mitteleuropa_sinnhuber 1954

8/12/2019 Mitteleuropa_Sinnhuber 1954

1/26

Central Europe: Mitteleuropa: Europe Centrale: An Analysis of a Geographical TermAuthor(s): Karl A. SinnhuberSource: Transactions and Papers (Institute of British Geographers), No. 20 (1954), pp. 15-39Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The Royal Geographical Society (with theInstitute of British Geographers)

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/621131Accessed: 14/05/2010 16:22

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)andBlackwell Publishingare

collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions and Papers (Institute ofBritish Geographers).

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/621131?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/621131?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MI'I ELEUROPA - EUROPE CENTRALEAN ANALYSIS OF A GEOGRAPHICAL TERM

By KARL A. SINNHUBER, D. PHIL.(University College, Universityof London)

IT is by no means the first time that the evasive term Central Europe or itsequivalents in other languages has been made the basis of a discussion by ageographer. Looking at English writingsalone the paper by Hilda Ormsbyofalmost twenty years ago and R. E. Dickinson's The GermanLebensraumarewell known. A similar theme was taken up by H. Cord Meyer in 1946.1 Con-sidering the attention this topic has already received, is it not unnecessaryorfutile to struggle again with this well-worn problem of clarifyingthe meaningof CentralEurope or its synonyms? Thereappearto be two reasons,however,for making yet another attempt.Firstly, the authors mentioned purposelybased their respectivetreatmentsof the subjectalmost exclusivelyon Germanpublications,since their aim was toexplain to the 'English' reader what was understoodby this term among Ger-man geographersand other Germanwriters.2 In the course of this paperI hopeto contribute to that aim by adding some new points and correcting a fewstatementsin the papersmentioned, but the major aim is different. By extend-ing the literature considered beyond the German sphere, an attempt will bemade to arrive at more generalconclusions.Secondly, in view of the great changes in the political boundaries andcultural landscape of Europe which have taken place during the recent past,we may need to modify our ideas as to the extent of CentralEurope. But wecan reach a decision only when we have re-examined he ways in which the termhas been used previously.It is unfortunate that many geographicalterms either lack or come to lackprecisemeaning and consequentlygive rise to misunderstandingof geographyor even to its ill repute among scholars of other subjects. One extreme case inthis category is the term Central Europe (Middle Europe, I'Europecentrale,Zentraleuropa,Mitteleuropa, I'Europacentrale, etc.).3 Perusing the literatureeither devoted to a discussion of the term or giving some attention to it onecannot help but be left with a feeling of absolute confusion. Since this is so

1 For full bibliographical details of these and other publications, and those quoted several times,see the bibliography on pages 37-9. References to these are given by quoting the name of the author,and where appropriate the year of publication, followed by the page reference.2 'German' is to be understood here as to mean 'of German mother tongue'.3 An indication of the present ambiguity of its meaning is the statement under the entry 'CentralEurope' in Webster's geographical dictionary (1949), 211, where this term is called 'indefinite andoccasional'.15


3/26


4/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA - EUROPE CENTRALE 17a map will usually depict a somewhat greaterarea than.its title suggests, but itneverthelessconveys an idea, especially in comparisonwith other maps, of the

MIDDLE EUROPEITS EXTENTON MAPS0 1o00 200 300 400m1,o 200 40o0 6oo0ms

Central Europe. G SG S 1-100.000Central Europe, GS G S 1250.000Generalkarte von Mitteleuropa.Austria. 1937 1200.000Obersichtskarte von Mitteleuropa.Austria. 1937 1750.000Central EuropeanStates.TheTimesAtlas 1922 1'3.000.000 -Germany and Central Europe.Oxford Advanced Atlas.1942 13.000.000Central Europe.Oxford Atlas.1951 14.000.000 -- ----Mitteleuropa.AustrianSchool Atlas bySlanar 928 15.000.000Mitteleuropa (Morphology)AndreesHandatas .1937 13.500.000Carte Ethnique et Linguistique de IEuropeCentrale. Geneve.l937 I 2.000.000

Geometrical centre of Europe according to -L.Neumann (1908)W.Schjerning (1914)A.Penck (1915)H.Lautensach (1926)LWLyde (1931)

FIGURE 1-Middle Europe: its extent on maps.The areas covered by, and the area common to, twelve maps and map seriesall bearing the name Central Europe (or the equivalent in French and German),and their location with respect to the geometrical centre of Europe and thestandard meridian of mid-European time.


5/26

CENTRALEUROPE MITTELEUROPA EUROPECENTRALEapproximateextent envisagedfor the area to which its title refers. Little agree-ment exists,and the areacommon to all maps,indicatedby shading,is extremelysmall; it includes the greaterpart of Czechoslovakia and extends into Austria,Germany, Hungary and Poland. Two more things are indicated on the map,which by theirvery names, should bear a close relationshipto CentralEurope:the geometricalcentre of Europeand the standardmeridianof so-called CentralEuropeanTime. One would expect that there would be agreementat least asregardsthe geometricalcentre of Europe, since this is a question that is to besolved by measuring, but this is not the case.9 Accepting the conventionaleastern boundariesof Europe, the geometricalcentre,markedon Figure 1 by acrossed circle, is near Warsaw. Other places which have been stated as thegeometrical centres of Europe are Grodno; the mouth of the Elbe river; theRokitno swamps;and the Tatra mountains. Even if we acceptthese locationsas alternatives,save for the last one, all are situated outside the common area.This appliesto an even greaterdegreewhenwe consider their location in relationto the area common to a selected number of definitions as shown in Figure 2.I suggestthat the term 'MiddleEurope' should be used in preference o 'CentralEurope, since the latter inevitably creates a misleading impression about thelocation of the centre of Europe and thus about the space relationshipswithinEurope."1For this reason, but also consideringthe political and cultural dis-integrationsince 1939, it seems that the case for using centralbecause it meansmore than geometrical centrality, as Roxby wrote (1926, 379), is no longervalid. Similarly, since the standard meridian of Central European Time(15? east of Greenwich)is far to the west of the centre of Europe, and furthersince we are faced with a time belt reaching the extremities of the Continentnorth and south, whereas the word central implies a compact area approxim-ately equidistantfrom all margins,I suggestthat the term mid-EuropeanTime(used for instance in the EncyclopaediaBritannical2)s to be preferred.

