Barbu Constantinescu, The First Romanian Scholar of Romani Studies

Barbu Constantinescu,
the first Romanian scholar of Romani studies

julieta rotaru
the first Romanian scholar of Romani studies
Half a century after the first work on the Romanian Roms written by M. Kogălniceanu
(1837) at the suggestion of the father of modern geography, Alexander von Humboldt,
similarly, at the suggestion of a foreign scholar, the father of Romani dialectology,
Franz Miklosich, a graduate of the Faculty of Theology, University of Leipzig, and
Ph.D. of the same university, Barbu Constantinescu, started to learn Romani and
became the first Romanian scholar in the emergent field. He was an acknowledged
educationist, the first exponent of Herbatianism in Romania, and worked in many
educational pioneering projects, such as the establishment of the first kindergarten,
as well as the reformation of the pedagogical and theological systems of education.
In the field of Romani studies, unfortunately, he could not publish all his projected
work, and posterity forgot his huge effort of travelling in all counties of Wallachia
and Moldavia in search of Romani settlements. He published in Bucharest, in
1877 and 1878, a dozen songs and tales in Romani of his own translation, which
were duly acknowledged (e.g. by F.H. Groome in his 1899 anthology of Gypsy folk
songs). However, his work, comprising hundreds of documents, was not included
in a collection, though it is partially preserved in some unedited manuscripts at
the Romanian Academy Library in Bucharest, which are described here for the first
time, in sections § 2.1–6. The article describes the intellectual legacy left by Barbu
Constantinescu in the field of Romani studies.
Keywords: Barbu Constantinescu, Francis Hinde Groome, Franz Miklosich, Moses
Gaster, Romani folklore, Romanian Roms, folklore diffusion
§ 0. Introduction: The international context

The end of the nineteenth century witnessed dynamic activity in the folklore
movements in Europe, amounting to the formation of the first Folklore
Society (1878), followed one decade later by the Gypsy Lore Society. There was
a time of intense exchange of views and information, ushering in momentum
for the field and collecting Romani folklore, not only with the aim of
amassing material, but also for scientific use and critical evaluation for the
study of European folklore in general.
Julieta Rotaru is senior researcher in Romani Studies at the Centre for Baltic and East
European Studies (CBEES), Södertörn University-Stockholm, Alfred Nobels Allé 7, 141 89
Huddinge, Sweden. E-mail: julieta.rotaru@sh.se
Romani Studies 5, Vol. 28, No. 1 (2018), 41–78 issn 1528–0748 (print) 1757–2274 (online)
doi: https://doi.org/10.3828/rs.2018.3
42 julieta rotaru
It was Francis Hinde Groome, founding member of the Gypsy Lore Society
and its first editor, together with David MacRitchie, of the society’s journal,
who bridged the path between folklorists and the scholars of Romani studies.
Groome is credited until today as having offered a so far unchallenged theory
of folklore diffusion (Jones 1967: 72), having acknowledged the Roms as the
disseminators of many beliefs and tales. His theory epitomizes a synthesis of
two contemporary different disciplines, one represented by Theodor Benfey,
the German translator of the Sanskrit fable collection Pañcatantra, in the
introduction of which he expounds his theory about the story’s migration
theme and the wandering Roms bridging the gap between India and the
European traditions. The second approach is represented by the linguistic
and philological studies of Franz Miklosich who could determine, based on
lone words in current Romani dialects, the routes of the Romani historical
migration. Groome’s diffusion theory was strongly opposed in the epoch
by the mythological and anthropological schools, who assigned prehistoric
antiquity to folktales, as seen, for instance, in the Transactions of the Interna-
tional Folk-lore Congress, a congress held in London in 1891 (Transactions
1891, vol. II: 374). However, Groome was then supported by a very prominent
member of the Folklore Society, and a contributor to the Journal of the Gypsy
Lore Society, Moses Gaster.1
In the first issue of the first volume of the Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society
(JGLS),2 Groome rendered in English a Romani tale collected and published
by Barbu Constantinescu in 1878, “The bad mother,” and described it as “one
of the best Gypsy folk tales that we have, and … probably the best known
among the Gypsies themselves.”3 In the sixth issue of the first volume (345–9),
Groome published his English translation of another tale from Constan-
tinescu’s collection, “The red King and the witch,” described as “the very
best Gypsy folk-tale that we have.” Groome went on to publish an English
translation of two other tales from the same collection, “The Vampire” (JGLS
1891 II (3): 142), and “The Master Chief” (JGLS 1893 III (3): 142–52). Notably,
1. This was a polymath scholar of Jewish origin, born in Romania, covering many fields, from
Romanian philology and apocrypha of old Romanian popular literature, European folklor-
istics, Jewish studies, and even Romani studies, collaborating on the latter with F. Miklosich
who published “a story of the Romanian Roms, from Dr. M. Gaster” ([259], 17–8) in “Proben
von Zigeunermundarten” in Beiträge zur Kenntniss der Zigeunermundarten. IV, Wien: Karl
Gerold’s Sohn. 1878, 54. When Gaster was expelled from Romania on ethnic grounds, he was
received at Oxford by the leading Indologist and father of comparative mythology, Friedrich
Max Müller. He was by then an expert on the migration story theme theory supported by Max
Müller and T. Benfey. These are the grounds on which Moses Gaster supported Groome in the
open criticism debate mentioned above, in 1891.
2. JGLS (1898) 1 (1): 25–9.
3. In Groome’s anthology (1899), there are two Hungarian, one Greek, one Lithuanian, one
Norwegian, and two Russian variants of this tale.
the first romanian scholar of romani studies 43
Groome knew all the Romani and sometimes non-Romani variants of these
stories available in published collections. The reason for selecting the variant
recorded by Barbu Constantinescu is explicitly discussed by Groome in the
respective articles in JGLS, as well as in his anthology of Gypsy Folk-tales
(1899), wherein he includes 13 tales of the Romanian scholar, out of which 11
are rendered in full, and only two are summarized, along with the full version
recorded in other “better” variants. Groome considered the tales collected by
Barbu Constantinescu as the best-preserved variants, accurate as transmitted
by the Romani raconteurs.
Regarding the role of the Roms as lăutari or “wandering minstrels,”
thus described by E.C. Grenville Murray, the first English translator of
Romanian popular poetry (Murray 1854: xxviii), Groome aptly quoted it in
the introduction of the anthology of Gypsy Folk-tales (1899: xlv) in support of
his transmission theory. E.C. Grenville Murray’s first anthology of Romanian
folk songs draws hugely on the collection of the most acknowledged Romanian
poet and folklore collector of that time, Vasile Alecsandri. Quite recently, a
manuscript was discovered of Vasile Alecsandri’s Romanian folk songs
collection with the musical notation of these songs, by the hand of Barbu
Constantinescu and his brother.4 Barbu Constantinescu may have heard
the songs from the Roms, in his journeys in Romania, in search of Romani
settlements in order to collect historical and ethnological data. As will be
further shown, he used to record the music, along with the text of the Romani
songs, as he intended to have a separate chapter on Romani music in his
projected comprehensive book “Gypsies in Romania,” an endeavour which
never came into being.
§ 1. The first collection of Romani folklore in Romania

Until today, Samples of language and literature of Gypsies from Romania5
by Barbu Constantinescu is acknowledged as a singular work in the
entire history of Romanian folkloristics (Papadima 1968: 219–301, Datcu
2006: 261, etc). It includes 75 lyrical songs and 15 tales in various Romani
dialects, gathered from seven itinerant Roms and 79 Roms settled in 22
districts of the two historic Romanian provinces, Wallachia and Moldavia.
The compositions were gathered following the most updated methods of
the time, and were edited with accuracy, alongside a Romanian literary
4. The manuscript was discovered by the late musicologist Viorel Cosma in 1976, but it was
only while writing the preface to the edition of Barbu Constantinescu (Rotaru 2016: X) that he
identified the thus far unknown author of the musical notations.
5. Rom. Probe de limba și literatura Ţiganilor din România publicate de Dr. Barbu Constatinescu.
Bucureşti: Tipografia Societăţii Academice Române (Laboratorii Români), 1878.
44 julieta rotaru
translation and explanatory notes for some grammatical constructions. The

localities, respondents, and dialects were mentioned, by the names referred
to by the respondents.
Fourteen of these lyrical songs were previously published in the journal
edited by B.P. Hașdeu, Columna lui Traian. Barbu Constantinescu therein
explained the method of his editing and translation:
I have gathered these songs from various regions of Romania with the utmost
accuracy. I tried to faithfully reproduce them in writing, as I heard them from
the mouths of the Gypsies, refraining from correcting them even when certain
grammatical constructions proved to be clearly erroneous. (Constantinescu
1877a: 606)
In the next issue of the Columna lui Traian, the general editor wrote that
he had received the manuscript of the article “The folk literature of the
Gypsies. Unedited texts with a glossary” (“Literatura populară a ţiganilor,
texturi inedite cu glosar”) by Barbu Constantinescu, which was scheduled
to be published in the next issue, covering the months January–March 1878.
Unfortunately, the journal was temporarily interrupted until 1882, and the
promised article was actually never published. It stands to reason that these
materials might have been included by Barbu Constantinescu in the volume,
as were the other 14 pieces already published in Columna lui Traian.
§ 1.1. Feedback on the Romani folklore collection

