Kočevska, pusta in prazna: nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book |
| Language: | Slovenian |
| Published: |
Ljubljana
Modrijan
2005
|
| Edition: | 1. izd. |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Item Description: | Zsfassung in engl. Sprache |
| Physical Description: | 829 S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. |
| ISBN: | 9612410720 |
Staff View
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV021545935 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20150204 | ||
| 007 | t| | ||
| 008 | 060410s2005 xx abd| |||| 00||| slv d | ||
| 020 | |a 9612410720 |9 961-241-072-0 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)123963720 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV021545935 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a slv | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 |a DE-19 |a DE-Re13 | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a DR1475.K63 | |
| 084 | |a 7,41 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Ferenc, Mitja |d 1960- |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)1066348766 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Kočevska, pusta in prazna |b nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev |c Mitja Ferenc |
| 250 | |a 1. izd. | ||
| 264 | 1 | |a Ljubljana |b Modrijan |c 2005 | |
| 300 | |a 829 S. |b Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Zsfassung in engl. Sprache | ||
| 648 | 4 | |a Geschichte 1900-2000 | |
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 1947-1962 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 1944-1947 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Geschichte | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Weltkrieg (1939-1945) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Germans |z Slovenia |z Kočevje (Občina) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Gottscheers | |
| 650 | 4 | |a World War, 1939-1945 |z Slovenia |z Kočevje (Občina) | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Neubesiedlung |0 (DE-588)4465270-7 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Vertreibung |0 (DE-588)4063299-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Deutsche |0 (DE-588)4070334-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 4 | |a Kočevje (Slovenia : Občina) |x History |y 20th century | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Kočevje |z Region |0 (DE-588)4021703-6 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Kočevje |z Region |0 (DE-588)4021703-6 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Vertreibung |0 (DE-588)4063299-4 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Deutsche |0 (DE-588)4070334-4 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 3 | |a Geschichte 1944-1947 |A z |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 689 | 1 | 0 | |a Kočevje |z Region |0 (DE-588)4021703-6 |D g |
| 689 | 1 | 1 | |a Neubesiedlung |0 (DE-588)4465270-7 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | 2 | |a Geschichte 1947-1962 |A z |
| 689 | 1 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=014762094&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=014762094&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 307.09 |e 22/bsb |f 09044 |g 4973 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 307.09 |e 22/bsb |f 09045 |g 4973 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 307.09 |e 22/bsb |f 09046 |g 4973 |
| 943 | 1 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-014762094 | |
Record in the Search Index
| _version_ | 1826763350772547584 |
|---|---|
| adam_text |
Vsebina
Uvod
I. Nemško jezikovno območje
1. Nemci na območju
in na
2.
A. Poimenovanje
B.
C.
Č.
D.
II.
do
1. Kočevska od naselitve kočevskih Nemcev
do leta 1918
A. Poseiitev in
B.
C.
Č. Izseljevanje
D. Prebivalstvo od
E. Národnostná
F.
G. Šolstvo
H.
2.
A. Oblastni ukrepi po prevratu
B. Upravno-politična ureditev
С
Č. Politično življenje kočevskih Nemcev
D. Kulturno življenje
E. Šolstvo
F. Demografske
G.
H. Kočevski Nemci pred
Kočevska
III. Preselitev kočevskih Nemcev
1. Italijanska okupacija
2.
A. Priprave
B. Pogodba
С
3.
A. Prodaja
B.
IV.
okupator
v
1. Kočevska
2.
3.
A. Kočevska po veliki ¡talijanski ofenzivi
B. Kočevska po kapitulaciji Italije
С
V.
v
1.
2.
A. Kulturna dediščina kočevskih Nemcev med preseljevanjem
3.
A. Do kapitulacije Italije
B. Po
VI.
po vojni
1.
VII. Usoda
po vojni
1.
imetja pred novembrom i944
Vsebina
2.
DO KOČEVSKIH NeMCEV MED VOJNO
3.
4.
na Kočevskem po vojni
5.
in na
A. Število
B.
C.
Č.
VIII.
1. Pravni predpisi
2.
3.
4.
5.
na Kočevskem
6.
nemske manjšine
kulturni sporazum
»nediskriminatorne denacionalizacije«
IX.
po vojni
1. Obnova podeželja, industrije
A. Nacrti
B. Obnova podeželja
C. Gospodarska izraba opuščenih naselij
Č. Krediti, denarna sredstva, nacrti obnove
D. Obnova rudarstva
E. Mesto Kočevje
2.
A. Razvojna preusmeritev gospodarstva
B. Vprašanje
C. Pomanjkanje delovne sile
Kočevska
Č.
Đ. Zaraščanje kmetijskih površin
X.
1. Število prebivalcev
2.
3.
4.
A. Prebivalstvo Kočevske glede na kraj rojstva, območje
in leto doselitve
XI.
1.
A. Organizacija uprave narodne imovine do začetka leta
B. Obdelovanje nekdanjih emonskih
po osvoboditvi
2.
A. Zakon
B. Površina emonske zemlje
C. Agrarne skupnosti
Č. Arondacije
3.
A. Kolonizacija
po drugi svetovni vojni
B. Kolonizacija Kočevske
C. Nacrt kolonizacije
na Kočevskem
Č.
D. Prisilna kolonizacija
4.
A. Pravni predpisi
B. Nacrti
C.
Č. Državno kmetijsko posestvo
D. Zasebno kmečko gospodarstvo
5.
A. Ustanavljanje
B. Kočevske kmetijsko-delavske zadruge
ustanavljanja na
Vsebina
С.
Č. Ukinitev
6.
A.
B. Obseg gozdnih površin
7.
8.
XII.
Kočevska
1.
2.
A. Vzroki za nastanek
B. Izgradnja
C. Režim
Č.
D. Gospodarjenje na zaprtem območju
E. Značilnosti
F. Kazenska taborišča
G. Gotenica in Škrilj
XIII.
kočevskih Nemcev
1.
A.
B.
C. Stanje
v
2.
3.
A. Osnovne sole
B. Gimnazija
C. Dijaški
Č. Druge šolske ustanove
Ą.
A. Preimenovanja, pristavki, združitve, razdružitve
in razglasitve
B. Kočevska
Kočevska
XIV.
XV. Summary
XVI.
1. Viri
A. Arhivi
B.
С
Č. Uradni listi
D. Statistično gradivo
2.
3.
Seznam naselij
Cerkve
Seznam kratic
XVII.
1. Imensko kazalo
2.
The fate of
is a subject that has been all but banished from the Slovene cultural con¬
sciousness. It has been avoided in spite of the fact that
relatively extensive region with a specific, varied, interesting and certainly-
tragic history. The secluded and inhospitable region was settled in the
14tla century, but during the Second "World War its German population
was practically completely resettled. What remained of their culture was
then systematically destroyed. The hatred bred by war did not fail to
leave a lasting mark on
The name
of Slovenia inhabited for six centuries, until
tlers of German stock, who formed a more or less compact, ethnically
mixed "island" amidst the Slovene population. The Gottscheers were
among the oldest German ethnic communities outside the borders of
Germany and Austria proper, and the only agrarian German-speaking
population island in the Slovene territory after the First World War.
Their settlement in the region was carried out by the Ortenburgs, a Ger¬
man aristocratic family which, for economic reasons, colonised
with serfs from Carinthia and East Tyrol.
Kočevska
In mid-April
The expectations of the Gottscheers that Germany would occupy the
region were not met.
(together called the Province of Ljubljana) were annexed to the Kingdom
709
Kočevska
of Italy. The Gottscheers, and especially their leaders, who had been
looking forward to
hern Slovenia occupied by the Germans, were deeply disappointed by
the Italian occupation. The German fascist authorities who were reset¬
tling Germans from occupied territories to the Reich, in fact had the
same solution in mind for the Gottscheers. The Nazi officials adopted
a resolution to resettle the Gottscheers either during the initial war in
Yugoslavia or soon after they occupied Slovenia. The idea of resettle¬
ment, however, was not new to the Gotscheers because they had dis¬
cussed it with the fascist authorities in Germany two years before the
occupation. The territory earmarked for the resettlement of the Got¬
tscheers and other German minorities (from Dobrudja,
Bessarabia) was located in the
Dreieck)
dred kilometres long and ten to fifteen kilometres wide stretch of ter¬
ritory between the Province of Ljubljana and Independent State of
Croatia. To this purpose, the Nazis first deported most of the Slovene
inhabitants (about
sus of March
2754
occupied themselves with crop farming and stockbreeding, and only
families with crafts. The total area of land owned by the Gottscheers
was
The governments of the German Reich and the Kingdom of Italy
reached an agreement on the resettlement in Rome on August
The German resettlement company, called Deutsche
handgesellschaft
and sold it to the Italian real estate office
(organized in so called
by
1942.
a couple of hundred people, were resettled to Germany, and an insignif¬
icant number of people were not allowed to resettle. The idea of the
Nazis was that the area
form a German bastion. The resettled people were to protect the south¬
eastern border of the German Reich "with the plough and by the sword".
110
XV.
To protect the cultural heritage of the Gottscheers and its trans¬
fer to the new settlement area, the Nazi authorities set up a special cul¬
tural commission. The commission operated in
Ljubljana from the beginning of October
June
of a severe winter, while lacking both adequate premises and assistance
from the local population. The commission accomplished only a small
part of its planned tasks.
After the resettlement of the Gottscheers, who had to leave behind
all of their real estate and two thirds of their livestock, the villages and
hamlets in which they had lived were largely left uninhabited. The re¬
settlement of the majority population left about
gion, mostly in the town of
of villages were left deserted. The Italian government tried to resettle
the area with tenants who would pay the
of their produce, but settling did not go according to plans. Very few
of the tenants were from other regions of Slovenia; most of them were
Slovenes from
timber in Italy, the
Kočevska,
of farming land, with Italian settlers.
The occupation forces held only the town of
served as an important strategic defence post on the Ljubljana-Delni-
ce-Bay of
the Partisan army and bombing by the allied forces and was greatly
damaged. Among the many badly damaged houses and outbuildings was
the Auersperg Castle. From May
countryside, while mainly held by the Partisans army, was often travers¬
ed by different armed forces and the deserted villages of the Gottscheers
were hard-stricken. The greatest damage was inflicted by the large-scale
Italian offensive in the summer of
down abandoned villages to prevent the Partisans from using the desert¬
ed houses for accommodation. Of all the areas in
Rog
suffered the greatest devastation as the Italian forces destroyed practi¬
cally every single village. After the Italian offensive, devastation con¬
tinued, albeit with decreasing intensity, for the next three years.
Ill
Kočevska
The property of the
In June
(ECLF) adopted a decree concerning the allocation and management
of the former land of the resettled Gottscheers in the liberated territo¬
ries. It appointed the Liberation Front as the representative of the
Slovene people to manage the property and distribute the land for free
use (but not into private property). The ECLF invalidated all the sales
and other contracts made by the Italian
mined that the existing conditions were to be respected until further
notice. Individuals who had given possession of farms by the
Office before the decree came into effect were allowed free use of all
of the land granted to them. With the exception of some areas, land were
not assigned to individuals, but was worked collectively. The reasons for
this decision were not of an ideological or political nature, but merely
practical: the extensive estates of the resettled Germans had to be cul¬
tivated, but there was not enough manpower nor equipment tools.
After the capitulation of Italy, the responsibilities of public admin¬
istration in the liberated territory were assumed by the Administrative
Committee for the Slovene Liberated Territory. One of its last measures
was a circular letter, dated February
expropriated and
decree, the Administrative Committee's letter ordered all land, includ¬
ing the estates of the Gottscheers to be redistributed. This meant, among
other things, that land was taken away from those who had taken pos¬
session of it before the ECLF decree came into effect. Consequently, the
Administrative Committee did not ratify the contracts concluded with
the Italian
therefore repartition was resumed immediately after the Italian capit¬
ulation, particularly in the winter and spring of
these leases and the allocation of properties to other interested parties
led to complaints, the processing and resolving of which lasted until the
spring of
circular letter issued by the Administrative Committee in cases where land
of resettled Gottscheers was taken from those who had assumed it for cul¬
tivation or use before the ECLF decree of June
effect. The restitution or repartition of the land for tenancy was ordered.
Ill
XV.
The expropriated estates of the former German ethnic minority
in
Commission (NPMC) from spring
until the commission's dissolution in
aged all the expropriated, abandoned or public property in Slovenia.
But the
NPMC divided the estates over several sections, each one led by an
appointed administrator who was responsible for the entire holdings
(buildings, livestock, fields and forests) and subordinated to the regional
and local commissioners of the NPMC. One of the primary duties of
these administrators was to ensure that the land would not remain unbro¬
ken. Cultivation of the abandoned
the lack of manpower, tools, machinery, seeds, and manure
that continued after the liberation
lands was cultivated. For practical reasons, cultivation of the fields was
done collectively and only areas where collective cultivation was unfeasi¬
ble were let to individual tenants.
The NPMC leased the
other estates for a period of one to three years. But this was the case
only in the eastern part of the former German language territory con¬
trolled by the Partisan army. Certain lands, especially those that were
in the vicinity of political or military premises in the
not leased out.
In its redistribution of land, the NPMC respected the provisions
of the decree of June
the owner of the estate, even if it had been acquired by lease or pur¬
chase. Those who had signed a lease or purchase contract with the
Emona
ly; they were given only preferential rights and could not actually own
the estate; if they continued to benefit from the land, they were bound
to the same commitments as the other interested parties. Those who
had signed a lease or purchase contract after June
standing with all the other interested parties.
By far the most difficulties, disputes and complaints were encoun¬
tered in the process of parcelling out of the vineyards in
Most parcels were subject to decisions dating back to spring
713
Kočevska
in compliance with the circular letter of the Management Commission
adopted in February
distributed, regardless of whether the leases had been signed before or
after the NPMC's decree. In resolving these problems, the NPMC
acted in accordance with the decree adopted by the Presidency of the
Antifascist Council of the National Liberation of Yugoslavia (ACNLY)
on November
property, state administration of absent persons' properties, confis¬
cation of properties forcibly alienated by the occupation army, and the
invalidity of any contracts made with the enemy, including the period
before the adoption of the ACNLY's decree. The Presidency of the
Slovene National Liberation Council (SNLC), as the ultimate body of
appeal, reaffirmed its decree of May
valid all contracts signed before June
Among the responsibilities of the NPMC was the use and distri¬
bution of timber from the
or issued permissions for felling, either payable or free of charge, to indi¬
viduals for the renovation of their homes, as well as to bodies and insti¬
tutions of the National Liberation Movement. It also permitted the use
of deserted
viduals notified the NPMC of their needs, and it either approved (or
rejected) the use and transport of goods from the estates belonging to
the national property. The Partisan field hospitals were the commission's
major "customers". In some cases the NPMC did not allow the use of
the inventory on abandoned estates. In addition to dealing with the use
of accommodation, outbuildings, land and forest, it also was responsi¬
ble for approving the use of inventory from the deserted or ruined
sawmills and water-mills, honouring the leases between timber mer¬
chants and the Gottscheers before their resettlement.
