Encyclopaedia Britannica Volume 3, Part 1, Slice 1 Part 7

Badeni after the election sent in his resignation, but the emperor refused to accept it, and he had, therefore, to do the best he could and turn for support to the other nationalities. The strongest of them were the fifty-nine Poles and sixty Young Czechs; he therefore attempted, as Taaffe had done, to come to some agreement with them. The Poles were always ready to support the government; among the Young Czechs the more moderate had already attempted to restrain the wilder spirits of the party, and they were quite prepared to enter into negotiations. They did not wish to lose the opportunity which now was open to them of winning influence over the administration. What they required was further concession as to the language in Bohemia. [Sidenote: The language ordinances of 1897.] In May 1897 Badeni, therefore, published his celebrated _ordinances_. They determined (1) that all correspondence and doc.u.ments regarding every matter brought before the government officials should be conducted in the language in which it was first introduced. This applied to the whole of Bohemia, and meant the introduction of Czech into the government offices throughout the whole of the kingdom; (2) after 1903 no one was to be appointed to a post under the government in Bohemia until he had pa.s.sed an examination in Czech. These ordinances fulfilled the worst fears of the Germans. The German Nationalists and Radicals declared that no business should be done till they were repealed and Badeni dismissed. They resorted to obstruction.

They brought in repeated motions to impeach the ministers, and parliament had to be prorogued in June, although no business of any kind had been transacted. Badeni had not antic.i.p.ated the effect his ordinances would have; as a Pole he had little experience in the western part of the empire.

During the recess he tried to open negotiations, but [v.03 p.0036] the Germans refused even to enter into a discussion until the ordinances had been withdrawn. The agitation spread throughout the country; great meetings were held at Eger and Aussig, which were attended by Germans from across the frontier, and led to serious disturbances; the cornflower, which had become the symbol of German nationality and union with Germany, was freely worn, and the language used was in many cases treasonable. The emperor insisted that the Reichsrath should again be summoned to pa.s.s the necessary measures for the agreement with Hungary; scenes then took place which have no parallel in parliamentary history. To meet the obstruction it was determined to sit at night, but this was unsuccessful. On one occasion Dr Lecher, one of the representatives of Moravia, spoke for twelve hours, from 9 P.M. till 9 A.M., against the Ausgleich. The opposition was not always limited to feats of endurance of this kind. On the 3rd of November there was a free fight in the House; it arose from a quarrel between Dr Lueger and the Christian Socialists on the one side (for the Christian Socialists had supported the government since the confirmation of Lueger as burgomaster) and the German Nationalists under Herr Wolf, a German from Bohemia, the violence of whose language had already caused Badeni to challenge him to a duel. The Nationalists refused to allow Lueger to speak, clapping their desks, hissing and making other noises, till at last the Young Czechs attempted to prevent the disorder by violence. On the 24th of November the scenes of disturbance were renewed. The president, Herr v.

Abrahamovitch, an Armenian from Galicia, refused to call on Schonerer to speak. The Nationalists therefore stormed the platform, and the president and ministers had to fly into their private rooms to escape personal violence, until the Czechs came to their rescue, and by superiority in numbers and physical strength severely punished Herr Wolf and his friends.

The rules of the House giving the president no authority for maintaining order, he determined, with the a.s.sent of the ministers, to propose alterations in procedure. The next day, when the sitting began, one of the ministers, Count Falkenhayn, a Clerical who was very unpopular, moved "That any member who continued to disturb a sitting after being twice called to order could be suspended--for three days by the president, and for thirty days by the House." The din and uproar was such that not a word could be heard, but at a pre-arranged signal from the president all the Right rose, and he then declared that the new order had been carried, although the procedure of the House required that it should be submitted to a committee.

The next day, at the beginning of the sitting, the Socialists rushed on the platform, tore up and destroyed all the papers lying there, seized the president, and held him against the wall. After he had escaped, eighty police were introduced into the House and carried out the fourteen Socialists. The next day Herr Wolf was treated in the same manner. The excitement spread to the street. Serious disorders took place in Vienna and in Graz; the German opposition had the support of the people, and Lueger warned the ministers that as burgomaster he would be unable to maintain order in Vienna; even the Clerical Germans showed signs of deserting the government. [Sidenote: Badeni resigns.] The emperor, hastily summoned to Vienna, accepted Badeni's resignation, the Germans having thus by obstruction attained part of their wishes. The new minister, Gautsch, a man popular with all parties, held office for three months; he proclaimed the budget and the Ausgleich, and in February replaced the language ordinances by others, under which Bohemia was to be divided into three districts--one Czech, one German and one mixed. The Germans, however, were not satisfied with this; they demanded absolute repeal. The Czechs also were offended; they arranged riots at Prague; the professors in the university refused to lecture unless the German students were defended from violence; Gautsch resigned, and Thun, who had been governor of Bohemia, was appointed minister. Martial law was proclaimed in Bohemia, and strictly enforced.

