Valla


Valla, Moson Megye, Hungary, Austria-Hungary

(now Wallern im Burgenland, Austria)




The Great Crisis:

The Destruction of Burgenland, 1938
&
The Re-establishment of Burgenland



from
"The Political Geography of Burgenland"
By Andrew F. Burghardt
© June 1958
Pages 171-180



C. The Great Crisis


1. The Destruction of Burgenland, 1938


In March 1938, the German Army marched into Austria, annexing her to the German Reich. All newspapers were taken over immediately by the Nazi party, so that it is impossible to locate any unbiased printed appraisals of the move. The federal system of Austria, which had been turned into a one-party rule by Dollfuss and Schuschnigg, now vanished completely in the absolute dictatorship of Hitler and his party. The tense interactions between Vienna and the provinces were replaced by the simple hierarchy of rule from above, without appeal.

At first the Nazis allowed the existing political subdivisions to remain as they had been, with Nazi officials in complete control. A new government was established for Burgenland; this consisted of 30 members, 20 of whorn were chosen areally, to represent the bezirke (counties). A Kreis-leiter (County Supervisor), Kreis-organisations-leiter (County Supervisor of Organizations), and a Bauern-führer (Peasants' Leader) were selected for each of the seven counties, except that Jennersdorf was included under the jurisdiction of the Kreis-organizations-leiter for Güssing county.

The ten remaining members of the government were, of course, the true holders of power. They held such offices as Hauptmann (premier), his Stellvertreter (Vice Premier), and the Offices of Propaganda, Press, Finance, etc. Of these ten, nine were from the south. (The lone northerner was from Eisenstadt.) Every one of these nine southerners came from a gemeinde that had either a majority or a very strong minority of Lutherans. Eight of them came from within 7 km (4-l/2 miles) of the Lutheran educational center, Oberschützen; three were from Oberschützen itself. (The three members specifically representing Oberwart Bezirk were from this same local area, the gemeinden of Oberschützen, Unterschützen, and Oberwart; eleven of the thirty-man total lived in or within 5 miles of Oberschützen.) This strongly suggests that the center of Nazi strength and popularity in Burgenland was in the uplands north of Oberwart and that actual party adherence may have had a religious base.

Nazi Burgenland was of short duration. In May the new rulers of Austria promulgated a vast reorganization of the Ostmark (Austria), destroying or altering the areas of the provinces in favor of the system of "Gau"s and "Kreis"s characterizing Germany. There were not one, but two reorganizations of territory.

On May 24, 1938, it was decreed that the entire province of Burgenland plus the bezirke Wiener Neustadt, Neunkirchen, and Bruck a/d Leitha, counties of the former province of Lower Austria, were to be added to "Gau" Styria. This seems to have been intended as a reward to Styria for its support of the Nazi cause. This award would have brought Styria to the Danube, at Hainburg, and increased its area from 6,310 to 8,880 square miles. Though communications between Graz and Hainburg might have been possible over the Semmering Pass and then along the east side of the Vienna Basin, this new Styria would have been somewhat of a monstrosity. Unfortunately for Gau Styria, the affected population of Lower Austria protested strongly against being detached from their traditional province, and a new decision was deemed advisable.



The Grazer Tagespost had labeled the first decision as "the only correct one, the best one that one could ever encounter"; the newspaper maintained a complete silence on the second decision.

Map 29 (page 173) indicates how Burgeniand was divided between her neighbors. The boundary between Lower Danube and Styria was to extend to the Hungarian border along the former county boundary between Oberwart and Oberpullendorf. Neusiedl County was joined to an enlarged Kreis Bruck a/d Leitha. The two counties, Eisenstadt and Mattersburg, were united into one Kreis Eisenstadt; but the salient gemeinde Neudörfl was detached and added to Kreis Wiener Neustadt. Oberpullendorf County was enlarged with the addition of the adjacent portions of Lower Austria into a greater Kreis Oberpullendorf. Oberwart County became Kreis Oberwart with the addition of seven gemeinden, in the lower Pinka valley from the former Güssing County. The major portion of Güssing County and the northern half of Jennersdorf County (the Lafnitz valley) were united to an enlarged Kreis Fürstenfeld. The southern half of Jennersdorf County (the Raab valley) was joined to an enlarged Kreis Feldbach.

Most of these alterations seem logical. The splitting of Jennersdorf County and the uniting of its two halves to Fürstenfeld and Feldbach provided an admirable solution of the problems of that county. The transfer of the northern portion of the lower Pinka valley from Güssing to Oberwart proved so acceptable that it was allowed to remain after Burgenland was re-established within its former boundaries. The joining of Neudörfl to adjacent Wiener Neustadt was an astute move. The two westward salients of Burgenland (Edelstal and Neudörfl) thus vanished from the map. In contrast, Styria's disconnected gemeinde, Sinnersdorf, was not united to Kreis Oberwart; that boundary aberration was allowed to remain.