9In a strict mathematical ensean irregular urfacedoesnot possessa centre. In Webster's ewinternational ictionary London, 1943), 434, 'centre' is definedas 'orig. the point round which acircle is described; .. a point at the averagedistance rom the exteriorpoints of a body or figure'.Appliedto any largepartof the earth's surface hismaybest beinterpreted s thatpointwhichservesas the centreof the circlewhichcan be drawn on the globe round the area in questiontouchingasmany points of its peripheryas possible.10Grodno:rossingpoint of the lines fromGibraltar o theNorth CapeandfromCapeda Rocato the Urals [sic] (L. NEUMANN, 908, 447); Mouth of the Elbe: equidistant from the entrance of theWhiteSea, the southernmostpoint of Greece,CapeTarifa,and the north-western oint of Iceland(W. SCHJERNING,914, 67); Rokitno swamps: the longest diagonals that can be drawn across Europecross there,and nearbyare also the mid-pointsof thesediagonals. Thepoint of Europeequidistantfrom the boundarymeridiansand parallels,whichcould be used as an alternative entre,is nearthesource of the Memel (Nyeman) (A. PENCK, 1915, 16; also H. LAUTENSACH,1926, 17); L. W. LYDE(1931, 1),simplystates:'EventheTatramass,thegeometrical entreof Europe, s within 300milesofthreeseas.'11Evensuchan experienced eographer s J. F. Unstead,who statedthat 'CentralEuropemaybe thoughtas lyingdirectlyacross the centreof Europe',was misled(1927,51). Webster's ew nter-nationaldictionary ontainsthe entry Mid-Europe 1943, 1556)but not CentralEurope.12 Fourteenthedn. (1929-32),vol. 22, 224. SectionTime, standard,by Sir ArthurStanleyEd-dington.

18


6/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA - EUROPE CENTRALE 19The divergenceof opinion as to the extent of Middle Europebecomes evengreater when we compare the actual definitionsgiven by various authors. Amap showing the boundariesof an author's particularnotion is only in a few

cases provided,and thus in Figure2 I have, in the other instances,attemptedtoplot these boundarieson the basis of the respectivetexts. This map aims to give

H.Hassinger 1917,23W.Schjerning 1914W.Sievers 1916Th.Arldt 1917 .........H.Lautensach 1926 .....F.Machatschek 1925,31-----F.Heiderich 1926 --J.F.Unstead 1927 +.+.+. -M.Lheritier 1928 ++*++*+De Martonne 1930 ++++++R.Blanchard) 1934R.E.Crist 1934W.Schissler 1939 -+-+-M.R.Shackleton 1950 -++4-A. Siegfried 1950 .........

FIGURE2-Middle Europe as a positional, historical, political, cultural and geographical concept:a graded assessment of the degree of coincidence existing between sixteen definitions of MiddleEurope.The shading density is directly proportional to the number of authorities who included a given areawithin Middle Europe. The various patterns are only the accidental result of the process of super-imposition. For an explanation of the R. Blanchard and R. E. Crist boundary, see footnote 13.a visual impression by graded shading of how frequently parts of Europe areincluded within Middle Europe: it is, in fact, sixteen maps superimposed.13

13 Although in most cases it would be possible to follow on the map the boundaries of the areaconceived as Middle Europe by one of the selected authors, the map aims at something different.The plotting of the boundaries was only a necessary step in the construction of the map. In caseswhere boundaries coincided, however, only one could be marked; in the case of Blanchard- Cristno separate symbol appears, since there is a complete coincidence with sections of boundaries of otherdefinitions. The individual maps are based on the following sources: H. HASSINGER1917, 478)(map); W. SCHJERNING1914, 67); W. SIEVERS,916, taken from H. Hassinger (1917, 467-8); TH.


7/26


8/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA- EUROPE CENTRALEpublication by August Zeune of Berlin.15 He defined Mitteleuropaas com-prising Karpatenland(the lower Danube basin), Hercinialand (the tradi-tional German lands including the entire Rhine basin) and Sevennenland(France). Although he made attempts in a later publication to justify his sub-divisions of Europe as Naturabtheilungen1820, 93-6), it is in fact only locationwhich is the common denominator, the situation between the northern andsouthern European peninsulas and islands, forming a median west-east stripthrough what L. W. Lyde in 1931 termed 'Peninsular Europe'. For thatreason, it seemsjustifiable to assign Zeune's use of the term to the first of thefour groups in question. Also, merelybased on location, the term Mitteleuropawas used by Hassel in 1819in a comprehensiveGermangeographicalreferencework to denote a median strip across Europe, this time in a north-south direc-tion and included the German states, Austria-Hungary,Switzerlandand theItalian peninsula.16 Quoting a non-German author, the French geographerDenaix in 1833used l'Europecentraleverymuch as Zeune had done to describea west-east strip from the Pyreneesto the rivers Vistula and Tisza.17 Later theuse of the termin a purelytopographicalsensegave way to otherconceptsusingthe same term but attachingto it a specificcontent as a common denominator.Nevertheless it may still be found used in this original way now and then; forinstanceby KathleenRishbeth in Chambers'sencyclopaediavol. 5 (1950), 443)where it denotes the entire part of Europe between its northern and southernislands and peninsulasand thus even includes Russia.One might think a term doing no more than indicatinglocation would bequite valuelessto the geographer,but anotheraspect should also be considered.Just because of the absence of furtherimplicationswhich makes it independentof political events and historicalchanges,it may be useful as a term of referenceto any middle part of Europe and as the name for a map or a series of topo-graphicalmaps covering such a part. Since its limits may thereforelegitimatelyvary a great deal, it is suggestedthat the term should not be used as a propername, and 'middle' in this case should be spelt with a small initial letter thusforming an equivalent to the German mittleres Europa. Alternatively mid-Europe or median-Europe could be used. In cases of doubt, it should bereferred o by its full name:middleEuropein a topographicalsense.

15 A. ZEUNE,Gea. Versuch einer wissenschaftlichen Erdbeschreibung(Berlin, 1808). Quoted fromE. MEYNEN1935, 84).16 A. C. GASPARI,G. HASSEL nd J. G. F. CANNABICH,Vollstdndiges Handbuch der neuestenErdbeschreibung (Weimar, 1819), I, viii; II, 38. Since this is the third though absolutely rewrittenedition of this work an attempt was made to check whether this term had been used already in theearlier editions, the first, published in three parts in 1797, 1799 and 1801, and the second, 1802, bothof which were never completed. When eventually copies of these earlier editions were traced, it wasfound that the term does not appear in any of them. The general plan of the work, as set out in thepreface of the second edition, suggests that the term Deutschland was used in place of what was laterreferred to as Mitteleuropa, since it is stated by Gaspari that the first and second volumes were to con-tain the general introduction as well as Deutschland, the third volume, western and southern, and thefourth volume, northern and eastern Europe. (For a discussion of the term Deutschland, see p. 22.)17 M. A. DENAIX,Etude de geographie naturelle sur l Europe centrale. Quoted from M. Lh6ritier(1928, 44, footnote 2).