Thun then arranged with the Hungarian ministers a compromise about the Ausgleich.

[Sidenote: Renewed conflict between Germans and Czechs.]

The Reichsrath was again summoned, and the meetings were less disturbed than in the former year, but the Germans still prevented any business from being done. The Germans now had a new cause of complaint. Paragraph 14 of the Const.i.tutional law of 1867 provided that, in cases of pressing necessity, orders for which the a.s.sent of the Reichsrath was required might, if the Reichsrath were not in session, be proclaimed by the emperor; they had to be signed by the whole ministry, and if they were not laid before the Reichsrath within four months of its meeting, or if they did not receive the approval of both Houses, they ceased to be valid. The Germans contended that the application of this clause to the Ausgleich was invalid, and demanded that it should be repealed. Thun had in consequence to retire, in September 1899. His successor, Count Clary, began by withdrawing the ordinances which had been the cause of so much trouble, but it was now too late to restore peace. The Germans were not sufficiently strong and united to keep in power a minister who had brought them the relief for which they had been clamouring for two years. The Czechs, of course, went into opposition, and used obstruction. The extreme German party, however, took the occasion to demand that paragraph 14 should be repealed. Clary explained that this was impossible, but he gave a formal pledge that he would not use it. The Czechs, however, prevented him pa.s.sing a law on excise which was a necessary part of the agreements with Hungary; it was, therefore, impossible for him to carry on the government without breaking his word; there was nothing left for him to do but to resign, after holding office for less than three months. The emperor then appointed a ministry of officials, who were not bound by his pledge, and used paragraph 14 for the necessary purposes of state. They then made way for a ministry under Herr v. Korber. During the early months of 1900 matters were more peaceful, and Korber hoped to be able to arrange a compromise; but the Czechs now demanded the restoration of their language in the internal service of Bohemia, and on 8th June, by noise and disturbance, obliged the president to suspend the sitting. The Reichsrath was immediately dissolved, the emperor having determined to make a final attempt to get together a parliament with which it would be possible to govern. The new elections on which so much was to depend did not take place till January 1901. They resulted in a great increase of the extreme German Nationalist parties.

Schonerer and the German Radicals--the fanatical German party who in their new programme advocated union of German Austria with the German empire--now numbered twenty-one, who chiefly came from Bohemia. They were able for the first time to procure the election of one of their party in the Austrian Delegation, and threatened to introduce into the a.s.sembly scenes of disorder similar to those which they had made common in the Reichsrath. All those parties which did not primarily appeal to national feeling suffered loss; especially was this the case with the two sections of the Clericals, the Christian Socialists and the Ultramontanes; and the increasing enmity between the German Nationalists (who refused even the name German to a Roman Catholic) and the Church became one of the most conspicuous features in the political situation. The loss of seats by the Socialists showed that even among the working men the national agitation was gaining ground; the diminished influence of the anti-Semites was the most encouraging sign.

Notwithstanding the result of the elections, the first months of the new parliament pa.s.sed in comparative peace. There was a truce between the nationalities. The Germans were more occupied with their opposition to the Clericals than with their feud with the Slavs. The Czechs refrained from obstruction, for they did not wish to forfeit the alliance with the Poles and Conservatives, on which their parliamentary strength depended, and the Germans used the opportunity to pa.s.s measures for promoting the material prosperity of the country, especially for an important system of ca.n.a.ls which would bring additional prosperity to the coal-fields and manufactures of Bohemia.

(J. W. HE.)

[Sidenote: Public works policy.]

