DEMOGRAPHICS OF ROMANIA IN THE INTERWAR PERIOD

Abstract

THE ROMANIAN STATISTICS, SYNCHRONIZED WITH THE INTERNATIONAL ONE, BRINGS FORWARD THE GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF ROMANIA'S INTERWAR POPULATION FROM A DEMOGRAPHIC POINT OF VIEW, WITH ITS DYNAMISM AND FLUCTUATIONS. THERE IS A GENERAL TENDENCY OF BIRTH RATE DECREASE AT THE GLOBAL LEVEL, MORE PRONOUNCED AT THE EUROPEAN LEVEL, ROMANIA INCLUDED, SCORING IN THIS CONTEXT ONE OF THE HIGHEST BIRTH RATES IN THE WORLD, THE ROMANIAN STATE CONSTANTLY INCREASING THE POPULATION OF THE COUNTRY, IN SPITE OF THE MORE PRONOUNCED BIRTH RATE DECREASE IN THE RURAL AREAS AS OPPOSED TO THE URBAN AREAS. THE MOST SEVERE PROBLEM IN THE DEMOGRAPHY OF THE COUNTY - BOTH IN RURAL AND URBAN AREAS- WAS THE EXTREMELY HIGH PERCENTAGE OF GENERAL DEATH RATE AND INFANT MORTALITY, ROMANIA OCCUPYING THE FIRST PLACE FROM THIS POINT OF VIEW. DUE TO THE HIGH BIRTH RATE, THE NATURAL POPULATION SURPLUS RATE HAS STILL MAINTAINED AT A CONSIDERABLE LEVEL. DATA OF THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES OF BUCHAREST, CORPUS "SABIN MANUINA", WITH REFERENCE TO THE GLOBAL LEVEL, COMPLETE THIS PICTURE. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Headnote

ABSTRACT:

THE ROMANIAN STATISTICS, SYNCHRONIZED WITH THE INTERNATIONAL ONE, BRINGS FORWARD THE GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF ROMANIA'S INTERWAR POPULATION FROM A DEMOGRAPHIC POINT OF VIEW, WITH ITS DYNAMISM AND FLUCTUATIONS.

THERE IS A GENERAL TENDENCY OF BIRTH RATE DECREASE AT THE GLOBAL LEVEL, MORE PRONOUNCED AT THE EUROPEAN LEVEL, ROMANIA INCLUDED, SCORING IN THIS CONTEXT ONE OF THE HIGHEST BIRTH RATES IN THE WORLD, THE ROMANIAN STATE CONSTANTLY INCREASING THE POPULATION OF THE COUNTRY, IN SPITE OF THE MORE PRONOUNCED BIRTH RATE DECREASE IN THE RURAL AREAS AS OPPOSED TO THE URBAN AREAS.

THE MOST SEVERE PROBLEM IN THE DEMOGRAPHY OF THE COUNTY - BOTH IN RURAL AND URBAN AREAS- WAS THE EXTREMELY HIGH PERCENTAGE OF GENERAL DEATH RATE AND INFANT MORTALITY, ROMANIA OCCUPYING THE FIRST PLACE FROM THIS POINT OF VIEW.

DUE TO THE HIGH BIRTH RATE, THE NATURAL POPULATION SURPLUS RATE HAS STILL MAINTAINED AT A CONSIDERABLE LEVEL. DATA OF THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES OF BUCHAREST, CORPUS "SABIN MANUINA", WITH REFERENCE TO THE GLOBAL LEVEL, COMPLETE THIS PICTURE.

KEY WORDS: DEMOGRAPHICS, BIRTH RATE, DEATH RATE, NATURAL POPULATION SURPLUS, RURAL POPULATION, URBAN POPULATION.

