1
World War I in the Slovene Consciousness, History Teaching and History Textbooks
Introduction
In the period between both world wars, the Slovene recollection of World War I was rather
modest and limited to occasionally issued memoirs of individual soldiers in newspapers as well
as, here and there, in rare book form. The territory of the Isonzo Front, which left the most
significant mark on the Slovenes during World War I, fell to Italy, and any sort of public
remembrance by the Slovenes who belonged to the hostile Austro-Hungary during the war
was prohibited. Naturally, the Italians celebrated their victories and mourned their defeats,
especially the Twelfth Battle of Kobarid which is a source of such painful memories for the
Italians that, whenever someone faces major personal, political or any other type of defeat,
they still tend to say they experienced Caporetto. They built ossuaries and monuments, and
integrated their remembrance and celebrations of World War I into the Fascist system and
ideology. In the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (Kingdom of Yugoslavia), the memory
of World War I was focused on the victories achieved by the Serbs, as was reflected in the
monuments built (the Battle of Cer, the Battle of Kolubara) and collective memory and
2
celebrations formed. An important emphasis was placed on the Yugoslav unification which
took place after World War I. On Avala (a hill situated south of Belgrade), the then Regent
Alexander had a monumental mausoleum erected and dedicated to an unknown soldier (not
hero!) which symbolises the struggle of all Yugoslav nations, not just the Serbians. The statues
of women from various Yugoslav lands serve as supporting columns, which symbolises the
thought that the main burden of war was carried on the shoulders of mothers and wives. The
monument is the work of a world-renowned Croatian sculptor Ivan Meštrović. Despite the
emphasized Yugoslav symbolism, the Slovenes joined Yugoslavia as part of Austro-Hungary
towards which the Serbs were hostile. Their “Yugoslavianness” was not enough: The Serbs
were convinced they liberated the Slovenes and that the latter should therefore pay a price,
both in the political and economic sense. The Slovene politics adapted to the Serbian
remembrance rituals; at home, however, it emphasized and celebrated events which led to
the unification with Yugoslavia (especially the May Declaration through which, in May 1917,
the Yugoslav representatives and their leader in the Austrian Parliament, Dr Anton Korošec,
requested the division of Austro-Hungary in three parts, i.e. the Austrian, the Hungarian and
the South Slavic; a large gathering in Ljubljana on 29 October 1918, which is deemed a
manifest withdrawal of the Slovenes from Austro-Hungary and their joining Yugoslavia which
was yet to be more precisely defined – a one-month State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs with
Zagreb as the capital, which, on 1 December 1918, united with Serbia, forming the Kingdom
of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes). On the basis of these events and by pointing out that, during
the war and after it, they brought the Slovenes to Yugoslavia, the Slovene politicians founded
their legitimacy during both wars. There was also much lamentation for the lost Littoral region
and Carinthia (the latter belonged to Austria after a plebiscite in addition to approximately
40% of the Slovenes voting in favour of staying under Austria). The Slovene newspapers and
writers of that time poured their indignation especially on the rapacious Italy which managed
not only to realise, but even surpass all provisions from the secret London Pact of 1915,
pursuant to which Great Britain, France and Russia assigned large territories to Italy in
exchange for the latter to join the war on the side of the Entente Powers.
In the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, the historical view and the teaching of history adapted to the
new reality, i.e. predominantly Serbian view of the course of events and emphasizing the role
of the new Yugoslav dynasty of the Karadjordjević family in the unification which was said not
3
to date back only to the time of World War I (which was really about the concept of expanding
Serbia rather than creating a state comprised of equal Yugoslav nations), but deep into the
19th century. Their struggle to free themselves from the Turks was said to have already been
the fight to create the Yugoslav state.