The property of the Gottscheers after the Second World War
After the Second World War, the fate of the German minority
in Slovenia would have been dreadful regardless of which side, the
Partisans or the anticommunist forces, had won. Both the new Yugoslav
authorities and the anticommunist camp envisaged already during the
war that the German minority would be expelled from the Slovene
114
XV.
national territory. As early as May
Protection of the People (DPP) started to deport groups of Germans
colonists from
resettlement area in the
By the midsummer of
Sava
home. In July
Slovenia. The third and most massive phase of the deportation of
Germans from Slovenia started in the second half of December
and included practically every single German in Slovenia. The key ele¬
ment determining the attitude of the Yugoslav authorities toward the
German population in Slovenia was undoubtedly the pro-Nazi stance
of the majority of the Germans, and their collaboration with the occu¬
pation forces against the Slovene population during the war. As else¬
where in Europe, it was these two factors which led people to believe
in the collective guilt of the German people, and the fate of Germans
in Slovenia was similar to that of many other German ethnic groups
in East Europe after the Second World War. Many of the Germans who
did not escape were confined to concentration camps
near Ptuj, Hrastovec near St. Lenart) by the Yugoslav authorities. From
there they were deported to Austria because the Slovene expellees had
to return to their homes and the greater part of the houses formerly
belonging to the Gottscheers were in ruins. Besides, national considera¬
tions led the Yugoslav authorities to reject any ideas of resettling the
greatly deserted
were quite suddenly and finally homeless. After being temporarily
housed in assembly camps in
and settled in various Austrian and German provinces; many of them
set off for the USA.
The property of the Gottscheers
settled
of ACNLY, as was the property of all the other Germans in Slovenia
and Yugoslavia. All Germans (the citizens of the German Reich and
those who were Yugoslav citizens) were declared public enemies by
the ACNLY's decree and all subsequent regulations. Their property itself
was treated as a "enemy property" which was to nationalised by the new
115
Kočevska
state of Yugoslavia. The confiscation procedures had been laid down dur¬
ing the war by the presidency of ACNLY, which had also appointed
state agencies to manager the seized property. The property of the
German population was declared state property by legally binding con¬
fiscation decrees. The new authorities justified the need for the nation¬
alization of German property by economic, strategic, material, ethical,
moral, homeland protection and ideological reasons. The decrees of con¬
fiscation of German property issued by district and municipal confis¬
cation committees. Appeals were reviewed by the regional and provin¬
cial confiscation committees. The committees compiled a register of the
property taken over from the Italian
from individual municipal land registers. These protocols had been
made by the
of persons who had applied with the
cial document proving the person's German allegiance.
The Decree of the presidency of ACNLY nullified all the legal
deals made by the occupation forces during their rule over Yugoslav ter¬
ritories. The authorities thus abolished the agreement between the Ger¬
man and Italian governments concerning the resettlement of the Ger¬
man citizens and individuals of German ethnicity from the Province
of Ljubljana, made on August
visions based on the said decree. The agreement indeed provided that
the property of those individuals who opted for Germany was assigned
by and payable to the German state. Since the property of those who
had opted for Germany preserved its "German" status, regardless of the
above mentioned annulment of legal deals, it was confiscated and be¬
came state property.
There were a number of controversial cases in Slovenia, including
Kočevska
cation committees. These were dealt with jointly by the NPMC, the
DPP, the Public Prosecutor's office, the presidency of National Gov¬
ernment of Slovenia, the Ministries of Justice and Internal Affairs,
and the State Administration for National Property (SANP). Their
propositions reveal that the NPMC proposed solutions that were more
benevolent, viable and advantageous to the Germans than those sub¬
mitted by the other agencies which abided strictly by the law and
716
XV.
treated each and every individual who had opted for Germany either
as a German or as a German citizen, even if they were Slovene nation¬
als. Those who did not opt for Germany and remained in
were allowed to keep their property. At the first judicial level, the
property of
committee resolved these cases on the basis of the political allegiance
of the claimants. When assessing the claimants' economic collabora¬
tion, the authorities tried to establish whether it had been voluntary,
high-risk, organised and constant. In
dispossessed of all their property by the regional confiscation committee
-
ing that after the capitulation of Italy, they had been promised and reas¬
sured by the then acting officials of the Slovene Liberation Front that
they would not be treated unfairly and that their individual freedom
would be preserved if they would not assist the German occupation
forces. Nevertheless and despite the fact that the views of the NPMC
and SANP often differed, in most cases only the legal provisions and
political "label" of individuals were taken into consideration.
The authorities also seized the estate of Prince Auersperg, which
was a f
estate. The land register thus recorded not only the Auersperg estate,
but also the prohibition of alienation and encumbrance of the said
estate. The confiscation decree shows that the estate was transferred to
the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY), without any restric¬
tions, because "the said notes (in the land register) have become irrele¬
vant". The confiscation records were extremely faulty, which resulted
in time-consuming second-level proceedings. The trustee's appeals (joint
for individual municipal land registers) were rejected by the district
confiscation commission in
estates had already been transferred to the
register, second-level decisions could not be issued before a formal
appeal by the trustee of
fiscation committee rejected the appeal on February
final decisions. In total,
were adopted. Abidance by the decree resulted in great changes in the
land ownership structure.
Ill
Kočevska
In Kočevska,
tion committees sometimes clashed with the DPP because of its spe¬
cific attitude toward the Germans and their property. The DPP main¬
tained that it would "control and protect the German property and
would allow no interference whatsoever in this regard", and reserved
the exclusive right of "deciding on matters of limiting the personal
freedom of any concerned German individual".
The confiscation procedure was completed by a entry in the land
register, but the procedure usually could not be accomplished in time
because of inadequate, faulty rulings and the slow process of law. When,
in
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of the People's Republic of Slovenia
took over the confiscation documents concerning the
discovered that not a single file had been resolved to completion.
As part of the confiscation issues related to the German property
in
particular case. The authorities did not start resolving the status of
these estates until
Committee (DPC) of
these "American" estates. The board was responsible for the upkeep of
the estates, accurate stock taking, collecting rent and taxes, and re¬
pairing the houses to prevent their decay. It operated until
most of the land was taken over by the Common National Property
(CNP)
Yugoslavia and the USA
owned real estate in Yugoslavia with an agreement made on July
on the compensation of American citizens dispossessed in Yugoslavia.
The agreement gave the owners the option to file a claim for compen¬
sation with the USA Commission for international claims in Washing¬
ton, where the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY) had
deposited seventeen million dollars. The property taken over by the
FPRY agencies was evaluated according to
ever no need to assess the value of the houses ruined and demolished
during and after the war, which was mostly the case.
Today, the issue of restitution of seized property to Gottscheers
is largely regulated by two acts. The first is the Denationalization Act,
718
XV.
which provides that nationalised property can be restored only to indi¬
viduals who were Yugoslav citizens at the time of confiscation. The reset¬
tled and expelled Gottscheers were not Yugoslav citizens. The second
is a decision by the Constitutional Court which in part invalidates the
principles stated in the decree by the ACNLY from November
about "collective guilt". The decisions grants the foreign citizens the
opportunity to prove that they were not disloyal to Yugoslavia during
the occupation. If they can prove it, they are then eligible for Slovene
citizenship which would automatically grant them the right to regain
their property. This decision by the Constitutional Court raised re¬
proaches by Austria, arguing that the decree promotes discriminatory
denationalization", that it runs against modern principles of law and
that it is not in line with European legal standards that someone has
to prove his innocence; quite contrary, it is guilt that has to be proven.
Slovenia refutes these reproaches among others by referring to inter¬
national conventions.
The attitude of the authorities towards the Germans who did not resettle
Based on the census conducted by the Germans in March
and the data on the number of Germans who were resettled from
Kočevska,
German ethnicity stayed behind in
possible to establish the number of people who lived in ethnically
mixed marriages. It is further unknown how many ethnic Germans were
executed by the National Liberation Movement during the war, but indi¬
vidual Germans appear on lists of people sentenced to death.
It is difficult to establish how many Germans did in fact remain
in
people who considered themselves German did not dare to publicly
declare themselves as such. According to data gathered by the Ministry
of Internal Affairs of the National Government of Slovenia, their num¬
ber was about
ethnically mixed marriages, mostly in
valley, on the eastern margin of
In
over forty ethnic Germans who had not resettled with the other
719
Kočevska
Gottscheers;
mostly resulted from the political labels
sympathiser of the German occupation authorities and the like
to them in the summer of
ing Germans. In the part of the German language area that belonged
to
they were "too old" to be interested in politics, or some members of
the family were "active participants" in the liberation war, or they were
"not opposed" to the National Liberation Army (NLA) or Liberation
Front. These different views of the Gottscheers had their roots in the
wartime period: the villages in the
liberated territory for most of the war, while the villages around
were mostly controlled by the occupation forces. Despite the fact that
the act on electoral registers and the instructions for its application effec¬
tively stripped the German population of their right to vote, it seems
that most of the Gottscheers who were not expelled by the authorities
had voting rights in
share of German individuals who were deprived of their right to vote
is impossible to establish. The position of the ethnic Germans who left
Yugoslavia after the war ended (beside those who emigrated or were
expelled) was quite different: they lost their citizenship. While the law
of
ty (opting for the German state was considered an act of disloyalty),
an amendment to the law adopted in
of Germany nationality were not citizens of the Federal People's
Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY). The legal provisions of the FPRY con¬
cerning Germany and German nationals were made obsolete in
when decrees declaring the cessation of a state of war with Austria and
Germany came into force. In
Yugoslavia signed an agreement allowing the remaining
to emigrate to Germany.
The first post-war census, conducted in
nic Germans and Austrians within the then borders of the People's
Republic of Slovenia
gained after the war, this number represents only slightly more than
of the population that had declared German as their mother tongue in
720
XV.
the census of
dence in the territory of Slovenia within the then borders), or a little
less than one tenth of those who were citizens of Yugoslavia at the time.
Despite the huge decrease in the numbers and share of ethnic Germans
in Slovenia, the census of
Germans or Austrians of all post-war censuses in Slovenia. According
to the first official post-war census, that of
at most up to
barely
in the
Apparently, the Germans from the
in
general population of
workers, retired people and individuals living on state benefits, and
less farmers, craftsmen
sus, the total number of Germans and Austrians had dropped to less
than
those were not indigenous: three quarters of them had been born abroad.
After Slovenia became an independent state, the matter of recog¬
nition of the German minority became a constant source of contention
in the Slovene-Austrian relations. Austria insisted on Slovenia's recog¬
nition of the Austrian ethnic minority
time refused to recognise the new state as a successor of the Austrian
State Treaty. Slovenia insisted in its opposition to making any mention
of Germans as a minority in Slovenia for a long time, and when it fi¬
nally agreed to discuss the matter, it was partly out of fear that Austria
might veto Slovenia's accession to the European Union. In Slovenia, the
issue of recognising an Austrian minority was also associated with the
denationalization claims by Austrian citizens. It was undoubtedly a
very sensitive political matter for both countries. After several years of
negotiations, the two countries settled the status of the German-spea¬
king ethnic group in Slovenia by means of a cultural agreement which
guarantees the rights of the German-speaking ethnic minority in accor¬
dance with the 61st article of the Constitution of the Republic of Slo¬
venia, thus establishing a sufficiently clear distinction between collec¬
tive and the individual rights.
121
Kočevska
The fate of settlements and houses, and the matter of their reconstruction
By the end of the war, half the villages lay deserted, and after the
war most of them were not repopulated. The last official census in the
Kingdom of Yugoslavia, in
in the area, while the ethnic land register of the
composed in
1262 - i.e.
ruins at the time. The census conducted in July
(89)
this number only increased.
By the end of the war, almost two thirds
3945
the entire country. Damage on such a scale had not been sustained by any
other Slovene region or district. While the number of houses in
was only
destroyed and damaged houses amounted to
Slovenia. In some areas of the region, particularly in the settlements of
the pre-war communities of
were virtually no liveable dwellings left, or just a handful of houses that
hat not been completely demolished. In the post-war period nobody
serious considered reconstruction of the utterly destroyed villages in the
remotest areas
resources were committed to rebuilding the villages in the valleys and
repairing the material damage caused by the war
The reconstruction plans adopted in
lages that were only partially destroyed, still inhabited, and preferably
near road and railway facilities. The same attitude continued through¬
out the next period, when, for purposes of industrialisation, people were
actively encouraged to migrate from the countryside to the towns,
where they could provide the much-needed industrial workforce; nobody
considered it necessary to rebuild places that had been completely de¬
stroyed. Therefore, thousands of burnt-down buildings soon fell into
decay and turned into heaps of rubble. On the other hand, the recon¬
struction period initiated several plans to develop a socialist agriculture
that were not well thought-through and eventually all failed.
Discussions on the post-war economic reconstruction of
had started even before the end of the war and were mostly conducted
722
XV.
within the economic development departments of the presidency of the
Slovene National Liberation Council (SNLC). It was planned to use land
of the Gottscheers used for "exemplary stockbreeding and pasture
farming", resulting in an "exemplary mega plant" that would serve as
a model to follow. According to the plan,
autonomy and become an autonomous economic unit relying on two
key branches: stockbreeding and forestry.
The reconstruction plan for Slovenia separated, in contents as well
as time schedule, the reconstruction of towns from that of the country¬
side. Unlike the revival of the economy, which the authorities deemed
to be the principal priority and to be started immediately and accord¬
ing to plans, the reconstruction of towns and the countryside in
was to be only provisional and temporary. Systematic and final rebuild¬
ing was planned to begin in
struction works in
textile and woodworking industry. Only modestly developed and con¬
centrated in the town of
of two textile factories, a coal mine and a number of saw-mills; no
companies existed in any other branch. Soon after the liberation, the
coal mine and the Tekstilana factory were refitted for production. The
Slavoteks and
tively
Kočevje, Grčarice
Most of the saw-mills in the countryside were destroyed during the war
operations; even the less damaged were not repaired because they were
considered unprofitable. Soon after the liberation, the saw-mill in
čevje
repaired.
During the initial post-war years, the reconstruction of the coun¬
tryside was led by reconstruction cooperatives in
Kočevska
berk, Dolenja
Semič
abolished; by October
Kočevska.
struction companies and contractors.
723
Kočevska
The work of the reconstruction cooperatives concentrated only
on buildings in villages that were still inhabited. Rebuilding hundreds
of houses in deserted villages was not possible, for there was neither
manpower nor building material available. Anyway, it is doubtful that
the reconstruction of deserted villages would have been worth the
effort. Uninhabited areas were used only as hay meadows and, partly,
for pasturing or fruit-growing. Reconstruction could only be brought
about with sufficient material and financial means, manpower, and co¬
lonisation
tions for the
greatest obstacle would be the lack of unqualified manpower.
Prisoners of war could not be employed in the task on a long-term
basis, the repatriated workers were mostly qualified, and the Slovene
workers were more attracted by the renovated industry and its new
branches; finally, soliciting exclusively unqualified manpower from the
other Yugoslav republics would have been sensitive political issue.
As the colonisation of
renovation was halted. It is impossible to quote data on the renovation
achieved in the area under study in the first post-war years; they were
gathered only at the district level and even those that are availably
differ widely. The share of buildings renovated in the first two years
after the liberation show that the lowest percentages of renovated
houses was recorded in the districts where the worst devastation
occurred. The lowest percentages were recorded in the Kocevje district,
24%,
was
The disorder and ruins in the town witnessed to the devastation
inflicted upon
heaviest damage was wrought upon the the town's centre which was
practically obliterated by bombing and in battle. Though most of the
funds invested in the district after the liberation were used for the reno¬
vation of
organised not massive enough, and much had to be made up for in later
years. For this reason, the social standard of living in
low for a long time.
