by Stefan Gruber
[Image 1] View towards the New Imperial Palace, standing in the center of Heldenplatz.
Image by Bwag (2014).
Abstract: Regarding its layout, Vienna’s Heldenplatz is a curious square. Regarding its use, it is an undecided square, and regarding its history, it is a contested square. As a steady stage, it witnessed several dramatic changes to the political and social landscape of Austria. Its visual identity is composed of the imperial architecture surrounding it, and its importance results from nearby political and cultural institutions. Among the many events held there, none has had a stronger impact on the site than Adolf Hitler’s “Anschluss” speech on the 15th March 1938 in front of hundreds of thousands of people on the Heldenplatz. The result is a complex, heterogeneous material and immaterial construction.
This essay sets out to unravel the processes behind this multifaceted spatial conglomerate and the difficult relationship of the Austrian nation with the Heldenplatz as its use by political figures, protesters and even visitors, still evokes reactions and interactions with the memory stored at this site.
THE FORMATION OF THE SQUARE
As the seat of monarchal power executed by the Habsburg family, the Imperial Palace represented the centre of the Austrian-Hungarian multinational empire.
In 1857 the old fortifications and walls were demolished which gave way for the famous Ringstraße, a representative circular street in the inner centre of Vienna. Along this boulevard, new private, public and governmental developments were built, all of them in a variety of historicist styles, depending on importance and role in society. In this changed architectural setting, with the rise of the bourgeois class and consequently their architectural presence along the Ringstraße, the need for an appropriate form of monarchal representation in the city centre was met with a monumental concept by architect Gottfried Semper in 1868. He envisioned a monumental imperial forum, a form which Semper based on the ancient Roman forums and which featured in many of his previous works. Concerning the Roman style he remarked that, “It represents the synthesis of the two apparently mutually excluding cultural moments, namely, individual aspiration and the absorption into collectivity. It arranges many spatial divisions around a large central space, according to a principle of coordination and subordination, according to which everything holds and supports each other and the individual is needed for the whole […]”.
The idea of the Imperial Forum suggested the expansion of the Imperial Palace with additional buildings- the so-called the New Imperial Palace, which were facing each other to enclose a representative square which later will become the Heldenplatz. The highly structured and adorned exterior of the curved facade of the New Imperial Palace dominates the scenery at the square. The median risalit with the imperial two-headed eagle on top is aligned with the axis of the two equestrian statues in the centre of the square.
Semper’s monumental plan envisioned the incorporation of several existing as well as new buildings to achieve a holistic design, including the old Imperial Palace, the New Imperial Palace and several additional buildings across the Ringstraße. In this regard, the prominent feature of the Imperial Forum was the establishment of a monumental axis marked by the Castle Gate. As a representative square with its imperial grandeur in front of the Imperial Palace, its primary functions were to display imperial power and to serve for ceremonial acts, as well as offer identifying moments as a gesture towards the multinational-state.
The work on the New Imperial Palace was delayed many times due to financial, technical and organisational difficulties until it was finally completed in 1913. The opposing second wing was never realised because of the upcoming First World War and the increasingly unjustifiable scale of the whole masterplan. This resulted in the present, unfinished state which caused an unresolved spatial layout of the square with the main axis being perpendicular to the envisioned monumental axis, highlighting instead the balcony of the New Imperial Palace and the two equestrian statues of Prince Eugene of Savoy (revealed 1865) and Archduke Charles (revealed 1860).
It was in this unfinished setting when the fate of the square was determined when on 15th March 1938, Adolf Hitler appeared on the balcony of the New Imperial Palace and announced the annexation of Austria by National Socialist Germany [Image 4]. During his speech Hitler was facing the Heldenplatz which was heavily crowded with approximately 250.000 people, even the equestrian statues and the Castle Gate were occupied by spectators.The scene was carefully orchestrated as Hitler’s convoy arrived through the Castle Gate while the military took care of the security and orientation of the masses on the square. On every facade facing the Heldenplatz, NS banners were hanging symmetrically and aligned with the axes of the buildings.
Unlike any other date in the history of the square it is this event which dominates the public memory until today. Every consequent event since then has to be considered in relationship to this memory, which is informed
not solely by the speech of Adolf Hitler but also by the crowd on the square, signalling the consent with Hitler’s words and the policies of the NS regime.
