ENG | FRA | HUN | ROM

2005 | Tribune: "In the great avalanche of books and articles dealing with these topics that have appeared since September 11th 2001, we have not found a single one that analyses events in this way. Only an exceptionally acute mind could so accurately detect the hidden motives at the root of the quarrel that so deeply divided France and a few other European countries on one hand, and the U.S.A on the other. This mind is Hungarian, i.e. a European, from Central Europe."

BÉLA BORSI-KÁLMÁN

2025 |  Dan Culcer   _{(Translated by Botond Zákonyi)}

"Borsi-Kálmán occupies a special place. It can be classified as part of the critical tradition of Hungarian historiography, while at the same time making a conscious attempt to initiate a methodological dialogue with Romanian historiography.
(...)
His work is distinguished by an explicit rejection of the ethno-essentialist reading of Hungarian-Romanian relations;
(...)
Borsi-Kálmán's work is part of a structural and relational historiography, heir to both the Hungarian school of social history and to some influences of German and French historiography (Sozialgeschichte, history of mentalities).
(...)
One of Borsi-Kálmán's major contributions is to read the Transylvanian 19th century as a space of unequal modernization and not as a mere theatre of national confrontation.
(...)
he emphasizes (...) and draws attention to the ambiguity of liberal Hungarian reform efforts which, while promising civil equality, resulted in linguistic and cultural exclusion. Borsi-Kálmán shows that national strife is not a permanent feature but rather the result of political modernization, state centralization and the clash of rising national elites. This shift in the focus of the analysis is crucial: it removes the political and emotional venom from the Hungarian-Romanian conflict and clearly shows its objective socio-historical roots.
(...)
he emphasizes the plurality and complexity of the political plans of the period, pointing out that there was no institutional framework in place at the time that would have allowed the national demands of the non-Hungarian population to be met.
(...)
This approach helps to understand why national tensions escalated towards the end of the 19th century, without reducing this process to a deliberate oppressive state policy or a spontaneous phenomenon of "national liberation."
(...)
Borsi-Kálmán recognizes the traumatic character of Trianon for Hungarian society while emphasizing that the integration of Transylvania into Romania also responds to earlier social and national dynamics. This rejection of exclusive victimization is one of the most courageous and from a scientific point of view most fertile aspect of his works.
(...)
His style is deliberately restrained and analytical, avoiding polemical rhetoric. He seeks to dismantle historiographical myths rather than create a new national counter-narrative.
_{Limitations and possible critical remarks}
(...) Relative underrepresentation of Romanian popular cultural and symbolic experiences; a pronounced focus on institutional frameworks, sometimes to the detriment of lived history;
(...)
His work (...) helps to remove the history of Transylvania from the nationalist confrontation, and offers a model of critical rigor in a highly politicized historiographical field.
As such, his books are not only a major scientific reference but also an ethical exercise in historiographical responsibility, essential to any contemporary reflection on coexistence, memory, and reconciliation in Central Europe.
(...)
Crushed between former and current empires, the countries concerned will finally be forced to collaborate."

_{Elancourt, France, 15 ianuarie 2025}