21


9/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA- EUROPE CENTRALEMiddle Europe as a Physical RegionSimilarly beyond historical changes is Middle Europe as a physical region.1lOnce the criteriaare agreed upon, the extent of the area to which they applycan be found quite objectively by observation, measuring and plotting theresults on a map. Surprisingly his concept is almost as old as the former sinceit resulted from August Zeune's Naturabtheilungen lready mentioned, andespecially from Carl Ritter's ideas on Naturgebiete,for the delimitation ofwhich he considered relief to be the most important criterion.19 Thus in aGerman geographicaltext-book of 1839, Mitteleuropawas defined as a regionformed by the Alps, togetherwith the mountain systemsand lowlands attachedto them.20 This concept covered much the same area as found by Zeune. Thisnotion, which included France within Middle Europe, prevaileduntil the 1870sand even later. It was, for instance,used by Friedrich Ratzel who, at the end of

the century, called it 'Middle Europe in its widest sense',21 and later still in1904 by Wilhelm Gotz in his book HistorischeGeographiewhich forms part 19of the collection Die Erdkunde. He divided Mitteleuropainto three parts,Gaul-France, the Alpine regions and Deutschland,and stated (p. 223) that onaccount of space relations Franceis also part of Mitteleuropa ince only a smallsection of that country is linked to the Mediterraneanshores. Usually, how-ever, by that time this term had come to be used for a smallerarea, one whichpreviouslyhad commonly been called Deutschland,as the latter termwas beingapplied more and more to the GermanEmpirein spite of its officialname, DasDeutscheReich. Although Deutschlandhad obviously referredto an ethnical22and historicalquality, when replaced by Mitteleuropa his region was neverthe-less defined on the basis of physical criteria. A number of definitions of thiskind could be given,23but one stands out, the paper by Albrecht Penck.24

18 Since there is no general agreement as to whether the use of the word 'natural' should be limitedto regions defined exclusively on a physical basis, as suggested by Unstead, or whether it should beused to describe the larger synthetic entities which are based on both physical and human criteria asadvanced by Roxby, this term had better be avoided (cf. ROXBY, 1926, 381). The correspondingGerman term to physical region is Naturraum.19Die Erdkunde in ihrem Verhiltnis zur Natur und zur Geschichte des Menschen (Berlin, 1817).20 C. E. MEINECKE,Lehrbuch der Geographiefir die oberen Classen hohererLehranstalten (Prenz-lau, 1839).21 'Between the Alps and the North and Baltic Seas, between the Atlantic Ocean and the BlackSea, lies a part of Europe to which Alps, Carpathians and Balkans, vast lowlands, and rivers like theRhine and Danube give a similarity to the major landforms, a region whose climate is of a similartype and whose plant cover from one end to the other spreads the same carpet of forests, meadows,heathlands, bogs and pastures. This is Middle Europe in its widest sense.... To this Middle Europebelong all neighbours of Germany except Russia ... That part of the Balkan Peninsula situatedtowards the Danube is also drawn into its embrace by this mighty river' (1898, 7-8).22deutsch from diutisc, later diutisch 'of the people' (popularis), cf. J. and W. GRIMM, DeutschesWorterbuch(Leipzig, 1860), vol. 2, 1043.23For references, cf. H. HASSINGER1917, 450-1).241887, 91-113. It is only fair to add that this is not the only and final definition of MiddleEurope by A. Penck as is sometimes implied. Later he revised it to include the lower Danube basinand wrote: 'Durch zwanzig Jahre in Wien lebend, habe ich mehr und mehr empfunden, dass ich vordreissig Jahren Mitteleuropa viel zu enge Grenzen gesetzt und seine Suidostgrenzegerade dorthin ver-legt habe, wo die geographische Gliederung Europas eine Stelle vorzeichnet, um die sich durch Jahr-hunderte Lander kristallisiert haben' (1915, 17).

22


10/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA - EUROPE CENTRALESince Deutschlandas contrasted to Deutsches Reich has been mentioned, afew words should be said regardingit. Deutschland s a very vague term; littleagreementexisted among German writers about the area that it was meant tocover and it has often been deliberatelymisused. It is, however, too great ageneralizationwhen Hilda Ormsbywrites that 'To the pre-warwriters the term"Deutschland" signified the German administrativestate...' and that theapplication of this term for a larger area independent of political boundarieswas a 'deliberate movement to establish this new use of the term. . .' (1935,340, 342). This movement,which no doubt existed, aimed to use the term in itsoriginal meaning which had persisted through the centuries since its firstappearancein the eleventh centuryin the form Diutischemi ande.25 Dickinsonstated correctly (1943, 32-3) that Deutschland'has been used for centuries todesignatethe wider area of the German-speakingpeoples, and of alien peoples

who in the past have been greatlyinfluencedby German culture' and H. CordMeyer admitted (1946, 179) that up to 1871 'Deutschlandwas an acceptedethnic-geographic erm . ..26 It is truly a historicalirony that the firstpoliticalunit ever to bear this name as its officialtitle is the Federal GermanRepublic,the BundesrepublikDeutschlandwhich does not even cover the entire area ofwhat remainedof the German state after the Second World War.Although for the reason outlined above Middle Europe was mostlyinterpretedat the turn of the century in a narrow sense among German geo-graphers,a work was published that made a well-arguedcase for a wider con-cept of Middle Europe. This was Joseph Partsch's Central Europe which

appeared in its English edition in 1903 and one year later in the unabridgedGermanoriginal. At firstmuch criticized for this widerinterpretation,not onlyabroad but also in Germany,2 it eventually brought againwide recognitionof aMiddle Europe extending beyond the boundaries of the area formerly calledDeutschland. Since Partsch, to indicate the area dealt with, enclosed a mapshowinga groupof states, it is not alwaysfully appreciated hat his criterion fordelimitingthis region was the physicalnature,in particularrelief.28 His famoussentence where he sums up the characterof Middle Europe proves this point:'The triadof Alps, hills and plain is the governingchord of the symphonyof theMiddle European landscape. Whereone of these notes ceases to sound MiddleEurope ends.'29In later years the delimitation of regions and thus of Middle Europe wasdone more and more on the basis of both physical and cultural elements,but nevertheless some geographersretained the principle of delimiting exclu-sively by the former. In Figure 3 four others are plotted, besides Penck's and

25 For reference cf. E. MEYNEN (1935, 6 and 135).26 The whole question of the origin and later uses of the term was discussed fully by Emil Meynenin his well-documented book, Deutschland und Deutsches Reich.27 G. G. CHISHOLM 1904, 242-4); A. KIRCHHOFF 1905, 28-9); TH. FISCHER(1905, 48-53).28 The boundaries of the region are plotted in Figure 3 on the basis of the text (1903, 1-3).29 Quoted in my own translation from the German edition (p. 4) since in the English edition(p. 2) much of the original flavour is lost.