Decades later, in the 1980s, it was at the Burgtheater adjacent to the actual Heldenplatz where Thomas Bernhard’s stage play titled Heldenplatz sparked up one of the biggest controversies in Austrian politics and society until then.The play stirred up the repressed episode of the Austrian history and forced the nation to confront its past. As a consequence, the debates on Bernhard’s Heldenplatz led to a revaluation of the denial and appeasement policy of parts of the society and official institutions, as so prominently displayed in both cases. The victim narrative, which portrayed Austria as the first country to be occupied by the aggressive German expansion policy in the years before the Second World War, was confronted with the images of the crowds standing on the Heldenplatz as Adolf Hitler announced the annexation of Austria in 1938. As a symbolic event, this consent with National Socialist ideas is thematised in the play.
As the curtain opens for the final act, a dinner room with a long dining table appears on stage. All family members have supper together for the last time. In the background, through a high arched window, the statue of Archduke Charles on the Heldenplatz is visible. Again, the family members have an intense discussion when Mrs Schuster starts to hear screams and cheers, at first inaudible for the audience but then intensifying until the “Sieg Heil” and “Heil Hitler” chants can be heard by the audience as well. Then suddenly, Mrs. Schuster falls dead onto her plate.
During the time of the interwar period and especially since the end of the Second World War, the vacuum left by the collapsed monarchy needed to be filled with a new definition of nationhood, with new governmental protocols and new forms of identification for its citizens. The imperial forms of representation, such as the layout of the square, the monarchal symbols and architectural vocabulary, still present today, needed to be reimagined. The National Day and its respective rites in general are therefore important tools to communicate politics and the national idea and form a cultural basis of collective experiences and memories, even more so for a newly formed nation-state. It connects the past with the present through continuity and tradition and simultaneously generate and envision a future.
The Austrian National Day on 26th October has been celebrated since 1965 and marks the anniversary of signing the declaration of neutrality when Austria regained independence after the Second World War. The festive event was meant to form a new national identity for a state that went through a partly self-inflicted World War and was under foreign protectorate for more than 10 years afterwards. Soon after the declaration of neutrality in 1955, the military celebrated the newly gained independence with a military parade on the Heldenplatz in reference to the parades regularly held by the occupation forces in front of the Imperial Palace. This shift can be seen as an act of displacement or spatial appropriation by the Austrian Army in order to seek legitimisation and connect to the past.
As sociologist Martina Löw argues, there are two processes at work in the constitution of space : “spacing” and “operations of synthesis”. The former describes the act of assembling and placing as well as the (re)arrangement of physical (social) goods and humans. The latter refers to processes involved in establishing a relationship between those objects, such as perception, imagination and memory. Both of these processes can be investigated in performative acts such as National Day celebrations and other forms of collective rituals.
The “performative” set up of the Austrian National Day is located between the French National Day with its renowned military parade on the Avenue des Champs-Élysées and the German Unity Day with its “Bürgerfest”, which is celebrated without any demonstration of military power. The Heldenplatz as the choice of location for the celebrations of the National Day and the concurrent fair can be explained partly because of practical reasons, as it is one of the biggest urban squares within the city centre and it is located close to most governmental institutions such as the office of the chancellor or the presidential offices inside the Imperial Palace.
The Austrian Army plays a major role in the events of the National Day by providing and exhibiting military equipment and troops for spectacle on the Heldenplatz. The fair serves several functions and includes the swearing-in of recruits and a memorial service at the Castle Gate, where the president and the government remember and honour the “dead soldiers and victims of the resistance”  . Additionally, politicians and government officials highlight the importance of the day by addressing the memory of the past while at the same time using the Heldenplatz as a stage to proclaim their political statements to the audience on the square and the accompanying media coverage of the event. Various other organisations and side-events offer entertainment and as on so many other occasions, blur the line of military show and amusement.
On National day, the otherwise empty Heldenplatz appears crowded with plentiful objects and visitors. Tents, trucks, tanks, helicopters and other military equipment are placed on the square and are aligned with the main architectural axes of the square or where necessary, in some practical order. The statue of Archduke Carl is encircled by helicopters, a Eurofighter jet and a children’s playground. Moreover, next to the two equestrian statues and along the border to the Volksgarten, food stands and cafes offer additional enjoyment for the visitors. On the boulevard, which leads from the Castle Gate to the Imperial Palace, the soldiers are traditionally inaugurated in front of the president, the chancellor and army commanders. Again, the alignment of the troops follows the two main spatial axes of the square. The troops face the Volksgarten, with the Imperial Palace and the infamous balcony as a backdrop. Although similar alignments were used in the pre-war era, the occupation of the Heldenplatz through the military evokes controversial feelings. It can be interpreted as a symbolic act by the Ministry of Defence to showcase the means with which to defend the nation’s crime independence if necessary.
