Windisch theory

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term Carinthian Windischentheorie describes the theses of an essay written by the Carinthian German national historian Martin Wutte in 1927 , which deals with the population in the mixed-language area of ​​Carinthia, citing geographical, economic, anthropological, historical, cultural, linguistic and political arguments.

The core theses are that the Carinthian Slovenes are closer to the German Carinthians than the Carniolan Slovenes and that they differ in two groups ( home-conscious, German-friendly Slovenes and national Slovenes ). The essay is not a scientific work, but - especially in the final summary, which ends with the distinction between "national" and "homeland-loyal" Slovenes and is sometimes referred to as social Darwinist - rather a kind of political persuasion. The article is a response to a recently published article in the Slovenian newspaper Slovenec .

The linguistic arguments are considered scientifically refuted. The terms “ Windisch ” - until the 19th century and partly until today a neutral German term for “Slovene”, which has since become common, or for “Slavic” in general (see “ Wendish ”) - or “Windischentheorie” can be used with Carinthians of all language groups trigger associations that lead to very emotional discussions. The reason for this lies in the referendum of 1920 on the state belonging to Lower Carinthia.

In the 2001 census, 14,010 Carinthians named Slovene as a colloquial language and 556 Windisch.

Historical background

The south-eastern part of Carinthia was and is a bilingual area (German and Slovenian). At the turn of the century, both German and Slovenian nationalists exaggerated the differences between the written Slovenian language and the Slovenian dialects in Carinthia.

After the First World War, a referendum of 1920 decided whether the area belonged to Austria or to the SHS state . According to the 1910 census, the majority of the population used Slovene as a colloquial language, but the vote was in Austria's favor. This decision is not unusual: in most of the other referendums at the time, the majority of voters decided to remain in their previous state association and against joining a state that used their colloquial language as the official language: in East Prussian Masuria (98% for Germany), in West Prussian voting area (92% for Germany) and Upper Silesia (60% for Germany) as well as in the predominantly German-speaking Ödenburg area , which decided against Austria and to stay with Hungary (65%). Only in the northern part of the Schleswig voting area did the population vote with 75% for a move to Denmark.

In Carinthia, where the vote was relatively close (59.04% for Austria), the decision inevitably had to lead to a division of the population into winners and losers more than anywhere else.

Core theses of the "Windisch theory"

In his introduction, Wutte refers directly to the result of the referendum and tries to capture the Carinthian Slovenes by quoting disappointed press voices from Slovenia: While the Province of Carinthia would have given them the nickname “Slovenes loyal to their home”, the Slovenian media would call them “sad, in renegade figures demoralized in every respect ”. In doing so, he is preparing a chain of arguments that is apparently intended to convince the Carinthian Slovenes that they have made the right decision. In a rather long consideration of the concept of the nation, he quotes u. a. Otto Bauer , Ignaz Seipel , Karl Renner , Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk as well as several South Slavic politicians, in order to derive a definition of ethnic affiliation according to the following categories:

  • Common residential area
  • Living and economic community
  • ancestry
  • Commonality of historical experiences
  • Cultural community
  • language
  • National feeling, national consciousness and national commitment.

From this, Wutte derives the following theses:

Common residential area

Just as the Swiss form a people despite their different languages, Germans and Slovenes in Carinthia have grown together to form one people, the “people of the Carinthians”. The separation of Carniola by the Karawanken Mountains meant that both Slovenian and German Carinthians could only see their future in Carinthia.

Living and economic community

The bilingual area in Carinthia is economically oriented towards the Carinthian central area. From the perspective of the Slovenian central area, it is only a periphery with no proximity to an economic center.

ancestry

Since the early Middle Ages, the German and Slovenian Carinthians would mix. They are therefore closer to each other in terms of parentage than the respective members of the same language group beyond the Carinthian borders. With genetic (mixed marriages), anthropological and onomastic arguments, Wutte tries to support his thesis that the Carinthian Slovenes are a "mixed people".

Commonality of historical experiences

German and Slovenian Carinthians had fought together in the course of history against Turks, Hungarians, French and Italians, and together they would have benefited from the reforms of Maria Theresa and Joseph II. Through shared experience, they have become a community of fate.