23


11/26

CENTRALEUROPE MITTELEUROPA EUROPECENTRALEPartsch's concepts alreadymentioned. As is broughtout by the shading,whichis done by using the same cartographictechniqueas in Figure 2, the commonarea is much more extensivethan on the previous map where differenttypes ofdefinitionswere represented,and consists of Germanywithin its 1937 boundar-ies, Austria, Switzerland and Bohemia-Moravia. Alfred Hettner stated his

FIGURE -Middle Europeas delimitedon physicalgrounds: he amountof agreement xistingaboutthe conceptof MiddleEuropeas a physical region.The shadingdensityis directlyproportional o the numberof authoritieswho included a given areawithin MiddleEurope. The variouspatternsare only the accidentalresultof the processof super-imposition.definition first in 1907 and retained it in the later editions of his book (1932,136). His major point of disagreementwith Partsch is over the south-easternpart which he added to the Balkan Peninsula,naming the whole region South-easternEurope though he did not go back to the earlier narrow definitions ofMiddle Europe but stated that Mitteleuropaand Deutschlandshould not beequated (1923, 132). In contrast to Hettner who held that culturalcriteria areunsuitable for delimitation of regions in geography (1908, 106; 1927, 296),Otto Maull recognizedthem as importantfor that purpose but employed themonly at whatone mightcall the 'lowerpartof the scale' of the regionalhierarchy.Middle Europe, as a region to be placed approximatelyin the middle of the

24


12/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA - EUROPE CENTRALEscale, was delimited exclusively on the basis of physical criteria whereas thenext smaller region Deutschlandis distinguished from Middle Europe by itsdistinct cultural properties, and characterizedby a cultural landscape of Ger-man character(1933, 8). This Middle Europe is almost the same as Hettner'sexcept for Denmark which is excluded on account of the different space re-lationships.30 The remainingdefinitions indicated on this map are based on asinglephysical criterion,climate. W. G. Kendrew's definition aims to be only aclimatic division of Europeand not a generallyapplicableregion.31 G. D. Hub-bard, on the other hand, uses climate as the criterion to delimit the majorregions of Europe but then groups a number of states together which fit bestinto the regions thus established (1937, 4; map). I am not aware of a Britishpublication where the subdivision of Europe into major regions is based solelyon physical factors, though the following remark of W. G. East (1948, 40)pointed in this direction: 'Centralor Middle Europe remains and must remainas a permanent fact because it rests on the physical structure of thecontinent... .'32

Summingup this section we may say that the concept of Middle Europeas a physical region is very useful because of its objective basis and its per-manency, although many geographerswould agree that it is not our ultimateaim when we wish to establish a subdivision of Europe into its major regions.But again I wish to point out that we should make ourselves quite clear and,wheneverwe use Middle Europe in this particular sense, give it its full name:'Middle Europe as a physical region.'When we turn to concepts of Middle Europe with an historical andpolitical bias or as a geographical region, we enter much more difficultgroundby introducinghuman elementsthat are liable to quick changes. Any definitiongiven must, therefore, be related to a certain time so that many definitions,though different,may nevertheless be correct. Furthermore,here we enter thefield of the humanities where the subjectiveelement inevitably plays a greaterpart. The fundamental problem is that the very definition of Europe as acontinent is only possible by taking the human factor into account and that,therefore, its eastern boundary has been subject to changes during history.3s

Thus we may conclude that Middle Europe, historically and geographicallyanarea with certain culturalqualities, is not fixed in space, and once it had come30 Basis for plottingthe boundaries MAULL, 1933, 3-5).31 This map can be found in all editions of his book The climates of the continents (1922 and 1927,211; 1937 and 1941, 241; 1953, 312). This map, with some alterations, was reproduced by L. D. STAMP,Europe and the Mediterranean (1932, 26), and this in turn with further alterations reproduced byN. G. J. POUNDSn An historical andpolitical geography of Europe (1947, 18).32 Cf. WILHELM BRtNGER (1951) who attempted a geomorphological classification of Europe inEastern, Middle and Western Europe without, however, making this the basis of the geographicalregions of Europe.33 For a short discussion of the concept of Europe as a continent and its changing easternboundary, cf. O. MAULL (1951, 667-8). Ibid., 670, he states: ' "Europa" ist eben kein geographischer

Begriff, der sich in die Reihe der Erdteilbegriffe einfiigen liesse.'

25


13/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA- EUROPE CENTRALEinto being it tended to expand and move eastwardparallel with the gradualeastward expansion of Europe.

Middle Europe as an Historical and Political RegionThe first question which presentsitself is: 'At what moment in the historyof Europe did Middle Europe emerge?' This question has been answered invarious ways. Oskar Kossmann in his book, Warum st Europaso?, where heinterpretsEuropeanhistory on a basis of time and space, came to the followingconclusion: back in prehistory,when, in the general movement of civilizationfrom the Near East via Greece and Rome, the firstraysof this advancebegantopenetrate to the northern parts of Europe, there was one section which onaccount of its physical naturewas particularly avoured to become the nucleusof a separate development. This was the Cimbrianregion, the Danish islandsand peninsulas,and they did in fact become the cradle of the Teutonic peoplesand'of Middle Europe. Far enough removed from the Mediterraneanworld,which first advancedinto the continent throughthe Ligurian gate, and shelteredfrom the forces of the steppe coming from the east, it was possible that hereenough energy could concentrate which eventually resulted in expansion, forvarious reasons, in the only possible direction, namely south. It interposed aseparate Middle European world between east and west, bringing about theprincipal tripartitionof the great northernslope of the Europeancontinent intoa Celto-Roman, a Teutonic and a Slav section. The western boundary of thismiddle part was determined by Caesar's defence line which dammed theTeutonic flood and forced it to fill the space east of the Rhine between thenorthern seas and the Alps. Its easternboundary,which persistedthrough theearlyMiddleAges, was in turn determinedby the defence line from the mouth ofthe Elbe to the Bohemian Forest, which offered itself to the Teutonic tribesagainst the forces thrustingfrom the east (1950, 89 and 110).The French historian, Michel Lheritier, gave a different answer to thisquestion in his Regionshistoriques 1928, 46). He is of the opinion that in theMiddle Ages there was no spacefor a Middle Europesince the area meant by itwas the eastern march of the continent as expressedby the name of Austria-Osterreich,i.e. the eastern march. It emerged in history from the sixteenthcenturyonwards as a resultof the growthof Austriaand the advanceof Germancivilization to the countries which are now meantby it, althoughthe name usedthen was not Middle Europebut Germany. Towards the end of the eighteenthcentury, Emperor Joseph II was the first to attempt its political organization,but still the name Middle Europewas not used. The concept of Middle Europeas such appearsat the time of the Austro-Prussianantagonismin the middle ofthe nineteenthcenturyand when the question arose as to whetherAustria withits differentcomponentswould be able to survive. Significant s an articlein theofficial WienerZeitung in 1849 expressing the opinion that, in a politico-economic union of Middle Europe,Austriawould inevitablybecome the centreof gravityon account of its centralposition. Exponents of this idea of Middle

26


14/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA - EUROPE CENTRALEEurope during the nineteenth century were the German economist, List, theAustrian Minister of Commerce, Bruck, and the German writer, Paul deLagarde.

