Regional identity and sustainable development in Transylvania: german cultural heritage

Understanding the role of Transylvanian Saxons in Romanian history is essential for comprehending the complexities of the region’s past and present. The Transylvanian identity, deeply rooted in the cultural landscape, has been largely shaped by the influence of German culture during their eight centuries of existence within the South-East Carpathians. It is important to note that the culture associated with this region has been enriched by various communities, with Romanians and Hungarians as the primary groups, alongside contributions from Szeklers (regional Hungarian group), Jews, Roma, Armenians, and Bulgarians.

To promote this cultural heritage, it is necessary to delineate the territory in which this distinctive culture developed and which is associated with the collective memory of the place. This territory is represented by Transylvania, a Romanian province that extends within the Carpathian arc – “beyond the forest” as it appears in early historical documents. It is bordered by the eastern, southern, and western subdivisions of the Carpathian Mountains, encompassing ten counties, according to the current administrative division. The geography of Transylvania has played a significant role in shaping the culture of the Transylvanian Saxons and other communities. The mountainous terrain has served as a natural barrier, protecting the region from invasions and allowing the Saxons to maintain their unique cultural identity.

Germans, predominantly represented by the Transylvanian Saxons, constituted the third largest ethnic group in Transylvania and held one of three privileged positions, along with Hungarian nobles and Szeklers. Their arrival in Transylvania commenced during the consolidation of Hungarian feudalism under King Géza II and continued in the Middle Ages. Emigrating from the present-day regions of Germany, Austria, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands, they established settlements in the southern and north-eastern regions of the principality, primarily near the passes and crossings that connected Transylvania to Moldavia and Wallachia across the Carpathian Mountains.

The specific territory of the Saxons was known as “Königsboden” (Royal Land, Pământul Crăiesc in Romanian, Szászföld in Hungarian, Terra Saxorum or Fundus Regius in Latin), enjoying privileges granted by Hungarian kings or Austrian emperors until its incorporation into the Kingdom of Hungary. This royal territory covered an expansive area of roughly 30,000 square kilometres in the southern and central regions of Transylvania (Siebenbürgen, as identified by the German population), encompassing the seats of Orăștie (Broos), Sebeș (Mühlbach), Miercurea Sibiului (Reussmarkt), Șeica (Marktschelken), Mediaș (Mediasch), Rupea (Reps), and Sighișoara (Schässburg), as well as the districts of Brașov (Kronstadt) and Bistrița (Bistritz), collectively forming the Saxon Municipality, governed by its own legal system, which was based on German law. In the early stages of colonization, their dominion over this land was centred on the fortified cities of Sibiu (Hermannstadt), Brașov (Kronstadt), and Bistrița (Bistritz), from which they would later establish numerous towns and villages.

The supreme institution of all Saxon settlements (the municipality) was called the Saxon University (Universitas Saxorum, Säschsische Nationsuniversität). It served as the emblem of cultural and political autonomy for the Saxon community, a status that persisted until 1876, at which point autonomy was relinquished.

Many Transylvanian Saxons identify as part of the broader German Nation, specifically aligning with Germany rather than any other country. Due to their geographical separation from German-speaking regions, they preserved a distinct dialect, sharing similarities with Upper German and Luxembourgish, even leading to hypotheses about the Luxembourgish origin of the Saxons. While most writings and cultural transmission occurred through standardized German, there are also written texts in the Saxon dialect, which is nowadays studied by linguists.

In addition to the Saxons, other provinces within the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy – such as Banat, Crișana, Maramureș, and Bukovina – located to the west, north, and north-east of the Carpathians, were home to various Germanic communities, notably the Schwaben. These groups each had distinct histories, religions, traditions, and geographical environments, leading to relatively weak communication and interaction among them. In Transylvania, the majority identified as Saxons, while those who declared themselves to be of German origin were recorded in the main cities and in a few mining centres: Certeju de Sus and Boița (Pernseifen) in Hunedoara County, Baia de Arieș (Offenburg) and Roșia Montană (Goldbach) in Alba County or Rodna (Altrodenau) in Bistrița-Năsăud County.