SUPERIORITY OF THE ROMANIAN BIRTH RAT

In the interwar period, the birth rate in Romania was superior to the rates registered in other European countries; in spite of the fact that there was a general tendency of decline, Romania scored one of the highest birth rates in Europe and even in the world.1

Source of statistical data: D.I. Ciocârlan in Buletinul demografic al Romäniei, Publicafie oficialä a Ministerului Muncii, Sänätäfii fi Ocrotirilor Sociale. Oficial Demografic, de Statisticä Sanitarä fi de ocrotire, Director: S. Manuilä, PhD, 1st Year, January, 1932, Publishing House of the Demographic Office, Bucharest, p. 294.

The leading place occupied by Romania, with a percentage of 34.1 %o, is followed by four European countries, with a birth rate exceeding the percentage of 30%o (Japan with 33%o, Poland and Portugal with 32.3%o, Bulgaria with 30.1%o), seven countries with birth rates of 20-30%o (Argentina, Spain, Italy, Hungary, The Netherlands, Czechoslovakia, Finland); the rest of 23 countries score a percentage under 20%o. We can also notice that the European Countries of Southern and Eastern Europe have higher birth rates than the countries form Western Europe.

In opposition, the lowest birth rate was registered in Sweden (15.2%o, England and Wales with 16.3%o, followed by Austria with 16.7%o, Switzerland with 17.1%o, Norway with 17.5%o, France with 17.7%o etc.

Regarding death rates, Romania registered the highest percentage out of the 23 states, being the only European state with a death rate of over 20 %o, an alarming phenomenon that must be reduced.

Sabin Manuilä, in the study "Spre 20 milioane de locuitori" [Towards 20 million inhabitants], brigs forward the severe demographic situation from Romania, with the sad remark that " in none of the developed countries there is such a high death rate as in our country, that nowhere else the average life expectancy was not more reduced than in Romania, and that nowhere else a new born had fewer chances of living than in our country"5.

This death rate also influences the natural increase of population and the average life expectancy in our country. Due to a very high birth rate, the natural increase, even though it is decreasing, is still maintained at a level that ensures the country a natural increase of a quarter million inhabitants per year. Life expectancy is still very low, and the life expectancy of a new bom is not higher than 40 years, whereas in other countries it is of approximately 60 years or even higher6.

The birth rate numbers determine the natural increase of population. From a biological point of view, the most advantageous situation is that of the countries scoring a reduced death rate and a considerable natural increase.

Hence, we can notice an intense phenomenon in the birth and death rates in the case of Romania's population, both rates scoring high percentages.

Regarding the natural increase, the first places are being occupied by Argentina, Poland, Portugal and Japan, Romania being at the same level as The Netherlands, in spite of the difference registered in birth rates (The Netherlands occupies the 10th position, with a percentage of 22,8%o, whereas Romania scores 34,1%7); the only country scoring a higher death rate that the birth rate is France, the difference being of one per cent, resulting in a negative natural increase.

Hence, we can notice that The Netherlands has a similar natural increase of population to that of Romania (12.1%o for The Netherlands, versus 12.7%o for Romania), although the birth rate of The Netherlands is much lower than that of Romania. Sabin Manuilä noticed that

"In our case, 1.000 women at a birth giving age, have a fecundity of 202, more precisely one woman out of five is pregnant in a year and gives birth. This represents an extraordinary and useless effort because these extremely numerous births give a natural increase of only 12%o8. Or, this percentage is reached by The Netherlands as well, where fecundity per 1000 women is of only 132, so, in their case, a woman out of eight has a pregnancy, respectively one birth a year. This means that Romanian women from 16 to 45 years old give birth once every five years, whereas the Dutch women give birth once every eight years, and the final result is the same number of children. Hence, a Romanian woman bares 50% more pregnancies than a Dutch woman, so that the number of children that survive is the same"9. In Romania, fecundity was diminished mainly by the birth of dead children, of premature birth and other causes10. From the statistical data of the interwar period, the conclusion is that "the annual birth rate number in our country is almost constant, of more than 625.000 children". Romania's natural increase was still appreciable, in spite of the high death rate, due to the high percentage registered on the birth rate scale.

Romania was exceeded on the birth rate scale only in 1924, by Yugoslavia that scored 38,6 %o that year, comparative to a value of 37,9 %o, registered by our country.11

We are going to compare the data above with the data on the movement of population from 30 states, reported to the year 1930, the chart below providing also data on child mortality.

