Austrian History

The forty-year jubilee of introducing municipal autonomy in accordance with the European Charter of Local Self-Government was celebrated in Austria in 2002. When considering a legal-historical aspect, the municipal autonomy in Austria did not begin forty years ago, but it began much earlier, because the entire development, which certainly commenced prior to the year 1918, should be taken into account. This was the period of the monarchy, to which also the present Republic of Slovenia belonged. The actual beginning of municipal autonomy goes back to the year 1848 and far beyond. In specialised literature, this year is referred to as the beginning of municipal autonomy, however, there are some good reasons to believe that municipal autonomy commenced at the beginning of the 16th century. The years 1848 and 1862 are correct  when referring only to commencements of modern understanding municipal autonomy, because there is a well-known principle of Article 1 of the Temporary Municipal Act from that period, which declares that the free municipality is the basis for the free state.
In view of development, it is possible to talk about the period prior to Joseph II’s legislation (until 1780), which provides borough and town charters and privileges. For Slovenia, the Ptuj Town Charter of 1376 (especially that of the year 1513), and the privilege, concerning Elections for Mayor, granted to Ljubljana in 1504, are two major
landmarks in municipal autonomy. They are followed by the pre-March period and by the period after the year 1848.
Modern municipal autonomy has its roots in the autonomy of individual government office holders. After the year 1848, government was divided into own and delegated competences of the Mayor and municipal councils.
With regard to development, terminologically speaking, the municipality as a legal person (the ideal one) is the body, which takes care of the matters within its own competence (referring to pasture rights, collection of individual contributions, etc.).
According to the above-mentioned information, the municipality, being an institution, has always served the interests of a local community. And to a large extent, the local
community has always autonomously performed its tasks.

Leta 2002 so v Avstriji praznovali štiridesetletnico uvedbe občinske avtonomije skladno z evropsko listino. S pravnozgodovinskega vidika to ni začetek občinske avtonomije v Avstriji, temveč je ta mnogo starejša in je potrebno upoštevati celoten razvoj, ki se gotovo začne pred letom 1918. To je obdobje monarhije, kamor je spadala tudi današnja Republika Slovenija. Dejanski začetek občinske avtonomije sega krepko preko leta 1848, ki v literaturi velja za začetek, in ga je mogoče z vso pravico postaviti v začetek 16. stoletja. Letnici 1848 in 1862 veljata le z vidika začetkov modernega razumevanja občinske avtonomije, saj je iz tega obdobja znano načelo prvega člena začasnega občinskega zakona, ki pravi, da je osnova svobodne države svobodna občina. Razvojno je tako mogoče govoriti o obdobju pred jožefinsko zakonodajo (do leta 1780), kamor je šteti trške in mestne statute in privilegije, kjer sta za Slovenijo Ptujski statut iz leta 1376, predvsem pa iz leta 1513 in privilegij za Ljubljano iz leta 1504 o volitvah župana, reprezentančna mejnika občinske avtonomije; sledi predmarčno obdobje in obdobje po letu 1848. Moderna občinska avtonomija ima svoje korenine v avtonomiji nosilcev posameznih funkcij oblasti in se po letu 1848 deli na lastne in prenesene pristojnosti župana in občinskih svetov. Terminološko gledano razvojno je že pred letom 1848 občina kot pravna oseba (idealna) tisti organ, ki skrbi za zadeve iz lastne pristojnosti (za pašno pravico, pobiranje posameznih prispevkov ipd.). Glede na predstavljeno je občina kot institucija vedno služila interesom lokalne skupnosti in jo je lokalna skupnost tudi v veliki meri avtonomno izvrševala.