The Romanian national poet, Mihai Eminescu, wrote a favourable review of
the volume, suggesting however, that a grammar and glossary were required
(Eminescu 1878). Hugo Meltzl, professor of German language at the University
of Cluj, Transylvania, redactor, together with Sámuel Brassai, the famous
Transylvanian polymath, of the Acta comparationis litterarum universarum,
showed great interest in the work. Some pieces were translated in Hungarian
by the Transylvanian educationist and Calvin priest Koós Ferencz.6 The
work served as a model for other Romanian folklorists collecting material in
Romani.7 The volume has been greatly read and quoted by those interested in
the subject: a famous university professor of law from Craiova City, Michail
6. Koós 1890: 86–7. In some quarters of the Romanian Orthodox Church, Constantinescu’s
relations with cultural personalities and theologians from Transylvania have raised concerns
half a century after his death, as will be further shown.
7. For example, twenty years after Constantinescu’s death, St Tuțescu, the founder of the
ethnological journal Ghilușul, wrote in the first issue that the journal would also publish Gypsy
folklore, which had been “much neglected” up until that time. He greatly acknowledged Barbu
Constantinescu as “the only specialist who has dealt with Gypsy lore” (Tuțescu 1912, I (1): 3).
For two years, Tuțescu published monthly pieces in the Romani language and with Romanian
translation, indicating the dialect and providing information about the respondents.
Stătescu, acknowledged that this is the only scholarly book in the field in
Romania and that is was written by “the erudite professor Barbu Constan-
tinescu, the only Romanian that, we may say, studied and deepened, with
notable success, the Gypsy language.”
Four years after his death, in 1895, the tales collected by Barbu Constan-
tinescu were analyzed by one of B.P. Hașdeu’s disciples, Lazăr Șăineanu, a
brilliant philologist and linguist, a Romanian born of Jewish origin who
resided in France after being expelled from Romania on ethnic grounds. In
the field of folkloristics, Șăineanu’s major contribution is represented by the
work Romanian tales in relation to antique classical legends and in relation to
the tales of the neighbouring people and all the Romance people, 1895, a work
awarded the Romanian Academy prize. In this work, Șăineanu refers to all
the tales published by Barbu Constantinescu, comparing them to the Balkan
and East Central European traditions, and to the tales from the Romance
world, going back to their mythological prototypes. However, this first
collection of Romanian Romani folklore was reedited only once, sui generis,
by Gheorghe Sarău in 2000, in Romani standard alphabet and with Barbu
Constantinescu’s Romanian literal translation substituted with a far-fetched
interpretation.
Outside Romania, the work was first presented by the author himself, in
September 1878, at the 4th Congress of the Orientalists, in Florence. The
congress was attended by 120 scholars and organised into seven sections:
North African studies; ancient Semitic studies; Arabic studies; general
linguistics; Iranistics; Indian studies; and Chinese–Tibetan studies. It was
chaired by the Arabist M. Amari, and the Sanskrit scholars Angelo de
Gubernatis and Gaspare Gorresio. The section on general linguistics was
chaired by Graziadio Isaia Ascoli, pioneer of Romani language studies. In this
section, Barbu Constantinescu presented his work together with his friend,
Bogdan Petriceicu Hașdeu, a prominent cultural personality, accurate scholar
and polymath dominating scholarship on nineteenth-century Romania, who
wrote this report:
For Romania, it is further written that the delegate selected by the Congress and
then officially confirmed by our government, was Bogdan Petriceicu Hașdeu
who in turn had recommended Mr. Dr. Barbu Constantinescu, acknowledged
for his works on the Gypsy language, works cordially approved by the illustrious
Miklosich, one of the paramount contemporary scholars of Gypsy studies. The
Congress opened on September 12, in the presence of His Royal Highness, the
Duke Amedeu of Aosta.
The two representatives of Romania, both registered in the language section,
presented their latest works in this branch to the Congress, namely Bogdan
46 julieta rotaru
Petriceicu Hașdeu Words from the ancestors,8 and Mr. Dr. Barbu Constantinescu
Samples of Gypsy language and literature. Regarding the latter, see what the bulletin
of the Congress says about the session of September 17 th, 1878: “Mr. Dr. Barbu
Constantinescu communicates to the section the plan of his work on Gypsy dialects
from Romania, a collection that is proposed from both a philological, as well as a
linguistic and literary point of view. As an example of this statement, he read some
passages from those published Gypsy songs, translated into German, alongside
linguistic and grammatical observations. His personal collection comprises over
3000 songs. Assembly receives the speaker’s presentation with applause. The Vice
President, prof. Ascoli, thanks Dr. Constantinescu for his important collection,
hoping that the extensive work that he has been dealing with will much benefit the
linguistic studies, in general, and, he acknowledges in particular, his advanced study
in Gypsy dialects, which is yet so hard to attain, and rarely tackled. As a linguist,
however, he takes the liberty to make a slight phonological observation. The form of
associative case, rumeia, does not seem to be a special form with the suffix ya, but is
a mere amplification of the vowel of the previous form rume-a (rume-ha, rume-sa)
therefore all getting back to the suffix sa. … See what de Gubernatis writes in Nuova
Anthologia of October 15th, 1878: “The fourth Congress of Orientalists … offered us
the pleasant opportunity to come to know another Romanian eminent philologist,
Mr. Dr. Barbu Constantinescu, who presented an important work dealing on
the language and literature of Gypsies from Romania.” In this way, at the fourth
Congress of Orientalists, Romania was represented not only by names [underlined
by the author, n. J.R.], but by some works, that attracted the attention of foreign
scholars. (Hașdeu 1878: 1064–5)
In the same year, Franz Miklosich personally wrote many times to Hașdeu
urging him to send the volume of Barbu Constantinescu. Through Moses
Gaster, Miklosich asked for other related articles by the same author. In fact,
Barbu Constantinescu acknowledged the influence of the Slovenian linguist
in his formation. He had taken part in the 1873 World Exhibition in Vienna, as
the Director of Studies at an important educational institution in Bucharest,
the orphanage “Asylum Elena Doamna,” which received a noteworthy prize
and the “appreciation of the most important German didactic authorities”
(Slavici 1884: 205). There, he came to know F. Miklosich, who recommended
he study Romani.
In a letter dated 12 May 1878, Hașdeu wrote to F. Miklosich:
Je vous envoie demain par poste le volume de la Columna pour l’année expirée,
ou il se trouve tout ce qu’y a été publié relativement au Tziganes, et beaucoup de
textes slaves ou roumains qui pourraient avoir pour vous quelque intérêt. Mon ami
B. Constantinescu, le seule tziganiste en Roumanie [underlined by J.R.], possède une
8. Rom. Cuvinte den batrani, a pioneering work on Romanian apocryphal literature,

awarded the Romanian Academy prize in 1877.
foule de matériaux de toutes espèces, et il m’a promis depuis longtemps de vous

l’envoyer en masse, mais son pèche est d’être diablement paresseux. Je ne cesserai
pas de le presser. (Hașdeu 1982, II: 57–8)
However, one should take Hașdeu’s words “diablement paresseux” cum grano
salis, as an informal expression of affection for his friend and collaborator.
As described by contemporaries, Barbu Constantinescu was a hard-working
person, capable of displaying great creative force when it came to fighting the
outdated and indolent Romanian authorities, and to creating new institutions,
as will be further shown. (He is reported to have died of a nervous breakdown
due to overwork.) We are now in the position to infer that Barbu Constan-
tinescu sent the requested materials to Miklosich, as the former used to
write the name of the Slovenian scholar in the margins of many songs that
remained in manuscripts (Rotaru 2016).
As far as the “foule de matériaux de toutes espèces” is concerned, Barbu
Constantinescu would soon report, as shown above, at the 4th Congress of
the Orientalists, on 17 September 1878, that he possessed a collection of “over
3000 Romani songs.” Out of these, not even a tenth were published in 1877
and 1878.
As already shown in the introduction, Barbu Constantinescu’s volume was
well received by F.H. Groome, who wrote about the Romanian scholar:
He must have known Romani thoroughly, and may have left large collections.
(Groome 1899: liv)
Thus, the hypothesis of the existence of large folklore materials collected by

Barbu Constantinescu is confirmed from many sources.
On 13 March 1889, Barbu Constantinescu presented a paper, “Gypsies
from Romania,” at the Romanian Geographical Society, presided over by the
Romanian King, Carol I.
At that point, His Majesty the King gave the floor to Mr. Professor Barbu Constan-
tinescu, who entertained the audience on Gypsies, on their probable origin and their
dispersion in Europe and especially in our country. Mr. Constantinescu explained
the customs, beliefs and traditions of the Gypsies in Romania, and concluded his
interesting presentation by reciting the prayer “Our Father” in Gypsy language, and
some original songs of longing. At 11 p.m., after His Majesty the King congratulated
the speakers on their interesting presentations … he asked them to publish these
studies in the Society’s Bulletin. (BSGR X, 1 (1889): 15)
Unfortunately, two years later, on 30 November 1891, Barbu Constantinescu

died prematurely, “overcome by his excessive work,” as one of his eminent
disciples, Ștefan Negulescu (Negulescu 1896: 367), wrote, leaving many of
48 julieta rotaru
his scholarly and educational projects unfinished. He also left behind many
unpublished works. It is said (Negulescu 1896: 365) that his manuscripts
were taken by his pupil, Dragomir Demetrescu, a doctor in Theology and
the future dean of the Faculty of Theology, and a great nomophylax of the
Romanian Orthodox Church.
§ 2. A collection of unedited manuscripts on Romani language, history,

and ethnology, and on the history of the Romanian Orthodox Church
Nevertheless, ten years after his death, on 5 June 1909, a great part of Barbu
Constantinescu’s manuscripts containing his projects on Romani language,
history and ethnology,9 were donated to the Romanian Academy by Petru
Stancu from Clinceni, Dragomir Demetrescu’s friend and Barbu Constan-
tinescu’s pupil, who eventually became Partenie Clinceni, the Bishop of the
Lower Danube, and later on the Metropolitan of Moldavia and Suceava.
Some of the manuscripts are unedited, others are simply underutilized,
hence, it will be very useful for future researchers to have as full a description
of them as possible.
§ 2.1. Ms. BAR 3923

Carte românească, 225 pages, 34,5x21 cm, bound in leather. On the front cover
the title is brocade with golden letters by the librarian: “Barbu Constantinescu,
“Gypsies in Romania” <Vol.> I.” The pages are numbered by the librarian. The
following information is written, apparently with the same handwriting as in
mss. 3924 and 3925, which is not Partenie Clinceni’s handwriting.10 “Donated
by Parthenie (sic!), former Metropolitan of Moldovia and Suceava, on June 5,
1909.” It is probably the librarian’s writing, who also drew up an incomplete
summary of the manuscript.
On page 5, there is a plan of Constantinescu’s projected work entitled
“Gypsies in Romania,” in eight chapters: “Migration from India,” “Their
diffusion in Europe and on other continents,” “Their arrival in Romania
and their settlement in the North Danube Lands,” “Their names,” “Gypsy
Language,” “Their physical condition and their way of living,” “Their
intellectual and moral life,” “The Gypsy music and songs.” The manuscript
9. Two decades after they entered the Library of the Romanian Academy, mss. 3923, 3924 and
3925 were acknowledged by researchers in the field: in 1930 Popp-Şerboianu mentions the work
plan drawn up by Barbu Constantinescu, entitled “Gypsies in Romania.” One decade later, in
1939, George Potra made use of the names contained therein for his study on the onomastics
of the Roms and of some words for his Romani glossary. Yet another decade later, in 1944, Ion
Chelcea refers to mss. 3923 in particular, without making use of any data contained therein.
10. Comparable with mss. BAR 4973 and 5048.
contains many tables drawn by different hands with various types of ink,
written on papers of variable length. The work represents the first project of a
demographic and ethnologic investigation on Romanian Roms.11
Barbu Constantinescu, upon Haşdeu’s recommendation, that time General
Director of the State Archives and member in the Commission of the
National Statistical Office,12 was employed by the Interior Ministry for the
interpretation and compilation of statistics on Roms in former Wallachia.
The investigation was conducted by sending a circular to the sub-prefects
of the Wallachian counties in the year 1878. The responses are preserved
in ms. 3923, in tabular form. There is evidence that this manuscript is
incomplete and that Barbu Constantinescu had more material in hand. The
manuscript contains responses sent between 2 March and 19 April 1878, by
local authorities from only five counties: Brăila (Division Vădeni), Buzău
(Division Sarata), Mehedinți (Division Câmpu, Division Dumbrava and
Division Plaiul Cloşani) and Mușcel (Division Podgoria) and from one
locality from Argeș (Division Râuri). The tables are structured as follows:
name and surname of the Roms living in the village; their social status
(residents or itinerants), the locality where they pay taxes; their occupation;
their ethnic group (Romanian neam ‘nation’). Although incomplete, these
statistics are somehow representative, as they include data about Roms from
various counties of Wallachia, including two counties that were part of the
Austro-Hungarian Empire (Mehedinți, from 1718 to 1738) and part of the
Ottoman Empire (Brăila, until 1828), respectively.
In the summer of the same year, 1878, statistics on Roms in another
historical province of Romania, Bukovina − a part of the Austro-Hungarian
Empire − (statistics renewed in 1889),13 were gathered. For the Roms in
11. I have edited ms. 3923 as a part of the reconstruction of Barbu Constantinescu’s projected
work, “Gypsies in Romania,” in my forthcoming volume Contributions to the history
of Wallachian Roms of the XIXth century. (Rom. Contribuții la istoria romilor din Ţara
Românească în secolul al XIX-lea). The manuscript is not complete, containing data from
only five counties, and we know from mss. 3924 and 3925 that Barbu Constantinescu travelled
in 17 Wallachian counties in search of Romani lore. Hence, I have reconstructed the map of
Barbu Constantinescu’s itineracy in the years 1877–1987, and I have also documented localities
that are not in the extant 1878 statistics on Wallachian Roms. I have corroborated this
information with data from the unpublished nominal statistics of 1838, in Cyrillic, preserved
at the Romanian State Archive, wherein many times I have found the ancestors of the Roms
recorded in the 1878 statistics. I have also added data regarding realia on the Roms, and the
ethnic attitudes of the Romanians towards Roma, from the two famous socio-mythological
Questionnaires undertaken by B.P. Hașdeu in 1878 and 1882 respectively, which are also
unpublished (c.1,200 and 20,000 pages respectively).
12. I came across this previously unknown information on Haşdeu’s biography in an
accounting record at the Romanian State Archive (ANIC, fond Ministerul de Interne, Dir.
Contabilitate, inv. 3132, dos. 114/1876).
13. Ficker 1879: 249–65 and Karpeles 1891: 31–3.
50 julieta rotaru
Transylvania,14 a Romanian historical province that was also a part of the

Austro-Hungarian Empire, similar statistics were gathered 15 years later.
In yet another Romanian historical province, Bessarabia, especially after
its annexation to the Russian Empire in 1812, the statistics of the time
rigorously record the number of each ethnic minority up until 1871 (Arbure
1899: 117).
The initiative of this 1878 investigation on Roms reflects the synchroni-
zation of Romania with similar initiatives in Europe, as shown above, in
the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Since this kind of research was uncommon
among the statistics gathered by the Interior Ministry, Barbu Constan-
tinescu was recruited, due to his status as specialist in the field who,
long before 1878, had devotedly travelled in the two Romanian provinces,
Wallachia and Moldavia, in order to gather Romani folk material. In
support of the hypothesis concerning his collaboration there is one letter
signed by the Minister of Interior, requesting the local authorities to “render
assistance and legal support, when necessary, to Mr. Barbu Constantinescu,
who travels the country in order to collect data on the history and origins
of the Gypsies.” Other evidence supporting the supposition of his official
employment is the fact that, in 1882, the Interior Ministry launched an
extensive investigation at community level to gather data for the Great
Geographical Dictionary, based on a 19-question questionnaire, written by
Barbu Constantinescu.15
One of the highlights of these 1878 statistics was that, as with those
undertaken in the same year in Bukovina and 15 years later in Transylvania,
they were undertaken with the specific purpose of collecting demographic
data on Roms, unlike other statistics gathered in the past, when only certain
ethnic and professional categories of Roms were registered, if at all. Because
Romanian statistics, in their different historical phases were carried out for
the purpose of establishing tax levels, the Roms were either assimilated with
other Romanian tax payers, or, when the statistics specifically mentioned the
“nation” among its entries,16 certain categories of Roms, unimportant for the
issue of tax levels, were left out.
This resulted in an unclear and hazy knowledge about the ethnic groups
of Romanian Roms, especially after their “Emancipation.” As shown in the
discussion between Miklosich and Hașdeu quoted above, by 1878, official
information17 provided by M. Kogălniceanu in 1837 – in particular about the
14. Magyarországban 1893. január 31-én végrehajtott czigányösszeirás eredményei.