While most of the other Germanic groups outside the Carpathians were Catholic, the Saxons’ primary religious affiliation was Lutheran, making it the second-largest Protestant religion in Transylvania. This religious identity stemmed from the adoption of Martin Luther’s reforms by the Transylvanian Saxons and was organized by Johannes Honterus, a humanist from Brașov, who studied in Basel where he produced the first map of Transylvania. The spread of Lutheran ideas was facilitated by merchants who frequently travelled to Germany or students who pursued education at German Protestant universities. The consolidation of their faith took place with the formulation of the “Augsburg Confession” during the Mediaș Synod in 1572, becoming the principal doctrinal document of Lutheranism for the Saxons. During critical periods in their history, including the loss of autonomy in 1876, World War II, and the communist era, the Church of the Transylvanian Saxons played a crucial role as the central institution preserving the identity of the Saxon community (Drs 2015). These factors significantly contributed to the cultural development of the Saxons in Transylvania.

The political context after World War I, with the shifting of the Saxon identity to German ethnicity, in terms of national-socialism (Cercel 2011), the aftermath of World War II, and the Stalinist regime led to a continuous decrease in the number of Germans in Romania, including the Transylvanian Saxons, who represented 10% of the Transylvanian population in 1850, 8% in 1930, 4% in 1956, and less than 1% in 1992. The sharp reduction occurred after World War II through the displacement of a significant number of Germans with the withdrawal of the German army, and the deportation of those remaining in the country to labour camps in the Soviet Union, Bărăgan, or Dobrogea.

The largest number of Germans in the last two centuries was recorded in 1930 – 237,845 in the ten counties that administratively form Transylvania (745,421 in the entire Great Romania), while, in 1992, there were only 41,604 (Fig. 1). However, the situation differs from other countries in the region where the German population almost disappeared after World War II. Romania is an exception, as German communities continued to exist and promote their culture, even during the communist period when all communities suffered (Ursprung 2015). However, the end of the communist period led to the mass migration of Germans to West Germany, as a result of a repatriation agreement between the Romanian and German governments. The higher immigration rate among Saxons compared to Swabians can be attributed to distinct historical contexts. The autonomy of the Saxons fostered the formation of a self-contained community, whereas Germans residing outside the Carpathians tended to be more open to local integration. Consequently, the presence of mixed families contributed to deterring Swabians from emigrating, as they had established local roots (Ursprung 2015).

Figure 1.

The demographic evolution of the German population in the present-day territory of Romania

Source: Population Census Romania (1930, 1956, 1966, 1977, 1992, 2002, 2011, 2021)

At the last census in 2021, the German population constituted the fifth ethnic group in Romania but only one-third of them lived in Transylvania. The city with the most inhabitants of German ethnicity is the capital of the country, Bucharest, followed by the municipality of Sibiu (Hermannstadt), in their traditional Saxon area, Satu Mare (Sathmar), in the western part of the country where they are represented by the Sathmarer Schwaben, and Brașov (Kronstadt), the most representative Saxon city in Transylvania. Out of the 7,520 Germans in Transylvania, two-thirds live in urban areas and one-third in rural areas. In this demographic context, the presence of Germans in Transylvanian villages is negligible, with only two communes, Laslea (Grosslasseln) and Merghindeal (Mergeln) in the Sibiu County, having over 100 inhabitants who currently identify as being of German origin.

