Despite Iorga's ambition of fusing research and pedagogy, his students, both rivals and friends, often noted that he was inferior to other colleagues when it came to teaching, in particular in directing advanced classes — his popularity, it was claimed, dropped with time, after the aging Iorga became aggressive toward some of his students.

Iorga's killing is often mentioned in tandem with that of agrarian politician Virgil Madgearu, kidnapped and murdered by the Guardists on the same night, and with the Jilava Massacre ( during which Carol II's administrative apparatus was decimated ).

Romanian historian of culture Alexandru Zub finds that Iorga's is " surely the richest opus coming from the 20th century ", while Maria Todorova calls Iorga " Romania's greatest historian ", adding " at least in terms of the size of his opus and his influence both at home and abroad ".

" Similarly, Maria Todorova notes that, although it minimized the Ottoman contribution and displayed " emotional or evaluative overtones ", such a perspective ran against the divisive interpretations of the Balkans, offering a working paradigm for a global history of the region: " Although Iorga's theory may be today 2009 no more than an exotic episode in the development of Balkan historiography, his formulation Byzance après Byzance is alive not only because it was a fortunate phrase but because it reflects more than its creator would intimate.

Other authors are more reserved about Iorga's value for this field: noting that Negoiţescu's verdict is an isolated opinion, Simuţ considers the plays ' rhetorical monologues " hardly bearable ".

Literary historian Nicolae Manolescu found some of the texts in question illegible, but argued: " It is inconceivable that Iorga's theater is entirely obsolete ".

Iorga's other work for the stage also includes the " five-act fairy tale " Frumoasa fără trup (" Bodyless Beauty "), which repeats a motif found in Romanian folklore, and a play about Jesus Christ ( where Jesus is not shown, but heard ).

Since 1990, Iorga's face is featured on a highly circulated Romanian leu bill: the 10, 000 lei banknote, which became the 1 leu bill following a 2005 monetary reform.

Iorga's descendants include historian Andrei Pippidi, son of Dionisie, who is noted as a main editor of Iorga's writings.

Although from the same cultural family as Sămănătorul, the Poporanist theorist Constantin Stere was dismissed by Iorga's articles, despite Sadoveanu's attempts to settle the matter.

A seminal moment in Iorga's political career took place during the 1907 Romanian Peasants ' Revolt, erupting under a Conservative cabinet and repressed with much violence by a National Liberal one.

However, Iorga's popularity was still increasing, and, carried by this sentiment, he was first elected to Chamber during the elections of that same year.

Iorga's interest in the Balkan crisis was illustrated by two of the forty books he put out that year: Istoria statelor balcanice (" The History of Balkan States ") and Notele unui istoric cu privire la evenimentele din Balcani (" A Historian's Notes on the Balkan Events ").

Iorga's home in Vălenii de Munte was among the property items left behind and seized by the occupiers, and, according to Iorga's own claim, was vandalized by the Deutsches Heer.

A major moment in Iorga's European career took place in 1924, when he convened in Bucharest the first-ever International Congress of Byzantine Studies, attended by some of the leading experts in the field.

Iorga's circle was joined by researcher Constantin C. Giurescu, son of historian Constantin Giurescu, who had been Iorga's rival a generation before.

The political conflicts were by then reflected in Iorga's academic life: Iorga was becoming strongly opposed to a new generation of professional historians, which included Giurescu the younger, P. P. Panaitescu and Gheorghe Brătianu.

Iorga's death caused much consternation among the general public, and was received with particular concern by the academic community.

Iorga's last texts, recovered by his young disciple G. Brătescu, were kept by literary critic Şerban Cioculescu in published at a later date.

" The conflict between Iorga and Dragomirescu was also personal, and, as reported by Iorga's disciple Alexandru Lapedatu, even caused the two to physically assault each other.

In Stanomir's assessment, this last period of Iorga's activity also implied a move toward the main sources of traditional conservatism, bringing Iorga closer to the line of thought represented by Edmund Burke, Thomas Jefferson or Mihail Kogălniceanu, and away from that of Eminescu.

The final years brought Iorga's stark condemnation of all etatism, from the absolute monarchy to modern state capitalism, accompanied by a dystopian perspective on industrialization as the end of the individual.

The program was criticized from early on by Constantin Rădulescu-Motru, Iorga's fellow nationalist and post-Junimist, who noted that the economic rationale behind it was unsound.

His anti-war texts of 1939 replied to claims that a new armed conflict would usher in national " vitality ", and, during the September Campaign, expressed solidarity with Poland — Iorga's Polonophila was even noted by the Nazis, causing more frictions between Berlin and Bucharest.

According to literary historian George Călinescu, Iorga's " huge " and " monstrously " comprehensive research, leaving no other historian " the joy of adding something ", was matched by the everyday persona, a " hero of the ages ".

The level of Iorga's productivity and the quality of his historical writing were also highlighted by more modern researchers.