Source of statistical data: D.I. Ciocârlan in Buletinul demografic al României, Publicafie oficialä a Ministerului Muncii, Sänätäfii §i Ocrotirilor Sociale. Oficial Demografic, de Statisticä Sanitarä §i de ocrotire, Director: S. Manuilä, PhD, FebruaryApril, 1932, publishing House of the Demographic Office, Bucharest, p. 45.

Comparative to the year 1929, statistical data do not change fundamentally for the year 1930, Romania still occupying the first position on both birth and death rates. Unfortunately, we have the highest percentage in the case of child mortality as well. Death rates decline from 21,4%o in 1929 , to 19.4%o in 1930, and, regarding natural increase, Romania occupies the third place, scoring a percentage of 15.6%o, comparative to 12.7%o in 1929 (the 5,fl place).

The most advantageous position among the countries with a high birth rate is occupied by Poland: 2nd place on the birth rate scale (32.8%o), 8th place on the death rate scale (15.8%o), and 1st place on the natural increase scale (17.0%o). The most disadvantageous demographic balance is occupied again by France, with a birth rate of 18.1 %o (23rd place), a high death rate of 15.7%o (9" place), and, in the case of natural increase, it occupies the last position (30th place), with 2.4%0. A similar position is occupied by Austria: birth rate of 16.8%o (28th place), death rate of 13.5%o (16th place), and natural increase of 3.3%o (28th place).

At a global level, the most favourable demographic situation is the one of The Union of South Africa, with a birth rate of 26.4%0, occupying the 9th place, with a death rate of 9.7%o (27th place), and with a natural increase of 16.7%o (occupying the 2nd place). Making a comparison between The Union of South Africa and Romania, we can notice that both states have an almost identical natural increase rate (2nd place for The Union of South Africa, with 16.7%o, respectively 3rd place for Romania, with 15.6%o); regarding birth rates, Romania occupies the 1st place with 35.0%o, and The Union of South Africa occupies the 9th place, with 26.4%0; regarding death rates, the situation is strikingly different, Romania occupying the 1st place with 19.4%0, and The Union of South Africa, with 9.7%o, occupying the 27th place. Similar positions to that of The Union of South Africa are encountered, at a global level, in the case of Australia, Canada, New Zeeland, and, at a European level, in the case of The Netherlands.

Our country occupies a disadvantageous position in the case of child mortality rates as well, in spite of the decline from 19.7%o, in 1929, to 17.6%o, in 1930.

Although it scores a very high birth rate, because of the alarming death rate, much higher that the death rates of any other civilized countries, and reaching the national potential of Romania's population structure, the interwar period required a much clearer demographic policy, with better defined and more rapid effects on the decline of mortality.

BIRTH RATES IN THE RURAL AREAS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SUPERIOR TO THOSE IN THE URBAN AREAS

Birth rates in the urban areas have been much more reduced than in the rural areas, invariably, the rural population having an extremely low natural increase rate. Sabin Manuilä stated that:

" Both from a biological, and social and economic perspective, the urban population has a totally different character from the rural population. [..] The rural population is conservative, less open to the idea of social and cultural progress, it has a higher natural increase, it is stationary and, generally, it is characterized by biological and social hyperfunctions. For the urban inhabitants, the situation is the other way around. The more intense pulse of the urban life necessarily produces a reduction of the vitality of the population, and it determines an exaltation of the social functions. As a result, villages act as a reservoir of population, and the cities as population destroyers."13 Of course, the observation is taken to the extreme, but it is later on supported by the study "Populaba României" [The Population of Romania].

If we analyse the phenomenon of reproduction, which ensures the perpetuation of human race, we can notice that, in the urban areas, this phenomenon is very reduced, and incapable of compensating the losses suffered because of yearly death rates. If the population from the cities would be recruited just from the indigenous, in a few decades the cities would become completely uninhabited.