Nevertheless, the problemremained an academicone until the First WorldWar broughtabout an economic unificationof the Middle Powers. It was thenpossible to see how it might work in peace time, and the idea of Middle Europeas a politico-economic unit was revived. Many writings on this theme werepublished;34the most important one is undoubtedly Friedrich Naumann'sMitteleuropa 1915). It was soon translatedinto English and French, and thusbecame fairly well known elsewhere,though it seems that in many cases it wasnot studied very thoroughly. Although Naumann only expressedhis privateopinion, which even within Germanyand Austria-Hungaryreceived much criti-cism, outside Germanyit was often taken to be official Germanpolicy. It wasinterpretedas 'the German aim for domination of the middle part of theContinent' and the very word Mitteleuropa n English and French usage oftencame to mean that. It is true that Naumann envisageda Middle Europewhichshould be German at its core and that German should be its linguafranca(1915, 101), but this, looking at the area he had in mind, was only natural. Hespoke bitterly of the tendencies of Germanization (73-5) and anti-Semitism(70-1; 114) and the creation that he wished to result from the war experienceswas not a new state organizedon Germanlines, not even a federal state, but afederationof sovereigncountries thatjoined voluntarilyas equalpartnerson thebasis of mutual treaties for their common interest (232).36 Only two matterswere to be dealt with by a common authority;economic planning and defence(249). Thus, by increasing production and producing more cheaply as a largeenterprise,the living standardof the masses could be raised (118-19), and byhaving trenchesround this group of states and a common defence force ready,further war could be averted (257).37 Of this book G. G. Chisholm wrote avaluablereview, 8 and in the same year further elaborated the subject: '.. . onemay even find in Naumann's book much that is consonant with the proposalsthat have been put forward for the formation of a Leagueof Nations' (1917(b),129). Of present-dayexperienceone might add 'much that is consonant withthe idea of a Little Europe'.

34 A number of these publications are quoted by H. HASSINGER1917, 438-9) and H. CORD MEYER(1946, 185-7).35Cf. Rheinisch Westfdlische Zeitung (November 27th, 1915). 'To sacrifice the individuality ofPrusso-Germany to the idea of a fictitious Middle Europe would mean to cut away the ground fromunderneath our feet.' Quoted from M. LHERITIER1928, 47, footnote 2). A summary of the reactionsin Hungary is given by Tamas Lengyel A vildghCbori idejen felmeriilt kozepeuropatervek es a magyarkozvelemeny (The Mitteleuropa schemes of the Great War and the Magyarian public opinion) pub-lished in Az Orszcg Utja 4 (1940), No. 7 (July). In German translation (duplicated) by the Publikations-stelle Wien (1940), No. 98.36 Not as stated by R. E. DICKINSON (1943, 24): 'There would thus be formed a federal stateunder German tutelage....'37 Cf. also p. 263, 'Mitteleuropa ist Kriegsfurcht'.38 He wrote about Naumann's book: '.. .it is written throughout in the heat, not of passion,but of imaginative thought based on wide and intimate knowledge' (1917(a), 83).

27


15/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA- EUROPE CENTRALEThe end of the war did not bringa political order like the one conceivedbyNaumann but the creation of a number of smaller states. As regards themLheritiermade the statement: 'Le Mitteleuropa est mort, mais 1'Europecen-trale n'en existepas moins ...' (1928, 47). To him l'Europecentraleconsistedessentially of the successor states of the Austro-HungarianEmpire: Austria,Czechoslovakiaand Hungary. His definition,or a modified form of it, came tobe widely acceptednot so much in Austria but in the other Danube states andalso in France and England, where the term CentralEuropecan still be foundused in this sense.39 In Germanythis definitionwas neveraccepted. The wholeregion from Finland to Greece, of which Lheritier'sl'Europecentraleforms thecontinental part, was termedZwischeneuropa.40 This was a narrowingdown ofa termoriginallycoined by AlbrechtPenck in 1915(Figure4). Dividing Europeunderthe principleof nearness to the open sea and the 'maritime' attitude of its

peoples, he established three major regions- Vordereuropa,Zwischeneuropaand Hintereuropa.'4 His idea was that common space relationshipswould leadthe peoples togetherand that a closely unitedZwischeneuropawould provideforEurope a strong backbone. He continued: 'Once a strong Zwischeneuropasestablished then it will no longer be Utopian to speak of the United States ofEurope' (1915, 40). Comingback to Lheritier'sconcept, though it is a politicalone, it has also a well-arguedgeographicalbasis. He stated:Europecentrale sthe continental part of a zone of greatestdiversityas regards anguage,culturalinfluencesand religion, which stretches from the North Capeto CyrenaicaandEgypt (1928, 49-50); 'its raisond'etreis to be a crossroad,a bridge,a turn-plate'(50). Europecentraleappearsas a synthesisof Europe,and each state again as asynthesis of a synthesis, a little Europecentraleand at the same time a wholeEurope in miniature(52). The geographicalcriticism which must be added isone of comparativescale. Although he thought that this Europecentralecouldbe graduallyextended,its size is too small to be put side by side with the othermajor regions of Europe.Situated between the two powers of Russia and Germany, this Europecentraledid not last very long.42 Hitler Germany, revivingthe idea of Middle

a9As an example cf. The Times in the leading article 'Europeans in exile' (January 21st, 1952).Generally, however, it has become more and more customary in the press to refer to all countriesbehind the 'Iron Curtain' as Eastern Europe. Cf. the article 'Eastern Europe' in the ManchesterGuardian (May 7th, 1953).40 Indicative of this is a wall map with this title by H. Haack, published by Justus Perthes, Gotha,which covers the following area: from the Vener Lake and the mouth of the Oder river in the west, to aline just east of the Volkhov river, Kiev and the Danube delta in the east. In the north it just includesHelsinki and Leningrad, in the south it goes a little beyond the southernmost part of the Danube.41The map appears in this publication on the cover and as Figure 3 in the text. It is reproducedin H. LAUTENSACH1926, Figure 44, 191). It is extremely difficult to render these terms into English.Since Europe is a word of Greek origin, a combination with the appropriate Greek prefixes pro,meso, meta, which are also used in biology for denoting a sequence of sections, would recommend itselfon linguistic grounds. The resulting terms would thus be Pro-Europe, Meso-Europe and Meta-Europe.42 Doubts about its lasting powers were expressed by the Austrian historian, H. STEINACKER,nhis paper 'Osterreich-Ungarn und Osteuropa' in Historische Zeitschrift, 128 (1923), 377-414, especi-ally 413-14.