The mass emigration of Transylvanian Saxons had a profound impact on the region’s ethnic composition and cultural heritage. While some scholars argue that this was a case of ethnic substitution replacement, others believe that it was a more nuanced and passive transformation. In some cases, Saxon culture was simply assimilated by the Romanian or Hungarian majority. In other cases, there was a more active process of “cultural borrowing” (Oltean, Anghel, & Schuster 2015), as elements of Saxon culture were adopted by the majority population, a trend less commonly observed in relation to other communities. In the last thirty years, significant advancements have occurred in the German-language education system, with a resurgence of cultural and scientific societies, the founding of fresh cultural and civic associations, and the proliferation of German-language media organizations (Rotaru, Creţan, & Ianăş 2023).

It is clear that ethnic replacement can lead to a decline in cultural heritage, lifestyle, land use, and other areas; thus, the preservation of the Transylvanian Saxon cultural heritage concerns the cultural preservation of the entire region. Protecting this unique heritage necessitates a collaborative effort between governments and non-governmental organizations.

This paper explores diverse instances of cultural heritage, encompassing monuments, architectural complexes, and sites of universal historical, artistic, and/or scientific significance.

Cultural geography is a complex field that studies the connections between people and their environments; it is vital in comprehending how heritage operates in diverse societies. The multifaceted nature of the heritagization process actively shapes collective identities in multicultural communities. Additionally, this process holds a significant ethnic component, as the ethno-socio-political context cannot be overlooked when examining the cultural legacy derived from a region with a distinct multicultural character.

The notion of heritage is closely tied to contemporary society’s adoption of historical components as valuable assets in social, political, and economic domains (Graham, Ashworth, & Turnbridge 2000). Heritage can be examined through both economic and political lenses. Politically, heritage can be strategically utilized as a tool for political agendas or to support the public image of political leaders. Transylvania serves as a compelling illustration of this phenomenon, as political figures at various levels, both local and national, have witnessed heightened electoral success when aligning themselves with the region’s rich German heritage. Concurrently, from an economic perspective, heritage can function as a catalyst for sustainable development, especially in rural communities, where transforming historical sites into tourist attractions can revitalize economies and foster social engagement. This is because heritage tourism can attract visitors, generate revenue, and create employment opportunities. Socially, cultural heritage involves promoting regional identity and social cohesion (Bujdosó et al. 2015). The perception of the heritagization of Saxon culture in Transylvania can also be correlated with the degree of involvement in tourism benefits (Corsale & Iorio 2014).

Although Transylvania’s history has been enriched by a diverse range of cultures, a consensus on the terminology used to describe the region’s heritage has yet to be reached (Iorio & Corsale 2013). The convergence of diverse communities in Transylvania has resulted in a rich common heritage, with each cultural group making a distinct contribution, as the cultures of Romanians, Hungarians, and Saxons have developed in close proximity, deeply influencing one another, while also preserving their distinct traditions (Takács 2017).

Despite substantial ethnic migration, German heritage remains a prominent force in southern Transylvania, its influence perpetuated and reimagined by individuals who are not ethnically German. These individuals engage in German ethnic organizations and educational systems, adopting distinct Saxon social practices. This phenomenon, termed “cultural borrowing” by Oltean (2017), involves the adoption of other groups’ social customs while also developing new cultural forms.

If a region’s identity is constructed through debates that revolve around archaeological, historical, and linguistic claims, coming mainly from Hungarian and Romanian communities who see Transylvania as their homeland (Baár & Deciu Ritivoi 2006), sometimes with hints of “protocronism”⁽¹⁾, in the case of the Germans in contemporary Romania, there is a large acceptance of their role in the cultural development of the region and an appreciation of their heritage.

While Transylvania’s cultural heritage is deeply rooted in the German influence, its popular perception is intertwined with the image of a Romanian ruler. Unlike conventional tourism marketing (Mureșan & Smith 1998), our approach will not rely on the association with legendary figures to analyse Transylvania’s cultural offerings. The rich legacy of the Saxon (German) community in southern Transylvania, spanning nearly nine centuries, continues to resonate today through a captivating blend of cultural and architectural heritage, which is unparalleled in Europe (Cristini, García-Soriano, & Vegas 2020) and distinguished by its picturesque rural landscapes and preserved peasant settlements punctuated by fortified churches (Dincă 2016; Dinu & Cioacă 2008).