724
XV.
The agrarian reform and the resettlement (colonisation) issue
During the implementation of the agrarian reform, the deserted
Kočevska
determined that the region was not suitable for individual resettlement.
The government planned, however, to resettle most of the former prop¬
erties of the Gottscheers
to individual colonisation. Resettlement was carried out exclusively as
part of the formation of agricultural production cooperatives (APCs)
and in the form of employment with state agricultural companies or
in forestry.
The colonists were given land in usufruct, not possession of the
land as was practised elsewhere in Slovenia.
into a magnificent model of socialist agricultural economy, and indi¬
vidual settlement on the former estates was therefore prohibited. In any
case, given the total destruction of villages, buildings, part of the land
and complete farms, such individual settlement would not have been
viable without massive state assistance. Immediately after the war,
Kočevska
had been sent there to restore them, there would have been no accom¬
modation for them. These conditions caused a huge shortage of man¬
power and neither sufficient funds not building materials were made
available. Another obstacle were the deficient and incomplete land
registers. Comparing
ferences are evident. In the Apace plain, the resettlement and subsequent
expulsion of the German population, followed by the settlement of
Slovene colonists, changed the national character of the border area.
Kočevska,
tional terms already in February
man nationality who were expelled after the war does not change this
basic fact.
The continuous lack of manpower was one of the key problems
in the reconstruction of
economy. The delays in colonisation and its final demise left extensive
areas uninhabited. The inadequate working and living conditions caused
shortages of manpower on the state agricultural estate as well as in the
state forestry administration. The authorities tried to solve the problem
725
Kočevska
in different ways: employing prisoners of war, "returnees" (returned
expatriates) and seasonal workers:, soliciting manpower from other dis¬
tricts, workers from the other republics of the Federal People's Republic
of Yugoslavia, youth brigades, foreign workers, freed prisoners of war,
forced colonisation, hiring convicts from penal camps, seasonal replace¬
ment of the workers in the forestry and agricultural sectors, and other
methods. In
ber of families from the border area of
murje and forced them to settle in
for colonisation purposes by the state agricultural estate. Among others,
200
1947.
Company mainly employed seasonal workers who had stayed behind
in
manpower, a substantial number of foreign citizens, mainly Italians, and
returnees were employed in
worked abroad but returned after the war, were an important source
of manpower to the authorities. Their return was not only economi¬
cally beneficial, it also had political (ideological) significance. But the
plans to settle them in the burnt-down villages of
carried through. In June
of
employed in the coal mine. They local population was often ill-dis¬
posed towards them and because of the poor living and working con¬
ditions many of them, especially miners, left
ment elsewhere.
Throughout the
larly of the central area, were given priority in the economic plans for
Kočevska.
lated and agriculturally backward, marginal areas: the
nica valleys,
ed villages, however, was never seriously considered.
In
exclusively as hay meadows. Farmland was temporarily leased to private
tenants and to district and local people's committees bordering
The leases were temporary in expectation of the implementation of
726
XV.
the colonisation process. No other economic activities (except fruit
picking in the deserted villages) were carried out on the land at the time,
and extensive tracts of farmland were left unbroken for several years after
the end of the war.
During the implementation of the agrarian reform, no less than
95 %
Land Fund and became state property, and only
land and pastures were distributed or disposed. Approximately
10000
the colonisation process itself was marred by continuous delays and was
finally abandoned.
The economic problems of the countryside and town
The resettlement of the Gottscheers and the ravages of war dra¬
matically changed the local political and economic conditions. The
depopulation of the area created the conditions for a complete economic
transformation. Apart from the mine and textile factories,
hardly any industrial tradition and all the industry was based in
In the first five-year plan the main goals for the district of
industrialisation and electrification.
After the liberation, the economic development of
lied heavily on the state-run and cooperative sectors The region differed
from others in that it was sparsely settled and that ownership was
"mainly of a socialist nature". The economic development plan there¬
fore had to be tailored to different criteria. The main economic branch
was mining and the coal mine remained the leading industrial company
in
Mining was followed by agriculture, forestry, and the woodworking
industry. Stockbreeding was the main branch in agriculture, followed
by fruit-growing, but farming was limited to producing fodder for the
livestock. The textile and construction industries (brickworks and tile
works) had relatively important shares, whereas those of tourism, the
crafts, trade, and other activities were less significant. After the war,
Kočevska
manage its vast agricultural and forest areas, there were many other
problems to be solved: water supply, electrification and transport, but
727
Kočevska
also education and health conditions and, above all, the chronic lack
of manpower.
After the war, the industry of
town of
inhabited by over a third of Kocevska's entire population, became a
strongly developed economic centre with a continuously growing po¬
pulation. Its industry promoted the development of settlements in
the town's environs.
ers' town and a centre of administration and education. As the devel¬
oping industry, administration, and schools were concentrated in
Kočevje,
new inhabitants of
bouring villages. Unlike in other towns in Slovenia, the great major¬
ity of the houses were state-owned or owned by the
dition of the buildings deteriorated from year to year. In the mid
1950s,
sold, but only in the area managed by the town or municipality.
Outside
by the state agricultural estates and the forestry administration, no res¬
idential buildings were sold. The authorities planned to build a new
woodworking plant in
technical staff in one place.
Objective as well as subjective reasons made it impossible to
resettle the whole of
theless, crop farming had to be organised on the confiscated land amidst
devastated and burnt down settlements, but the land could not be in¬
cluded in the agricultural use of the entire region. Precisely because of
the extensive confiscated farmland,
suited for the experimental operation of a socialist, state-run agricultur¬
al estate; the composition of the agricultural areas, their geographical
location, the terrain's rugged relief, the
soil, the shortage of manpower, and other reasons, however, required
development to turn to stockbreeding. Until
of the Gottscheers were managed by the state forestry administrations
and by the state agricultural estate in
al stages of development and reorganisation.
728
XV.
The settlement and economic reconstruction of
carried out in accordance with the plans of the Ministry of Agriculture
and Forestry adopted in
duction methods and forms practised by the former owners were not
adequate as they did not provide a solid foundation for the systematic
development and organisation of the new agricultural economy in
Kočevska.
typical, natural conditions for stockbreeding, in particular cattle and
sheep breeding. And only the area with devastated and burnt down vil¬
lages was considered suitable for inclusion in the state sector as it
lacked the basic conditions for colonisation (housing and outbuildings,
equipment and the like). The state sector aimed to incorporate about
18,000
terms, the land was divided into a central administration of state-run
agricultural estates in
ships (Mahovnik, Rajndol, Onek,
Stari Log),
from the area under study belonged. Some of them had been burnt down
completely, most were uninhabited. The principal responsibility of the
stewardships was to introduce pasture farming and to promote efficient
farming, fruit-growing, and beekeeping. The plans envisaged to make
half the so-called pasture forests suitable for pasturing livestock. Before
the stewardships were established, the land had been leased for annual
use to cooperative and village communities.
The state-run agricultural estate in
Mahovnik state estate, which itself had developed from the administra¬
tion and estate in Mahovnik joined by the estates of Gotenica and
Borovec. Mahovnik was thus given the role of a starting basis from
which the stewardships and estates were to be organised and revived.
By May
nik) were already operating, as well as two estates (Ferdreng and
cerji). The estate, which had almost no employees at the beginning
(until
into the largest of the eight existing state estates in Slovenia by num¬
ber of workers and employees by mid
nearly entirely composed of properties formerly belonging to the
119
Kočevska
Gottscheers.
-
and was the strongest economic company in
the living conditions of the employees on the estate were very harsh and
marked by dreadful shortages. As the structure of the economy and the
natural conditions required closer connections between agriculture and
forestry, a joint state economic company was established within the
republic's economic administration
estry Company (AFC). At the end of the
45,343
managed the state-owned agricultural and forest land of the
region. Similarly to the other companies in
trough several stages of development and reorganisation and achieved
quite significant successes. When, at the beginning of
ment of the People's Republic of Slovenia established the
Estate in
tate managed most of the state-owned agricultural and forest land, and
a small part was managed by the AFC in
melj Agricultural Cooperative.
The private agricultural sector was very small and was hampered
by the extreme fragmentation of the land. Considering the age struc¬
ture of the peasant population
-
industrial centres, the ill-defined agrarian policy, the social differentia¬
tion of the peasant population, the abandoned farmland resulting from
the resettlement of the majority population, and the continuing depopu¬
lation of the agricultural areas, the position of the private agricultural
sector was highly inauspicious, and it was not capable of competing with
the dominant state agricultural estates. The authorities used the posi¬
tive results achieved by the
demonstrate the great advantages of big socialist estates over small pri¬
vate estates. In
of
farms had over
tled. The introduction of a socialist economy meant that no less than
71 %
730
XV.
The initially envisaged individual colonisation of
massive scale failed to come true. From the autumn of
cially from the spring of
of agricultural production cooperatives (APCs) a precondition for
colonisation. They planned to establish thirteen agricultural production
cooperatives, including
And the colonisation was to ignore villages in which no cooperatives were
planned. Membership in a cooperative was the condition for colonists
to settle. The initial colonists (especially in
and
agricultural production cooperatives or state estates and most of them
succeeded. Only one fourth of the planned cooperatives were however
established. By the end of
German area (Livold,
(2,9 %
lished on state-owned land that had previously belonged to Gottscheers
and the settlers thus automatically joined the socialist sector. A meagre
0,5 %
leased land. With the exception of a handful of undamaged houses, all
houses were without furnishings and equipment and huge investment
was required; the standard of living of a cooperative's members was there¬
fore very low. In the districts of Crnomelj and
under study, a further agricultural production cooperative was founded
in
and April of
with the establishment of APCs were not granted possession of the land,
and even their kitchen gardens were only leased to them. These condi¬
tions turned people away from settling and working in a cooperative.
The economic operation of an agricultural workers' cooperative (AWC)
was based on a brigade (team) system and work quotas, as well as on
jointly owned production means. The income was divided among them
based on workdays, that is on the members' invested labour and equip¬
ment. In all of
cooperatives with a total of
When the poor living conditions forced individuals to seek
employment elsewhere, the political and executive authorities, whose
731
Kočevska
economic
went as far as ordering companies to dismiss all the members of coopera¬
tives who were employed with them. An increasing number of people
dropped out of the cooperatives. In autumn
were ordered not to employ people who had left a cooperative in vio¬
lation of the rules. Due to pressures from the political authorities, the
members of the cooperatives were ill-motivated and sought find employ¬
ment on one of the state estates. The political authorities, on the other
hand, blamed them for not having enough sense of responsibility to their
job and for lacking firm ideological conviction. In addition to the above
described problems impeding the operation of the cooperatives, the
forest areas given to them in the beginning were taken away from them
in
to the private sector, were much harder and the earnings of their mem¬
bers several times lower then those of craftsmen; they therefore sought
employment elsewhere.
In
Yugoslavia
expansion around Slovenia, and the discussions on the future of small
agricultural estates and their transformation into big agricultural com¬
panies ran high in the
they had to join the socialist sector, they would rather work on a state
estate than in an APC. Not all the peasants in
they were less attached to the land than the peasants from the Ribnica
area. Another reason for their views was the poor work organisation
in the cooperatives and the low standard of living of their members. The
state estates, on the other hand, achieved better results through higher
work discipline, professional management, and better working condi¬
tions, even though they often had to do with less skilled manpower. As
a result, the members of the APCs in Livold and
oppose the incorporation into state estates as this granted them regu¬
lar monthly wages.
At the beginning of
"about to disintegrate" as it had no clear prospects for the future. It was
abolished in
incorporated into the state estate and that of
732
XV.
Borovec estate. The cooperative of
for some time and that of
The
State Administrations became state property after they were confiscated
and they were not distributed. They were managed by the state's forest
administrations (and the stewardships subordinated to them) in
Ribnica,
forestry, the
-maintained forests which were exploited based on forest exploitation
plans
forests of the former German owners, and pasture forests which had
grown on areas initially entered in the land register as pastures and were
indeed used a pastures. Many had started to turn into forest because
of inadequate management. Pastures were meant to be returned to their
original purpose except where they had already turned into proper
forests. Because of the very poor yield of farmlands and their high
location
lages was left entirely to overgrowing.
important economic source and provided much more employment in
forestry than elsewhere. Of the
ulation) in the former German language area in
or
entire Slovene territory.
Of all regions in Slovenia,
the land ownership structure. The government introduced a socialist eco¬
nomic system and very little private property was left. Confiscations,
exchanges, rounding off of properties, colonisation and overgrowing pas¬
tures, meadows and, in places, even fields, changed the image of the land
so thoroughly that all the mentioned ownership relations were no
longer evident from the land register. Apart from the changes in the
ownership structure, a growing problem in the socialist sector was how
to establish changes to the types of land use listed in the land register
that had occurred after resettlement of the German population. The
Kočevska
tional for the then requirements, because in an area previously oc¬
cupied by private farms with typical production methods, a socialist
133
Kočevska
economy was now developing that was based on a different production
method, changing the form, area, use, and ownership of the land.
The farmland of nearly half the deserted villages was being over¬
grown by forest and this became a typical feature of the
scape. This process had, however, started already before the First "World
"War when the population abandoned the common pastures. At the
turn of the 20th century, the forest coverage of
was not unlike the other regions of Slovenia. In the following seven
decades, however, the coverage nearly doubled, reaching
according to experts today exceeds
square kilometres or more than a third of the entire area under study.
In the reverse sense, the share of farmland, in particular pastures,
dropped. The share of fields and meadows,
century, was similar to the neighbouring areas in
krajina,
the pastures which occupy only a fifth of their former extent. In. areas
where most settlements were burnt down during the war and were not
rebuilt after the war, no farmland exists any longer. Farmland is exclu¬
sively concentrated around the town of
The rapidly overgrowing forests changed the image of
landscape and very few areas developed in a normal, continuous way.
Forest overgrowing first occurred at the turn of the 20tl1 century due to
the emigration of
World "War due to the resettlement of the majority (German) popula¬
tion and the desertion and destruction of settlements, and it continued
after the war because the new authorities deemed that the vast areas had
no future anyway and that they were not suited for resettlement. In addi¬
tion, the inhabitants who had settled here were not attached to the land
and most of them were not familiar with agriculture. Today, most of the
population lives in
drop in the peasant population, more pronounced in
where in Slovenia, has only added to this development.
Demographic issues
The composition of
pletely after the war. During the war, some deserted villages were set¬
tled by new inhabitants, mostly from the close environs, and after the
734
XV
war new settlers came from all over Slovenia and Yugoslavia. Most of
them settled in the bigger and less damaged settlements.
Immediately after the war,
over a third of the number of inhabitants in
pulation nearly doubled in the eight years following the end of Second
World War, but this meant only two thirds of the pre-war population
of
The latest population census shows that the number of inhabitants
has now reached the pre-war figure. Due to the resettlement and later
expulsion of the Germans, the population density in
very low after the war and highly differed from the country's average.
Right after the war, in
square kilometre, in
years later
densely populated, whereas most of the deserted villages are in
Rog
Most of
which contributed about two thirds of the region's total national income.
