Danijel Grafenauer TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 95 / 2025, p. 193–215 Corresponding author Danijel Grafenauer, Inštitut za narodnostna vprašanja, Ljubljana, Slovenia; e-mail: danijel. grafenauer@inv.si; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9039-694X Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations as Hostage of the Troubled Legacy of the 19 th and 20 th Centuries Abstract Austria and Slovenia are neighbours and friends, closely linked both geographically and historically. Over time, their peoples have developed various perceptions, stereotypes, and prejudices about each other. The rise of national movements and modern states has significantly shaped national historiographies, which have often drawn on past events in search of foundational ideas for the formation of their respective nation- states. This paper explores how this complex and sometimes troubled legacy has influenced cross-border relations. Keywords  Austria, Slovenia, cross-border relations, history, stereotypes © Author 2025. This is an open access article licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). DOI:10.2478/tdjes-2025-0017 Received 20. 3. 2025, Accepted 11. 11. 2025 D. GRAfENAUER Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations ... 1. Introduction Austria and Slovenia are neighbouring and friendly countries, closely connected both geographically and historically, working together in co- existence to find common interests and shared pathways. Over time, various perceptions, stereotypes, and prejudices have developed be- tween the two countries and peoples, especially in the border areas on both sides of the Slovene-Austrian border. To analyse these prejudices, it is essential to know the history of relations on this territory, the so- cial forces at play during specific historical periods, and the actions and political decisions of the social elites in both countries. Only through such an understanding can we explain the emergence of stereotypes and prejudices, which, it seems, have often influenced the behaviour of political elites in both countries and shaped their bilateral relations, especially over the last century. A significant event in this context was the November 1993 meeting of the Slovene-Austrian Commission of Historians, whose Slovene/Ger- man title translates to A Neighbour Through the Neighbour’s Eyes (Roz- man 1995). This meeting was part of a series addressing the history and relations between the two countries and nations. For several decades, researchers from various fields – primarily historians, more so in Slove- nia than in Austria – have been studying the diverse social intersections between the two countries. This paper builds on that tradition, examin- ing how myths, stereotypes, and historical processes, alongside current events, shape generalised pictures of the other. These images often outgrow their purpose, shaping and influencing everyday life and soci- ety in general. The aim of the article is to show and explain – through an analysis of literature, research, and other sources, as well as by ex- amining stereotypes and prejudices – how historiographical narratives influenced mutual relations between the two nations and states in the 19 th and 20 th centuries. Former Slovenia’s Prime Minister Janez Drnovšek (2002) observed that misinterpretation and irrational attachments to the past could fuel irresponsible populist policies. Any issues, he argued, should be resolved through reason. He emphasised the Slovene minority as a key factor in strengthening Austria’s role as a partner for Slovenia and play- ing a crucial role in Slovenia’s future integration into European struc- tures. On that same occasion, former Austria’s Prime Minister Wolfgang Schüssel (2002) highlighted the need to distinguish between the sub- stantive and emotional aspects of unresolved issues. He argued that politicians should address the root causes of emotions and mistrust, taking the difficult but necessary steps to break existing clichés. Doing 195 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES 95 / 2025 so, he claimed, would make it easier to resolve outstanding issues be- tween the two countries. From a historical perspective, many stereotypes persist between Austria and Slovenia, with deeply rooted images of the neighbour often stemming from the past (cf., e.g., Bruckmüller 2002; Suppan 2002; Štih 2002; 2012; 2024; etc.). In today’s context, as both countries share mem- bership in the European Union, these stereotypes present obstacles. Consequently, discussions and dialogue between neighbours (Brousek et al. 2020) are essential to address and correct these images, highlight- ing those that affect good neighbourly relations and constructive coex- istence in a common space. Such efforts are particularly significant for the social perception of national minorities in both countries, both the Slovene national community in Austria and the German-speaking eth- nic community in Slovenia. The purpose of the article is to demonstrate how the complex and challenging legacy between two neighbouring and friendly nations and states has influenced and continues to influence cross-border relations, both in the past and in the present. The research methodology is based on a range of methods and techniques that enable the analysis of the past and the understanding of historical processes. In addressing the topic, critical source analysis, comparative methods, the hermeneutic approach, and interdisciplinary methods were employed. These includ- ed historical, sociological, anthropological, and literary methods and techniques. Through contextualisation and qualitative approaches, di- verse historical narratives were considered to interpret historical events and processes. The article is structured into six subchapters. Following the intro- duction to the topic, it begins with an examination of the origins of ste- reotypes and myths, continues with an overview and analysis of the history of relations between the two nations and states, and includes a discussion of generalisations and imagery based on stereotypes. A significant part of the article focuses on the importance of minorities in mutual relations. The article concludes with subchapters that aim to present the most recent perceptions of neighbouring nations and, in the final section, highlight positive examples and developments of cross-border cooperation. 2. The Formation of Stereotypes and Myths The rise of national movements and modern states has significant- ly shaped national historiographies, which have often drawn on past 196 events in search of foundational ideas for the formation of their respec- tive nation-states (Vodopivec 2006). This process led to national stereo- types, which generalised historical and contemporary conditions and events to the extent that specific perceptions about the neighbouring nation became entrenched and embedded in national ideologies. As the latter gained social recognition and validity, the perception of the neighbouring nation became increasingly filtered and abstracted. Na- tionalisms, which have played a crucial role in social and political move- ments as well as personal lives since at least the mid-19 th century (cf. Wingfield 2004), mobilised social elites and sought equality or domi- nance in multicultural or border regions (Judson 2006). The formation of ethnic and national identities became both a unifying and dividing force in everyday social life in the region (cf. Hobsbawm 1990; Hroch 2015; Štih et al. 2008, etc.). The perception or image of the neighbour- ing nation has often been shaped by social elites, which had access to the means of mass communication, including schools, the press, car- toons, various media, film, public lectures, novels, arts, historiography, and modern social