„There is still enough space on the globe for everyone to live in peace. We are the largest and the most solid people in this Southeast Europe for us not to look towards the future with confidence. And in order to lighten the road ahead, we do not need to mystify the past. On the contrary. Isn’t it wiser to reconcile with history’s verdict and get along with each other?” (David Prodan, Transylvania and Again Transylvania, 1992)

* * *

Mankind witnessed in the last decades not only the complexity of the world but also the particularly high speed in which the social events unfold. This is the reason why every person may feel the need to decode the evolution paths as quick and extensive as possible. The international crises that tend to succeed in an increasing short time frame are relativizing the mathematical models of forecasting. Historical contemporary phenomena and processes are being inquired in order to find explanations at actual facts and serial reconstructions to indicate the near future, at least.
The initiative to publish this volume is a response to the interest shown by scholars and by public opinion, with regard to the debating in the mass media of the Trianon Treaty (1920) topic. During the previous years, many authors wrote about the Centenary of the Outbreak of the First World War (1914) and the end of the conflict (1918).
A century from the completion of the Great Union of Romania (1918) was also celebrated. The Trianon topic has been aggressively brought into discussion, challenging the historical moments under consideration and puzzling the news media consumers, most particularly those of the social media. And the environment for receiving such opinions has been largely polluted by the intensification of the populist, nationalist, xenophobic politicized discourse having proliferated in the European public space and especially in the Central South East European area. While professional historians have addressed these issues in small conferences or specialized publications, the so-called ”journalistic history” has only emphasized aspects that newsrooms or broadcasting circles considered to correspond to the ”market demand”. Hence the need to come to the general public with historiographical or social sciences opinions that provide readers with support for the rational thinking, too.