Journal for the Study of Peace and Conflict TWO PLAQUES IN THE KARLSKIRCHE by David Randall Luce REFERENCES and FOOTNOTES

References Cole, G. D. H. (1965). A History of Socialist Thought, Volume IV, Part I: Communism and Social Democracy 1914-1931. London: Macmillan; New York: St. Martin's Press. See Chapter VII, "The Revolution in Austria-Hungary: Austria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia," especially pp 213-234. Seemingly a fair account of the role of the Austrian Social Democrats. Gehl, J?rgen (1979). Austria, Germany, and the Anschluss 1931-1938. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press. Originally published by Oxford University Press, 1963. A thoroughly documented account of the events leading up to the Anschluss. Gunther, John (1938). Inside Europe. 1938 Edition, New York: Harper and Brothers. Four chapters (22-25) are devoted to Austria. Jedlicka, Ludwig (1966). "The Austrian Heimwehr." In The Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. I, No. 1, pp. 127-144. Heinrich Schuschnigg tells us that Jedlicka was a member of the K…L. Klemperer, Klemens von (1972). Ignaz Seipel: Christian Statesman in a Time of Crisis. Princeton: Princeton University Press. A sympathetic and well-documented biography. Liebling, A. J., and Sheffer, Eugene Jay (Eds.) (1947). La R?public du Silence: The Story of French Resistance. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co..FONT> An anthology of readings designed for students of French. The title is taken from an article by Jean-Paul Sartre that it includes. Liebling, A. J. (Ed.) (1947). The Republic of Silence. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co. Translations from the French in Liebling and Sheffer (1947) by Ramon Guthrie and others. Luza, Radomir V. (1984). The Resistance in Austria, 1938-1945. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Seemingly a very thorough account, by a Czech resister who became an American professor of sociology. An Appendix contains 32 pages of statistical data re party affiliation, profession etc. Molden, Fritz (1988). Die Feuer in der Nacht: Opfer und Sinn des ?sterreichischen Widerstandes 1938-1945. Vienna & Munich: Amalthea Verlag. For an English translation see Molden (1989), directly below. Molden, Fritz (1989). Fires in the Night: The Sacrifices and Significance of the Austrian Resistance, 1938-45. Boulder, San Francisco & London: Westview Press. English translation by Harry Zohn of Molden (1988), directly above. A detailed account of the resistance movements, with a useful index. Molden, Otto (1958). Der Ruf des Gewissens: Der …sterreichische Freiheitskampf 1938-1945, 2nd ed. Vienna & Munich: Verlag Herold. Translation of the title: The Call of Conscience: The Austrian Fight for Freedom 1938-1945. In a series entitled (in translation) "Contributions towards the history of the Austrian resistance movement." Another detailed account with a useful index. Fritz Molden and Otto Molden are brothers with different experiences. Schuschnigg, Heinrich (1997). "Die Katholisch …sterreichischen Landsmannschaften im Widerstand gegen den Nationalsozialismus" ["The K…L in Resistance against National Socialism"]. In Peter Krause & Herbert Fritz, eds., Korporierte im Widerstand gegen den Nationalsozialismus [Fraternities in Resistance against National Socialism], pp 161-173. Vienna: …sterreichischen Vereins f?r Studentgeschichte. An invaluable resource for the matters discussed here, but it may not be readily available in the U.S. Schuschnigg, Heinrich (Ed.) (1998). "Geschichte des Akademischen Bundes Katholisch-…sterreichischer Landsmanschaften" ["History of the Academic Federation of Catholic-Austrian Fraternal Associations"]. Vienna: Archiv des Akademischen Bundes Katholisch …sterreichischer Landsmannschaften [Archives of the Academic Federation of Catholic-Austrian Fraternal Associations]. A brochure or handbook describing the K…L; 7 pages. Schuschnigg, Kurt von (1946). Austrian Requiem. Translated by Franz von Hildebrand. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. A translation of K. v. Schuschnigg's Ein Requiem in Rot-Wei§-Rot (Z?rich, 1946). Schuschnigg's personal recollections of his meeting with Hitler, the Anschluss, and his imprisonment during the war years. Stadler, Karl R. (1966). The Birth of the Austrian Republic, 1918-1921. Leyden: A. W. Sijthoff. A study of the Peace Conference at St. Germaine-en-Laye, May and June, 1919, and its consequences for Austria. Stadler, Karl R. (1968). "Austria." In S. J. Woolf (Ed.), European Fascism. London: George Weidenfeld & Nicolson, Ltd; New York: Random House. In the series: [University of] Reading University Studies on Contemporary Europe. I. Studies in Fascism. Stadler, Karl R. (1971). Austria. New York & Washington: Praeger Publishers. A volume in the "Nations of the Modern World" series. An excellent