the "Ceangai" ("Csangos") villages in Moldavia

University of Bucharest Center for Urban and Rural Sociology CURS

2002

The „Ceangai” („Csangos”) villages in Moldavia Identity and Culture A Public Opinion Survey

Table Of Contents Methodology regarding sampling procedure and social distance scale 3 Sampling

3

Social Distance Scale

4

Research pattern

5

Ethnical attitudes of the population from “Ceangai” villages

6

Ethno-cultural profile

6

“Ceangai” Identity. The “Ceangai” – Cultural - Religious Group.

7

The Romanians

8

The Hungarians

9

Which is the language that “Ceangai” would like to use for education and for the religious service?

10

Social distance scale at the “ceangai” from Moldavia

11

The study „The Ceangai (Csangos) villages in Moldavia” was ordered by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Education and Research and the Ministry of Public Informations.

The research was carried out by the University of Bucharest (Department of Sociology) and the Centre for Urban and Rural Sociology during March-April 2002. The focus was on the villages with „ceangai” („csangos”).

UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST. CURS SA. THE “CEANGAI” VILLAGES IN MOLDAVIA

2

1 Methodology regarding sampling procedure and social distance scale Sampling The sampling refers to “Ceangai“ villages from Moldova. The majority of “Ceangai” population live in the rural and urban areas of Moldova, even if “Ceangai” live in other rural or urban areas of Romania, too. Besides, it is here that certain historical traditions are more visible. The “Ceangai” issue is a delicate subject causing political controversy at the Council of Europe.

The sample uses a total of 1056 subjects and is considered representative for the rural “Ceangai” villages, with a maximum 3% margin of error and a 95% confidence level.

A stratified, probabilistic sample was first elaborated. The sample was stratified in the first stage and randomly applied in the second stage.

The sampling area consists of “Ceangai” villages from Moldova. The National Institute for Statistics provided the information on “Ceangai” settlements in Moldavian counties, as resulted from the 1992 census. The Association of Catholic Romanians of Moldova also helped in the identification of the sampling units (see The sample interviewed).

It was estimated that 90% of Moldavian “Ceangai” population live in Bacau county, the remaining 10% living in Iasi, Neamt and Vrancea counties. The sample was stratified, on one hand, in accordance with the distribution of “Ceangai” villages’ population (90% in Bacau and 10% in the other three counties), and on the other hand, in accordance with the population’s size of the selected villages.

Thirty-three villages were kept for further investigation, 30 “Ceangai” villages situated in Bacau (90% of the sample) and one village for each of the three counties mentioned above, representing 10% of the sample. The 33 villages are included in 15 larger administrative areas (“comune”).

Sample’s distribution by villages and counties is cartographically represented (see The map distribution of the sample).

N.B. “Ceangai” population is not to be found in all the villages we investigated.

UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST. CURS SA. THE “CEANGAI” VILLAGES IN MOLDAVIA

3

Random route method of selection of households and people to interview was used, using as selection interval, a statistic step resulted from dividing village’s population by the number of subjects to be submitted to interview, and then divided by 2, as assurance in case of absence or refusal.

The structure of the sample thus resulted, fits the maximum 3% margin of error for the best known parameters. For instance, from the ethnic structure’s point of view, the population of Bacau included in the sample shows comparable values to those resulted after the census from 1992. The percentage of Romanians as resulted from the sample is 93%, in comparison with 95% after the census from 1992. The Hungarian population represents a percentage of 5.5 in the sample, in comparison with 4% after the same census. Other ethnic minorities kept their percentage. A significant change is reflected in the gender structure of “Ceangai” sample, where the percentage of men (51%) to women (49%) exceeds the percentage of men (49%) to women (51%) at national scale. An explanation would be the refusal of some Ceangai men to allow their wives to be interviewed.

The slight deviation does not influence the final results; the sample’s ratio indicates that no significant opinion differences appear as result of the situation.

Social Distance Scale Social Distance Scale (SDS) is worldwide used as measuring tool in studying ethnical attitudes of population in the designated area in 1992.

“Bogardus Scale” was adapted and first applied in Romania for the research of ethnical attitudes of population living in the designated area. The measurement of the social distance was based on answers to seven questions ranking from highly positive attitudes (question no 7) to highly negative attitudes (question no 1). The seven questions are: 7 would you consent to marrying a person belonging to the ethnic minority of....

6. have as close friends people...

5. have as neighbours…

4. accept as co-villagers…

3. share your citizenship with…

2. be visitors only 1. be removed from your village

UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST. CURS SA. THE “CEANGAI” VILLAGES IN MOLDAVIA

4

Research pattern We intended to evaluate ethnical, cultural and religious identity of the population living in “Ceangai” villages from Moldova.

