This is the first completed posting to come off the here present carpenter’s table and its subject is no coincidence: “Neagoe Basarab’s Teachings for his son Teodosie” .

Allow me to explain: I’ve recently picked up Samuel Huntington’s book “Clash of Civilizations…” and found, to my surprise, a strange comfort in his declaration that we live in times of a global search for identity. “Peoples and nations are attempting to answer the most basic questions humans face: Who are we? … People use politics not just to advance their interests but also to define their identity.”

Strange comfort? Yes. Exactly that. The book isn’t exactly painting a peachy world picture – it isn’t “comforting” in any largely understood sense of the word. It is thus strange that it comforted me. And it comforted me because I suddenly stopped rushing to find my own identity – and stopped feeling the pressure of constantly failing.

NO, this is NOT a teenage phase of self questioning and discovery – first because I’m not a teenager, and second because I’m not searching to define my personality.

Personal circumstances of immigration at an early age have created two tectonic plates of the once unitary “me”. Needless to say that collisions between the two have been many and painful as one landmass tried to slide on top of the other in frivolous attempts to eliminate the rift. My search for unity moved them to quakes. And so I read “The Clash…” and gave up the trade of “wonderer” to set up a carpentry shop on the rift.

First wood carving: a rant about “Neagoe Basarab’s Teachings for his son Teodosie” – a foundation book, not only for Romanian identity and culture, but also for the evolution of European political thought – as it has come to pass, and as it may evolve henceforth.

Neagoe Basarab was voivode of the Romanian Country (southern part of present-day Romania) from 1512 to 1521. Between 1518 and 1521, he wrote “Neagoe Basarab’s Teachings for his son Teodosie” or, in Romanian, “Invataturile lui Neagoe Basarab catre fiul sau Teodosie”. The full Romanian text, complete with references and chronological notes, can be found here: Neagoe Basarb’s Teachings for His Son Teodosie.

The book is a guide to politics, the art of governing, and the proper conduct of a sovereign. It exposes a philosophy about society, human interactions, life, and having the power to order the lives of others. The book has not been given the attention it deserves and its value has not been widely recognized nor publicized – see, in contrast, the popularity of Machiavelli’s The Prince. Basarab’s Teachings stand in deep contrast to this latter work. In main stream knowledge, The Prince stands almost unchallenged – and although Erasmus of Rotterdam is known as the main opponent to the Machiavellistic approach, his works haven’t achieved quite the same popularity.

Part of the reason why Basarab is so little known is the lack of translations. So far I have been unable to find an English or French translation but I’m working on it. Even if there isn’t one out there as of yet, I know one is forthcoming (Dan Zamfirescu is working on translating the book, though no publishing dates have been announced).

As a general guide, here are a few dates and notes to give some context and perspective on the book.

~ During the 15th and 16th centuries, the Renaissance had enveloped Western Europe.

~ Machiavelli wrote his famous book, The Prince, in 1513 (to be published only after the author’s death in 1532), as a practical political guide for Lorenzo Di Medici.

~ In 1518, Erasmus of Rotterdam wrote a rebuttal to Machiavelli’s The Prince, The Education of a Christian Prince. This was also, in part, an instruction manual for the future King Charles X of Sweden.

~ The sum of their works singled out Erasmus and Machiavelli as the faces of two opposite but equally influential schools of thought: humanism and pragmatism. For a detailed comparison between the two, see: Machiavelli and Erasmus Compared.

~ Dan Zamfirescu, who has “The Teachings…”’s translation in the works, is planning on publishing a book comparing the three: Machiavelli, Erasmus, and Basarab.

As someone with a limited knowledge of history and old literature, especially that particular to Byzantium, I often need to read his books with Google within reach. Despite this, I find the man’s works and research fascinating and look forward to the completion of this comparative project of his.

~ Neagoe Basarab was a deeply spiritual man. His reign was peaceful: he did not believe in waging war and was recognized as a great diplomat and a protector of the arts. His teachings reflect the Christian Orthodox faith and stand in deep contrast to Machiavelli’s philosophy.

~ For an overview analysis of Neagoe Basarab’s reign and his influence on culture and politics follow the link below. The article is in Romanian. Pentru o analiza concisa (dar bineinteles mai detaliata decat ceea ce am scris aici) articolul Neagoe Basarab – principe isihast este o referinta buna.

~ About authorship and authenticity of “The Teachings…” : 1895-Theodor Codrescu is the first to question the authenticity of the book; 1906 – D. Russo argues that the book was actually written in the 17th century by a monk who copied the byzantine literary style; Russo also characterizes the book as a chaotic amalgamation of religious texts and, overall, a plagiarized text. Those who support the initial thesis that Neagoe is indeed the author, that the work was written in 1518-1521 and has not been plagiarized, have brought several arguments to the table: the many references to his personal life that the author uses to exemplify ethical or political dilemmas, the usage by subsequent voivodes and princes of passages from the book, the usage of metaphors and similes which are incongruent with of ecclesiastic texts of the time, etc … Some names to look up for more in depth info. on this research: Anton Balota, Pavel Chihaia, N. Stoicescu, B.P. Hasdeu, P.A. Lavrov, N. Iorga, V. Grecu, Florica Moisil, Dan Zamfirescu, M. Muthu in Romanian Literature and the South-East European Spirit, E. Papu in Of our Classics (Din clasicii nostri).

Needless to point out that I believe the book to be the original work of Basarab and I hold it in high regard. I am fully aware of the origin of my convictions and biases in the matter. I choose to maintain my current position until discovery of evidence to the contrary.

I will keep updating this post with pertinent references – translations, commentaries, facts, etc … and will try to reference both those who praise it and those who criticize it. Also, if you, the passer-by on this page, know of a source that would be useful, please leave a note to that effect .