networks. The histories of European nations are, to a large extent, constructs and projections, shaped in their essential fea- tures in the 19 th century and representing visions of the past formulated by intellectual elites in connection with their political and national ide- als. These pseudo-historical images, which also contained contempo- rary needs, values, and contents projected onto the past, continue to prevail in Europe at the level of historical memory and are accepted as self-evident and unquestionable historical realities, even though they are, in essence, mere representations (Grafenauer & Wakounig 2025, 528). The past is crucial for the formation of identity, mainly because of the re-emergence of marginalised, silenced, and unacknowledged sto- ries of suffering (Assmann 2006). Historians have observed that past events are remembered, classified, and interpreted in relation to the present (Benjamin 1965). Collective memory within a social commu- nity or a nation primarily refers to the foundational and key events in its history. Most of these involve violence but are later legitimised and celebrated as milestones. Events glorified by some may be perceived as humiliating by others (Ricoer 1998). Stereotypes originating in the 19 th century persist also today. For in- stance, the German-Austrian perspective portrays Slavs (including Slo- venes) as a “people of servants” (Štih 2006), which, in contemporary terms, translates to distrust of their southern neighbours. For Slovenes, this aligns with their own auto-stereotype of an oppressed people with a glorious past (the era of the Carantanian princes) and a generally D. GRAfENAUER Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations ... 197 hostile attitude toward the oppressive Germans/Austrians. Converse- ly, Austrians’ auto-stereotype paints them as slightly conservative but polished, refined, and cultured (Bruckmüller 2001). Slovene literature, particularly after the First and Second World Wars, has reinforced a self- perception or auto-stereotype that drives the recent fears of Austrian economic dominance and the use of pejorative terms like yodellers or Nazis to describe Slovenia’s neighbours. While these negative conno- tations are relatively isolated, they gain immediate resonance through mass media. Recently, however, these perceptions have begun to shift. The history of Slovenes is now increasingly viewed alongside the broad- er history of the Slovene territory, which has long been home to di- verse identities – of which Slovene identity is just one (Štih 2001; 2002). Nevertheless, a still-contentious and potentially destabilising factor in maintaining hostile heterostereotypes is the way political elites in both countries treat indigenous, historically rooted national or linguistic communities (Jesih 2004). The negative or hostile image of Germans/Austrians in Slovenia and Slovenes/Yugoslavs in Austria is rooted in viewing history through na- tionalist and nationalistic lens. Europe remains ensnared in perceptions that originated in the mid-19 th century, when modern nation-states were taking shape (Štih 2002). Recent research indicates that certain events, such as the Carinthian plebiscite celebrations on 10 October, still hold significant relevance among young people in Carinthia. Slo- vene community members often feel excluded or boycott these cele- brations, perceiving the plebiscite’s significance differently than their Austrian counterparts (cf. Pirker 2013). National stereotypes play a key role in these differing perceptions (Bruckmüller 2001). While such cele- brations serve as building blocks for nationalism and the popularisation of nationalist ideas and borders in Austria, the plebiscite is perceived as a national defeat in Slovenia. Therefore, Slovenia commemorates the struggle for the northern border, although to a much lesser degree (Pušnik 2011). Slovenes’ perception of their history is perhaps best encapsulated by the myth of the nation of servants, a long-standing auto-stereotype. Since their settlement in the wider territory of present-day Slovenia in the 6 th century, Slovenes have experienced domination by more power- ful neighbouring nations, particularly Germans (Štih & Winkler 2025, 43) and later also Italians. A brief exception was the glorious and inde - pendent state of Carantania, symbolised by the Prince’s Stone, which was used for the installation of princes and is now displayed at the Kla- genfurt Landhaus, and the often mistakenly associated Duke’s Chair. TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES 95 / 2025 198 This projection of national history stretches back to the settlement of Slavs in the Eastern Alps (Štih 2012). Slovenes perceive themselves as a hard-working, peaceful, and reasonable nation that has often been treated unfairly by history. The sun of freedom truly shone for them only in 1918, 1945, and 1991 – dates that, today, are interpreted dif- ferently depending on the ideological viewpoint of individuals or po- litical groups. However, one perception remains unanimous: the idea of the 1000-year yoke under which the nation suffered at the hands of their, at least in the last century, bloodthirsty neighbours. In this narra- tive, Slovenes are seen as having been deprived of their own nobility and bourgeoisie, taken from them by foreigners. Language, as a con- stitutive element of statehood, remained central to their identity, but it could not fully flourish, as foreign rulers relegated Slovene to the lan- guage of servants and peasants. Only at the beginning of the 19 th cen- tury did the situation begin to improve. Slovenia’s greatest poet France Prešeren foreshadowed the nation’s awakening and a brighter future in his Wreath of Sonnets, where he spoke of clearer skies and kinder stars shining upon the people of Upper Carniola. This perception, rooted in certain historical realities of the local population – such as cultural and linguistic traditions – became particularly pronounced during the for- mation of modern European nations. It also shaped heterostereotypes, i.e., perceptions of how other nations and their elites view Slovenes. In the multicultural Alpine-Adriatic region, the 19 th century was marked by processes of identity negotiation, demarcation, and adaptation within complex ethnic identifications (Fikfak & Schönberger 2024). The terms used to describe this historical narrative classify Slovenes as either latecomers or martyrs of history – portrayed as a people ruled by foreign masters on their own land, oppressed and governed as a nation of serfs and peasants, without a political history of their own. These conceptual frameworks began to emerge as early as the late 18 th century with Anton Tomaž Linhart, an Enlightenment intellectual, and his unfinished work an attempt at a History of Carniola and the other Lands of the Southern Slavs of austria. In this work, Linhart examined Slovenes as a distinct national whole, tracing their history back to the early Middle Ages and Carantania. While Linhart himself did not yet present Slovenes as martyrs of history, his study – later reinforced by 20 th -century Slovene historiography – played a crucial role in shaping Slovene historical consciousness. As a result, the ethnic history of the nation was projected backward along the chronological timeline, retro- actively attributing essential elements of 19 th -century national identity to earlier historical periods (Štih 2006; 2024). D. GRAfENAUER Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations ... 