The national composition of the population had changed greatly due
to the resettlement of the Gottscheers and the settlement of new inhabi¬
tants. In the whole of Slovenia, more than half the inhabitants lived in
their birthplace in
who had lived in the same settlements since their birth was below one
third. Compared with other municipalities in the Socialist Republic of
Slovenia, the number was lower only in the municipalities of
Piran.
tory of the same municipality. A major difference compared to the Slo¬
vene average was recorded in settlement from other regions of Slovenia,
as it was one third in
Slovenia. A major disproportion was also recorded in the number of
inhabitants, immigrants from the other republics of Yugoslavia: nearly
8 %
The share of inhabitants of
earlier was among the lowest in Slovenia,
was twice as high. The share of inhabitants who resettled to
in
735
Kočevska
as well as twice the Slovene average. In the following periods the share
of new settlers in
Slovenia. A little over one fifth of the population in
to
compared with the then Slovene municipalities, while the share of reset¬
tled people in the whole of Slovenia was below one tenth. In the
1953-1957
in the previous period
Slovenia, the percentage in either period was slightly over
The mass executions and graves, camps, and the Restricted Area
The
abysses provided the ideal surroundings for the secret mass executions
of several thousand returned members of the Homeguard and other
opponents of the National Liberation War. The secret graves of the
opponents of the Partisan movement in
impact on
Kočevski Rog
cutions in Slovenia, in spite of the fact that the general public had no
knowledge of individual mass graves.
At the end of the Second "World War in Europe about
12,000
-Partisan camp and were accompanied by about
to the Austrian province of Carinthia. In addition, they were joined by
several thousand Ustashi, Croatian Homeguard members, Serbian and
other soldiers and civilians, who in fear of the Yugoslav Army and the
new authorities wanted to surrender to the Allied Forces. The latter
decided to surrender to the Yugoslav Army all the Yugoslav citizens who
had supported the German armed forces. Though different numbers of
returned persons are quoted, a British report states that over
sons were surrendered to the Yugoslav authorities in May
Croatians,
of
vilians returned by trains by way of Jesenice (another route led from
Bleiburg
central camp in the St.
736
XV.
The camp was also used to assemble those captured in Slovenia during
their withdrawal and those who had served in the German army or
armed forces under the command of the German army, or who had
collaborated with them and remained in Slovenia; all these people were
requested to report to the new authorities.
After a brief interrogation, the prisoners were classified into three
groups:
-
by train and by trucks to the abysses in
was shared by many from group B, who were to be sentenced to forced
labour, and some under-age persons from group A. The selection among
the Croatians and Serbs was carried out following slightly different
criteria.
Prisoners from Sentvid were first executed in the vicinity (the
Brezar abyss, May
about the executions, the special execution unit moved to
unit operated in
mainly executed people of Croatian nationality. Based on the state¬
ments of people who managed to escape from the abysses, we may
conclude that the unit was then replaced by Slovene soldiers.
For a brief period, homeguards and others were confined in St.
Mary's Home, the Home of the Blind, and the grammar school in
Kočevje;
trucks. Here they were untied, stripped to their underwear, tied again
and led to the entrance of an abyss where the executioners shot them
and pushed them over the edge. A handful of prisoners nevertheless
managed to escape from the
Milan Zajec from Veliki
Ribnica later wrote about the tragedy when they were living abroad.
There is no way to establish how many victims an individual
mass grave in
multiply the number of prisoners on a truck with the number of days
the executions were carried out and include several trips to
Rog
quote diverse numbers. France
he was shot contained around
737
Kočevska
The two best known mass graves in
Jama pod Krenom and Jama pod Macesnovo
the traces of the mass graves were concealed by mining them: the
entrances to the caves collapsed and instead of caves sinkholes formed.
Researchers have not been able yet to locate a third abyss known as
Ušiva jama.
(Jama v
Based on the statements of homeguards who escaped (no written
sources exist) it is not quite clear, who is buried in an individual abyss.
The most recent research from
Macesnova
whereas the grave below Kren contains members of various nationali¬
ties (Croatians, Serbs, Germans, Russians). The excavated remains of
personal belongings and gear of the victims provide no evidence that
there were any Slovenes among them.
For many decades after the war the exact locations of the mass
graves in
bidden to publicly mention the executions. The mass graves were levelled
with the ground, concealed, or destroyed. Even in the
Security Service still kept a close watch on anybody who would come
near the places where the mortal remains of the victims were supposed
to rest.
On July
tions, a reconciliation ceremony was held at the mass grave Kren below
Kočevski Rog,
highest representatives of political and public life. In spite of the fact
that the reconciliation ceremony provided for a more open discussion
of the post- war executions and hidden mass graves, the activities under¬
taken in the following fifteen years did not meet the expectations about
a speedy and dignified arrangement of the hidden graves, their research,
and the identification of the victims.
In view of the fact that the area was depopulated and in critical
need of manpower, several penal camps were set up in May
were run by the Department for the Protection of the People (DPP, the
army's security department) or by the headquarters of the Fourth
Army in Ljubljana. The construction and operation of the penal camps
738
XV.
in
because all the protected areas, which the exception of the
one in
fied: Ferdreng,
The area of
son
for the Republic's leadership in wartime; after breaking with the
Informbiro,
In Slovenia,
allow for a possible retreat into Central Bosnia and Herzegovina or to
the sea and, secondly, because most of the area of
habited and devastated. Throughout the post-war period, Gotenica
remained the most protected and inaccessible place in the Restricted
Area of
dents. The development of military technology made the construction
of such bunkers, some were built during the Second World "War, obso¬
lete. In recent years, the national defence plans no longer mention
Gotenica as the destination for a retreating republican leadership. The
regime in the Restricted Area had two levels. Gotenica and Skrilj were
inaccessible, while the rest of the area had a less strict regime. By the
time the territory was opened up to the public in late
had been changed three times. The initial borders were determined in
1952,
in
Kočevska.
bigger only in the
fourth of the municipality of
many people thought it was identical with
part of
The area was managed economically by the
Kočevska
Estate (SSE) were identical with the borders of the protected area, the
municipality of
Kočevska Reka.
Gotenica. Throughout the history of the Restricted Area, the SSE
employed most of the local population, and it owned or managed over
739
Kočevska
90 %
Area had a population of
who lived in
nica-Reka valley were spared most of the ravages of war, unlike the vil¬
lages of the municipalities Koprivnik,
As a result, the deserted houses and settlements were used to accommo¬
date refugees already during the war, mainly those from the
lina
people from nearly all over Slovenia, but in some settlements this
amounted to just a couple of families. When the authorities started to
close off the area in
twelve settlements, and in
700
shows the following characteristics: a reduction of the population re¬
sulting from its special purpose (the population dropped by a third),
and its concentration in three settlements. In this period, fourteen vil¬
lages were completely and finally deserted, while three others had only
one family each, taking the number of effectively deserted settlements
to seventeen. If we add another four settlements, deserted before the
establishment of the Restricted Area, we see that less than a third of
the villages were inhabited. Many settlements were virtually obliterated
because even the ruins of houses were removed completely. In the
1953-1956
vived the war, and not a single one of the former
standing. Of the twelve cemeteries in the area, only three were left. And
of the former
side shrines survived.
The fate of the cultural heritage
The tragic fate suffered by this region of Slovenia begs answers
to the question how and in what way it was possible to eliminate in such
a short period nearly all evidence of the cultural landscape in this
and forested region, marked by the former German minority that had
been a linguistic island in the midst of the Slovene national territory
for six hundred years. The physical removal of numerous settlements
had far-reaching effects on the nature of the cultural landscape. What
140
XV.
is left are fragments of a past culture and has merely historical signif¬
icance.
In recent years, a debate on the demolition of the churches in
čevska
ture. Most of the debate was politically biased, blaming one or another
ideology for the fate of the churches, but without taking account of the
circumstances and the fact that the fate of the cultural heritage in Ko-
čevska
the area, in particular in the last decades of the
the First World War; the sudden, large-scale and final resettlement of
the majority population and the depopulation of scores of settlements
in
inadequate economic, personnel, employment and settlement policies
after the war; and systematic demolition, mainly in the
causes effected the whole of
different levels of effect in different areas of
the damages to the settlements and sacral buildings in
from the large-scale Italian offensive, the majority of the sacral heritage
in the area of
of
The German fascist policy, aimed at eliminating the Slovene peo¬
ple as an ethnical group, effectively destroyed
minority, while the war and the vicious post-war period, fraught with
intolerance, destroyed its cultural heritage. Today we are aware of the
significance of national minorities; we can view the period with different
eyes and regret that the Germans of
For centuries, the Slovene people indeed coexisted with the minority
and shared with it its hardships and fortune in this part of the world.
Following the fate suffered by
the former German settlement of the province are very rare. Of its
settlements
either no longer exist today or have only one or two occupied houses.
Places were once villages had stood are usually identified only by the
surviving fruit trees that are increasingly threatened by the encroaching
forest; other evidence are concrete wells carrying the date of con¬
struction and the initials of the owner, and the remains of wells and
141
Kočevska
foundations of buildings whose ruins were largely removed. It would
probably be very hard to find another region anywhere in Europe
where the cultural landscape has undergone changes of the dimension
that occurred in
lost their original appearance or are in the process of losing it.
Before the Italian occupation of Slovenia the German language
area in
the school buildings in
settlements. "Where the population was either predominantly or exclu¬
sively German, the village was burnt down and uninhabited by the end
of the war, and the schools were no exception. After the war, thirteen
schools stopped to operate, and another sixteen schools which operated
for some time after the war, were later abolished. Seven school disap¬
peared without a trace, the buildings of others are deserted or were
turned into residential buildings. Today, only four complete primary
schools and four branch schools are in operation, and with the excep¬
tion of one, they are all located in
The entire period following the Second World War was character¬
ised by a clear desire to wipe out the former German image of the land.
Soon after the liberation, attempts were made at renaming German place
names in
until the early
followed later, between
ished, fifteen obtained an addition to their name, six were given comple¬
tely new names, and four were newly founded.
The tragic fate of the settlements did not spare their sacral build¬
ings. Of the
been preserved. Of the
only twelve are still visible. In six parishes
Reber,
ing was left standing, in seven others only one in each (Koprivnik,
Mozelj,
buildings in the parish of
were preserved in both parishes in the
Cerkev), where the villages were resettled after the war. Many parishes
remained unoccupied. In
142
XV.
by seven parish administrators and one curate, and the unoccupied
parishes were jointly managed by three priests from parishes outside
the area. Twelve years later, the parishes in the former German language
area have only three appointed parish priests.
In the early and mid
tural heritage of
forms. The people who managed
sons, to forcibly remove all traces that would witness to the former
presence of a German minority in the area. In the new authorities,
nationalist and ideological factors combined and showed in the violent
removal all things German, and particularly in the demolition of sacral
buildings
destructive rage has often been explained as driven by ideology, that is
by anti-Catholicism, we should not ignore the nationalist drive. Let us
recall that all the sacral buildings that were destroyed in the wider
Kočevska
former German language area. To sum up: at least
and chapels were demolished in places that were still inhabited and
where the furnishings in the churches had been preserved. These fig¬
ures mainly refer to the parishes of
and
were demolished after the eviction of the population in
area was closed off. The destructive rage unleashed on sacral buildings
was particularly evident in the area of the
people who did not reside there were not allowed access after
1953
were destroyed. The authorities in Ljubljana were aware of the ravages
as they were informed by the Episcopal
Ordinariate
Religious Issues. Its statements were confirmed by the state security
department of the
particular that by management of the
adding that the destruction was more extensive than described in the
Bishop's reports. Because of the illegal activities in the Restricted Area
and official protests by the Church, the authorities decided to settle the
status of the Church's property in
743
Kočevska
chronology of events. In February and March of
property in
on a decree of the presidency of the Antifascist Council of the National
Liberation of Yugoslavia (ACNLY). Most of the land became state
property in
parishes and the affiliate parish in Zdihovo were expropriated. The
parishes in
Cerkva
among other buildings all the parish churches, filial churches and
chapels that were owned by the Church. All church and religious insti¬
tutions managed by an individual parish were counted as one unit and
the parish was left with a "maximum allowed property", while every¬
thing else was expropriated. However, the issue of the expropriation of
Kočevska's
majority of the buildings preserved after the war had been destroyed
a year or two before the expropriation and the issue thus had no legal
basis at all. Two years earlier the authorities had solved the issue of the
Church's property in a different way. Whether the different approach
was influenced by the changed relations with the Church
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia broke off diplomatic relations with the
Vatican
The management of the Church's expropriated real estate was
taken over in part by the
in part by the
were free to decide upon the further destiny of the buildings, that is
whether to adapt them for other purposes or remove them.
That the mass demolition ended in
incident related to the demolition of the church in
planned demolition of the parish church in Mozelj, protests by vil¬
lagers, and a complaint to the cabinet of
following, no further sacral buildings were demolished in
furnishings which the parish administrators managed to collect or
rescue from the demolished churches were mostly given to churches else¬
where in Slovenia, and some of it
today in presbyteries in
rior furnishings did not all share the fate of the buildings (churches),
144
XV.
and that much more furnishings were rescued; these items were either
appropriated by locals or workers, lost, given away, sold in various
parts of Slovenia or abroad
of the church authorities. A similar fate as to the churches was dealt
to the chapels and wayside shrines. Of the over
only one tenth has been preserved. Despite the fact that most of the
38
removed by the Gottscheers, the remaining cemeteries with a total of
523
witnessing to the six-hundred-year presence of Germans in the heart of
the Slovene territory.
745 |
| adam_txt |
Vsebina
Uvod
I. Nemško jezikovno območje
1. Nemci na območju
in na
2.
A. Poimenovanje
B.
C.
Č.
D.
II.
do
1. Kočevska od naselitve kočevskih Nemcev
do leta 1918
A. Poseiitev in
B.
C.
Č. Izseljevanje
D. Prebivalstvo od
E. Národnostná
F.
G. Šolstvo
H.
2.
A. Oblastni ukrepi po prevratu
B. Upravno-politična ureditev
С
Č. Politično življenje kočevskih Nemcev
D. Kulturno življenje
E. Šolstvo
F. Demografske
G.
H. Kočevski Nemci pred
Kočevska
III. Preselitev kočevskih Nemcev
1. Italijanska okupacija
2.
A. Priprave
B. Pogodba
С
3.
A. Prodaja
B.
IV.
okupator
v
1. Kočevska
2.
3.
A. Kočevska po veliki ¡talijanski ofenzivi
B. Kočevska po kapitulaciji Italije
С
V.
v
1.
2.
A. Kulturna dediščina kočevskih Nemcev med preseljevanjem
3.
A. Do kapitulacije Italije
B. Po
VI.
po vojni
1.
VII. Usoda
po vojni
1.
imetja pred novembrom i944
Vsebina
2.
DO KOČEVSKIH NeMCEV MED VOJNO
3.
4.
na Kočevskem po vojni
5.
in na
A. Število
B.
C.
Č.
VIII.
1. Pravni predpisi
2.
3.
4.
5.
na Kočevskem
6.
nemske manjšine
kulturni sporazum
»nediskriminatorne denacionalizacije«
IX.
po vojni
1. Obnova podeželja, industrije
A. Nacrti
B. Obnova podeželja
C. Gospodarska izraba opuščenih naselij
Č. Krediti, denarna sredstva, nacrti obnove
D. Obnova rudarstva
E. Mesto Kočevje
2.
A. Razvojna preusmeritev gospodarstva
B. Vprašanje
C. Pomanjkanje delovne sile
Kočevska
Č.
Đ. Zaraščanje kmetijskih površin
X.