28


16/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA - EUROPE CENTRALEEurope as a political concept, now not in Naumann's sense but as propagatedby the exponents of geopolitics in the sense of a German-ruledpolitical unit,'4for a time seemed near to putting it into effect. The Anschluss,the annexationof Bohemia-Moravia and attempts to establish political control in the otherstates of Danubian Middle Europe were contributing causes of war. But,

THE TRIPARTITIONOF EUROPEACCORDING TO

A.PENCK 1915

FIGURE4-The tripartition of Europe on the basis of space relationshipsinto Vordereuropa,Zwischeneuropa nd Hintereuropa s suggested by Albrecht Penck in 1915. The zone betweenKareliaand the Asov Sea he termedthe 'VarangianFringe'.although liberationof these states was one of the aims the Allied armiesfoughtfor, the outcome of the war did not bring the re-emergenceof this Europecentrale. In 1945, unlike 1920,there was only one power as its neighbour;thestates concernedwere unable to preservetheir independenceand soon becameSoviet SatelliteEurope. Besides Finlandand Yugoslavia, which arerathermar-ginally situated, the only state left of these political concepts of Mitteleuropa,Zwischeneuropaand Europe centrale alike is Austria, its further existencedependingon an understandingbetween West and East. Will it on account ofits particularlyadvantageous geographical location once again function as acore round which a Europecentralemay develop?

43 As an example, see KARL HAUSHOFER 1937).

29


17/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA- EUROPE CENTRALEMiddle Europe as a GeographicalRegionWith the beginningof the twentieth centuryincreasing weight came to beattributed to human geographic criteria for regional classification. Although

there were some forerunnerswho attempteda definitionof Middle Europe onthe basis of both physical and cultural elements, as F. Heiderich (1909, 263-4)

- t1O---:-:->0 E :

0 200 400 600 ml0 200 400 6o00 80 1000oo m

FIGURE 5-The major regions of Europe according to Hugo Hassinger, delimited on the basis oflandscape character.

and G. Braun(1916, 1), I think that it is no overstatement o say that one paperstands foremost and had the greatest influence on the furtherdevelopment ofthe geographical concept of Middle Europe: Hugo Hassinger's essay, DasgeographischeWesenMitteleuropas,publishedin 1917. H. Cord Meyercalled itone of the milestones in the developmentof the Mitteleuropa dea (1946, 188),and Dickinson also paid tribute to its importanceas 'a masterly essay' (1943,25). Hassinger's map has been redrawn without alteration, apart from thetranslation of the names and the additions of the 1937 frontiers(Figure 5).44Being misled by the term Naturgebiet t has been said that Hassingerbased his44 The map is to be found on p. 478 of Hassinger's paper. It was reproduced by R. E. Dickinson

(1943, Figure 2, 25), but as a rough sketch only.

30


18/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA- EUROPE CENTRALEdefinitiononly on physical facts45but he used the term Naturgebiet,which hetook from CarlRitter,in the same sense as Roxby used the term 'naturalregion'.Since in his opinionall geographical actorsfind theirexpression n thelandscape,the characterof the landscape s the criterionon which he based his delimitationof Middle Europe.46 We are facing three groups of geographical factors, thephysical which are relativelypermanent,the human which are changingand inturn result in changes within the third group, the space relationships. Payingdue regard to these changes, Hassinger termed an eastern part of the regionwerdendes,heranreifendesMitteleuropa (emerging, maturing Middle Europe),(477, 483).It is impossible to give a short summaryof Hassinger's characterizationofMiddle Europewhich does justice to this essay; only a few majorpoints can bementioned. Middle Europe, situatedbetween the monotonous vast mass of thecontinent in the east and the maritimewest with its indented coastlineand manyislands, is neither as monotonous as the formernor as diversifiedas the latter.Though not reachingthe open ocean it has access to tributaryseas in the northand south; thus maritime influencesare considerable,though weaker than inWesternEurope. Climateand vegetation,population and economy, and finallythe entire cultural and political life owe much to this distinct geographicallocation. Middle Europe's potential strengthlies in its nodality at the crossingof the north-south and east-west lines of communication.In variety of structureand geology Middle Europe takes firstplace amongthe European regions. The mountains, provided with frequent passes, areseparatedby lowlands: thus crossingin any direction s not difficult. The diversesoils and rocks are an important prerequisite o its economicwealth, its fertility,its industry, and its highly developed division of labour and social structure.Since the riversdrain to the north-west on one hand and to the south-east onthe other, a firstglanceat the drainage patternmight lead to the erroneous con-clusion that it consists of two independent parts with their peoples standingback to back to each other, the western ones looking out to the ocean, theeastern ones looking towards the continental interior. 'Middle Europe indeedhas a head like Janus looking out to west and east, but it most certainly hasonly one body. Its two halves that seeminglytend to separateare closely linkedby nature through their common lines of communications.' Just because thetwo halves are differentlyendowed with natural wealth - minerals in the north-west, fertile soils and a favourable climate in the south-east- they are inter-

45 'Since he bases his ideas on natural or physical facts, these are used to define his regions ...'R. E. DICKINSON1943, 26). But Hassinger had stated quite clearly (473) 'The physical and the humanas expressions of the local endowment of areas on the earth's surface are so closely interwoven inthe landscape that the geographer must not take one out in order to make it the criterion of con-sideration, judgment and classification of the whole'. Not only did Hassinger deplore the use of aselected criterion or group of criteria as unsuitable for establishing major regions but he also statedthat the independent use of all criteria is impossible since the courses of their boundaries differ sogreatly (471).46 ,. . . the landscape (Landschaftsbild) as the product of the interacting and mutually interrelatedgeographical factors...' (472).D

31


19/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA- EUROPE CENTRALEdependent and more closely linked. Culturally it is the German influencewhichhas acted on the spacefor centuries,giving unity to the whole. Neverthe-less, its cultural and ethnographic diversity is very great. Whereas nationalstates are the natural form of political organizationin other parts of Europewhere a nation could expand into physically simpler areas, Middle Europe isby its very naturedestined to be a 'mediatorEurope', culturallyand politically(477-88). This briefly is, according to Hassinger, the character of MiddleEurope and this region stretches as far as we find this characterrepresented.As he states,its boundariesare therefore zones rather han lines and it is only forpracticalconsiderations,such as mapping,that certainnaturalfeatureswhich arevisible in the landscapehave to be selectedfor a demarcationof its boundaries.It canjustly be said that no othergeographerpaid as much attention to thisparticular problem and contributed as much to it as Hassinger in this andsubsequentpublications,as for instance in the introductorychapterof his book,Die Tschechoslowakei.4 7 This statement s by no meansderogatory owards othervaluablecontributionslike those made by Roxby, de Martonne,Dickinson andmore recently Andre Siegfried,Jean Gottmann and G. Hoffmann. But, withthe exception of Dickinson's book, it was not a central theme to those authorsas it was to Hassinger,who, born in Vienna, and occupyingthe chairof humangeography at Vienna University for almost twenty years, was quite naturallyconcernedwith the problem of Mitteleuropa.