The German material cultural heritage is primarily visible in the cultural landscape of Transylvania, especially in the southern part, but also in Bistrița and Reghin areas in the east. Most of the cities, towns, and villages formerly inhabited by Germans preserve some of the fortifications, churches, and civil buildings that were made by and belonged to German communities, thus creating a specific cultural landscape, easily recognizable and quite distinct.

According to their main function, these constructions may be classified as follows: military and defensive compounds, especially fortifications around cities and fortresses; mixed military and religious buildings (fortified churches); religious buildings, mainly urban churches and monasteries; and civilian buildings, including state-owned, administrative, and other official buildings, private palaces, manors and courts, trade offices, and houses.

Some of the constructions had mixed functions. The fortified churches were primarily places of worship but their fortifications allowed for a defensive function in case of attack. Some of the towers along the urban fortifications also had civilian functions in times of peace, and even small fortresses included houses or other civilian buildings.

Civilian buildings and architecture

Civilian buildings represent the bulk (more than 95%) of German material cultural heritage, both in urban and rural areas. Most of these buildings are simple houses, but there are also a number of cultural landmarks, such as administrative and other state-owned buildings (town halls, offices), trade-related sites, private palaces, and manors, some of them turned into museums. Apart from the buildings themselves, one should also note the urban structure, including notable squares and main streets that have their own specificities.

Brașov (Kronstadt), Sibiu (Hermannstadt), and Sighișoara (Schässburg) are the most representative cities in terms of Saxon civilian buildings and architecture, while Bistrița (Bistritz), Mediaș (Mediasch), Sebeș (Mühlbach), Orăștie (Broos), Cisnădie (Heltau), and Râșnov (Rosenau) also have a wide range of specific buildings and a typical Saxon urban structure. In fact, most of the former Saxon towns and villages maintain a specific cultural landscape, characterized by the presence of long rows of terraced houses along the streets, with a large square in the town or village centre, which is usually surrounded by important buildings such as the town hall. The Saxon terraced row houses are quite different from the houses of other people in Transylvania; both Romanians and Hungarians usually lived in individual houses with courtyards and gardens that were clearly delineated and separated by fences; there was always some space between the houses and separating the houses from the road. The typical Saxon village presents a compact structure of houses that are attached to each other, forming a single row, which acted like a defensive wall in itself in case of an attack. The houses had common residential areas with the neighbours on the sides, separated only by a single wall within the building, while the front and the back of the house (where it existed) were linked to neighbouring houses in a harmonious architectural setting; this was because all houses were built in the same manner and were more or less the same size. The entrance to the house is usually through a covered passageway connecting the outside to the inner enclosed courtyard. The passageway provides access to the front rooms of the house, while the courtyard connects to the other buildings of the household (Butură 1989).

The civilian buildings and the architecture of the historic centre of Sighișoara are listed among the UNESCO World Heritage Sites. Apart from those in Sighișoara, the buildings within the fortified cities of Brașov, Sibiu, Sebeș, Bistrița, and Mediaș are included in the nationally relevant protected areas according to Law 5/2000. There are also ten specific buildings that are classified separately in the above-mentioned Law as “urban civilian buildings”. These have a higher degree of protection and visibility (table 2): three in Bistrița (Ioan Zidaru House, also known as Hans Maurer House or Andreas Beuchel House; the Silversmith’s House; and Șugălete row of buildings); three in Sibiu (the Council Tower; the former Town Hall; and Brukenthal Palace, now hosting a famous art museum); two in Brașov (the Council House and the Hirscher House), and two in Sighișoara (Vlad Dracul House or Vlad the Impaler’s House; and the Stag House). Many other buildings are on the Romanian List of Historical Monuments and enjoy a certain degree of protection. Apart from the buildings, there are other notable elements of urban structure, such as squares (the Grand Square and the Lesser Square in Sibiu, the Town Square in Sighișoara, the Council Square in Brașov, and so on); certain streets – for example, Sforii Street in Brașov, which is the narrowest in Romania and one of the narrowest in Europe; and even stairs, such as the covered Scholars’ Stairs in Sighișoara, connecting the lower and upper portions of the citadel, and allowing for better access to the church and school in the upper town, especially in winter. Palaces outside the main cities were rare. One of them is Brukenthal Palace in Avrig (different from the more famous one with the same name in Sibiu), where renovation works are in progress (Fig. 2).

