This is a work about identity and belonging in Vienna between 1861 and 1938. It engages with one of the great debates in Austrian history, concerning the nature, aims, depth and extent of radical German nationalist feeling that existed in the city in the period down to 1938. In particular, it addresses the level of support that existed among radical groups on the Right in favour of the joining of Austria and Germany into one country. This aim was known in German as Anschluss, which translates as union, and many, often small, political parties put it at the top of their priorities.1 This aim of joining all Germans together was also known as the Pan-German policy, as it was theoretically based on bringing together all Germans in one country, regardless of the state in which they then lived. The main focal points for early Pan-German efforts, however, were the lands which were to be brought together as the German Empire in 1871 and the German-speaking parts of the Habsburg Empire. After the First World War, Germany and Austria were the main, if not only, points of attention. Switzerland and its German-speaking population received little Pan-German attention, perhaps because of the long independence of Switzerland outside of the Holy Roman Empire.2 In examining radical German nationalism in Vienna over this period, much of the historiography has rested on an assumption that German nationalist sentiment was expressed in support for such an Anschluss? In this view, the outburst of pro-Anschluss enthusiasm in 1938 in Vienna - and elsewhere in Austria - was therefore a genuine and long-held expression of support for a German nationalist position. Yet throughout the period there was much disagreement about how, or even whether, Anschluss should be achieved, what kind of German state it would be desirable to join and what role Austrians - and Austria - should play within this state. There was also much disagreement over many decades about what it meant to be German, and who should belong as a German. In terms of this debate, the essence of the Germany that was on offer in 1938 presented a radical solution that can be expressed in three brief sentences. All Germans should be brought together in one state. A German was ethnically defined. A Jew was not a German. If they are taken at face value, the crowds that gathered in Vienna to greet the arrival of Hitler shortly after the Anschluss suggest that the Viennese did support these three elements of the radical vision being put forward in 1938. The size of the crowds suggests the extent of German nationalist feeling. The passion on display suggests that these people were willing supporters of the Anschluss, gladly surrendering the independence of Austria. More than this, however, these people must have understood the essence of the German state to which Austria was being joined. The anti-Jewish violence that swept the country as these crowds gathered suggests that, for these participants at least, this was an enthusiastic endorsement of a racial, antisemitic, exclusionary vision of what it meant to be German.4 Again, taken at face value, the members of these crowds seem confident that they belonged, that they were not excluded, and that they were part of the new order.5 Yet, as there had been so much debate in Vienna over these very ideas over many years, whether the support that these crowds appeared to show for Anschluss was widespread among the population in general, even on the Right, must be questioned. The purpose of this work is therefore to address two key questions. First, by 1938, had support for a radical, exclusionary German nationalism become deeply embedded in the political and social life of Vienna? Second, was Anschluss the fulfilment of the visions that those with radical, exclusionary, definitions of being German had been supporting in the lead-up to 1938? In order to understand whether these scenes were a momentary outburst, or the expression of a whole-hearted endorsement of this particular realisation of Anschluss, the work therefore focuses on competing, and yet at times overlapping, visions that evolved in Vienna of what it should mean to be German. In particular, this work focuses on those defined here as the radical Right, who promoted visions of being German which were predominantly based on the idea that an attributed ethnic origin could exclude someone from being German. The work aims to show how deeply these visions had penetrated Viennese thinking, who was promoting them and what they meant.

This thesis presents the first integrated history of Vienna’s four Jewish cemeteries as sites reflecting the construction, negotiation and at times contestation of Jewish communal belonging within Viennese society, embedded in the Viennese cityscape. Through a novel analysis of the sepulchral epigraphy of the thousands of matzevot or grave-memorials contained therein, the development and expression of codes of belonging constructed in the nexus between shifting notions of ‘Jewish’ and ‘Viennese’ culture are illuminated in a longue durée from the medieval into the modern periods. The Shoah, while it does not represent the first instance of the violent erasures of Jewish life and culture in the city, through its magnitude and presence in living memory constitutes a profound rupture in the historic enmeshment of the Jewish community in Viennese society. During the Shoah, the cemeteries became a focal point for the attempted excision or revision of Jewish cultural heritage and its place in Viennese culture, perpetrated by a complex network of agency, with the cemeteries moreover becoming recalibrated as sites of intense Jewish-communal introspection and activity. The cemeteries constituted after the Shoah some of the only sites of Jewish heritage to survive in the physical and memorial landscape, becoming moreover deeply contested sites of memory, within the context of the fledgling re-establishment of Jewish life in the city and the conflicted political and historical discourses in the Second Austrian Republic. This thesis presents the cemeteries as sites of the most profound engagements with Vienna’s long and convoluted Jewish history, comprising moments of great cultural prowess as well as murderous destructivity, embodying the deeply interactive yet conflicted relationship between the City of Vienna and its successive Jewish communities.