1. Število prebivalcev
2.
3.
4.
A. Prebivalstvo Kočevske glede na kraj rojstva, območje
in leto doselitve
XI.
1.
A. Organizacija uprave narodne imovine do začetka leta
B. Obdelovanje nekdanjih emonskih
po osvoboditvi
2.
A. Zakon
B. Površina emonske zemlje
C. Agrarne skupnosti
Č. Arondacije
3.
A. Kolonizacija
po drugi svetovni vojni
B. Kolonizacija Kočevske
C. Nacrt kolonizacije
na Kočevskem
Č.
D. Prisilna kolonizacija
4.
A. Pravni predpisi
B. Nacrti
C.
Č. Državno kmetijsko posestvo
D. Zasebno kmečko gospodarstvo
5.
A. Ustanavljanje
B. Kočevske kmetijsko-delavske zadruge
ustanavljanja na
Vsebina
С.
Č. Ukinitev
6.
A.
B. Obseg gozdnih površin
7.
8.
XII.
Kočevska
1.
2.
A. Vzroki za nastanek
B. Izgradnja
C. Režim
Č.
D. Gospodarjenje na zaprtem območju
E. Značilnosti
F. Kazenska taborišča
G. Gotenica in Škrilj
XIII.
kočevskih Nemcev
1.
A.
B.
C. Stanje
v
2.
3.
A. Osnovne sole
B. Gimnazija
C. Dijaški
Č. Druge šolske ustanove
Ą.
A. Preimenovanja, pristavki, združitve, razdružitve
in razglasitve
B. Kočevska
Kočevska
XIV.
XV. Summary
XVI.
1. Viri
A. Arhivi
B.
С
Č. Uradni listi
D. Statistično gradivo
2.
3.
Seznam naselij
Cerkve
Seznam kratic
XVII.
1. Imensko kazalo
2.
The fate of
is a subject that has been all but banished from the Slovene cultural con¬
sciousness. It has been avoided in spite of the fact that
relatively extensive region with a specific, varied, interesting and certainly-
tragic history. The secluded and inhospitable region was settled in the
14tla century, but during the Second "World War its German population
was practically completely resettled. What remained of their culture was
then systematically destroyed. The hatred bred by war did not fail to
leave a lasting mark on
The name
of Slovenia inhabited for six centuries, until
tlers of German stock, who formed a more or less compact, ethnically
mixed "island" amidst the Slovene population. The Gottscheers were
among the oldest German ethnic communities outside the borders of
Germany and Austria proper, and the only agrarian German-speaking
population island in the Slovene territory after the First World War.
Their settlement in the region was carried out by the Ortenburgs, a Ger¬
man aristocratic family which, for economic reasons, colonised
with serfs from Carinthia and East Tyrol.
Kočevska
In mid-April
The expectations of the Gottscheers that Germany would occupy the
region were not met.
(together called the Province of Ljubljana) were annexed to the Kingdom
709
Kočevska
of Italy. The Gottscheers, and especially their leaders, who had been
looking forward to
hern Slovenia occupied by the Germans, were deeply disappointed by
the Italian occupation. The German fascist authorities who were reset¬
tling Germans from occupied territories to the Reich, in fact had the
same solution in mind for the Gottscheers. The Nazi officials adopted
a resolution to resettle the Gottscheers either during the initial war in
Yugoslavia or soon after they occupied Slovenia. The idea of resettle¬
ment, however, was not new to the Gotscheers because they had dis¬
cussed it with the fascist authorities in Germany two years before the
occupation. The territory earmarked for the resettlement of the Got¬
tscheers and other German minorities (from Dobrudja,
Bessarabia) was located in the
Dreieck)
dred kilometres long and ten to fifteen kilometres wide stretch of ter¬
ritory between the Province of Ljubljana and Independent State of
Croatia. To this purpose, the Nazis first deported most of the Slovene
inhabitants (about
sus of March
2754
occupied themselves with crop farming and stockbreeding, and only
families with crafts. The total area of land owned by the Gottscheers
was
The governments of the German Reich and the Kingdom of Italy
reached an agreement on the resettlement in Rome on August
The German resettlement company, called Deutsche
handgesellschaft
and sold it to the Italian real estate office
(organized in so called
by
1942.
a couple of hundred people, were resettled to Germany, and an insignif¬
icant number of people were not allowed to resettle. The idea of the
Nazis was that the area
form a German bastion. The resettled people were to protect the south¬
eastern border of the German Reich "with the plough and by the sword".
110
XV.
To protect the cultural heritage of the Gottscheers and its trans¬
fer to the new settlement area, the Nazi authorities set up a special cul¬
tural commission. The commission operated in
Ljubljana from the beginning of October
June
of a severe winter, while lacking both adequate premises and assistance
from the local population. The commission accomplished only a small
part of its planned tasks.
After the resettlement of the Gottscheers, who had to leave behind
all of their real estate and two thirds of their livestock, the villages and
hamlets in which they had lived were largely left uninhabited. The re¬
settlement of the majority population left about
gion, mostly in the town of
of villages were left deserted. The Italian government tried to resettle
the area with tenants who would pay the
of their produce, but settling did not go according to plans. Very few
of the tenants were from other regions of Slovenia; most of them were
Slovenes from
timber in Italy, the
Kočevska,
of farming land, with Italian settlers.
The occupation forces held only the town of
served as an important strategic defence post on the Ljubljana-Delni-
ce-Bay of
the Partisan army and bombing by the allied forces and was greatly
damaged. Among the many badly damaged houses and outbuildings was
the Auersperg Castle. From May
countryside, while mainly held by the Partisans army, was often travers¬
ed by different armed forces and the deserted villages of the Gottscheers
were hard-stricken. The greatest damage was inflicted by the large-scale
Italian offensive in the summer of
down abandoned villages to prevent the Partisans from using the desert¬
ed houses for accommodation. Of all the areas in
Rog
suffered the greatest devastation as the Italian forces destroyed practi¬
cally every single village. After the Italian offensive, devastation con¬
tinued, albeit with decreasing intensity, for the next three years.
Ill
Kočevska
The property of the
In June
(ECLF) adopted a decree concerning the allocation and management
of the former land of the resettled Gottscheers in the liberated territo¬
ries. It appointed the Liberation Front as the representative of the
Slovene people to manage the property and distribute the land for free
use (but not into private property). The ECLF invalidated all the sales
and other contracts made by the Italian
mined that the existing conditions were to be respected until further
notice. Individuals who had given possession of farms by the
Office before the decree came into effect were allowed free use of all
of the land granted to them. With the exception of some areas, land were
not assigned to individuals, but was worked collectively. The reasons for
this decision were not of an ideological or political nature, but merely
practical: the extensive estates of the resettled Germans had to be cul¬
tivated, but there was not enough manpower nor equipment tools.
After the capitulation of Italy, the responsibilities of public admin¬
istration in the liberated territory were assumed by the Administrative
Committee for the Slovene Liberated Territory. One of its last measures
was a circular letter, dated February
expropriated and
decree, the Administrative Committee's letter ordered all land, includ¬
ing the estates of the Gottscheers to be redistributed. This meant, among
other things, that land was taken away from those who had taken pos¬
session of it before the ECLF decree came into effect. Consequently, the
Administrative Committee did not ratify the contracts concluded with
the Italian
therefore repartition was resumed immediately after the Italian capit¬
ulation, particularly in the winter and spring of
these leases and the allocation of properties to other interested parties
led to complaints, the processing and resolving of which lasted until the
spring of
circular letter issued by the Administrative Committee in cases where land
of resettled Gottscheers was taken from those who had assumed it for cul¬
tivation or use before the ECLF decree of June
effect. The restitution or repartition of the land for tenancy was ordered.
Ill
XV.
The expropriated estates of the former German ethnic minority
in
Commission (NPMC) from spring
until the commission's dissolution in
aged all the expropriated, abandoned or public property in Slovenia.
But the
NPMC divided the estates over several sections, each one led by an
appointed administrator who was responsible for the entire holdings
(buildings, livestock, fields and forests) and subordinated to the regional
and local commissioners of the NPMC. One of the primary duties of
these administrators was to ensure that the land would not remain unbro¬
ken. Cultivation of the abandoned
the lack of manpower, tools, machinery, seeds, and manure
that continued after the liberation
lands was cultivated. For practical reasons, cultivation of the fields was
done collectively and only areas where collective cultivation was unfeasi¬
ble were let to individual tenants.
The NPMC leased the
other estates for a period of one to three years. But this was the case
only in the eastern part of the former German language territory con¬
trolled by the Partisan army. Certain lands, especially those that were
in the vicinity of political or military premises in the
not leased out.
In its redistribution of land, the NPMC respected the provisions
of the decree of June
the owner of the estate, even if it had been acquired by lease or pur¬
chase. Those who had signed a lease or purchase contract with the
Emona
ly; they were given only preferential rights and could not actually own
the estate; if they continued to benefit from the land, they were bound
to the same commitments as the other interested parties. Those who
had signed a lease or purchase contract after June
standing with all the other interested parties.
By far the most difficulties, disputes and complaints were encoun¬
tered in the process of parcelling out of the vineyards in
Most parcels were subject to decisions dating back to spring
713
Kočevska
in compliance with the circular letter of the Management Commission
adopted in February
distributed, regardless of whether the leases had been signed before or
after the NPMC's decree. In resolving these problems, the NPMC
acted in accordance with the decree adopted by the Presidency of the
Antifascist Council of the National Liberation of Yugoslavia (ACNLY)
on November
property, state administration of absent persons' properties, confis¬
cation of properties forcibly alienated by the occupation army, and the
invalidity of any contracts made with the enemy, including the period
before the adoption of the ACNLY's decree. The Presidency of the
Slovene National Liberation Council (SNLC), as the ultimate body of
appeal, reaffirmed its decree of May
valid all contracts signed before June
Among the responsibilities of the NPMC was the use and distri¬
bution of timber from the
or issued permissions for felling, either payable or free of charge, to indi¬
viduals for the renovation of their homes, as well as to bodies and insti¬
tutions of the National Liberation Movement. It also permitted the use
of deserted
viduals notified the NPMC of their needs, and it either approved (or
rejected) the use and transport of goods from the estates belonging to
the national property. The Partisan field hospitals were the commission's
major "customers". In some cases the NPMC did not allow the use of
the inventory on abandoned estates. In addition to dealing with the use
of accommodation, outbuildings, land and forest, it also was responsi¬
ble for approving the use of inventory from the deserted or ruined
sawmills and water-mills, honouring the leases between timber mer¬
chants and the Gottscheers before their resettlement.
The property of the Gottscheers after the Second World War
After the Second World War, the fate of the German minority
in Slovenia would have been dreadful regardless of which side, the
Partisans or the anticommunist forces, had won. Both the new Yugoslav
authorities and the anticommunist camp envisaged already during the
war that the German minority would be expelled from the Slovene
114
XV.
national territory. As early as May
Protection of the People (DPP) started to deport groups of Germans
colonists from
resettlement area in the
By the midsummer of
Sava
home. In July
Slovenia. The third and most massive phase of the deportation of
Germans from Slovenia started in the second half of December
and included practically every single German in Slovenia. The key ele¬
ment determining the attitude of the Yugoslav authorities toward the
German population in Slovenia was undoubtedly the pro-Nazi stance
of the majority of the Germans, and their collaboration with the occu¬
pation forces against the Slovene population during the war. As else¬
where in Europe, it was these two factors which led people to believe
in the collective guilt of the German people, and the fate of Germans
in Slovenia was similar to that of many other German ethnic groups
in East Europe after the Second World War. Many of the Germans who
did not escape were confined to concentration camps
near Ptuj, Hrastovec near St. Lenart) by the Yugoslav authorities. From
there they were deported to Austria because the Slovene expellees had
to return to their homes and the greater part of the houses formerly
belonging to the Gottscheers were in ruins. Besides, national considera¬
tions led the Yugoslav authorities to reject any ideas of resettling the
greatly deserted
were quite suddenly and finally homeless. After being temporarily
housed in assembly camps in
and settled in various Austrian and German provinces; many of them
set off for the USA.
The property of the Gottscheers
settled
of ACNLY, as was the property of all the other Germans in Slovenia
and Yugoslavia. All Germans (the citizens of the German Reich and
those who were Yugoslav citizens) were declared public enemies by
the ACNLY's decree and all subsequent regulations. Their property itself
was treated as a "enemy property" which was to nationalised by the new
115
Kočevska
state of Yugoslavia. The confiscation procedures had been laid down dur¬
ing the war by the presidency of ACNLY, which had also appointed
state agencies to manager the seized property. The property of the
German population was declared state property by legally binding con¬
fiscation decrees. The new authorities justified the need for the nation¬
alization of German property by economic, strategic, material, ethical,
moral, homeland protection and ideological reasons. The decrees of con¬
fiscation of German property issued by district and municipal confis¬
cation committees. Appeals were reviewed by the regional and provin¬
cial confiscation committees. The committees compiled a register of the
property taken over from the Italian
from individual municipal land registers. These protocols had been
made by the
of persons who had applied with the
cial document proving the person's German allegiance.
The Decree of the presidency of ACNLY nullified all the legal
deals made by the occupation forces during their rule over Yugoslav ter¬
ritories. The authorities thus abolished the agreement between the Ger¬
man and Italian governments concerning the resettlement of the Ger¬
man citizens and individuals of German ethnicity from the Province
of Ljubljana, made on August
visions based on the said decree. The agreement indeed provided that
the property of those individuals who opted for Germany was assigned
by and payable to the German state. Since the property of those who
had opted for Germany preserved its "German" status, regardless of the
above mentioned annulment of legal deals, it was confiscated and be¬
came state property.
There were a number of controversial cases in Slovenia, including
Kočevska
cation committees. These were dealt with jointly by the NPMC, the
DPP, the Public Prosecutor's office, the presidency of National Gov¬
ernment of Slovenia, the Ministries of Justice and Internal Affairs,
and the State Administration for National Property (SANP). Their
propositions reveal that the NPMC proposed solutions that were more
benevolent, viable and advantageous to the Germans than those sub¬
mitted by the other agencies which abided strictly by the law and
716
XV.
treated each and every individual who had opted for Germany either
as a German or as a German citizen, even if they were Slovene nation¬
als. Those who did not opt for Germany and remained in
were allowed to keep their property. At the first judicial level, the
property of
committee resolved these cases on the basis of the political allegiance
of the claimants. When assessing the claimants' economic collabora¬
tion, the authorities tried to establish whether it had been voluntary,
high-risk, organised and constant. In
dispossessed of all their property by the regional confiscation committee
-
ing that after the capitulation of Italy, they had been promised and reas¬
sured by the then acting officials of the Slovene Liberation Front that
they would not be treated unfairly and that their individual freedom
would be preserved if they would not assist the German occupation
forces. Nevertheless and despite the fact that the views of the NPMC
and SANP often differed, in most cases only the legal provisions and
political "label" of individuals were taken into consideration.
The authorities also seized the estate of Prince Auersperg, which
was a f
estate. The land register thus recorded not only the Auersperg estate,
but also the prohibition of alienation and encumbrance of the said
estate. The confiscation decree shows that the estate was transferred to
the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY), without any restric¬
tions, because "the said notes (in the land register) have become irrele¬
vant". The confiscation records were extremely faulty, which resulted
in time-consuming second-level proceedings. The trustee's appeals (joint
for individual municipal land registers) were rejected by the district
confiscation commission in
estates had already been transferred to the
register, second-level decisions could not be issued before a formal
appeal by the trustee of
fiscation committee rejected the appeal on February
final decisions. In total,
were adopted. Abidance by the decree resulted in great changes in the
land ownership structure.
