Planning Capital Cities

Capital city as national vision at the Serbs, Bulgarians and Romanians

Finally one should also consider the pre-national “twin” capitals of Bucharest
and Iaşi, the residence(s) of the Valachian and Moldavian princes.^5 These two
cities offered the Romanians a basis on which to construct capitals, but were
unable to compete with Constantinople, Venice and Vienna for several reasons.
First, both cities were at their absolute height, little more than regional centres.
Additionally, they were much younger and smaller than Venice, Vienna or
Constantinople. Next, they were geographically distant from major European
transit or trade routes. Finally, they did not, even well into the 19th century
represent the focal point for all Romanians, since a not insignificant segment of
Romanians lived in the Kingdom of Hungary as part of the Habsburg Monarchy
and shared only the faith of the remainder of Romanians. That is not to say
that the two cities were culturally irrelevant; Greeks from Constantinople
who resided in the two capitals from 1711-1821 (so called Fanariots) helped
strengthen the relationship between Constantinople and Iasi and Bucharest;
ultimately Moldavia and Valachia merged in 1861, forming Romania.

Nation building of the Romanians, Serbs and Bulgarians

Nation-building among the Serbs, Bulgarians and Romanians reveals some
parallels, but also distinct differences. The national development among the
Romanians began in the early 18th century, as Greek-catholic clergy, influenced
by the Habsburg system of rule and the spirit of the Enlightenment began to
research the origin of the Romanian people.^6 Although there did not exist any
fixed plan for implementing a Romanian nation state at the end of the 18th
century, at least there was a desire for emancipation from the dominant
political and social environment in Transylvania (National petition “Supplex
Libellus Valachorum”, 1791). Only after the diplomatic and military intervention
of Russia in the 1820’s and 1830’s to the benefit of Moldavia and Valachia did
the Romanian national movement outside of the Carpathians gain momentum.
This was further exacerbated by France’s role during the negotiations at the
Paris Congress (1856). The fusion of the Principalities of Moldavia and Valachia
and the establishment of a foreign dynasty (1866) coupled with the acquisition
of independence as a result of the Berlin Congress (1878) represent further
turning points. The zenith of the development of the Romanian Nation State
came during the restructuring in Central and South Eastern Europe after the
First World War (1919/20). This period saw the attachment of parts of the
Romanian Dobrudja, the Banat, Transylvania, Bucovina and Bessarabia to the
state of Romania. However, despite various efforts to unify those peoples
inhabiting the territory of the Romanian nation, different regional and ethnic
traditions persist to this day.

The national development of the Serbians likewise began in the 18th century
and was subject to similar impulses as the Romanian development, inasmuch
as a part of the Serbian people fled from the Ottomans to the Habsburg Empire
and there built a new life.^7 The subsequent integration into “Austria” and the
impact of many organizational and intellectual reforms led to a reorientation