survey of Austrian history, with special emphasis on the 20th century. The author has been a professor of history at the Universities of Nottingham (England) and Linz (Austria). Wright, William E. (1995). Austria, 1938-1988: Anschluss and Fifty Years. Riverside, CA: Ariadne Press. In the series "Studies in Austrian Literature, Culture, and Thought." Based on papers presented at a symposium at the University of Minnesota's Center for Austrian Studies on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Anschluss. Professor Wright, the editor, teaches at the University of Minnesota. Footnotes iI was to learn of other events and publications that marked that 50th anniversary year. Wright (1995) provides one example. Back iiFrom "La Rose et Le R?s?da." The two lines -- "he who believed in heaven, he who did not believe" -- are repeated throughout the poem and define its rhyme-scheme. "La Fran?aise (Paris: Pierre Seghers, 1945). It bears a dedication: "? Gabriel P?ri et Rose et Le R?s?da." appears in the collection of Aragon's war-time poems La Diane d'Estienne d'Orves comme ?Guy Mocquet et Gilbert Dru." Gabriel P?ri had been foreign affairs commentator for the Communist newspaper Humanit?. Guy Mocquet was a 17-year-old youth among the first group of hostages killed by the Germans in France. I take this information from Aragon: Poet of the French Resistance, edited by Hannah Josephson and Malcolm Cowley (New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1945), p. 90, p. 137. I have not identified d'Estienne d'Orves or Gilbert Dru. Back iiiI played small roles in challenging a "speakers' ban" at the University of Michigan, in undoing a "loyalty oath" designed to weed out teachers opposed to racial segregation in Arkansas, in moving a Congressman to introduce a resolution calling for the abolition of the Un-American Activities Committee, in side-tracking the Nixon-McClellan criminal code bills in the 1970s, in defeating a "group libel" ordinance proposed for the City of Milwaukee as a means of combating the local Nazis, in exposing the activities of the Milwaukee Police Department's "Red Squad," and -- most recently -- in challenging a procedure for disciplining faculty that a University of Wisconsin Chancellor had substituted for the Regents' Rule on the subject. Back ivThe reference is to the World War I decisions Schenk v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919), and Debs v. United States, 249 U.S. 211 (1919), upholding the federal statute under which some 2,000 Americans were prosecuted and jailed for utterances opposing the United States' entry into World War I. That those decisions reflected Holmes' seriously held convictions about war and patriotism, and did not rest only on legal technicalities, is clear from the language of Holmes' 1895 Memorial Day speech, "A Soldier's Faith." How Holmes' name came to be associated with liberal views about freedom of speech is a fascinating question, addressed in G. Edward White's biography Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes: Law and the Inner Self (Oxford University Press, 1993), especially Chap. 12. Holmes' speech "A Soldier's Faith" is reprinted in Max Lerner, ed., The Mind and Faith of Justice Holmes (1943). Back vThe word "Heuriger" has no exact English equivalent. It represents a unique Viennese (or Austrian) institution. The adjective "heurig" means "of the current year" and the noun "Heuriger" means either "this year's wine" or a place (Gasthaus, restaurant, "night club") where the current year's wine is sold -- typically a place with an open courtyard and serving "country style" food appropriate for wine- and beer-drinking. In and around Vienna they are popular tourist attractions. Back viGordon Zahn, In Solitary Witness: The Life and Death of Franz J?gerst?tter (Boston: Beacon Press, 1964). According to the cover of the paperback edition, "a startling case of draft resistance in Nazi Germany." J?gerst?tter was from a farming community in Upper Austria. Back viiHeinrich Schuschnigg's letter to me of November 17, 1997, supplies specific references to the minutes of the relevant meetings of the K…L to document these claims. Back viiiHeinrich Schuschnigg, letter to the author dated November 17, 1997. The translation is the author's. Schuschnigg saw and had no comment on an earlier version of this translation. Back ixMonarchists recognized Otto von Habsburg, the son of Kaiser Karl, as the rightful claimant to the throne. Back xH. Schuschnigg, letter of November 17, 1997, cited above. Back xiQuoting again from H. Schuschnigg's letter of November 17, 1997: "There was no special reason for the 'Lukas' alter site, other than the fact that there a suitable space was available. There is also no connection, other that aesthetic, with the memorial on the opposite wall... Efforts were made not to damage the architecture