{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017479300827966882, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014719411223551058, 'mean_word_length': 5.886075949367089, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Law between Nationalism and Regionalism: The Integration of the Transylvanian Juridical Field in Greater Romania (1918–1927)

The article explores the process of legal and judicial integration of Transylvania within Greater Romania, focusing on how Romanian legal professionals experienced the transition from the Habsburg Empire to the Romanian nation-state. I argue that lawyers, judges, and jurists placed greater importance on legal tradition, professional solidarity, and the pursuit of personal interests than nationalism. Building on Pierre Bourdieu’s notion of the juridical field, the article investigates how the traditions and categories of judgment typical of legal professionals often hampered the nationalization projects undertaken by the Romanian government, thereby casting new light on the process of Romanian state building in the early 1920s. Furthermore, the present piece addresses the issue of the imperial legacy, exploring the relationship between new and old laws and the reasons behind the former legislative structure surviving the political upheaval of 1918.