Austria-Hungary as a dualistic monarchy was formed in 1867 and existed until 1918. its specific features were: a) the absence of overseas possessions, since all its lands were located in the center and east of Europe; b) the multinational nature of the government system, combining elements of a centralized and federal monarchy; c) intensive development of the national consciousness of the peoples of the outskirts, which led to local separatism.
The defeat of Austria in the war with Prussia in 1866 accelerated the process of political transformation of the Habsburg Empire. Emperor Franz Joseph (1867-1916) agreed to the proposal of State Minister A. Beist to carry out political reforms. It was necessary to reach a compromise between two significant groups of the population - the Germans (Austrians) and the Hungarians, although they constituted only a third of the empire's population. In February 1867, the Hungarian constitution (which existed until 1848) was restored, which facilitated the creation of its own government. Through the so-called Ausgleich - "agreement between the king and the Hungarian nation" - Austria became a dualist monarchy of two states. "Cisleithania" united Austria, the Czech Republic, Moravia, Silesia, Harz, Istria, Trieste, Dalmatia, Bukovina, Galicia and Carniola. "Transleithania" consisted of Hungary, Transylvania, Fiume and Croatian-Slavonia (gained autonomy in 1867).
The united Austria-Hungary (Danube Monarchy) was one of the largest states in Europe. In terms of territory and population, it was ahead of Great Britain, Italy and France.
More than 10 nationalities lived on the territory of Austria-Hungary, none of which constituted a majority. The most numerous were Austrians and Hungarians (40%), Czechs and Slovaks (16.5%), Serbs and Croats (16.5%), Poles (10%), Ukrainians (8%), Romanians, Slovenes, Italians, Germans etc. The vast majority of them lived in compact groups, which contributed to the development of national liberation movements and the strengthening of centrifugal tendencies. Religious ones were added to national contradictions, since several church denominations operated in the country - Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, Uniate, etc.
The Emperor of Austria was at the same time the King of Hungary, the ruler of the unified royal-imperial institutions - the military department, foreign affairs and finance. Austria and Hungary had their own parliaments and governments, the composition of which was approved by the emperor. King-Emperor Franz Joseph was inconsistent and unpredictable in implementing radical political and economic reforms. Depending on his own preferences, he constantly changed cabinets of ministers, which often paralyzed political life, because none of the “teams” could complete the reforms. The army played an important role in internal life, which, thanks to the imperial ambitions of the heir to the throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, became an elite part of society. Propaganda formed a somewhat mythical image of the mighty imperial army and navy in the mass consciousness, its numbers increased, and the costs of its maintenance increased.
Austria-Hungary was a land of contrasts. There was no universal suffrage in the empire, since only owners of certain real estate had the right to vote. However, in areas densely populated by some nationalities, their own constitutions were in force, there were local parliaments (17 throughout the empire) and self-government bodies. Office work and teaching in primary schools were supposed to be conducted in national languages, but this law was often not implemented and German speech prevailed everywhere.
The economy of Austria-Hungary at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century. characterized by weak rates of industrial development, backward agriculture, uneven economic development of individual regions, and a focus on self-sufficiency.
Austria-Hungary was a moderately developed agrarian-industrial country. The vast majority of the population was employed in agriculture and forestry (more than 11 million people). The low level of agriculture was determined by the landowners' latifundia, where manual labor of farm laborers was used. In Hungary, Croatia, Galicia, and Transylvania, about a third of the cultivated land belonged to large landowners, who owned more than 10 thousand hectares each.
In Austria-Hungary, the same economic processes took place as in other developed capitalist countries - concentration of production and capital, increased investment. According to individual gross indicators (steel production), the empire was still in the second half of the 19th century. ahead of England and France. Austria and the Czech lands were industrially developed. The six largest monopolies controlled the production of almost all iron ore and more than 90% of steel production. The metallurgical concern "Zhal" in the Czech Republic was one of the largest enterprises in the European military industry. In total, small and medium-sized industry predominated in Austria-Hungary. A characteristic feature of the empire's economy was its technological backwardness, poor provision of the latest technology and the absence of the latest industries. German and French capital actively invested in basic industries - oil production, metallurgy, and mechanical engineering.
Industry and agriculture worked for the needs of their own market. In the Danube Monarchy, products were consumed mainly from their own production. Trade between the internal imperial territories received a significant boost after its liquidation in the second half of the 19th century. customs duties and producers from different parts of Austria-Hungary mastered the promising markets of Cisleithania and Transleithania, Galicia. Imports, like exports of goods, were insignificant and barely reached 5%.
There were up to a million officials in the country - twice as many as workers. And for every ten peasants there was one official. Bureaucracy reached fabulous proportions, which in turn led to sharp social contrasts. The general standard of living was very low. For example, in 1906, 6% of the population spent the night in Viennese shelters. Different standards of living in the capital and in provincial cities. If in Vienna a worker received an average of 4 guilders a day, then in Lvov - about 2. Moreover, prices for consumer goods in the capital were lower than in the provinces.
The multinational Austro-Hungarian Empire at the beginning of the 20th century was experiencing a deep crisis due to the rise of national and labor movements. National movements with clearly defined centrifugal tendencies, which aimed at creating their own independent states, took shape in the second half of the 19th century. This was associated with the process of formation of the national intelligentsia. It was she who became the bearer of the spirit of freedom, the idea of independence and found the means to penetrate these ideas into the mass consciousness.
The first means was the “struggle for language” - for the national language of teaching in schools and universities, for the national language of literature, for equal rights of national languages in office work and the army.
This movement was led by cultural and educational societies: the National League (Italian lands), Matice Shkolska (Czech lands), Matice Slovene (Slovenia), People's House (Galicia), etc. They founded national schools and literary magazines. Under their pressure, in 1880 Vienna was forced to establish equal rights for the German and Czech languages in official records in the Czech lands. In 1881, the University of Prague was divided into two - German and Czech. In 1897, the emperor signed the so-called language decrees, which finally equalized the rights of the German and Czech languages. The movement of the Slavic intelligentsia to establish close ties became widespread. Mass youth organizations were formed in individual national lands, for example, the Czech military sports organization "Falcon", which united tens of thousands of boys and girls and held nationalist rallies. All this contributed to the formation of national identity, and on the eve of the First World War, the majority of subjects of the Austro-Hungarian Empire were already fully formed citizens of future sovereign states.
At the beginning of the 20th century. under the influence of the Russian democratic revolution (1905-1907), the labor movement intensified. The leadership of the Austrian Social Democratic Party (founded in 1889) called on workers to take mass action in support of the demand for universal suffrage. In November 1905, demonstrations took place on the streets of Vienna and Prague, which escalated into armed clashes with the police. Workers went on strike. The government was forced to agree to the introduction of a general election law.