of the Karlskirche." Back xiiKaiser Karl, who had succeeded Franz Josef in 1916. Back xiiiStadler (1966), Chap. 6, "The Struggle for the Tyrol," pp. 93-109, gives us a thorough and informed study of the negotiations over South Tyrol at the St. Germain conference. The secret diplomacy of 1915, in which Britain, France, and Russia promised to award Italy with South Tyrol if Italy joined in the war on their side, loomed large in the background of those negotiations. The United States was not a party to that secret diplomacy and Woodrow Wilson initially sought to mitigate its effects but ultimately yielded to the parties supporting Italy's demands. The phrase "war booty" is mine but the record seems to warrant that harsh label. Back xivAs Karl Stadler put it: "The wishes of the nationalities and the political strategy of the Allies brought the succession states into being [Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia] and provided them with their initial impetus and dynamic. No such wish -- to form an Austrian Nationalstaat -- had ever been formulated by [German-speaking] Austrians; their new nationality was forced upon them by the victors, their state was, in Clemenceau's phrase, 'that which was left over' after the break-up. And since Austrians had not worked and fought for their state, it was to them a Provisorium und Transitorium and not the culmination of their hopes; hence there was no patriotism, no identification, no feeling of permanence." Stadler (1971), p. 106. Back xvAccording to Karl Stadler, "Only the Anschluss question produced anything like a national front -- in favor of an anti-national policy -- and for this the Social Democrats have been largely held responsible by historians. That it should have beenÊaÊMarxist and internationalist party which orientated the new republic towards Germany, and not the habitual Pan-Germans, calls for an explanation." Stadler (1971), p. 107. The six pages that follow are devoted to "The Social Democrats and the German Question." Back xvi"Weimar, not Berlin or Vienna, was the spiritual home of the German-speaking intelligentsia in Austria." Stadler (1971), p. 108. Back xviiSee Walter H?flechner, "Austrian Universities and the Anschluss," in Wright (1995), pp.119-133. Back xviiiI quote from H. Schuschnigg (1997) at page 162: "The parties that found themselves with any power -- Left or Right -- all wanted the Anschluss after 1918, in spite of all their mutual ideological opposition. They did not believe in the viability of an Austria now become so small. Karl Renner [the new republic's first chancellor, a Socialist], on departing for the Paris Peace Conference at the Westbahnhof [the railroad station in Vienna connecting with points west], promised not to return home without the Anschluss [nicht ohne den Anschluss heimzukehren]. If the victorious powers in St. Germain had not expressly forbidden the Anschluss, Austria would at that time have become a German province and would today very likely have a status akin to that of the Free State of Saxony [a German province]." (The translation is the author's.) Writing from a quite different (socialist) perspective, G. D. H. Cole corroborates the two points that (1) the Austrian political parties with any influence all sought union with Germany as the solution to their problems, and (2) only the intransigence of the Allies on that issue prevented it from happening. See Cole (1965), Chapter VII. As to what Karl Renner said at the Westbahnhof, one observer was left with a different impression: "Representatives of the Viennese press crowd around the Chancellor before he gets on the train. Asked by one of them to bring back a good Treaty, the Chancellor replies that Austria, as a defeated nation, has no reason for high hopes." H. Oldofredi in Zwischen Krieg und Frieden (Vienna, 1925), p. 173, cited in Stadler (1966) at p. 39. (Presumably the translation is Stadler's.) The quoted statement does not expressly contradict Schuschnigg's account, of course. Back xixKarl Stadler sums up the story of German-Austrian relations in this fashion: "In this story Austria rises from the position of a Bavarian Ostmark to the dominant power in the 'Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation,' until, in the century of nationalism, her rulers are first shorn of the title of 'Holy Roman Emperor' and then finally expelled from the councils of the nascent German state... By the end of 1918 Austria is once again the small outpost of German speech and culture, a wedge in the Slav belt of Eastern Europe, without dominions, markets or friends; and the most natural development would have seemed a reunion of the remnant with the parent body. This the Allies would not permit; partly because the addition of Austria would have allowed Germany to regain her pre-war strength in man-power and industrial potential; and