The politicization of historical research in the ethno-national area in the second half of the ,70s of the 20th century in MSSR

Abstract

In the 70s of the last century, a new research direction appeared in the MSSR historiography, which tried to reveal a certain role of Romanized population in the ethnogenesis process in the East of Carpathian Mountains. The exponent of this point of view was archaeologist Ion Hâncu (21.07.1931–24.05.2003). But the local ”scientific” forces (N. Mohov, V. Zelenciuc, etc.), with a pro-Russian and anti-Romanian orientation, did everything possible to prevent Hâncu’s opinion from being promoted, and he was excluded from the ranks of researchers. On August 22, 1977, N. Mohov wrote a letter to B.A. Rîbakov, director of the Institute of Archaeology of the USSR Academy of Sciences. The answer of B. Rîbakov from October 13, 1977 is currently known, in which Hâncu’s concept is appreciated as „anti-Slav”, it „exaggerating the role and importance of Romanic ethnic element” on the area of Pruto-Nistru interfluve, the author being accused of anti-Slav, ideologically „vicious” concepts and lack of professionalism. B.A. Rîbakov’s letter clearly points out that „until the XIVth century, there is no evidence of any significant East Romanic population” and that one of the peculiarities of „Moldavian nation formation is a close contact and mixing of Voloche population with the native Old Russian population”, which „differentiates ... Moldovans from Romanians and the other East-Romanic peoples”. As a consequence of these concerted actions of scientific authorities of the USSR and the MSSR, Ion Hâncu was removed from the position of head of the Archaeology Department within the MSSR Academy of Sciences, and his monograph, which was to appear in 1978, was taken out of printing.