Ghica's ascendancy

During the early 19th century, both Moldavia and Wallachia were Ottoman vassals ruled upon by Phanariote princes (or hospodars). This era, inaugurated in 1714 by the ouster of Constantin Brâncoveanu, signified "150 years of Greek cultural predominance".^[1] This also led to the erosion of the elective monarchy—under the adapted Vlach law of the Middle Ages, electors included the boyardom and all bishops of the Wallachian Orthodox Church, thus opening the way for the erosion of princely powers.^[2] The Phanariote regime did away with elections from 1730, when Constantine Mavrocordatos was the last elected prince of Wallachia. Reigning for just one month, he was later restored without elections by Sultan Mahmud I.^[3] Although such appointments became the standard, the Phanariote regime developed into a boyar oligarchy, which was largely dominated by the local families—up to 80% of the Boyar Assembly were of indigenous descent.^[4] Their opposition to the immigrant Greeks produced the early forms of Romanian nationalism, which seeped into a liberal movement, feeding the Wallachian uprising of 1821 and the social philosophy of Dinicu Golescu.^[5]

The Phanariote era came to an abrupt end in 1829, when the Russian Empire occupied both principalities during a war with the Ottomans. The subsequent Treaty of Adrianople called for a new constitutional regime, under shared Ottoman–Russian custody: Regulamentul Organic was drafted by a special Commission of boyars, overseen by the Russian envoys Peter Zheltukhin and Pavel Kiselyov. In obtaining their mix of liberalizing and conservative articles, they repressed both the liberal current and the traditionalist boyars, leading them to compromise on the core issues.^[6] Regulamentul was adopted in Wallachia by May 1831, after two years of deliberations.^[7] With this, the old Boyar Assembly was refashioned into a 42-member "Ordinary National Assembly", based on the estates of the realm: 20 members were elected by plurality from among the 56 boyars; 18 more, similarly elected, were representatives of the counties, with one additional deputy for Craiova; the other seats were held by the Orthodox bishops.^[8] All eligible seats were contested in 1831—"the first time [in Romanian history] when elections were used for producing a deliberative assembly".^[9]

Regulamentul and the preceding Akkerman Convention also specified the reintroduction of an elective monarchy to both principalities, but an exception was immediately made under a special protocol between Russia and the Ottomans.^[10] In Wallachia, Alexandru II Ghica was appointed prince in March 1834 and anointed in October, his rise curbing that of another favorite, Ban Iordache Filipescu.^[11] From its beginnings, the reign was controlled by the Russian Consul, Baron Peter I. Rikman, who imposed his favorites, Barbu Dimitrie Știrbei and Constantin Suțu, as ministers.^[12] This episode produced frictions among the boyars and the Russians, exacerbated over the following years. During the legislature of 1836, boyar envoys discovered that sections of Regulamentul had been forged or purposefully left unclear, giving legislative oversight to the Russian envoys. Prince Ghica was mandated by Karl Nesselrode to impose the controversial fragments on the Assembly, but his motion failed to pass, and so he dissolved the Assembly; the new Assembly also refused to accept his version of Regulamentul.^[13]

Ghica, in turn, refused to dissolve the Assembly a second time, and Rikman was ordered by his government to seek resolution with the Ottoman partners. As a result of this intercession, Sultan Abdulmejid I issued a firman dissolving the Assembly altogether, and replacing it with a non-elective "ad hoc Divan", comprising only the top 27 boyars of Wallachia.^[14] The project never took off because of Rikman's personal failings. His passionate love affair with boyaress Mimica Glagoveanca resulted in her divorce and marriage to Rikman, both of which were facilitated by Prince Ghica, who expected leniency in return. Nesselrode was informed of this and recalled Rikman.^[15] Memoirist Grigore Lăcusteanu notes that Ghica's "naive" sexual diplomacy was also attempted, with less success, on Rikman's replacement Vladimir P. Titoff, before the later was replaced by Karl Evstafevich Kotzebue.^[16]