Ill
Kočevska
In Kočevska,
tion committees sometimes clashed with the DPP because of its spe¬
cific attitude toward the Germans and their property. The DPP main¬
tained that it would "control and protect the German property and
would allow no interference whatsoever in this regard", and reserved
the exclusive right of "deciding on matters of limiting the personal
freedom of any concerned German individual".
The confiscation procedure was completed by a entry in the land
register, but the procedure usually could not be accomplished in time
because of inadequate, faulty rulings and the slow process of law. When,
in
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of the People's Republic of Slovenia
took over the confiscation documents concerning the
discovered that not a single file had been resolved to completion.
As part of the confiscation issues related to the German property
in
particular case. The authorities did not start resolving the status of
these estates until
Committee (DPC) of
these "American" estates. The board was responsible for the upkeep of
the estates, accurate stock taking, collecting rent and taxes, and re¬
pairing the houses to prevent their decay. It operated until
most of the land was taken over by the Common National Property
(CNP)
Yugoslavia and the USA
owned real estate in Yugoslavia with an agreement made on July
on the compensation of American citizens dispossessed in Yugoslavia.
The agreement gave the owners the option to file a claim for compen¬
sation with the USA Commission for international claims in Washing¬
ton, where the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY) had
deposited seventeen million dollars. The property taken over by the
FPRY agencies was evaluated according to
ever no need to assess the value of the houses ruined and demolished
during and after the war, which was mostly the case.
Today, the issue of restitution of seized property to Gottscheers
is largely regulated by two acts. The first is the Denationalization Act,
718
XV.
which provides that nationalised property can be restored only to indi¬
viduals who were Yugoslav citizens at the time of confiscation. The reset¬
tled and expelled Gottscheers were not Yugoslav citizens. The second
is a decision by the Constitutional Court which in part invalidates the
principles stated in the decree by the ACNLY from November
about "collective guilt". The decisions grants the foreign citizens the
opportunity to prove that they were not disloyal to Yugoslavia during
the occupation. If they can prove it, they are then eligible for Slovene
citizenship which would automatically grant them the right to regain
their property. This decision by the Constitutional Court raised re¬
proaches by Austria, arguing that the decree promotes discriminatory
denationalization", that it runs against modern principles of law and
that it is not in line with European legal standards that someone has
to prove his innocence; quite contrary, it is guilt that has to be proven.
Slovenia refutes these reproaches among others by referring to inter¬
national conventions.
The attitude of the authorities towards the Germans who did not resettle
Based on the census conducted by the Germans in March
and the data on the number of Germans who were resettled from
Kočevska,
German ethnicity stayed behind in
possible to establish the number of people who lived in ethnically
mixed marriages. It is further unknown how many ethnic Germans were
executed by the National Liberation Movement during the war, but indi¬
vidual Germans appear on lists of people sentenced to death.
It is difficult to establish how many Germans did in fact remain
in
people who considered themselves German did not dare to publicly
declare themselves as such. According to data gathered by the Ministry
of Internal Affairs of the National Government of Slovenia, their num¬
ber was about
ethnically mixed marriages, mostly in
valley, on the eastern margin of
In
over forty ethnic Germans who had not resettled with the other
719
Kočevska
Gottscheers;
mostly resulted from the political labels
sympathiser of the German occupation authorities and the like
to them in the summer of
ing Germans. In the part of the German language area that belonged
to
they were "too old" to be interested in politics, or some members of
the family were "active participants" in the liberation war, or they were
"not opposed" to the National Liberation Army (NLA) or Liberation
Front. These different views of the Gottscheers had their roots in the
wartime period: the villages in the
liberated territory for most of the war, while the villages around
were mostly controlled by the occupation forces. Despite the fact that
the act on electoral registers and the instructions for its application effec¬
tively stripped the German population of their right to vote, it seems
that most of the Gottscheers who were not expelled by the authorities
had voting rights in
share of German individuals who were deprived of their right to vote
is impossible to establish. The position of the ethnic Germans who left
Yugoslavia after the war ended (beside those who emigrated or were
expelled) was quite different: they lost their citizenship. While the law
of
ty (opting for the German state was considered an act of disloyalty),
an amendment to the law adopted in
of Germany nationality were not citizens of the Federal People's
Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY). The legal provisions of the FPRY con¬
cerning Germany and German nationals were made obsolete in
when decrees declaring the cessation of a state of war with Austria and
Germany came into force. In
Yugoslavia signed an agreement allowing the remaining
to emigrate to Germany.
The first post-war census, conducted in
nic Germans and Austrians within the then borders of the People's
Republic of Slovenia
gained after the war, this number represents only slightly more than
of the population that had declared German as their mother tongue in
720
XV.
the census of
dence in the territory of Slovenia within the then borders), or a little
less than one tenth of those who were citizens of Yugoslavia at the time.
Despite the huge decrease in the numbers and share of ethnic Germans
in Slovenia, the census of
Germans or Austrians of all post-war censuses in Slovenia. According
to the first official post-war census, that of
at most up to
barely
in the
Apparently, the Germans from the
in
general population of
workers, retired people and individuals living on state benefits, and
less farmers, craftsmen
sus, the total number of Germans and Austrians had dropped to less
than
those were not indigenous: three quarters of them had been born abroad.
After Slovenia became an independent state, the matter of recog¬
nition of the German minority became a constant source of contention
in the Slovene-Austrian relations. Austria insisted on Slovenia's recog¬
nition of the Austrian ethnic minority
time refused to recognise the new state as a successor of the Austrian
State Treaty. Slovenia insisted in its opposition to making any mention
of Germans as a minority in Slovenia for a long time, and when it fi¬
nally agreed to discuss the matter, it was partly out of fear that Austria
might veto Slovenia's accession to the European Union. In Slovenia, the
issue of recognising an Austrian minority was also associated with the
denationalization claims by Austrian citizens. It was undoubtedly a
very sensitive political matter for both countries. After several years of
negotiations, the two countries settled the status of the German-spea¬
king ethnic group in Slovenia by means of a cultural agreement which
guarantees the rights of the German-speaking ethnic minority in accor¬
dance with the 61st article of the Constitution of the Republic of Slo¬
venia, thus establishing a sufficiently clear distinction between collec¬
tive and the individual rights.
121
Kočevska
The fate of settlements and houses, and the matter of their reconstruction
By the end of the war, half the villages lay deserted, and after the
war most of them were not repopulated. The last official census in the
Kingdom of Yugoslavia, in
in the area, while the ethnic land register of the
composed in
1262 - i.e.
ruins at the time. The census conducted in July
(89)
this number only increased.
By the end of the war, almost two thirds
3945
the entire country. Damage on such a scale had not been sustained by any
other Slovene region or district. While the number of houses in
was only
destroyed and damaged houses amounted to
Slovenia. In some areas of the region, particularly in the settlements of
the pre-war communities of
were virtually no liveable dwellings left, or just a handful of houses that
hat not been completely demolished. In the post-war period nobody
serious considered reconstruction of the utterly destroyed villages in the
remotest areas
resources were committed to rebuilding the villages in the valleys and
repairing the material damage caused by the war
The reconstruction plans adopted in
lages that were only partially destroyed, still inhabited, and preferably
near road and railway facilities. The same attitude continued through¬
out the next period, when, for purposes of industrialisation, people were
actively encouraged to migrate from the countryside to the towns,
where they could provide the much-needed industrial workforce; nobody
considered it necessary to rebuild places that had been completely de¬
stroyed. Therefore, thousands of burnt-down buildings soon fell into
decay and turned into heaps of rubble. On the other hand, the recon¬
struction period initiated several plans to develop a socialist agriculture
that were not well thought-through and eventually all failed.
Discussions on the post-war economic reconstruction of
had started even before the end of the war and were mostly conducted
722
XV.
within the economic development departments of the presidency of the
Slovene National Liberation Council (SNLC). It was planned to use land
of the Gottscheers used for "exemplary stockbreeding and pasture
farming", resulting in an "exemplary mega plant" that would serve as
a model to follow. According to the plan,
autonomy and become an autonomous economic unit relying on two
key branches: stockbreeding and forestry.
The reconstruction plan for Slovenia separated, in contents as well
as time schedule, the reconstruction of towns from that of the country¬
side. Unlike the revival of the economy, which the authorities deemed
to be the principal priority and to be started immediately and accord¬
ing to plans, the reconstruction of towns and the countryside in
was to be only provisional and temporary. Systematic and final rebuild¬
ing was planned to begin in
struction works in
textile and woodworking industry. Only modestly developed and con¬
centrated in the town of
of two textile factories, a coal mine and a number of saw-mills; no
companies existed in any other branch. Soon after the liberation, the
coal mine and the Tekstilana factory were refitted for production. The
Slavoteks and
tively
Kočevje, Grčarice
Most of the saw-mills in the countryside were destroyed during the war
operations; even the less damaged were not repaired because they were
considered unprofitable. Soon after the liberation, the saw-mill in
čevje
repaired.
During the initial post-war years, the reconstruction of the coun¬
tryside was led by reconstruction cooperatives in
Kočevska
berk, Dolenja
Semič
abolished; by October
Kočevska.
struction companies and contractors.
723
Kočevska
The work of the reconstruction cooperatives concentrated only
on buildings in villages that were still inhabited. Rebuilding hundreds
of houses in deserted villages was not possible, for there was neither
manpower nor building material available. Anyway, it is doubtful that
the reconstruction of deserted villages would have been worth the
effort. Uninhabited areas were used only as hay meadows and, partly,
for pasturing or fruit-growing. Reconstruction could only be brought
about with sufficient material and financial means, manpower, and co¬
lonisation
tions for the
greatest obstacle would be the lack of unqualified manpower.
Prisoners of war could not be employed in the task on a long-term
basis, the repatriated workers were mostly qualified, and the Slovene
workers were more attracted by the renovated industry and its new
branches; finally, soliciting exclusively unqualified manpower from the
other Yugoslav republics would have been sensitive political issue.
As the colonisation of
renovation was halted. It is impossible to quote data on the renovation
achieved in the area under study in the first post-war years; they were
gathered only at the district level and even those that are availably
differ widely. The share of buildings renovated in the first two years
after the liberation show that the lowest percentages of renovated
houses was recorded in the districts where the worst devastation
occurred. The lowest percentages were recorded in the Kocevje district,
24%,
was
The disorder and ruins in the town witnessed to the devastation
inflicted upon
heaviest damage was wrought upon the the town's centre which was
practically obliterated by bombing and in battle. Though most of the
funds invested in the district after the liberation were used for the reno¬
vation of
organised not massive enough, and much had to be made up for in later
years. For this reason, the social standard of living in
low for a long time.
724
XV.
The agrarian reform and the resettlement (colonisation) issue
During the implementation of the agrarian reform, the deserted
Kočevska
determined that the region was not suitable for individual resettlement.
The government planned, however, to resettle most of the former prop¬
erties of the Gottscheers
to individual colonisation. Resettlement was carried out exclusively as
part of the formation of agricultural production cooperatives (APCs)
and in the form of employment with state agricultural companies or
in forestry.
The colonists were given land in usufruct, not possession of the
land as was practised elsewhere in Slovenia.
into a magnificent model of socialist agricultural economy, and indi¬
vidual settlement on the former estates was therefore prohibited. In any
case, given the total destruction of villages, buildings, part of the land
and complete farms, such individual settlement would not have been
viable without massive state assistance. Immediately after the war,
Kočevska
had been sent there to restore them, there would have been no accom¬
modation for them. These conditions caused a huge shortage of man¬
power and neither sufficient funds not building materials were made
available. Another obstacle were the deficient and incomplete land
registers. Comparing
ferences are evident. In the Apace plain, the resettlement and subsequent
expulsion of the German population, followed by the settlement of
Slovene colonists, changed the national character of the border area.
Kočevska,
tional terms already in February
man nationality who were expelled after the war does not change this
basic fact.
The continuous lack of manpower was one of the key problems
in the reconstruction of
economy. The delays in colonisation and its final demise left extensive
areas uninhabited. The inadequate working and living conditions caused
shortages of manpower on the state agricultural estate as well as in the
state forestry administration. The authorities tried to solve the problem
725
Kočevska
in different ways: employing prisoners of war, "returnees" (returned
expatriates) and seasonal workers:, soliciting manpower from other dis¬
tricts, workers from the other republics of the Federal People's Republic
of Yugoslavia, youth brigades, foreign workers, freed prisoners of war,
forced colonisation, hiring convicts from penal camps, seasonal replace¬
ment of the workers in the forestry and agricultural sectors, and other
methods. In
ber of families from the border area of
murje and forced them to settle in
for colonisation purposes by the state agricultural estate. Among others,
200
1947.
Company mainly employed seasonal workers who had stayed behind
in
manpower, a substantial number of foreign citizens, mainly Italians, and
returnees were employed in
worked abroad but returned after the war, were an important source
of manpower to the authorities. Their return was not only economi¬
cally beneficial, it also had political (ideological) significance. But the
plans to settle them in the burnt-down villages of
carried through. In June
of
employed in the coal mine. They local population was often ill-dis¬
posed towards them and because of the poor living and working con¬
ditions many of them, especially miners, left
ment elsewhere.
Throughout the
larly of the central area, were given priority in the economic plans for
Kočevska.
lated and agriculturally backward, marginal areas: the
nica valleys,
ed villages, however, was never seriously considered.
In
exclusively as hay meadows. Farmland was temporarily leased to private
tenants and to district and local people's committees bordering
The leases were temporary in expectation of the implementation of
726
XV.
the colonisation process. No other economic activities (except fruit
picking in the deserted villages) were carried out on the land at the time,
and extensive tracts of farmland were left unbroken for several years after
the end of the war.
During the implementation of the agrarian reform, no less than
95 %
Land Fund and became state property, and only
land and pastures were distributed or disposed. Approximately
10000
the colonisation process itself was marred by continuous delays and was
finally abandoned.
The economic problems of the countryside and town
The resettlement of the Gottscheers and the ravages of war dra¬
matically changed the local political and economic conditions. The
depopulation of the area created the conditions for a complete economic
transformation. Apart from the mine and textile factories,
hardly any industrial tradition and all the industry was based in
In the first five-year plan the main goals for the district of
industrialisation and electrification.
After the liberation, the economic development of
lied heavily on the state-run and cooperative sectors The region differed
from others in that it was sparsely settled and that ownership was
"mainly of a socialist nature". The economic development plan there¬
fore had to be tailored to different criteria. The main economic branch
was mining and the coal mine remained the leading industrial company
in
Mining was followed by agriculture, forestry, and the woodworking
industry. Stockbreeding was the main branch in agriculture, followed
by fruit-growing, but farming was limited to producing fodder for the
livestock. The textile and construction industries (brickworks and tile
works) had relatively important shares, whereas those of tourism, the
crafts, trade, and other activities were less significant. After the war,
Kočevska
manage its vast agricultural and forest areas, there were many other
problems to be solved: water supply, electrification and transport, but
727
Kočevska
also education and health conditions and, above all, the chronic lack
of manpower.