ConclusionTaking up a basic principle expressedby Hassingerin his paper (476) that'boundariesof regions are therefore[since the landscape changes continuouslythrough human action] not stable but changeableand mobile in the course ofhistory, and classificationsinto geographical regions are thus always only ofvalue for the present...', it might appear to be logical to conclude with anattempt to answer the question put at the beginning- to what extent the con-cept of Middle Europeas a geographicalregion needs to be revised in ordertobe applicableto the present day? I was temptedto do this but refrained or tworeasons. Firstly, this question is rather outside the scope of the paper, andspace would not permit a reasoned presentation. Secondly, since so many

importantfacts like the future of Germanyand Austria are still undecided,andso much is still in a state of flux, it would be too soon to give any definitionofMiddle Europe as a geographicalregion today which would be of more thanephemeralvalidity. Nevertheless, it seems appropriateto indicate the generaldirectionwhich the developmentof Middle Europehas taken since Hassinger'spaper was publishedin 1917.As a reaction against the over-emphasisonce given in geographyto states,their capitals, and similar subject matter, political boundaries came to be47 For some of his other contributions in this field, see the bibliography. Cf. also the obituary ofH. Hassinger by H. BOBEKin Petermanns GeographischeMitteilungen, 97 (1953), 36-9, with a selective

bibliography.

32


20/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA- EUROPE CENTRALEconsideredas outside the scope of regionalgeography.48During recentdecadesthe pendulumhas swung back and it has been shown in many examples,as forinstancein Hassinger's inaugurallecture in Vienna in 1931,that the state is oneof the most powerfulcultural factors and that its boundaries,though in varyingdegree, act as differentiating orces upon the culturallandscape.49Changesofstate boundaries are always succeededby landscapechanges,which may occurrapidly or gradually and may or may not be striking, depending on circum-stances. As regardsMiddle Europe as a whole, the frontier changes after theFirst World War made no modification of the boundaries of Middle Europenecessary. On the contrary, within the new states, where areas of more ad-vanced civilization were linked with more backward ones farthereast, the pro-cess of integrationof the 'emergingMiddle Europe' to parts of equal standingwas accelerated. The consequencesof the Second World War arequitedifferent.Since 1939, when various groups of ethnic Germansbegan to make their wayinto the Reich,we have witnessed a continuousdisintegrationof Middle Europeas a geographicalregion. Together with the retreatingGerman armies on theeasternand south-eastern ront wentmanythousands of Germansettlers, eavingthe land that theirforefathershad cultivated. In 1939approximately en millionGerman nationals lived in the lost easternprovinces,and about eleven millionethnic Germansin the states of eastern and south-eastern Middle Europe. Outof this total of over twenty million Germans, about thirteen million arrivedeventually n PotsdamGermany,and almost400,000found a refuge n Austria.5We are here not concernedwith this greatestfolk migrationin history as such,but with its effects on the cultural landscapeand thus on Middle Europe as ageographical region. Nevertheless, the actual figuresof this population move-ment give an indication of the degree of the landscape changes and Figures 6and 7 areintended to servethis purpose. The expulsionof the Germanscreated apopulation vacuum which so far has only partiallybeen filled, on the whole bypeoples taken mainly from the easternparts of the states affected and thus of aconsiderably lower standard of civilization. In some cases people were eventaken from Asia so that we now find an appreciablenumber of Mongols work-

48 Cf. H. HETTNER1927, 295).49Earlier, but not dealt with in such a systematic way as by Hassinger, the geographical im-portance of the political factors was emphasized by L. W. LYDE:'It is almost always the politicalcontrol that gives the dominant note in the most important areas; and, as the method of treating suchareas should in each case, as far as possible, be appropriate to the dominant note, the political unitcannot be made subordinate without more being lost than is gained' (1913, iv).50 There is already an extensive literature on the refugee problem. For examples in English seeCHAUNCYD. HARRIS nd G. WULKER, 'The refugee problem of Germany', Economic Geography,29 (1953), 10-25 and the relevant chapters in J. VERNANT, he refugee in the post-war world (1953).Important is the publication containing the nine maps by W. ESSEN 1952), of which No. 1 andNo. 7 were used for the preparation of Figures 6 and 7, supplemented with statistical data published inthe GeographischesTaschenbuch 1950), 147-54, and in the case of South Tyrol by the paper by F. DOR-RENHAUS1953), 191. An official work on the expulsion of the Germans, of which the first volume hasappeared, is being prepared by the Federal German Government (Dokumentation der VertreibungderDeutschen aus Ost-Mitteleuropa bearbeitet von Theodor Schieder, herausgegeben vom Bundesminis-

teriumfiir Vertriebene, Band I [1953]. (cf. The Times, September 17th, 1953).

33


21/26


22/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA - EUROPE CENTRALE

V

-

/X-X

- Frontiers of Potsdam Germany and boundaries of its occupation zones- Boundaries of the German LanderBoundaries of provinces and other administrative units0 Kms. 200

FIGURE -The effect of the influx of refugees and expellees on the population distribution of PotsdamGermany.

35

SAAIt

INCREASE1007075lI

40%g 30%

DECREASE:--- 207

-- 407=-- 60

Adapted from W. Essen

m /

I


23/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA- EUROPE CENTRALEof farming land have reverted to waste52 and it was officially stated that inCzechoslovakia 250 of the former German villages have not been resettled.53On the other hand thereare population increases in parts of over 100 per cent,with a consequentincrease in the number of dwellingsand intensityof land use.This contrast is emphasizedby the difference n ideology which bringswith it acertain economic attitude and policy and thus again gives the landscapebehindthe 'Iron Curtain' a new and differentimprint. One need only point at theeffect that the land reform has had on the field and settlementpattern whereformerly large estates, with huge fields under the same crop, were subdividedinto small holdings, though this is only a first stage.54 Despite the failuresex-periencedso far, as long as the ideology remains the same, it is only a matterof time until the second stage will come and those newly-createdfarms, to-gether with the originalpeasant holdings with their often minute field parcels,will be supersededby sovkhozand kolkhoz(stateand co-operative)farmsgivingthe rural landscape yet another appearance. This influence of ideology caneven be felt in the Soviet zone of Germany,which, as the events in June 1953showed, cannot be considered a proper Soviet satellite like the other stateswithin the Russian sphere. A particularlystriking example of this is found inBerlin and attention has been drawn to it in a number of publications.55 Onesentence in The Times of April 11th, 1952, brings this out particularlyclearly:'The prospect is that two distinct faces of Berlin would emerge from a pro-longed division of the city. Just as the west has its Clay Allee and the east itsStalin Allee so there is a marked difference n architectural orms which some-how contrives to transmute the ideological conflict into stone.'56In spite of the various changes taking place which give the Soviet zone ofGermany certain east European imprints, one cannot separatethis area fromMiddle Europeif this regionis to be retained at all. On the one hand, seen on aEuropean scale, Middle Europe would then be too small to be considered amajor region in its own right. On the other hand, there is at least not yetsufficientcause for such a major separation. Although Communist-ruled, hetraditional culturallandscapehas not alteredas greatlyas some instancesmightsuggest,and the landscapeof the Soviet zone is still much more akin to WesternGermanythan it is to Russia, the East Europeanstatepar excellence. Similarly,but to a lesser degree, what has been said about the Soviet Zone of Germanyapplies also to the marches still farthereast, over which German cultural in-fluence once extended,for many tracespointing to that heritageare still visible.