15. See also, among others, “Chestionar Comunal”. BSGR 1882 III (1): 36–9.
16. Such are the relatively modern statistics recorded by the Russian occupant administration,
in 1831, and in 1838. The last one clearly registers the Roms as a distinct ethnic category.
17. For which he has drawn on the law’s texts, which precisely stipulated these three categories
three socio-juridical categories of Roms – further categorised according to

professions, had become unsatisfactory for Western and Romanian scholars
alike. It was, therefore, high time for a demographic investigation concerning
the Romanian Roms, and, upon Hașdeu’s recommendation, the Romanian
authorities summoned the first folklorist of Romani, namely Barbu Constan-
tinescu, to undertake it.
§ 2.2. Ms. BAR 3924

Carte românească, 279 pages, 33x20 cm, bound in leather. On the front
cover the title is brocade with golden letters, by the librarian: “Data about
the Gypsies in Romania, gathered by Barbu Cosntantinescu.” The pages are
numbered by the librarian. There is numbering made by Barbu Constan-
tinescu from 1 to 124. On the first page, this information is written by the
librarian: “Donated by Parthenie (sic!), former Metropolitan of Moldovia, on
June 5th, 1909.” It includes three notebooks, written by Barbu Constantinescu
with blue and black ink:
1. Title on the cover written by Constantinescu: “For Gypsy Language. Songs

1–182. June 20th, 1878, Bucharest.” 96 pages, numbered beginning with p. 4.
2. Title on the cover written by Constantinescu: “Gypsy Songs 183…<275> July 11th,
1878, Bucureşti.” p. 98–146 written, p. 147–192 empty.
Notebooks no. 1 and 2 contain songs and tales in Romani and Romanian
translations,18 collected from all the counties of Romanian principalities:
17 counties of Wallachia (Argeș, Brăila, Bucureşti, Buzău, Dâmboviţa, Dolj,
Ilfov, Gorj, Mehedinți, Muscel, Olt, Prahova, Râmnicu Sărat, Romanaţi,
Teleorman, Vâlcea, Vlaşca), from 89 urban and/or rural localities, and eight
urban and/or rural localities from Moldavia (Bacău, Fălciu, Iași, Neamţ,
Roman, Boghicea, Tecuci, Vrancea).
3. Title on the cover written by Constantinescu: “For the Dictionary of Gypsy

Language. October 29th, 1878, Bucharest.” P. 194–256r written, 256v-288 empty. It
contains entries for the letters: A, B, Ć [e], D, E, F, g, ģ[e], H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O,
P, R, S, Ş, T, Ţ, U, V, Y, Z.
(Roms belonging to the State; those belonging to the monasteries, and those belonging to
the boyars), further divided into six professional classes: art. 68 from the Constitution called
the “Organic Statute” (Rom. “Regulamentul Organic/Reglement Organique”), rendered
bilingually, in Romanian and French and issued in 1831 for Wallachia, and in 1832 for Moldavia
by the Russian administration.
18. These songs were critically edited, with English translation (Rotaru 2016).
52 julieta rotaru
Figure 1. Manuscript BAR 3923. Plan of the work “Gypsies in Romania”
§ 2.3. Ms. BAR 3925

Carte românească, 239 pages, 21x18 cm, bound in leather. On the front
cover the title is brocade with golden letters, by the librarian: “Data about
the Gypsies in Romania, gathered by Barbu Constantinescu.” The pages are
numbered by the librarian. On the first page this piece of information is
written by the librarian: “Donated by Parthenie (sic!), former Metropolitan
of Moldovia, on June 5, 1909.” It includes riddles, proverbs, lists of words and
expressions in Romani, etc. The manuscript is written by various hands, with
pencil, and is annotated by Barbu Constantinescu.
§ 2.4–5. Ms. BAR 5056 and ms. 5062

Another manuscript, ms. BAR 5056, was donated in 1921 to the Romanian
Academy Library. It hails from Clinceni’s collection. It contains the notes that
Constantinescu took as a student in Leipzig, amongst which is a sketch of the
“History of the Romanian Orthodox Church,” a subject in which Dragomir
Demetrescu (the disciple who allegedly took the manuscript collection upon
Barbu Constantinescu’s death) in particular, was much interested.19
Similarly, in April 1921, ms. 5062 came to the Romanian Academy
Library, containing the notes taken by Clinceni from the course “History of
Romanian Orthodox Church” taught by Barbu Constantinescu at the Faculty
of Theology in 1866–1867.
§ 2.6. Ms. BAR 4973

There is one more manuscript hailing from Clinceni’s collection, whose
date of provenience in the Library of the Romanian Academy is not known,
which is ms. BAR 4973, containing the “First Catalogue of the Faculty of
Theology books,” written by Barbu Constantinescu when he was appointed
the first librarian of the newly founded Library of the Faculty of Theology,
on 16 November 1868. It is recorded that after nearly two decades (Negulescu
1896: 333) this actual catalogue “was still in use for orientation and books’
localisation.” The manuscript that we possess in fact contains two catalogues
rendered by Barbu Constantinescu, and joined together probably by Clinceni.
The first is a list of the titles, with bibliographical descriptions, of the books
and manuscripts which once belonged to the Metropolitan Seat of Ungro-
Vlachia and to the richest private library in the South-Eastern Europe,
that of Nicolae Mavrocordat (Iorga 1926). Barbu Constantinescu did the
19. He actually held the chair of “Universal Church History” at the Faculty of Theology upon
Barbu Constantinescu’s death. The course, taught from 1 December 1866 by Constantinescu,
included history of the Romanian Orthodox Church. Dragomir Demestrescu’s course was
published as “Istoria bisericii române,” 1942, from the notes taken by his student, Veniamin
G. Ploeșteanu, who became patriarchal vicar.
54 julieta rotaru
monumental job of cataloguing the entirety of the material and in a second

phase, he intended to enter the titles, by subject, in domains and subdomains
such as logic, philosophy of religion, prose, poetry (dramatic poetry, epic
poetry, etc), mythology (Oriental mythology, Semitic mythology, Occidental
mythology, Egyptian mythology, etc). This second catalogue, arranged by
subject, remained unfinished, yet, one may see it plagiarized in the catalogue
published in 1890 (Catalogul Bibliotecii Seminarului Central din București,
așezat după alfabet și după limbi, făcut și tipărit cu cheltuiala P.S. Silvestru
Bălănescu, Episcop de Huși, București: Tipografia cărților bisericești).
§ 3. Barbu Constantinescu: Some biographical notes

Despite his international recognition and national popularity during the epoch,
his industrious nature in having established new educational institutions,
and his having embarked upon the untracked path of Romani studies in
Romania, not much is known about Barbu Constantinescu today, apart
from the sketchy lines in some reference works quoted in the bibliography
of this article. Nonetheless, the information (in many respects inaccurate)
about these works is sourced mainly from the report given five years after his
premature death, by his disciple, Ștefan Negulescu (see Negulescu 1896). This
report was partly copied by Ștefan Negulescu’s professor, Petre Gârboviceanu
(Gârboviceanu 1903). He was, in turn, a disciple of Barbu Constantinescu,
and eventually continued the latter’s projects in the fields of education and
ecclesiastical instruction. Fortunately, Petre Gârboviceanu attained a greater
notoriety and his work is quite well known in Romania. Nevertheless, in
his published works, he acknowledged the help he received from his teacher
(including personal financial support to pursue his Ph.D. in Philosophy at the
University of Leipzig), and the training he received from his spiritual guide.
§ 3.1. Trained to become an Eastern Orthodox priest

Barbu was born in 1839 in Ploiesti City, the son of the priest Constandin,
aged 36 (who was the son of the priest Gheorghe), and Maria, aged 21. He had
one sister, Paraschiva, three years older, one brother, one year younger, who
eventually became Prelate Calistrat Orleanu “Bârlădeanu” (b. 1840–d. 1916),
and another much younger brother, Petre, who was licentiate in law in Paris
(in 1880).
They all lived at no. 175 in the “Holy Emperors” district, so-called because
of the eponymous church, and which, at that time, looked very much like a
village. In 1838, 286 families lived there who cultivated 143 acres, and lived
on livestock, as follows: 117 horses; 35 cattle; 410 cows; 11 sheep; 155 goats; two
pigs. They had 89 hives, 443 plum and 780 mulberry trees.
Figure 2. Barbu Constantinescu (1839–1891)

56 julieta rotaru
Figure 3. Barbu Constantinescu’s brother, the Prelate Calistrat Orleanu

(1840–1916)
Barbu attended one of the four Greek primary schools in Ploiesti. One
day, Bishop Stratonichias Calistrat, the vicar of the Primate Metropolitan
(i.e. patriarch), having passed through Ploiesti and having attended a service
officiated by the priest Constandin, assisted by his son, was attracted by the
boy’s “wisdom and humbleness” (Negulescu 1896: 332). Upon the bishop’s
request, Barbu’s father consented to leave his son in Bucharest in order to
study at the Theological College. Graduates of four classes were admitted
to this college; the study duration was four years, and after graduation, the
graduates were directly ordained priests. After graduation, Barbu’s father
decided to find him a fiancée in order to be ordained a priest in Ploiesti.
A contemporaneous anecdote says that Barbu, who wished to continue his
education, ran away to Bucharest on the engagement evening. He remained
a studious bachelor until he was 45 years old, when he married one of
his students, Ecaterina Ioanovici, a graduate who became a teacher at the
prestigious college “Asylum Elena Doamna,” where he was Director of
Studies. His marriage took place in the same year as the marriage of his good
friend, Ioan Slavici, one of the chief Romanian novelists, who also married a
graduate and teacher at the same college.
Regarding the four years’ training in the Theological College, Barbu Constan-
tinescu always maintained that it was insufficient for becoming a priest, people
who he expressly described in his writings as the illuminators of the nation.
His project to change that to eight years’ training for theological secondary
education became a reality through his disciple, Petre Gârboviceanu, who
supported the law for the reorganization of the institution, 2230/29 May 1893.
Yet, at that time, there was not a Faculty of Theology where Constantinescu,
as a Theological College graduate, could continue his education.20 Hence, he
pursued his training at the “Saint Sava” College, the most important institution
of secondary education in Romania, completing the four years in two. He was
an eminent pupil, and in 1860, he won a scholarship to study at the University
of Leipzig, at the Faculty of Theology and Faculty of Philosophy. He studied
there for 11 semesters (April 1861–August 1866) and was licentiate of Theology
and earned a Ph.D. in Philosophy.
§ 3.2. Licentiate of Theology and Ph.D. in Philosophy at University of Leipzig

(1861–66) and first exponent of Herbatianism in Romania
His professors at the Faculty of Theology were: Bruno Benno Brückner
(1824–1905), professor of Practical Theology (1853–1869), Dean of the Faculty
20. Nonetheless, the Faculty of Theology was founded in Bucharest on 11 November 1881 at
the Metropolitan Calinic’s initiative, with the intercession of Bishop of Arges, Gennady, and
Barbu Constantinescu’s instrumental efforts.
58 julieta rotaru
of Theology, University of Leipzig (1858–1860, 1864–1865), and Rector of the

