Through the centuries the Gottscheers and Slovenes had been good neighbors. The former Austrian monarchy likewise had a good relationship with the latter. The relationship began to deteriorate only with the onset of nationalism in the nineteenth century. The entry in the "Großen Brockhaus", Volume XIX, 1934 edition, page 116 for Primoz Truber, whom the Slovenes regard very highly, shows how great the German tolerance already was in the sixteenth century:

Truber, Primoz (Primus Truber), Slovenian clergyman and writer, born in Rascica (Carniola), on June 8, 1508, died in Derendingen (Württemberg) on July 25, 1586, was canon in Ljubljana and vicar in Carniola and Carinthia. T. was particularly devoted to spreading the Reformation among the Slovenes and established the Slovenian written language. After being expelled in 1547, he went to Germany where he translated the "Catechismus in der windischen Sprache" in 1550 and 1556, an Abecedarium (1559, 1555), the New Testament (1557—1582), the Psalter (1556) among others, into Slovenian and had them printed (by Ungnad in Urach in Tübingen). In 1561 he was recalled to Ljubljana by the Carniolian estates but had to leave the country once more in 1565. For a brief period, he was a minister in Lauffen (Neckar), after 1566 in Deringen. Truber's letters were published in 1897 by v. Th. Elze.

To be sure, a lecture given in June 1970 by the certified engineer Milan Ciglar shows how difficult it still was for a Slovenian intellectual of recent times to find a middle course between reason, taxed tolerance, and emotionally charged nationalism when the topic dealt with the Gottscheers. Ciglar, a forestry expert, was at that time director of the Slovenian institute for forestry and lumber in Ljubljana. He spoke to Tyrolean forestry experts in Gottschee about "Zerfall und Neuaufbau einer Landschaft, dargestellt am Beispiel des Gottscheerlandes" (Decline and Renewal
of a Terrain Using the Gottscheer Region as an Example). For the Gottscheers his statements are highly informative. Hopefully, one will not hold it against them if they at first view its content critically, even though Ciglar shows a certain attempt at objectivity.

The lecture was given in German and this is probably the first time that it is being discussed.

Above all, the openness with which Milan Ciglar depicts what his countrymen did or did not do with the region that the Gottscheers left is noteworthy. He, the forester, quite naturally emphasizes the forest as man's challenging partner. In his opinion, of all the regions of Slovenia, the Gottscheer region has changed the least. Red beech and pine are the most common trees, but spruce and maple can also be found everywhere. Ciglar writes on page 9 of the typewritten manuscript: "The Gottscheer region thus is characterized by a thriving, indestructible forest."

The lecturer, historically accurate, states that the region was settled by Germans in the thirties of the fourteenth century. He lists Upper Carniola and East Tyrol as their land of origin, thus recognizing the research findings of the Viennese professors Dr. Kranzmayer and Dr. Maria Hornung. He does not mention Thuringia or Franconia. He continues that the German settlers entered a practically unsettled region.

These are well-known historical facts. The Gottscheers only begin to pay close attention when Ciglar goes into the reasons for their decision to resettle and deals with the behavior of his own countrymen after the restoration of Yugoslavia.

Ciglar gives the following critical account of the resettlement decision on page 15 of his presentation: "A horrible crime was committed against the Gottscheers in 1941 when, in accordance with an agreement between the Germans and the Italians, the entire German-speaking population resettled in the border regions of the former German Reich near Brezice (Rann) and Krsko (Gurkfeld), from which in turn the native Slovenian populace had been ousted. What astonishes everybody about this emigration is that, even though the Gottscheer farmers had lived on their land for 600 years, they were not deeply rooted and apparently did not feel themselves sufficiently bound to the homeland. One thus has to ask if they perhaps had always considered themselves to be strangers and if the emotional ties to their ancestors were too weak, or if they were momentarily blinded when they emigrated, or if they had considered emigrating for some time. There surely are several reasons for their emigration which cannot be analyzed here in detail."

The author of this book finds Ciglar's quoted views on the resettlement of the Gottscheers to be subjective and imprecise. When he read the presentation, the writer (Ciglar) did not notice that the introduction and the conclusion invalidate the content of the middle section.

Initially, the presenter speaks of a "crime" that was committed against the Gottscheers with the German-Italian agreement. That can only mean that the Gottscheers did not "emigrate" voluntarily. Ciglar is too well informed about Gottscheer matters not to have known this fact. The totally unfounded insinuations that the Gottscheers had perhaps always perceived themselves as strangers on their own land and had not had any real ties to it and had shown too little attachment to their ancestors and possibly had considered emigrating for some time are thus
only diversionary tactics. It is an attempt to attribute the entire responsibility for the dissolution of the former linguistic island of Gottschee to its inhabitants and the German Reich and to cover up the part that Slovenia played in the psychic desolation of the Gottscheers between 1918 and the "crime" -year of 1941. To be sure, the speaker does not feel quite comfortable in his role as judge of the Gottscheers, for otherwise he would have omitted the comment that there were" surely several reasons for the emigration." Yes, there were! They are given in the book at hand.

