„The history of the Roman auxilia was for the first time closely examined by C. Cichorius. An early attempt to discuss various topics and aspects related to the place and role of the auxiliary units in the Roman army belongs to G. L. Cheesman. For the study herein, of great significance are the studies of W. Wagner and K. Kraft4, who tackle, others also the units active on the territory of Moesia Superior. J. Beneš approaches the issue of auxiliaries from the two Moesiae and the Dacian provinces, initially in a 1970-study and then in a monograph issued in 1978.

In 1980, P. A. Holder also contributed an article to the basic reference work on the topic of Roman auxilia and their history in the Roman empire during the 1st century AD at a time when the evidence was limited (to some degree represented by military diplomas) and difficult to interpret together with our knowledge on the history auxiliary units known later to be stationed in the mentioned provinces. The special importance of the study consists in the attempt to equate the units recorded in the 1st century with those attested with certainty through 2nd century-military diplomas. The approach has been recently furthered by the publication of two overviews on the displacement of the auxiliaries under Trajan and Hadrian.” Introduction

-

Istoria Regimentului al II-lea român de graniţă, cu statul major la Năsăud (1763–1851), din cadrul structurilor militare imperiale austriece, este cunoscută, atât ca urmare a rolului avut în unele evenimente istorice care i-au definit existenţa, cât şi datorită studiilor şi scrierilor istoriografice, mai vechi sau de dată mai recentă. Mult mai puţine date au fost publicate despre Batalionul I Grăniceresc de Gardă (1933–1940) – destinat, inițial, pentru a fi cantonat în Năsăud, dar instalat efectiv în garnizoana Bistriţa – înfiinţat de regele Carol al II-lea, menit a fi continuatorul vechiului regiment năsăudean, şi care a avut ca areal geografic de recrutare locuitorii din fostele comune grănicereşti. Tocmai de aceea, lucrarea de faţă îşi propune să ofere cititorilor un corpus documentar privitor la acest batalion prin publicarea sau reluarea unor materiale scrise, provenite din mai multe surse: Serviciul Judeţean Bistriţa-Năsăud al Arhivelor Naţionale, Muzeul Grăniceresc Năsăudean, Arhivele Militare Piteşti, presa vremii, însemnări memorialistice etc. (Editorii)

 

SOMMAIRE

Alexander Baumgarten, Le reste comme problème de la philosophie

I. Figurer le reste

Luigi Tassoni, La poetica delle somiglianze. Milo De Angelis dalle rovine del soggetto alle tracce del riconoscimento
Corin Braga, Le centre structurel et ses restes
Giovanni Rotiroti, Per una poetica e una politica dei resti a partire da Urmuz: il caso di Tristan Tzara, Eugène Ionesco, Paul Celan e Gherasim Luca
Antonio Patraș, The Anecdote in The History of Romanian Literature from Its Origins to the Present
Ligia Tudurachi, « Jouets », « boîtes », « reliques ». Fascination du petit chez Hortensia Papadat-Bengescu
George Alexandru Condrache, The Residual Forms in Contemporary Central European Literature. Two Case Studies: Bohumil Hrabal and Ádám Bodor


II. Le continent de la non-lecture

Horea Poenar, Glitches of the Archive: On the Relation Between Memory and the Commons
Catherine Gravet, Dépouiller des archives pour éditer des textes « résiduels » : le cas Alexis Curvers
Florin Oprescu & Monica Oprescu, Mateiu Caragiale – Through the Leftovers’ Glass. From the Journal to Ephemerides
Gabriela Glăvan, Communist Leftovers: The Forgotten Books of Gellu Naum
Eugen Radu Wohl, Ion D. Sîrbu’s Anthumous Works as (Re)valuable Residues
Levente T. Szabó, Dilettantism as a Moral Panic. Recovering a Forgotten Discourse of Hungarian Literary Modernization]
Corina Croitoru, Le résidu du résidu : ombres de la poésie roumaine de guerre
Roxana Patraș, When All That Rests Is Literature: Traces, Transcriptions and Remnants of Great Speeches
Arina Neagu, Une autre approche sur les mémoires roumains de prison : le caractère résiduel de « l’indicible concentrationnaire »
Barbara Miceli, How to Turn a Forgotten Figure of American History into a National and Gender Emblem: Joyce Carol Oates’s Treatment of Mary Jo Kopechne in Black Water


III. Identités en marge

Marie Vrinat-Nikolov, Les langues ignorées de l’espace littéraire bulgare
Annalisa Cosentino, La boemia altrove
Marius Popa, Le classicisme français dans la critique littéraire de la génération roumaine de 1848. Radiographies d’un « malentendu »
Lavinia Sabou, The Travel Accounts We Don’t Write About. Eastern European Ways of Mapping the World
Ruxandra Cesereanu, Societal Metabolism and “Excretion”: Towards a Typology of Marginals (The Fiction of Venedikt Yerofeyev, Alexander Zinoviev and Roberto Bolaño)


IV. Survivances

Monica Fekete, La rigenerazione del poema cavalleresco: da centro epico-narrativo a margine del moderno, da trionfo idealistico a spazio del romanzo contemporaneo
Laura Marin, Survivances du neutre
Márta Zabán, Residual Nationalism. The Nineteenth-Century Hungarian Folk Drama as a Reinterpretation of European Theatrical Nationalism. Pour une politique du résiduel en littérature
Ioana Bot, Gli esordi dimenticati della stilistica: Leo Spitzer, censore dei soldati italiani nei campi di prigionia della Prima Guerra Mondiale
Elena Crașovan, (Mis)readings of Contemporary Magical-Realist Fiction in the Context of Romania’s 2000 Literary Generation. The Case of Bogdan Popescu
Adriana Stan, Monuments of Literature, Scraps of Criticism


V. Entretiens: Ioana Bot, What’s Left? A Discussion on the Remains of Writing – and the Remains of Living – with Two European Authors

Romanian nationalism has been and it still is a research topic that has generated and still generates various controversies, both at the level of the opinions of the authors who have dealt with this subject, and at the level of the interpretations that the reader can have on such a topic. And the analysis of the evolution of Romanian nationalism since 1989 is a theme that can be included in this framework of different, and sometimes even contradictory, approaches. Moreover, any analysis of post-communist Romanian nationalism may have its limitations, in terms of the authors’ approaches, and because, in general, approaches to nationalism have a certain potential for inaccuracy. The nationalist phenomenon is very complex because it refers to the people (the nation) and the country and quite often the boundary between nationalism and patriotism, for example, is quite weak. And in the Romanian case, things were even more complicated, both because the nationalism responded to a need for homogeneity existing in the post-communist Romanian society, and because the Romanian nationalism had a specific and quite complex typology.

In this paper, we referred more to those aspects that looked at the presence of nationalism in areas such as society, culture, religion or interethnic relations. Moreover, the period chosen for the study was rather a delicate one, considering the fact that the last decade of the twentieth century was, for Romania, a period of search of the road that the country needed to straighten, after half a century of totalitarian regime. And studying nationalism in such a historical context may have different interpretations, especially since post-communist Romanian nationalism, as some Romanian authors have stated, could be considered as paradigmatic for nationalism in general, because of its subtlety and complexity. (from the „Introduction”)