On the eve of the First World War, Austria-Hungary took an openly hostile position towards the Balkan countries, seized Bosnia and Herzegovina, which led to increased tensions in relations with Serbia. With the support of Germany, the government of Austria-Hungary set a course for starting a world war.
The Austro-Hungarian Empire was formed in 1867 on the basis of an agreement between the ruling elites of the two countries.
The Austrian Empire included the Czech Republic, Moravia, Galicia and Bukovina, and Hungary included Slovakia, Croatia and Transylvania.
In the same year, a new constitution of the empire was adopted. According to it, the general ruler of the empire was the Emperor of Austria. The emperor was a representative of the Habsburg dynasty. This dynasty led the empire from 1867 to 1918. During the formation of the empire, Franz Joseph II was emperor.
In Austria, imperial power was officially limited by the Reichstag, and in Hungary by the Diet. Consequently, the Austro-Hungarian Empire was a constitutional monarchy.
After the creation of the empire, 3 imperial ministries were formed: 1. External Affairs. 2. Naval. 3. Financial. The remaining ministries functioned independently for each of the two parts of the empire. Hungary had its own parliament, executive power, political and administrative autonomy. The majority of the empire's population consisted of conquered Slavic peoples.
Economic development of Austria-Hungary
In the last quarter of the 19th century, Austria-Hungary was one of the most backward countries in Europe. The preserved remnants of feudalism in the country led to a slowdown in the pace of industrial progress compared to the advanced countries of Europe.
In the 1990s, the urban population accounted for only one third of the total population of Austria-Hungary. Even in Austria, the most developed part of the empire, the majority of the population was rural.
The Austro-Hungarian agreement concluded in 1867 was a definite impetus for the economic development of Hungary. The metallurgical industry began to develop on the basis of Hungary's coal base. But the main industrial sector in Hungary was still the food industry. In 1898, Hungary produced half of the empire's food production.
In the industrial regions of the country - Lower Austria and the Czech Republic - the process of concentration of production and the formation of monopolies was proceeding at a rapid pace.
By the beginning of the 20th century, loan capital was concentrated mainly in several large banks in Vienna. The role of the financial oligarchy in the life of the country has increased.
Another characteristic feature of the empire’s progress was its growing dependence on foreign capital. The banks of France, Belgium, and Germany flooded Austria with their capital by investing in industry. Such industries of Austria-Hungary as metallurgy, mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, etc., were financially supported by German firms. In textile and engineering enterprises, the position of German capital was very strong. German capital also broke into agriculture. 200,000 hectares of land in Austria belonged to German landowners.
Social movement
The workers of the empire fought for their rights. For example, in 1869, a massive demonstration of workers was held in the imperial capital of Vienna. The demonstrators demanded democratic freedoms.
In response, the government accused the leaders of the labor movement of treason. The court sentenced them to long imprisonment.
The Austrian government, following the example of Bismarck, introduced an “emergency law” against the labor movement in 1884. The law authorized the tightening of police terror against the labor movement. By the end of the 1980s, trade unions were dissolved and the publication of workers' newspapers was suspended. Despite this, the workers continued to fight. For example, in 1889 the Austrian Social Democratic Party (ASDP) was created. The party program included provisions such as the provision of political freedoms, the adoption of a law on the election of parliament through general, equal, direct and secret voting, the separation of church and state, schools from the church, and a reduction in the working day.
Due to the intensification of the labor movement in 1907, the government was forced to pass an electoral reform law. Men at the age of 24 received voting rights.
National liberation movement
Chauvinistic forces seeking to preserve the colonial position of the Slavic peoples created their own political parties. One of these parties was called the Pan-German Union, and the other was the Christian Socialist Party.
The leaders of the Christian Socialist Party, most of whom were Austrian Catholics, promoted the idea of a “Greater Germany” along with the agitation of class peace, a call for the resolution of all social contradictions “in the spirit of community and love” and the propaganda of anti-Semitism. But the ruling circles could not stop the national liberation movement of the Slavic people.
The Czech opposition demanded that the Czech Republic be given political rights. The government responded by intensifying repression. In 1868, a blockade was even introduced in the Czech Republic. But this did not break the Czech opposition. The struggle continued. And finally, in 1880, bilingualism was introduced in the Czech Republic for the conduct of judicial and administrative matters. Since 1882, education in two languages (German and Czech) began at the University of Prague.
The Ukrainian population in Galicia was also under national oppression. The Austrian government, having concluded an agreement with the ruling classes of Galicia, gave them leadership of the region.
In the last decades of the 19th century, national oppression increased even more. The Ukrainian population in Transcarpathia was “Hungarianized”. Croatia was constantly in a state of war or emergency, and popular discontent was suppressed.
The government responded to the Croatian national liberation movement in 1912 by dissolving the Croatian Sejm and suspending the constitution.
Economic crisis
In 1912, Austria-Hungary experienced a severe economic crisis. As a result, large industrial and commercial enterprises went bankrupt. The export potential of the empire sharply decreased. The ruling circles of the empire further intensified national oppression, as a result of which the economic and national liberation struggle intensified.
Despite the difficult situation, the ruling circles of the empire began to actively participate in Austria's aggressive policy in the Balkans. The army was transformed. This meant that the empire was preparing for war. In the capital of Hungary, Budapest, a demonstration of many thousands was held against the unification of the country, national oppression and preparations for war.
General discontent led to mass strikes by workers. Police forces were sent against the demonstrators. As a result, Budapest was filled with barricades. But the forces were not equal, and the workers were forced to suspend the strike.
The social movement and national liberation struggle of the Slavic peoples that were part of the empire marked the entry of the Austro-Hungarian Empire into a deep period of crisis.
The idea of trialism began to spread widely in the ruling circles of the country and in political organizations. The idea of trialism meant the transformation of the empire into a federation that included Austria, Hungary and the lands of the Slavic peoples that were part of the empire, uniting all three countries on an equal basis. But the ruling circles, fearing the strengthening of the Slavic part of the federation, rejected the idea of trialism.
This became the reason for the aggravation of internal contradictions of the empire on the eve of the First World War.
Federation (Latin foederatio - union, association) is a single union state consisting of state entities that have a certain political independence in territorial terms.