Figure 2.

ArcMap 10.8 based on administrative and historical data as well as ESRI spatial data

Source: own elaboration

The former Saxon cities are among the most visited in Romania. Brașov and Sibiu both rank in the top five most visited cities in Romania in any given year, usually only behind the capital city of Bucharest, and Constanța on the Black Sea Coast, which includes several seaside resorts catering for mass tourism in summer (Rusu 2022). It is also true that Brașov and Sibiu receive a wide range of tourists, not just culturally motivated ones, since they both include ski resorts (Poiana Brașov is part of Brașov, and Păltiniș is part of the city of Sibiu); there are plenty of natural attractions as well. Brașov, the largest former German city, was also home to the famous Golden Stag Festival, during which the main stage was usually located in the Council Square. Sibiu was the capital city of the Transylvanian Saxons and the first city in Romania to become European Capital of Culture, together with Luxembourg, in 2007. Despite the very low number of Germans living in the city, Sibiu had a German mayor for many years, and one of its former mayors, Klaus Iohannis, has been the president of Romania since 2014. A German mayor was also usually elected in Mediaș. Both Sibiu and Sighișoara host medieval festivals, and Sighișoara is also the place selected for a planned (but not yet materialized) Dracula theme park. Castles and fortresses are much visited as well. Bran Castle, also related to Vlad the Impaler (Dracula), is among the top ten attractions in Romania, and tourists also flock to the nearby Râșnov Fortress, as well as to other fortresses and fortified churches (Pop 2011).

The churches lost much of their spiritual function because of the declining number of parishioners. In the rural areas especially, religious ceremonies rarely take place because a single priest is in charge of many Lutheran Evangelical churches and provides specific services by rotation. Churches are sometimes maintained with the help of former German inhabitants and their offspring, who live for the majority of their time in Germany. As a result, many churches have turned to tourism as a means of achieving the necessary funds for their maintenance or renovation. State funds are also allocated, with a view to increasing the tourist value of the churches but also to avoid the degradation of the historical monuments. Private funds, such as Mihai Eminescu Trust and Transylvania Trust, contribute as well. Britain’s King Charles III invested a lot in the small village of Viscri (Brașov County), where he used to come very often as a visitor when he was the Prince of Wales. Those unofficial visits led to an improvement of the image of Romania (and Transylvania) as a tourist destination and, metaphorically, put Viscri on the map for many other visitors eager to find out more about the German cultural heritage in Transylvania (Fischer, Hartel & Kuemmerle 2012).

Many civilian buildings have been turned into museums, even since the Communist period. Brukenthal Palace in Sibiu, with its art collection, became one of the most important art museums in Romania. Other museums were established within former German civilian buildings in Brașov, Sibiu, Bistrița, Mediaș, and Sighișoara. Fortresses were also turned into open-air museums. On the one hand, visitors are interested in seeing inside the buildings, and the manner in which rooms and other spaces were organized and, on the other, in viewing the museum exhibits. Some of the museums include an ethnographic section, displaying a wide range of objects used in the everyday life and activities of the population. In Livezile (Jaad, Bistrița-Năsăud County), there is a former Saxon house transformed into a museum, named Casa Săsească (the Saxon House), which contains original furniture, folk costumes, and houseware. The fortified churches of Viscri, Biertan, and Prejmer host permanent exhibitions concerning the everyday life of the Saxons. Such objects represent another (less visible) aspect of German cultural heritage, sometimes only preserved in such museums (Mittelstrass 1993).