This dissertation explores modem Austrian national identity construction. In response to the tragedies of National Socialism and the Second World War, Austrian nation building fostered a civic national consciousness in direct opposition to the ethno-cultural variety prevalent before 1945. While this endeavour succeeded, the nature of evolving Austrian nationhood in the second half of the twentieth century leads us to ask whether the traditional divide between ethno-cultural and civic perspectives on the phenomenon of nations and nationalism requires revision in the case of Austria.

The overarching theme of the present dissertation is the documentation of the cultural and intellectual environment of the Mozart family in Salzburg from 1750 until 1790. A particular focus lies on the cultural transfer between the Protestant North and the Catholic South of the German-speaking lands. Enlightenment and Empfindsamkeit as a social and aesthetic ideal are traditionally associated with the northern parts of Germany, yet a new evaluation of sources and documents in Salzburg demonstrates the currency of these ideas in the archbishopric. The dissertation assembles a wide range of information regarding the erudition and interests of Salzburg citizens in general and more specifically of friends and acquaintances in the direct environment of the Mozart family, demonstrating their active participation in a cultural modernity at large. Detailed accounts on the book and sheet music trade in the archbishopric demonstrate the ubiquity of the newest cultural products from North Germany, France and England. At the centre of this dissertation stands a reconstruction of the Mozarts’ Salzburg library and their literary knowledge, which displays their wide interests and their participation in the vibrant cultural life of their hometown. The currency of and the high value attached to Empfindsamkeit within Salzburg culture is demonstrated in locally printed educational books, portrait collections, a ‘hill of friendship’ in Aigen near Salzburg, the theatre repertoire and the books and music for sale in town. It is hoped that this vibrant cultural life, as documented in the present dissertation, will help to challenge several traditional concepts in historiography and Mozart biography about Enlightenment and modernity in Salzburg.

This work aims to provide an objective portrait of Emperor Karl I and an analysis of his early reign in order to help determine his responsibility in the collapse of Austria-Hungary and to fill the gap in a historiography distorted by both hagiography and underestimation. This thesis examines Karl’s character, education, ability, outlook and ambitions prior to his enthronement in November 1916, and his attempts in the following six months to revive political life, implement administrative and constitutional reform and bring about national reconciliation in Cisleithania. The Bohemian lands, and in particular the Czech-German conflict, constitute the main focus of this study, although developments among Poles, Ukrainians and South Slavs are also considered. Since Karl’s chief concern was nevertheless the conclusion of peace, foreign policy – in any case inextricably bound to domestic issues in the Habsburg Monarchy – is also given due attention. The examination of Karl’s pre-war years reveals a not unpromising young man. His short heirship, however, involved only a perfunctory introduction to statecraft, leaving him lacking in preparation and experience. Yet, contrary to popular belief, Karl was not a blank slate; nor was he without his prejudices. Upon his accession to the throne, although he enjoyed a remarkably free hand, he threw in his lot with the German nationalists. After four months, however, he – or rather his foreign minister – retreated under the influence of the Russian Revolution and of the American entry into the war. Karl then recalled parliament but did not have the resolve, courage, skill or support to build on this initiative. Offered no prospects, the political representatives of the Slav nationalities radicalized behind the scenes. With the reopening of the House, the irreversible extent of their disenchantment and estrangement burst to the fore. Although Karl finally sought to embark on a new course, his resolve again faltered and his half-hearted efforts bore no fruit. Largely as a result of his earlier mistakes and vacillation, the chance had, in any case, already passed.

No description available.

