Talk:History of Austria

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Austria (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Austria, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles about Austria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject History (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Added Pictures[edit]

Sorry about the number of edits, but it is saver to add pics and save immediately... sorry. Themanwithoutapast 23:50, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for adding them, they look great. With the pictures, I think, the article has the potential to obtain featured status. A couple of things that probably should be done:
  • There should be more information on prehistory (maybe with a picture of the Venus of Willendorf or another famous artifact) and more information on the first millenium.
  • The period 1714-1815 is much too long and should be put cut, the current content put into a subarticle.
  • Maybe a picture of one of those really aggressive polical ads from the first or early second republic.
  • Another picture for the "recent past" section.

Martg76 22:34, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

as the person who wrote the history from 1278 to 1814, I will agree that perhaps the stuff on 1714-1815 is too long, but that a much more serious problem is the terrible 1814-1918 section (which I've never gotten around to working on). I'm not sure if the 20th century stuff needs to be worked on. john k 23:26, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

- So much could be added here! The sequestering of Austria to the Habsburgs, the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, Maria Theresa, Joseph and enlightened absolutism, Congress of Vienna, Metternich, Franz Josef, Anschluss to Nazi Germany, Jörg Haider, ...

Especially the parts about the First Republic and Austrofacism remain very inaccurate if you do not mention the self-paralyzation of Parliament in 1933, the bloody February uprising of 1934 and the aborted Nazi putsch of the same year, which cost Dollfuss' life. wg 23:11 Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)

This text is no more than a stub. It would/will take months to write a decent encyclopaedia entry on the history of Austria. For the time being, looks like a good place to go to get more information.

By the way, during the Second World War Austria did not "side with the Axis Powers" because in those years Austria did not exist (see "Anschluss"). --KF 07:07 Mar 31, 2003 (UTC)

=As for "The War of Bavarian Succession was ended on May 13, 1979 when Russian and French mediators at the Congress of Teschen negotiated an end to the war. In the agreement Austria receive a part of its territory that was taken from them (the Inn District).", I must have been ill that week because I have no recollection of such a bizarre deterioration of Central European diplomatic relations. Harry Potter

This article is as stubby as the outside link is huge. I could write a good deal from memory, and it's been two years since I took that class. But I must go to sleep now... Smack 06:41 18 May 2003 (UTC)
There is really no point in adding isolated pieces of information to this stub: They only confuse the innocent reader. As Koyaanis Qatsi already pointed out last summer, "so much could be added here". However, the first step will have to be to give a sort of survey. Even the meaning of the name Austria has changed considerably over the centuries (see, for example, Hyncice, Czech Republic, Gregor Mendel's birthplace). --KF 07:01 18 May 2003 (UTC)
Possibly skipping over this first step, I've tried to outline the history of Austria up through the 17th century. One problem is that the meaning of the name Austria was rather varied even in one particular century. In the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, for instance, the name might refer to any of 1) The "House of Austria" (aka, House of Habsburg), whose two branches ruled Spain (until 1700) and the Holy Roman Empire; 2) Austria proper, the small Danubian province divided into "Upper" and "Lower" parts, with capitals at Linz and Vienna respectively; 3) The whole of the Habsburg hereditary lands, roughly modern Austria (but larger), with Tyrol and the Vörlande occasionally called "Further Austria", and Styria, Carinthia, Carniola, Istria, Trieste, Gorizia, Gradisca called "Inner Austria", in addition to "Upper" and "Lower" Austria; 4) The lands specifically ruled by the Austrian branch of the Habsburg family, including not only the Hereditary lands, but also Hungary and Bohemia (and, after 1772, Galicia). The whole thing is rather a mess. john 07:23 18 May 2003 (UTC)
That's exactly what I was referring to. Let's not forget that for most of the time we're talking about here the province of Salzburg did not belong to the Habsburg lands. Nice to see this article grow. --KF 08:00 18 May 2003 (UTC)

Exactly what information on this page could possibly be derived from the World Fact Book and the State Department website? john 03:57 20 May 2003 (UTC)

Okay, I reverted changes because I've never seen a hyphen used with reference to the Christian Socialist Party. Capitalization should be enough to indicate that this is the name of a specific political party. john 07:31, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Well, my additions seem to be getting more and more detailed as I go forward - the most recent one is far too focused on foreign policy, though. If anyone knows anything about Austrian domestic policy in the Napoleonic period, that'd balance it out a lot. john 04:10, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

No specific entry on annexation?[edit]

Howdy. Is there no specific entry on Wikipedia dealing with the annexation of Austria by Nazi Germany? Oberiko 00:05, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Look at Anschluss. john k 02:33, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

whats this[edit]

I removed the following code from the top of the "The Nineteenth Century (1815-1918)" section:

{{details|Austrian Empire]], Austria-Hungary and [[Congress of Vienna}}

I don't know what this line was supposed to do, but whatever it was, it wasn't doing it properly, and was mostly just showing the code. Herostratus 20:52, 2 November 2005 (UTC)


Version by Ulritz[edit]

At the end of World War II, Austria was overrun by Allied Forces.