National Party emergence

These incidents rekindled nationalism in Wallachia, albeit confined to a relatively small portion of the elite, the "National Party".^[17] Its roots reached back to 1798, when Scarlat Câmpineanu and other boyars founded a group of that name, inspired by the French First Republic.^[18] Reconstructing the party, Ioan Câmpineanu circulated a constitutional project that would have established a crowned republic,^[19] before being publicly shunned and forced into exile.^[20] Lăcusteanu, at the time an officer in the Wallachian Militia, claims that: "The aristocracy and the people were Russophiles, words such as 'patriotism' and 'public opinion' were only used by the prince and a couple of boyars."^[21] Nevertheless, as noted by scholar N. N. Hêrjeu: "With all their submission to the Muscovites, the boyars quickly understood that Russia only offered them apparent protection, in order to slowly strip them of their privileges. In fact, they hated both the Russians and the Turks."^[22] The chronicler Zilot Românul recorded that the boyars were particularly worried by Russian tax farming, which they considered predatory.^[23] Among the more powerful boyars, some also opposed the prince, but for purely personal reasons—they included Alecu Filipescu-Vulpea, who had seduced Ghica's divorcee mother, and was therefore detested by the monarch.^[24]

Nationalist opposition was also concentrated into cultural projects for the "national awakening", which, as historian A. D. Xenopol writes, were particularly resented by the Russian envoys. In repressing them, Rikman and Kotzebue "did not realize that these were ultimately but mere products, effects, and [they could not hope to] destroy their cause".^[25] This period also witnessed the alleged conspiracy headed by the low-ranking boyar Mitică Filipescu in Bucharest. Some months later, a revolt was also raging in Brăila County, where treasurer Andrey Deshov, who reportedly wanted to crown himself or Constantin Suțu as Tsar of Bulgaria,^[26] rallied troops to fight against the pro-Ottoman Ghica. The capital was pacified quickly, but the military expedition against Deshov required assistance from Hüseyin Avni Pasha and the Ottoman Army.^[27] Both Filipescu and Deshov were sentenced to prison,^[28] but the details of their conspiracies remain sketchy. Lăcusteanu, for instance, sees Filipescu as an agent of Russian intrigues, "more Russian than Muscovite Russians",^[16] whereas the liberal Ion Ghica insists that he was a patriot and a believer in individual rights.^[29]

From 1841, Russia's presence in Wallachia was strengthened by the appointment of a commissioner, Alexander Osipovich Duhamel. He and the prince detested each other, and Duhamel himself was also disliked by Ghica's subjects, who resented in particular his attempts to curb free speech.^[30] Ghica himself angered the boyars by celebrating his birthday with 300 promotions of his associates, and allegedly pocketing 11 million French francs from the national treasury.^[31] Before the legislative election of 1841, a more conservative opposition group, distinct from the National Party, was slowly emerging among the boyars. It was consolidated around the jurist Gheorghe Bibescu, who had exposed Ghica's favoritism toward foreigners,^[32] and had Vornic Alexandru Vilara for its éminence grise.^[33] Another affiliate was Barbu Catargiu of Teleorman, who used his maiden speech to denounce Ghica's abuses.^[34] Under such influences, the Assembly issued a special report, authored by Bibescu and Filipescu-Vulpea,^[35] which depicted Ghica as an anti-patriot, emphasizing his Albanian background.^[36] Ion Ghica suggests that his relative was being in fact framed by the Russians, acting in conjunction with Bibescu.^[37]

In October 1842, having received the Assembly's formal complaint,^[38] Sultan Abdulmejid signed off on Ghica's removal. The prince was informed of this by his physician, Apostol Arsache, and decided to resign before being handed the firman.^[39] He exiled himself to the Austrian Empire, and his trip toward the border saw public displays of loyalism. At Ploiești, the citizens offered to reinstate and defend him against foreign invaders. Ghica refused, noting that his "children the Romanians" could not hope to defend the land against two imperial powers.^[40] A controversy ensued between those who saw him as a "victim of Muscovite ambitions" and those who believed he was a paragon of corruption.^[31]

Bibescu's reign

Within two weeks, the new prince earned recognition from Russia, with Emperor Nicholas I informing Wallachians that Bibescu's selection, a "guarantee of wise, regular and loyal administration", "honors the Assembly".^[84] His enthronement included the first oath of office in Romanian history, and an affirmation of autonomy: when visiting the Sultan to be confirmed, Bibescu refused to wear the fez, and would not prostrate before his overlord.^[85] Instead, he went on pilgrimage to Dealu Monastery, paying his homage to the reliquary hosting the head of Michael the Brave.^[86] An unsigned poem mocked him over this choice, depicting Michael the Brave disgusted at having been "kissed by a wicked devil."^[87] After taking the throne, Bibescu encouraged economic growth and the "fast civilizing" of his country,^[88] his limited protectionism being discarded when he proposed, and obtained, a customs union with Moldavia.^[89] Bibescu also initiated the first steps toward the abolition of Roma slavery, and limited the corvée.^[90]