L’histoire de la Première République en Autriche révèle l’attachement de la plupart desAutrichiens à la Grande Allemagne jusqu’à l’avènement de l’Anschluss. En outre, il a souventété dit que les Autrichiens étaient des Allemands. Dans l’espace francophone, il semble peuclair qu’une volonté, d’abord politique, de détachement de l’Allemagne s’est dessinée àl’issue de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, volonté qui s’est transformée en un processus de prisede conscience nationale indépendante.L’émergence et le développement d’une conscience nationale autrichienne aboutissent à unenation autrichienne libre et indépendante dans le contexte de la Deuxième République. Denombreux résultats de sondages, suivant une logique chronologique, retracent l’évolution decette conscience nationale, ce qui vient en complément d’analyses de l’histoire politique etsociale de l’Autriche d’après-guerre jusqu’à nos jours. Ce processus est observé aux niveauxdes acteurs politique, de la population et des régions. En analysant ce phénomène de prise deconscience et son développement à divers niveaux, on finit par conclure que certainespersonnalités emblématiques, à l’instar du chancelier Kreisky, ont largement contribué à laconsolidation de ce sentiment national au travers d’une politique intérieure et extérieurequ’elles ont su mettre en place. De plus, on constate que des facteurs non négligeables telsque la Sozialpartnerschaft (partenariat social) et la Proporzdemokratie (démocratie à laproportionnelle) ont également contribué à l’affermissement de ce sentiment. Par ailleurs, l’onobserve aussi que ce processus d’identification nationale fut soumis à rude épreuve par deséléments nationaux-allemands, sous la bannière d’autres figures politiques comme JörgHaider, aussi charismatique que controversé. Malgré tout, l’adhésion à la nation autrichienne,précédée d’une prise de conscience nationale autrichienne, fut totale. Le décalage estégalement perceptible entre les trois niveaux précités que sont la politique, la population et lesrégions. Par exemple, l’adhésion à la nation autrichienne a été de durée variable selon lesrégions. Le suivi de l’évolution de ce sentiment national au profit de l’émergence d’une nationautrichienne constitue l’élément capital de ce travail. / The history of the Austrian First Republic brings to light the attachment of most Austrians tothe Greater Germany until the annexation in 1938. Moreover, it has often been said that theAustrians were Germans. In the French speaking world, it doesn’t seem so clear that a mainlypolitical will to separate from Germany showed off after the Second World War, and thenbecame an independent national awakening process.The emergence and development of an Austrian national consciousness lead to a free andindependent Austrian nation in the context of the Second Republic. Numerous poll resultsbased on a chronological analysis describe the evolution of this national consciousness. Theycomplement political and social history analysis from post war Austria to nowadays. Thisprocess can be observed in the fields of political players, of the population as well as on aregional scale. Studying the awakening of a national consciousness and its development onvarious levels leads to the conclusion that certain emblematic figures, such as ChancellorKreisky, have played a major role in the consolidation of this national feeling, through thenational and international politics they lead. Moreover, crucial factors such as theSozialpartnerschaft (social partnership) and the Proporzdemokratie (proportional democracy)have also contributed to strengthening this national feeling. Furthermore, it is also to benoticed that this national identification process was put to a severe test by pan-GermanicAutrians, under the banner of other political figures, such as Jörg Haider, who wascharismatic and controversial at the same time. Nonetheless, the adherence to the Austriannation, which followed the awakening of a national Austrian consciousness, was total. Thediscrepancies are also noticeable between the three fields mentioned above, which are thepolitics, population and regions. For instance, the adherence to the Austrian nation took moreor less time among regions.

