Settlement and state organisation in the Bucovine 1774-1918

On October 11th Rumanian troops entered the Bucovina. According to the resolutions of the Paris peace conferences this country became part of the Romanian Kingdom. Up to this moment ongoing from 1775 the Bucovina was a country of the Austro-Hungarian empire. Since 1918 the political as well as the scientifically interests from the Austrian side on the Bucovina was slowly declining. Even after 1945 the research on this topic remained a margin matter of Austrian science. Most of the research was done by scientists from Germany who of course did not intensively reflect on Austria specific questions. During the reign of Maria-Theresia and the Emperor Joseph II. the Austrian state entered a period of political reconstruction. A new state with a centralist administration, clearly defined borders inside and outside was planned in the state`s chancelleries and finally to be transferred into reality. In the elder countries of the Monarchy these reforms had to cope with serious resistance of regional power structures which were in fear to loose their political weight towards the steadily enforcing centre of the Empire. In the Bucovine the contrary was stated. There were no important structures of lasting powers which could have been in a strong position to resist against the reforms. The Bucovina was an European border line between East and West. Many years of different wars depopulated and devastated this area. A fast repopulation in connection with an economical reconsolidation was therefore of major importance to include still existing settlements in the state`s structure to be weaved. Within less than 140 years of Austrian rule structures of settlement and landscape were founded which are shaping the Bucovina up to now despite of all changes during the 20th century. Nevertheless no profound scientific reflection on the interrelation of settlement and growing of a modern territorial state (`Territorialstaat`) - for which the Bucovina is an ideal example - has not yet been undertaken. Therefore we can define four major questions within this complex: - How was the settlement organised by the state and which preconditions were therefore to be done? - Which influence was exercised by the middle and lower level administration and which interaction to the central administration in Vienna took place concerning the intended plans of settlement? - From which time onwards we can state that the state was retreating from state-administered colonisation? How was the process of colonisation going further afterwards? - Do these conserved structures of a `Kulturlandschaft` carry enough persistence to form a basis for a new regional consciousness after the disintegration of the USSR? A basis which was totally destructed by collectivisation in other extensive areas of the Ukraine.

Cursory regarding the dukedom Bukowina in 1914 - at the beginning end of the Double-Monarchy - on a level of the entire Habsburg Empire it gives an impression of a remote provincial Austrian crown land. But if one puts this territory in a sensible relation towards its neighbourhood and if the scale of reflection is at a regional level a much more differentiated picture appears. Since the mid of 19th century the small county faced a remarkable rise as a part of the monarchy. A distinguished supranational and regional consciousness started to develop. In 1910 a `shining` example of a national balanced electoral law passed the counties diet. Even though Romanians and Ruthenians (`Ukrainians`) were in majority they both depended on a consensual policy together with the numerous minorities of the county (Germans (Jews), Slovaks, Hungarians, Russians, etc.); a policy which could not effort a continuous privileging of any nation at the costs of another. In comparison to other parts of the monarchy and regardless massive problems of coexistence of these groups one had found a way of living together always trying to find a constructive solution. The perception of Moldova in European public and politics since 17th century was formed by Turkish wars. The extension of Habsburg Monarchy towards South-East at the cost of the Ottoman Empire caused an increasingly interest in Moldova by Vienna as this territory was regarded to be an important link in the Eastern Carpathians in between Transylvania and Galizien-Lodomerien. Since the military occupation of Bukowina by Austrian troops in 1774 the modern territorial state tried to adapt the territory step by step to the needs of a contemporary administrative practice. First of all one intended to get international acknowledgement of the forcefully incorporated territory by contracts. Parallel to the demarcation of the county outwards Vienna endeavoured to raise its economical power. German speaking immigrants from the Holy Roman Empire should help to improve the economical situation of the county. The political status within the monarchy became clear only in the second half of 19th century. From 1774-1786 Bukowina was directly administered from Vienna by military. From 1786-1848 the county was part of Galizien- Lodomerien (as `19. Kreis`). This unclear situation came only to a longer lasting end during the years 1848-1861, when Bukowina was appointed to sovereign land of the crown with its own county`s political administration. The period of 1774-1918 formed to a significant extend today`s still existing Kulturlandschaft Bukowina. In many cases, elder structures - rooting back to this period - still visibly exist in the contemporary divided county. Nevertheless there are also more elder traditions of Moldova which were incorporated in the modernized Austrian Bukowina, even though these traditions were much weaker then in other parts of the monarchy.