest forms or newer.
Note also that, surprisingly, some details significant geopolitical Russian-Romanian relations, which are Cantemir’s action or his work marked them then, to have a resonance today almost as effervescent as then ; they are called, as then: Dniester, Prut, Buceag, Moldova and moldovenism, garrisons for conflict (Dniester or Transnistria, for example), or some other mouths of the Danube.
Their historical resonance tends, however, goes gradually into the new geo-political crucible of the Black Sea where the new actor – the European Union – its way of peaceful and constructive instruments of a desirable future for all.
Trying to find this message vein Cantemir’s life and work – the politician of his era – perhaps not too daring or too urge unrealistic.
The Description of Moldova, Cantemir mentions several times the usual presence of prominent merchants and townsmen in Iasi, in the main ceremonies of the Court, first installing lords (p. 170, 172, 226, 236). Their repeated mention of the author’s stable reflects the perceptions of the emergence (embryonic) and the affirmation of a new new classes – the bourgeoisie, the origin of which stood traders, those appointed to administrative positions (in public office), the bureaucracy and the military caste superior. Note that appointments to political positions ensured, as a rule, access among the privileged classes or the political class of that time. By extending and “freshening” of the political class of his day Cantemir actually start a lengthy process of reconfiguration mechanisms generating system of governance and political alliances.