University of Leipzig (1868–1869); Heinrich Leberecht Fleischer, professor
of Oriental Languages (1840–1888); Hölemann Gustav Herman, professor
of Theology (1853–1867); Hugo Rudolf Hofmann, professor of Theology
(1862–1917); Karl Friedrich August Kannis, professor of Dogmatics (1850–1885);
Viktor Gotthlard Lechler, professor of Church History (1858–1888), Dean of
the Faculty of Theology, University of Leipzig (1862–1863); Friedrich Wilhelm
Lindner, professor of Catechism and Pedagogy (1825–1864); Richard Adelbert
Lipsius, professor of Theology (1855–1861); Christoph Ernst Luthardt, professor
of Lutheran Theology (1856–1896), Dean of the Faculty of Theology (1860–1861;
1866–1867); and Hermann Brockhaus, professor of Indian languages and
literature (1848–1877), Rector of the University of Leipzig (1872–1873).
His professors at the Faculty of Philosophy were: Heinrich Ahrens, professor
of Political Science (1860–1863); Friedrich Carl Biedermann, professor of
Political Science (1865–1891); Heinrich Bernhard Christian Brandes, professor
of History (1850–1865–1884); Karl Christian Bruhns, professor of Astronomy
(1859–1860–1868); Georg Curtius, professor of Classical Philology (1862–1885);
Delitsch Otto, Professor of Geography (1865–1866); and Tuikson Ziller,
Professor of the Philosophy of Law (Rechtsphilosophie) and Pedagogy
(1853–1862); professor of Pedagogy and Didactics (1862–1882).
In the last two years of his stay in Leipzig, Barbu Constantinescu intensively
studied pedagogy with Tuikson Ziller. As a part of his teaching practice, he
visited cultural and educational institutions in Lepizig. Throughout his
activity in Romania, he always resorted to his experience in Leipzig and to
the models for education seen there.
By that time, in 1865, Alexandru Odobescu, one of the greatest historians
and the first professor of archaeology in Romania, was a member in the
General Education Council. He pledged himself to the efficiency of the rural
schools, which numbered around 2,000, but had no good teachers: “In four
villages which are in my domain in Dragomirești, I have schools but, I swear,
I do not have four boys who know to read and write … The teachers are not
capable … I have a fake school at Dragomirești, where the teacher has become
a swineherd” (Gârboviceanu 1906: XXXIII).
This was the situation of education in Romania in August 1866 when
Barbu Constantinescu finished his advanced pedagogical studies in Leipzig
and came back to his country to start his career as an educationist, reformist
and creator of new educational institutions. On 1 December the same year,
he was appointed assistant professor of Universal Church History and
Philosophy at the Theological College. Petre Staicu, the future Partenie
Clinceni, Metropolitan of Moldavia and Suceava, attended his course and
took notes that are now preserved in ms. BAR 5062.
The Theological College was not much better than the overall situation of
general civic education already described. The following anecdote, told by
one of the first disciples of Barbu Constantinescu, Boroianu, a future priest,
may best describe the state of affairs of two Romanian institutions of vital
importance, improperly re-relocated to inadequate locations:
The third day, around 9.00 a.m. we all21 were wandering on the streets, two by
two, visiting Bălăceanu’s houses on [street] Șerban Vodă. Here we found the state
archive and Mr. Hașdeu, its director. The yard was jammed with bullock carts. We,
too, helped to load the archive which was relocated to Mihai Vodă. In two days,
everything was set and the place was emptied for the college. Within a week, the
courses started to the great contentment of all and to the special satisfaction of those
who struggled to reopen the school. (Călinescu and Boroianu 1904: 114)
It was in these conditions that Barbu Constantinescu embarked with zeal

upon the reformation of the college, from his position of professor and
interim director. Due to his abnegation, within two years, he was elected by
the professorial council to be librarian of the newly founded Library of the
Theological College, wherein he catalogued all the material. (v. supra § 2.6)
Nonetheless, in a short time he was blamed for having smuggled books, as the
official handover record was allegedly missing. I found this official handover
record No. 6210/31 March 1868, in ms. BAR 5048, signed among others, by
Barbu Constantinescu.
This was but the beginning of a difficult path paved by obstacles set by
authorities who were actually appointed to sustain projects synchronic with
other European countries. Barbu Constantinescu spared no efforts to translate
and publish in national educational journals, current German legislation
regarding the system of education22 or best practices and discussions from
German conferences on learning.23
How many complicated circumstances, especially in the sphere of learning and

education do not pass before our eyes without being explained by our publications!
School programs change, school regulations change, special schools are established,
other get closed, laws are made, from which the fate of the teaching staff is pending
21. i.e. a group of collegians from the final year, who were undertaking negotiations with the
Minister to reopen the Theological College, which had been delayed for two years due to lack
of premises and other basic requirements.
22. “Project of law regarding education in Prussia.” [Rom. “Proiect de lege pentru instrucțiune
în Prusia.”] Societatea pentru învăţătura poporului român. Foaie mensuală. I, 9 (1870): 74–150;
I; 12 (1870): 50ff.
23. The 19th Congress of German school teachers held in Vienna. [Rom. Congresul XIX al
învăţătorilor germani ţinut în Viena (27–30 mai)]. Societatea pentru învăţătura poporului
român. Foaie mensuală. I, 6 (1870): 20–32; I; 8 (1870): 41–3; II, 1 (1871): 13–21; II, 3 (1871): 169–73;
II, 4 (1872): 249–66; II, 5 (1872): 344–50.
60 julieta rotaru
for long time; all these may require special journals to be debated in, in order to see
how these problems are to be solved, based on the principles of pedagogical sciences
as well as on the experiences made by other countries that have progressed further
than us on the path of culture. (Constantinescu 1883a: 1)
Barbu Constantinescu, through his teacher Tuikson Ziller, came in contact

with the Herbatian ideas applied to education, which he further developed in
his articles published in various educational journals and in the journals that
he administered24 or founded.25
Give people schools!

If once the sword was the only weapon to defend a nation against another, that
weapon is today the book, specifically teaching and science, which is stronger than
a steel sword.
If the safest guarantee for the future of a country was once a well-organized army,
today that guarantee is the school, which, if at the height of its mission, may do more
than an army. …
It is not enough to spread light merely here and there, by highlands, but its rays
must rule everywhere, in hut and in palace, in villages and in towns.
We have many enlightened men, but we do not have a cultivated people capable to
fully understand these fellows’ aspirations and to be able to achieve them.
In other words, a more enlightened people; and henceforth more able to meet the
obligations and to defend the rights of a free citizen of their country [emphasised by the
author n. J.R.]: that is what Romania needs today, so that it may safely look towards
its future. Good schools in all municipalities and devoted teachers, true apostles of
light, morality and patriotism: these are the things which Romanian people need in
order to be enlightened and become a strong and invincible shield for their country.
And if such villages still exist in Romania, where one may find even a single
Romanian who does not know at least to read and write, we cannot say that it was
done enough for enlightening the people. (Constantinescu 1883b: 1)
§ 3.3. Reformist and creator of new educational institutions

It is for these rural teachers, mentioned in the report of Alexandru Odobescu,
quoted above, that Barbu Constantinescu made many decisions, mainly as a
Director of the Pedagogical College of the private popular school called the
“Society for the Education of Romanian People.”26 He changed the length of
24. Barbu Constantinescu was chief editor of the semi-monthly journal Învețatorul between
1 November 1879 and 15 February 1880. He was chief editor from 1890 until the death of
the monthly journal Lumina pentru toti, revista enciclopedica ilustrată pentru luminarea
poporului.
25. He founded the journal Educatorul. Ziar pedagogic şi literar. Organ al corpului didactic
din azilul „Elena Doamna” şi „Ateneul Elisabeta,” Bucureşti: Tipografia Academiei Române,
Laboratorii României I (1883), nr. 1–43 and II (1884) 1–27, which was issued for only two years.
26. He occupied this position from 13 November 1877 until 10 June 1888, when he presented his
education at the Pedagogical College from two to four years, introduced a

final qualification examination, and added more disciplines, among which
was French:
There is no doubt that dr. Barbu Constantinescu was in touch with everything that
had been done and was done abroad for such schools, and he wished Society’s school
to be a model school in every respect. This results from all directives he undertook
and his entire activity as a school Director. Besides the disciplines from the official
curriculum, he introduced French, so that future teachers may have access to the
French pedagogical literature. (Gârboviceanu 1906: XLV)
These measures led to the recognition of the Pedagogical College as a State

institution in 1884. Barbu Constantinescu introduced a preparatory class for
applicants to the Pedagogical College. This was compulsory, as the situation
of future schoolteachers was not regulated.
What the primary school graduates, aspiring to enter the Pedagogical College,
were to do until 17 years old? Many of them repeated the primary classes until
they got bored, and others, from the time of graduation from primary school until
the age when they could be admitted to the Pedagogical College, lost whatever
little knowledge they had learned. These were the sound reasons that urged Barbu
Constantinescu to create the preparatory class. (Gârboviceanu 1906: LXXV–VI)
In spite of this progress, in 1886, the preparatory class was stopped and new
disciplines from the curriculum (including French)27 of the Pedagogical
College and the final qualification examination were removed by the Ministry.
However, a few decades later, these progressive measures taken by Barbu
Constantinescu for this school were ultimately adopted by the Ministry for
the entire system of education.
On 1 April 1881, Barbu Constantinescu created the Romanian Association
for Kindergarten, also called Froebelian school. On 23 April, the first
Froebelian school in Romania opened, in the quarters of Saint Ekaterina
Church, where Barbu Constantinescu also lived. It was soon visited by the
King, who assured Barbu Constantinescu of his support for this enterprise
(Învățătorul IV (21) 1 July 1881: 529). Barbu Constantinescu opened the next
demission. However, he was professor there for two decades, teaching the following disciplines:
history (1870–April 1871, and March 1885–June 1888); geography (1870–1871 and October
1878–2 September 1880); pedagogy (January 1874–June 1888); Romanian language (1874–June
1878); French (1879–October 1884); and religion (1 September 1885–24 September 1885).
27. It is precisely French, among other disciplines, which was removed from the curriculum
enriched by Barbu Constantinescu at the Theological College, in 1872, despite its necessity felt
by the collegians. “Nonetheless, good pupils taught themselves French and sciences which
were deleted from the curriculum. With this curtailed curriculum, the Theological College
continued from 1872 to 1893, exactly 21 years” (Călinescu and Boroianu 1904: 137).
62 julieta rotaru
kindergarten at the orphanage “Asylum Elena Doamna,” where he had been

