the roumanian is very obstinate in character, and does not let himself be easily persuaded. he does nothing without reflection, and often he reflects so long that the time for action has passed. this slowness has become proverbial, for the saxon says, “god grant me the enlightenment which the roumanian always gets too late.” in the same proportion as he is slow to make up his mind, he is also slow to change it. frankness is not regarded as a virtue, and the roumanian language has no word which directly expresses this quality. the hungarians, on the contrary, regard frankness and truth-speaking as a duty, and are therefore often laughed at by their roumanian neighbors, who consider as a fool any man who injures himself by speaking the truth.
of pride the roumanian has little idea as yet; he has been too long treated as a degraded and serf-like being, and the only word approaching this characteristic would rather seem to express the vanity{133} of a handsome man who sees himself admired. also for dignity the epithet is wanting, and the nearest approach to it is to say that a man is sensible and composed if you would express that he is dignified.
revenge is cultivated as a virtue, and whoever would be considered a respectable man must keep in mind the injuries done to him, and show resentment thereof on fitting occasions. reconciliation is regarded as opprobrious, and forgiveness of wrongs degrading. but the roumanian’s rage is stealthy and disguised, and while the hungarian lets his anger openly explode, the roumanian will dissemble and mutter between his teeth, “tine mente” (“thou shalt remember this”); and his memory is good, for he does not suffer himself to forget. when an injury has been done to him henceforward it becomes his sacred duty to brood over his vengeance. he must not say a good word more to his enemy nor do him a service, and must strive to injure his foe to the best of his ability—with, however, this nice distinction, that he himself do not profit by the injury done. thus, it would not be consistent with the roumanian’s code of honor were he to steal the horse or ox of his enemy, but there can be no reasonable objection to his advising or inducing another man to do so. such behavior is considered only right and just, and by so acting he will only be fulfilling his duty as an honest and honorable man.
the roumanian does not seem to be courageous by nature—at least not as we understand courage—nor does courage exactly take rank as a virtue in his estimation, for courage implies a certain recklessness of consequences, and, according to his way of thinking, every action should be circumscribed, and only performed after due deliberation. when, however, driven to it by circumstances, and brought to recognize the necessity, he can fight bravely and is a good soldier. in the same way, he will never expose his life without necessity, and will coolly watch a house burning down without offering assistance; but when compelled to action under military orders, he will go blindly into the fire, even knowing death to be inevitable.
what is commonly understood by military enthusiasm is wanting in the roumanian (at least on this side of the frontier), for he is too ignorant to perceive the advantage of letting himself be shot in the service of a foreign master, for a cause of which he understands nothing and cares less. he is extremely sorry for himself when forced to enlist, and sometimes becomes most poetically plaintive on the subject, as in the following verses translated from a popular song:
“to the battle-field i go,
there to fight the country’s foe.
wash my linen, mother mine,
all my linen white and fine.[20]
rinse it in thy tears, and then
dry on burning breast again.
send it, mother, to me there
where you hear the trumpet’s blare.
where the banners droop o’erhead,
there shall i be lying dead,
stricken by the musket’s lead,
seamed by gashes rosy red,
trampled by the charger’s tread.”
something of the spirit of the ancient spartans lies in the roumanian’s idea of virtue and vice. stealing and drunkenness are not considered to be intrinsically wrong, only the publicity which may attend these proceedings conveying any sense of shame to the offender. thus a man is not yet a thief because he has stolen; and whoever becomes accidentally aware of the theft should, if he have no personal interest in the matter, hold his peace, on the shakespearian principle that
“he that filches from me my good name
robs me of that which not enriches him,
and makes me poor indeed.”
even the injured party whose property has been abstracted is advised if possible to reckon alone with the thief, without drawing general attention to his fault.
neither is drunkenness necessarily degrading. on the contrary, every decent man should get drunk on suitable occasions, such as weddings, christenings, etc., and then go quietly to a barn or loft and sleep off his tipsiness. bea cat vrei apoi te calcu si dormi (drink thy fill and then lie down and sleep) says their proverb; but any man who has been seen reeling drunk in the open street, hooted at by children and barked at by dogs, were it but once, is henceforward branded as a drunkard. it is therefore the duty of each roumanian who sees a drunken man to conduct him quietly to the nearest barn or loft.
there are some few villages where even the noblest inhabitants{135} are not ashamed to be seen drunk in the open street, but in such villages the moral standard is a low one throughout.
another curious side of the roumanian’s morality is the point of view from which he regards personal property, such as grain and fruit. in general, whatever grows plentifully in the fields, or, as they term it, “whatever god has given,” may be taken with impunity by whoever passes that way, but with this restriction, that he merely take so much as he can consume at the moment. this is but right and just, and the proprietor who makes complaint at having his vineyard or his plum-trees rifled in this manner only exposes himself to ridicule. whoever carries away of the fruits with him is a thief, but, strictly speaking, only when he sells the stolen goods, not when he shares them quietly with his own family.
with regard to fowls, geese, lambs, and sucking-pigs, the rule is more or less the same. whoever steals only in order to treat himself to a good dinner is not blamed, and may even boast of the feat on the sly; but the man caught in the act is punished by having the stolen goods tied round his neck, and being led round the village to the sound of the drum to proclaim his shame to the people. if, however, he has stolen from a stranger—that is, some one of another village—the culprit does not usually lose his good reputation; and he who robs a rich stranger is never considered base, but simply awkward to have exposed himself to the odium of discovery.
the roumanian only looks at deeds and results, motives being absolutely indifferent to him. so the word passion he translates as patima, which really expresses weakness. thus an om patima—a weak man—may be either a consumptive invalid, a love-sick youth, or a furious drunkard. passion is a misfortune which should excite compassion, but not resentment; and whoever commits a bad action is above all foolish, because it is sure to be found out sooner or later.