In the rural areas, child bearing is more frequent. Not only do they cover the losses caused by death, but they also give a significant natural increase rate. This natural increase is divided into two parts. One part remains in the rural areas, strengthening the rural population, and the other part inhabits the cities, filling in the gaps and increasing the population of the cities.

The capital had 321.000 inhabitants in 1912. In 1930, the population of the capital increased, reaching a number of 631.000 inhabitants, among which only 10% were bom in the capital. The rest of 90% originated from the rural areas.

Although rural areas generate, urban areas develop, consume. In human biology, rural areas represent the industry: the creation, and urban areas represent commerce: the development."14

In Romania, birth rates encountered bizarre fluctuations, whose causes have not been clarified yet. Around 1860, the birth rate was reduced to an approximate percentage of 30 %0. In 1870, it increased from 40 to 50 %o, and between 1890 and 1910 the birth rate maintained around a constant percentage of 40%o, increasing up to 43%o in the years preceding the war. After the war, birth rates declined comparative to the interval 19101914, and they continuing to decrease, particularly in the rural areas. In the urban areas, the birth rate is much lower than in the rural ones, but it remains constant, without registering a decreasing direction15.

Nevertheless, as a general rule, the overproduction of the rural population flows into the cities, in order to fill in the gaps produced by the disappearance of the urban population, and to lead to a continuous increase of the cities. Analysing the situation of the cities form Romania, we could easily make use of this truth. Hence, in Transylvania and in 6 of the 8 cities with municipalities, in 1870, the urban population was of 151,059 inhabitants, and the population of the villages and of the rest of the cities was of 4,022,327. Up until 1900, the urban population increased up to 255,118, and the rural one increased up to 4,639,558 inhabitants, and, after another 3 decades, in 1930, the cities registered a number of 438,048 inhabitants, whereas the rest of 5,111,393 inhabitants have been registered in the rural areas. The increase in the municipalities was, in the first 3 decades, of 68.9%, and, in the last ones, of 190%; in the rural areas, the increase was of 15.3% in the first decades, and of 27.1% in the last ones.16

In order to thoroughly analyse birth rates in the urban areas, comparative to the rural ones, we are going to present the concrete situation of the number of child bearings in Romania, in both areas, from the interval 1920-193917:

Source of statistical data: Dr. Sabin Manuilä, D.C. Georgescu, op.cit., p. 80-83; Ing. I. Measnicov, Mortalitatea populafiei rurale româneçti, in "Sociologie româneascâ", year Il (1937), no. 4, April, p. 158; D. Çandru, Populafia ruralà a României íntre cele douä räzboaie mondiale, Yearbook of the Institute foe History and Archeology "A.D. Xenopol" (Supplement II), Publishing House of the Academy of the Socialist Republic of Romania, Ia§i, 1980, p.15.

We can notice that the highest number of child bearings, more precisely 625.341, was registered in 1930, Romania scoring a percentage of 35.0%o. Moreover, we can notice a tendency of decline in birth rates, each year, except for 1930.

In the rural areas, birth rates registered very high percentages.

More precisely, the main demographic data of the counties18, present the following fluctuations: in Muntenia, the birth rate is of over 40%o; in Bräila it even exceeds 48%o; an exception is encountered in Mused, with a percentage of just 34%0; in Dobrogea, the average birth rate is of 45,l%o, with 48.1%o in Tulcea and 49.5%o in Constanta. Moldavia is the province with the highest birth rate scores, comparative to all the other Romanian provinces, scoring an average percentage of 44.5%o, in the county of Fälciu the birth rate reaching a percentage of 52%o, the highest percentage registered in Romania in 1930. Furthermore, it is important to point out that in Moldavia there is no county registering a birth rate lower than 41.0%o, in the rural areas. Bessarabia occupies the 3rd place on the birth rate scale, and a 2nd place on the natural increase of population scale; the average percentage of the birth rate declines below 40%o, because of the scores registered in the counties of Cetatea-Albä, Hotin and Soroca; a high birth rate is scored by the county of Cahul, with a percentage of 50.0%o. Bucovina registers an average birth rate, similar to Oltenia. In the case of Transylvania and Cri§ana-Maramure§, there is a reduced birth rate of 33%o, and no county of this area registers a percentage higher than 40%o in the rural areas. The lowest birth rate is registered in the vilages of Banat, with a percentage of 23%o, the lowest percentage being registered in the county of Timi§, with 22,3%o. The lowest birth rate in Romania is registered in the counties of Timiç, Cara§, Hunedoara, Severin, Arad and Fägära§.