Director of Studies for a decade, and which was under the patronage of the
Queen Elizabeth.
As anticipated, the Faculty of Theology was founded in Bucharest on 11
November 1881, through the intervention of the Bishop of Arges, Gennady,
to the Metropolitan Calinic. The contemporaries acknowledged Barbu
Constantinescu’s contribution to its creation. Hence, he became a professor
there and its first dean, functions in which he served voluntarily. He was
Dean from 16 November 1882 to 1884, when the Faculty became an official
institution and, due to intrigues, he was left out. He was called back to serve
on 1 April 1888, and remained there until his death. He was professor to
many generations of theologians, some of whom became great personalities,
professors and deans at the Faculty of Theology, such as Partenie Clinceni,
Dragomir Demetrescu, D.G. Boroianu, and Petre Gârboviceanu, who we
have already mentioned.
As a third generation of priests, Barbu Constantinescu’s brother followed
the family tradition and became a high priest, Prelate Calistrat Orleanu. He
was a doctor in Theology from the University of Athene, a Synod member, a
professor at the Faculty of Theology and an author of manuals, among which
were two books on religion and ancient history, respectively, written together
with his brother, which we shall further mention. However, he shared the
same progressive thinking of Barbu Constantinescu regarding religious
education.
This opposed him to the Synod and directly to the Patriarch Calinic
Miclescu, which resulted in his abusive exclusion from the Synod. In the
meeting of 15 June 1883, the Synod, under the chairmanship of the Patriarch
(called the Metropolitan Primate) and in the presence of the Minister of
Religious Affairs and Public Instruction, discussed the so-called problem
created by the official recognition in Romania of the Catholic Bishop, with
the consent of all the central powers and his being called with the confusing
designation “Metropolitan.” The Bishop of Arges thus expressed the position
of the Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church:
Catholics have gone too far with their institutions of all kinds. They have established
schools of all kinds and for both sexes, and I am sure that most of our citizens’
children attend those Catholic schools. Well, it is not enough of tolerance? (Mărzescu
1884: V)
They all voted to make a resolution against the Catholic Bishop, except for
Orleanu. The Metropolitan Primate asked him to explain his refusal to vote,
and he replied that it was his legal right. This led to conflict, as a result of
which Orleanu was excluded from the Synod; he was prohibited to serve
further as a priest. At that time Calistrat Orleanu was involved in a trial
against the Synod, during which we see Barbu Constantinescu supporting
his brother who somehow attracted the latter’s demission from the position of
dean of the Faculty of Theology. As an anecdote, Orleanu’s advocate was one
Mărzescu, who exactly one decade earlier defended Calinic Miclescu, who
was similarly, abusively excluded from the Synod. That time, justice decided
in favour of the future Metropolitan Primate Calinic Miclescu. The same
justice decided just the opposite, in a similar case, ten years later.
This unfair trial made Barbu Constantinescu extremely unpopular in some
quarters of the Church. However, he continued his reformation of religious
education. Although he was not a staunch Orthodox, he advocated for the
teaching of religion in primary and secondary schools:
A third deficiency in the curriculum of rural schools is the exclusion of religious

education in the Ist, IInd, Vth and VIth grades. All such minded teachers admit that
without religious education, people’s self-expression cannot be developed and
strengthened. If in France and other countries, out of political reasons, exertions
are made to remove religious education from school, for those countries there is no
danger of people becoming miserable, because they have an enlightened clergy and
eminent preachers, and it is in this way the religious education manages to be taught.
(Constantinescu 1884: 1)
§ 3.4. Author of school and college manuals and university courses

Barbu Constantinescu is the author of manuals for primary school, from 1st28
to 4th grade,29 approved by the Ministry, successfully used in the country
28. For 1st grade he published Romanian Primer [Rom. Abecedar românesc prelucrat, de
Dr. Barbu Constantinescu. Carte aprobată de Onor. Minister al Cultelor şi Instrucţiunei
Publice pentru Şcoalele primare din România. Bucureşti: Tipografia Statului, 1874. 116 pp.]
He acknowledges the sources of the book, namely Albert Hästers’ Lehr- und Lesebuch, oder,
Der sinnliche und sittliche Anschauungsunterricht für die Mittelklassen katholischer Volkss-
chulen, Bädeker, 1863, and Karl Ferdinand Ranke’s Chrestomathie aus lateinischen Dichtern
vorzüglich aus Ovidius, Berlin, 1850. The successful manual was published in 39 editions until
1891, the last three with illustrations. In the preface to the eighth edition he writes: “The first
two editions of 70,000 copies printed at State Typography having passed in less than three
years, I thought thereby encouraged publishing this primer at Publishing House Socec and
here we are in front of the VIIIth edition of 20,000 copies, which shows quite clearly that it
is one of the most methodical manuals.” (Constantinescu 1880: 4). In the year of his death,
he publishes The new Romanian primer (with illustrations), which is meant for rural schools.
[Rom. Noul abecedar românesc (cu ilustraţiuni) de Dr. Barbu Constantinescu. Prelucrat
conform programei oficiale. Destinat pentru clasa I primară-rurală şi clasa I (divisiunile I, II)
primară de ambe sexurile. Ploeşti, Edit. stab. Progresul I. Gheorghiu, D. Hernia & Co., 1891.
108 pp.]
29. Barbu Constantinescu was the chief editor of a panel which published a Reader in three
parts, for 2nd to 4th grade. [Rom. Carte de citire prelucrată de o asociaţie de învăţători.
64 julieta rotaru
and used for teaching Romanian in Transylvania and in the Romanian

communities from South Danube.
A reader should display the living speech of the people with ideas, feelings, customs
and habits, its material and intellectual needs. Therefore, the reader should be
written in the current language. When such a book does not reflect the people in its
entireness, then it does not reach its goal.
A reform of our reading books has been needed for a long time, and the teaching
staff from certain intellectual quarters tried their best to accomplish this task.
Nevertheless, only a few were well-trained and, often, without any principles, they
worked troubling children’s minds with an alien language, feelings and reality, so
that the gap between school and people became increasingly large. The practical
part of life was completely neglected, so the child, learning with no interest at all,
by the completion of schooling, also forgot the book. The reader written by a panel of
associated teachers from Bucharest, to which I greatly contributed, was an exception
to that. (Constantinescu 1891: 1)
As hinted in this preface, his methods were not always accepted. It was
the time when a unitary Romanian language was crystalized. At some
conferences of Romanian teachers,30 Barbu Constantinescu was accused of
having used in his manuals the “Romanian spoken in Bucharest,” which was
not true. Yet, this accusation reflected his vision of using a standard language,
free of regionalisms.
He was a critic of the dogmatic ways of teaching religion in schools and
colleges, hence, one year before his death, he was the head a panel of authors
for a manual of the Sacred history of the New Testament [Rom. Istoria Sacră a
Noului Testament] for secondary schools, pedagogical colleges, gymnasiums
and high schools.
The problem that we meet in the development of religious feeling is on the one hand,
the lack of good books of religion, which should guide, in the process of learning,
Bucuresci: Edit. Librăriei Socecu şi C-nia, 1875, In-8°, 180 p., cu ilustraţii, 45 bani.] The book
was issued in 21 editions until 1889. “They were the best readers in the epoch, and as for
their content, they will always remain appropriate.” (Gârboviceanu 1906: LXX–LXXI) In
1889, the volume was revised with substantial additions by A. Odobescu, one of the greatest
Romanian historians, and I. Slavici, one of the paramount novelists. Curiously, the name of
Barbu Constantinescu was removed from the authors. This is probably due to the fact the
Barbu Constantinescu did not consent to the changes made by his friends and long-time
collaborators. He issued in the next years, 1890–1891, the Romanian Reader in a panel together,
among others, with the famous poet George Coșbuc. Nevertheless, in the next year, after
Barbu Constantinescu’s death, the 24th edition of his first original reader, without Odobescu’s
and Slavici’s revision, appeared.
30. “From the Congress of the teaching staff, held on 26th, 27th, and 28th March, current year,
in Bucharest” [Rom. “De la Congresul corpului didactic, ținut în zilele de 26, 27 și 28 martie
a.c. în București”], Lumina pentru toți V, 10 (1890): 631.
both, teacher and pupil, and on the other hand, inexperience regarding the methods
of teaching religion. The method should enable the teaching of religion to the extent
that it should make this study a pleasure and should also elevate the pupil’s heart to
the extent, where everything is but life … As a rule, for teaching religious ideas to the
youth in school, it should be understood that dogmatic ideas are not essential, but
are more practical moral training, ensuing from dogmatic ideas. Regarding religion,
and other knowledge, which we teach to children in school, we must have in mind
the old principle of education: “Not for school, but for life we learn.” (Constantinescu
1890a: IV)
There was no field of education into which Barbu Constantinescu did not
contribute. This was due to his vast teaching experience. Whatever discipline
he taught, he felt the need to write a manual. Thus, he taught history and he
subsequently created a new discipline and wrote together with other authors,
Ancient history through biographies [Rom. Istoria Antică în Biografii] for
secondary schools, pedagogical colleges, gymnasiums and high schools:
History, by reproducing the events of the past, has no other purpose but to make
us to justly judge, and to strengthen our will and character, so as to be useful to
ourselves, our fellows, and our country, by taking the model of the most significant
men of all time and emulating their actions. This is the reason for introducing in
the school curricula the study of history through biographies. Explaining the facts
should be simple, up-to-date, and based on truth. There should be taught, especially
at the earliest age of the child, legends, maxims and stories that are valuable food for
the vivid imagination of the child. (Constantinescu 1890b: 2–3)
In the council meeting of 24 March 1877, the National Geographical Society

chose a committee to draft the syllabus for a manual of geography for
primary school. Barbu Constantinescu read and subsequently published in
the committee’s report:
In fact, the study of geography has an important influence on the intellectual

formation of a person and is the place where the pupil finds a huge field where he
can enrich his mind with valuable knowledge. It also awakens the child’s faculty of
observation, sharpens his intelligence, strengthens his memory, develops his sense
of nature’s beauty, to know better and love his homeland and finally, to give young
men’s vivid fantasy healthy food for thought …
In the teaching of geography, starting from the subjective development of the
child’s personality, one should be consistent with the well-known pedagogical
principle that one must proceed from the closest to the farthest, from the known to
the unknown. The birthplace and first home of the child will be examined firstly, and
subsequently, other parts of the globe will be explained …
The syllabus will include three distinct parts for 2nd, 3rd and 4th grades of primary
school: Part 1, 2nd grade: first notions of geography, school and parental home,
66 julieta rotaru
village, town; Part 2, 3rd grade: Romanian mountains, valleys, rivers, flora, fauna etc;
Part 3, 4th grade: The earth and other heavenly bodies. … Language must be fair and
written with phonetic spelling. (BSGR II, 1, (1877): 68–71)
§ 3.5. An accurate philologist

He always pledged an orthographic rendering of schoolbooks, in all fields. As
an illustration of his philological accuracy, we may quote from his conference
conveyed at the National Geographic Society. For five years, the Society
was working on the largest ever project in the field, the Great Geographical
Dictionary, based on a questionnaire of 19 questions, written by Barbu
Constantinescu, as described earlier. His orthographical rules, explained
herewith, are accepted and recognized as correct even today.
After a 10-minute break, upon the reopening of the meeting, the King gave the
floor to Dr. Barbu Constantinescu, who entertained the assembly on the issue of
[Romanian] geographical designations … The conference focused on a practical
issue, on how one must reproduce geographical designations. After he shows the
general rules, he explains that it is impossible for these designations to be reproduced
precisely and uniformly by all nations, but each nation adjusts them according to the
peculiarities of its language, and he concludes on the following:
a) the geographical proper names, long popular among people and attested in the
Romanian literature, must remain in this form. Thus, one says Viena and not Wien,
Lipsca and not Leipzig, Florența rather than Firenze, Londra and not London,
Germania and not Deutschland etc.
b) for geographic proper names which were simplified, belonging to the nations that
admitted the Latin alphabet, we should admit their official spelling: thus, one should
say Franche Comté, Langue doc, Canterbery and not Franco-contea, Language doc,
Canturia etc.
c) in the countries where Romanians live as well and where they employ Romanian
names for geographical locations, we should admit the Romanian proper names,
such as: Sibiu, Cluj, Oradea Mare instead of Hermanstadt, Clausemburg or Kolosvar,
Grosswardein and others.
d) for geographic proper names from countries which do not use the Latin alphabet,
such as Russia and the peoples of the Balkan Peninsula, Asia, Africa and Oceania, we
reproduce them as they sound in their local pronunciation, leading us more from the
form admitted in the Italian geographical literature, since the Italian pronunciation
adjusts better than any other to our language.
e) for geographic proper names, phonetic spelling should be used, as it is accepted by
the Society for its geographical dictionary, avoiding etymologies like Târgu-Vestei,
Selatina and others.
(Minutes of the meeting, 13 February 1887. BSGR 1887 VIII, 1 (1))
As seen above, he considered the knowledge of French for schoolteachers

of fundamental importance in order to have access to the pedagogical
bibliography written originally in French or translated, since France at that
time had programmatically translated books from all fields of research.
During his life, he translated from a French minor poet, Antonin Roques,31
who lived in Romania. Antonin Roques is known for having written a
play, “Constantin Brâncoveanu’s martyrdom,” which was staged at Jassy on
31 October 1874, and which was seen by the national poet, M. Eminescu,
who wrote a review, which remained unpublished. Other translations,
from J.W. Goethe,32 Adelbert von Chamisso,33 and Edgar Alan Poe34 were
published post mortem, probably by Dragomir Demetrescu, who allegedly
had the legacy over his teacher’s manuscripts.
As already seen, his philological accuracy in rendering school manuals
caused opposition with some reluctant teachers who wished to bring region-
alisms and grammatical particularities of their regional language into their
teaching.
§ 3.5.1. Ion Heliade− Rădulescu Barbu Constantinescu, parallel lives