Only one move, that of making Kreis Oberwart a part of Gau Styria, seems questionable. Though a first look at the map would suggest this move as obvIous under the circumstances, the fact remains that at present, and even more so at that time before the development of buses, Oberwart Bezirk is tied more closely to Vienna than to Graz (see Map 28, page 164). The principal routes, both railroad and highway, run north towards Lower Austria and Vienna, rather than towards Styria.

At present it is impossible to ascertain how the majority of the people of Burgenland felt about the destruction of their province. No one will admit that they were in favor of anything that the Nazis did, yet everywhere people said, "Of course, there were certain circles who favored it, because it does make sense economically"; however, these "circles" were never identified. Burgenlanders added, "What could we do?" "We couldn't say anything." It evidently came as a surprise, though there was a week between the two announcements.

It appears that most of the inhabitants were against the destruction of Burgenland, but that few, if any, cared deeply. As one person said, "Very few tears were shed." There seems to have been only one case of local opposition to the attempted rearrangement: the inhabitants of Sieggraben protested successfully against being separated from Mattersburg and joined to Kreis Oberpullendorf. On a provincial or regional scale there was no sign of any opposition to the move.

Burgenland had experienced a very difficult 17 years of existence, and in that time had not been able to surmount the enormous difficulties confronting it. 1938 was less than two decades past the time of the attempts of the Lafnitz valley to join Styria and the desires of the extreme north to be united to Vienna and Lower Austria. The political life of the province had not yet come to rest in its citizenry; most of the party leaders had been immigrants from Old-Austria, as had been almost the entire bureaucracy. There were, therefore, but few articulate persons who felt any deep identification with a Burgenland.

2. The Re-establishment of Burgenland


In February 1945, the Soviet Army entered Burgenland. Within two months the Nazi rule of Austria came to an end. In many ways Austria was back to where she had been in 1918: a ruined country, shattered by a disastrous war, dropped from a postition of great power to one of powerless prostration, and, again, leading the country was Chancellor Renner. For several months there was no effective self-government in the provinces; durIng this time there was uncertainty as to the future status of the former Burgenland.

Reportedly there were movements in Lower Austria and Styria to keep their portions of Burgenland. In May 1945, at a meeting in Eisenstadt of the mayors of Lower Austria, Provincial Vice Premier Helmer stated that he was certain that, despite attempts to reintroduce a government for Burgenland, the majority of the people of north Burgenland would not feel this to be the time to tear the ties that bound them to Lower Austria.



A delegation representing party leaders of the former Burgenland formally appealed to the provisional government of Austria for the re-establishment of the province. Its request was quickly granted. A special law, the "Burgenland Law," was enacted on August 29, 1945. Article 1 stated, "Burgenland is re-established as an autonomous ["selbständig"] province of the republic," and Article 2 stated that its boundaries were to be the same as they were previously.

Though Burgenland was now once more a province, its immediate resumption of its rights, privileges, and functions was not assured. The matter was debated at the September 8th session of the provisi6nal national government. Chancellor Renner suggested the naming of a special commissioner who, with the help of a council chosen from the three permitted parties, was evidently to oversee the government of the province. This would have signified that Burgenland was to be handled as a "second-class province," considerably less than autonomous. Herr Fig, the leader of the Austrian People's Party (Volks-partei), and who later became chancellor, fought this proposal, energetically supporting the complete self-government of Burgenland.

On October 1, 1945, Burgenland again became an autonomous and equal province. On November 10, 1945, the August 29 "Burgenland Law" of the Austrian government was accepted by the Allied occupation authorities.

In the moves that returned self-government to Burgenland, the population of the province was very poorly represented. Except for the delegation of interested persons that went to Vienna to request the re-establishment of the province; all activity concerned the leaders of the provisional national government in Vienna. Did the majority of the population wish a resurrection of Burgenland? It seems that they did; beyond doubt the inhabitants of Burgenland wanted their province back.

There remain yet the important questions. Why was Burgenland re-established? Why did its inhabitants want the province back? Why did they get it back so easily? No clamor, no demonstrations, no floods of letters to Vienna or Eisenstadt were required.

1. There was a revulsion to everything Nazi. After the catastrophic war Austrians seemed seized with the desire to reverse everything the Nazis had done, just because they had done it. The old boundaries and provincial entities were re-established: the Ost-Tirol was separated from Carinthia, even though it is topographically a continuation of the Carinthian valleys and isolated from the remainder of the Tirol; the territorial changes among Salzburg, Styria, and Upper Austria were reversed; and Vienna surrendered to Lower Austria the area it had gained in 1938. Unless there were compelling reasons for not doing so, everything was returned to its pre-l938 status. The presence of the Allied occupation forces strongly augmented this tendency. The Nazi-introduced marriage law, allowing civil marriage and divorce, and driving on the right side of the road remained in force.