In the rural areas, the teams of students also encountered major fluctuations: the team working in Stoeçeçti, county of Tutova, registered, for the years 1928-1937, an average birth rate of 51,8 %o, while for the interval 1927 -1936 in Jdioara, county of Severin, the average birth rate was of only 26,47 %o, namely approximately half the scores obtained for Stoeçeçti19.

The lowest birth rate, presenting alarming aspects from a demographic point of view, was registered constantly, between the two World Wars, in the west and south-west areas of the country; regarding the social criteria, the lowest birth rate was registered in the case of intellectuals, where there were few child bearings.20

Regarding overall death rate, the percentage is of 19.8%o in the rural areas. In 34 of the counties there is a death rate higher than 20.0%o, and 37 of them do not exceed this percentage. All the counties from Dobrogea, Moldavia (except for the counties of Baia and Neanfr) and those of Bucovina (except fort the county of Câmpulung), score death rates higher than 20%o. In Banal, Criçana and Maramureç (except for Bihor), there is no county that reaches the national average number, andm in the case of Transylvania, only in 3 counties (Fägära§ with 20.5%o, Näsäud with 21.3%o, and Some§ with 19.9%o) the national average number is exceeded. The highest percentage of mortality was registered in the county of Durostor (28.2%o), and the lowest was registered in the county of Soroca (16.5%o).

Regarding the natural increase of population, the average national percentage is of 17%o, with very high fluctuations: the county of Fälciu scoring a percentage of 31.6%o and the county of Timiç-Torontal a percentage of only 3.7%o.

In the Romanian provinces, the natural increase varies by region. In Dobrogea it is very high, some counties of Dobrogea scoring a natural increase percentage of 40 %o. At the opposite end, in the counties of Banat, particularly in the county of Caraç, we cannot talk about a natural increase rate, because of the demographic decline - very low birth rates, very high death rates, a decline in population. In the evolution of population, the situation of Banat is particular. Namely, Banat has a very low birth rate, a high death rate, a disparent natural increase and a decline in population. In 1929, the birth rate was of 220 in Banat, without being below the average birth rate of most European countries. Germany, Switzerland, Austria, The United States, England, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, etc. have lower birth rates than Banat; nevertheless, they register a considerable natural increase rate. The explanation is the lower death rate of these countries, of 15.0 %o in Belgium, 14.5 %o in Austria, 12.6 %o in Germany and Switzerland, 11.9 %o in The United States, 10.7 %o in The Netherlands and 9.6 %o in Australia21.

The situation of Banat is exceptional, the overall mortality being of 22.0 %o, which means that, overall, the number of people being bom is similar to the number of those deceasing. The disastrous result is caused particularly by child mortality of children under 1 year old22.

For the urban areas23, we can notice as a general feature that there are large fluctuations from city to city, the birth rate in the cities being very low. In Bucharest, the birth rate is of 21.5%o. A high percentage is encountered in the case of small under populated cities or towns: Urlafi 42.7%o, Isaccea 40.0%o, Mäcin 42.9%o, Medgidia 41.9%o, Märä§e§ti 41.7%o, Comrat 46.0%o; at the opposite end, we encounter cities with very low birth rates: Orçova 13.3%o, Oravifa 12.5%o, Suceava 13.9%o, Fägära§ 11.0%o.

Death rates in the urban areas reach a percentage of 25%o, and in some cities, even above 30%o (for example, Filipeçti-Târg from the county of Prahova, scores 31.9%o), a unique negative situation in Europe. For this reason, the natural population increase is low in the cities.