“Ceangai” villages are spread in four Moldavian counties: Bacau (90%), Iasi, Neamt and Vrancea (10%). 30 villages from Bacau were included in the sample.

The field research provided information in relation to several requirements (see: The survey issues): 

ethnic self-evaluation (who I am, from the ethnical point of view)



perception of “Ceangau” matter (he considers himself/is considered Ceangau)



knowing of the “Ceangai” speaking



the idiom used in family environment



main self-identification (ethnocentricity degree)

In the analysis, the parameters intersect the main socio-demographic characteristics. Other variables were added to these self-identification parameters. These variables are used for those who consider themselves/ are considered “Ceangai”.

Ethno-religious variables were added, together with other aspects regarding the importance of “Ceangai” idiom to those who use it.

Social distance scale was also applied, together with questions that show the degree of knowledge about the Governmental Organizations, active in “Ceangai” villages.

The information can help create data banks concerning economic self-evaluation of past and future households, the seriousness of social issues that may occur in the residence place of the investigated population and the trust for different institutions.

UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST. CURS SA. THE “CEANGAI” VILLAGES IN MOLDAVIA

5

2 Ethnical attitudes of the population from “Ceangai” villages Ethno-cultural profile Based on parameters of ethnical identity, the study certifies the existence of Romanian population (93%) and Hungarian population (5.5%), in “Ceangai” villages from Moldova. Approximately 1.5% of “Ceangai” villagers consider themselves belonging to another ethnic minority, Gipsy, German or “Ceangai” – See chart “What is your nationality?” % of the total sample”.

Therefore, the region’s profile is mainly given by the 93% of Romanian population. A percentage of 5.5 represents Hungarian population, to which a percentage of 0.5 that consider themselves “Ceangai” is added and 1% representing other ethnic minorities.

The survey indicates that regarding main identification or of the ethnocentrism, inhabitants consider themselves: 1. 92.8% - Romanians 2. 5.0% - Hungarians 3. 0.4% - Ceangai 4. 0.7% - other ethnic minorities (Gipsies or Germans) 5. 1.1% - do not know/ do not answer. See chart “From the point of view of your nationality what do you think you are?” First choice? Second choice?

Based on self-identification and hetero-identification parameters, “Ceangai” population is proved to be a group of population with cultural and religious identity. Approximately a quarter, 26% to be more exact, of the adult population from “Ceangai” villages, identify themselves/are considered “Ceangai”. Only 13% of the “Ceangai” assume the “Ceangai” identity. See chart “Do you consider yourself a “Ceangau” or do the others call you like that?”

If we agree to the existence of two ethnic groups and a cultural religious group in “Ceangai” villages from Moldova, we can identify some characteristics based on the survey.

The main concern is to determine who the “Ceangai” are, from the selfidentification process. (What they are from the ethnical and ethno-religious

UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST. CURS SA. THE “CEANGAI” VILLAGES IN MOLDAVIA

6

perspective). Are they Romanians? Are they Hungarians? Are they a distinctive group?

Another concern is to determine the degree in which they consider themselves Romanians, Hungarians or other nationality.

“Ceangai” Identity. The “Ceangai” – Cultural - Religious Group.

The cultural-religious group of people that consider themselves or are considered “Ceangai” comprises over a quarter 26%) of “Ceangai” villages’ population from Moldova. Their number varies within the communes from Moldova. See map “The distribution of the “Ceangai” population on the surveyd settlements”.

Identity features of the group: - Consistency: 90% of the subjects consider themselves Romanians, 8% Hungarians, 2% other nationalities. The situation differs in “Ceangai” villages.

(See chart “Romanian and Hungarian “Ceangai” by villages”).

- From the identification point of view, half consider themselves “Ceangai” and half are considered “Ceangai” (hetero-identification). In case of assumed identity, we can say that only half of the total “Ceangai” population (which represents 26% of the population of the area) could be included in this category. See chart “Do you consider yourself “Ceangau” or do others call you like that?”

- 62% of the total 26% of “Ceangai” population speak “Ceangai” idiom in the family, a percentage of 31 use Romanian language when speaking in family environment and 7% use Hungarian language. See chart “What is the common language in your family?”

- 90% of the total 26% of “Ceangai” population know “Ceangai” idiom. The other 10% that do not know “Ceangai” idiom, but declare themselves “Ceangai”, are almost all Hungarians. See chart “Do you know the “Ceangau” idiom?”

- 96% of the “Ceangai” population share the Roman-Catholic religion and 4% are Orthodox. See chart “The sample structure of those considered “Ceangai”.

What does it mean for “Ceangai” population to be considered “Ceangai” from the nationality point of view? (See chart “What does it mean for you to be considered “Ceangau”in terms of nationality?”)