In the 1930s, Iorga's status in regulating the official historical narrative was challenged by Constantin C. Giurescu, P. P. Panaitescu and Gheorghe Brătianu, who wanted to return academic discourse back to the basic Junimist caveats, and were seen by Iorga as " denialists ".

On Blaga's side, the quarrel involved philologist and civil servant Bazil Munteanu ; his correspondence with Blaga features hostile remarks about Iorga's " vulgarity " and cultural politics.

Iorga's personal conservative outlook, passed into the party doctrines, also implied a claim that the Jews were agents of rebellion against political and cultural authority.

Iorga's coverage of European culture and continental affairs also opened bridges with other cultural areas, particularly so during the interwar.

" While Japanese sociologist Kosaku Yoshino sees Iorga as a main contributor to didactic and dramatized cultural nationalism in Europe, University of Trento academic Paul Blokker suggests that, although " politicized, essentialist and sometimes anachronistic ", Iorga's writings can be critically recovered.

Iorga's writings insisted on the importance of Byzantine Greek and Levantine influences in the two countries after the fall of Constantinople: his notion of " Byzantium after Byzantium " postulated that the cultural forms produced by the Byzantine Empire had been preserved by the Principalities under Ottoman suzerainty ( roughly, between the 16th and 18th centuries ).

During the 1930s, as the cultural and political climate changed, Iorga's main accusation against Tudor Arghezi, Lucian Blaga, Mircea Eliade, Liviu Rebreanu, George Mihail Zamfirescu and other Romanian modernists was their supposed practice of literary " pornography ".

A lengthy polemic consumed Iorga's relationship with Lovinescu, having at its core the irreconcilable differences between their visions of cultural history.

His views on the bridging of tradition with modernism quoted profusely from Iorga's arguments against cultural imitation, but parted with Iorga's various other beliefs.

Cultural historian William O. Oldson notes that Iorga's " amazing list of accomplishments " in other fields helped give antisemitism " an irresistible panache " in Romania, particularly since Iorga shared in the belief that all good nationalists were antisemites.

Literary historian Ovid Crohmălniceanu opined that Iorga's scientific work was one of the " illustrious accomplishments " of the interwar years, on par with Constantin Brâncuşi's sculptures and George Enescu's music.

A peak in Nicolae Iorga's own nationalist campaigning occurred that year: profiting from a wave of Francophobia among young urbanites, Iorga boycotted the National Theater, punishing its staff for staging a play entirely in French, and disturbing public order.

According to one of Iorga's young disciples, the future journalist Pamfil Şeicaru, the mood was such that Iorga could have led a successful coup d ' état.

The political class as a whole was particularly apprehensive of Iorga's contacts with the Cultural League for the Unity of All Romanians and their common irredentist agenda, which risked undermining relations with the Austrians over Transylvania and Bukovina.

Its success caused alarm in Austria-Hungary: Budapesti Hírlap newspaper described Iorga's school as an instrument for radicalizing Romanian Transylvanians.

This noted critic of Austria-Hungary became Iorga's admiring friend, and helped popularize his ideas in the Anglosphere.

Nicolae Iorga's involvement in political disputes and the cause of Romanian irredentism became a leading characteristic of his biography during World War I.

Political themes were again reflected in Nicolae Iorga's 1915 report to the Academy ( Dreptul la viaţă al statelor mici, " The Small States ' Right to Exist ") and in various of the 37 books he published that year: Istoria românilor din Ardeal şi Ungaria (" The History of the Romanians in Transylvania and Hungary "), Politica austriacă faţă de Serbia (" The Austrian Policy on Serbia ") etc.

The two scholars later took their battle to court and, until Iorga's death, presented mutually exclusive takes on recent political history.

The elections seemed to do away with the old political system: Iorga's party was third, trailing behind two newcomers, the Transylvanian PNR and the Poporanist Peasants ' Party ( PŢ ), with whom it formed a parliamentary bloc supporting an Alexandru Vaida-Voevod cabinet.

This union of former rivals also showed Iorga's growing suspicion of Brătianu, whom he feared intended to absorb the PND into the National Liberal Party, and accused of creating a political machine.

Iorga's parliamentary bloc crumbled in late March 1920, when Ferdinand dissolved Parliament.

Iorga's speech, " Stere's Betrayal ", turned attention back to Stere's Germanophilia ( with quotes that were supposedly taken out of context ) and demanded his invalidation — the subsequent debate was tense and emotional, but a new vote in Chamber confirmed Stere as Soroca deputy.

Iorga's suggestions that new arrivals from Transylvania and Bessarabia were becoming a clique also resulted in collisions with former friend Octavian Goga, who had joined up with Averescu's party.

His interest in Vladimirescu and his historical role was also apparent in an eponymous play, published with a volume of Iorga's selected lyric poetry.

Seton-Watson ), documented Carol's confiscation of agrarian politics for his own benefit, noting: " Professor Iorga's immense vanity delivered him into the king's hands.