52TERENCERITTIE1953, 207).53 E. LENDL1951, 45). For a more detailed discussion of the population changes in north-westBohemia see the paper by A. HAMMERSCHMIDThere, in two maps and a table of the populationfigures for ten towns, he compares the population distribution of 1949 with that of 1930.54 Cf. A. E. MOODIE1954).55Articles in The Times, the Manchester Guardian, and a paper by P. SCHOLLERn Erdkunde.For details cf. bibliography.56 Only a few examples of the recent geographical changes within Middle Europe as conceivedby Hassinger can be given here. The topic has been dealt with more fully by E. LENDL,Dozent at

the University of Vienna.

36


24/26

CENTRAL EUROPE - MITTELEUROPA- EUROPE CENTRALEFor how long these traceswill be retainedis difficultto gauge,but to changethecharacterof a landscapecompletelyis always a process to be measuredat leastin decades rather than years.

It is possible to use the 'vague' term Middle Europe in a clear and un-mistakeablemannerprovidedwe expresspreciselywhich kind of Middle Europewe mean. 'Middle Europe as a topographicalterm' and 'Middle Europe in aphysical sense' remain unchanged by historical events. 'Middle Europe in apolitical sense' depends on the political situation at a given time, and at leastfor the moment has ceased to exist. 'Middle Europe as a geographicalregion'is still with us, though smaller, but still a geographicalentity worthy of beingstudied not as a mere group of states, but as a geographicalsubject of morelasting character:a geographical region.BIBLIOGRAPHY

TH. ARLDT,Die Vilker Mitteleuropas (Leipzig, 1917).J. AULNEAU,Histoire del'Europe centrale (Paris, 1926).R. BLANCHARDnd R. E. CRIST,A geography of Europe (London, 1934).G. BRAUN,Deutschland, Band I (Berlin, 1916).G. BRAUN,Mitteleuropaund seine Grenzmarken,Wissenschaft ndBildung,No. 141(Leipzig,1917).W. BRUNGER,Gedankenzur morphologischenGliederungEuropas in ostwestlicherRichtung',Petermanns Geographische Mitteilungen, 95 (1951), 31-4.G. G. CHISHOLM,eview of J. Partsch's 'Central Europe', Geographical Journal, 23 (1904), 242-4.G. G. CHISHOLM,a) Review of F. Naumann's 'Mitteleuropa', Scottish Geographical Magazine,33 (1917)(a), 83-8.G. G. CHISHOLM,b) 'Central Europe as an economic unit', Geographical Teacher, 9 (1917)(b), 122-33.E. DE MARTONNE,La notion d'Europe centrale', introduction in Gdographie Universelle, tome IV,premiere partie (Paris, 1930), 1-3.R. E. DICKINSON, he GermanLebensraumHarmondsworth nd New York, 1943).F. D6RRENHAUS, 'Deutsche und Italiener inSuidtirol', Erdkunde, 7 (1953), 185-216.W. G. EAST,Remarks in the discussion after Mrs. J. A. Steers' paper, 'The middle people', Geo-graphical Journal, 112 (1948), 40-1.W. ESSEN, Herkunftsgebiete, Wanderungswege und heutige Verteilung der deutschen Heimatvert-riebenen im Vierzonen-Deutschland' (9 maps) in Europa und die deutschen Fliichtlinge, ed.Institut zur Forderungffentlicher Angelegenheiten e.V. (Frankfurt/Main, 1952).I. ESSENWEIN-ROTHE,Heimatvertriebene in Osterreich', Zeitschrift fur Geopolitik, 24 (1953), 307-16.TH. FISCHER,Review of J. Partsch's 'Mitteleuropa', Zeitschrifit der Gesellschaft fur Erdkunde zuBerlin (1905), 48-53.J. GOTTMANN, geography of Europe (New York, 1951).A. HAMMERSCHMIDT,Wandlungen der Bevolkerungsverteilung in Nordwestb6hmen seit dem zweitenWeltkrieg', Berichte zur Deutschen Landeskunde, 12 (1954), 233-8, with two maps.E. HANSLIK,Osterreich, Schriften des Institutsfiir Kulturforschung,Band III (Wien, 1917).H. HASSINGER,Das geographische Wesen Mitteleuropas, nebst einigen grundsatzlichen Bemerkungeniiber die geographischen Naturgebiete Europas und ihre Begrenzung', Mitteilungen der Geo-graphischen Gesellschaft Wien, 60 (1917), 437-93.H. HASSINGER,Mitteleuropa', Ewald Banse, Lexikon der Geographie (Braunschweig, 1923), BandII, 124-7.H. HASSINGER,Weltage und Wesen des ostlichen Mitteleuropa' being section II in Die Tschechoslo-wakei (Wien, 1925), 26-41.H. HASSINGER,Der Staat als Landschaftsgestalter', Zeitschriftfiir Geopolitik, 9 (1932), 117-22 and182-7.H. HASSINGER,Eine franz6sische Landerkunde von Mitteleuropa' (Review of E. de Martonne'sEurope Centrale), Petermanns Geographische Mitteilungen, 78 (1932), 13.

37


25/26


26/26

CENTRALEUROPE MITTELEUROPA EUROPE CENTRALE 39W. SIEVERS, ie geographischen Grenzen Mitteleuropas, Akademische Rede zur Jahresfeier der gross-herzoglichen Hessischen Ludwigs-Universitat (Giessen, 1916).H. G. STEERSMRS. J. A. STEERS),The middle people: resettlement in Czechoslovakia', GeographicalJournal, 112 (1948), 28-40.J. F. UNSTEAD,Europe of today (London, 1927).F. A. VOIGT, Berlin today. A city of contrasts', Manchester Guardian, May 6th, 1953 (illustrationsof Communist architecture).A. ZEUNE,Erdansichten oder Abriss einer Geschichte der Erdkunde (2nd edn., Berlin, 1820).'Berlin clearing house', The Times (April 11th, 1952).'The two Berlins. A city of contrasts and artificial frontiers', The Times (May 4th, 1953)(illustration of Stalin Allee).

'Germany's tragic east. Polish settlers' invasion of Silesia', The Times (April 1st, 1954).

mitteleuropa_sinnhuber 1954

Documents