The perception of Romani people in “western” European states has been predominantly linked with forms of migration that emerged from post-communist countries, especially since the two latest EU enlargements. Still, these migrations are not unidirectional and homogeneous at all, but contain multi-layered and diverse forms of movement. In this book we present some outcomes of a recent research project which we carried out in analysing movements from members of Romani communities in southern Slovakia to the Austrian province of Styria. These discussed communities are neither linguistically separated nor in terms of housing strictly segregated from their mostly Hungarian surrounding. Nevertheless, the migrations – initially for the purpose of begging – and especially their effects foster differentiation and even an increase of segregation tendencies. In particular, the projects of NGOs in the region and the depiction of Romani people in Austrian media has shaped the othering of these Hungarian Slovakian citizens of Romani belonging.
In an introductive overview on the character of these migrations, we argue that these movements are transnational, not only because they are circular (instead of once-and-forever), but also because they question the notion of seemingly traditional migratory patterns. One of the effects of the migrations has been the emergence of a relatively strong connection between the regions involved, highly visible in the symbolical relationship between the village of Medovce-Metete  and Graz. Not only have development projects by Austrian NGOs and official support from local governments in Austria changed the situation in this village, but the presence of begging Romani people has shaped political debates and self-perceptions in Graz. These effects and relationships can most adequately be described as a transnational network that allows the movement of people, goods, money, knowledge etc.
This book is based on material from our field researches in South-central Slovakia (called the Gemer/Gömör region), and Graz, deriving first and foremost from interviews with migrants, NGO-activists, officials and non-migrating people, which we carried out from September 2010 until February 2011. The second basis for this book are images and texts from coverage in different forms of media, such as newspapers and magazines, but also graffiti in public space, bulk mail, etc., from 1989 to 2011. We set these sources in dialogue with one other and thus map a space across the borders between language and action as well as the borders of nations/regions. In doing so, it becomes visible that there are huge intersections and interdependences between perceptions of these migrations, the circumstances in which they happen and the consequences they have (like development aid).

This book addresses a major gap in Holocaust history and the history of Vienna: the “visualization” of the persecution, expulsion, and murder of Jewish Viennese and other Jewish Austrians who were forcibly relocated to Vienna as a result of National Socialist persecution measures. Vienna, which was home to one of the largest Jewish communities in Europe, became the testing ground for the radicalization of Nazi anti-Jewish policies.
The book focuses on the City of Vienna between the years 1938 and 1945 from the viewpoint of its Jewish victims. It uncovers the topography of persecution as well as sites of agency and survival, thereby mapping and visualizing the destruction of Jewish Vienna. It shows Vienna as a place that is “contaminated” by the Shoah. The historic events that unfolded between 1938 and 1945 are here connected to specific sites and spaces: So, for example, the Vienna Ringstraße is shown as a paradigmatic site of exclusion from professional life as well as appropriation (“Aryanization”). The Mariahilfer Straße and West Station are revealed as sites of escape but also places connected to deportations to the concentration camps of Dachau and Buchenwald. Meanwhile, the Inner City is shown as the center of Jewish and non-Jewish aid agencies – to summarize a few chapters. The events are presented both chronologically and thematically through a variety of documents, narrative sources, photographs, and objects, thereby disseminating new research to a broader audience.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Das Buch greift eine Leerstelle in der Literatur zur Geschichte der Stadt Wien auf: die »Sichtbarmachung« der Verfolgung, Vertreibung und Er-mordung der jüdischen WienerInnen bzw. der im Zuge der NS-Verfol-gungspolitik nach Wien verbrachten jüdischen ÖsterreicherInnen. Das Wien der Jahre 1938 bis 1945 wird aus der Perspektive der Opfer betrach-tet, wobei sowohl die Topographie des Terrors als auch die Orte der Selbst-behauptung und des Überlebens kenntlich und so die Zerstörung des jüdi-schen Wien nachvollziehbar gemacht werden. Das Buch zeigt Wien als einen durch die Shoah »kontaminierten« Ort.
DIETER J. HECHT ist wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter des Instituts für Kulturwissenschaften und Theatergeschichte der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften und des Zentrums für Jüdische Studien an der Karl Franzens-Univer-sität Graz. ELEONORE LAPPIN-EPPEL ist Dozentin für Neuere Geschichte und Zeitgeschichte der Karl Franzens-Universität Graz und wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin des Instituts für Kulturwissenschaften und Theatergeschichte der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. MICHAELA RAGGAM-BLESCH ist wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin des Instituts für Kulturwissenschaften und Theatergeschichte der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissen-schaften. www.topographie-der-shoah.at