Loan - provision of something on the terms of a guarantor, return of what is provided and payment
Vladimir Dergachev
The Austro-Hungarian Empire existed from 1867 to 1918. and had no overseas possessions. The population of the empire in 1910 was 52 million people, of which Austrians - 23.5%, Hungarians - 19.1%, Czechs and Slovaks - 16.5%, Serbs and Croats - 10.5%, Poles - 10%, Ukrainians - 8%, Romanians - 6.5%, Slovenes - 2.5% and others 3.4%. Multinational Austria-Hungary, in contrast to the old Habsburg despotism, was rebuilt into a federal state. Hungarians and Poles had self-government rights. The level of political freedom in Austria-Hungary was unthinkable for Tsarist Russia, but the Slavs passionately hated the “patchwork” and multi-tribal empire and fled to their national apartments at the first opportunity. Why did this prototype of a “common European home” turn out to be fragile?
Austria-Hungary was distinguished by moderate economic growth and was a moderately developed agrarian-industrial state with a huge bureaucratic apparatus. The processes of concentration of production and capital characteristic of Western Europe took place here. The empire was ahead of Great Britain and France in steel production, but its economic and military power was not comparable to the world powers. The main feature of the imperial economy was self-sufficiency. Domestic production did not experience international competition, which did not stimulate the development of new technologies; many local goods were inferior in quality to foreign ones. Foreign trade developed poorly, and there was a sharp differentiation in living standards between the capital and the provinces. Thus, wages in industry in Vienna were twice as high as in Galicia.
Austrian Vienna still retains the splendor of the imperial capital of the Habsburg era. Stefan Zweig wrote: “In hardly any other city in Europe was the thirst for culture as passionate as in Vienna... The Romans founded this city as a citadel, as an outpost to protect Latin civilization from the barbarians, and more than a thousand years later about this The walls were broken by the Ottoman movement to the West. Here the Nibelungs rushed, here an immortal galaxy of musicians shone over the world: Gluck, Haydn and Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Brahms and Johann Strauss; All currents of European culture converged here...”
The largest armed forces in Europe, Austria-Hungary was second only to the Russian Empire. The army consisted of military formations of mixed and national composition, which played a fatal role in the fate of the empire. Austria-Hungary survived the Napoleonic era and withstood the iron onslaught of Bismarck, but in 1918 it collapsed overnight into separate, including multinational states (Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia).
The collapse of the dual monarchy was facilitated by the radiation of the national spirit, but the future of the newly recreated states was not so rosy. The revival of national identity did not lead to the emergence of new authoritative European powers. A national (by language) state is a rather rare phenomenon in history. National consciousness, according to Georgy Fedotov, strives to perpetuate chaos and is not capable of organizing the world.
This is how English Prime Minister David Lloyd George (1863 - 1945) described the consequences of the unforeseen collapse of Austria-Hungary and anarchy in Central Europe in his memoirs “The Truth about Peace Treaties”: “The authors of the Treaty of Paris had to resolve the issue not only justice should be received by the liberated peoples, but that it is in the interests of simple justice that should be liberated from their tenacious clutches when they overstepped the limits of national self-determination.” While the delegates of the Great Powers were discussing the provisions of the peace treaty with Germany, dozens of small wars were taking place in different places in Europe and sometimes so fiercely “as if man had become a barbarian again, as in the harsh days of Tamerlane and Attila. The newly liberated peoples of Southern Europe were ready to gnaw each other's throats in pursuit of the best pieces of the legacy of the dead empires... Poland again imagined itself as the undivided mistress of Central Europe. The principle of self-determination did not correspond to her harassment. She demanded Galicia, Ukraine, Lithuania and some parts of Belarus... The right of peoples to determine their own nationality was immediately rejected by Polish leaders. They argued that these different nationalities belonged to the Poles by right of conquest carried out by their ancestors. Like the old Norman baron who drew his sword when asked to show proof of his rights to the estate, Poland brandished the sword of its warlike kings, which has been rusting in their tombs for centuries...”
Small national Eastern European states have not been able to successfully integrate into the European economy. Before independence, 3/4 of the industrial production of Austria-Hungary was concentrated in the Czech Republic alone, and according to a number of indicators, Czechoslovakia in the early 20s was among the top ten highly developed industrial countries in the world. However, accelerated integration with European capital was suspended by the economic crisis of 1929.
The famous Hungarian thinker I. Bibo, in his article “The Poverty of the Spirit of Small Eastern European States,” gave the following explanation for the problems of Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland after the collapse of Austria-Hungary. These states had to become convinced of their inability to introduce a single national consciousness in the historical territories they inherited due to the multilingualism of the population. Countries that pride themselves on democracy have given birth to a political monster - anti-democratic nationalism. The lack of certainty in the territorial status and the deformation of political culture had the most negative impact on the relations between these peoples.
Despite the enormous differences between Austria-Hungary and the Soviet Union, both federal states collapsed as a result of national disunity and insurmountable territorial differentiation in living standards
With the accelerated acceptance of the countries of Eastern and South-Eastern Europe into the “pan-European house”, the EU turned into a new version of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy with deep differentiation in income and an outbreak of radiation of the national spirit. It is no coincidence that interest in the history of Austrian federalism has intensified in connection with the expansion to the east of the European Union.
"Geopolitics of Superpowers"
Policy of Charles I. Attempt to make peace
The death of Franz Joseph was undoubtedly one of the psychological preconditions leading to the destruction of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. He was not an outstanding ruler, but became a symbol of stability for three generations of his subjects. In addition, the character of Franz Joseph - his restraint, iron self-discipline, constant politeness and friendliness, his very respected old age, supported by state propaganda - all this contributed to the high authority of the monarchy. The death of Franz Joseph was perceived as a change in historical eras, the end of an incredibly long period. After all, almost no one remembered Franz Joseph’s predecessor; it was too long ago, and almost no one knew his successor.
Karl was very unlucky. He inherited an empire that was embroiled in a disastrous war and torn apart by internal strife. Unfortunately, like his Russian brother and adversary Nicholas II, Charles I did not possess the qualities that were necessary to solve the titanic task of saving the state. It should be noted that he had a lot in common with the Russian emperor. Karl was a great family man. His marriage was harmonious. Charles and the young Empress Cita, who came from the Parma branch of the Bourbons (her father was the last Duke of Parma), loved each other. And marriage for love was rare for the highest aristocracy. Both families had many children: the Romanovs had five children, the Habsburgs - eight. Tsita was her husband’s main support and had a good education. Therefore, evil tongues said that the emperor was “under his thumb.” Both couples were deeply religious.
The difference was that Charles had practically no time to transform the empire, and Nicholas II ruled for more than 20 years. However, Karl made an attempt to save the Habsburg empire and, unlike Nicholas, fought for his cause to the end. From the very beginning of his reign, Charles tried to solve two main problems: to stop the war and carry out internal modernization. In his manifesto on the occasion of his accession to the throne, the Austrian emperor promised to “return to My people the blessed peace without which they suffer so grievously.” However, the desire to achieve his goal as quickly as possible and the lack of the necessary experience played a cruel joke on Karl: many of his steps turned out to be poorly thought out, hasty and erroneous.