Despite such nationalist-and-liberalizing overtures, within two years of his election the prince was in open conflict with the estates of the realm. A public scandal began during the coronation ceremony, when Bibescu fell in love with Marițica Văcărescu, who was still married to his unsuccessful rival Costache Ghica.^[91] After expressing his intention of divorcing Zoe Brâncoveanu and marrying Marițica, Bibescu had a publicized row with Metropolitan Neofit.^[62][92] His nepotism was by then notorious, leading to intense criticism from the boyars, only enhanced by Bibescu's attempt to curb tax evasion.^[93] More significantly, Bibescu also clashed with the National Party and the Assembly, over his project of leasing Wallachia's mines to a Russian entrepreneur, Alexander Trandafiloff. Although it was prompted by a generous bid, this move inspired fears that Wallachia would be overrun with cheap Russian labor, and that it was a precedent for expropriations.^[94] It also alienated some of Bibescu's conservative backers, including Catargiu, while giving impetus to the liberal movement.^[95]

Up to the very end of his rule, Bibescu favored an understanding with the liberals, showing himself ready to usurp privilege: in 1848, he proposed that boyars engaging in commerce be required to apply for letters patent.^[96] According to Lăcusteanu, Marițica made Bibescu into a "superlatively vain" character, one likely to flirt with the liberals who promised him the imperial throne of "Dacia". The country, he claims, was actually governed, "very well", by Vilara.^[97] Bibescu eventually dissolved the Assembly, and reigned as an absolute monarch for two more years; when he accepted new elections in 1846, he skewed the results by blocking multiple votes and also by filtering out hostile candidates.^[98] In 1847, Alexander Osipovich Duhamel returned as commissioner—according to Lăcusteanu, his mission was to instigate liberal revolts and thus justify a complete Russian takeover.^[99]

Revolution and beyond

The clashes between liberals and conservatives eventually produced the Wallachian Revolution of 1848. It is depicted by the conservative Lăcusteanu as one "of the petty schoolteachers, the lawyers, the rapacious upstarts [and] the boyar sons", the urban masses having been incensed by both Duhamel and the deposed ruler Ghica.^[100] Initially welcoming the radicals, Bibescu abdicated under street pressure, then fled to safety in Austria.^[101] The uprising had a set of republican ideals, with a democratized elective monarchy—goals expressed in the Proclamation of Islaz.^[102] However, it did not effect complete institutional changes, only establishing a Revolutionary Government that included, in its earliest stages, Bibescu's rival Câmpineanu as Caimacam.^[74] This collective leadership was eventually brought down by an Ottoman–Russian invasion, co-led by Mehmed Fuad Pasha, Abdülkerim Nadir Pasha, and Alexander von Lüders, with the only battle being fought over Dealul Spirii.^[103]

The Convention of Balta Liman restored and partly modified Regulamentul, suspending elections for the post of prince. Știrbei was handpicked by Abdulmejid to serve a seven-year term.^[104] The Assembly, now called "National Divan" and preserving primarily consultative functions, was made up of unelected bureaucrats, judges, and bishops.^[105] This regime was also perturbed by the Crimean War and an Austrian occupation, at the end of which Wallachia and Moldavia came under a collective supervision of the European powers. Ghica returned to govern as Caimacam, this time with full Ottoman support, and after various intercessions in his favor.^[106] The ad hoc Divan was convened under the Treaty of Paris, reviving popular consultation with an extensive suffrage, which now offered representation to the peasantry; the main issue on its agenda was unification with Moldavia as the "United Principalities", the basis of modern Romania.^[107] The election of September 1857 produced a Divan in which both Bibescu and Știrbei, again as leaders of competing factions, were elected deputies.^[108]

While conservative and liberal unionists were both challenged by the Convention of Paris, which reduced suffrage and stipulated that the two countries would be united in name only;^[109] a Wallachian prince was scheduled to be elected in January 1859. Both Știrbei and Bibescu were again prominent among the candidates.^[110] However, a series of coordinated actions by the National Party ensured the election of Alexandru Ioan Cuza, a Moldavian, effectively creating a personal union between the two Ottoman vassals. The election of 1843, alongside the 1859 assembly and its Moldavian counterpart, endures as the only instance of elective monarchy in modern Romanian history^[111] (with a partial exception being the April 1866 referendum).