À partir d’un corpus de deux cent vingt et un portraits répartis principalement dans les anciens territoires de la Monarchie des Habsbourg (Autriche, Royaumes de Hongrie et de Bohême, mais aussi les Pays-Bas autrichiens ainsi que certains territoires italiens), réalisés entre la naissance de Marie-Thérèse en 1717 et sa mort en 1780, une base de données a été mise en place, qui a permis d’analyser l’importance des portraits de Marie-Thérèse au sein des pays de la Monarchie. Tour à tour, archiduchesse d’Autriche, puis « roi » de Hongrie et de Bohême, fille, épouse et mère des empereurs du Saint Empire Romain Germanique, Charles VI, François Ier et Joseph II, impératrice-veuve, les types de portraits diffusés tout au long du règne et de la vie de Marie-Thérèse sont à chaque fois liés à des contextes et des publics précis. L’unité et la continuité entre les Habsbourg et les Habsbourg-Lorraine est fortement soulignée à travers les portraits. Malgré la Pragmatique Sanction de 1713 censée garantir l’accès au trône de la fille aînée de Charles VI, l’arrivée au pouvoir de Marie-Thérèse en 1740 est tout de suite remise en cause et marquée par de nombreuses contestations externes comme internes. Les guerres marquent les vingt premières années du règne de Marie-Thérèse, qu’il s’agisse des guerres de Succession d’Autriche ou de la guerre de Sept ans. Même l’allégeance des élites de la Monarchie n’est jamais une chose totalement acquise. Comme le monarque ne peut être présent en personne en tout lieu et en tout temps, il doit être dédoublé par l’image. Au cours du temps, l’image royale se confond avec la figure de l’entité monarchique et étatique. La mise en place de la figure royale permet celle de l’État. La formation étatique sous le contrôle de la Monarchie est encore fragile et nécessite un certain nombre de rituels ; la commande et le don de ces portraits royaux apparaît ainsi comme l’un d’entre eux. [...] L’objectif de notre travail fut de rassembler les portraits de Marie-Thérèse pour les analyser sous l’angle de la production (avec l’analyse des peintres), sous celui de leur localisation (pays, institutions, emplacement particulier au sein d’une pièce), et des occasions de la commande et/ou de l’envoi des portraits. Enfin, les tableaux ont été étudiés sous l’angle de leur contenu iconographique, contenu qui évolue au cours des quarante années du règne et reflètent ainsi les divers enjeux des périodes comme des publics auxquels les tableaux sont destinés. L’analyse des portraits sous ces différents angles aide à appréhender les rapports de la souveraine avec ses élites, comme des élites entre elles et avec le pouvoir royal habsbourgeois. Il est possible d’en conclure à une interdépendance des acteurs entre eux, que cela passe par le choix d’un réseau de mêmes peintres, ou que cela relève des mêmes occasions de commander et/ou de recevoir des portraits royaux, ainsi que dans les types de portraits diffusés qui sont assez homogènes. / The PhD is about the representation of Maria Theresa, queen of Hungary and Bohemia and archduchess of Austria. It focuses on portraits, using them as the basis for exploring the relationship between the monarch and the elites. To this end, I consider in turn the production, the distribution and the content of the paintings. How did the portraits of Maria Theresa reinforce the legitimacy of her rule in a situation of crisis? At the same time, how did portraits provide legitimacy for both the position of the elites and their relation to Maria Theresa? These images can be considered as self-projections not only of the queen, but of the various groups that made up her monarchy. The marks and symbols of each province as well as those of the monarchy as a whole are displayed in the portraits. Royal portraits were commissioned both by Maria Theresa and her court, and by the elites of the monarchy: nobles, ecclesiastical institutions, cities and others. The same painters often worked for both the monarch and the elites, creating similar images and representations of the ruler. The most important occasions for these commissions were visits by Maria Theresa, on the occasion of a coronation, a diet or some other event; the portrait left behind served to perpetuate the presence of the monarch. It manifested the bond between the elites and the ruler; this display was in the interests of both sides. The portraits were displayed in the centres of power and representation both of the dynasty (imperial residences) and of the institutions and groups of which the monarchy was composed (aristocratic chateaux, town halls, universities). The act that placed them there were themselves performances of the mutual relation: the gift of a portrait by Maria