Barbu Constantinescu, as his forerunner at the directorate of the “Society
for the Education of Romanian People,” the paramount cultural personality
Ion Heliade Rădulescu, founding member of the Romanian Academy and its
first president, adopted the same reformist attitude regarding the Romanian
language and, mutatis mutandis, in some ways shared the latter’s fate, which
will become clear from the following explanation.
In 1872, Barbu Constantinescu was professor of ecclesiastical history and
philosophy and acting professor of Latin at the Theological College. For
didactic requirements, he translated into Romanian one of the fundamental
books of Christianity, the first Orthodox and Catholic Catechesis written
31. “Fragmente din Noua carte a înțelepciunii de B. Antonin Roques, traduse de Dr. Barbu
Constantinescu. Cartea I. cugetări asupra instrucțiunei, educațiunei, ignoranței, studiului
și muncei. – Consilii și precepe, – Florile nemuririi, – Ciocârlanul. Cartea II. Consilii și
macsime. Cartea III. Poesia, artea in genere. Cartea IV. Consilii morale. Templul, moartea,
nemurirea.” Federațiunea 22–4, 26–7, 29, 1874, Budapesta.
32. Goethe, Povestea lui Achille, Prometheus. Poeme în traducere de Barbu Constantinescu,
Biblioteca pentru toţi, 922, Bucureşti: Librăria Universală Alcalay & co. 72 pp. [1908?]. Goethe,
Hermann şi Dorothea. Traducere de B.C., Biblioteca pentru toţi, 922, Bucureşti: Librăria
Universală Alcalay & co. 112 p., cu ilustraţii. [1908]. Preface date February 1908.
33. Chamisso, Omul care şi-a pierdut umbra, traducere de Barbu Constantinescu, Biblioteca
pentru toţi, 462, Bucureşti: Librăria Universală Alcalay & co. 1909.
34. Edgar Alan Poe, Nuvele extraordinare. Cele două asasinate din str. Morgue. Scrisoare
furată. Cărăbuşul de aur. Eleonora, Metyengertsein, Morella. Zigeia, traducere de Barbu
Constantinescu, Biblioteca Populară Socec, no. 101–103, Bucureşti: Editura Librăriei Socec &
co, 1910, 269 pp.
68 julieta rotaru
by Peter Moghila in Latin and Greek in 1640. By Barbu Constantinescu’s

time, there were three Romanian translations from Greek,35 yet he is the
first who undertook a philological translation of the text established in one
of the most reliable editions. One can see from the Preface of his work that
he consulted all the previous editions and translations of the Catechesis and
he translated the passages from the New and Old Testament from standard
editions, checking all variants and not leaving anything to the will of
chance. It was high time for such enterprise in Romanian culture:
In this work we encountered great difficulties because the Greek text is written in
common Greek, which at that time lacked scholarly awareness, and thus the style
is very rough. I translated the quotations from the Old and New Testament from
the original Greek … With the publication of this new translation I had no other
purpose than to give my modest contribution to the development of Romanian
literature … With the progress of the language, the need of a new translation of
this Catechesis was felt, because the old Romanian translations that had been good
in their time, nowadays are almost incomprehensible. (Constantinescu 1872: XXII)
One can sense the dimension of the reaction from some quarters of the
Romanian Orthodox Church from the blind criticism of two priests who
attempted a new translation, 70 years after Barbu Constantinescu’s translation:
This unsuccessful attempt to overcome the “old Romanian translations” that Dr.
B.C. wrongly deemed as “almost incomprehensible” for his time, caused bitter
shortcomings within several series of collegians, for they were provided with a
manual written in an incomprehensible language and totally alien from common
parlance in the villages from where they were hailing. And the painful consequences
immediately started to be seen in the vocabulary of our priests and in all the church
writings at the end of the XIXth century, because instead of the clean Romanian
language, preserved in the old service books, it now emerged a corrupted and
incomprehensible language which was not understood not only by the people, but
sometimes even by those who used it. (Popescu and Moisescu 1942: LXI)
Indeed, the Catechesis in the new Romanian translation served as a

manual for the discipline of Orthodox confession, taught at the Theological
College and later at the Faculty of Theology, for more than a decade.36 Its
35. By that time, the Latin version was not available to scholars. It is only in 1927, that the
codex 1265, Parisinus, containing Greek and Latin versions, was discovered at the National
Library of France. The Latin version was edited by Antoine Malvy and Marcel Viller (Rome
& Paris 1927).
36. In 1886, one of Barbu Constantinescu’s famous disciples, Dr Dragomir Demetrescu,
published a book on dogmatics and in the preface, he pledged for the utility of this volume
that could successfully replace Barbu Constantinescu’s Catechesis, which was per se, a difficult
work (Demetrescu 1886: V).
status as a widely-read book is confirmed by its reediting within five years, in

1877, and shortly after, in 1879, to the great despair of some representatives of
the Church, 70 years later:
Perhaps his titles of Doctor of Philosophy and Master of Theology at the University
of Leipzig helped him to enjoy a major influence in our Church over the mountains.
Hence in 1877, when the Romanian Principalities were in the middle of the
Independence War, a new edition appeared in the typography of the Archbishopric
in Sibiu, we do not know under which circumstances … (Popescu and Moisescu
1942: lxii)
Indeed, the book was published with the approval of His High-Grace, the
Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Greek-Oriental Romanians in Hungary
and Transylvania (part of the Austrian Empire), Miron Romanolu, from the
Metropolitan chair in Sibiu city. Barbu Constantinescu’s book had never
received such ecclesiastical endorsement in Wallachia. The fact that a book
of fundamental importance for Eastern Orthodoxy was published in the
middle of the Second Russian-Turkish War which brought independence to
Wallachia and Moldavia, should be considered a great achievement for Barbu
Constantinescu and for the Archbishopric in Sibiu, alike.
In the very same year of the war, 1877, Barbu Constantinescu was once
more belittled by the Romanian authorities. He was Director of Studies at
the orphanage “Asylum Elena Doamna” and the right hand of its founder,
General Carol Davila, a French naturalized Romanian, the founder of the
Romanian Military Medical Service. Carol Davila had to leave for his war
mission and he left Barbu Constantinescu as stand-in general manager.
Each summer holiday, the orphan girls were taken to a camp in a popular
mountain resort. In the summer of 1877, Barbu Constantinescu was accused
by the Ministry that he had organized the camp without its official approval
and he was dismissed. Upon Carol Davila’s return from the battlefield, Barbu
Constantinescu was restored to his position.
Mutatis mutandis, in 1828, in the middle of the First Russian-Turkish War,
Ion Heliade Rădulescu was forced to leave Bucharest for Sibiu, the centre
of Romanian Eastern Orthodox spirituality, wherein he published the first
Romanian grammar, supporting the Latin alphabet and phonetic spelling,
and neologisms borrowed from Latin and Romance languages.
To conclude about Barbu Constantinescu’s Catechesis, the unfathomable
hatred against the book is demonstrated in the following:
This time [i.e. in 1879, third and last edition, n. J.R.] the book was printed by a
bookstore, out of futile mercantile interests, hence we suspect that enough copies
were published until 1891, when Barbu Constantinescu died, so there was no need for
a new edition. (Popescu and Moisescu 1942: lxii)
70 julieta rotaru
Shortly after his death, on 3 December 1893, a Synod committee decided to

undertake a new translation of the Catechesis, which appeared as a reaction
to Barbu Constantinescu’s version:
The language book will simply be that of the Romanian old ritual books, removing
precisely and carefully the neologisms that today stealthy slipped into our literature
and speech and which shook people’s language from its old Romanian historical
grounds.
The Synod committee entrusted this to Gennadie Enăceanu, with an

inadequate knowledge of Greek, but soon rejected his translation. However,
in 1895, a new translation of the Catechesis by Gennadie Enăceanu was
published under the aegis of the Holy Synod.
The ultimate hatred by some Romanian authorities of Barbu Constan-
tinescu belittled him even at his funeral:
Father Pimen Georgescu, the spokesman of His Eminence the Metropolitan Primate,
delivered a speech that ended with the words: “All those assembled here should ask
those whom the deceased upset to forgive him and we should also pray to God to
forgive him.” These last words made an ugly impression on the audience mostly
composed of teachers and pupils. The undersigned could not keep quiet in regard of
these, so I said: “Grieved assembly, there is no need to say who Dr. Barbu Constan-
tinescu was. I do not believe that there exists any Romanian with as little education
as possible, who has not heard the name of the illustrious deceased … In fact, you
can walk around all the schools in towns, villages, and the most remote corners
of the country, go to all the churches of Romania and you will see that all priests,
all teachers and pupils, all small children in the kindergartens know him and
uphold him in high esteem. Moreover, go beyond our country’s borders and visit
the Romanian schools across the Carpathian Mountains, the Romanian schools
of the Macedonians in Turkey, and you will hear them all in one voice uttering his
name with respect … This is mainly due to the fact that in the matters of culture
and propagation of light, the deceased sacrificed his time, rest, interests and the last
penny. He even took debts; it was enough for him to see a poor young man willing
to pursue his study and he would immediately give him all possible assistance, either
through his high relations, or by giving him his last penny. However, that young man
would not have been left helpless. … In his colossal activity, our respected deceased
encountered numerous obstacles, which distressed his soul and body, bringing him
here, where we see him today. … Due to his voluntary sacrifice for the cause of the
culture and the enlightenment of the Romanian nation, our duty is not to pray for
his forgiveness, because such a man could not willingly do wrong, and God, who
is always just, does not need our prayers; but what is dutiful for us now is to keep
indelible in our souls the respected name of the man who was Dr. Barbu Constan-
tinescu. May his memory last forever.”
(Bălteanu 1891: 419–23)
§ 4. Barbu Constantinescu’s intellectual legacy

