The establishment of the Communist regime in Romania was produced by terror and unprecedented pressure in the context of the presence of the Red Army troops in the territory of the country. In order to consolidate its authorities have turned to brutal crackdowns of any resistance (real or imagined) to pursue two objectives: to annihilate any attempt to challenge the regime, both in its substance and legitimacy through refusal rules they required; to obtain the adhesion of the majority population in relation to the new policy. In these circumstances, the first two decades, the arrest and conviction of opponents or potential oppositionists policies are main methods used. Were envisaged both the representatives of the political parties during the inter-war period, and those who, for one reason or another, were not to the liking of the new regime. But more than that, in parallel with the brutal actions of the security, in which most of the opponents has been virtually eliminated, were taken in a series of retaliatory measures by which and their families have been punished, marginalized and stigmatized. All of these intrusive practices over individuals and their families were, by extension, the evolution of Romanian society in the long term, some of the effects may be noticeable even today.
In the last 25 years, researches regarding the background of years of communism in Romania, implicitly referred to the political repression, have witnessed an unprecedented development. This was natural in the circumstances in which such subjects were taboo before 1989. The interest of researchers was doubled by the influx of memory works, which, in turn, to the recovery of some pages of recent history. However, many aspects of the history of the first two decades of the Communist regime remained the least known. They included and how the "great history" or public history, i.e., the waves of repression resulting in over one hundred thousands of arrests and convictions, have interfered with the microistoria, more specifically with individuals. Keep in mind, in this case, not those directly in the crosshairs of the Communist authorities, who ended up in detention, but the other members of their family, themselves victims of the regime, which has shown far too little. The dramatic changes that have occurred in the evolution of social, cultural, economic and professional families of former political prisoners have been in recent years, more than secondary themes, the interest of historians and the general public being rather concentrated on the fates of those who suffered because of the communist terror following surveys and deprivation of liberty. But, if the number of those who have arrived in the detention facilities, prisons, labour camps and colonies in excess of 100,000 people (in historiography are traded-in our opinion-and unrealistically 350,000 figures-600,000 people) we can appreciate that the number of victims apparently collateral damage-but who were themselves victims of these repressive measures, amounted to several hundred thousand people Thus a significant proportion of the population at that time. We consider the implementation estimates that, as a result of arrests and convictions, families, represented by her parents, husbands, wives, children, times had, in turn, to endure a series of vicissitudes because of how the Communist regime understood to relate to "enemies of the people" and to all those who are close to them. The attitude of authorities lacking humanity weather towards the members of these families represent, in fact, an invasive way of imposing control on society, through fear.
By addressing the theme of research from a dual perspective, both the oral history testimonies of those directly concerned, and by recourse to archival documents (and with direct reporting to the General bibliography), we believe that research is realising that to capture the complex links between major processes of history and their impact on the level of society and of individuals.
We appreciate that such a project is important because potential witnesses, and historical information suppliers whom we consider are inevitably affected by the passage of time, and the recovery of their testimonies is subject to necessity for both the research today, but especially for future historians, who very soon will no longer be able to "access" that such "sources".