Franz Leander Fillafer and Thomas Wallnig's anthology Josephinismus zwischen den Regimen: Eduard Winter, Fritz Valjavec und die zentraleuropäischen Historiographien im 20. Jahrhundert is a unique, long-overdue contribution to the research of Josephinism and the Austrian Enlightenment. This book aims to examine the development and reception of Josephinism during National Socialism. In the introduction, co-written with Wallnig, and the first chapter, Fillafer defines and summarizes the terms “Josephinism” and “Austrian Enlightenment.” There are two commonly accepted periods of Josephinism: temporally extended periodization and person-centered periodization. According to Fillafer, Josphinism begins with either the inauguration of Emperor Joseph I (1678–1711) in 1705 or the inauguration of Emperor Charles VI (1685–1740) in 1711 and lasts until the nineteenth century.

The anthology analyzes how historians from East-Central Europe and from southeastern Europe interpret Josephinism in the twentieth century. More precisely, the chapters scrutinize the divergent interpretations on Josephinism by Eduard Winter (1896–1982) and Fritz Valjavec (1909–60), which emerged during the National Socialist era. Winter's and Valjavec's careers greatly benefited from the advancement of the National Socialist German Workers Party. Although Winter lost his position as the Chair of the History of the Church, he was appointed a professorship of European Intellectual History in Prague. Valjavec was appointed to a professorship in Munich, before he went to the Institute for International Studies in Berlin to work on his studies of racial ideology. Both men interpreted the Josephinism differently. Winter describes Josephinism as a reform Catholicism and Valjavec as a result of different intellectual and ecclesiastical currents. In contrast to all previous interpretations, they both consider Josephinism to be part of the Catholic Enlightenment.

Two other chapters by Jiří Němec and Norbert Spannenberger discuss the influence of Nazism on Winter's and Valjavec's interpretations of Josephinism. Němec points out that Winter's book about Josephinism from 1942–43 is not a National Socialist interpretation of history and that the fact that Winter was a disappointed, excommunicated priest may have greatly influenced his interpretation. He understood Josephinism as a Germanic, failed reformation. Winter's grave intention was to illustrate the precarious situation of the church under Joseph II (1741–90). The chapter by Spannberger clearly illustrates the differences between his and Valjavec's interpretation of Josephinism. Valjavec focuses not on the ideas and measures of modernization of the church under Joseph II, but rather on the long-term effects of Josephinism and, as a consequence, formed Josephinism into a Nazi ideology. Petra Svatek examines Fritz Valjavec's concept of Enlightenment in another scientific contribution. In all his studies on racial ideology, Svatek claims the Germans had intellectual and economic superiority over Southeastern Europe during the Age of Enlightenment.

The two chapters by Johannes Holeschofsky and Sonia Horn analyze the influence of Winter's and Valjavec's ideas about Josephinism in the scientific papers from Hugo Hantsch (1895–1972) and Erna Lesky (1911–86). Hantsch and Lesky dissociated themselves from Winter's and Valjavec's narratives and interpreted Josephinism differently. The last four chapters summarize how Josephinism was received in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Croatia, Serbia, and Italy.