The inauguration of the troops [Image 5,6] is held on the Heldenplatz with every attendee, even the president and the military commanders, standing on the same level without any differentiation or prioritizing. Despite the crowded appearance of the square, enough of the surrounding buildings and statues are visible to provide a reference to the location. Even more importantly, the superimposition is often sought for in photographs and videos of the National Day. All of this results in a spectacle which aims to combine elements of military power, politics and entertainment in a common national sensation which enters the collective memory through the resulting pictures and evoked feelings. But the unconventional mix of children’s playground and casual drinking and eating amidst military equipment has led to critical reactions in recent years.
Having Löw’s conceptual approach in mind, one can deduce that the mix of humans and physical objects placed in an existing spatial setting provoke strong relational processes as can be witnessed in the course of the National Day celebrations. This specifically accounts for the symbolic and historical spatial composition of the Heldenplatz. Therefore, it is vital for an informed interaction with a historic space such as the Heldenplatz to be precise and deliberate in the way action and reaction is deployed. The historic significance of the Heldenplatz seems to some extent subordinated to practical considerations as further confirmed in interviews by representatives of the Austrian Army upon enquiry. As a result, these considerations determine the use of the square more decisively than mere symbolic arrangements. While in the course of the National Day celebrations history and the past in general are addressed in various speeches and commentaries, the awareness for a performative nuanced engagement with history at the Heldenplatz in order to address the lingering topics seems limited. Nevertheless, this site highlights the importance of physical almost “bodily” reference as an initiator of relational processes such as perception and memory.
Most of the aforementioned topics can be witnessed in theatrical domain as well. Thomas Bernhard’s play Heldenplatz exemplifies the importance of spatial relationships, and the use of appropriation and seizure of specific meaningful spaces in a very precise and condensed matter. The stage of Heldenplatz consists of references and symbols which are used to connect the enclosed space of the theatre with a wider (spatial) context and to provide certain additional information for the audience.
The play opens with the fact, that the Jewish professor Josef Schuster committed suicide by jumping out of his flat near the Heldenplatz. Professor Schuster, his wife and his brother had to flee the country following the annexation of Austria. After their return from exile in Oxford, the professor and his wife moved into a flat close to the Heldenplatz. In the year 1988 they decided to return to Oxford because of, as the play points out, the apparent hostility against the Jewish community, the hidden national socialist tendencies within the Austrian society and the unresolved past - topics which are relevant until this day.
The curtain opens again, a bench appears on stage in a park-like environment. In the background, the audience can spot a building which appears to be the Burgtheater next to the Heldenplatz - the very building they are sitting in right now to watch the play. On the bench, an elderly man and two women are having an intense discussion directed towards the audience:
“Conditions today really are the same as they were in thirty-eight. There are more Nazis in Vienna now than in thirty-eight. […] Now they’re coming back out of every hole that’s been sealed for over forty years.”
COMMEMORATION OF THE DEAD & FESTIVAL OF JOY
Besides aspects of representation with performative means as exemplified on National Day, forms of spatial contestation, appropriation and displacement can be observed as well at this site but on other occasions. A disputed commemorative event at the Castle Gate on the outer perimeter of the Heldenplatz has been challenged in recent years and finally has been dislodged. The Castle Gate reflects the Austrian history since imperial times and constitutes a unique site of memory and identity as it displays the discourse of shifting opinions and changing positions within society and politics. It differs from the Heldenplatz due to its purpose as a memorial while the adjoining square, despite the two equestrian statues on it, is used as a multi-purpose area featuring many shifting utilisations. This becomes apparent in the way the two sites are addressed by different forms of events.
The construction of the Castle Gate was dedicated to the remembrance of the Battle of Nations in 1813, therefore reflecting a monarchal memory. Throughout the consequent periods, different forms of memorials were added. The refurbishment in 1965 finally turned the Castle Gate into a collage of contradicting and distorted Austrian narratives. Within in the crypt, there is a memorial designed by a national socialist sculptor - mourning the dead soldiers of both World Wars. In addition, there is a memorial room in the left wing which remembers the victims of the fight for Austria’s freedom. To add confusion, a plaque was added inside the crypt to commemorate the dead soldiers of the Austrian army since 1955. This mix of undetermined storylines and memories as well as the lack of performative appropriation by official institutions, enabled alternative narratives to grow and adapt the site for their own purposes.