After the war, the industry of
town of
inhabited by over a third of Kocevska's entire population, became a
strongly developed economic centre with a continuously growing po¬
pulation. Its industry promoted the development of settlements in
the town's environs.
ers' town and a centre of administration and education. As the devel¬
oping industry, administration, and schools were concentrated in
Kočevje,
new inhabitants of
bouring villages. Unlike in other towns in Slovenia, the great major¬
ity of the houses were state-owned or owned by the
dition of the buildings deteriorated from year to year. In the mid
1950s,
sold, but only in the area managed by the town or municipality.
Outside
by the state agricultural estates and the forestry administration, no res¬
idential buildings were sold. The authorities planned to build a new
woodworking plant in
technical staff in one place.
Objective as well as subjective reasons made it impossible to
resettle the whole of
theless, crop farming had to be organised on the confiscated land amidst
devastated and burnt down settlements, but the land could not be in¬
cluded in the agricultural use of the entire region. Precisely because of
the extensive confiscated farmland,
suited for the experimental operation of a socialist, state-run agricultur¬
al estate; the composition of the agricultural areas, their geographical
location, the terrain's rugged relief, the
soil, the shortage of manpower, and other reasons, however, required
development to turn to stockbreeding. Until
of the Gottscheers were managed by the state forestry administrations
and by the state agricultural estate in
al stages of development and reorganisation.
728
XV.
The settlement and economic reconstruction of
carried out in accordance with the plans of the Ministry of Agriculture
and Forestry adopted in
duction methods and forms practised by the former owners were not
adequate as they did not provide a solid foundation for the systematic
development and organisation of the new agricultural economy in
Kočevska.
typical, natural conditions for stockbreeding, in particular cattle and
sheep breeding. And only the area with devastated and burnt down vil¬
lages was considered suitable for inclusion in the state sector as it
lacked the basic conditions for colonisation (housing and outbuildings,
equipment and the like). The state sector aimed to incorporate about
18,000
terms, the land was divided into a central administration of state-run
agricultural estates in
ships (Mahovnik, Rajndol, Onek,
Stari Log),
from the area under study belonged. Some of them had been burnt down
completely, most were uninhabited. The principal responsibility of the
stewardships was to introduce pasture farming and to promote efficient
farming, fruit-growing, and beekeeping. The plans envisaged to make
half the so-called pasture forests suitable for pasturing livestock. Before
the stewardships were established, the land had been leased for annual
use to cooperative and village communities.
The state-run agricultural estate in
Mahovnik state estate, which itself had developed from the administra¬
tion and estate in Mahovnik joined by the estates of Gotenica and
Borovec. Mahovnik was thus given the role of a starting basis from
which the stewardships and estates were to be organised and revived.
By May
nik) were already operating, as well as two estates (Ferdreng and
cerji). The estate, which had almost no employees at the beginning
(until
into the largest of the eight existing state estates in Slovenia by num¬
ber of workers and employees by mid
nearly entirely composed of properties formerly belonging to the
119
Kočevska
Gottscheers.
-
and was the strongest economic company in
the living conditions of the employees on the estate were very harsh and
marked by dreadful shortages. As the structure of the economy and the
natural conditions required closer connections between agriculture and
forestry, a joint state economic company was established within the
republic's economic administration
estry Company (AFC). At the end of the
45,343
managed the state-owned agricultural and forest land of the
region. Similarly to the other companies in
trough several stages of development and reorganisation and achieved
quite significant successes. When, at the beginning of
ment of the People's Republic of Slovenia established the
Estate in
tate managed most of the state-owned agricultural and forest land, and
a small part was managed by the AFC in
melj Agricultural Cooperative.
The private agricultural sector was very small and was hampered
by the extreme fragmentation of the land. Considering the age struc¬
ture of the peasant population
-
industrial centres, the ill-defined agrarian policy, the social differentia¬
tion of the peasant population, the abandoned farmland resulting from
the resettlement of the majority population, and the continuing depopu¬
lation of the agricultural areas, the position of the private agricultural
sector was highly inauspicious, and it was not capable of competing with
the dominant state agricultural estates. The authorities used the posi¬
tive results achieved by the
demonstrate the great advantages of big socialist estates over small pri¬
vate estates. In
of
farms had over
tled. The introduction of a socialist economy meant that no less than
71 %
730
XV.
The initially envisaged individual colonisation of
massive scale failed to come true. From the autumn of
cially from the spring of
of agricultural production cooperatives (APCs) a precondition for
colonisation. They planned to establish thirteen agricultural production
cooperatives, including
And the colonisation was to ignore villages in which no cooperatives were
planned. Membership in a cooperative was the condition for colonists
to settle. The initial colonists (especially in
and
agricultural production cooperatives or state estates and most of them
succeeded. Only one fourth of the planned cooperatives were however
established. By the end of
German area (Livold,
(2,9 %
lished on state-owned land that had previously belonged to Gottscheers
and the settlers thus automatically joined the socialist sector. A meagre
0,5 %
leased land. With the exception of a handful of undamaged houses, all
houses were without furnishings and equipment and huge investment
was required; the standard of living of a cooperative's members was there¬
fore very low. In the districts of Crnomelj and
under study, a further agricultural production cooperative was founded
in
and April of
with the establishment of APCs were not granted possession of the land,
and even their kitchen gardens were only leased to them. These condi¬
tions turned people away from settling and working in a cooperative.
The economic operation of an agricultural workers' cooperative (AWC)
was based on a brigade (team) system and work quotas, as well as on
jointly owned production means. The income was divided among them
based on workdays, that is on the members' invested labour and equip¬
ment. In all of
cooperatives with a total of
When the poor living conditions forced individuals to seek
employment elsewhere, the political and executive authorities, whose
731
Kočevska
economic
went as far as ordering companies to dismiss all the members of coopera¬
tives who were employed with them. An increasing number of people
dropped out of the cooperatives. In autumn
were ordered not to employ people who had left a cooperative in vio¬
lation of the rules. Due to pressures from the political authorities, the
members of the cooperatives were ill-motivated and sought find employ¬
ment on one of the state estates. The political authorities, on the other
hand, blamed them for not having enough sense of responsibility to their
job and for lacking firm ideological conviction. In addition to the above
described problems impeding the operation of the cooperatives, the
forest areas given to them in the beginning were taken away from them
in
to the private sector, were much harder and the earnings of their mem¬
bers several times lower then those of craftsmen; they therefore sought
employment elsewhere.
In
Yugoslavia
expansion around Slovenia, and the discussions on the future of small
agricultural estates and their transformation into big agricultural com¬
panies ran high in the
they had to join the socialist sector, they would rather work on a state
estate than in an APC. Not all the peasants in
they were less attached to the land than the peasants from the Ribnica
area. Another reason for their views was the poor work organisation
in the cooperatives and the low standard of living of their members. The
state estates, on the other hand, achieved better results through higher
work discipline, professional management, and better working condi¬
tions, even though they often had to do with less skilled manpower. As
a result, the members of the APCs in Livold and
oppose the incorporation into state estates as this granted them regu¬
lar monthly wages.
At the beginning of
"about to disintegrate" as it had no clear prospects for the future. It was
abolished in
incorporated into the state estate and that of
732
XV.
Borovec estate. The cooperative of
for some time and that of
The
State Administrations became state property after they were confiscated
and they were not distributed. They were managed by the state's forest
administrations (and the stewardships subordinated to them) in
Ribnica,
forestry, the
-maintained forests which were exploited based on forest exploitation
plans
forests of the former German owners, and pasture forests which had
grown on areas initially entered in the land register as pastures and were
indeed used a pastures. Many had started to turn into forest because
of inadequate management. Pastures were meant to be returned to their
original purpose except where they had already turned into proper
forests. Because of the very poor yield of farmlands and their high
location
lages was left entirely to overgrowing.
important economic source and provided much more employment in
forestry than elsewhere. Of the
ulation) in the former German language area in
or
entire Slovene territory.
Of all regions in Slovenia,
the land ownership structure. The government introduced a socialist eco¬
nomic system and very little private property was left. Confiscations,
exchanges, rounding off of properties, colonisation and overgrowing pas¬
tures, meadows and, in places, even fields, changed the image of the land
so thoroughly that all the mentioned ownership relations were no
longer evident from the land register. Apart from the changes in the
ownership structure, a growing problem in the socialist sector was how
to establish changes to the types of land use listed in the land register
that had occurred after resettlement of the German population. The
Kočevska
tional for the then requirements, because in an area previously oc¬
cupied by private farms with typical production methods, a socialist
133
Kočevska
economy was now developing that was based on a different production
method, changing the form, area, use, and ownership of the land.
The farmland of nearly half the deserted villages was being over¬
grown by forest and this became a typical feature of the
scape. This process had, however, started already before the First "World
"War when the population abandoned the common pastures. At the
turn of the 20th century, the forest coverage of
was not unlike the other regions of Slovenia. In the following seven
decades, however, the coverage nearly doubled, reaching
according to experts today exceeds
square kilometres or more than a third of the entire area under study.
In the reverse sense, the share of farmland, in particular pastures,
dropped. The share of fields and meadows,
century, was similar to the neighbouring areas in
krajina,
the pastures which occupy only a fifth of their former extent. In. areas
where most settlements were burnt down during the war and were not
rebuilt after the war, no farmland exists any longer. Farmland is exclu¬
sively concentrated around the town of
The rapidly overgrowing forests changed the image of
landscape and very few areas developed in a normal, continuous way.
Forest overgrowing first occurred at the turn of the 20tl1 century due to
the emigration of
World "War due to the resettlement of the majority (German) popula¬
tion and the desertion and destruction of settlements, and it continued
after the war because the new authorities deemed that the vast areas had
no future anyway and that they were not suited for resettlement. In addi¬
tion, the inhabitants who had settled here were not attached to the land
and most of them were not familiar with agriculture. Today, most of the
population lives in
drop in the peasant population, more pronounced in
where in Slovenia, has only added to this development.
Demographic issues
The composition of
pletely after the war. During the war, some deserted villages were set¬
tled by new inhabitants, mostly from the close environs, and after the
734
XV
war new settlers came from all over Slovenia and Yugoslavia. Most of
them settled in the bigger and less damaged settlements.
Immediately after the war,
over a third of the number of inhabitants in
pulation nearly doubled in the eight years following the end of Second
World War, but this meant only two thirds of the pre-war population
of
The latest population census shows that the number of inhabitants
has now reached the pre-war figure. Due to the resettlement and later
expulsion of the Germans, the population density in
very low after the war and highly differed from the country's average.
Right after the war, in
square kilometre, in
years later
densely populated, whereas most of the deserted villages are in
Rog
Most of
which contributed about two thirds of the region's total national income.
The national composition of the population had changed greatly due
to the resettlement of the Gottscheers and the settlement of new inhabi¬
tants. In the whole of Slovenia, more than half the inhabitants lived in
their birthplace in
who had lived in the same settlements since their birth was below one
third. Compared with other municipalities in the Socialist Republic of
Slovenia, the number was lower only in the municipalities of
Piran.
tory of the same municipality. A major difference compared to the Slo¬
vene average was recorded in settlement from other regions of Slovenia,
as it was one third in
Slovenia. A major disproportion was also recorded in the number of
inhabitants, immigrants from the other republics of Yugoslavia: nearly
8 %
The share of inhabitants of
earlier was among the lowest in Slovenia,
was twice as high. The share of inhabitants who resettled to
in
735
Kočevska
as well as twice the Slovene average. In the following periods the share
of new settlers in
Slovenia. A little over one fifth of the population in
to
compared with the then Slovene municipalities, while the share of reset¬
tled people in the whole of Slovenia was below one tenth. In the
1953-1957
in the previous period
Slovenia, the percentage in either period was slightly over
The mass executions and graves, camps, and the Restricted Area
The
abysses provided the ideal surroundings for the secret mass executions
of several thousand returned members of the Homeguard and other
opponents of the National Liberation War. The secret graves of the
opponents of the Partisan movement in
impact on
Kočevski Rog
cutions in Slovenia, in spite of the fact that the general public had no
knowledge of individual mass graves.
At the end of the Second "World War in Europe about
12,000
-Partisan camp and were accompanied by about
to the Austrian province of Carinthia. In addition, they were joined by
several thousand Ustashi, Croatian Homeguard members, Serbian and
other soldiers and civilians, who in fear of the Yugoslav Army and the
new authorities wanted to surrender to the Allied Forces. The latter
decided to surrender to the Yugoslav Army all the Yugoslav citizens who
had supported the German armed forces. Though different numbers of
returned persons are quoted, a British report states that over
sons were surrendered to the Yugoslav authorities in May
Croatians,
of
vilians returned by trains by way of Jesenice (another route led from
Bleiburg
central camp in the St.
736
XV.
The camp was also used to assemble those captured in Slovenia during
their withdrawal and those who had served in the German army or
armed forces under the command of the German army, or who had
collaborated with them and remained in Slovenia; all these people were
requested to report to the new authorities.
After a brief interrogation, the prisoners were classified into three
groups:
-
by train and by trucks to the abysses in
was shared by many from group B, who were to be sentenced to forced
labour, and some under-age persons from group A. The selection among
the Croatians and Serbs was carried out following slightly different
criteria.
Prisoners from Sentvid were first executed in the vicinity (the
Brezar abyss, May
about the executions, the special execution unit moved to
unit operated in
mainly executed people of Croatian nationality. Based on the state¬
ments of people who managed to escape from the abysses, we may
conclude that the unit was then replaced by Slovene soldiers.
For a brief period, homeguards and others were confined in St.
Mary's Home, the Home of the Blind, and the grammar school in
Kočevje;
trucks. Here they were untied, stripped to their underwear, tied again
and led to the entrance of an abyss where the executioners shot them
and pushed them over the edge. A handful of prisoners nevertheless
managed to escape from the
Milan Zajec from Veliki
Ribnica later wrote about the tragedy when they were living abroad.
There is no way to establish how many victims an individual
mass grave in
multiply the number of prisoners on a truck with the number of days
the executions were carried out and include several trips to
Rog
quote diverse numbers. France
he was shot contained around
737
Kočevska
The two best known mass graves in
Jama pod Krenom and Jama pod Macesnovo
the traces of the mass graves were concealed by mining them: the
entrances to the caves collapsed and instead of caves sinkholes formed.
Researchers have not been able yet to locate a third abyss known as
Ušiva jama.
(Jama v
Based on the statements of homeguards who escaped (no written
sources exist) it is not quite clear, who is buried in an individual abyss.
The most recent research from
Macesnova
whereas the grave below Kren contains members of various nationali¬
ties (Croatians, Serbs, Germans, Russians). The excavated remains of
personal belongings and gear of the victims provide no evidence that
there were any Slovenes among them.
For many decades after the war the exact locations of the mass
graves in
bidden to publicly mention the executions. The mass graves were levelled
with the ground, concealed, or destroyed. Even in the
Security Service still kept a close watch on anybody who would come
near the places where the mortal remains of the victims were supposed
to rest.
On July
tions, a reconciliation ceremony was held at the mass grave Kren below
Kočevski Rog,
highest representatives of political and public life. In spite of the fact
that the reconciliation ceremony provided for a more open discussion
of the post- war executions and hidden mass graves, the activities under¬
taken in the following fifteen years did not meet the expectations about
a speedy and dignified arrangement of the hidden graves, their research,
and the identification of the victims.