Theresa was a sign of favour and recognition; when elites themselves ordered a portrait, this was both an act of homage and an assertion of status. The same types of paintings were ordered by the monarch and by the elites, indicating a consensus about the representation of the royal image. Maria Theresa was queen of Hungary and Bohemia, archduchess of Austria and ruler of many other provinces, each with its own title and symbolism; she was the daughter, wife, widow and mother of emperors. Her person incarnated the unity of all these provinces and the continuity between the house of Habsburg and the new line of Habsburg-Lorraine. Her body, her postures and gestures and her attributes represented in her portraits changed over the course of her reign, reflecting the development of the structure of the monarchy, the role of its ruler, and the strategies of legitimation. New symbols of legitimacy such as pen and paper appeared alongside traditional ones such as crowns and sceptres, or even supplanted them. Established imagery of both male and female Habsburgs was continued, adapted and even reinvented for Maria Theresa; regional traditions of many provinces were incorporated into her images. / Diese Dissertation beschäftigt sich mit der Darstellung der Herrscherin Maria Theresia anhand von 221 Porträts, die zwischen der Geburt der Herrscherin im Jahre 1717 und ihrem Tod im Jahre 1780 angefertigt wurden, die meisten nach dem Regierungsantritt im Jahre 1740. Die Porträts befinden sich in allen ehemaligen Ländern der Monarchie, und zwar in den österreichischen Erbländern, in Ungarn, Böhmen, Italien und in den österreichischen Niederlanden. Die Porträts erlauben es, die Beziehungen zwischen Maria Theresia und den Eliten der Monarchie (Adlige, Klöster, Städte) zu untersuchen. Sowohl die Produktion als auch die Verbreitung und der ikonographische Inhalt werden berücksichtigt. Wie stärkten die Porträts die Position und die Legitimität der Herrscherin Maria Theresia in einer schwierigen Situation? Wie legitimierten sie sowohl die Monarchin als auch die Eliten der Monarchie, die das königliche Porträt auch selbst in Auftrag gaben, in ihrer jeweiligen Stellung? Die meisten Maler der königlichen Porträts wurden an der Wiener Akademie ausgebildet, deren Direktor der wichtigste Hofmaler Maria Theresias, Martin van Meytens, war. Viele Maler, die für Kopisten gehalten werden können, imitierten die Porträts von Martin van Meytens und seiner Werkstatt. Diese Maler, die meistens unbekannt geblieben sind, vermitteln übrigens ein etwas weiblicheres Bild der Herrscherin. Die Maler, insbesondere die Hof- und Kammermaler, arbeiteten für verschiedene Auftraggeber und fertigten das königliche Porträt sowohl für den Wiener Hof als auch für die Eliten aus den verschiedenen Ländern der Monarchie an. [...]Es hat sich gezeigt, dass die Porträts sowohl von Maria Theresia als auch von den Eliten in Auftrag gegeben wurden. Sie wurden in bestimmten Räumen der adligen und kaiserlichen Schlösser ausgestellt: nämlich in Audienzzimmern, die auch Kaiserzimmer oder Maria-Theresien-Zimmer genannt wurden. Sie waren Repräsentationszeichen für die Herrscherin und zugleich Repräsentationsmittel für das eigene Prestige der Eliten. Die Bildtypen waren ähnlich, ob die Porträts von den Eliten oder vom Hof in Auftrag gegeben wurden; sie änderten sich aber im Laufe der Regierung und stellten verschiedene unter den zahlreichen Rollen Maria Theresias in den Vordergrund. Sie trat verschiedentlich als Erzherzogin von Österreich, als König (nicht Königin) von Ungarn und Böhmen, als Tochter, Ehefrau und Mutter von Kaisern des Heiligen Römischen Reiches in Erscheinung. Neben und zugleich mit ihren Rollen als Herrscherin konnte Maria Theresia auch als Frau, Mutter und Witwe gezeigt werden. Die Krone und die Kaiserwürde des Heiligen Römischen Reiches Deutscher Nation, die Maria Theresia als Frau nicht tragen durfte, spielten immer noch eine wichtige Rolle, insbesondere in der Darstellung von Maria Theresia und ihrer Familie. Komplementäre Porträts von Maria Theresia und ihrem Ehemann, Kaiser Franz I., respektive später ihrem Sohn, Kaiser Joseph II., dienten dazu, die Kontinuität zwischen den Habsburgern und den Habsburg-Lothringern zu betonen. Nach dem Aussterben der männlichen Linie der Habsburger im Jahre 1740 war es wichtig für Maria Theresia, ihre zahlreichen Kinder durch Porträts darzustellen. Neben Kronen und Zeptern werden nach und nach neue Legitimations- und Herrschaftssymbole in den Bildern dargestellt. Dokumente, Papiere, Bücher spiegeln am Ende des Lebens der Herrscherin neue Herrschaftswerte wider. Als Zeitgenossin der Aufklärung wird die Darstellung Maria Theresias von diesen neuen Symbolen geprägt.