199 The myth of the Prince’s Stone and the installation of Carantani- an princes remains deeply embedded in Slovenia’s society. Following the country’s independence in 1991, the stone was depicted on the young country’s temporary currency. This, however, triggered politi- cal tensions between Ljubljana, Klagenfurt, and Vienna. As a result, the Prince’s Stone did not feature on Slovenia’s official currency tolar that was used until 2006. When Slovenia joined the EU in May 2004 and strived for an early introduction of the euro in January 2007, tensions with Austria resurfaced when the Prince’s Stone appeared on the two- cent coin (cf. Štih 2024; Nikolay 2010). In essence, this forms a central axis of Slovenia’s history, leaving no room for interpretation other than that the Prince’s Stone is a funda- mental Slovene legal monument. However, historical evidence today suggests that it is primarily a monument to Carinthian heritage, where Carantanian princes and Carinthian dukes were enthroned in Old Slo- vene language. 3. History of Relations Between the Two Nations and Countries, Inclusion of Generalisations and Images Based on Stereotypes During the 19 th century, but also later, particularly during the period of nation-building, the German language, supported by its broader base and more developed political thought, held greater social, cul- tural, and economic capital. This created a fluidity of ethnic identities in the interactions between German and Slovene speakers, with many shifting from Slovene to German – though the reverse also occurred. At the same time, an expanding circle of Slovene-minded intellectu- als emerged, largely composed of individuals educated at universities across the Austrian Empire and later the monarchy. These intellectuals – including writers, poets, and scholars from various fields – reflected on the history of the Slovene nation, imbuing various tragedies with national significance and often depicting Slovenia as a key defender of Europe against the Turkish threat (Moritsch 1997; 2000; 2002). Similar processes unfolded among German speakers, who also fol- lowed the patterns of modern nation-building. Their national aspira- tions included the idea that wherever German speakers lived or had strategic interests – such as access to the Adriatic Sea – German state formations should emerge. Caricatures that generalise stereotypes about Slovenes in ways accessible to the broader public (Suppan 2002) TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES 95 / 2025 200 offer a vivid illustration of how Slovenes were perceived in Austrian society. These depictions often reflected a paternalistic German atti- tude toward Slovene-speaking neighbours, portraying the latter as lack- ing the necessary attributes of a fully developed nation (no significant national achievements, language alone was deemed insufficient). The Germans adopted a patronising stance to the prob LemS of t He Litt Le na - tion , which they saw as destined to live and prosper under the influ- ence of the German spirit (Grdina 2004, 707–732). Social organisation, power, and culture were considered privileges of the German-speaking population. This was reflected in the glorification of German culture and achievements, the emphasis on the German language as a cornerstone of intellectual and cultural life (evident, for instance, in the availability of translations of major world literature in German but not in Slovene), and the activities of various German nationalist societies advocating for the protection of German speakers in southern Styria, Carinthia, Upper Carniola, and other regions. By the late 19 th and early 20 th centuries, these tensions escalated into violent confrontations between members of the two nations, amplified by media coverage. The mistrust between Slovenes and Germans reached its peak after the outbreak of World War I, when, at a politically charged moment, sections of the German press accused the Slovene intelligentsia – particularly priests and teach- ers – of Serbophilia and anti-Austrian, anti-German, and anti-dynastic activities (Heppner 2002; Suppan 1983, 175–212; 1996; 1998; 2002; Liška 1984). After the victory of the national principle in 1918, the development of newly defined Austrian-Slovene (Yugoslav) relations was significantly shaped by the Carinthian plebiscite and the minority question (Pleter- ski 2003; Grafenauer 2016a). The plebiscite’s outcome and the subse- quent loss of Carint Hia aS t He Crad Le of t He SLovene nation understand- ably caused great disappointment and frustration in Yugoslav Slovenia. Gosposvetsko polje/Zollfeld was perceived as the Slovene equivalent of Kosovo Field, and the koroška bol (Carinthian pain) resonated deeply among all Slovenes. This sense of loss played a crucial role in shaping Slovene collective consciousness, with the defeat framed as a national catastrophe. The pressures of Germanisation imposed by German na- tionalist societies and the Carinthian regional authorities on the Slovene minority in Carinthia were viewed as a profound injustice. In the minds of Slovenes in Yugoslavia, Carinthian Slovenes were seen as brothers who had not yet managed to break free from a t Hou Sand year S of Ger - man domination , while Austria was increasingly regarded as a German- oriented state. On both sides, plebiscite celebrations carried strong sym- D. GRAfENAUER Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations ... 201 bolic and communicative value, reinforcing national cultural memory and identity (cf. Fikfak 2013; Grafenauer 2015). According to the Carin- thian regional authorities, post-plebiscite exiles from Carinthia, who sought new livelihoods in Yugoslav Slovenia due to German nationalist pressures, significantly disrupted the good relations between the two newly formed states (Grafenauer 2010). For historical reasons, German Austrians were increasingly perceived as the fatal enemy of the Slovene nation – an image that culminated with Hitler’s Germany’s invasion of Yugoslav Slovenia and the substantial role Austrians played in the occu- pation regime during World War II. Even after the war ended, tensions persisted. The 1955 Austrian State Treaty on the Re-establishment of an Independent and Democratic Austria did not fully resolve these issues. The abolition of compulsory bilingual schools in southern Carinthia in 1958/59, the so-called ortstafelsturm (the 1972 war against local bi- lingual signs), and the special nature of the 1976 census all further en- trenched distrust between Slovenes and Austrians on both sides of the Karavanke mountains (cf. Stourzh 2005; Pandel et al. 2004; Klemenčič & Klemenčič 2010, 165–197; Grafenauer 2020; Suppan 2005). The national tensions after 1918 also fuelled anti-Slavic sentiments and stereotypes in Austria. While the majority of Slovenes (along with other Slavic peoples of the former monarchy) found themselves in other, victorious state formations, Austria remained in the losers’ circle. The prevailing sentiment was associated with the victorious interpretation of the struggle for the northern Slovene or southern Austrian border which, despite Austria’s military defeat, ultimately resulted in Austria’s favour. The glorification of the Carinthian defensive struggle (abweh- rkampf) emphasised love for the country (Rumpler 2005). The defend- ers were venerated, and the defensive struggle became a core symbol of German nationalist ideology, shaping Carinthia’s culture of remem- brance (Koschat 2010). Plebiscite propaganda also played a significant role in shaping stereotypes (Semlič Rajh 2020; Grafenauer 2016b, etc.) Conversely, Slovenia in 2005 elevated the 1918 liberation of m aribor and ot Her part S of Sout Hern Styria to the status of a national holiday, of- ficially naming it Rudolf Maister’s Day. In Austria, however, Rudolf Mais- ter is viewed negatively as the man who Came wit H t He Carnio Lan S to di Srupt tHe unity of tHe Country . He is also associated with Bloody Sun- day, a term used to describe the January 1919 shooting of more than ten German demonstrators in Maribor (Jenuš et al. 2020). Adding to these