THE TENDENCY OF DECLINE IN BIRTH RATE IS A GENERAL GLOBAL PHENOMENON

In the interwar period, birth rates began to decline severely in most civilized countries. The decline was almost general and more significant in the European countries. Other continents faced a less severe decline in birth rates, and, in some countries, it even remained constant. An exception is represented by Japan, where birth rates grew significantly, Japan being considered one of the most fertile countries of the world.

Romania does not make an exception to this general tendency, Sabin Manuilä stating that: "Concerning birth rates, around the middle of the previous century, a decline began almost all over the countries of Europe.

Before the war, no serious tendency of decline was registered in Romania. After the war, a decline in the birth rates begins in our country as well, yearly.

In Transylvania, the decline between 1875 and 1930 is continuous. In the Old Kingdom the birth rate has a vertiginous tendency of growth.24

As we can observe in Table no. 3, a general tendency of decline in birth rates occurs for our country as well, almost permanent each year, with a regulation around the percentage of 35%o between the decades three and four, and around 30-32%o in the following period, except for the year 1930.

Naturally, the population of the new united provinces was also included in the calculation of birth rates. As these provinces registered a lower birth rate, this led to the decline of the birth rate percentage at a national level. Sabin Manuilä, in the study problema populafiei în cadrul planului economic" [Aspects regarding population within the economic plan] stated that: "Certainly, we must take into consideration, in the analysis of this phenomenon, that after the unification of the new provinces, in the calculus of average birth rates, the very low scores registered by the provinces beyond the Carpathians influenced the calculation of the average birth rate. However, once the post-war level of Greater Romania was stabilized, a visible decline in birth rates was registered yearly. This decline is general and it covers all the provinces of the country. And in the provinces from the West, particularly in Banat, it reached such low extreme, that we can discuss about a population decline." 5

CONCLUSION

We draw the conclusion that, at a global level, while birth rates are in a significant and continuous decline all over the world, in Romania birth rates still maintained at a high level; still, on the other hand, death rates also registered alarming levels, Romania being situated on an unfortunate first place in the world, regarding the number of deceased per 1000 inhabitants*. The consequence of this high death rate and of the reduced birth rate was the decline of the natural increase rate in all European countries.

Comparing birth rates in urban and rural areas, we can observe that the low birth rates registered in the cities did not generate a stagnation in the growth of the urban population, as the high birth rates registered in the villages did not generate a high increase in the number of inhabitant of the counties. As a general conclusion, we can observe that the rural population, although prolific, proved to be stable, whereas the urban population, with a lower number of child bearings, registered a more rapid increase.

Hence, as interwar cities could not maintain the natural increase, it was obvious that the constant growth in urban population was the result of a migration of the inhabitants from the villages. Finally, the growth of both urban and rural population was the result of the rural population increase.26.

In a nutshell, we can observe that, in the first pot-war years, the birth rate in the rural areas was of 40,5 per 1000 inhabitants, whereas in the urban areas it scored only 21,1 per 1000 inhabitants.27 The average national birth rate for the period 1931-1935 was of 32,9%o; it scored 35,5%o in the villages, while in the cities it scored only 21,4%0.28 Birth rates in the rural areas, as well as those registered at the national level, revealed large fluctuations from one area to another, the highest score being registered in Moldavia, and the lowest one in Banat.29 As a general rule, the larger was the city, the lower was the birth rate.

As a whole, the balance for the internar period can be considered to be a positive one, as the population of the country grew up to approximately 5 million inhabitants; on the birth rate scale, Romania occupied the first place in Europe, the same leading position as it unfortunately occupied on the overall mortality and child morality scales; should child mortality rates improve, it could lead to a considerable improvement of the population natural increase.

Fighting for the decrease in mortality rates should represent a prior concern, for an improvement in the standard of living and for an action of modem preventive medicine.30

Footnote

1 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, doc. 68/25/1932, f. 6.

