He fell into disgrace for serving the collaborationist Lupu Kostaki as Prefect and head of the National Theater, although he eventually managed to overturn his death sentence for treason.

"[18] Like other historiographers and doctrinaires raised by Junimea, Filitti the scholar firmly believed in the preservation of boyar demesnes and, as political scientist Victor Rizescu suggests, took part in the century-long debate opposing elitist historians to the advocates of natural law.

[19] Filitti's biographer and posthumous daughter-in-law, Georgeta Penelea-Filitti, also writes that, even in the 1910s, he had become a Conservative apologist, who felt compelled to justify the party line in a "trenchant and unresponsive" manner.

[8] Like senior Junimists Maiorescu and Petre P. Carp, Filitti reserved contempt for Take Ionescu, the rising star of Romanian conservatism, whom he depicted as a manipulator with no actual convictions.

The main stimulus of this activity was, according to Filitti's son Manole, a sense of filial duty: "since destiny wished for his parents to have such assets as would allow him to study in Paris for a couple of years, [my father] felt compelled to repay them by publishing works which would live up to that degree of education.

"[27] His services during the Conference earned him public praise from Maiorescu,[28] and Filitti, who feared for his prospects, was kept on at the Ministry even after the National Liberal Emanoil Porumbaru became Minister in January 1914.

"[8] The diplomat witnessed with alarm that public opinion was against him, either because of seductive Francophilia, or because a war on Austria-Hungary could bring Romania Transylvania region and other irredenta: "The Russian gold has bought off the press and many private persons.

He prudently signed it with the fake initials F. K.[29] In it, Filitti spoke out at length about containing Pan-Slavism, more important a priority than "the nation's other aspirations" (in Transylvania): "The best thing one may wish upon Romania is that the Muscovite Empire be evicted as far away as possible from the heart of Europe.

[2] It was also in 1915 that Filitti contributed his views on the thorny issue of "Capitulations", contracts reputedly signed by two Danubian Principalities (Wallachia and Moldavia) when they first came under the Ottoman Empire's suzerainty.

The author postulated that the Capitulations regulated the status of foreigners living in ancient Romania, exempting them from the consequences of common law, and creating major legal problems after 1800.

[48] Both of his assignments failed to satisfy him: he was, according to Boia, a "strange" choice for the Theater leadership, and gave up on this office in April 1917; Filitti himself viewed his Prefect's job as inane, and repeatedly presented his resignation (only accepted in February 1918).

[56] He largely immersed himself in his decades-long work, in effect a multilevel historical narrative covering the history of the Danubian Principalities, from the foundation of Wallachia (14th century) to the emergence of United Romania (1859).

He repeatedly complained about street noises, confiscated the footballs of neighborhood children, and eventually received (from Romanian Police chief Gavrilă Marinescu) a permanent guard to protect him from distractions.

[12] He was however in constant correspondence with other scholars who shared his passions, including Greek jurist Panagiotis Zepos, His Majesty's Antiquarian G. T. Kirileanu, bibliophile Constantin Karadja, regional historian G. Poboran, academician-priest Nicolae M. Popescu[58] and Hungarian archivist Endre (Andrei) Veress.

[59] In addition to the anti-Germanophile Nicolae Iorga, his rivals in academia included a new generation of leading historians, who were targets of his polemical articles: Gheorghe I. Brătianu, George Fotino, Constantin C. Giurescu and P. P.

[65] Filitti the politician returned in 1921 with an extended pro domo covering his wartime stances: Rusia, Austro-Ungaria și Germania față de România ("Russia, Austria-Hungary and Germany Confront Romania").

[16] The same year, in May, Iași's Viața Românească review hosted his tract on administrative reform, whereby he criticized attempts to impose centralized government on post-war Greater Romania.

His topical study, published by in the 1924 Romanian Academy annals, concluded that Negru Vodă was in fact the stuff of legend, concocted by the 17th-century Wallachian Lord Matei Basarab.

As noted by Ioan Stanomir, Filitti's evolution in this direction marks a final cycle in the history of classical, "Burkean", conservatism in Romania, which did not have a political aspect, but was complementary and contemporary with the views of his rival Nicolae Iorga.

[18] Some of his core ideas were updated versions of 19th-century Junimist concepts: the praise of moderation and organicity, the rejection of state capitalism and its "pseudo-bourgeoisie", and in particular the critique of generous land reforms.

[83] Directly influenced by the agrarian skepticism of Carp and Maiorescu, Filitti argued that the division of large estates into non-lucrative plots had only enhanced endemic problems, such as poverty or an unskilled workforce, and had prevented an organic growth toward good governance.

[84] Filitti's diary chides the political establishment of Greater Romania for not obtaining sufficient guarantees of territorial integrity—particularly so against Russia's successor, the Soviet Union—and for deprofessionalizing the diplomatic corps.

"[85] In his post-Junimist studies, Filitti angrily noted that the PNL regime had only increased the ranks of the bureaucracy (and implicitly enlarged their political machine), perpetuating etatism.

[86] He proposed measures to counter this trend by encouraging a "rural bourgeoisie", "self-reliant", determined to reemerge "from the darkness and routine" of country life, and, in time, capable of supporting a national industry.

[16] The work mainly documents the emergence of a civic consciousness, called "public spirit" by Filitti, over the years when Regulamentul was in force, and speaks about how the Moldo-Wallachian Russophile class turned Russophobic as it became acquainted with Tsarist autocracy.

[95] Building on his previous research in Arhiva Gheorghe Grigore Cantacuzino, Filitti also contributed an article about the Romanian origins of French diplomat Maurice Paléologue (Adevărul daily, September 29, 1935)[96] and edited for print the letters of Oltenian engineer Petrache Poenaru (Arhivele Olteniei, 74-76/1934).

The volume criticized the PNL's historical narrative, Romania's answer to Whiggishness, and noted that, from the beginning, the Conservatives were closer to the models of classical liberalism than their revolutionist opponents.

[98] Published with the Lupta Graphic Arts Institute in 1936, Filitti's new essay revisited the birth and evolution of conservatism in the Danubian Principalities and then Romania: Conservatori și junimiști în viața politică românească ("Conservatives and Junimists in Romanian Political Life").

An aristocrats by blood and conservatives by conviction, Ioan C.'s descendants and relatives suffered heavily as a result of the new policies: the outspoken anti-communist Filitti-Robănești became a political prisoner, as did his cousin Puiu Filitti, who had been the King's Adjutant.

[16] On the academic side, the main contributor to this particular recovery project was Georgeta Penelea-Filitti, also distinguished as the editor of books by Iorga, Mihail Kogălniceanu, and other intellectual figures.