tensions was the presence of a German-speaking minority in the newly formed South Slavic state to which Slovenia now belonged. The TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES 95 / 2025 202 once politically and economically strong German minority experienced a significant regression of its rights. Throughout the 20 th century, national perspectives on social develop- ments in the Alpine-Adriatic region were deeply shaped by the conse- quences of both world wars. While these narratives are only slowly fad- ing into the subconscious, they still resurface whenever tensions arise between the two neighbouring countries – most notably in the form of mistrust toward the other nation. For example, during the Covid-19 cri- sis in November 2020, an Austrian border police officer at the Lavamünd border crossing hung up a sign that read: “f ür Jugos gesperrt, da Ös- terreicher sich auch nicht frei bewegen dürfen!” “Closed to yugoslavs [pejor.], since austrians are also not allowed to move freely!” (Habich 2020). Another case occurred in late 2016 in the Austrian region of Styria, where posters appeared featuring images of Kekec, a well-known Slovene literary character and hero, accompanied by hostile slogans claiming that Kekec was an economic migrant who wanted to destroy Austrian culture and the social system and to harass Austrian women (Volksgruppen.orf.at 2016). A particularly sensitive and enduring ele- ment in this dynamic remains Austria’s policies toward the Slovene na- tional community in Carinthia and Styria (Grafenauer 2020). 4. Minorities in Both Countries: An Opportunity or an Obstacle to Cooperation in the 20 th Century? The strong Nazification of the pre-war German minority in Slovenia, coupled with the pre-war activities of the Swabian-German Cultural As- sociation (Schwäbisch-deutscher kulturbund) in the Slovene territory, further strained relations between the populations. The relocation of the Gotscheers to the Lower Sava and Sotla valleys – areas from which some 40,000 Slovenes had previously been expelled – and the align- ment of the German minority leadership with Nazi plans, alongside wartime atrocities, laid the groundwork for the final post-war reckon- ing with the German minority (Biber 1966). When asked about post- war rights of the German minority at the December 1945 meeting of the Liberation Front Central Committee in Ljubljana, Boris Kidrič replied that the German minority “will have no right in our country because there will be none” (Jenuš 2013). After World War II, members of the German minority largely retreated northward, fearing retaliation by the victors. Many were forcibly deported, and some perished in camps or D. GRAfENAUER Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations ... 203 through extrajudicial killings (Nećak et al. 2004). These actions were compounded by the violent revolution and class-oriented confiscation of property. In Austrian society, and particularly among the descen- dants, there is a general perception that the Republic of Slovenia failed to provide a fair and just restitution. To this day, their memory and cul- ture of remembrance remain primarily focused on the actions of the post-war communist authorities, while their own Nazification and role in wartime atrocities are continuously minimised (cf. Marschnig 2010). Conversely, Slovene authorities and individuals viewed the post-war period as one of justified revenge and reckoning with those who had contributed to their suffering and war crimes. Similar patterns could be observed in Austria, where, until 1991, vigilance and fear of the com- munist south (Ljubljana and Belgrade) persisted. The southern neigh- bour was perceived as untrustworthy, continuing to cast its gaze beyond the Karavanke Mountains, as it had done since the 19 th century. Mean- while, Slovenes in Carinthia and Styria were viewed as irredentists with secret ties to the south, scheming against Austria. In short, the largely expelled German minority perceives the post-war period as a time of immense injustice (cf. Karner 1998; 2005; Nećak et al. 2004; Ferenc & Repe 2004; Grafenauer 2014). This legacy, amplified by politicians and the media, posed a chal- lenge at the time of Slovenia’s independence but was offset by Austria’s strong support for Slovenia’s aspirations for independence. Newly in- dependent Slovenia and Austria began shaping their mutual relations from the outset. Or so it seemed in the milestone years of 1991 and 1992. Austria’s support, particularly through the efforts of then Foreign Minister Alois Mock, left a lasting impression on the Slovene people. During his visits to the country on the sunny side of the Alps, Minister Mock was met with affection by the people on the streets (Eichtinger & Wohnout 2012, 224–249). It is worth noting that Slovenes tend to have a much deeper knowl- edge of their Austrian neighbours than vice versa. Austrians, outside the federal states of Carinthia and Styria, generally know little about Slovenes and have no particular stereotypes about them. Many gen- eral opinions about Slovenes in Austria – derived from public opinion surveys after 1918 – can be attributed to the association of Slovenes with other South Slavic peoples, thereby reinforcing the perception that other Yugoslavs could be found beyond the southern border alongside Slovenes (Bruckmüller 2001). The term Yugoslavia and its derivative Yu- goslavs carried negative connotations within interpersonal and family relations that persisted into the 1990s. This sentiment was reinforced TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES 95 / 2025 204 by Austria’s historically ambivalent attitude toward the larger state of which Slovenia was a part. During the Cold War, mistrust persisted, driven by fears of potential escalations and uncertainty about Yugosla- via’s intentions. The border was internationally recognised but was per- ceived in different ways, depending on the viewpoint. In the Slovene public opinion and the views of intelligentsia, the border was perceived as unjust, particularly given the Slovene national community’s ongoing deprivation of minority rights and the state’s lack of intervention against national intolerance, particularly in Carinthia. From the perspective of Austria’s elites, the border was viewed as the minimum Austria man- aged to preserve while having to relinquish certain areas and the old German towns of Maribor, Celje, Ptuj, etc., once predominantly inhab- ited by German speakers (cf. Bister & Vodopivec 1995; Lendvai 2001; Mayrhofer-Grünbühel & Polzer 2002). The issue of Austrian property that was confiscated and nationalised in Slovenia at the end of World War II and after 1945 further contrib- utes to Austria’s image of its problematic southern neighbour. This also affects the implementation of minority rights for Carinthian Slovenes, which were eroded during and after the two world wars, with planned Germanisation efforts and the incomplete implementation of Article 7 of the 1955 Austrian State Treaty. Austria’s failure to fully implement these provisions continues to consolidate anti-German and anti-Austri- an sentiments among Slovenes (Grafenauer & Jesih 2020). A particular point of tension is the Carinthian primal fear or ura- ngst which is sometimes ridiculed in Austria but draws from historical events, particularly the two world wars and post-war territorial claims by Slovenia/Yugoslavia for a part of the territory of once Austro-Hunga- ry and later Republic of Austria inhabited by a majority Slovene-speak- ing population. German nationalist organisations such as the Carinthian Homeland Service (kärntner Heimatdienst) called for vigilance against the communist south during the Cold War, fostering widespread sus- picion by accusing Carinthian Slovenes of covert ties to Yugoslavia and labelling them as irredentists. These accusations intensified following a series of bombings in southern Carinthia during the 1970s, culminat- ing in the 1979 explosion at the museum in Velikovec/Völkermarkt and the arrest of two collaborators of the Yugoslav State Security Service (udba) (cf. Omerza 2011). Thus, the cycle was complete once again, with all old prejudices reinforced and enriched with new elements. All of this has caused historical traumas that have been transmitted across generations among Carinthian Slovenes (Wutti 2013, 45–54). These ex- periences and the transmission of trauma influence various memory D. GRAfENAUER Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations ... 