Today, there is only a bust in front of the Faculty of Theology, in Bucharest, on
St Ekaterina Street, exactly at the place of the house wherein Barbu Constan-
tinescu lived throughout his life. The monument was erected 20 years after
his premature death, through the initiative of Petre Gârboviceanu and other
disciples, with subscriptions from over 1,000 donors, mainly schoolteachers
from various towns and villages from all counties of Romania. After paying
the expenses necessary to erect the bust, the organizing committee decided
to establish “an inalienable fund called ‘Barbu Constantinescu,’ which, in
time, should be able to provide a scholarship for a rural pupil studying at the
Pedagogical College of the “Society for the Education of Romanian People””
(Gârboviceanu 1911: 26).
Barbu Constantinescu was an authority on Romani language and culture,
which caused him to be employed by the Interior Ministry for the interpre-
tation and compilation of statistics on Roms in Romania (1878). He had a rich
library37 of 1,693 titles (v. ms. BAR, A 1057), among which were all the titles
on the Roms current in the epoch: Franz Miklosich, Ueber die Mundarten
und die Wanderungen der Zigeuner Europa’s; A. Vaillant, Les Rômes histoire
vraie des vrais Bohémiens; Charles Godfrey Leland, The English gipsies and
their language; August Friedrich Pott, Die Zigeuner in Europa und Asien;
Paul Bataillard, État de la question de l’ancienneté des Tsiganes en Europe
pour servir d’introduction à la question de l’importation du bronze dans le
nord et l’occident de l’Europe par les Tsiganes; Carl Hopf, Die Einwanderung
der Zigeuner in Europa, etc.
His name is seldom met except in the history of pedagogy works, as
author of school books, despite the fact that he was the first exponent of
Herbatianism in Romania, the founder of the first kindergarten in Bucharest
(1881), the reformist of the Pedagogical College which used to train school
teachers, and the factor behind its recognition as a State institution (1884), etc.
He contributed to all fields of education and he wrote a manual for whatever
discipline he taught (ancient history, Church history, geography, etc).
He is occasionally mentioned in the works of the history of Romanian
Christian Orthodox Church institutions, especially for being the first dean
of the Faculty of Theology, and because of his brother, the excommunicated
37. I came across the books donated by Constantinescu’s disciple, Partenie Clinceni, to the
Library “V.A. Urechia” from Galati city in 1896, as well as the donation act. Nowhere is it
mentioned that these books belonged to Barbu Constantinescu, although some of them have
his signature. A comparison of these books with the titles from the unpublished catalogue of
his library proves beyond doubt that the library of the first Romanian Romani specialist is
nowadays in Galati city.
72 julieta rotaru
Synod member, who was for a period, parish priest at the Romanian Chapel
in Paris. However, his philological translation from Greek of a fundamental
Christian text, Cathechesis by Peter Moghila, needs to be reconsidered,
as it was criticized merely for the neologisms he introduced, ignoring the
erudition of the author and his Hellenistic knowledge which attracted
B.P. Hașdeu’s appreciation. His study about the culture of the Phanariot
rulers published in Columna lui Traian II (1871) is very poorly known,
although it is significant, as it draws on an unedited text of the eighteenth
century found by him in the Library of the Theological College. Equally,
he was the first librarian here, and he composed the first catalogue of its
books and manuscripts. This was unfairly copied by his successors, as can
be seen by a simple comparison of the ample and accurate bibliographical
descriptions entered in ms. BAR 4973 (described above in § 2.6), with the
catalogue published in 1890 (Catalogul Bibliotecii Seminarului Central din
București, așezat după alfabet și după limbi, făcut și tipărit cu cheltuiala
P.S. Silvestru Bălănescu, Episcop de Huși, București: Tipografia cărților
bisericești).
His name is mentioned several times in the Preface of the Great
Geographical Dictionary (1898–1902), underlining his overlooked significant
contribution to the first encyclopaedia of its kind in Romania, which
remains a very important reference work. This article, dedicated to Barbu
Constantinescu’s life and work – published or in planning – highlights a
complex cultural personality, acting in various fields, in many of which he
was a pioneer.
Acknowledgement
I am very thankful to Professor Yaron Matras, who read a previous version
of this article, and to the learned anonymous reviewer, for their useful
suggestions.
References
Manuscripts
Romanian State Archive: Ms. ANIC, fond Ministerul de Interne, Dir. Contabilitate,
inv. 3132, dos. 114/1876.
Romanian State Archive: Ms. ANIC, Catagrafii, Partea I, inv. 501, dos. 75/1838,
Orașul Ploiești.
Romanian State Archive: Ms. BAR, A 1057. Barbu Constantinescu’s Library Book
Catalog. [Rom. Catalogul cărţilor din Biblioteca Barbu Constantinescu].
Romanian Academy Library: Ms. BAR, Mss. Rom. 3923. Year 1878. Barbu Constan-
tinescu, Gypsies in Romania. Volume I. [Rom. Barbu Constantinescu, Ţiganii
în România, Vol. I].
Romanian Academy Library: Ms. BAR, Mss. Rom. 3924, year 1878. Documents
about Gypsies in Romania, gathered by Barbu Constantinescu. Volume II.
[Rom. Material documentar cu privire la ţiganii din România, adunat de Barbu
Constantinescu. Vol. II].
Romanian Academy Library: Ms. BAR, Mss. Rom. BAR 3925, year 1878. Documents
about Gypsies in Romania, gathered by Barbu Constantinescu. Volume III.
[Rom. Material documentar cu privire la ţiganii din România, adunat de Barbu
Constantinescu. Volume III].
Romanian Academy Library: Ms. BAR, Mss. Rom. 5048. The handover official record
and the inventory of the books and manuscripts of the Metropolitan Seat of
Ungro-Vlachia, given to the Theological College of Bucharest in 1867–1868.
[Rom. Procesul verbal de primirea Biblioteci Sfintei Mitropoli<i> a Ungro-
Vlahiei, dăruită Seminarului Central din București în 1867–1868 și inventariul].
Romanian Academy Library: Ms. BAR, Mss. Rom. 5056, approximately 1864–1865.
Notes on history written by Dr. <Barbu> Constantinescu while a student at
Leipzig. <Notes in Romanian, Greek, and German on political and religious
history of the Romanians>. [Rom. Acte istorice scrise de Dr. <Barbu> Constan-
tinescu pe când era student la Lipsca. <Însemnări în limba română, greacă,
germană cu privire la istoria politică şi bisericească a românilor>].
Romanian Academy Library: Ms. BAR, Mss. Rom. 4973. The first catalogue of
the books of the Theological College Library of Bucharest. Manuscript by
Professor Dr. Barbu Constantinescu. [Rom. Catalogul cel dintîi al cărţilor
Bibliotecii Seminarului Central din Bucureşti. Manuscris de Profesorul Dr.
Barbu Constantinescu].
Romanian Academy Library: Ms. BAR, Mss. Rom. 5064. Year 1881/1882. Stylistics
taught by Miss V. Alexandrescu at the Asylum “Elena Doamna,” written
by Ecaterina Ioanovici, the future Mrs. Barbu Constantinescu, Bucharest,
1881–2. [Rom. Stilistica de d-șoara V. Alexandrescu, predată în Asilul Elena
Doamna, scrisă de Ecaterina Ioanovici, devenită doamna Barbu Constan-
tinescu, București 1881–2].
Romanian Academy Library: Ms. BAR, Mss. Rom. 5062. Approximately 1866–1867.
Church History by Dr. B<arbu> Constantinescu, Professor at the Theological
College of Bucharest, written by his pupil, Peter Stancu from Clinceni.
1866–7. [Rom. Istoria bisericească de Dr. B<arbu> Constantinescu, profesor la
Seminarul Central din Bucureşti, scrisă de şcolarul Petru Stancu din Clinceni.
1866–7].
Secondary sources
Arbure, C. Zamfir. 1899. Bessarabia in the nineteenth century. [Rom. Basarabia în
secolul XIX.], Bucureşti: Institutul de Arte Grafice, Carol Göbl.
Bălteanu, Eniu. 1891. Dr. Barbu Constantinescu. Lumina pentru toți, VII (7):
419–23.
74 julieta rotaru
BSGR= Romanian Geographic Society Bulletin [Rom. Buletinul Societăţii Geografice

Române], 1876–1891. Vol. I–XII. Societatea Geografică Română. Bucureşti: Socec.
Călinescu, Ștefan (econ.) and Boroianu, d.g. (dr.) 1904. History of the Pedagogical
Institute of Bucharest from the beginning to the setting in its own premises
[Rom. Istoria seminarului central din București de la început până la instalarea
în localul său propriu], Iași: Tipografia editoare “Dacia” Iliescu, Grossu & Comp.
Chelcea, Ion. 1944. Gypsies in Romania, ethnographic monography [Rom. Ţiganii
din România, Monografie etnografică], Biblioteca Statistică nr. 8, Bucureşti:
Editura Institutului Central de Statistică.
Constantinescu, Barbu. 1870. Draft Law for education in Prussia. [Rom. Proiect de
lege pentru instrucțiune în Prusia]. Societatea pentru învăţătura poporului
român. Foaie mensuală. I, 9 (1870): 74–150; I; 12 (1870): 50ff.
—— 1870–1872. The XIXth Congress of the German teachers held in Vienna
(May 27–30). [Rom. Congresul XIX al învăţătorilor germani ţinut în Viena
(27–30 mai)]. Societatea pentru învăţătura poporului român. Foaie mensuală.
București: Tipografia Petrescu-C & Costescu, I, 6 (1870): 20–32; I; 8 (1870): 41–3;
II, 1 (1871): 13–21; II, 3 (1871): 169–73; II, 4 (1872): 249–66; II, 5 (1872): 344–50.
—— 1872. Confession of faith of the Orthodox and Apostolic Church of the East.
translated with a preface by B.C. [Rom. Confesiunea ortodoxă a credinţei
bisericii catolice şi apostolice a Răsăritului. Din nou tradusă şi cu o prefaţă de
B.C.] Bucureşti: Tipografia Laboratorilor Români.
—— 1877a. Gypsy folk literature, unpublished texts with a glossary [Rom. Literatura
populară a ţiganilor, texturi inedite cu glosar]. Columna lui Traian, Revista
pentru istorie, lingvistică şi psihologia poporană. Editor B.P. Haşdeu. VIII
(1877), tom II, nos. 10–11, oct.–dec. 1877: Bucureşti: Noua tipografie a labora-
torilor români. 605–20.
—— 1877b. Orthodox confession of faith of the Catholic (all-embracing) and
Apostolic Church of the East. translated by Dr. B.C. Edition approved by His
Grace High-Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Greek-Oriental Romanians
in Hungary and Transylvania, Miron Romanolu [Rom. Confesiunea ortodoxă
a credinţei bisericii catolice (soborniceşi) şi apostolice a Răsăritului. Din
nou tradusă de Dr. B.C. Ediţiune aprobată de Exclenţa Sa, Înalt-Preasfinţitul
Arhiepiscop şi Mitropolit al Românilor greco-orientali din Ungaria şi
Translivania, Miron Romanolu], IInd ed., Sibiu: Tipografia Arhiedecesana.
—— 1878. Specimens of the Romanian Gypsy language and literature [Rom. Probe
de limba şi literatura țiganilor din România], Bucureşti: Tipografia Societăţii
Academice Române (Laboratorii Români).
—— 1879. Orthodox confession of faith of the Orthodox Church of the East. Edition
approved by His Grace High-Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Greek-
Oriental Romanians in Hungary and Transilvania, Miron Romanolu [Rom.
Confesiunea ortodoxă a credinţei bisericii otodoxe a Răsăritului. Tradusă din
nou de Dr. B.C. Ediţiune aprobată de Exclenţa Sa, Înalt-Preasfinţitul Arhiepiscop
şi Mitropolit al Românilor greco-orientali din Ungaria şi Translivania, Miron
Romanolu], IIIrd ed. Bucureşti: Editura Librăriei Socec & Compania.
—— 1880. Romanian primer [Rom. Abecedar românesc], VIIIth ed. Bucureşti: Edit.
Librăriei Socec & Comp. (Tip. Laboratorilor Romani).
—— 1883a. <Leading Article.> The Teacher. Pedagogical and literary newspaper.