The history of Austria since the general election of 1901 is the [v.03 p.0037] history of franchise reform as a crowning attempt to restore parliament to normal working conditions. The premier, Dr von Korber, who had undertaken to overcome obstruction and who hoped to effect a compromise between Germans and Czechs, induced the Chamber to sanction the estimates, the contingent of recruits and other "necessities of state" for 1901 and 1902, by promising to undertake large public works in which Czechs and Germans were alike interested. These public works were chiefly a ca.n.a.l from the Danube to the Oder; a ship ca.n.a.l from the Danube to the Moldau near Budweis, and the ca.n.a.lization of the Moldau from Budweis to Prague; a ship ca.n.a.l running from the projected Danube-Oder ca.n.a.l near Prerau to the Elbe near Pardubitz, and the ca.n.a.lization of the Elbe from Pardubitz to Melnik; a navigable connexion between the Danube-Oder Ca.n.a.l and the Vistula and the Dniester. It was estimated that the construction of these four ca.n.a.ls would require twenty years, the funds being furnished by a 4% loan amortizable in ninety years. In addition to the ca.n.a.ls, the cabinet proposed and the Chamber sanctioned the construction of a "second railway route to Trieste"

designed to shorten the distance between South Germany, Salzburg and the Adriatic, by means of a line pa.s.sing under the Alpine ranges of central and southern Austria. The princ.i.p.al sections of this line were named after the ranges they pierced, the chief tunnels being bored through the Tauern, Karaw.a.n.ken and Wochein hills. Sections were to be thrown open to traffic as soon as completed and the whole work to be ended during 1909. The line forms one of the most interesting railway routes in Europe. The cost, however, greatly exceeded the estimate sanctioned by parliament; and the contention that the parliamentary adoption of the Budget in 1901-1902 cost the state 100,000,000 for public works, is not entirely unfounded. True, these works were in most cases desirable and in some cases necessary, but they were hastily promised and often hastily begun under pressure of political expediency. The Korber administration was for this reason subsequently exposed to severe censure.

[Sidenote: Korber's parliamentary difficulties.]

Despite these public works Dr von Korber found himself unable to induce parliament to vote the Budgets for 1903, 1904 or 1905, and was obliged to revert to the expedient employed by his predecessors of sanctioning the estimates by imperial ordinance under paragraph 14 of the const.i.tution. His attempts in December 1902 and January 1903 to promote a compromise between Czechs and Germans proved equally futile. Korber proposed that Bohemia be divided into 10 districts, of which 5 would be Czech, 3 German and 2 mixed.

Of the 234 district tribunals, 133 were to be Czech, 94 German and 7 mixed.

The Czechs demanded on the contrary that both their language and German should be placed on an equal footing throughout Bohemia, and be used for all official purposes in the same way. As this demand involved the recognition of Czech as a language of internal service in Bohemia it was refused by the Germans. Thenceforward, until his fall on the 31st of December 1904, Korber governed practically without parliament. The Chamber was summoned at intervals rather as a pretext for the subsequent employment of paragraph 14 than in the hope of securing its a.s.sent to legislative measures. The Czechs blocked business by a pile of "urgency motions" and occasionally indulged in noisy obstruction. On one occasion a sitting lasted 57 hours without interruption. In consequence of Czech aggressiveness, the German parties (the German Progressists, the German Populists, the Const.i.tutional Landed Proprietors and the Christian Socialists) created a joint executive committee and a supreme committee of four members to watch over German racial interests.

[Sidenote: Baron Gautsch premier.]

By the end of 1904 it had become clear that the system of government by paragraph 14, which Dr von Korber had perfected was not effective in the long run. Loans were needed for military and other purposes, and paragraph 14 itself declares that it cannot be employed for the contraction of any lasting burden upon the exchequer, nor for any sale of state patrimony. As the person of the premier had become so obnoxious to the Czechs that his removal would be regarded by them as a concession, his resignation was suddenly accepted by the emperor, and, on the 1st of January 1905, a former premier, Baron von Gautsch, was appointed in his stead. Parliamentary activity was at once resumed; the Austro-Hungarian tariff contained in the Szell-Korber compact was adopted, the estimates were discussed and the commercial treaty with Germany ratified. In the early autumn, however, a radical change came over the spirit of Austrian politics. For nearly three years Austria had been watching with bitterness and depression the course of the crisis in Hungary. Parliament had repeatedly expressed its disapproval of the Magyar demands upon the crown, but had succeeded only in demonstrating its own impotence. The feeling that Austria could be compelled by imperial ordinance under paragraph 14 to acquiesce in whatever concessions the crown might make to Hungary galled Austrian public opinion and prepared it for coming changes. In August 1905 the crown took into consideration and in September sanctioned the proposal that universal suffrage be introduced into the official programme of the Fejervary cabinet then engaged in combating the Coalition in Hungary. It is not to be supposed that the king of Hungary a.s.sented to this programme without reflecting that what he sought to further in Hungary, it would be impossible for him, as emperor of Austria, to oppose in Cisleithania. His subsequent action justifies, indeed, the belief that, when sanctioning the Fejervary programme, the monarch had already decided that universal suffrage should be introduced in Austria; but even he can scarcely have been prepared for the rapidity with which the movement in Austria gained ground and accomplished its object.