On December 30, 1916, in Budapest, Charles and Cita were crowned King and Queen of Hungary. On the one hand, Charles (as the Hungarian king - Charles IV) strengthened the unity of the dualistic state. On the other hand, having deprived himself of maneuver, tied himself hand and foot, Charles could now not begin to federalize the monarchy. Count Anton von Polzer-Hoditz prepared a memorandum at the end of November in which he proposed that Charles postpone the coronation in Budapest and come to an agreement with all national communities of Hungary. This position was supported by all the former comrades of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, who wanted to carry out a series of reforms in Hungary. However, Karl did not follow their recommendations, succumbing to pressure from the Hungarian elite, especially Count Tisza. The foundations of the Hungarian Kingdom remained intact.
Cita and Karl with their son Otto on the day of their coronation as monarchs of Hungary in 1916
Charles took over the duties of supreme commander. "Hawk" Konrad von Hötzendorff was relieved of his post as Chief of the General Staff and sent to the Italian front. His successor was General Artz von Straussenburg. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs was headed by Ottokar Czernin von und zu Hudenitz, a representative of Franz Ferdinand's circle. The role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs increased dramatically during this period. Chernin was a controversial person. He was an ambitious, gifted, but somewhat unbalanced man. Chernin's views represented a strange mixture of supranational loyalism, conservatism and deep pessimism about the future of Austria-Hungary. The Austrian politician J. Redlich called Chernin “a man of the seventeenth century who does not understand the time in which he lives.”
Chernin himself went down in history with a phrase full of bitterness about the fate of the empire: “We were doomed to destruction and had to die. But we could choose the type of death - and we chose the most painful one.” The young emperor chose Chernin because of his commitment to the idea of peace. “A victorious peace is highly unlikely,” noted Chernin, “a compromise with the Entente is necessary, there is nothing to count on for conquests.”
On April 12, 1917, the Austrian Emperor Karl addressed Kaiser Wilhelm II with a memorandum letter, where he noted that “every day the dark despair of the population is becoming stronger... If the monarchies of the Central Powers prove unable to make peace in the coming months, the peoples will do so - through them heads... We are at war with a new enemy, even more dangerous than the Entente - with the international revolution, whose strongest ally is hunger.” That is, Karl correctly noted the main danger for Germany and Austria-Hungary - the threat of an internal explosion, a social revolution. To save the two empires, peace had to be made. Karl proposed ending the war, “even at the cost of heavy casualties.” The February Revolution in Russia and the fall of the Russian monarchy made a huge impression on the Austrian emperor. Germany and Austria-Hungary followed the same disastrous path as the Russian Empire.
However, Berlin did not heed this call from Vienna. Moreover, in February 1917, Germany, without informing its Austrian ally, began an all-out submarine war. As a result, the United States received an excellent reason to enter the war on the side of the Entente. Realizing that the Germans still believed in victory, Charles I began to independently look for a path to peace. The situation at the front did not give the Entente any hope of a quick victory, which increased the possibility of peace negotiations. The Eastern Front, despite the assurances of the Russian Provisional Government to continue the “war to a victorious end,” no longer posed a serious threat to the Central Powers. Almost all of Romania and the Balkans were occupied by the troops of the Central Powers. On the Western Front, the positional struggle continued, bleeding France and England. American troops had just begun to arrive in Europe and their combat effectiveness was doubted (the Americans had no experience of a war of this scale). Chernin supported Karl.
As an intermediary to establish relations with the Entente, Charles chose his brother-in-law, Zita's brother, Prince Sixtus de Bourbon-Parma. Together with his younger brother Xavier, Sixtus served as an officer in the Belgian army. This is how the “Siktus scam” began. Sixtus maintained contacts with the French Foreign Minister J. Cambon. Paris put forward the following conditions: the return of Alsace and Lorraine to France, without concessions to Germany in the colonies; the world cannot be separate, France will fulfill its responsibilities towards its allies. However, a new message from Sixtus, sent after a meeting with French President Poincaré, hinted at the possibility of a separate agreement. France's main goal was the military defeat of Germany, "severed from Austria."
To condemn the new possibilities, Charles summoned Sixtus and Xavier to Austria. They arrived on March 21st. A series of meetings between the brothers with the imperial couple and Chernin took place in Laxenberg near Vienna. Chernin himself was skeptical about the idea of a separate peace. He hoped for universal peace. Chernin believed that peace could not be concluded without Germany; refusal of an alliance with Berlin would lead to tragic consequences. The Austrian Foreign Minister understood that Germany could simply occupy Austria-Hungary in the event of its betrayal. Moreover, such a peace could lead to civil war. Most Austrian Germans and Hungarians could perceive a separate peace as a betrayal, and the Slavs supported it. Thus, a separate peace led to the destruction of Austria-Hungary, as did the defeat of the war.
Negotiations in Laxenberg ended with the transfer of a letter from Charles to Sixtus, in which he promised to use all his influence to fulfill French demands regarding Alsace and Lorraine. At the same time, Charles promised to restore the sovereignty of Serbia. As a result, Karl made a diplomatic mistake - he presented his enemies with irrefutable, documentary evidence that the House of Austria was ready to sacrifice Alsace and Lorraine - one of the main priorities of the allied Germany. In the spring of 1918, this letter will be made public, which will undermine the political authority of Vienna, both in the eyes of the Entente and Germany.
On April 3, 1917, at a meeting with the German Emperor, Charles suggested that Wilhelm II give up Alsace and Lorraine. In exchange, Austria-Hungary was ready to transfer Galicia to Germany and agree to turn the Kingdom of Poland into a German satellite. However, the German elite did not support these initiatives. Thus, Vienna’s attempt to bring Berlin to the negotiating table failed.
The Sixtus Scam also ended in failure. In the spring of 1917, the government of A. Ribot came to power in France, which was wary of Vienna’s initiatives and offered to fulfill the demands of Rome. And according to the London Treaty of 1915, Italy was promised Tyrol, Trieste, Istria and Dalmatia. In May, Charles hinted that he was ready to cede Tyrol. However, this turned out to be not enough. On June 5, Ribot declared that “peace can only be the fruit of victory.” There was no one else to talk to and nothing else to talk about.