2. The Allied Forces, in effect, reconstituted Burgeniand even before the enactment of the Burgenland Law by the Austrian government. Early in August 1945, in the Allied agreement on the zones of occupation, the Soviet zone was specified to include all of Lower Austria, that portion of Upper Austria north of the Danube, one quarter of Vienna, and the former Burgenland. Burgenland was thus designated as a separate zone of occupation, separate from Styria which was occupied by the British. Actually, Burgenland had been under Soviet occupation since February. The principal reason for this demarcation of Burgenland as a zone of occupation separate from Styria lies, undoubtedly, in its geographic position; by occupying this strip, the Soviet Forces prevented any direct contact between the western powers and Hungary. Furthermore, the Soviet authorities may have favored a separate Burgenland as granting them an added opportunity to influence political activities.

The occupation boundary was strictly enforced, turning the Burgenland-Styria border into a milder version of the "Iron Curtain." Barbed wire was strung along the border. People could cross back and forth with a pass, but the checkIng was often a dangerous and uncomfortable procedure; the Soviet authorities used the border check points as convenient places for apprehending wanted persons.

As a result, south Burgenland was forced to turn north. This dependence of the south on the north was of great importance because it was in the north that political power in the province had been centered, hence it was there that the desire to have the province re-established was most strongly concentrated. The north had always feared that the south tended towards Graz; now the south was being forcibly turned away from Graz towards Eisenstadt and Vienna. The occupation boundary exerted a definite pressure towards the resurrection of a Burgenland government.

3. The war had produced a solidifying of the Burgenland provincial consciousness. Just as in the First World War, when the local men had served as soldiers of Hungary but had returned with an intensified consciousness of being German, so now the men returned with an Intensified consciousness of being Burgenlanders. They had felt themselves different from the other German, or even Austrian soldiers; when they met a serviceman from some other portion of Burgenland they would greet him as a provincial kinsman, as someone who could understand the mutual problems.

Among the civilians this consciousness of a difference was strengthened also. The people of the south, who were supposedly so similar to the Styrians, felt the difference keenly and referred to themselves as "New Styrians" in distinction to the Styrians themselves. This conscious distinction was based on the many "differences" mentioned previously; because of their different heritage, even because of the economic backwardness of their area these people felt themselves to be different from their neighbors.

4. The "Grenzland" (borderland) consciousness rekindled the desire to try it alone. The Burgenlanders felt themselves a border folk, in a border area. They had been the "stepchild" of the Hungarians; recently they had been the "stepchild" of the Styrians and the Lower Austrians. There was a borderland which was always neglected in favor of other areas or provinces.

They had grown to suspect any rule by any outsider. "For the Lower Austrian government Burgenland was only an area for the procurement of the necessities of life for the Lower Austrian market, but nobody concerned himself whether or not the needy areas of Burgenland were supplied." One peasant put it into local terminology "If I have five oxen and like four but am not too interested in one, then I will give all my best to the four and neglect the one. South Burgenland was only an extra bit attached to the rim of Styria." The prevailing opinion of the people of south Burgenland is that in Styria they paid their taxes but received nothing in return; in Burgeniand there is less money to work with, but they know that they will get their share. As long as they remained somebody's borderland they would be neglected. They wIshed to rule themselves.

5. All the county seats that had lost their political functions wished to regain their positions and offices. This was true of Neusiedl, Mattersburg, Güssing, and Jennersdorf. Not only the county seats themselves desired this resumption of political power, but all the surroundIng areas as well wished a return to the former system, if only for the reason of convenience. Thus a peasant in Steingraben explained that he had favored a re-establishment of Burgenland because Güssing was close at hand, where as Fürstenfeld, the Kreis center from 1938 to 1945, was several hours away by foot or wagon. Since this factor also carried weight in every village to the east of the former county seats, it may have had some influence on almost half of the inhabitants of Burgenland.

Thus Burgenland survived the most rigorous test a political area can endure, the test of dissolution. The destruction and division of Burgenland had long been contemplated as a possible, and perhaps a preferable, solution to the organizational problems confronting it. During the Nazi regime this alternate suggestion had been given the benefit of a trial, albeit under poor circumstances. It must be remembered too that the act of dissolution had occurred before the special unifying features of added finances and integrated road and bus systems had become operative, yet in two decades the "Staatsidee" based on a complex of "differences" had grown from nothing to a power capable of maintaining a Burgenland when the organization of the area had been abolished.




Dean's Genealogy Home Page

E-mail: dwagner2@isd.net

©2004 DJW
Last Modified:
February 2, 2004