Starting in 1997, Burschenschafter (fraternity members) of the Viennese fraternity collective WKR used the Castle Gate as a site for their so called “Commemoration of the Dead” on 8th May, the annual day of the end of the Second World War in Europe in 1945. Critics argue that the Burschenschafter mourn the end of the NS regime and its Greater German idea instead of remembering the victims of the war. Additionally, their interest in the site is rooted in the history of the Castle Gate not only as a memorial site, but also in the imperial origin of the Hofburg. 
Dressed in uniform and equipped with torches and swords, the Burschenschafter march from the University of Vienna to the crypt inside the gate. Their ceremony includes a wreath-laying ceremony and commemorative speeches in front of the Gate. With the growing public awareness of the event and the resulting protests against these commemorations, the police had to shield the procession to the Heldenplatz as well as the ritual act at the Castle Gate where they installed a security zone around the area.
In 2012, protesters such as members of the Austrian Jewish Community and left-wing political parties arranged a counter-event next to the Castle Gate. An artistic performance, speaker announcements and bangers were used to interfere with the Burschenschafter’s memorial service. The police acted as a mediator between the opposing groups, directing the scene as they set up spatial boundaries and controlled the degree of interaction between the two opposing groups.
While the Burschenschafter performed their memorial service and the demonstrators protested on the public stage on the Heldenplatz, the official State Act for commemorating the end of the Second World War was held inside, in the nearby office of the chancellor with members of the government and the president, in a comparatively withdrawn setting. Consequently, public reactions thereafter questioned the appropriateness of the Commemoration of the Dead on the Heldenplatz at the site where the NS regime took over in 1938 . This was an urgent reminder of the apparently underestimated effect of spatial appropriation by some groups on the Heldenplatz.
The following year, in 2013, the Mauthausen Committee Austria  organised a festive event called Festival of Joy, which since then is held on the Heldenplatz on this memorable date. It includes classical music performed by the Viennese Symphony Orchestra, speeches by political figures and first-hand accounts by survivors of the Holocaust. In addition, the Austrian Army announced they would hold a memorial service at the crypt inside the Castle Gate. Although the crypt is also used on the National Day by state representatives, this new act came with the plan to reconfigure and redesign the crypt in response to the newly heightend awareness of the site. As a result, those actions displaced the Burschenschafter from the Castle Gate and ended their tradition of memorial services at this site.
The Festival of Joy highlights some instruments used for this paradigm shift. Again, this includes processes of appropriation, superimposition and reference, as well as a return to symbolism, forms of identity and remembrance. Aligned with the axis of monuments and situated in front of the monument of Prince Eugene of Savoy with the New Imperial Palace as a backdrop, a vaulted roof rises above the stage where the Viennese Symphony Orchestra performs and politicians and contemporary witnesses speak about the purpose of the event. Interestingly, the stage blocks out most of the view onto the median risalit with the recognisable balcony but keeps visible the imperial double-headed eagle on top of the New Imperial Palace and the side wings of the imperial facades. Thus the illuminated stage is superimposed with the adorned architectural elements to form an impressive and almost theatrical experience for the audience.
The Festival seeks legitimisation through the attendance of people on the square, deliberately contrasting the masses once cheering on 15th March 1938 and giving power to the NS regime. In this context, the Heldenplatz is used as a memorial and its referential power is used to symbolically interact with the past. As the president of the Jewish Community in Vienna put it in 2012, “I would wish that the entire Heldenplatz was crowded”, clearly remarking on the day of Hitler’s speech.
These events emphasise, that without any official thematisation of the Castle Gate and the Heldenplatz, both will be subject to alternative narratives. In 2015, in an attempt to enhance the appreciation and visibility of the memorial site, a commemorative plaque was installed on the facade and the memorial service itself was transferred to the outside.
Altogether, these acts have been celebrated as part of a new, reflected, and confident reconception of Austria’s history and the NS-past in particular. The new awareness is ultimately transformed into a new national identity, formed by the past and the actions of the present. Still, with the example of the National Day celebrations in mind, performative practices in similar spatial settings need to be scrutinized even further to expand this emerging consciousness in order to engage with the past.
 It was Joseph Bayer in 1879 and later Camillo Sitte who used this term to describe Semper’s concept.
See: Telesko (2012).
 As Peter Stachel points out, the specific form and relationship to ancient Roman architecture was meant to be both, representative for the power of the monarchy but also a conciliatory gesture to the multinational empire, avoiding definitive national symbols.