partly for the protection of the new national States in Eastern Europe." Stadler (1966) at the outset of Chap. 3, "The Anschluss," p. 62. Back xxH. Schuschnigg (1997), p. 162. Back xxi"…sterreichischer Patriotismus galt als anachronistisch und eines Intellectuellen nicht w?rdig." H. Schuschnigg (1998), p. 1. In the preceding sentences I have been summarizing while translating. Back xxiiH. Schuschnigg (1998), pp. 1-2. Back xxiiiH. Schuschnigg (1998), p. 2. Back xivH. Schuschnigg (1998), p. 5. Back xxvAccording to an estimate by Heinrich Schuschnigg, in the years following 1922 90% of the Austrians would have denied the existence of an Austrian nation. H. Schuschnigg (1997), p. 164. Back xxviThe Social Democratic Party continued to wield power in Vienna, which had the status of a province. G. D. H. Cole sums up the socialist influence in Vienna in these terms: "In Vienna especially the hold of the Social Democratic Party on the workers was immensely strong, not only politically, but also culturally and in every aspect of social life. Viennese Socialism, much more than the German, was an entire way of living... " Cole (1965), p. 224. Back xxviiStadler (1971), p. 116. Back xxviiiThe New Encyclopedia Britannica (Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1995), Vol. 10, Micropaedia: Ready Reference, article "Seipel, Ignaz,"p. 611. Back xxixCollier's Encyclopedia (New York: Macmillan Educational Co.; Toronto: Collier Macmillan Canada, 1991), Vol. 20, article "Seipel, Ignaz," p. 577. Back xxxStadler (1968), p. 95. Back xxxiStadler (1968), p. 90. Back xxxiiThe so-called "Korneuberg Oath" of May 18, 1930 is a formal expression of this ideology. It is reprinted in part in Stadler (1971), pp. 132-133, and in full in Jedlicka (1966), pp. 138-139. Back xxxiiiSubsidies to the Heimwehr were a means of shifting popular feelings away from Germany and towards Italy, and also a means of furthering the destruction of the Social Democratic Party in Austria. Jedlicka (1966) is the authority here. See especially pp. 134-137, which quotes from documents out of the Hungarian archives. Back xxxivThe Heimwehr party won only 8 out of the 155 seats in Parliament, as against the Social Democrats' 72 seats and the Christian Social's 66. The National Socialists (Nazis) had none at all. Stadler (1971) provides the figures on p. 116. Back xxxvEmil Fey and Prince Ernst R?diger Starhemberg. Back xxxviStadler (1971), p. 127. Back xxxviiStarhemberg was one of the conspirators on the Heimwehr side, even though he held the position of Minister of the Interior in the Dollfuss government at the time. Back xxxviiiThe American journalist John Gunther was in Vienna at the time and gave the world a vivid account of the attempted Putsch in Inside Europe. See Gunther (1938), Chap. 24, "Death of Dollfuss," pp. 333-348. Back xxxixKurt von Schuschnigg (1897-1977) survived the war years in concentration camps and was for two decades (1948-1967) a professor of political science at St. Louis University (in St. Louis, Missouri.) He was the uncle of the author's informant Heinrich Schuschnigg. Back xlFour days of fighting in Vienna; in other cities the fighting continued for several more days. Back xliAccording to John Gunther, the Austrian Social Democratic Party was the largest institution in Central Europe, employing 54,000 people and owning 35% of the land in Vienna as well as gas works, electrical plants, and other enterprises (including a newspaper printing presses). The Dollfuss regime took over all these assets. See Gunther (1938), p. 326. Back xliiStadler (1971), pp. 130-132, provides a brief account of the "civil war" and Gunther (1938), pp. 120-131 a somewhat more expansive account. The "provocations" of the Heimwehr and the Dollfuss regime are itemized on p. 324 in the form of extracts from the Bulletin of International Affairs published by the Royal Institute of International Affairs. Gunther himself was an eye-witness to much of the fighting in Vienna. A detailed account of the action as seen from the socialist side is provided by Ilona Duczymska in Workers in Arms: The Austrian Schutzbund and the Civil War of 1934 (New York and London: Monthly Review Press, 1978). Aside from the tragedy, the affair constitutes a remarkable case study for evaluating the pros and cons of militancy. Bauer himself seems to have changed his mind on the question; Gunther quotes his Austrian Democracy Under Fire on p. 328. Back xliiiIn the case of Prince Starhemberg, the triggering event was a telegram sent to Mussolini on February 13, 1936 and made public. It congratulated Mussolini for his victory in Ethiopia and celebrated the event as a "triumph of the fascist idea." The full text of the telegram is reproduced in Jedlicka (1966), p. 144. Schuschnigg at the time had to remain within the good graces of the League of Nations and found the telegram a