205 narratives, which in turn shape the memory culture of a particular part of the population. Because of differing historical narratives, the memo- ry culture is not unified and, in the past, did not engage in processes of confrontation or reconciliation. New initiatives seek to be more inclu- sive and to introduce an inclusive discourse also into the educational process (Wutti et al. 2021). The media’s reinforcement of sentiments toward the south contrib- uted to a perception in Slovenia that, during EU accession negotiations, Austria was exploiting Slovenia’s small size, inexperience, relative weak- ness, and ultimate submissiveness when it came to Austria’s interests (e.g., the issue of the Lipizzaner horses). Regarding political awareness and perception of developments in both countries, the saying w Hen an au Strian po Liti Cian C ou GHS, t He SLovene pre SS Cat CHeS a Co Ld seems par- ticularly fitting. Historical perceptions and stereotypes continue to be shaped by the idea of the German-loyalist Austria that enthusiastically joined the German Reich in 1938 and where denazification after World War II was not carried out to a sufficient extent. Austria’s own ambigui- ties regarding its national identity further contributed to this. During EU accession negotiations, old fears resurfaced in Slovenia – particularly the irrational anxiety that open borders would lead to a renewed state of German servitude. This fear was reflected in Slovene media head- lines such as “iS SLovenia a Lready an a u Strian C o Lony?” and references to Austrian hegemonic aspirations, arrogance, sanctimony, Viennese ar- rogance, manipulation, and other similar notions. The fear of history repeating itself remained ever-present (Drčar-Murko 2002). It is well known that the majority of the German-speaking ethnic group in Slovenia today is dissatisfied with the arrangements provid- ed by the Cultural Agreement between Slovenia and Austria (officially titled Act on the Ratification of the Agreement between the Govern- ment of the Republic of Slovenia and the Government of the Republic of Austria on Cooperation in Culture, Education and Science, adopted in 2002). Article 15 thereof relates to the integration of cultural, edu- cational, scientific, and other projects of the German-speaking popula- tion in Slovenia into interstate relations. The Austrian Parliament has repeatedly called for recognition and the regulation of their minority rights, such as those of the Italian and Hungarian national communi- ties in Slovenia (J. R., 2020 ). These wishes of Austria were reiterated by Prime Minister Kurz during his visit to Slovenia in September 2020. Also, the umbrella organisation of the German-speaking ethnic community in Slovenia – the Association of Cultural Societies of the German-speak- ing Ethnic Community in Slovenia – has publicly called on the Slovene TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES 95 / 2025 206 government in several resolutions for constitutional recognition of its minority rights (cf. Škerl Kramberger 2018). Above all, efforts to ensure the national existence or revitalisation of the German-speaking ethnic group in Slovenia can be traced after 1991, when Slovenia became in- dependent (Grafenauer 2014). After Slovenia’s independence and the change of the political sys- tem, relations between Slovenia and Austria became to thaw at all lev- els. However, certain stereotypes persist. On the Austrian side, Slovenes continue to be associated with folk music and accordion playing. Anoth- er stereotype, particularly in the southern regions, portrays Slovenes (including Carinthian Slovenes) as (former) partisans and Russophile- oriented pan-Slavists. Conversely, a common stereotype for Austrians is that they secretly sympathise with neo-Nazism, and that the German- speaking fellow countryman of Carinthian Slovenes still has his boots ready to march across the southern border and secure Germany’s long- coveted access to the Adriatic Sea. 5. Recent Perceptions of Neighbours In recent years, certain stereotypes have emerged regarding the approx- imately 27,000 daily migrants from Slovenia employed in Austrian com- panies, particularly in the border regions of Carinthia and Styria. Highly valued are Slovene nurses, nursing home staff, and 24-hour caregivers, alongside roughly 1,000 professionals from Slovenia who commute to Austria every day. Conversely, there are over 1,000 companies in Slove- nia founded with Austrian capital, 760 of which are predominantly Aus- trian-owned. As a result, Austrian business owners and employees fre- quently travel to Slovenia, many of them daily. These perceptions of the neighbouring nation tend to be largely positive. Slovenes are regarded as diligent workers who share a similar cultural background with Austri- ans. Austrians, in turn, are seen as the employers who provide Slovenes with better economic opportunities. While occasional negative portray- als surface in public discourse, the overall relationship remains symbiot- ic. This positive shift is attributed to increased mutual understanding in recent years, bolstered by stronger cross-border cooperation in various fields, including economic, cultural, scientific, sports, etc. (Grafenauer & Jesih 2021). Over the last three decades, Austrian perceptions and prejudices regarding Slovenia have been shaped by various issues, such as the debate surrounding the Krško nuclear power plant – where Slovenia was sometimes portrayed as unreliable or backward – and media cov- D. GRAfENAUER Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations ... 207 erage of property restitution for the German-speaking ethnic commu- nity (in media reporting, restitution is not recognised as a complex legal issue, addressed in the Austrian State Treaty and court rulings). Addi- tionally, Austria’s view of its neighbour has been influenced by Slove- nia’s initiatives regarding the Slovene minority in Austria and its rights, and by some Slovene political parties’ attempts to gain support from ideologically aligned Austrian counterparts. Historical events that have caused deep traumas and continue to shape a contradictory and often conflicting culture of remembrance include border disputes following World War I and the differing narratives of the border struggle (defen- sive struggle from the Austrian perspective versus the struggle for the northern border from the Slovene viewpoint), Nazism and the Nazi oc- cupation of Yugoslavia, the Partisan resistance, the Yugoslav occupation of Carinthia, post-World War II border disputes, post-war executions, the communist regime in Slovenia, the rights of Carinthian Slovenes, Austrian-Yugoslav (Slovene) relations during the Cold War, and the sta- tus of the German-speaking minority in Slovenia after 1991 (Brousek et al. 2020). Numerous events have influenced and continue to influ- ence the formation of prejudices and stereotypes, many of which are addressed by the author of this paper in the literature cited. National minorities themselves are also often triggers of tensions and creators of prejudices. More recently, this includes the illegal and disproportionate police intervention at the Peršman Homestead, a historical site preserv- ing the memory of the partisan resistance of Carinthian Slovenes and the Nazi atrocities committed during the World War II (Bundesministe- rium für Inneres 2025), the incident at the football match between the Slovene Athletic Club (Sak) and Atus from Borovlje/Ferlach, when the assistant referee demanded that Sak’s goalkeeping coach speak Ger- man to a player of the opposing team and issued him a yellow card when he refused (Rustia 2025), and the latest attack on bilingual place- name signs in October 2025 (Smrečnik 2025). 