Foreign Minister of Austria-Hungary Ottokar Czernin von und zu Hudenitz
The idea of dismembering the Austro-Hungarian Empire
The First World War was total, intense military propaganda had one goal - complete and final victory. For the Entente, Germany and Austria-Hungary were absolute evil, the embodiment of everything that was hated by republicans and liberals. Prussian militarism, Habsburg aristocracy, reactionaryism and reliance on Catholicism were planned to be uprooted. The “Financial International”, which stood behind the USA, France and England, wanted to destroy the powers of medieval theocratic monarchism and absolutism. The Russian, German and Austro-Hungarian empires stood in the way of the capitalist and "democratic" New World Order, where big capital - the "golden elite" - was supposed to rule.
The ideological nature of the war became especially noticeable after two events in 1917. The first was the fall of the Russian Empire, the House of Romanov. The Entente acquired political homogeneity, becoming an alliance of democratic republics and liberal constitutional monarchies. The second event is the entry of the United States into the war. American President Woodrow Wilson and his advisers actively carried out the will of American financial leaders. And the main “crowbar” for the destruction of old monarchies was supposed to be the cheating principle of “self-determination of nations.” When nations formally became independent and free, they established democracy, but in fact, they were clients, satellites of the great powers, the financial capitals of the world. He who pays calls the tune.
On January 10, 1917, the declaration of the Entente powers on the goals of the bloc included the liberation of Italians, South Slavs, Romanians, Czechs and Slovaks as one of them. However, there was no talk yet of liquidating the Habsburg monarchy. There was talk of broad autonomy for the “unprivileged” peoples. On December 5, 1917, speaking to Congress, President Wilson announced his desire to liberate the peoples of Europe from German hegemony. About the Danube monarchy, the American president said: “We are not interested in the destruction of Austria. How she disposes of herself is not our problem.” In Woodrow Wilson's famous 14 Points, Point 10 concerned Austria. The peoples of Austria-Hungary were asked to provide “the widest possible opportunities for autonomous development.” On January 5, 1918, British Prime Minister Lloyd George noted in a statement on England’s military goals that “we are not fighting for the destruction of Austria-Hungary.”
However, the French were of a different mind. It was not for nothing that Paris supported Czech and Croatian-Serbian political emigration from the beginning of the war. In France, legions were formed from prisoners and deserters - Czechs and Slovaks, in 1917-1918. they took part in the fighting on the Western Front and in Italy. In Paris they wanted to create a “republicanize Europe”, and this was impossible without the destruction of the Habsburg monarchy.
In general, the issue of the division of Austria-Hungary was not announced. The turning point came when the “Sixtus scam” came to light. On April 2, 1918, Austrian Foreign Minister Chernin spoke to members of the Vienna city assembly and, in some impulse, admitted that peace negotiations were indeed underway with France. But the initiative, according to Chernin, came from Paris, and the negotiations were interrupted allegedly due to Vienna’s refusal to agree to the annexation of Alsace and Lorraine to France. Outraged by the obvious lie, French Prime Minister J. Clemenceau responded by saying that Chernin was lying, then published the text of Karl’s letter. The Viennese court was hit with a hail of reproaches for infidelity and betrayal, that the Habsburgs had violated the “sacred commandment” of “Teutonic loyalty” and brotherhood. Although Germany itself did the same and conducted behind-the-scenes negotiations without the participation of Austria.
Thus, Chernin rudely set up Karl. Count Chernin’s career ended here; he resigned. Austria was struck by a severe political crisis. In court circles there was even talk about the possible resignation of the emperor. Military circles and Austro-Hungarian “hawks” committed to an alliance with Germany were furious. The Empress and the Parma house to which she belonged were under attack. They were considered a source of evil.
Karl was forced to make excuses to Berlin, to lie that it was a fake. In May, under pressure from Berlin, Charles signed an agreement on an even closer military and economic union of the Central Powers. The Habsburg state finally became a satellite of the more powerful German Empire. If we imagine an alternative reality where Germany won the First World War, then Austria-Hungary would become a second-rate power, almost an economic colony of Germany. The victory of the Entente also did not bode well for Austria-Hungary. The scandal surrounding the “Sixtus scam” buried the possibility of a political agreement between the Habsburgs and the Entente.
In April 1918, the “Congress of Oppressed Peoples” was held in Rome. Representatives of various national communities of Austria-Hungary gathered in Rome. Most often, these politicians did not have any weight in their homeland, but they did not hesitate to speak on behalf of their people, who, in fact, no one asked. In reality, many Slavic politicians would still be satisfied with broad autonomy within Austria-Hungary.
On June 3, 1918, the Entente stated that it considered one of the conditions for creating a just world to be the creation of an independent Poland, with the inclusion of Galicia. The Polish National Council had already been created in Paris, headed by Roman Dmowski, who after the revolution in Russia changed his pro-Russian position to a pro-Western one. The activities of independence supporters were actively sponsored by the Polish community in the United States. A Polish volunteer army was formed in France under the command of General J. Haller. J. Pilsudski, realizing which way the wind was blowing, broke off relations with the Germans and gradually gained fame as a national hero of the Polish people.
On July 30, 1918, the French government recognized the right of Czechs and Slovaks to self-determination. The Czechoslovak National Council was called upon to be the highest body that represents the interests of the people and is the core of the future government of Czechoslovakia. On August 9, the Czechoslovak National Council as the future Czechoslovak government was recognized by England, and on September 3 by the USA. The artificiality of Czechoslovak statehood did not bother anyone. Although Czechs and Slovaks, apart from linguistic similarity, had little in common. For many centuries, both peoples had different histories and were at different levels of political, cultural and economic development. This did not bother the Entente, like many other similar artificial structures; the main thing was to destroy the Habsburg Empire.
Liberalization
The most important part of the policy of Charles I was the liberalization of domestic policy. It is worth noting that in war conditions, this was not the best decision. At first, the Austrian authorities went too far with the search for “internal enemies”, repressions and restrictions, then they began liberalization. This only worsened the internal situation in the country. Charles I, guided by the best intentions, himself rocked the already not very stable boat of the Habsburg empire.
On May 30, 1917, the Reichsrat, the parliament of Austria, which had not met for more than three years, was convened. The idea of the Easter Declaration, which strengthened the position of the Austrian Germans in Cisleithania, was rejected. Charles decided that strengthening the Austrian Germans would not simplify the position of the monarchy, but vice versa. In addition, in May 1917, Hungarian Prime Minister Tisza, who was the personification of Hungarian conservatism, was dismissed.