On March 28, 1945, American troops set foot on Austrian soil, with the Red Army crossing the eastern border two days later, capturing Vienna by April 13. US and British forces occupied the western and southern parts of the country, securing Austria from complete Soviet domination, marking an end to Nazi rule.

Comments on version by Ulritz[edit]

This version looks as if it were written by someone who supported nazism and is kind of disappointed that the Allies and Red Army freed the Austrian people from Nazi ruled imposed on them since 1938. No offence. Rex 13:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Version by Rex, or version before Ulritz' edits[edit]

At the end of World War II, Austria was liberated from Nazi rule by Allied Forces. - On March 30, 1945 Red Army forces entered the country, and on April 13 freed Vienna. US and British forces freed the western and southern parts of the country.

Comments on version by Rex[edit]

History is subjected to opinions from contemporary times. Today Austrians (or at least I hope they do) feel that they were liberated from the Nazis and German domination. Wikipedia should reflect contemporary opinions. Rex 13:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Classic revisionism- the poor Austrians, how could they vote for inclusion into the Reich (headed by a compatriot), having greeted their "oppresors" with cheers? See the discussion about the word "liberation" on words to avoid, which sparked the protests of Poles and Ukrainains, who were far more liberated than the Austrians, who, besides having a disproportionate role in the spread of Nazism, fought the liberators, housed concentration camps, etc. -indisputable facts which find no refelction in RG's whitewashed, lopsided version. Of course there are many more facts, but these alone prove how indefensible RG's POV is. Ulritz 13:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I think you should be very careful with claiming Poles housed the concentration camps, you see history will prove you wrong and show that it were the people behind the banner on your user page who housed them on the lands they invaded without a declaration of war.

Apart from that, there is a clear line between revisionism and modern views. Judging from what I've seen now, you think the findings of Copernicus were revisionism as well? Rex 14:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Comparing Austrian-run camps with Austro-German camps in Poland won't get you anywhere, nor will drifting off topic. Ulritz 14:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't evade questions Ulritz. You are the one that propagates revisionism, not I. By changing the wording you try to make it seem as if the nazis were the true liberators and the Allies were the bad guys. Rex 14:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Im sorry I even bothered, though it just proves how helpless you are in the face of solid arguments by turning this into a 'cops and robbers' scenario. Ulritz 14:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Do I need to repeat myself Ulritz? YOU are the one editing this article and yet I have to defend the previous version?! Who do you think you are? You refer to a non existant discussion all the time in your edit (or rather revert) summaries and when a discussion finally develops you refuse to take part. Are you sure you want to be a wikipedian?! Rex 14:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Austria was no more "liberated" than Germany was, and the idea that it is is a species of Austrian revisionism designed to free Austria from being guilty of Nazi atrocities. Certainly, a majority in Austria before March 1938 probably didn't support the Nazis, but the same is true of Germany before 1933. There was a large Austrian Nazi community, and Austria was certainly not a conquered territory - it was part of the Reich. Saying that Austria was "liberated" is to buy into a myth that the Austrians created to avoid having to deal with their Nazi past - which they did successfully enough that they decided to elect a known war criminal as president in a fit of pique, something which would be unheard of in Germany itself. Beyond that, you guys seem to be completely talking past each other. john k 01:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Well put John k. BTW the current formulation is much better, but the whole WWII section needs expansion - I will work on that if I get the chance as this is an area I've done research in. Dmhaglund 10:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Source of Information[edit]

This website has information on the history of Austria that might be useful. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 08:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC).


Notably absent on this page. I'm going to flag it and will periodically try to add some, primarily for the 20th Century period with which I am relatively familiar. Dmhaglund 10:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep I think everyone loves tags,
but maybe it isn't necassary to reference everything on this page, I think that one should reference the "Main Pages" instead.
--Lumber Jack 23:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Well but some things that may be disputed need citations. For example in the section allied occupation "The Communist Party of Austria (KPÖ), who had hardly any support in the Austrian electorate" has citation and is according to wiki sources of the election of 1949 not correct. According to them they had 210.000 votes or 5,1% in 1949. Thats definitly a minor political party but thats not really "hardly any support". In general I think this part of the sentence is unnecessary anyway.Kmw2700 (talk) 04:08, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

overlong sentences[edit]

Grüß Gott,

does anyone else think the following sentence is a bit long? It is from the section about the 30 Years War:

"His forced conversions or evictions carried out in the midst of the Thirty Years' War, which with the later general success of the Protestants therefore had greatly negative consequences for Habsburg control of the Holy Roman Empire itself, while these campaigns within the Habsburg hereditary lands were largely successful in religiously purifying his demesnes, leaving the Austrian Emperors thereafter with much greater control within their hereditary power base— although Hungary was never successfully re-Catholicized—but one much reduced in population and economic might while less vigorous and weakened as a nation-state."