Body of the teaching staff of the Asylum “Elena Doamna” [Rom. <Programa
ziarului>, Educatorul. Ziar pedagogic şi literar. Organ al corpului didactic din
azilul “Elena Doamna”], Bucureşti: Tipografia Academiei Române, Laboratorii
României I (1883), 1: 1.
—— 1883b. <Leading Article.> The Teacher. Pedagogical and literary newspaper.
Body of the teaching staff of the Asylum “Elena Doamna” and “Elisabeta’s
Atheneum” [Rom. <Editorial> Educatorul. Ziar pedagogic şi literar. Organ al
corpului didactic din azilul “Elena Doamna” şi “Ateneul Elisabeta”], Bucureşti:
Tipografia Academiei Române, Laboratorii României I (1883), 11: 1.
—— 1884. <Leading Article.> The Teacher. Pedagogical and literary newspaper.
Body of the teaching staff of the Asylum “Elena Doamna” and “Elisabeta’s
Atheneum,” (Rom. [Editorial], Educatorul. Ziar pedagogic şi literar. Organ al
corpului didactic din azilul “Elena Doamna” şi “Ateneul Elisabeta”], Bucureşti:
Tipografia Academiei Române, Laboratorii României, 23 (1884): 1.
Constantinescu, Barbu et alii. 1890a. Sacred history of the New Testament. [Rom.
Istoria Sacră a Noului Testament], Ist ed. Ploeşti: Edit. Progresului.
—— 1890b. Ancient history through biographies [Rom. Istoria Antică în Biografii],
Bucureşti: Edit. Librăriei Socec & C-nie. Tip. Modernă, Gregorie Luis.
—— 1891. Romanian Reader. Part II [Rom. Carte de citire. Partea II], Ist ed. Ploieşti:
Editura Progresului.
Datcu, Iordan. 2006. Dictionary of Romanian ethnologists. Third revised and
enlarged edition [Rom. Dicționarul etnologilor români. Ediția a treia, revăzută
și mult adăugită], București: Saeculum.
Demetrescu, Dragomir. 1886. Dogmas and mysteries of the Christian religion or
Orthodox catechism. For the use of the schools for both sexes [Rom. Dogmele
și misterele religiunei creștine sau catechismul ortodox. Pentru usul școalelor
secundare de ambele sexe], Jasy: Tipo-Litografia H. Goldner.
Eminescu, Mihai. 1878. Specimens of the Romanian Gypsy language and literature of
Dr. Barbu Constatinescu (review) [Rom. Probe de limba şi literatura țiganilor
din România publicate de Dr. Barbu Constatinescu. (recenzie)], Timpul 189/27
August 1878.
Ficker, Adolf. 1879. Die Zigeuner in der Bukowina: ein Beitrag zur Ethnographie
internationale. Statistiche Monatschrift. Wien: Verlag von Alfred Hölder. V:
249–65.
From the Congress of the teaching staff, held on 26th, 27th, and 28th of March,
current year, in Bucharest. [Rom. De la Congresul corpului didactic, ținut în
zilele de 26, 27 și 28 martie a.c. în București] Lumina pentru toți V, 10 (1890): 631.
Gârboviceanu, Petru. 1903. Report on the progress of the Society, and also on its
fröbelian, primary and normal schools for the year 1902–1903 [Rom. Dare de
seamă despre mersul societății, cum și despre mersul Școalelor ei fröbeliană,
primară și normală pe anul 1902–1903], Societatea pentru învățătura poporului
român, Biserica Sf. Ecaterina, București: Tipografia Cărților Bisericești.
—— 1906. The Society for the Education of Romanian People in Bucharest, and its
schools. 1866–1906 [Rom. Societatea pentru învățătura poporului român din
București cu școalele ei. 1866–1906], București: Carol Göbl.
76 julieta rotaru
—— 1911. Inauguration of the former professor Barbu Constantinescu’s bust on May
8th, 1911 [Rom. Inaugurarea bustului fostului profesor Barbu Constantinescu
în ziua de 8 mai 1911], București: Carol Göbl.
Groome, Francis Hindes. 1899. Gypsy folk-tales. London: Hurts and Blackett.
Haşdeu B.P. 1878. The IVth Congress of the Orientalists in Florence. [Rom. Congresul
al IV-lea al Orientaliștilor la Fireze]. Românul, November 18 (1878): 1064/1065.
—— 1982. Bogdan Petriceicu Haşdeu and his Romanian and foreign contemporaries
[Rom. Bogdan Petriceicu Haşdeu şi contemporanii săi români şi străini, text
stabilit şi note de Nicolae Mecu, Viorica Nişcov et alii, Coordonare şi studiu
introductiv: Al. Săndulescu], vol. I–III, Bucureşti: Minerva.
Iorga, N. 1926. News about the Mavrocordats’ library. [Rom. Știri nouă despre
Biblioteca Mavrocordaților]. Memoriile Secției Istorice, seria III, București:
Cultura Națională. Tom IV (6): 135–70.
Jones, Michael Owen. 1967. Francis Hindes Groome: “Scholar Gypsy and Gypsy
scholar.” The Journal of American Folklore. 80 (315): 71–80.
Kaindl, Raimund Friedrich. 1899. Das Unterthanswesen in der Bukowina. Ein
Beitrag zur Geschichte der Bauernstände und seiner Befreiung. Archive für
Österreichische Geschichte, 84 (2), Wien.
—— 1904. Geschichte der Bukowina von den ältesten Zeiten bis zur Gegenwart:
unter besonderer Berücksichtung der Kulturverhältnisse, Band I, S. 34 f.
Czernowik: H. Pardini.
Karpeles, Benno. 1891. Beiträge zur Statistik der Zigeuner in Österreich. Mitthei-
lungen der Antropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien, tom. XXI, Wien: F. Berger
& Söhne.
Kogălniceanu, Michail. 1837. Esquisee sur l’histoire, les moeurs et la langue des
cigains, conus en France sous le nom de Bohémiens, suivie d’un recueil de sept
cents mots cigains, Berlin: B. Behr.
Koós, Ferencz. 1890. Romániai czigány népdalok. Dr. BC után közli: Koós Ferencz.
Bukaresti Magyar Képes Naptár az 1890-ik. Közönséges évre. Ed. Veress
Endre, Brassó: Alexi Könyvnyomdája, (1890): 86–7.
Magyarországban, A. 1893. január 31-én végrehajtott czigányösszeirás eredményei.
Magyar Statisztikai Közlemények, Országos Magyar kir. Statisztikai Hivatal, Új
Folyam, 9. Budapest: Athenaeum, 1895. http://www.europeana.eu/portal/record/
9200386/BibliographicResource_3000045502801.html, accessed 10 July 2017.
Mărzescu, George. 1884. The Prelate Calistrat Orleanu’s defense in front of the High
Court of Cassation and Justice against the injustices of the Holy Synod, together
with the minutes of the Holy Synod meeting, the indictment, the report of Mr.
Adviser Al. Degre, the statement of the General Prosecutor of the Court of
Cassation, the decision of the High Court, and all the documents related to this
famous case [Rom. Apărarea Arhiereului Calistrat Orleanu înaintea Înaltei
Curţi de Casaţie şi de Justiţie contra nelegiuirilor sinodale dimpreună cu
Şedinţa Sfântului Sinod, actul de acuzare, raportul d-lui Consilier Al. Degre,
memoriul Procurorului General al Curţii de Casaţiune, deciziunea Înaltei
Curţi şi toate actele relative la această celebră cauză], Bucureşti: Tipografia
Academiei Române (Laboratoriii români), 1884].
Miklosich, Franz. 1878. Proben von Zigeunermundarten. Beiträge zur Kenntniss der
Zigeunermundarten. Vol. IV, Wien: Karl Gerold’s Sohn.
Murray, E.C.  Grenville. 1854. Doine, or the national songs and legends of Roumanians,
Translated from the originals, with an introduction and specimens of the
music. London: Smith, Elder, and co.
Negulescu, Ștefan. 1896. Dr. Barbu Constantinescu. Învățământul primar. Revistă
pentru școală și familie, (apare o dată pe lună) II, 11 (15 nov. 1896): 332–4, and
Dr. Barbu Constantinescu. Scrierile și ideile sale pedagogice. Învățământul
primar. Revistă pentru școală și familie, (apare o dată pe lună) II, 12 (15 dec.
1896): 364–7, București: Tipografia și Fonderia de litere Thoma Basilescu.
Papadima, Ovidiu. 1968. Folklore in B.P. Haşdeu’s journals (Traian and Columna lui
Traian). [Rom. Folclorul în periodicele lui B.P. Hașdeu (Traian și Columna lui
Traian)]. Studii de istorie a literaturii române de la C.A. Rosetti la G. Călinescu,
Institutul de Istorie și teorie Literară “G. Călinescu,” București: Editura
Academiei Republicii Socialiste România, 217–334.
Popescu, Niculae, and Moisescu, Gheorghe I. (eds.). 1942. Orthodox confession.
Original Greek text. Ms. Parisinus 1265. Romanian Text from the edition
Buzau 1691. Edited by Father Niculae M. Popescu, Professor, Member of the
Romanian Academy, and Deacon George I. Moisescu, Assistant at the Faculty
of Theology in Bucharest, with a forward by Tit Simedrea, the Metropolitan of
Bukovina [Rom. Mărturisirea Ortodoxă. Text grec inedit. Ms. Parisinus 1265.
Text român ed. Buzău 1691. Editată de preotul Niculae M. Popescu, Profesor
universitar, Membru al Academiei Române și Diac. Gheorghe I. Moisescu,
Asistent la Facultatea de teologie din București, Cu o precuvântare de Tit
Simedrea, Mitropolitul Bucovinei], București: Editura Mitropoliei Bucovinei].
Popp-Şerboianu. 1930. Les Tsiganes. Histoire. Ethnographie. Linguistique.
Grammaire. Dictionnaire. Bibliotheque scientifique. Paris: Payot.
Potra, George. 1939. Contributions to the history of the Gypsies in Romania
[Rom. Contribuțiuni la istoricul țiganilor din România], București: Fundația
Carol I.
Rotaru, Julieta. 2016. Barbu Constantinescu. Cântece țigănești. Romané ghilea.
Gypsy Songs; critical edition, introductory study, chronology, index and
bibliography by Julieta Rotaru; forward by Viorel Cosma. București: Editura
Muzeul Literaturii Române.
Șăineanu, Lazăr. 1985. Romanian tales in relation to antique classical legends and in
relations to the tales of the neighbouring people and all the Romance people
[Basmele române în comparație cu legendele antice clasice și în legătură cu
basmele popoarelor învecinate și ale tuturor popoarelor romanice]. București:
Carol Göbl.
Sarău, Gheorghe. 2000. Specimens of the Romanian Rromani language and literature
[Rom. Probe de limba și literatura Rromilor din România], Biblioteca Rromă,
6, București: Kriterion.
Siminiginowicz-Staufe, Ludwig Adolf. 1884. Die Völkergruppen der Bukowina.
Ethnographisch-culturhistorische Shizzen. Czernowik: Drud und Verlag von
Czopp.
78 julieta rotaru
Slavici, Ion. 1884. The Asylum “Elena Doamna.” [Rom. Azilul “Elena Doamna.”]
Educatorul. Ziar pedagogic şi literar. Organ al corpului didactic din azilul
“Elena Doamna” şi “Ateneul Elisabeta,” Bucureşti: Tipografia Academiei
Române, Laboratorii României II (1884) 26: 205.
Tuțescu 1912. The aim of the publication. [Rom. Ținta.] Ghilșul, revistă folclorică.
Apare lunar. Ed. Șt.St. Tuțescu, Comuna Balota, Dolj, I (1) Dec. 1912: 3.

Barbu Constantinescu, The First Romanian Scholar of Romani Studies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Barbu Constantinescu, The First Romanian Scholar of Romani Studies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Barbu Constantinescu,

the first Romanian scholar of Romani studies

§ 0. Introduction: The international context

§ 1. The first collection of Romani folklore in Romania

translation and explanatory notes for some grammatical constructions. The

§ 1.1. Feedback on the Romani folklore collection

8. Rom. Cuvinte den batrani, a pioneering work on Romanian apocryphal literature,

foule de matériaux de toutes espèces, et il m’a promis depuis longtemps de vous

Thus, the hypothesis of the existence of large folklore materials collected by

Unfortunately, two years later, on 30 November 1891, Barbu Constantinescu

§ 2. A collection of unedited manuscripts on Romani language, history,

§ 2.1. Ms. BAR 3923

Transylvania,14 a Romanian historical province that was also a part of the

14. Magyarországban 1893. január 31-én végrehajtott czigányösszeirás eredményei.

three socio-juridical categories of Roms – further categorised according to

§ 2.2. Ms. BAR 3924

1. Title on the cover written by Constantinescu: “For Gypsy Language. Songs

3. Title on the cover written by Constantinescu: “For the Dictionary of Gypsy

§ 2.3. Ms. BAR 3925

§ 2.4–5. Ms. BAR 5056 and ms. 5062

§ 2.6. Ms. BAR 4973

monumental job of cataloguing the entirety of the material and in a second

§ 3. Barbu Constantinescu: Some biographical notes

§ 3.1. Trained to become an Eastern Orthodox priest

Figure 2. Barbu Constantinescu (1839–1891)

Figure 3. Barbu Constantinescu’s brother, the Prelate Calistrat Orleanu

§ 3.2. Licentiate of Theology and Ph.D. in Philosophy at University of Leipzig

of Theology, University of Leipzig (1858–1860, 1864–1865), and Rector of the

It was in these conditions that Barbu Constantinescu embarked with zeal

How many complicated circumstances, especially in the sphere of learning and

Barbu Constantinescu, through his teacher Tuikson Ziller, came in contact

Give people schools!

§ 3.3. Reformist and creator of new educational institutions

education at the Pedagogical College from two to four years, introduced a

These measures led to the recognition of the Pedagogical College as a State

kindergarten at the orphanage “Asylum Elena Doamna,” where he had been

A third deficiency in the curriculum of rural schools is the exclusion of religious

§ 3.4. Author of school and college manuals and university courses

and used for teaching Romanian in Transylvania and in the Romanian

In the council meeting of 24 March 1877, the National Geographical Society

In fact, the study of geography has an important influence on the intellectual

§ 3.5. An accurate philologist

As seen above, he considered the knowledge of French for schoolteachers

§ 3.5.1. Ion Heliade− Rădulescu Barbu Constantinescu, parallel lives

by Peter Moghila in Latin and Greek in 1640. By Barbu Constantinescu’s

Indeed, the Catechesis in the new Romanian translation served as a

status as a widely-read book is confirmed by its reediting within five years, in

Shortly after his death, on 3 December 1893, a Synod committee decided to

The Synod committee entrusted this to Gennadie Enăceanu, with an

§ 4. Barbu Constantinescu’s intellectual legacy

BSGR= Romanian Geographic Society Bulletin [Rom. Buletinul Societăţii Geografice

—— 1883a. <Leading Article.> The Teacher. Pedagogical and literary newspaper.

You might also like

In the council meeting of 24 March 1877, the National Geographical Society

Shortly after his death, on 3 December 1893, a Synod committee decided to