Footnote

2 Buletinul demografic al Romäniei, Publicafie oficialä a Ministerului Muncii, Sänätäfii fi Ocrotirilor Sociale. Oficiul Demografic, de Statisticä Sanitarä fi de ocrotire, Director: S. Manuilä, PhD, 1st Year, January, 1932, Publishing House of the Demographic Office, Bucharest, p. 29.

3 The Rate of Natural Increase is the yearly difference between the birth rate and the deathh rate, unlike the effective growth, caused by natural growth and population growth by imigration, called population growth rate. Deffmition from the Buletinul Demografic al Romäniei..., February - April, 1932, p. 14.

*** From "Statistisches Jahrbuch für das Deutsche Reich ", 1931.

** From "Rapport Epidémiologique Mensuel de la Société des Nations ", from 15 Novemberl931.

* From "Annuarire statistique de la France", 1930.

4 For England and Wales, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Switzerland, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, The Netherlands, Poland, Hungary, Australia and The United States, the data have been extracted from Statistical Yearbooks of the above mentioned countries.

Footnote

5 Arch. St. Bucharest, doc. 103/26/1934, f. 1, Apud. D. Çandru, Populaba ruralà a României íntre cele douä räzboaie mondiale, Yearbook of the Institute for History and Archeology "A.D. Xenopol" (Supplement II), Publishing House of the Academy of the Socialist Republic of Romania, Ia§i, 1980, p. 26.

6 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Populafia României, doc. 82/XII/1933, f. 25.

7 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Studiu demografic, doc. 167/X/1940, f. 28.

8 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Studiu demografic, doc. 167/X/1940, f. 27.

Footnote

9 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Studiu demografic, doc. 167/X/1940, f. 28-29.

10 Sabin Manuilä, PhD, Demografía ruralä a României, in "Revista de igienä socialä", Bucharest, year X (1940), no. 1-6, January-June, 269.

11 G. Banu, PhD, Biología satelor, in "Arhivapentru §tiin(a fi reforma socialä", Bucharest, year VII (19271928), no. 1-2, p. 91; Sabin Manuilä, PhD, D.C. Georgescu, Populafia României, Bucharest, 1937, 81.

12 Buletinul demografic al României, Publicare oficialä a Ministerului Muncii, Sänätäfii fi Ocrotirilor Sociale. Oficial Demografic, de Statisticä Sanitarä fi de ocrotire, Director: S. Manuilä, PhD, FebruaryAprili, 1932, Publishing House of the Demographie Office, Bucharest, p. 45 (Note: In the case of the Union of South Africa, reference is made to the white population;).

* From "Statistisches Jahrbuch fur das Deutsche Reich", for the year 1931.

** From "Statistisches Jahrbuch fur das Deutsche Reich", for the year 1932.

*** From 'Annuarire statistique de la France ", 1931.

From "Annuaire Statistique du Japon ", for the year 1930.

**** From "Annuario Statistico Italiano ", for the year 1932.

Footnote

' From "Annuarire Statistique de la Norvège", for the year 1932.

Footnote

13 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Populafia României, doc. 82/XII/1933, f. 18.

Footnote

14 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Populada României, doc. 88/XII/1934, f. 6-7.

15 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Studiu demografic, doc. 167/X/ 1940, f. 26.

16 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Studiul Dr. S. Manuilä, directorul Institutului de Demografie, depre "întinderea si populada României", doc. 96/XII/1934, f. 9-10.

17 D. Çandru, op.cit., 14.

Footnote

18 Dátele sunt culese din Buletinului Demografie al României..., Februarie - Aprilie, 1932, p. 21-23; Arh. St. Bucureçti, Fond Dr. S. Manuilä, Studiu demografic, doc. 167/X/ 1940, f. 27.

Footnote

19 D. Çandru, op.cit., p. 16.

20 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, doc. 204/28/1940, f. 1.

21 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Populafia României, doc. 82/XII/1933, f. 25-26.

Footnote

22 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Populafa României, doc. 82/XII/1933,, f. 26.

23 Data collected from Buletinului Demografie al României..., February - April, 1932,p. 25.

24 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Populafia României, doc. 82/XII/l 933, f. 6; Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Populafia României, doc. 82/XII/1933, f. 24..