considerable embarassment. Back xlivThose events included Germany's success in reoccupying the Rhineland without triggering a military reaction, Germany and Italy's mutual engagement in the civil war in Spain, and Italy's estrangement from Britain and the League of Nations. See Stadler (1971), p. 148; Gehl (1979), pp. 133-134. Back xlvStadler (1971), p. 148. Back xlviGehl (1979), pp. 146-147. Back xlviiE.g. in the composition of his cabinet. See Gehl (1979), pp. 147-149. Back xlviiiThe terms included the appointment of Seyss-Inquart and other National Socialists to ministerial posts, the dismissal of the current Austrian Chief of the General Staff, and amnesty for the Nazis doing jail terms for their involvement in the 1934 Putsch. Stadler (1971), p. 149; Gehl (1979), pp. 169-174. Back xlixThis is Gehl's analysis of the situation. Gehl (1979), p. 178. Back lGehl (1979), p. 115, pp. 163-165. Back liThe phrase is Stadler's. Stadler (1971), p. 149. Back liiThis is the text that K. v. Schuschnigg gives us. "After considering the text from a constitutional angle, we [members of the government] finally agreed on the following: 'For a free and independent, German and Christian Austria.'" K. v. Schuschnigg (1946), p. 36. But Gehl reports a somewhat lengthier text. "The delivery of [Schuschnigg's] speech [the evening of March 9] was immediately followed by the broadcasting of the formula, on which the population should vote: 'For a free and German, independent and social, for a Christian and united Austria! For peace and work and the equality of all who acknowledge their faith in our people and Fatherland!'" Gehl (1979), p. 184. Back liiiK. v. Schuschnigg took full responsibility for his decision. "There is no question but that a single order would have sufficed on the day of the Anschluss to call a general strike or to meet the invasion with armed resistance," he tells us. "Why I decided then, after carefully weighing the pros and cons, to avoid bloodshed and destruction appears in the following pages." K. v. Schuschnigg (1946), p. 37. We have another "case history" for the study of militancy in the consideration of the sufficiency of those reasons. Back livIn this account I am following Gehl (1979), pp. 182-195. The eyewitness' was Major-General Wilhelm von Grolmann. Grolmann's affidavit is identified in Gehl (1979), p. 191, fn. 1. Back lvStadler (1971), p. 157. Back lviF. Molden (1989), p. 4. Back lviiFor the source of the quote see ibid., fn. 2. The emphasis is presumably Stadler's. Back lviiiKlemperer (1972), p. 97, fn. 75. Back lixThe account was published in Vaterland, Lucern (Switzerland), Sept. 8, 1938, and quoted in H. Schuschnigg (1997), p. 169. I presume (from the name) that Vaterland was a newspaper published by Austrians in Switzerland at a time when every newspaper lacking official approval was illegal in Austria. The translation is the author's. Back lxJohn Haag in "Hochschulen and the Anschluss," in Wright (1995), p. 162, writes: "As early as August 1938, the Catholic Monarchist Professor Zessner-Spitzenberg... was killed at Konzentrationslager Dachau." But in H. Schuschnigg (1997) p. 169 we have: "He died in the arms of [his K…L brother] Gustav von Szabo on August 1, 1938, in Dachau." (The author's translation.) The two statements are not logically inconsistent but do raise questions. Back lxiThe notes have been worked up into a book and published. Hans Karl Zessner-Spitzenberg, Kaiser Karl. Edited from the unpublished notes by Erich Thanner. Salzburg: Salzburg Verlag f?r Wirtschaft und Kultur, 1953. Back lxiiMolden (1989), p. 1. Back lxiiiIbid., p. 2. Back lxivH. Schuschnigg (1997), p. 164. Back lxvSeipel's biographer wrote a Preface to Winter's book on Seipel and comments that "in this building of bridges to the Left Winter saw the last possible weapon that could be used against the enemy that threatened them, National Socialism." Ernst Karl Winter, Ignaz Seipel als Dialectisches Problem: Ein Beitrag zur Scholastikforschung (Vienna: Europa Verlag, 1966), Vorwort (by Klemens von Klemperer), pp. 10-11. The translation of the quoted passage is the author's. Back lxviStadler (1971), p. 145. Back lxviiH. Schuschnigg, fax to the author dated 7/14/98. For the story of 05, see Luza (1984), pp. 158-164, 216-218, 232-238; F. Molden (1989), pp. 55-56 and elsewhere. Back lxviiiF. Molden (1989), p. 4. Back lxixIbid., p. 5. Back lxxLuza (1984), p. 293. Back lxxiIbid. Back lxxiiWinston Churchill, radio broadcast, November 12, 1939; Franklin D. Roosevelt, radio broadcast, May 27, 1941. See Stadler (1971), p. 256. Back lxiiiThe essential paragraphs of the Moscow Declaration are quoted in Stadler (1971), p. 257, and an official source is cited. Back lxxivStadler (1971), Chap. 5, "The German Occupation," pp. 151-180. Back

| Back to Top || Previous Text || Table of Contents || Advisory Board || Book Reviews |