Convening parliament was Charles's big mistake. The convening of the Reichsrat was perceived by many politicians as a sign of the weakness of the imperial power. The leaders of national movements received a platform from which they could put pressure on the authorities. The Reichsrat quickly turned into an opposition center, essentially an anti-state body. As parliamentary sessions continued, the position of the Czech and Yugoslav deputies (they formed a single faction) became more and more radical. The Czech Union demanded the transformation of the Habsburg state into a "federation of free and equal states" and the creation of a Czech state, including the Slovaks. Budapest was indignant, since the annexation of Slovak lands to the Czech ones meant a violation of the territorial integrity of the Hungarian kingdom. At the same time, the Slovak politicians themselves waited to see what would happen, preferring neither an alliance with the Czechs nor autonomy within Hungary. The focus on an alliance with the Czechs won only in May 1918.
The amnesty announced on July 2, 1917, which released political prisoners sentenced to death, mainly Czechs (more than 700 people), did not contribute to calm in Austria-Hungary. Austrian and Bohemian Germans were outraged by the imperial forgiveness of “traitors,” which further aggravated national contradictions in Austria.
On July 20, on the island of Corfu, representatives of the Yugoslav Committee and the Serbian government signed a declaration on the creation after the war of a state that would include Serbia, Montenegro and the provinces of Austria-Hungary inhabited by the South Slavs. The head of the “Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes” was to be a king from the Serbian Karadjordjevic dynasty. It should be noted that the South Slavic Committee at this time did not have the support of the majority of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes of Austria-Hungary. Most South Slavic politicians in Austria-Hungary itself at this time advocated broad autonomy within the Habsburg federation.
However, by the end of 1917, separatist, radical tendencies won. The October Revolution in Russia and the Bolshevik “Decree on Peace” played a certain role in this, which called for “peace without annexations and indemnities” and the implementation of the principle of self-determination of nations. On November 30, 1917, the Czech Union, the South Slavic Club of Deputies and the Ukrainian Parliamentary Association issued a joint statement. In it, they demanded that delegations from various national communities of the Austro-Hungarian Empire be present at the peace negotiations in Brest.
When the Austrian government rejected this idea, a congress of Czech deputies of the Reichsrat and members of the state assemblies met in Prague on January 6, 1918. They adopted a declaration in which they demanded that the peoples of the Habsburg Empire be given the right to self-determination and, in particular, the proclamation of a Czechoslovak state. Prime Minister of Cisleithania Seidler declared the declaration "an act of treason." However, the authorities could no longer oppose nationalism with anything other than loud statements. The train left. The imperial power did not enjoy its former authority, and the army was demoralized and could not resist the collapse of the state.
Military disaster
On March 3, 1918, the Brest-Litovsk Treaty was signed. Russia has lost a huge territory. Austro-German troops remained in Little Russia until the fall of 1918. In Austria-Hungary, this world was called “grain”, so they hoped for grain supplies from Little Russia-Ukraine, which was supposed to improve the critical food situation in Austria. However, these hopes were not justified. The civil war and poor harvest in Little Russia led to the fact that the export of grain and flour from this area to Cisleithania amounted to less than 2.5 thousand wagons in 1918. For comparison: about 30 thousand wagons were exported from Romania, and more than 10 thousand from Hungary.
On May 7, a separate peace was signed in Bucharest between the Central Powers and defeated Romania. Romania ceded Dobruja to Bulgaria, and part of southern Transylvania and Bukovina to Hungary. As compensation, Bucharest was given Russian Bessarabia. However, already in November 1918, Romania defected back to the Entente camp.
During the 1918 campaign, the Austro-German command hoped to win. But these hopes were in vain. The forces of the Central Powers, unlike the Entente, were running out. In March - July, the German army launched a powerful offensive on the Western Front, achieved some successes, but was unable to defeat the enemy or break through the front. Germany's material and human resources were running out, and morale was weakened. In addition, Germany was forced to maintain large forces in the East, controlling the occupied territories, losing large reserves that could help on the Western Front. In July-August, the second Battle of the Marne took place; Entente troops launched a counter-offensive. Germany suffered a heavy defeat. In September, Entente troops, in a series of operations, eliminated the results of previous German success. In October - early November, the Allied forces liberated most of the territory of France and part of Belgium captured by the Germans. The German army could no longer fight.
The offensive of the Austro-Hungarian army on the Italian front failed. The Austrians attacked on June 15. However, Austro-Hungarian troops were only able to penetrate the Italian defenses on the Piava River in places. After several troops, the Austro-Hungarian troops, having suffered heavy losses and demoralized, retreated back. The Italians, despite the constant demands of the allied command, were unable to immediately organize a counteroffensive. The Italian army was not in the best condition to advance.
Only on October 24 did the Italian army go on the offensive. In a number of places, the Austrians successfully defended themselves and repelled enemy attacks. However, soon the Italian front simply collapsed. Under the influence of rumors and the situation on other fronts, the Hungarians and Slavs rebelled. On October 25, all Hungarian troops simply abandoned their positions and went to Hungary under the pretext of the need to defend their country, which was threatened by Entente troops from Serbia. And Czech, Slovak and Croatian soldiers refused to fight. Only the Austrian Germans continued to fight.
By October 28, 30 divisions had already lost their combat capability and the Austrian command gave the order for a general retreat. The Austro-Hungarian army was completely demoralized and fled. About 300 thousand people surrendered. On November 3, the Italians landed troops in Trieste. Italian troops occupied almost all of the previously lost Italian territory.
In the Balkans, the Allies also went on the offensive in September. Albania, Serbia and Montenegro were liberated. Bulgaria concluded a truce with the Entente. In November, the Allies invaded Austria-Hungary. On November 3, 1918, the Austro-Hungarian Empire concluded a truce with the Entente, and on November 11, Germany. It was a complete defeat.
End of Austria-Hungary
On October 4, 1918, in agreement with the Emperor and Berlin, the Austrian-Hungarian Foreign Minister Count Burian sent a note to the Western powers informing them that Vienna was ready for negotiations based on Wilson’s “14 Points,” including the clause on self-determination of nations.
On October 5, the People's Assembly of Croatia was established in Zagreb, which declared itself the representative body of the Yugoslav lands of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. On October 8, in Washington, at the suggestion of Masaryk, the Declaration of Independence of the Czechoslovak people was announced. Wilson immediately recognized that the Czechoslovakians and Austria-Hungary were at war and the Czechoslovak Council was the government waging the war. The United States could no longer consider the autonomy of peoples a sufficient condition for concluding peace. It was a death sentence for the Habsburg Empire.
On October 10-12, Emperor Charles received delegations of Hungarians, Czechs, Austrian Germans and South Slavs. Hungarian politicians still did not want to hear anything about the federalization of the empire. Karl had to promise that the upcoming manifesto on federalization would not affect Hungary. And to the Czechs and South Slavs, the federation no longer seemed like the ultimate dream - the Entente promised more. Karl no longer ordered, but asked and begged, but it was too late. Karl had to pay not only for his mistakes, but for the mistakes of his predecessors. Austria-Hungary was doomed.