In view of the fact that the area was depopulated and in critical
need of manpower, several penal camps were set up in May
were run by the Department for the Protection of the People (DPP, the
army's security department) or by the headquarters of the Fourth
Army in Ljubljana. The construction and operation of the penal camps
738
XV.
in
because all the protected areas, which the exception of the
one in
fied: Ferdreng,
The area of
son
for the Republic's leadership in wartime; after breaking with the
Informbiro,
In Slovenia,
allow for a possible retreat into Central Bosnia and Herzegovina or to
the sea and, secondly, because most of the area of
habited and devastated. Throughout the post-war period, Gotenica
remained the most protected and inaccessible place in the Restricted
Area of
dents. The development of military technology made the construction
of such bunkers, some were built during the Second World "War, obso¬
lete. In recent years, the national defence plans no longer mention
Gotenica as the destination for a retreating republican leadership. The
regime in the Restricted Area had two levels. Gotenica and Skrilj were
inaccessible, while the rest of the area had a less strict regime. By the
time the territory was opened up to the public in late
had been changed three times. The initial borders were determined in
1952,
in
Kočevska.
bigger only in the
fourth of the municipality of
many people thought it was identical with
part of
The area was managed economically by the
Kočevska
Estate (SSE) were identical with the borders of the protected area, the
municipality of
Kočevska Reka.
Gotenica. Throughout the history of the Restricted Area, the SSE
employed most of the local population, and it owned or managed over
739
Kočevska
90 %
Area had a population of
who lived in
nica-Reka valley were spared most of the ravages of war, unlike the vil¬
lages of the municipalities Koprivnik,
As a result, the deserted houses and settlements were used to accommo¬
date refugees already during the war, mainly those from the
lina
people from nearly all over Slovenia, but in some settlements this
amounted to just a couple of families. When the authorities started to
close off the area in
twelve settlements, and in
700
shows the following characteristics: a reduction of the population re¬
sulting from its special purpose (the population dropped by a third),
and its concentration in three settlements. In this period, fourteen vil¬
lages were completely and finally deserted, while three others had only
one family each, taking the number of effectively deserted settlements
to seventeen. If we add another four settlements, deserted before the
establishment of the Restricted Area, we see that less than a third of
the villages were inhabited. Many settlements were virtually obliterated
because even the ruins of houses were removed completely. In the
1953-1956
vived the war, and not a single one of the former
standing. Of the twelve cemeteries in the area, only three were left. And
of the former
side shrines survived.
The fate of the cultural heritage
The tragic fate suffered by this region of Slovenia begs answers
to the question how and in what way it was possible to eliminate in such
a short period nearly all evidence of the cultural landscape in this
and forested region, marked by the former German minority that had
been a linguistic island in the midst of the Slovene national territory
for six hundred years. The physical removal of numerous settlements
had far-reaching effects on the nature of the cultural landscape. What
140
XV.
is left are fragments of a past culture and has merely historical signif¬
icance.
In recent years, a debate on the demolition of the churches in
čevska
ture. Most of the debate was politically biased, blaming one or another
ideology for the fate of the churches, but without taking account of the
circumstances and the fact that the fate of the cultural heritage in Ko-
čevska
the area, in particular in the last decades of the
the First World War; the sudden, large-scale and final resettlement of
the majority population and the depopulation of scores of settlements
in
inadequate economic, personnel, employment and settlement policies
after the war; and systematic demolition, mainly in the
causes effected the whole of
different levels of effect in different areas of
the damages to the settlements and sacral buildings in
from the large-scale Italian offensive, the majority of the sacral heritage
in the area of
of
The German fascist policy, aimed at eliminating the Slovene peo¬
ple as an ethnical group, effectively destroyed
minority, while the war and the vicious post-war period, fraught with
intolerance, destroyed its cultural heritage. Today we are aware of the
significance of national minorities; we can view the period with different
eyes and regret that the Germans of
For centuries, the Slovene people indeed coexisted with the minority
and shared with it its hardships and fortune in this part of the world.
Following the fate suffered by
the former German settlement of the province are very rare. Of its
settlements
either no longer exist today or have only one or two occupied houses.
Places were once villages had stood are usually identified only by the
surviving fruit trees that are increasingly threatened by the encroaching
forest; other evidence are concrete wells carrying the date of con¬
struction and the initials of the owner, and the remains of wells and
141
Kočevska
foundations of buildings whose ruins were largely removed. It would
probably be very hard to find another region anywhere in Europe
where the cultural landscape has undergone changes of the dimension
that occurred in
lost their original appearance or are in the process of losing it.
Before the Italian occupation of Slovenia the German language
area in
the school buildings in
settlements. "Where the population was either predominantly or exclu¬
sively German, the village was burnt down and uninhabited by the end
of the war, and the schools were no exception. After the war, thirteen
schools stopped to operate, and another sixteen schools which operated
for some time after the war, were later abolished. Seven school disap¬
peared without a trace, the buildings of others are deserted or were
turned into residential buildings. Today, only four complete primary
schools and four branch schools are in operation, and with the excep¬
tion of one, they are all located in
The entire period following the Second World War was character¬
ised by a clear desire to wipe out the former German image of the land.
Soon after the liberation, attempts were made at renaming German place
names in
until the early
followed later, between
ished, fifteen obtained an addition to their name, six were given comple¬
tely new names, and four were newly founded.
The tragic fate of the settlements did not spare their sacral build¬
ings. Of the
been preserved. Of the
only twelve are still visible. In six parishes
Reber,
ing was left standing, in seven others only one in each (Koprivnik,
Mozelj,
buildings in the parish of
were preserved in both parishes in the
Cerkev), where the villages were resettled after the war. Many parishes
remained unoccupied. In
142
XV.
by seven parish administrators and one curate, and the unoccupied
parishes were jointly managed by three priests from parishes outside
the area. Twelve years later, the parishes in the former German language
area have only three appointed parish priests.
In the early and mid
tural heritage of
forms. The people who managed
sons, to forcibly remove all traces that would witness to the former
presence of a German minority in the area. In the new authorities,
nationalist and ideological factors combined and showed in the violent
removal all things German, and particularly in the demolition of sacral
buildings
destructive rage has often been explained as driven by ideology, that is
by anti-Catholicism, we should not ignore the nationalist drive. Let us
recall that all the sacral buildings that were destroyed in the wider
Kočevska
former German language area. To sum up: at least
and chapels were demolished in places that were still inhabited and
where the furnishings in the churches had been preserved. These fig¬
ures mainly refer to the parishes of
and
were demolished after the eviction of the population in
area was closed off. The destructive rage unleashed on sacral buildings
was particularly evident in the area of the
people who did not reside there were not allowed access after
1953
were destroyed. The authorities in Ljubljana were aware of the ravages
as they were informed by the Episcopal
Ordinariate
Religious Issues. Its statements were confirmed by the state security
department of the
particular that by management of the
adding that the destruction was more extensive than described in the
Bishop's reports. Because of the illegal activities in the Restricted Area
and official protests by the Church, the authorities decided to settle the
status of the Church's property in
743
Kočevska
chronology of events. In February and March of
property in
on a decree of the presidency of the Antifascist Council of the National
Liberation of Yugoslavia (ACNLY). Most of the land became state
property in
parishes and the affiliate parish in Zdihovo were expropriated. The
parishes in
Cerkva
among other buildings all the parish churches, filial churches and
chapels that were owned by the Church. All church and religious insti¬
tutions managed by an individual parish were counted as one unit and
the parish was left with a "maximum allowed property", while every¬
thing else was expropriated. However, the issue of the expropriation of
Kočevska's
majority of the buildings preserved after the war had been destroyed
a year or two before the expropriation and the issue thus had no legal
basis at all. Two years earlier the authorities had solved the issue of the
Church's property in a different way. Whether the different approach
was influenced by the changed relations with the Church
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia broke off diplomatic relations with the
Vatican
The management of the Church's expropriated real estate was
taken over in part by the
in part by the
were free to decide upon the further destiny of the buildings, that is
whether to adapt them for other purposes or remove them.
That the mass demolition ended in
incident related to the demolition of the church in
planned demolition of the parish church in Mozelj, protests by vil¬
lagers, and a complaint to the cabinet of
following, no further sacral buildings were demolished in
furnishings which the parish administrators managed to collect or
rescue from the demolished churches were mostly given to churches else¬
where in Slovenia, and some of it
today in presbyteries in
rior furnishings did not all share the fate of the buildings (churches),
144
XV.
and that much more furnishings were rescued; these items were either
appropriated by locals or workers, lost, given away, sold in various
parts of Slovenia or abroad
of the church authorities. A similar fate as to the churches was dealt
to the chapels and wayside shrines. Of the over
only one tenth has been preserved. Despite the fact that most of the
38
removed by the Gottscheers, the remaining cemeteries with a total of
523
witnessing to the six-hundred-year presence of Germans in the heart of
the Slovene territory.
745 |
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| any_adam_object_boolean | 1 |
| author | Ferenc, Mitja 1960- |
| author_GND | (DE-588)1066348766 |
| author_facet | Ferenc, Mitja 1960- |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Ferenc, Mitja 1960- |
| author_variant | m f mf |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV021545935 |
| callnumber-first | D - World History |
| callnumber-label | DR1475 |
| callnumber-raw | DR1475.K63 |
| callnumber-search | DR1475.K63 |
| callnumber-sort | DR 41475 K63 |
| callnumber-subject | DR - Balkan Peninsula |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)123963720 (DE-599)BVBBV021545935 |
| edition | 1. izd. |
| era | Geschichte 1900-2000 Geschichte 1947-1962 gnd Geschichte 1944-1947 gnd |
| era_facet | Geschichte 1900-2000 Geschichte 1947-1962 Geschichte 1944-1947 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>00000nam a2200000 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV021545935</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20150204</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t|</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">060410s2005 xx abd| |||| 00||| slv d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9612410720</subfield><subfield code="9">961-241-072-0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)123963720</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV021545935</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">slv</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-19</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-Re13</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">DR1475.K63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ferenc, Mitja</subfield><subfield code="d">1960-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1066348766</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Kočevska, pusta in prazna</subfield><subfield code="b">nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev</subfield><subfield code="c">Mitja Ferenc</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="250" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1. izd.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Ljubljana</subfield><subfield code="b">Modrijan</subfield><subfield code="c">2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">829 S.</subfield><subfield code="b">Ill., graph. Darst., Kt.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zsfassung in engl. Sprache</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1900-2000</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1947-1962</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1944-1947</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Geschichte</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Weltkrieg (1939-1945)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Germans</subfield><subfield code="z">Slovenia</subfield><subfield code="z">Kočevje (Občina)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gottscheers</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">World War, 1939-1945</subfield><subfield code="z">Slovenia</subfield><subfield code="z">Kočevje (Občina)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Neubesiedlung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4465270-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Vertreibung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4063299-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Deutsche</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4070334-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Kočevje (Slovenia : Občina)</subfield><subfield code="x">History</subfield><subfield code="y">20th century</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Kočevje</subfield><subfield code="z">Region</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4021703-6</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Kočevje</subfield><subfield code="z">Region</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4021703-6</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Vertreibung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4063299-4</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Deutsche</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4070334-4</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1944-1947</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Kočevje</subfield><subfield code="z">Region</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4021703-6</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Neubesiedlung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4465270-7</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1947-1962</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=014762094&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=014762094&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">307.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09044</subfield><subfield code="g">4973</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">307.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09045</subfield><subfield code="g">4973</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">307.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09046</subfield><subfield code="g">4973</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="943" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-014762094</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Kočevje (Slovenia : Občina) History 20th century Kočevje Region (DE-588)4021703-6 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Kočevje (Slovenia : Občina) History 20th century Kočevje Region |
| id | DE-604.BV021545935 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-02T14:29:50Z |
| indexdate | 2025-03-16T15:01:28Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9612410720 |
| language | Slovenian |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-014762094 |
| oclc_num | 123963720 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 DE-19 DE-BY-UBM DE-Re13 DE-BY-UBR |
| owner_facet | DE-12 DE-19 DE-BY-UBM DE-Re13 DE-BY-UBR |
| physical | 829 S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. |
| publishDate | 2005 |
| publishDateSearch | 2005 |
| publishDateSort | 2005 |
| publisher | Modrijan |
| record_format | marc |
| spelling | Ferenc, Mitja 1960- Verfasser (DE-588)1066348766 aut Kočevska, pusta in prazna nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev Mitja Ferenc 1. izd. Ljubljana Modrijan 2005 829 S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Zsfassung in engl. Sprache Geschichte 1900-2000 Geschichte 1947-1962 gnd rswk-swf Geschichte 1944-1947 gnd rswk-swf Geschichte Weltkrieg (1939-1945) Germans Slovenia Kočevje (Občina) Gottscheers World War, 1939-1945 Slovenia Kočevje (Občina) Neubesiedlung (DE-588)4465270-7 gnd rswk-swf Vertreibung (DE-588)4063299-4 gnd rswk-swf Deutsche (DE-588)4070334-4 gnd rswk-swf Kočevje (Slovenia : Občina) History 20th century Kočevje Region (DE-588)4021703-6 gnd rswk-swf Kočevje Region (DE-588)4021703-6 g Vertreibung (DE-588)4063299-4 s Deutsche (DE-588)4070334-4 s Geschichte 1944-1947 z DE-604 Neubesiedlung (DE-588)4465270-7 s Geschichte 1947-1962 z Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=014762094&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=014762094&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Ferenc, Mitja 1960- Kočevska, pusta in prazna nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev Geschichte Weltkrieg (1939-1945) Germans Slovenia Kočevje (Občina) Gottscheers World War, 1939-1945 Slovenia Kočevje (Občina) Neubesiedlung (DE-588)4465270-7 gnd Vertreibung (DE-588)4063299-4 gnd Deutsche (DE-588)4070334-4 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4465270-7 (DE-588)4063299-4 (DE-588)4070334-4 (DE-588)4021703-6 |
| title | Kočevska, pusta in prazna nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev |
| title_auth | Kočevska, pusta in prazna nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev |
| title_exact_search | Kočevska, pusta in prazna nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Kočevska, pusta in prazna nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev |
| title_full | Kočevska, pusta in prazna nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev Mitja Ferenc |
| title_fullStr | Kočevska, pusta in prazna nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev Mitja Ferenc |
| title_full_unstemmed | Kočevska, pusta in prazna nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev Mitja Ferenc |
| title_short | Kočevska, pusta in prazna |
| title_sort | kocevska pusta in prazna nemsko jezikovno obmocje na kocevskem po odselitvi nemcev |
| title_sub | nemško jezikovno območje na Kočevskem po odselitvi Nemcev |
| topic | Geschichte Weltkrieg (1939-1945) Germans Slovenia Kočevje (Občina) Gottscheers World War, 1939-1945 Slovenia Kočevje (Občina) Neubesiedlung (DE-588)4465270-7 gnd Vertreibung (DE-588)4063299-4 gnd Deutsche (DE-588)4070334-4 gnd |
| topic_facet | Geschichte Weltkrieg (1939-1945) Germans Slovenia Kočevje (Občina) Gottscheers World War, 1939-1945 Slovenia Kočevje (Občina) Neubesiedlung Vertreibung Deutsche Kočevje (Slovenia : Občina) History 20th century Kočevje Region |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=014762094&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=014762094&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ferencmitja kocevskapustainpraznanemskojezikovnoobmocjenakocevskempoodselitvinemcev |