World War II as well as the creation of the federal and socialist Yugoslavia pushed the memory
of World War I completely into the background, in in terms of the public as well as the teaching
of history and textbooks. Gradually (from about the 1960s onwards), the Isonzo Front in
particular came to penetrate the collective consciousness and the teaching of history. From
the 1970s on, the interest in World War I intensified, but this was largely evident among the
people who were, above all, amateur researchers and collectors of the related material
(especially in connection with the Isonzo Front). The first works that were more substantial
from the national standpoint (i.e. the position of the Slovenes in Austro-Hungary, the decision
for Yugoslavia, the border question) were created as late as the 1970s. Today, there exists a
diverse collection of works in which World War I is discussed in a more complex manner – in
this context also the attitude of the great powers towards the Slovenes at that time, and the
reasons behind taking the Slovene territory apart. Nowadays, the treatment of World War I
and the historical memory of it are still primarily focused on the Isonzo Front and, in part, the
fate of soldiers on the Eastern Front, especially in Galicia. Accounts through various
exhibitions, anthologies and documentaries, especially in this, the jubilee year, are centred on
the cultural heritage of the Isonzo Front, but are otherwise mainly personalized, depicting the
fate of individual soldiers or army units based on journal entries, memoirs and photos. The
subjects of treatment are also some social groups which have been neglected thus far (e.g.
women and children) as well as the issue of daily life in general. It is a kind of a “sentimentalneutralistic” approach without ideological charges (as evident, for example, in views of World
War II). Today’s Slovene view is one devoid of critical self-questioning of why, during and after
World War I, the great powers deemed the Slovenes to be a “non-historic” nation, “a dead
body” as was vividly summed up by Dr Franjo Supilo, a member of the Yugoslav Committee
(which endeavoured to unite the South Slavs into a single Yugoslav country). There is also the
question of why these powers regarded the Slovenes as inferior to the Italian and other larger
nations, why they had no qualms dividing the Slovenes (or allowing them to be divided) among
4
four states and, finally, why the Slovene political players of the time acted in such a naïve and
opportunistic manner, allowing this to happen.
Treatment in history classes and textbooks:
During the period of socialist Yugoslavia, there was only one textbook for each grade or year
in Slovenia; it was published by the Državna založba Slovenije publishing house and was always
reviewed thoroughly, also in terms of the prevailing ideology. History was treated mainly from
the class aspect, i.e. the history of workers’ movements, socialist parties followed by
communist parties, the national liberation struggle and revolution. However, quite a lot of
room was dedicated to the Yugoslav idea and the realisation thereof. In the textbook by Dr
Metod Mikuž from 1967 entitled Zgodovina za četrti razred gimnazij (History for the 4th Grade
of Grammar School), almost 30 pages (from p. 197 onwards) are dedicated to World War I.
The relevant chapter is entitled Prva svetovna vojna, februarska in oktobrska revolucija 1917
v Rusiji in mirovna konferenca (World War I, the February and October Revolution of 1917 in
Russia and the Peace Conference). It starts with the assassination in Sarajevo and the
operations of Young Bosnia, a description of warfare up to 1917 across various fronts and
battlefields, the February and October Revolution in Russia, the impact of both revolutions,
the end of the war and the Peace Conference. This is followed by a treatment of the Yugoslav
question and the creation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, and a chapter on the
struggles to secure the northern and western borders of the Kingdom of SHS. The language
employed by Mikuž is factual and precise, and accompanied by clear illustrations and maps;
as far as the content is concerned, one could only wish for the present generations to have
the knowledge of history at the level of this textbook. Surprisingly, the Isonzo Front is covered
very briefly, in only one paragraph and without illustrations. Among other things, Mikuž
provides a detailed analysis on why, in April 1917, the Salonika Trial took place against the
leader of the Black Hand, Colonel Dragutin Dimitrijević, also known as Apis (Black Hand was a
Serbian nationalist organisation which was supposedly behind the assassination of Franz
Ferdinand). The Serbian authorities which took refuge in Greece with the remains of the army
condemned Apis to death due to his supposed organisation of the assassination of Regent
5
Alexander even though he was the Regent’s ardent supporter. Mikuž offers (among others)
an explanation that is interesting even from today’s point of view, namely that the then
Austro-Hungarian diplomacy initiated secret negotiations with the Entente Powers on
achieving a separate peace. Since the Austrian side claimed not to be responsible for the
beginning of the war, and as the Serbian government did the same, they had to find a guilty
party, i.e. Dimitrijević, a.k.a. Apis, and the Black Hand.