- They are Romanians, even if considered Ceangai – 78% - They are Hungarians, even if considered Ceangai – 7%

UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST. CURS SA. THE “CEANGAI” VILLAGES IN MOLDAVIA

7

- I don’t know / I don’t answer – 5% Reported to the religion, being considered population: 

I am a Catholic Romanian – 80%



I am a Catholic Hungarian – 8%



I don`t know \ I don`t answer – 12%

“Ceangau”

means to this

Thus, “Ceangai” are Catholic Romanians in proportion of about 80%. The 78 percents who still correlate the attribute of “Ceangai” to the Hungarian ethnonim are entirely Hungarian ethnics.

Only 0.4 % of “Ceangai” consider themselves to be something else, different from Romanians and Hungarians, without being able to define this “something else” (See chart “What does it mean to you to be considered a “Ceangau” in terms of religion?”)

From the amount of 26% - the ones who consider themselves or are considered by others to be “Ceangai” in Moldavia – 88.7% think firstly of themselves to be Romanian, 6.5% - firstly Hungarian, 1.5% firstly ”Ceangai”, the rest of 0.4% define themselves mainly German and 2.9% do not answer. As a consequence, “Ceangai” self define as Romanian in proportion of 89% (see chart “From the point of view of nationality, what do you think you are? First choice. Second choice.”)

The Romanians

What is the situation of the Romanians?

If, on the one hand 33% of the Hungarians declare to know the “Ceangai” idiom but only 12% use it in the family, on the other hand the Romanians (93% of the total amount of the population from the Moldavian “Ceangai” villages) know the “Ceangai” idiom in proportion of 49% and, also, 27% of them declare that they usually speak it in the family (see chart “Do you know “Ceangai” idiom?” % of the Romanians and what is the common language in your family? % of the Romanians.”).

We also note that 25% of the Romanians consider themselves to be and\or are considered to be ”Ceangai”. It should be noticed that the Romanians hesitate to define themselves as “Ceangai” (about 2%), while more than 27% of them usually speak the “Ceangai” idiom.

For the Romanians who consider themselves to be and/or are considered to be “Ceangai” (the 25%), being “Ceangau” means to be Romanian from the ethnic

UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST. CURS SA. THE “CEANGAI” VILLAGES IN MOLDAVIA

8

point of view, in proportion of 98%, and only for 2% the ethnic dimension has no importance or significance.

Resuming, we conclude that, from the religious point of view, the Romanians who consider themselves to be and/or are considered to be ”Ceangai”, about 99% self define as Catholic Romanians (Roman-Catholic religion).

However, regarding the priority identification or the ethnocentric degree, almost 99% of the Romanians consider themselves to be firstly Romanian and only about 1% “Ceangai” (0.5%), Gipsies, Hungarian or I don’t know (0,5%). (see chart “From the point of view of your nationality what do you think you are? First choice. Second choice. % of Romanians”) Only secondly, about 5% of the Romanians consider themselves to be “Ceangai” and 1% Hungarian or German; for 93% of the Romanians there is no second identification (ethnic or cultural).

Only 3.5% of the Romanian are aware of a NGO active in the area.

The gender and age structure (as well as the one based on education and studies) of the Romanian population from the area is similar to the entire sample.

Regarding the religion, the Romanian from the Moldavian villages consider themselves to be Roman-Catholics in proportion of 75%, Orthodox – 24%, 1% having another religion or having not declared which religion they share.

The Hungarians So, if we were to conclude on the ethno-religious profile of the “Ceangai” group, we should say that they are and they consider themselves to be Romanian and only a small part of them, whose origins are Hungarian, correlate the “Ceangai” characteristics to the Hungarian ethnonim. When we report these data to the total amount of grown-up Hungarian population from the “Ceangai” villages (5.5% self define as Hungarian) we see that 20.7% consider themselves to be ”Ceangai”, and 19% declare that they are being identified likewise. (heteroidentification) About 33% of those who consider themselves to be Hungarian estimate that they know the “Ceangai” idiom.

Only 12% of the Hungarian declare that they usually speak the “Ceangai” idiom in the family, reporting to more than 86% who declare that they mostly speak Hungarian.

We can notice that, differently from the Romanians, the Hungarians overestimate their quality of ”Ceangai”, taking into consideration the fact that there is a difference of 28 percents between 12% of them who usually speak the “Ceangai” idiom and the 40% who self identify and/or are identified as being “Ceangai” (only

UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST. CURS SA. THE “CEANGAI” VILLAGES IN MOLDAVIA

9

21% self identify as ”Ceangai”, so they assume the identification). (see graph “Do you know the “Ceangai” idiom? What is the common language in your family?” % of the Hungarians).