See: Stachel (2018).
 Telesko (2012), p. 184 and Semper (1884), p. 422.
Translation into English by the author.
 Those statues were the decisive factor in renaming the square as Heldenplatz (Square of the Heroes).
 The victimhood as assigned to the nation-state was converted into a moral innocence of the entire society.
See: Bergmann (1995), p. 21.
 Simon (2010), p. 12.
 Simon (2010), p. 200.
 Löw (2016), p.232.
It is worth noting, that in sociology, “space” is used to describe relationships and not necessarily a three-dimensional conventional space as in the architectural discipline.
 Löw (2016), p.134.
 ‘Nationalfeiertag: Kranzniederlegungen und Angelobung der Rekrutinnen und Rekruten’ (2018).
 A fact which became especially visible in 2015 when Austria was under the impression of the emerging refugee crisis earlier that year and where the military was deployed to maintain security.
 ‘Leistungsschau des Heeres: Republik im Retro-Look’ (2018).
The combination of family oriented activities and militirary equipment raises concerns about the appropriateness of a fair like this.
 Many monarchal buildings and institutions are still in use by political institutions, for example the parliament, the Hofburg and the office of the chancellor. A great number of interiors in these buildings still display paintings of monarchs and imperial symbols. Signs and inscriptions can be discovered on the Neue Burg, the Castle Gate, the two museums and many others.
 ‘Skizze - Paradeaufstellung - Beeidigung der Jungmänner’ (2018).
 Parts of this analysis are based on Jeanette Malkin’s dissection of the play in:
Malkin (1999), pp. 183-214.
 Weeks before the premiere of the play on 4th November 1988, parts of the script were leaked to the press and caused an outcry in the media and among the highest political ranks such as president Waldheim and Chancellor Kreisky. As a consequence, Heldenplatz moved out of the theatre and entered the public domain as well as the political ranks, turning the real reactions and events into an interactive dialogue with the play.
See : Bentz (2000).
 This spatial oxymoron is clearly intended to locate the audience physically on the Heldenplatz and force them into a form of reflexivity.
 Bernhard (1999), p. 343.
 A certain appeal is probably based on the association with the Holy Roman Empire of which the Habsburg monarchs have been emperors until 1806.
 Instruments used to create loud banging sounds.
 ‘Großprotest gegen „Totengedenken“ am Heldenplatz’ (2018).
 ‘Befreit den Heldenplatz endlich von diesem Spuk!’ (2018).
 ‘8. Mai: Burschenschafter ‚erfreut‘ über Heeres-Mahnwache’ (2018).
 The Mauthausen Committee Austria is an organisation dedicated to the former concentration camp Mauthausen. It provides scientific research as well as commemorative work, for example in form of events taking place on 8th May.
 Bernhard writes in the Heldenplatz play, “Uncle Robert can listen to Beethoven without thinking of the Nuremberg rally […].” He refers to the unreflected use of music for the purpose of convenience.
See: Bernhard (1999), p. 347.
 ‘Prominenz gegen Burschenschafter’ (2018).
Translated by the author.
[Image 2] Plan of the Imperial Forum as envisioned by Gottfried Semper.
Image by Oktobersonne (2017).
[Image 3] Map of the Heldenplatz and Centre of Vienna.
02: Monument of Archduke Charles
03: Monument of Prince Eugene of Savoy
04: New Imperial Palace
05: Corps de Logis
06: Outer Castle Gate
07: Imperial Palace (Office of the President)
08: Congress Center Hofburg
09: Burggarten (Imperial Garden)
10: Volksgarten (People‘s Garden)
13: Kunshistorisches Museum (Art History Museum)
14: Naturhistorisches Museum (Natural History Museum)
15: Austrian Parliament
16: City Hall of Vienna
18: Office of the Chancellor
19: Albertina Art Museum
20: Museum Quarter
Image by the author (2018).
[Image 4] Hitler standing on the balcony of the New Imperial Palace on 15th March 1938.
Image taken from the German Federal Archives, author unknown (1938).
[Image 5] Inauguration of the troops on National Day (26th October).
Image by Österreichisches Bundesheer (2017).
[Image 6] Inauguration of the troops, aligned with the axis of monuments and the imperial décor as background.
Image by Österreichisches Bundesheer, Harald G. M. Minich (2016).
[Image 7] Festival of Joy with the superimposition of spectacle and monarchal past.