Also, what does "demesnes" mean - is it some specific Austrian term? (talk) 19:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Austria-Hungary was not the only multinational state in 1867[edit]

Great Britain was also multinational. (Irish Scottish English etc...) English suppressed their language and culture. The other multinational state was France. Only 50% of population of France was French in 1850. The local identities of these ethnic minorities were stronger than french identity in 1870 yet. These minority languages based on different grammar and words. They weren't closer to french than Italian or Spanish language. French nationalism and forced assimilation grew the ratio of French mother tongue and identity from 50% to 91% in 1900.

Russian Empire was similarly multiethnic country too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:18, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

External Links[edit]

The external links are linking to irrelevant sites, possibly phishing sites. Can anyone confirm that the links are not heading to the correct location? If you can confirm this, a revision seems most prudent.

--Eichermacher (talk) 18:09, 2 October 2011 (UTC) why marconmanni??? and another thing what aboit ostergothic... they settled in teh are what is nowadays austria.. and ha dteh ostergothic kindgom there — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:18, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

His forced conversions or evictions carried out in the midst of the Thirty Years' War, which with the later general success of the Protestants therefore had greatly negative consequences for Habsburg control of the Holy Roman Empire itself, while these campaigns within the Habsburg hereditary lands were largely successful in religiously purifying his demesnes, leaving the Austrian Emperors thereafter with much greater control within their hereditary power base— although Hungary was never successfully re-Catholicized—but one much reduced in population and economic might while less vigorous and weakened as a nation-state.

Badly written[edit]

The article is written in atrocious English. Could some knowledgeable person rewrite the following passages please.

In terms of human costs, the Thirty Years' wars many economic, social, and population dislocations caused by the hardline methods adopted by Ferdinand's strict counter-reformation measures and almost continual employment of mercenary field armies contributed significantly to the loss of life and tragic depopulation of all the German states, during a war which some estimates put the civilian loss of life as high as fifty-percent overall. Studies mostly cite the causes of death due to starvation or as caused (ultimately by the lack-of-food induced) weakening of resistance to endemic diseases which repeatedly reached epidemic proportions amongst the general Central European population—the German states were the battle ground and staging areas for the largest mercenary armies theretofore, and the armies foraged amongst the many provinces stealing the food of those people forced onto the roads as refugees, or still on the lands, regardless of their faith and allegiances. Both townsmen and farmers were repeatedly ravaged and victimized by the armies on both sides leaving little for the populations already stressed by the refugees from the war or fleeing the Catholic counter-reformation repressions under Ferdinand's governance.[6]

Good Article[edit]

I have done quite a bit of work on some sections. Please Note that this is rated a Good Article in the German Wiki, so that would be a good model to emulate --Michael Goodyear (talk) 17:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

It is worth noting that the German version has recently undergone considerable revision--Michael Goodyear (talk) 15:33, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
The page has been brought up to to at least the standard of the German version, as far as the beginning of the Middle Ages Michael Goodyear (talk) 05:31, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Upgraded to the beginning of Habsburg rule --Michael Goodyear (talk) 03:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
To elevation of Duchy in 1453 --Michael Goodyear (talk) 02:45, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
To death of Ferdinand I (1564) and the further division of the lands --Michael Goodyear (talk) 04:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Revised up to onset of Thirty Year's War and succession of Ferdinand III (1618)--Michael Goodyear (talk) 17:49, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Revision taken to end of Thirty Year's War (1648) --Michael Goodyear (talk) 17:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Accession of Maria Theresa (1740)
Death of Maria Theresa (1780)
Ascent of Francis II (1792)


Since this is an article about Austria, and not for instance the Holy Roman Empire, I suggest that we prioritise people's titles and dates as rulers of Austria, since their other titles and dates may be different. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 02:03, 18 October 2012 (UTC)


Hello, I propose two changes to the article's lead: 1. "from 1156 an independent duchy (later archduchy) ..." 2. "as a dual monarchy with Hungary"

Best Edward Kitaju (talk) 02:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Seems reasonable - done. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 03:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

World War One[edit]

Given how long this article is, I cannot believe how short the WWI section is. Not even a link to main article. I was looking for information on the allied occupation of Austria, guess I will have to look elsewhere. SpinningSpark 18:03, 24 November 2013 (UTC)


Under the section "Anschluss and unification with Germany (1938–1945)" the comment is made "With a Nazi administration already in place and the country integrated into the Third Reich as so-called Ostmark, a referendum on 10 April approved of the annexation with a majority of 99.73%." This has been used in post war victor's propaganda to establish the general guilt of the Austrian population, however the article fails to mention that it was by no means a secret ballot and any voter voting against annexation risked being shot. Nevertheless some brave souls did vote against it. The ultimate source for this interpretation appears to be Shirer, who despite his presence during some events is unreliable on many matters of interpretation, except the Holocaust where he is a renowned source. But see p429 which contradicts much of what he says later about Austrian complicity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jafdip (talkcontribs) 07:36, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of Austria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC)