COMMUNICATIONS
IN MEMORIAMPHILIP E. MOSELY1905-1972
In the commemorative meeting of last February and again today,* my colleaguesdescribed many aspects of the personality of the late Philip Mosely: an eminent scholar, professor and patriot. Allow me now to reveal another aspect of Mosely's personality. He was a close friend of the Romanian people-one who not only investigated a Romanian villagein Transylvania,but also rose to the defense of Romania in a critical moment during the Second World War. Mosely came to Romania in 1935 with a scholarship from the Rockefeller Foundation,l the same foundation which awarded scholarships to other Romanian researchers, such as professor Nicolae Cornateanu and the late art critic, Petre Comarnescu.2 Upon his arrival in Bucharest, Mosely met the sociologistDimitrie Gusti, who ten years earlier had initiated the systematic study of the Romanian village.? Deeply impressed by this research, Mosely participated during the summer of 1935 in the investigation of the village of Sant, which is located in the district of Bistrita-Nasaud in the northeastern part of Transylvania. He stayed there a month, working with Professor Gusti and the latter's young collaborators, all the while becoming a friend of each of them.4 At this time he discovered the Romanian peasant's way of life as well as the methods of investigation of what he called "The sociological school of D. Gusti." He observed the manner in which researchers thoroughly investigated the village: beginning with the village's geographicalsetting and history; followed by an analysis of the economic foundations (the revenues and expenses) of a peasant family, social relations-the customs of the village as related in large measure to religion and tradition, the cultural life-school, popular poetry, songs and dances; and culminating with an evaluation of perspectivesof villagelife and the ultimate goal of raising economic, sanitary and cultural standards.5 . The result of this month of field research and of the studies which followed in Bucharest was an article by Mosely in the Sociological Review, the journal of the Institute of Sociologyin London.6 It contains a keen analysis of Gusti's sociological concepts and methods. At the outset Mosely declares that the Romanian sociologist's investigation "is unique in Europe."7 Referring to Gusti's idea of social activity, Mosely points out that this activity "takes place within the environment," in four cadres or frames of existence: cosmological, biological, physical and historical. The cosmological cadre includes the soil, sub-soil, flora, fauna, climate, the situation, and physical structure, of the village. The biological cadre leads to the study of the relations between race, population, hygiene, disease, and social life. The psychical or mental cadre examines the relation between the individual and the group, the mechanism of social constraint of the individual and the reactions of the latter, the sentiment of justice, religious mentality, etc., culminating in the study of group-mentality. The examination of the historical cadre leads to the investigation of vestigial social forms, of traditions which condition the society in the present.... Together these four categories of manifestations constitute reality, which, however, is greater than their sum."8 Concluding that "Society is a functional, not a substantial reality," Mosely reiterates Gusti's definition, that society is "the functional totality of economic and spiritual phenomena, regulated ethnically and juridically, and organized politically and administratively."9 Accordingly, "the task of
*An address delivered at the School of International Affairs of Columbia University on April l7th, 1972. 1. See "?nsemnari" [Notes] in Sociologie rom3nea
the sociologist is to trace the relative importance" of each of the four abovementioned categories "in the concrete functioning of social life, not to establish the monopoly of any one of them by a priori metaphysical speculation."10 Continuing his analysis of Gusti's views, Moselyappreciates that A sociological system has to fulfill two requirements: it must be logically coherent and complete within itself, and it must be an adequate tool for the study of social reality on the spot. One of the remarkable features of the Gusti system is the success with which it has been applied to the study of the Rumanian village. 11l Moreover, as Mosely points out, Gusti had solicited for this study the cooperation of a wide range of specialists. Economists, anthropologists, . artists are enrolled in the work.... In 1934 and a musicians, 1935 number of ' voluntary teams was sent by Gusti to villages throughout the country (ten in 1934, twenty-seven in 1935, with an average of ten members). Each team includes ' a doctor, a veterinary, and a farm expert. All treatment and medicine are free.... The team organizes libraries, peasant schools, singing circles, and evening meetings, mingling instruction with amusement after the manner of the itinerant American Chataugua.l2 And now Mosely's conclusion: The aim of the Gusti school is comprehensive,its method strict, and the results of general value.... [Gusti] is the creator of a closely knit sociological system, organizer of a unique school of field work, and inspirer of a growing movement of rural improvement. With great physical and financial sacrifice he has pressed on with his task. His personal dynamism is felt everywhere, in overcoming administrative red tape and local rivalries, in stretching the pathetically slight resources available, and in enthusing intelligentsia and peasantry with his own indomitable idealism and determination. 133 Besides this basic article on Dimitrie Gusti's sociological system, Moselycontributed severalitems to the Sociologie Româneasca, the journal of the Romanian Social Institute. First, he wrote an article concerning the "psychological world" of a Romanian peasant from the village of Sant, who lived in America for several years and then returned home;14 in addition, three reviewsof books published in the United States and in England ;15and finally an account of research concerning rural life in Bulgaria. 16 But Mosely did not content himself with identifying and assessing Gusti's sociologicalsystem; he also defended the interests of Romania in a very difficult hour of her history. When Romania was isolated and threatened after the collapse of France in 1940, Mosely raised his voice to defend with scholarly authority the indisputable rights of the Romanian people to theirterritory, rights based nott only on history and on massive numerical superiority, but also on international treaties which had been repeatedly renewed.17 Once again was demonstrated the accuracy of the ancient Romanian saying: "In time of need, you get to know your friend." I anticipated with joy the prospect of meeting him in New York this year, when I arrived as a
10. Ibid. 11. Ibid., p. 153. , 12. Ibid., pp. 156, 163-164. 13. Ibid., p. 165. 14. Philip E. Mosely, "Lumea psihologica a unui 'American' din Sant"# [The PsychologicalWorld of an 'American' of Sant], Sociologieromaneasca I, 7-9 (1936), 75-78. 15. The books are: C. Luther Fry, The Technique of Social Investigation (New York: Harper, 1934); Julius Hecker, Russian Sociology: A contribution to the history of sociological thought and theory with an introduction by Sydney Webb (London: Chapman, 1934); Robert Redfield, Tepoztlan, A Mexican village. A study of folk life (Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1930); these reviewsarc published in Sociologie româneascal, 4 (1936l, 43-44 and 44-45, and 1, 5 (1936), 39-41. 16. Philip E. Mosely "Cercetari rurale in Bulgaria" [Rural researches in Bulgaria], Sociologie romaneasci I, 11 (1936), 31-33; Mosely signs this article as a stipendiary of the Social Science Research Council. 17. See Philip E. Mosely "Is BessarabiaNext?" Foreign Affairs XVIII, 3 (April 1940), 557-562; "Transylvania Partitioned," Foreign Affairs XIX, 1 (October 1940), 237-244.