an anecdote which aptly characterizes the roumanian’s moral sense is told by mr. patterson. three peasants waylaid and murdered a traveller, dividing his spoils between them. among his provisions they discovered a cold roast fowl, which they did not eat, however, but gave to their dog, as, being a fast-day, they feared to commit sin by tasting flesh. this was related by the murderers themselves when caught and driven to confess the crime before justice.
while on the subject of fasts, i may as well here mention that those prescribed by the greek church are numerous and severe; and{136} it is a well-ascertained fact that the largest average of crimes committed by roumanians occurs during the seasons of advent and lent, when the people are in a feverish and over-excited state from the unnatural deprivation of food—just as the saxon peasants are most quarrelsome immediately after the vintage.
another english traveller, speaking disparagingly of the serf-like, crouching demeanor of the roumanians, remarked that “perhaps nothing else could be expected of people who are required to fast two hundred and twenty-six days in the year.”
the inhabitants of each roumanian village are divided into three classes:
first, the distinguished villagers—front-men—called fruntasi, or oameni de frunta.
second, the middle-men—mylocasi, or oameni de mana adona—men of second-hand.
third, the hind-men, or codas (tail-men).
each man, according to his family, personal gifts, reputation, and fortune, is ranged into one or other of these three classes, which have each their separate customs, rights, and privileges, which no member of another class durst infringe upon.
thus the codas may do much which would not be suitable for the other two classes. the mylocasi have, on the whole, the most difficult position of the three, and are most severely judged, being alternately accused of presumption in imitating the behavior of the fruntas, and blamed for demeaning themselves by copying the irregular habits of the codas. in short, it would seem to be all but impossible for an unfortunate middle-man to hit off the juste milieu, and succeed in combining in his person the precise proportions of dignity and deference required of his state.
nor is the position of the front-men entirely an easy one. each one of these has a separate party of hangers-on, friends and admirers, who profess a blind faith and admiration for him—endorsing his opinion on all occasions, and recognizing his authority in matters of dispute. his dress, his words, his actions are all strictly regulated on the axiom noblesse oblige; but woe to him if he be caught erring himself—for only in the case of the popa is it allowable for the practice to differ from the preaching. a fruntas may sit down to table with the codas of his own village, whenever they are in his service helping him to bring in the harvest or to build a house; but{137} he durst not, under pain of losing caste, be equally familiar with any strange codas.
there are, moreover, whole districts which are reckoned as distinguished, and whose codas take rank along with the mylocasi, or even the front-men, of less aristocratic villages. a single woman, coming from one of these distinguished neighborhoods, may in a short time transform the whole village into which she marries, the inhabitants eagerly studying and imitating her dress, manners, and gestures, down to the most insignificant details.
a distinctive quality of the roumanian race is the touching affection which mostly unites all members of one family. unlike the saxon, who seeks to limit the number of his offspring, the poor roumanian, even when plunged into the direst poverty, yet regards each addition to his family as another gift of god; while to be a childless wife is considered as the greatest of misfortunes.
numerous instances are recorded of children of other nationalities, who, deserted by their unnatural parents, have been taken in by poor roumanians, themselves already burdened with a numerous family.
there is an ancient roumanian legend which tells us how in olden times there used to prevail the custom of killing off all old men and useless encumbrances, on the same principle as in mr. trollope’s “fixed period.” one young man, however, being much attached to his parent, could not resign himself to executing this cruel order; but fearing the anger of his country-people, he concealed his father in an empty barrel in the cellar, where every day he secretly brought him food and drink.
but it came to pass that all arms-bearing men were summoned together to sally forth in quest of a terrible dragon which was devastating the land. the pious son, sorely puzzled to know how to provide his father with nourishment during his absence, carried together all the victuals in the house, lamenting to him that possibly he might never return from the expedition, in which case his beloved parent would be obliged to die of hunger. the old man answered,
“if in truth thou returnest not, then life has no more charms for me, and gladly will i let my weak body sink into the grave. but wouldst thou come back victorious out of the conflict with the dragon, listen to my words. the cavern inhabited by the monster has over a hundred subterraneous passages and galleries which run like a labyrinth{138} in every direction, so that even if the enemy be killed the victors, unable to find the outlet, will perish miserably. therefore take with thee our black mare which goes to pasture with a foal, and lead them both to the mouth of the cavern. there kill and bury the foal, but take the mother with thee, and when the struggle with the dragon is over, she will safely lead thee back to the light of day.”
the son then took leave of his father with many tears, and marched away with his comrades, and when he reached the cavern he obeyed the given directions, without, however, revealing the secret to any one.
after a desperate struggle, the monster in the cavern was slain; but terror and dismay took possession of the warriors when it proved impossible to find the outlet from this dreadful labyrinth. then stepped forward the pious son with his black mare, and called upon the others to follow him. the mare began to neigh for her foal, and, seeking the daylight, soon hit on the right track, which brought them safely to the mouth of the cavern.
the warriors, seeing how their comrade had saved them all from certain death, now besought him to reveal to them how he chanced to have hit on this cunning device. but he now took fright that if he spoke the truth, not only his own life but that of his old father would be forfeited for having thus dared to disobey the law of the land. only at last, when all had sworn to do him no injury, did he consent to unseal his lips and tell them how, in his cellar, there lived his father, an old and experienced man, who, at parting, had given him this advice with regard to the mare.
on hearing this the warriors were mightily astonished, and one of them called out, “our ancestors did not do wisely in teaching us to kill the old ones, for these are more experienced than we, and can often help the people with their sage counsels when mere strength of arm is powerless to conquer.”
all applauded this sentiment, and the cruel law which demanded the death of the aged was henceforth abolished.