25 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Confer inia Dr. S. Manuilä relativ la "Problema populafiei în cadrul planului economic", doc. 151/XII/1938, f. 3.

Footnote

* This unfortunate finding has as source Enciclopedia României, vol. I, 1938, p. 511: "What is predominant in our high overall mortality rate is the enormous percentage of child mortality. From this perspective, we are in front of a totally particular phenomenon: even today we are scoring the record number of 50 years ago, that is not encountered anywhere else in the world, and that we could not modify at all."

26 Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Populafia României, doc. 88/XII/1934, f. 5, Apud. Sabin Manuilä, Evolufia demografigà a oraçelorçi minoritäfilor etnice din Transilvania, Bucharest, 1926.

27 Sabin Manuilä, PhD, Demografía ruralâ .... 159.

28 D.C. Georgescu, Populaba satelor româneçti, in "Sociologie româneascâ", year II (1937), no. 2-3, February-March, 74.

29 Sabin Manuilä, PhD, op.cit., 159.

30 Arch. St. Bucharest, General Directorate, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Studiul dr. S. Manuilä - Tendinfele de creçtere a populafiei româneçti, doc. 68/XII/12 June 1932, f. 7-8.

* Quotations are translated by the author.

References

REFERENCES

1. Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Populafia României, doc. 82/XII/l933.

2. Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Populafia României, doc. 88/XII/1934.

3. Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Studiul Dr. S. Manuilä, directorul Institutului de Demografie, depre "Intinderea §ipopulafia României", doc. 96/XII/1934.

4. Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Conferinfa Dr. S. Manuilä relativ la ".Problema populafiei in cadrulplanului economic", doc. 151/XII/1938.

5. Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Studiu demografic, doc. 167/X/ 1940.

6. Arch. St. Bucharest, General Directorate, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, Studiul dr. S. Manuilä - Tendinfele de cre§tere a populafiei române§ti, doc. 68/XII/12 June 1932.

7. Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, doc. 68/25/1932.

8. Arch. St. Bucharest, doc. 103/26/1934.

9. Arch. St. Bucharest, Corpus S. Manuilä, PhD, doc. 204/28/1940.

10. Banu, G., Biologia satelor, in "Arhivapentru §tiinfa §i reforma socialä", Bucharest, year VII (1927-1928), no. 1-2.

11. Buletinul demografic al României, Publicafie oficialä a Ministerului Muncii, Sänätäfii §i Ocrotirilor Sociale. Oficiul Demografic, de Statisticä Sanitärä §i de ocrotire, Director: S. Manuilä, PhD, Year I, January, 1932, Publishing House of the Demographic Office, Bucharest.

12. Buletinul demografic al României, Publicafie oficialä a Ministerului Muncii, Sänätäfii §i Ocrotirilor Sociale. Oficiul Demografic, de Statisticä Sanitärä §i de ocrotire, Director: S. Manuilä, PhD, February-April, 1932, Publishing House of the Demographie Office, Bucharest.

13. Enciclopedia României, vol. I, 1938.

14. Georgescu, D.C., Populafia satelor române§ti, in "Sociologie româneascâ", year II (1937), no. 2-3, February-March.

15. Manuilä, Sabin, Evolufia demografigä a ora§elor §i minoritäfilor etnice din Transilvania, Bucureçti, 1926.

16. Idem, Demografía ruralâ a României, in "Revista de igienä socialä", Bucharest, year X (1940), no. 1-6, January - June.

17. Manuilä, Dr. Sabin, $i Georgescu, D.C., Populafia României, Bucharest, 1937.

18. Measnicov, Ing. I., Death ratea populafiei rurale române§ti, in "Sociologie româneascâ", year II (1937), no. 4, April.

19. Çandru, D., Populafia ruralâ a României íntre cele douä räzboaie mondiale, Yearbook of the Institute for History and Anthropology "A.D. Xenopol" (Supplement II), Publishing House of the Academy of the Socialist Republic of Romania, Iaçi, 1980.