In general, one can sympathize with Karl. He was an inexperienced, kind, religious man who was in charge of the empire and felt terrible mental pain as his whole world was collapsing. The peoples refused to obey him, and nothing could be done. The army could have stopped the disintegration, but its combat-ready core died at the fronts, and the remaining troops almost completely disintegrated. We must give Karl his due, he fought to the end, and not for power, since he was not a power-hungry person, but for the legacy of his ancestors.
On October 16, 1918, a manifesto on the federalization of Austria (“Manifesto of the Peoples”) was released. However, the time for such a step was already lost. On the other hand, this manifesto allowed us to avoid bloodshed. Many officers and officials, brought up in the spirit of devotion to the throne, could calmly begin to serve the legitimate national councils, into whose hands power passed. It must be said that many monarchists were ready to fight for the Habsburgs. Thus, the “lion of the Isonzo”, Field Marshal Svetozar Boroevich de Boina, had troops that maintained discipline and loyalty to the throne. He was ready to march on Vienna and occupy it. But Karl, guessing about the field marshal’s plans, did not want a military coup and blood.
On October 21, the Provisional National Assembly of German Austria was created in Vienna. It included almost all the Reichsrat deputies who represented the German-speaking districts of Cisleithania. Many deputies hoped that soon the German districts of the collapsed empire would be able to join Germany, completing the process of creating a unified Germany. But this was contrary to the interests of the Entente, therefore, at the insistence of the Western powers, the Austrian Republic, declared on November 12, became an independent state. Charles announced that he was “removing himself from government,” but emphasized that this did not constitute an abdication of the throne. Formally, Charles remained emperor and king, since refusal to participate in state affairs was not tantamount to renunciation of the title and throne.
Charles “suspended” his powers, hoping that he could regain the throne. In March 1919, under pressure from the Austrian government and the Entente, the imperial family moved to Switzerland. In 1921, Charles made two attempts to return the throne of Hungary, but failed. He will be sent to the island of Madeira. In March 1922, Karl fell ill with pneumonia due to hypothermia and died on April 1. His wife, Tsita, will live a whole era and die in 1989.
By October 24, all Entente countries and their allies recognized the Czechoslovak National Council as the current government of the new state. On October 28, the Czechoslovak Republic (CSR) was proclaimed in Prague. On October 30, the Slovak National Council confirmed the accession of Slovakia to the Czechoslovakia. In fact, Prague and Budapest fought for Slovakia for several more months. On November 14, the National Assembly met in Prague and Masaryk was elected President of Czechoslovakia.
On October 29 in Zagreb, the People's Assembly announced its readiness to take all power in the Yugoslav provinces. Croatia, Slavonia, Dalmatia and the lands of the Slovenes seceded from Austria-Hungary and declared neutrality. True, this did not prevent the Italian army from occupying Dalmatia and the coastal regions of Croatia. Anarchy and chaos ensued in the Yugoslav regions. Widespread anarchy, collapse, the threat of famine, and the severance of economic ties forced the Zagreb Assembly to seek help from Belgrade. Actually, the Croats, Bosnians and Slovenes had no choice. The Habsburg Empire collapsed. Austrian Germans and Hungarians created their own states. It was necessary either to take part in the creation of a common South Slavic state, or to become victims of territorial seizures by Italy, Serbia and Hungary (possibly Austria).
On November 24, the People's Assembly addressed Belgrade with a request to include the Yugoslav provinces of the Danube monarchy into the Serbian Kingdom. On December 1, 1918, the creation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (the future Yugoslavia) was announced.
In November, Polish statehood was formed. After the capitulation of the Central Powers, dual power arose in Poland. The Regency Council of the Kingdom of Poland sat in Warsaw, and the Provisional People's Government in Lublin. Józef Pilsudski, who became the generally recognized leader of the nation, united both power groups. He became the "chief of state" - the temporary head of the executive branch. Galicia also became part of Poland. However, the borders of the new state were determined only in 1919-1921, after Versailles and the war with Soviet Russia.
On October 17, 1918, the Hungarian parliament broke the union with Austria and declared the country's independence. The Hungarian National Council, headed by the liberal Count Mihaly Károlyi, set a course for reforming the country. In order to preserve the territorial integrity of Hungary, Budapest announced its readiness for immediate peace negotiations with the Entente. Budapest recalled Hungarian troops from the collapsing fronts to their homeland.
On October 30-31, an uprising began in Budapest. Crowds of thousands of townspeople and soldiers returning from the front demanded the transfer of power to the National Council. The victim of the rebels was the former Prime Minister of Hungary István Tisza, who was torn to pieces by soldiers in his own home. Count Károlyi became prime minister. On November 3, Hungary concluded a truce with the Entente in Belgrade. However, this did not stop Romania from capturing Transylvania. Attempts by the Károlyi government to reach an agreement with the Slovaks, Romanians, Croats and Serbs on preserving the unity of Hungary on the condition of granting its national communities broad autonomy ended in failure. Time was lost. Hungarian liberals had to pay for the mistakes of the former conservative elite, which until recently did not want to reform Hungary.
Uprising in Budapest October 31, 1918
On November 5 in Budapest, Charles I was deposed from the throne of Hungary. On November 16, 1918, Hungary was declared a republic. However, the situation in Hungary was difficult. On the one hand, in Hungary itself the struggle of various political forces continued - from conservative monarchists to communists. As a result, Miklos Horthy became the dictator of Hungary, who led the resistance to the 1919 revolution. On the other hand, it was difficult to predict what would remain of the former Hungary. In 1920, the Entente withdrew troops from Hungary, but in the same year the Treaty of Trianon deprived the country of 2/3 of the territory where hundreds of thousands of Hungarians lived and most of the economic infrastructure.
Thus, the Entente, having destroyed the Austro-Hungarian Empire, created a huge area of instability in Central Europe, where long-standing grievances, prejudices, hostility and hatred broke free. The destruction of the Habsburg monarchy, which acted as an integrating force, capable of more or less successfully representing the interests of the majority of its subjects, smoothing out and balancing political, social, national and religious contradictions, was a great evil. In the future, this will become one of the main prerequisites for the next world war.
Map of the collapse of Austria-Hungary in 1919-1920.
Ctrl Enter
Noticed osh Y bku Select text and click Ctrl+Enter
The Austrian Empire was proclaimed as a monarchical state in 1804 and lasted until 1867, after which it transformed into Austria-Hungary. Otherwise, it was called the Habsburg Empire, after the name of one of the Habsburgs, Franz, who, like Napoleon, also proclaimed himself emperor.
