Cum nu trebuie să arate o construcţie istoriografică
How a Historiographical Construct must not Look Like

Summary/Abstract: The case-study relevates a series of flaws in the process of constructing the historical desiderate. Even though the author insists upon the originality of his creation, he uses text parts published by previous researchers without indicating the sources most of the time. Moreover, Mr. Turliuc emerges as an advocate of "tribal nationalism", and cognizant of it, makes efforts to hide this side of romanian nationalism. A notable fact is the lack of examining documentary sources. Text fragments are being copied from other authors and quoted as primary documents. The issue becomes obvious when significant differences occur between the sources and the words taken from somebody else, which are presented as primary documents. Mr Turliuc duplicates another writer's language without being aware of the fact that he is actually not presented with real document quotation, but the writer's point of view. He goes further to close imitation of other writer's thoughts and results, representing them as his own original work (e. q. the Avram Rosen table). The case studied is not an isolated one within the academic society. Thus everyone must join efforts to prevent spreading this plagiarism- related phenomena.

• Details
• Contents