The Saxon cultural heritage is also maintained and transmitted through meetings and festivals. The Annual Meeting of the Saxons takes place every year in September, or sometimes in August to facilitate the participation of Saxons who currently live in other countries (mainly in Germany). One should note that there are formal Saxon associations in Germany, Austria, the USA, and Canada, which together with those in Transylvania, have established the Saxon Confederation. The 34th meeting of the Saxons took place on 2–4 August 2024 in Sibiu. The meeting location is not always the same – the first meetings took place in Biertan, for instance. Such meetings include plenty of cultural events, such as Saxon traditional folk dancing, concerts, folk costume parades, and theatrical representations. Another event is the so-called Haferlandwoche (Oat Land Week), which refers to the area between Rupea (Reps) and Saschiz (Keisd); the 12th edition was celebrated on 8–11 August 2024. This also includes concerts (especially organ music played in churches), dances, and workshops. The Urzellauf (the Run after Lolas) is a winter event, taking place at the end of January or the beginning of February, in Agnita (Agnetheln). People are masked to represent the character of “Lola”, just like in a carnival, and are meant to frighten the audience, marching on the streets and making noise, using whips and bells. Initially the performers were Saxons, but now most of them are Romanians. This tradition has been successfully exported to Germany, where similar events are organized. The German newspaper Allgemeine Deutsche Zeitung für Rumänien (2024), published in Bucharest, provides coverage of all these events and many more, and represents yet another important element for the continuity of German culture in Romania.

German cultural heritage is also visible in the large number of schools and several high schools where all lessons are taught in German. These schools were initially meant for the few remaining German pupils although the actual number of such pupils is very low; nonetheless, many Romanians and Hungarians are eager to study in German, hoping to increase their chances to get better jobs as German “native” speakers or to enrol in German universities in the future. The most famous German high schools are Johannes Honterus in Brașov (Kronstadt) and Samuel von Brukenthal in Sibiu (Hermannstadt). German culture, including the knowledge of the German language, is highly esteemed among the Transylvanian inhabitants regardless of their origin. Connections to German institutions and companies are greatly valued and sought after by Transylvanian authorities and businesspeople.

Within the Lefebvrian spatial framework, Transylvania emerges as a dynamic social and historical landscape that has been continuously shaped by its inhabitants. It serves as a realm for the generation, utilization, and interchange of various elements, producing a space of discord but mainly of cooperation within Transylvania. The German cultural heritage is an essential element of the Transylvanian identity, despite the sharp decline of the German (Saxon) population itself. Cultural elements, such as fortifications, churches, and civilian buildings (from palaces to houses), as well as customs and traditions have been gradually incorporated and integrated into the Transylvanian cultural landscape, and adopted by the people living in Transylvania, regardless of their ethnicity or religion – a sort of “cultural borrowing”.

The resurgence of German cultural and scientific societies, the founding of fresh cultural and civic associations, and the proliferation of German-language media organizations and events are further reasons to believe that the German culture in Transylvania is not only rooted in the landscape but in people’s everyday lives. Saxons from all over the world are now connected through vast networks, and organize meetings and other events in Transylvania with the help of local authorities. Tourism is a thriving business for a region that promotes its diversity, and the former German fortified cities, castles, and churches are among the most visited sites. Some of these, possessing universal historical, artistic, and/or scientific significance have been designated as UNESCO World Heritage Sites, while most of the others are included on the nationally relevant lists of protected sites. The protection of this unique heritage necessitates a collaborative effort between the government and non-governmental organizations; European funds have also been utilized in the renovation of several sites.