Furthermore, who is this "everybody" who supposedly was astonished about the "emigration" of the Gottscheers? The Slovene, the Austrian, or the citizen of the German Reich? In all three instances, only a very small circle of political experts or delegates concerned themselves with the problems that resulted because of the existence of Gottschee. Everyone in these circles knew that the Gottscheers, or more accurately, the rest of the Gottscheer people, did not emigrate but were resettled. The way in which this was done can only be comprehended when one
considers what the conditions were at that time. It is inaccurate not to mention the resistance and thus to pretend that the population left voluntarily. The assertion that the Gottscheers had no ties to their land is so absurd that the "Jahrhundertbuch" does not have to bother responding to it. Its author simply allows himself to ask
how long the Gottscheers would have had to remain on their land in order to develop a sense of homeland if 600 years were not sufficient for it? And if they were not sufficient, why then the Slovenian extermination policy after the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian empire?

Ciglar could not report anything about the reconstruction plans for the destroyed Gottscheer region that would have been comparable to the achievements of the German settlers of the fourteenth century. He simply reports the following: "They (this refers to the Slovenian planners after the establishment of the socialistic Yugoslavian state, author's note) set up a big, ideal model of a generously designed socialistic agricultural region in which new settlements were neither encouraged nor permitted."

It is apparent that it would not have made much sense to resume the centuries-old Gottscheer farming and settlement method with its severely subdivided land at the point where the resettlers had stopped, particularly since most of the settlements had been completely destroyed. The Gottscheers, too, would have changed their ways if they had not been ousted. This was already very apparent in the thirties. But it seems like a retreat before the primitive power of the forest for the young socialist society of Slovenia to surrender land which it should have kept cleared as a food source for future generations. But that is the concern of the Slovenian people themselves. What interests the Gottscheers more is Ciglar's statement that "some plans failed." Indirectly, he even admits that they failed to consider "all natural factors, population factors and economic factors." In another section on page 17 of the manuscript, he literally states: "Later, seasonal workers came to this region but only a small number of them stayed. They lived more off promises and expectations than off the results of their own work and effort. Thus, the population changed often at that time and those who stayed are probably those of whom one cannot always say that they felt bound to the land." (Had they not been told that it was the personal patriotic duty of every Slovene to take possession of the land that the Gottscheers had vacated by vigorously colonizing it anew in the name of the entire nation?)

Ciglar said that the city of Gottschee was rebuilt in a modern style, with streets like those in Ljubljana. A lumber, chemical, and metal industry was established which thus brought new elements into the landscape.

About the destruction of the cultivated land of the Gottscheers and the unique structures that were left behind, the speaker literally said: "But the land around the city of Gottschee remained lifeless, like a deserted cemetery. Supposedly time destroyed all structures, roofs, the bell towers of all little churches, the old village wells dried up, the fruit trees were not picked and progressively degenerated from year to year. The little chapels and village linden trees were totally neglected. The builders who built hunting lodges and isolated houses in the woods took the building material from the old settlements and thus destroyed the last witnesses of former times. Later, the religious statues were placed in private homes, churches, and antique collections. Whoever managed to get around in Gottschee during the years immediately following the war was able to amass a considerable fortune simply from the church treasures which were available everywhere. He did not even pay the state or the church." The speaker holds the "snob" and not the Slovenes in general responsible for this.

Milan Ciglar describes the "charging forest" as follows to his Tyrolean colleagues in the field: "No one had, however, noticed the most enormous change immediately after the war, but only ten years later, the incessant reclamation of the farmed land. The reclamation had originally already begun one hundred years earlier, during the time before the First World War . . . Even for those only fleetingly acquainted with the conditions in Gottschee, this advance of the forest is occurring at a downright fantastic rate. One can quite confidently maintain that the forest has since reclaimed about 30,000 hectares, about 300 square kilometers, that is, a third of the entire surface area of Gottschee." Since this estimate from the year 1970, this figure has most likely risen to 36,000 to 37,000 hectares. The certified engineer from Ljubljana continues: "In view of this fact, one must now imagine what this region will look like in another thirty years, nothing but forest, forest, everywhere forest."

This is as far as the author's vitality carried him. Erich Petschauer died on September 6, 1977. He knew of his impending fate and had asked his brother to complete the final chapter, "The Circle Closes," according to his notes and his wishes. Hermann Petschauer fulfilled his last wish.

("Jahrhundertbuch der Gottscheer", Dr. Erich Petschauer, 1980)

www.gottschee.de

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Artikel