Cultural community

Due to the long political affiliation to the "German north", the Carinthian Slovenes are culturally very close to the Germans. Wutte tries to do this by way of example. a. to be evidenced by customs, legends, meter of the songs etc.

language

The language of the Carinthian Slovenes would differ so much from the artificially created written Slovene language that communication would be difficult. Wutte also cites alleged statements by Slovenian personalities to support this claim.

National feeling, national consciousness and national commitment.

In the past (e.g. 1848) Carinthian Slovenes had massively opposed the connection of their area to a planned administrative unit "Slovenia" within Austria-Hungary . They would have stood side by side with the German Carinthians in the Carinthian defensive struggle and they decided in favor of Austria in the referendum.

conclusion

In the last chapter of the essay, Wutte draws conclusions that partly contradict his previous line of argument. He quotes a Slovenian medium (newspaper “Slovenec” of April 26, 1927) in which - apparently out of disappointment at the unfavorable outcome of the referendum - the Carinthians are divided into three groups: the majority, the minority, and a third element, the “Nemčurji”, which “is economically oriented and oriented towards the north, but culturally and emotionally Slovenian”. Wutte adopts this structure, but reinterprets it in the sense of the “winners” of the referendum: The “homely” or “German-friendly” Slovenes are essentially not Slovenes, but rather a “middle class” in contrast to the “national Slovenes”. Thus, the Slovenian-speaking Carinthians could be divided into two groups:

  • the “national” Slovenes who were forced into a state with a foreign population by the result of the vote and who seek their salvation in the maintenance of the Slovenian culture , the center of which is located outside the new state borders,
  • the other group, which voted for Austria in the referendum, sees its prosperity only in connection with German culture and has nothing to do with the Slovenian minority .

The article does not contain any citations and does not seem to claim to be an academic work. However, the author asserts several times that the arguments put forward stem from scientific research.

Scientific evaluation of the "Windisch theory"

Several scientific papers (Priestley, Hunter, see bibliography) come to the conclusion that the differences between the standard Slovene language and its Carinthian expression are much smaller than claimed. Hunter, who speaks Slovene but not German, was able to talk to Slovene-speaking residents of the Carinthian Gail Valley without any problems.

The anthropological evidence cited in the chapter "Descent" (including body structure, head shape) no longer corresponds to the current state of science; these methods have largely lost their importance due to developments in the field of genetics . However, the assumption that mixed marriages often occurred in a multicultural environment does not necessarily require scientific evidence.

Incidentally, the chain of arguments itself hardly gives rise to controversy, but the conclusion is seen as offensive, especially by members of the Slovenian ethnic group in Carinthia. The term "windy" is taboo in public language in Carinthia.

Myths about the "Windisch theory"

There are also some myths about the “Windisch theory”. It is claimed that Wutte described the Carinthian Slovenes as descendants of the Lausitz Wends . The widespread opinion that Wutte had split the Carinthian Slovenes into two ethnic groups is equally untenable . There is no reference to this in the text; the distinction is made according to political criteria, in particular according to the willingness to assimilate .

Carinthian Slovenes and Windische today

The majority of Slovene-speaking Carinthians today call themselves “ Carinthian Slovenes ”. They understand the term "Windische" pejoratively and as an attempt to divide and weaken the Slovenian population group. A smaller group calls themselves "Windisch" and carries this name with self-confidence.

swell

  1. ↑ Martin Wutte: German – Windisch – Slovenian, original text as a facsimile
  2. ↑ 2001 census, main results I - Carinthia, table 14
  3. ↑ Master Thesis by Katherine Hunter (PDF file; 4.44 MB), page 52
  4. ↑ cf. on this in detail Heinz Pohl: The ethnic-linguistic requirements of the referendum

literature

  • Martin Wutte: German – Windisch – Slovenian. Klagenfurt 1927 (reprinted in 1930 in: Gedenkbuch Kampf um Kärnten , edited by JF Perkonig, Klagenfurt).
  • Katherine Hunter: The Slovene-Speaking Minority of Carinthia: The Struggle for Ethnolinguistic Identity in the Gail Valley, pp. 51ff ; Edmonton, Alberta, 2000 (Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Applied Linguistics, Department of Modern Languages ​​and Cultural Studies).
  • Tom Priestley: On the development of the "Windischentheorie". International Journal of the Sociology of Language 124: 75-98, 1997 (= Special Issue: Sociolinguistics of Slovene).

See also