On August 10, 1913, the Bucharest Peace Treaty was signed, ending the Second Balkan War. It was the most important success that Romania achieved since gaining independence and until the Peace of Paris that ended the First World War. Romania was becoming a regional power in 1913.
The Peace Treaty signed in Bucharest between Bulgaria, on the one hand, and Romania, Serbia, Montenegro and Greece, on the other, drew new borders in the region.
By treaty, Bulgaria ceded to Romania the portion of Southern Dobrogea (the Quadrilateral), from west of Tutrakan (Turtucaia) to the western shore of the Black Sea, south of Kranevo (Ecrene).
The quadrilateral had an area of approximately 6,960 km², a population of approximately 286,000 inhabitants and included the fortress of Silistra and the cities of Turtucaia (port on the Danube) and Balcic (port on the Black Sea).
“We played the war beyond the Danube, in Bucharest we played the Congress of Vienna”
And the contemporaries of those events correctly appreciated the dimension of the Peace concluded in Bucharest and the fact that Romania presented itself to Europe as an arbiter and a force between the Balkan peoples. But the only politician who really rose to the moment was the head of the Romanian government, Titu Maiorescu.
“The Bucharest peace, crowning the work of luck that had led us by the hand for a year, represented the culminating moment of our policy before the Great War (World War I, no.
On the scale of nations, the Romanian people suddenly climbed dozens of steps, presenting themselves to Europe – especially Europe – as the arbiter of the Balkan peoples. It’s a shame that the procedure wasn’t more honest and simpler, but it can be seen that Bucharest is too close to Byzantium. The puppets who held our first roles, apart from Maiorescu, the only one at the top, indulged in all the excesses.
We had played the war across the Danube, in Bucharest we played the Congress of Vienna. Only the stench of onions and the smell of mastic and brandy had replaced the scent of the Johannisberg. In the absence of Talleyrand, the authentic prince, the superficial and sleazy Marghiloman, type of the upstart `tenait les dés de la conservation’, as the French say, and Take Ionescu, the “modern Fouché”, operated in the secret funds for the partisans.
General Coandă, a peaceful man with an excruciating banality, and Colonel Christescu, a peasant’s son who reached greatness only through his work, but poisoned by syphilis, appeared as obscure forerunners of the defiled guild of experts, the scourge of new times, and cut hairs in four for the establishment of a border which after much haggling turned out badly. Marghiloman’s “Notes” from July 1913 must be read and reread to see how the most solemn moments can be debased”, wrote Constantin Argetoianu.
“The Bucharest Peace of 1913 was a great success for Romania”
Unfortunately, the political scene in Bucharest was still troubled by all kinds of political games. This time, the conservative leaders were torn between themselves for taking over the leadership of the party, under the eyes of Titu Maiorescu, who had decided to retire from political life. Alexandru Marghiloman and Take Ionescu were fighting to take over the leadership of the Conservative Party, after Petre P. Carp had retired, and Maiorescu was going to take the same step.
“However, the Peace of Bucharest in 1913 was a great success for Romania and it should have been a great success for the Maiorescu government and strengthened it. However, the Maiorescu government was facing death, and the antagonism between Marghiloman and Take Ionescu, or more broadly speaking, between the conservatives and the Takists, on the one hand – the antipathy between Nicu Filipescu and Marghiloman, in the conservative camp itself, could only lead to the opening of a a ministry that even the strained will of its boss no longer supported”, mentioned Argetoianu.
“Maiorescu preferred to leave power in the light of apotheosis and disgusted by everything he had seen around him”
Affected by the death of his wife and “disgusted” by the political battles taking place around him, Titu Maiorescu preferred to retire from politics. On the other hand, looking back, Argetoianu also regretted the way he got involved in politics.
“Maiorescu preferred to leave power in the light of apotheosis and disgusted by everything he had seen around him; he was not at all willing to get involved in the fights and intrigues he envisioned in the party around the leadership left vacant by Petre Carp’s resignation.
If I had known then all that I found out later, perhaps I would have given up from the beginning, with all the impetus of a duty to fulfill, to do politics, or perhaps I would have engaged in it in another way . But far from the pond, I couldn’t hear the croaking of the frogs, – and full of illusions I left to strengthen my strength for the fight I felt called to”, noted Constantin Argetoianu, full of sadness.
We also recommend that you read:
Titu Maiorescu’s advice for the young politician Constantin Argetoianu
Romania in the Second Balkan War. “We were lucky to come across exhausted Bulgarians, otherwise we would have registered Turtucaia already in 1913”
Cholera, the “smell of death” and Nicolae Iorga
What it was like to die the leader of the Romanian conservatives in a duel with pistols
Source: www.descopera.ro