[Sidenote: Franchise reform.]

On the 15th of September 1905 a huge socialist and working-cla.s.s demonstration in favour of universal suffrage took place before the parliament at Budapest. The Austrian Socialist party, encouraged by this manifestation and influenced by the revolutionary movement in Russia, resolved to press for franchise reform in Austria also. An initial demonstration, resulting in some bloodshed, was organized in Vienna at the beginning of November. At Prague, Graz and other towns, demonstrations and collisions with the police were frequent. The premier, Baron Gautsch, who had previously discountenanced universal suffrage while admitting the desirability of a restricted reform, then changed att.i.tude and permitted an enormous Socialist demonstration, in support of universal suffrage, to take place (November 28) in the Vienna Ringstra.s.se. Traffic was suspended for five hours while an orderly procession of workmen, ten abreast, marched silently along the Ringstra.s.se past the houses of parliament. The demonstration made a deep impression upon public opinion. On the same day the premier promised to introduce by February a large measure of franchise reform so framed as to protect racial minorities from being overwhelmed at the polls by majorities of other races. On the 23rd of February 1906 he indeed brought in a series of franchise reform measures. Their main principles were the abolition of the _curia_ or electoral cla.s.s system and the establishment of the franchise on the basis of universal suffrage; and the division of Austria electorally into racial compartments within which each race would be a.s.sured against molestation from other races. The Gautsch redistribution bill proposed to increase the number of const.i.tuencies from 425 to 455, to allot a fixed number of const.i.tuencies to each province and, within each province, to each race according to its numbers and tax-paying capacity. The reform bill proper proposed to enfranchise every male citizen above 24 years of age with one year's residential qualification.

At first the chances of the adoption of such a measure seemed small. It was warmly supported from outside by the Social Democrats, who held only 11 seats in the House; inside, the Christian Socialists or Lueger party were favourable on the whole as they hoped to gain seats at the expense of the German Progressives and German Populists and to extend their own organization throughout the empire. The Young Czechs, too, were favourable, while the Poles reserved their att.i.tude. Hostile [v.03 p.0038] in principle and by instinct, they waited to ascertain the mind of the emperor, before actively opposing the reform. With the exception of the German Populists who felt that a German "Liberal" party could not well oppose an extension of popular rights, all the German Liberals were antagonistic, some bitterly, to the measure. The Const.i.tutional Landed Proprietors who had played so large a part in Austrian politics since the 'sixties, and had for a generation held the leadership of the German element in parliament and in the country, saw themselves doomed and the leadership of the Germans given to the Christian Socialists. None of the representatives of the _curia_ system fought so tenaciously for their privileges as did the German nominees of the _curia_ of large landed proprietors. Their opposition proved unavailing. The emperor frowned repeatedly upon their efforts.

[Sidenote: Baron Beck premier.]

Baron Gautsch fell in April over a difference with the Poles, and his successor, Prince Konrad zu Hohenlohe-Schillingsfurst, who had taken over the reform bills, resigned also, six weeks later, as a protest against the action of the crown in consenting to the enactment of a customs tariff in Hungary distinct from, though identical with, the joint Austro-Hungarian tariff comprised in the Szell-Korber compact and enacted as a joint tariff by the Reichsrath. A new cabinet was formed (June 2) by Baron von Beck, permanent under secretary of state in the ministry for agriculture, an official of considerable ability who had first acquired prominence as an instructor of the heir apparent, Archduke Francis Ferdinand, in const.i.tutional and administrative law. By dint of skilful negotiation with the various parties and races, and steadily supported by the emperor who, on one occasion, summoned the recalcitrant party leaders to the Hofburg _ad audiendum verb.u.m_ and told them the reform "must be accomplished," Baron Beck succeeded, in October 1906, in attaining a final agreement, and on the 1st of December in securing the adoption of the reform. During the negotiations the number of const.i.tuencies was raised to 516, divided, according to provinces, as follows:--

Bohemia . . . . . . . . 130 previously 110 Galicia . . . . . . . . 106 " 78 Lower Austria . . . . . . . 64 " 46 Moravia . . . . . . . . 49 " 43 Styria. . . . . . . . . 30 " 27 Tirol . . . . . . . . . 25 " 21 Upper Austria . . . . . . . 22 " 20 Austrian Silesia . . . . . . 15 " 12 Bukovina . . . . . . . . 14 " 11 Carniola . . . . . . . . 12 " 11 Dalmatia . . . . . . . . 11 " 11 Carinthia . . . . . . . . 10 " 10 Salzburg . . . . . . . . 7 " 7 Istria. . . . . . . . . 6 " 5 Gorz and Gradisca . . . . . . 6 " 5 Trieste and territory . . . . . 5 " 5 Vorarlberg. . . . . . . . 4 " 4

In the allotment of the const.i.tuencies to the various races their tax-paying capacity was taken into consideration. In mixed districts separate const.i.tuencies and registers were established for the electors of each race, who could only vote on their own register for a candidate of their own race. Thus Germans were obliged to vote for Germans and Czechs for Czechs; and, though there might be victories of Clerical over Liberal Germans or of Czech Radicals over Young Czechs, there could be no victories of Czechs over Germans, Poles over Ruthenes, or Slovenes over Italians. The const.i.tuencies were divided according to race as follows:--

Germans of all parties. . . . . 233 previously 205 Czechs of all parties . . . . . 108 " 81 Poles . . . . . . . . . 80 " 71 Southern Slavs (Slovenes, Croats, Serbs) . . . . . . . . 37 " 27 Ruthenes . . . . . . . . 34 " 11 Italians . . . . . . . . 19 " 18 Rumanians . . . . . . . . 5 " 5

These allotments were slightly modified at the polls by the victory of some Social Democratic candidates not susceptible of strict racial cla.s.sification. The chief feature of the allotment was, however, the formal overthrow of the fiction that Austria is preponderatingly a German country and not a country preponderatingly Slav with a German dynasty and a German facade. The German const.i.tuencies, though allotted in a proportion unduly favourable, left the Germans, with 233 seats, in a permanent minority as compared with the 259 Slav seats. Even with the addition of the "Latin"

(Rumanian and Italian) seats the "German-Latin block" amounted only to 257.

This "block" no longer exists in practice, as the Italians now tend to co-operate rather with the Slavs than with the Germans. The greatest gainers by the redistribution were the Ruthenes, whose representation was trebled, though it is still far from being proportioned to their numbers.

This and other anomalies will doubtless be corrected in future revisions of the allotment, although the German parties, foreseeing that any revision must work out to their disadvantage, stipulated that a two-thirds majority should be necessary for any alteration of the law.

[Sidenote: General election 1907.]

After unsuccessful attempts by the Upper House to introduce plural voting, the bill became law in January 1907, the peers insisting only upon the establishment of a fixed _maximum_ number or _numerus clausus_, of non-hereditary peers, so as to prevent the resistance of the Upper Chamber from being overwhelmed at any critical moment by an influx of crown nominees appointed _ad hoc_. The general election which took place amid considerable enthusiasm on the 14th of May resulted in a sweeping victory for the Social Democrats whose number rose from 11 to 87; in a less complete triumph for the Christian Socialists who increased from 27 to 67; and in the success of the extremer over the conservative elements in all races. A cla.s.sification of the groups in the new Chamber presents many difficulties, but the following statement is approximately accurate. It must be premised that, in order to render the Christian Socialist or Lueger party the strongest group in parliament, an amalgamation was effected between them and the conservative Catholic party:--

_German Conservatives_-- Total.

Christian Socialists. . . . . . . . 96 German Agrarians. . . . . . . . . 19 _German Liberals_-- Progressives. . . . . . . . . . 15 Populists . . . . . . . . . . 29 Pan-German radicals (Wolf group). . . . . 13 Unattached Pan-Germans . . . . . . . 3 " Progressives . . . . . . . 2 _Czechs_-- -- 177 Czech Agrarians . . . . . . . . . 28 Young Czechs. . . . . . . . . . 18 Czech Clericals . . . . . . . . . 17 Old Czechs . . . . . . . . . . 7 Czech National Socialists . . . . . . 9 Realists. . . . . . . . . . . 2 Unattached Czech. . . . . . . . . 1 _Social Democrats_-- -- 82 Of all races. . . . . . . . . . 87 87 _Poles_-- Democrats . . . . . . . . . . 26 Conservatives . . . . . . . . . 15 Populists . . . . . . . . . . 18 Centre . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Independent Socialist . . . . . . . 1 _Ruthenes_-- -- 72 National Democrats . . . . . . . . 25 Old or Russophil Ruthenes . . . . . . 5 _Slovenes_-- -- 30 Clericals . . . . . . . . . . 17 _Southern Slav Club_-- Croats . . } Serbs . . .} . . . . . . . . 20 37 Slovene Liberals } _Italians_-- Clerical Populists . . . . . . . . 11 Liberals. . . . . . . . . . . 4 -- 15 _Rumanians_-- Rumanian Club . . . . . . . . . 5 5 _Jews_-- Zionists. . . . . . . . . . . 4 Democrats . . . . . . . . . . 1 5 -- Uncla.s.sified, vacancies, &c. . . . . . 6 6 --- 516

[v.03 p.0039] The legislature elected by universal suffrage worked fairly smoothly during the first year of its existence. The estimates were voted with regularity, racial animosity was somewhat less prominent, and some large issues were debated. The desire not to disturb the emperor's Diamond Jubilee year by untoward scenes doubtless contributed to calm political pa.s.sion, and it was celebrated in 1908 with complete success. But it was no sooner over than the crisis over the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is dealt with above, eclipsed all purely domestic affairs in the larger European question.

(H. W. S.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--1. _Sources_. A collection of early authorities on Austrian history was published in 3 vols. folio by Hieronymus Pez (Leipzig, 1721-1725) under the t.i.tle _Scriptores rerum Austriacarum veteres et genuini_, of which a new edition was printed at Regensburg in 1745, and again, under the t.i.tle of _Rerum Austriacarum scriptores_, by A. Rauch at Vienna in 1793-1794. It was not, however, till the latter half of the 19th century that the vast store of public and private archives began to be systematically exploited. Apart from the material published in the _Monumenta Germ. Hist_. of Pertz and his collaborators, there are several collections devoted specially to the sources of Austrian history. Of these the most notable is the _Fontes rerum Austriacarum_, published under the auspices of the Historical Commission of the Imperial Academy of Sciences at Vienna; the series, of which the first volume was published in 1855, is divided into two parts: (i.) _Scriptores_, of which the 9th vol. appeared in 1904; (ii.) _Diplomataria et Acta_, of which the 58th vol. appeared in 1906. It covers the whole range of Austrian history, medieval and modern.

Another collection is the _Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte, Literatur und Sprache osterreichs und seiner Kronlander_, edited by J. Hirn and J. E. Wackernagel (Graz, 1895, &c.), of which vol. x. appeared in 1906.

Besides these there are numerous accounts and inventories of public and private archives, for which see Dahlmann-Waitz, _Quellenkunde_ (ed. 1906), pp. 14-15, 43, and suppl. vol. (1907), pp. 4-5. Of collections of treaties the most notable is that of L. Neumann, _Recueil des traites conclus par l'Autriche avec les puissances etrangeres depuis 1763_ (6 vols., Leipzig, 1855: c.), continued by A. de Plason (18 vols., Vienna, 1877-1905). In 1907, however, the Imperial Commission for the Modern History of Austria issued the first volume of a new series, _osterreichische Staatsvertrage_, which promises to be of the utmost value. Like the _Recueil des traites conclus par la Russie_ of T. T. de Martens, it is compiled on the principle of devoting separate volumes to the treaties entered into with the several states; this is obviously convenient as enabling the student to obtain a clear review of the relations of Austria to any particular state throughout the whole period covered. For treaties see also J. Freiherr von Vasque von Puttlingen, _ubersicht der osterreichischen Staatsvertrage seit Maria Theresa bis auf die neueste Zeit_ (Vienna, 1868); and L. Bittner, _Chronologisches Verzeichnis der osterreichischen Staatsvertrage_ (Band G, 1526-1723, Vienna, 1903).

2. _Works_.--(a) _General._ Archdeacon William c.o.xe's _History of the House of Austria, 1218-1792_ (3 vols., London, 1817), with its continuation by W.

Kelly (London, 1853; new edition, 1873), remains the only general history of Austria in the English language. It has, of course, long been superseded as a result of the research indicated above. The amount of work that has been devoted to this subject since c.o.xe's time will be seen from the following list of books, which are given in the chronological order of their publication:--J. Majlath, _Geschichte des osterreichischen Kaiserstaates_ (5 vols., Hamburg, 1834-1850); Count F. von Hartig, _Genesis der Revolution in osterreich im Jahre 1848_ (Leipzig, 1851; 3rd edition, enlarged, _ib._, 1851; translated as appendix to c.o.xe's _House of Austria_, ed. 1853), a work which created a great sensation at the time and remains of much value; W. H. Stiles, _Austria in 1848-1849_ (2 vols., New York, 1852), by an eye-witness of events; M. Budinger, _osterreichische Gesch.

bis zum Ausgange des dreizehnten Jahrhunderts_, vol. i. to A.D. 1055 (Leipzig, 1858); A. Springer, _Geschichte osterreichs seit dem Wiener Frieden_, 1809 (2 vols. to 1849; Leipzig, 1863-1865); A. von Arneth, _Geschichte Maria Theresias_ (10 vols., Vienna, 1863-1879); the series _osterreichische Gesch. fur das Volk_, 17 vols., by various authors (Vienna, 1864, &c.), for which see Dahlmann-Waitz, p. 86; H. Bidermann, _Gesch. der osterreichischen Gesamtstaatsidee_, 1526-1804, parts 1 and 2 to 1740 (Innsbruck, 1867, 1887); J. A. Freiherr von Helfert, _Gesch.

osterreichs vom Ausgange des Oktoberaufstandes_, 1848, vols. i.-iv.

(Leipzig and Prague, 1869-1889); W. Rogge, _osterreich von Vilagos bis zur Gegenwart_ (3 vols., Leipzig and Vienna, 1872, 1873), and _osterreich seit der Katastrophe Hohenwart-Beust_ (Leipzig, 1879), written from a somewhat violent German standpoint; Franz X. Krones (Ritter von Marchland), _Handbuch der Gesch. osterreichs_ (5 vols., Berlin, 1876-1879), with copious references, _Gesch. der Neuzeit osterreichs vom 18ten Jahrhundert bis auf die Gegenwart_ (Berlin, 1879), from the German-liberal point of view, and _Grundriss der osterreichischen Gesch_. (Vienna, 1882); Baron Henry de Worms, _The Austro-Hungarian Empire_ (London, 2nd ed., 1876); Louis a.s.seline, _Histoire de l'Autriche depuis la mort de Marie Therese_ (Paris, 1877), sides with the Slavs against Germans and Magyars; Louis Leger, _Hist. de l'Autriche-Hongrie_ (Paris, 1879), also strongly Slavophil; A. Wolf, _Geschichtliche Bilder aus osterreich_ (2 vols., Vienna, 1878-1880), and _osterreich unter Maria Theresia, Joseph II. und Leopold I._ (Berlin, 1882); E. Wertheimer, _Gesch. osterreichs und Ungarns im ersten Jahrzehnt des 19ten Jahrhunderts_ (2 vols., Leipzig, 1884-1890); A. Huber, _Gesch. osterreichs_, vols. i. to v. up to 1648 (in Heeren's _Gesch. der europ. Staaten_, Gotha, 1885-1895); J. Emmer, _Kaiser Franz Joseph I., funfzig Jahre osterreichischer Gesch_. (2 vols., Vienna, 1898); F. M. Mayer, _Gesch. osterreichs mit besonderer Rucksicht auf das Kulturleben_ (2 vols. 2nd ed., Vienna, 1900-1901); A. Dopsch, _Forschungen zur inneren Gesch. osterreichs_, vol. i. 1 (Innsbruck, 1903); Louis Eisenmann, _Le Compromis austro-hongrois de 1867_ (Paris, 1904); H.

Friedjung, _osterreich von 1848 bis 1860_ (Stuttgart, 1908 seq.); Geoffrey Drage, _Austria-Hungary_ (London, 1909).