Inheritance
The Austrian Empire in the 19th century, if you look at the map, looks like this. It is immediately clear that this is a multinational state. And, most likely, as often happens, it is devoid of stability. Looking through the pages of history, one can be convinced that this happened here too. Tiny multi-colored specks collected under one border - this is Habsburg Austria. The map especially shows how fragmented the lands of the empire were. The Habsburg ancestral allotments are small regional areas inhabited by completely different peoples. The composition of the Austrian Empire was something like this.
- Slovakia, Hungary, Czech Republic.
- Transcarpathia (Carpathian Rus').
- Transylvania, Croatia, Vojvodina (Banat).
- Galicia, Bukovina.
- Northern Italy (Lombardy, Venice).
Not only did all peoples have different origins, but their religions also did not coincide. The peoples of the Austrian Empire (about thirty-four million) were half Slavs (Slovaks, Czechs, Croats, Poles, Ukrainians, Serbs. There were about five million Magyars (Hungarians), about the same number of Italians.
At the junction of history
Feudalism had not yet outlived its usefulness by that time, but Austrian and Czech artisans could already call themselves workers, since the industry of these areas had fully developed to capitalist.
The Habsburgs and the nobility surrounding them were the dominant force of the empire, they occupied all the highest positions - both military and bureaucratic. Absolutism, the dominance of arbitrariness - bureaucratic and security forces in the form of the police, the dictates of the Catholic Church, the richest institution in the empire - all this one way or another oppressed small nations, united together, like water and oil are incompatible even in a mixer.
The Austrian Empire on the eve of the revolution
The Czech Republic was quickly Germanized, especially the bourgeoisie and aristocracy. Landowners from Hungary strangled millions of Slavic peasants, but they themselves were also very dependent on the Austrian authorities. The Austrian Empire put harsh pressure on its Italian provinces. It is even difficult to distinguish what type of oppression was: the struggle of feudalism with capitalism or based on purely national differences.
Metternich, the head of government and an ardent reactionary, for thirty years banned any language other than German in all institutions, including courts and schools. The population was mainly peasant. Considered free, these people were completely dependent on the landowners, paid quitrents, and performed duties reminiscent of corvée.
It was not only the masses of the people who groaned under the yoke of residual feudal orders and absolute power with its arbitrariness. The bourgeoisie was also dissatisfied and clearly pushed the people to revolt. The revolution in the Austrian Empire for the above reasons was simply inevitable.
National self-determination
All peoples are freedom-loving and respect the development and preservation of their national culture. Especially Slavic ones. Then, under the weight of the Austrian boot, the Czechs, Slovaks, Hungarians, and Italians strove for self-government, the development of literature and the arts, and sought education in schools in national languages. Writers and scientists were united by one idea - national self-determination.
The same processes took place among the Serbs and Croats. The more difficult living conditions became, the brighter the dream of freedom blossomed, which was reflected in the works of artists, poets and musicians. National cultures rose above reality and inspired their compatriots to take decisive steps towards freedom, equality, and fraternity - following the example of the Great French Revolution.
Uprising in Vienna
In 1847, the Austrian Empire achieved a completely revolutionary situation. It was made more acute by the general economic crisis and two years of crop failures, and the impetus was the overthrow of the monarchy in France. Already in March 1848, the revolution in the Austrian Empire matured and broke out.
Workers, students, and artisans erected barricades on the streets of Vienna and demanded the resignation of the government, not being afraid of the imperial troops who advanced to suppress the unrest. The government made concessions, dismissing Metternich and some ministers. Even a constitution was promised.
The public, however, quickly armed itself: the workers in any case received nothing - not even voting rights. The students created the academic legion, and the bourgeoisie created the national guard. And they resisted when these illegal armed groups tried to disband, which forced the emperor and the government to flee Vienna.
The peasants, as usual, did not have time to take part in the revolution. In some places they spontaneously rebelled, refusing to pay rent and arbitrarily cutting down the landowners' groves. Naturally, the working class had more consciousness and organization. Fragmentation and individualism of labor do not add cohesion.
Incompleteness
Like all German revolutions, the Austrian revolution was not completed, although it can already be called bourgeois-democratic. The working class was not yet mature enough, the bourgeoisie, as always, was liberal and behaved treacherously, plus there was national discord and military counter-revolution.
Failed to win. The monarchy renewed and intensified its triumphant oppression over impoverished and disenfranchised peoples. It is positive that some reforms took place, and most importantly, the revolution finally killed it. It is also good that the country retained its territories, because after the revolutions, more homogeneous countries than Austria fell apart. The empire map has not changed.
Rulers
In the first half of the nineteenth century, until 1835, all state affairs were managed by Emperor Franz I. Chancellor Metternich was smart and had great weight in politics, but it was often simply impossible to convince the emperor. After the unpleasant consequences of the French Revolution for Austria, all the horrors of the Napoleonic wars, Metternich most of all longed to restore order so that peace would reign in the country.
However, Metternich failed to create a parliament with representatives of all the peoples of the empire; the provincial diets never received any real powers. However, economically quite backward Austria, with a feudal reactionary regime, over the thirty years of Metternich’s work turned into the strongest state in Europe. His role was also great in the creation of the counter-revolutionary in 1915.
In an effort to keep the shreds of the empire from completely disintegrating, Austrian troops brutally suppressed the uprisings in Naples and Piedmont in 1821, maintaining complete domination of the country by Austrians over non-Austrians. Very often, popular unrest outside Austria was suppressed, due to which the army of this country acquired a bad reputation among adherents of national self-determination.
An excellent diplomat, Metternich was in charge of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Emperor Franz was in charge of the internal affairs of the state. With close attention, he monitored all movements in the field of education: officials strictly checked everything that could be studied and read. The censorship was brutal. Journalists were prohibited from even mentioning the word “constitution.”
Things were relatively calm in religion, and some religious tolerance appeared. Revived Catholics supervised education, and no one was excommunicated from the church without the consent of the emperor. Jews were released from the ghetto, and synagogues were even built in Vienna. It was then that Solomon Rothschild emerged among the bankers, making friends with Metternich. And even received a baronial title. In those days it was an incredible event.
The end of a great power
Austria's foreign policy in the second half of the century is full of failures. Continuous defeats in wars.
- (1853-1856).
- Austro-Prussian War (1866).
- Austro-Italian War (1866).
- war with Sardinia and France (1859).
At this time, there was a sharp break in relations with Russia, then the creation of all this led to the fact that the Habsburgs lost influence on the states of not only Germany, but throughout Europe. And - as a consequence - the status of a great power.