Textbooks of the 1970s and 1980s followed the concept of Mikuž as far as the WWI period is
concerned (Ivan Grobelnik, Nace Voje: Zgodovina 3 (History 3), Ljubljana 1983). They are
different in that this period (especially the 1970s) was much more ideologized and classoriented. The textbook by Grobelnik and Voje dedicates as many as 18 pages to the Yugoslav
idea and its realisation. Similar to Mikuž, much attention is paid to the secret group called
Preporodovci (Revivalists) which, in Slovenia, strived to resolve the Yugoslav question outside
Austro-Hungary, and was connected with Young Bosnia, with its leading member condemned
at political processes. A similar number of pages is dedicated to the Yugoslav nations in WWI,
with the military part treated in the form of tables and comprising the Balkan battlefields and
the Isonzo Front. One chapter also depicts life during the war, and the textbook ends with the
border question. Its characteristic feature is that it only covers the Yugoslav nations and not
general history as it is intended for general secondary school education. The 1980s were
namely a period in which school reforms were aimed to level grammar schools (which had a
broader educational programme in history as well) as much as possible with vocational schools
and other forms of secondary school education (“career-oriented education”).
Great changes in teaching history (and otherwise) were brought about by Slovenia's
attainment of independence. A thorough school reform was implemented in the 1990s.
Textbooks became pluralistic and were published by various publishing houses. Changes were
also evident from the visual aspect as textbooks became more sumptuous and colourful in an
attempt to attract the pupils' attention. Today, the basic concept remains the same, despite
attempts made during the right-wing government rule (especially in the period from 2004 to
2008) to once again subordinate history lessons to the political views and select textbook
writers by their ideology.
The first textbook of the new generation for primary schools by Branimir Nešović and Janko
Prunk entitled 20.stoletje, zgodovina za osmi razred osnovne šole (20th Century, History for the
6
8th Grade of Primary School) was published in 1993, while the first modern grammar school
textbook by Božo Repe entitled Naša doba (Our Era) was published in 1996.
Nešović and Prunk devoted 18 pages to WWI, from p. 260 on, which means they covered this
subject rather briefly. In terms of content, this section is divided into a short introductory
description, along with a description of new methods of fighting and military plans.
Imperialism is stated as the reason for the beginning of the war which was prompted by the
assassination in Sarajevo. The Isonzo Front is covered on one page and includes a map. This is
followed by a chapter on the crisis of empires, a brief description of the October Revolution,
the Yugoslav idea and unification into the Yugoslav state under the heading Proč od Nemcev
(Away from the Germans), covering a total of 4 pages. The new generation of textbooks
typically contain a reduced scope of the South Slavic history. The border question is treated
separately, within the period between both world wars. Authors devote 4 pages to the
subject-matter under the heading Usoda primorskih, koroških in porabskih Slovencev (The Fate
of the Littoral, Carinthian and Hungarian Slovenes). The textbook written by Nešović and
Prunk was followed by others; in the last decade and a half, as many as 4 primary school
textbooks competed with various approaches, yet similar in terms of content.
The grammar school level (and secondary school level in general) witnessed the emergence
of similar competition, but in the form of slightly fewer textbooks. The Our Era textbook was
followed by a competitive textbook by Ervin Dolenc and Aleš Gabrič entitled Zgodovina 4
(History 4), while Our Era was revised by the same author, Božo Repe, resulting in a textbook
entitled Sodobna zgodovina (Contemporary History). The latter, which is an updated version
of Our Era (2008), covers World War I on 51 pages from p. 278 on (including the introductory
chapter on the world at the turn of the century, the scientific and technical development, and
the Slovenes in the Habsburg Monarchy). Conceptually, the period is divided into 6 chapters,
i.e. the beginning of the war, the course of warfare and diplomatic activities, revolution in
Russia, life, politics, and economy during the war, the end of the war and its consequences,
and the Slovenes during WWI. The Isonzo Front is covered on 5 pages, including a map,
illustrations and a description of everyday life. A similar concept was applied in other
textbooks.
7
To sum up: WWI is a subject-matter that has been taught to all generations from the time
between both world wars onwards. Teaching history and writing history textbooks were
subject to different approaches which depended on the current political situation and the
prevailing ideology. During the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, the Serbian or Yugoslav-centralistic
approach was dominant, while the period of the socialist Yugoslavia witnessed the class and
social-oriented approach, but with great emphasis on the Yugoslav question. After Slovenia’s
attainment of independence, the treatment became more focused on the Slovene nation and
simultaneously highlighted the everyday life aspect. The treatment of the military and
diplomatic side of the war and the placement of the Slovene/regional circumstances in the
European and global context also depends on the current national and political situation.