(b) _Const.i.tutional._--E. Werunsky, _osterreichische Reichs- und Rechtsgeschichte_ (Vienna, 1894, &c.); A. Bechmann, _Lehrbuch der osterreichischen Reichsgesch_. (Prague, 1895-1896); A. Huber, _osterreichische Reichsgesch_. (Leipzig and Vienna, 1895, 2nd ed. by A.

Dopsch, _ib._, 1901); A. Luschin von Ebengreuth, _osterreichische Reichsgesch_. (2 vols., Bamberg, 1895, 1896), a work of first-cla.s.s importance; and _Grundriss der osterreichischen Reichsgesch_. (Bamberg, 1899); G. Kolmer, _Parlament und Verfa.s.sung in osterreich_, vols. i. to iii. from 1848 to 1885 (Vienna, 1902-1905). For relations with Hungary see J. Andra.s.sy, _Ungarns Ausgleich mit osterreich, 1867_ (Leipzig, 1897); L.

Eisenmann, _Le Compromis austro-hongrois de 1867_ (Paris, 1904).

(c) _Diplomatic._--A. Beer, _Zehn Jahre osterreichischer Politik, 1801-1810_ (Leipzig, 1877), and _Die orientalische Politik osterreichs seit 1774_ (Prague and Leipzig, 1883); A. Fournier, _Gentz und Cobenzl: Gesch.

der ost. Politik in den Jahren 1801-1805_ (Vienna, 1880); F. von Demelitsch, _Metternich und seine auswartige Politik_, vol. i. (1809-1812, Stuttgart, 1898); H. ubersberger, _osterreich und Russland seit dem Ende des 15ten Jahrhunderts_, vol. i. 1488 to 1605 (Kommission fur die neuere Gesch. osterreichs, Vienna, 1905). See further the bibliographies to the articles on METTERNICH, GENTZ, &c. For the latest developments of the "Austrian question" see Andre Cheradame, _L'Europe et la question d'Autriche au seuil du XX^e siecle_ (Paris, 1901), and _L'Allemagne, la France et la question d'Autriche_ (76, 1902); Rene Henry, _Questions d'Autriche-Hongrie et question d'orient_ (Paris, 1903), with preface by Anatole Leroy-Beaulieu; "Scotus Viator," _The Future of Austria-Hungary_ (London, 1907).

(d) _Racial Question._--There is a very extensive literature on the question of languages and race in Austria. The best statement of the legal questions involved is in Josef Ulbrith and Ernst Mischler's _osterr.

Staatsworterbuch_ (3 vols., Vienna, 1894-1897; 2nd ed. 1904, &c.). See also Dummreicher, _Sudostdeutsche Betrachtungen_ (Leipzig, 1893); Hainisch, _Die Zukunft der Deutsch-osterreicher_ (Vienna, 1892); Herkner, _Die Zukunft der Deutsch-osterreicher_ (_ib._ 1893); L. Leger, _La Save, le Danube et le Balkan_ (Paris, 1884); Bressnitz von Sydacoff, _Die panslavistische Agitation_ (Berlin, 1899); Bertrand Auerbach, _Les Races et les nationalites en Autriche-Hongrie_ (Paris, 1898).

(e) _Biographical._--C. von Wurzbach, _Biographisches Lexikon des Kaisertums osterreich_ (60 vols., Vienna, 1856-1891); also the _Allgemeine deutsche Biographie_.

Many further authorities, whether works, memoirs or collections of doc.u.ments, are referred to in the lists appended to the articles in this book on the various Austrian sovereigns and statesmen. For full bibliography see Dahlmann-Waitz, _Quellenkunde_ (ed. 1906, and subsequent supplements); many works, covering particular periods, are also enumerated in the bibliographies in the several volumes of the _Cambridge Modern History_.

(W. A. P.)

[1] Rudolph V. as archduke of Austria, II. as emperor.

[2] Thus, while the number of recruits, though varying from year to year, could be settled by the war department, the question of the claim of a single conscript for exemption, on grounds not recognized by precedent, could only be settled by imperial decree.

[3] Forbidden books were the only ones read, and forbidden newspapers the only ones believed.

[4] In Hungary the diet was not summoned at all between 1811 and 1825, nor in Transylvania between 1811 and 1834.

[5] For the separate political histories of Austria and Hungary see the section on II. _Austria Proper_, below, and HUNGARY; the present section deals with the history of the whole monarchy as such.