Image by Manfred Werner (2013).
[Image 8] Map of the Heldenplatz depicting performative spatial arrangements during the Festival of Joy and the National Day Celebrations.
Image by the author (2022).
This article is based on the Dissertation „Discursive Memory Construction - Processes of Contestation and Identity Formation in the Context of Vienna’s Heldenplatz “ conceived for the MA Architectural History at the Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL in 2017-2018.
Aigner, Clemens, Gerhard Fritz and Constantin Staus-Rausch (eds.), Das Habsburger-Trauma: Das schwierige Verhältnis der Republik Österreich zu ihrer Geschichte (Wien: Böhlau Verlag, 2014).
Bentz, Oliver, Thomas Bernhard: Dichtung als Skandal (Würzburg: Verlag Königshausen und Neumann GmbH, 2000).
Bernhard, Thomas and Gitta Honegger (translator), ‘Heldenplatz’, Conjunctions, no. 33 (1999).
Bernhard, Thomas, Heldenplatz: Mit einem Kommentar von Martin Huber (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, 2012).
Bergmann, Werner, Rainer Erb, Albert Lichtblau (eds.), Schwieriges Erbe: Der Umgang mit Nationalsozialismus und Antisemitismus in Österreich, der DDR und der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Frankfurt-New York: Campus Verlag, 1995).
Douer, Alisa (ed.), Wien, Heldenplatz: Mythen und Massen 1848-1998 (Wien: Mandelbaum, 1998).
Hanisch, Ernst, ‘Wien, Heldenplatz’, in Etienne François and Hagen Schulze (eds.), Deutsche Erinnerungsorte I (München: Verlag C.H. Beck, 2001-2002), pp. 105-21.
Malkin, Jeanette, Memory-Theater and Postmodern Drama (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1999).
Löw, Martina and Donald Goodwin (translator), The Sociology of Space: Materiality, Social Structures and Action (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016).
Simon, Vera C., Gefeierte Nation: Erinnerungskultur und Nationalfeiertag in Deutschland und Frankreich seit 1990 (Frankfurt-New York: Campus Verlag, 2010).
Stachel, Peter, Mythos Heldenplatz: Hauptplatz und Schauplatz der Republik (Wien-Graz-Klagenfurt: Styria Buchverlage, 2018).
Semper, Gottfried, Kleine Schriften (Berlin-Stuttgart: Verlag von Spemann, 1884), p. 422.
Telesko, Werner (ed.), Die Wiener Hofburg 1835-1918: Der Ausbau der Residenz vom Vormärz bis zum Ende des “Kaiserforums” (Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2012).
‘Befreit den Heldenplatz endlich von diesem Spuk!’, https://derstandard.at/1336563145793/Gerhard-Zeillinger-Befreit-den-Heldenplatz-endlich-von-diesem-Spuk (accessed 08 August 2018).
‘Großprotest gegen “Totengedenken” am Heldenplatz’, https://diepresse.com/home/politik/innenpolitik/755709/Grossprotest-gegen-Totengedenken-am-Heldenplatz (accessed 08 August 2018).
‘Nationalfeiertag: Kranzniederlegungen und Angelobung der Rekrutinnen und Rekruten’, http://www.bundespraesident.at/newsdetail/artikel/nationalfeiertag-mit-kranzniederlegungen-und-angelobung-der-rekrutinnen-und-rekruten-feierlich-eroeffnet/ (accessed 20 August 2018).
‘Prominenz gegen Burschenschafter’, https://www.news.at/a/heldenplatz-prominenz-burschenschafter-327289 (accessed 09 August 2018).
‘Leistungsschau des Heeres: Republik im Retro-Look’, https://derstandard.at/2000066620357/Leistungsschau-des-Heeres-Republik-im-Retro-Look (accesssed 25 August 2018).
‘Skizze - Paradeaufstellung - Beeidigung der Jungmänner’, http://www.bildarchivaustria.at/Preview/15873843.jpg (accessed 05 July 2018).
‘8. Mai: Burschenschafter ‘erfreut’ über Heeres-Mahnwache’, https://diepresse.com/home/innenpolitik/1398742/8-Mai_Burschenschafter - erfreut-ueber-HeeresMahnwache (accessed 09 August 2018).
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wien_-_Neue_Hofburg.JPG (Bwag/commons )
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bundesheer/24094128778/ (Österreichisches Bundesheer)
Foto: Bundesheer/HARALD G.M.MINICH
Published in Issue 2022
Explore other articles in this issue: