Visit to the Military History Museum

August 20th 2012

     Today, a group of my fellow students and I went to visit the National Military History museum in order to learn more about Austria's history of war and conflict. Getting to the museum was a bit of an adventure in and of itself, as it was near the edge of Vienna, and required taking a street car and a bus after taking the subway. Nevertheless, we managed to get there and tour the various exhibits along with the museum's audio guide. As we explored the museum, I noticed that the differed periods in military history were depicted very differently from each other, with each one casting it's respective wars in a certain light. It occurred to me that the way the Austrian people remembered there wars, and the way they portrayed their histories, might be political in nature. With that in mind, I payed particular attention to what was displayed, how those displays contributed to a narrative about war, and how that narrative might be political in nature.
     I first came the part of the museum that focused on the Napoleonic wars, and other conflicts that occurred after the invention of rifling, but before the outbreak of world war 2, more specifically the period between the reigns of Francis the 1st and Franz Joseph. The displays were dominated by military uniforms, medals representing various honor society and orders, as well as exhibits depicting the military exploits of  a choice few high born officers that manged particularly fantastic feats during their services. The display during this time had a good number of cannons and  rifles in addition to the military dress and colors, but the aforementioned objects were featured much more prominently for this time period than for any other. The focus on individual heroes and military decorations serves to portray this period of warfare as being one of honor and selfless sacrifice. These combats are remembered as heroic and noble, the wars are portrayed as being stately gentlemen and officers, and the uniforms are displayed as if they themselves are things of beauty. This period in warfare seems to romanticize the solider, as the individual glory of warfare seems to be a major theme in the display. I am not entirely sure why this era is remembered this way, but I suspect it has something to do with the escalation in military power that occurred as monarchies grew in power. The audio guide to the museum stated that Franz Joseph came to revere the army as the only force that could hold his emperor together. I suspect that sentiment is reflected in the way this era is remembered, and explains why the individual solider is portrayed as honorable and noble.
     The section depicting the Turkish war is also very positive, but the tone was markedly different. The exhibit was made up almost entirely of portraits portraying battles, but unlike the Napoleonic period, no individual solider was shown or focused on. With the exception of the great hero, Eugene of Savoy, armies were displayed as mobs of unknown Turks or Austrians, fighting in battles around the city of Vienna. The focus of the paintings seemed to be the celebration of the armies victory, but not the army itself. I got the feeling that the narrative expressed by these paintings much more collectivist in nature. The Viennese seemed to be celebrating their collective victory against there universal enemy, and were attempting to communicate their greatness and pride in their military accomplishment. The paintings left no doubt that the Viennese felt very good about their victory against the Turks, but unlike in the Napoleonic exhibit, the soldiers were not lionized. Instead, one got the impression of pride, but not nationalistic pride.
     The saw the exhibit on the  Renaissance era next, and it appeared to be the least political of all the various military displays. It seemed to be wholly factual, to the point of being mechanical. The main focus of the exhibit was the invention and early use of gun powder weapons, and the displays consisted of old guns, and diagrams depicting how they would be fired, aimed, and reloaded. I suspect that the lack of narrative or politicization occurred for two main reasons. The 1st one is simply a matter of distance in time. The Renaissance era was a long time ago, and one could argue that much of the warfare at the time has little to do know with modern events. However, I tend to believe that this era's warfare is not remembered in a culturally important way because the makings of a modern nation state were not really there during this period. I remember for a previous course in history (Sally Mckee) that monarchs did not have the means to maintain standing armies at this point in time, so most wars were fought with military contractors and guns for hire. People were not simply invested in those forces the way one would be in a national army supported by the state and representative of populace, so I suspect that explains why this period's display seemed less political than the others.
     The last exhibit I visited was the world war 2 exhibit, and unlike the preceding one, it was deeply political in nature, and it communicated what was possibly the most political narrative out of any other exhibit in the museum. The Austrians want to be remembered as victims in World War 2, and the exhibit makes that very clear as one enters. The first few pieces in the exhibit display paintings and images that display the loss and horror of war. There's a painting of abstract looking male human figures lying in pain and agony was one enters the exhibit, and a few feet away from it are more pictures and paintings depicting more realistic human suffering on the part of the Austrians. The next part of the exhibit displays images of Hitler and the Nazi's in an overbearing and almost fear inspiring manner. A large red white and black banner showing Hitler's likeness over a swastika looms menacingly over the next section, implying that Hitler and the Nazi's are clearly threatening and bad people. The banner is large enough to be hung from a large building during a rally, and there was space further in the museum to hang in up in a less claustrophobic space, however the museum chose to place the banner where it would loom over viewers instead of showing it from a more fitting point of view. The rest of the exhibit appeared to be rather matter of fact after this point, showing only guns, uniforms, and model tanks and ships. However it is important to keep in mind that viewers were required to pass by reminders of the destruction and horror of war before coming face to face with a (at least) 12 tall picture of Hitler's face before seeing these things. I was left with the impression that the first part of the exhibit was meant to frame the war in a negative light, and I feel the reason for this is political in nature. Modern day Austria has to remember world war 2, but they do not want to be seen as celebrating Nazi rule, so there response to this is remembering the war as a horrible thing that happened to their country instead of highlighting Austrian participation in the war.