6. Conclusion National antagonisms between Austria and Slovenia are gradually being overcome, particularly through cross-border cooperation in various fields – in economic, scientific, political, cultural, and sporting domains, as well as within civil society. A step toward improved bilateral coopera- tion was the 2001 Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Austria and the Government of the Republic of Slovenia on Coop- eration in the Fields of Culture, Education and Science. This agreement TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES 95 / 2025 208 was the first official treaty in which Slovenia recognised the existence of a German-speaking ethnic group within its borders and committed to supporting its cultural and educational needs. In parallel, Austria ac- knowledged the cultural and educational needs of Slovenes outside the settlement area of the Slovene minority. Another key initiative toward better mutual understanding and coexistence in Carinthia was the es- tablishment of the Carinthian Consensus Group in 2005. This group brought together previously irreconcilable opponents – the Carinthian Heimatdienst and a part of Carinthian Slovenes – who are now willing to engage in dialogue and reconciliation efforts. This was not a new initia- tive. Rather, it built upon earlier dialogue efforts between German and Slovene speakers within the Diocese of Gurk-Klagenfurt (Carinthian Di- ocesan Synod 1972) and the talks in the Alps-Adriatic Working Commu- nity (since 1978). The latter played a crucial role in fostering economic cooperation between Austria and Yugoslavia (especially Slovenia) and in garnering support among the German-speaking population for the Slovene national community in Austria. More recently, the Alps-Adriatic Peace Region project, founded in 2013, has continued efforts to en- hance understanding, cooperation, and coexistence – not only in Carin- thia but across a broader geographical area. A particularly symbolic and significant gesture of reconciliation is the annual commemorative event at the cemetery in Velikovec/Völkermarkt, where twelve Slovenes who fought for Slovenia’s northern border and four Austrians who defended Austria’s southern border, perished in the spring of 1919, now rest side by side. The commemoration’s slogan reads: “They died believing in their respective homelands because politics failed to resolve the con- flict peacefully”. The cemetery in Velikovec/Völkermarkt, the only com- mon burial site of former adversaries in Carinthia, has become a symbol of reconciliation. In 2021, a memorial plaque was unveiled listing 430 names of fighters who fell on both sides in 1918 and 1919, arranged al- phabetically and without distinction of allegiance. The 2020 centenary ceremony of the Carinthian plebiscite in Klagenfurt/Celovec symboli- cally underscored reconciliation and cooperation, highlighted by Aus- trian President Alexander Van der Bellen’s apology to the Slovene na- tional community for past injustices and delays in implementing their constitutional rights (“Zgodovinsko opravičilo avstrijskega predsednika”, 2020). A similar message of reconciliation is embodied in the Work- ing Group for a Permanent Dialogue with the German-Speaking Ethnic Group in the Republic of Slovenia, established in 2021 within the Minis- try of Culture of Slovenia. D. GRAfENAUER Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations ... 209 Acknowledgements The article is a result of the project The Weight of the Past. Heritage of the Multicultural Area: Case Study of Gottschee (J6-4612), funded by the Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency (ARIS). References act on the r atification of the agreement between the Government of the r epu- blic of Slovenia and the Government of the r epublic of austria on Coopera - tion in Culture, education and Science [Zakon o ratifikaciji Sporazuma med Vlado Republike Slovenije in Vlado Republike Avstrije o sodelovanju v kul- turi, izobraževanju in znanosti (BATKIZ)]. Uradni list RS 20 (2002), 8 March 2002, https://www.uradni-list.si/glasilo-uradni-list-rs/vsebina/2002-02-0014 (accessed 25 November 2025). Assmann, A., 2006. der lange Schatten der vergangenheit: erinnerungskultur und Geschichtspolitik. C. H. Beck, München. Benjamin, W., 1965. Geschichtsphilosophische Thesen. In W. Benjamin (ed.) Zur kritik der Gewalt und andere aufsätze. Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt. Biber, D., 1966. nacizem in nemci v Jugoslaviji: 1933–1941. Cankarjeva založba, Ljubljana. Bister F. J. & Vodopivec, P . (eds.), 1995. kulturelle w echselseitigkeit in mitteleuro- pa: deutsche und slowenische kultur im slowenischen r aum vom anfang des 19. Jahrhunderts bis zum Zweiten w eltkrieg. Oddelek za zgodovino Filozofske fakultete, Ljubljana. Brousek, J., Grafenauer, D., Wintersteiner, W. & Wutti, D. (eds.), 2020. Slovenija – Österreich: befreiendes erinnern – osvobajajoče spominjanje. dialogische aufarbeitung der vergangenheit – dialoško obravnavanje zgodovine. Drava, Klagenfurt/Celovec. Bruckmüller, E., 2001. Nationale Stereotypen unter Nachbarn. In P . Lendvai (ed.) Österreich – Slowenien: Geschichte und Gegenwart (Europäische Rundschau 29 (1)), 41–47. Bruckmüller, E., 2002. Nacionalni stereotipi med sosedi. In F. Mayrhofer-Grünbühel & M. Polzer (eds.) avstrija – Slovenija: preteklost in sedanjost. Cankarjeva založba, Ljubljana; Wieser, Klagenfurt/Celovec, 31–34. Bundesministerium für Inneres, 2025. bericht der expertinnen- und expertenkom- mission peršmanhof. Bundesministerium für Inneres, Wien, https://www. bmi.gv.at/Downloads/files/Bericht_Persmanhof_DE_Web.pdf (accessed 27 November 2025). Drčar-Murko, M., 2002. Podoba Slovenije v avstrijskih javnih občilih. In F. Mayrho- fer-Grünbühel & M. Polzer (eds.) avstrija – Slovenija: preteklost in sedanjost. Cankarjeva založba, Ljubljana; Wieser, Klagenfurt/Celovec, 155–164. TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES 95 / 2025 210 Drnovšek, J., 2002. Knjigi »Avstrija – Slovenija. Preteklost in sedanjost« na pot / Vorwort. In F. Mayrhofer-Grünbühel & M. Polzer (eds.) avstrija – Slovenija: preteklost in sedanjost. Cankarjeva založba, Ljubljana; Wieser, Klagenfurt/ Celovec, 13–15, 17–19. Eichtinger, M. & Wohnout, H., 2012. alois mock: politik piše zgodovino. Mohorjeva / Hermagoras, Klagenfurt/Celovec. Ferenc, M. & Repe, B., 2004. Nemška manjšina v Sloveniji med obema vojnama / Die deutsche Minderheit in Slowenien in der Zwischenkriegzeit. In D. Nećak, B. Jesih, B. Repe, K. Škrilec & P . Vodopivec (eds.) Slovensko-avstrijski odnosi v 20. stoletju / Slowenisch-österreichische beziehungen in 20. Jahrhundert. Oddelek za zgodovino Filozofske fakultete, Ljubljana, 147–160, 161–176. Fikfak, J., 2013. Koroški politični rituali in kompetitivni diskurzi [Carinthian Political Rituals and Competitive Discourses]. traditiones 42 (1), 239–257, doi: https:// doi.org/10.3986/Traditio2013420115 Fikfak, J. & Schönberger, K., 2024. Ethnographic Descriptions of “Land und Leute” in the Alps-Adriatic Region in the 19th Century. traditiones 53 (3), 7–19, doi:. https://doi.org/10.3986/Traditio2024530301 Grafenauer, D., 2010. Koroški Slovenci – begunci in njihova družbena integracija v osrednji Sloveniji. In P. Štih & B. Balkovec (eds.) migracije in slovenski prostor od antike do danes . Zveza zgodovinskih društev Slovenije, Ljubljana, 474–487. Grafenauer, D., 2014. Prizadevanje za narodnostni obstoj oziroma oživljanje nem- ško govoreče etnične skupine prebivalcev v Sloveniji po letu 1991. In V. Bukić- Kržišnik & D. Josipovič (eds.) Zgodovinski, politološki, pravni in kulturološki okvir za definicijo narodne manjšine v r epubliki Sloveniji. Inštitut za narodno- stna vprašanja, Ljubljana, 95–126. Grafenauer, D., 2015. Volksabstimmungsfeiern als Teil der Erinnerungskultur und Schaffung eines kollektiven Bewusstseins. Legenden und Mythen, Ge- schichtschreibung, Märchen? / Plebiscitarne proslave kot del kulture spre- minjanja in oblikovanja kolektivne zavesti. Legende in miti, zgodovina, pravlji- ce?. In J. Pirker (ed.) kärnten und Slowenien: getrennte w ege – gemeinsame Zukunft: Jugend zwischen Heimat, nation und europa / koroška in Slovenija: ločene poti – skupna prihodnost: mladi o domovini, narodu in evropi. Nomos, Baden-Baden, 101–109. Grafenauer, D., 2016a. Volksabstimmung, Kärntner. In K. Sturm-Schnabl & B. I. Schnabl (eds.) enzyklopädie der slowenischen kulturgeschichte in kärnten/ koroška: von den anfängen bis 1942 (Vol. 3). Böhlau Verlag, Wien, 1436–1441. Grafenauer, D., 2016b. Volksabstimmung propaganda. In K. Sturm-Schnabl & B. I. Schnabl (eds.) enzyklopädie der slowenischen kulturgeschichte in kärnten/ koroška: von den anfängen bis 1942 (Vol. 3). Böhlau Verlag, Wien, 1442–1446. Grafenauer, D., 2020. Projekt Mirovna regija Alpe-Jadran (MRAJ) – model, kako preseči zgodovinske travme ter ideološke in politične razlike? In M. Medvešek & S. Novak-Lukanović (eds.) r aznolikost v raziskovanju etničnosti: izbrani D. GRAfENAUER Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations ... 211 pogledi ii. Inštitut za narodnostna vprašanja, Ljubljana, 347–372, https:// www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-U2IEXIH2/eb2b556a-b490-4ad4-a27e- 00e35abe567e/PDF (accessed 27 November 2025). Grafenauer, D. & Jesih, B. (eds.), 2020. avstrijska državna pogodba in slovenska narodna skupnost v avstriji. Inštitut za narodnostna vprašanja, Ljubljana, https://dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-JGPNQ9J3/b794d564-7d85-4354- 882f-08dccb120a08/PDF (accessed 27 November 2025). Grafenauer, D. & Jesih, B., 2021. Covid-19 in njegove posledice za delovanje slovenske narodne skupnosti v Avstriji. In K. Munda-Hirnök & S. Novak Lukanović (eds.) Svet je postal drugačen: vpliv Covida-19 na etnične manjšine in obmejni prostor v Sloveniji in sosednjih državah. Inštitut za narodnostna vprašanja, Ljubljana, 115–145, https://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI: DOC-1QWHR3GQ/48387493-2974-4e1d-a5e3-fc8ff8a43615/PDF (accessed 27 November 2025). Grafenauer, D. & Wakounig, M., 2025. Das Bild des Anderen oder der Nachbar im Spiegel des Nachbarn. In O. J. Schmitt, P . Štih, A. Suppan & P . Vodopivec (eds.) beidseits der alpen: ein Österreichisch-Slowenisches Geschichtsbuch. Verlag der Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, 527–537. Grdina, I., 2004. Nevarna razmerja v Vzhodnih Alpah / Bedrohliche Verhältnis- se in den Ostalpen. In D. Nećak, B. Jesih, B. Repe, K. Škrilec & P . Vodopivec (eds.) Slovensko-avstrijski odnosi v 20. stoletju / Slowenisch-österreichische beziehungen in 20. Jahrhundert. Oddelek za zgodovino Filozofske fakultete, Ljubljana, 707–732, 733–764. Habich, J., 2020. “Für Jugos gesperrt”: Polizist wegen Verhetzung angezeigt. kleine Zeitung online, 22 November 2020, https://www.kleinezeitung.at/kaern- ten/5900701/Vorfall-bei-Grenzkontrolle_Fuer-Jugos-gesperrt_Polizist-wegen (accessed 10 October 2021). Heppner, H. (ed.), 2002. Slowenen und deutsche im gemeinsamen r aum: neue f orschungen zu einem komplexen thema. R. Oldenbourg, München. Hobsbawm, E. J., 1990. nations and nationalism Since 1780: programme, myth, r eality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Hroch, M., 2015. european nations: explaining their f ormation. Verso, London, New York. Jenuš, G., 2013. Uničenje nemške manjšine v Sloveniji. In J. Dežman & H. Filipič (eds.) vroče sledi hladne vojne: meja med Slovenijo in avstrijsko koroško v letih od 1945 do 1991. Mohorjeva / Hermagoras, Klagenfurt/Celovec etc., 51–58. Jenuš, G., Friš, D. & Šela, A., 2020. Maribor med prevratom in senžermensko pogodbo: »Zasijalo nam je sonce svobode: Maribor je jugoslovanski!«. Pri- spevki za novejšo zgodovino 60 (3), 110–148, doi: https://doi.org/10.51663/ pnz.60.3.06 Jesih, B., 2004. Slovenska narodna manjšina v Republiki Avstriji: kratek prerez zgo- dovinskega razvoja in oznaka trenutnega položaja / Die slowenische natio- TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES 95 / 2025 212 nale Minderheit in der Republik Österreich: ein kurzer Querschnitt durch ihre historische Entwicklung und zur Charakteristik ihrer aktuellen Lage. In D. Nećak, B. Jesih, B. Repe, K. Škrilec & P . Vodopivec (eds.) Slovensko-avstrijski odnosi v 20. stoletju / Slowenisch-österreichische beziehungen in 20. Jahrhun- dert. Oddelek za zgodovino Filozofske fakultete, Ljubljana, 269–304, 305-348. Judson, M. P ., 2006. Guardians of the nation: activists on the Language f rontiers of imperial austria. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), London. J. R., 2020. Avstrijski parlament četrtič pozval k priznanju nemško govoreče skup- nosti v Sloveniji. mmC rtv SL o , 3 July 2020, https://www.rtvslo.si/svet/ evropa/avstrijski-parlament-cetrtic-pozval-k-priznanju-nemsko-govorece- skupnosti-v-sloveniji/529261 (accessed 12 September 2020). Karner, S., 1998. die deutschsprachige volksgruppe in Slowenien: aspekte ihrer entwicklung 1939–1997. Mohorjeva / Hermagoras, Klagenfurt/Celovec etc. Karner, S., 2005. Die “Deutschen” Sloweniens als Teil der Geschichte und Kultur des gemeinsamen Raumes. In S. Karner & J. Stergar (eds.) kärnten und Slowenien – “dickicht und pfade”. (Kärnten und die nationale Frage, Vol. 5). Mohorjeva / Hermagoras, Klagenfurt/Celovec etc.; J. Heyn, Klagenfurt, 264–299. Klemenčič, M. & Klemenčič, V., 2010. die kärntner Slowenen und die Zweite r epu- blik: Zwischen assimilierungsdruck und dem einsatz für die umsetzungder minderheitenrechte. Mohorjeva / Hermagoras, Klagenfurt/Celovec etc. Koschat, M., 2010. braune flecken im ortsbild: die abwehrkämpferdenkmäler in St. Jakob/Št. Jakob und r osegg/r ožek. Mohorjeva / Hermagoras, Klagenfurt/ Celovec. Lendvai, P . (ed.), 2001. Österreich – Slowenien: Geschichte und Gegenwart (Euro- päische Rundschau 29 (1), 2001). Liška, J. (ed.), 1984. koroški Slovenci v avstriji včeraj in danes [Carinthian Slovenes in austria: past and p resent]. Komunist, Ljubljana; Drava, Celovec. Marschnig, G., 2010. Die Gottscheer als Teil der europäischen Erinnerungsge- meinschaft? / Kočevarji kot del evropske spominske skupnosti?. In P . Karpf, T. Kassl, W. Platzer & U. Puschnig (eds.) Sind wir alle europäer oder ist noch platz für volksgruppen? (Kärnten Dokumentation 26). Land Kärnten – Amt der Kärntner Landesregierung, Klagenfurt, 97–105, 106–113. Mayrhofer-Grünbühel, F. & Polzer, M. (eds.), 2002. avstrija – Slovenija: preteklost in sedanjost. Cankarjeva založba, Ljubljana; Wieser, Klagenfurt/Celovec. Moritsch, A., 2000. Nationale Ideologien in Kärnten. In A. Moritsch (ed.) die kärnt- ner Slowenen 1900 bis 2000: bilanz des 20. Jahrhunderts. Mohorjeva / Her- magoras, Klagenfurt/Celovec etc., 9–28. Moritsch, A., 2002. Dva različna pojmovanja naroda. In F. Mayrhofer-Grünbühel & M. Polzer (eds.) avstrija – Slovenija: preteklost in sedanjost. Cankarjeva založba, Ljubljana; Wieser, Klagenfurt/Celovec, 81–88. Moritsch, A. (ed.), 1997. karantanien – ostarrichi: 1001 mythos. Mohorjeva / Her- magoras, Klagenfurt/Celovec etc. D. GRAfENAUER Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations ... 