Could this be the result of a propaganda campaign or a simple incoherence of some Hungarians who, although they declare that they neither know nor speak the “Ceangai” idiom, still consider themselves to be ”Ceangai”? - this is an issue yo be studied as it follows, together with the problem of the Romanians, who underestimate their “Ceangai” quality, although they know and use the “Ceangai” idiom.

We may suppose that the part of them (as habitants of the “Ceangai” villages) who are Hungarian consider themselves to be, as it is natural, firstly Hungarian.

The Hungarian consider themselves firstly to be Hungarian in a proportion of 87.9%, and 8.6% consider themselves to be Romanian. And 3.4% do not give an answer. However, the Hungarian consider themselves secondly to be: 24.1% Romanian, 3.7% Hungarian, and there are no Hungarians who should consider themselves not even secondly to be”Ceangai”, from the ethnic point of view. (see chart: “From the point of view of your nationality, what do think you are? First choice. Second choice. % of the Hungarians”) Not a single Hungarian from the “Ceangai” villages of Moldavia considers himself to be a “Ceangau” ethnic, neither firstly nor secondly. However, for 86% of Hungarian ”Ceangai”, it means that they are Catholic Hungarians. On the other hand, from the 5.5% of Hungarians sampled from those who live in the “Ceangai” villages, 20.7% assume their “Ceangai” identity, but not as an ethnic one, but as a “cultural and religious” identity, i.e., a local one, meaning only a particular feature of the “place” that differentiates them from other co-ethnics who live in other areas in which Hungarians dwell.

Which is the language that “Ceangai” would like to use for education and for the religious service?

From the almost 27% who use the “Ceangai” idiom in their families, 97% would like their children to be taught in Romanian, 2% in Hungarian (although, from those who speak the ”Ceangai” language, 25% consider it to be closer to the Hungarian language, 65% consider it an idiom, 10% think it is closer to the Romanian and 3% say it is something else, without specific answer) and 1% I don’t know/I don’t answer. (See chart “What should be the learning language for your children? % of those speaking “Ceangai” idiom in the familiy”.)

Regarding the religious service, meaning the language they would like to use for praying in the church, almost 96% of the “Ceangai” would like it to be Romanian, 3% Hungarian and 1% the “Ceangai” idiom. (See chart “What should be the sermon language? % of those speaking “Ceangai” idiom in the family”.)

UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST. CURS SA. THE “CEANGAI” VILLAGES IN MOLDAVIA

10

3 Social Distance Scale At The “Ceangai” From Moldavia A number of 275 persons (from the total amount of 1056 interviewed) self identify or are identified as ”Ceangai”. How do they report themselves to Hungarians and to Romanians?

Table 2. The value of the index obtained by applying the Scale of Social Distance on the population self identified or hetero-identified as ”Ceangai”.

Hung

Number of answers 242

Social Distance Index 0.61

arians Rom

253

0.09

anians Note: The difference up to 275 (number of persons who self identify as “Ceangai” represents the number of those who didn’t answer. The lesser is the index, the more it approaches that specific ethnic group.

In order to check whether the population who self identifies or is identified by others as “Ceangai” self evaluates more like Romanian or Hungarian ethnic group, we compared its pattern of ethnic attitude to that of the population self evaluated as Romanians (table 3). We started with the hypothesis that the lack of significant statistical difference between the answers of the two population categories indicates belonging to the same ethnic group.

The data of our investigation lead to the conclusion that the population self identified as “Ceangai” considers itself to be more part of the Romanian than of the Hungarian ethnic group.

Table 3. Index value obtained by applying the Social Distance Scale on the population self identified as “Ceangai” (N = 275) and on the population self identified as Romanian (N = 983).

Ethnic group Hungarians Romanians

SDI C 0.61 0.09

R 1.23 0.10

the difference 0.38 0.01

Note: SDI: Social Distance Index. C: persons self identified as “Ceangai” R: persons self identified as Romanians.

It results from the data contained by table 3 that ethnic attitudes of the persons who consider themselves or are considered to be “Ceangai” have a pattern of ethnical attitudes similar to that of those who self identified as Romanians. Both population categories manifest towards Romanians the highest degree of “understanding and affection”.

UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST. CURS SA. THE “CEANGAI” VILLAGES IN MOLDAVIA

11

The coefficient of rank correlation (Spearman), being 0.65, indicates a correlation at the limit between “moderate” and “statistically highly significant” of the ethnic attitudes of the two population categories.

The conclusion we may reach after the study of ethnic attitudes by using the Social Distance Scale is that the persons who self identify as “Ceangai” have psychological features specific to the Romanians, as they express the most favorable attitude towards the Romanians and as they have an attitudinal pattern similar to the Romanians.

UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST. CURS SA. THE “CEANGAI” VILLAGES IN MOLDAVIA

12