213 Nećak, D., Jesih, B., Repe, B., Škrilec, K. & Vodopivec, P . (eds.), 2004. Slovensko- avstrijski odnosi v 20. stoletju / Slowenisch-österreichische beziehungen in 20. Jahrhundert. Oddelek za zgodovino Filozofske fakultete, Ljubljana. Nikolay, S., 2010. der kärntner f ürstenstein im bild: darstellungen eines europäi- schen r echtsdenkmals. Mohorjeva / Hermagoras, Klagenfurt/Celovec. Omerza, I., 2011. od belce do velikovca ali kako sem vzljubil bombo. Mohorjeva / Hermagoras, Klagenfurt/Celovec. Pandel, M., Polzer, M., Polzer-Scrienz, M. & Vospernik, R. (eds.), 2004. ortsta- felkonflikt in kärnten – krise oder Chance?. Braumüller, Wien. Pirker, J. (ed.), 2013. wir sind kärnten – mi smo koroška: Jugend, begegnung und politische bildung in volksgruppenfragen. Nomos, Baden-Baden. Pleterski, J., 2003. koroški plebiscit 1920. poskus enciklopedične razlage gesla o koroškem plebiscitu / kärntner volksabstimmung 1920. versuch einer enzyk- lopädischen auslegung des Stichwortes kärntner volksabstimmung. Zveza zgodovinskih društev Slovenije, Ljubljana; Inštitut za narodnostna vprašanja, Ljubljana. Pušnik, M., 2011. popularizacija nacije: komuniciranje, nacionalizem in proizvodnja mej. Založba FDV, Ljubljana. Ricoer, P ., 1998. das r ätsel der vergangenheit. Wallstein Verlag, Göttingen. Rozman, F. (ed.), 1995. Sosed v ogledalu soseda: od 1848 do danes / der nachbar im Spiegelbild des nachbarn: von 1848 bis heute. Nacionalni komite za zgodo- vinske vede, Ljubljana. Rumpler, H., 2005. Die nationale Frage im Spannungsfeld von kärntnerischem Lan- despatriotismus, österreichischem Staatsbewusstsein und völkischem Natio- nalismus 1918–1938. In C. Fräss-Ehrfeld & H. Rumpler (eds.) kärnten und wien: Zwischen Staatsidee und Landesbewusstsein. (St. Karner (ed.) Kärnten und die nationale Frage; Vol. 4). J. Heyn, Klagenfurt; Mohorjeva / Hermago- ras, Klagenfurt/Celovec etc., 9–82. Rustia, S., 2025. Gelb für Slowenisch. ballesterer, 29. 8. 2025, https://ballesterer. at/2025/09/12/gelb-fuer-slowenisch/ (accessed 26 November 2025). Schüssel, W., 2002. Gemeinsam in die europäische Zukunft. In F. Mayrhofer- Grünbühel & M. Polzer (eds.) avstrija – Slovenija: preteklost in sedanjost. Can - karjeva založba, Ljubljana; Wieser, Klagenfurt/Celovec, 7–11. Semlič Rajh, Z. (ed.), 2020. Slovenci, za zmiraj gre! 100. obletnica koroškega plebi - scita. Pokrajinski arhiv Maribor; Arhiv Republike Slovenije, Ljubljana. Smrečnik, D., 2025. Napad na dvojezične krajevne table. novice, 24. 10. 2025, 2–3. Stourzh, G., 2005. um einheit und f reiheit: Staatsvertrag, neutralität und das ende der ost-w est-besetzung Österreichs 1945–1955. Böhlau Verlag, Wien. Suppan, A., 1983. die österreichischen volksgruppen: tendenzen ihrer gesellschaf- tlichen entwicklung im 20. Jahrhundert. Verlag für Geschichte und Politik, Wien. TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES 95 / 2025 214 Suppan, A., 1996. Jugoslawien und Österreich 1918–1938. bilaterale aussenpolitik im europäischen umfeld. Verlag für Geschichte und Politik, Wien; Oldenbourg Verlag, München. Suppan, A., 1998. deutsche Geschichte im osten europas. Zwischen adria und karawanken. Siedler Verlag, Berlin. Suppan, A., 2002. Karikatura kot vir modernih stereotipov: (nemški) Avstrijci – Slovenci [Die Karikatur als Quelle moderner Stereotypen: (Deutsch-) Öster- reicher – Slowenen]. In F. Mayrhofer-Grünbühel & M. Polzer (eds.) avstrija – Slovenija: preteklost in sedanjost. Cankarjeva založba, Ljubljana; Wieser, Klagenfurt/Celovec, 47–80. Suppan, A., 2005. Jugoslawien und der österreichische Staatsvertrag. In A. Suppan, G. Stourzh & W. Mueller (eds.) der österreichische Staatsvertrag 1955: inter- nationale Strategie, rechtliche r elevanz, nationale identität / the austrian State treaty 1955: international Strategy, Legal r elevance, national identity. Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, 431–471. Škerl Kramberger, U., 2018. Avstrija pritiska za priznanje manjšine, a Šarec se ne da. dnevnik, 3 December 2018, https://www.dnevnik.si/novice/slovenija/ avstrija-pritiska-za-priznanje-nemske-manjsine-a-sarec-se-ne-da-2274764/ (accessed 26 November 2025). Štih, P., 2001. Ungerechtfertigte Feindbilder in der slowenischen Geschichtssch- reibung. In P . Lendvai (ed.) Österreich – Slowenien: Geschichte und Gegenwart (Europäische Rundschau 29 (1)), 79–87. Štih, P., 2002. Nacionalizacija zgodovine in nastanek sovražnih predstav o sosedih. Slovensko-nemški (avstrijski) primer. In F. Mayrhofer-Grünbühel & M. Polzer (eds.) avstrija – Slovenija: preteklost in sedanjost. Cankarjeva založba, Ljublja- na; Wieser, Klagenfurt/Celovec, 35–46. Štih, P., 2006. Miti in stereotipi v podobi starejše slovenske nacionalne zgodovine [Myths and Stereotypes in the Depiction of Early Slovene National History]. In M. Ferenc & B. Petkovšek (eds.) mitsko in stereotipno v slovenskem pogledu na zgodovino. Zveza zgodovinskih društev Slovenije, Ljubljana, 25–47. Štih, P., 2012. Ustoličevanje koroških vojvod med zgodovino in predstavami: pro- blemi njegovega izročila, razvoja in poteka kot tudi njegovo razumevanje pri Slovencih [The Enthronement of Carinthian Dukes between History and Per- ceptions: Tradition, Development, Process, and Interpretation among Slove- nes]. Zgodovinski časopis 66 (3/4), 306–343. Štih, P., 2024. Die Kärntner Herzogseinsetzung und der Fürstenstein als sloweni- scher Erinnerungsort. In Ch. Augustynowicz & F. Kühnel (eds.) vom meer zu den bergen: f estschrift für marija w akounig. Lit Verlag, Wien, Berlin, 149– 158. Štih, P . & Winkler, K., 2025. Frühmittelalterliche Anfänge. Slawen und Bayern im gemeinsamen Raum. In O. J. Schmitt, P . Štih, A. Suppan & P . Vodopivec (eds.) D. GRAfENAUER Slovenia and Austria at the Crossroads of Mutual Relations. Slovene-Austrian Relations ... 215 beidseits der alpen. ein Österreichisch-Slowenisches Geschichtsbuch, 19–55, 43. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien. Štih, P ., Simoniti, V. & Vodopivec, P ., 2008. Slovenska zgodovina: družba – politika – kultura. Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino, Ljubljana. Vodopivec, P ., 2006. Začarani krog nacionalne zgodovine [The Vicious Circle of National History]. In M. Ferenc & B. Petkovšek (eds.) mitsko in stereotipno v slovenskem pogledu na zgodovino. Zveza zgodovinskih društev Slovenije, Lju- bljana, 49–59. Volksgruppen.orf.at, 2016. ksenofobni plakat z likom kekca. 7 December 2016, https://volksgruppen.orf.at/v2/slovenci/stories/2813455/ (accessed 10 Sep- tember 2018). Wingfield, N. M. (ed.), 2004. Creating the other: ethnic Conflict and nationalism in Habsburg Central e urope. Berghahn Books, New York, Oxford. Wutti, D., 2013. Transgeneracijski prenosi v družinah koroških Slovencev. treatises and documents / r azprave in gradivo 70, 45–54. Wutti, D., Hartmann, E. & Danglmaier, N., 2021. Minority Topics, Ethnic Questions and Their Potential for Memory Work in Schools. treatises and documents / r azprave in gradivo 86, 33–48, doi: https://doi.org/10.36144/rig86.jun21.33- 48 Zgodovinsko opravičilo avstrijskega predsednika, 2020. novice, 16 October 2020, 2–3. Slovenija in Avstrija na presečišču medsebojnih odnosov. Slovensko-avstrijski odnosi kot talec težavne dediščine 19. in 20. stoletja Izvleček Avstrija in Slovenija sta sosednji in prijateljski državi, ki sta geografsko in zgodovinsko tesno povezani. Skozi zgodovino so se med narodoma oz. državama izoblikovale določene predstave, stereotipi in predsodki. Nastanek nacionalnih gibanj in modernih držav je močno pospešil tudi nacionalna zgodovinopisja, ki so v preteklih dogodkih iskala konstitutivne ideje za oblikovanje svojih nacionalnih držav. V prispevku skušamo prikazati, kako je ta kompleksna in težavna dediščina vplivala na čezmejne odnose. Ključne besede Avstrija, Slovenija, čezmejni odnosi, zgodovina, stereotipi TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES 95 / 2025