Autriche-Hongrie
L'Autriche-Hongrie , souvent appelée l' Empire austro-hongrois ou la double monarchie , était une monarchie constitutionnelle et une grande puissance en Europe centrale [a] entre 1867 et 1918. [6] [7] Elle a été formée avec l' Autriche-Hongrie Compromis de 1867 et dissous à la suite de sa défaite lors de la Première Guerre mondiale .
En son cœur se trouvait la double monarchie qui était une véritable union entre l' Empire autrichien et le Royaume de Hongrie . Une troisième composante de l'union était le Royaume de Croatie-Slavonie , une région autonome sous la couronne hongroise, qui a négocié le règlement croate-hongrois en 1868. À partir de 1878, l'Autriche-Hongrie a gouverné conjointement la Bosnie-Herzégovine , qu'elle a annexée en 1908. Autriche -La Hongrie était dirigée par la maison de Habsbourg et constituait la dernière phase de l'évolution constitutionnelle de la monarchie des Habsbourg. L'union a été créée par le compromis austro-hongrois le 30 mars 1867 au lendemain de la guerre austro-prussienne . À la suite des réformes de 1867, les États autrichien et hongrois étaient à égalité de pouvoir. Les deux États menaient des politiques étrangères, de défense et financières communes, mais toutes les autres facultés gouvernementales étaient réparties entre les États respectifs.
L'Autriche-Hongrie était un État multinational et l'une des grandes puissances européennes à l'époque. L'Autriche-Hongrie était géographiquement le deuxième plus grand pays d'Europe après l' Empire russe , avec 621 538 km 2 (239 977 milles carrés) [5] et le troisième plus peuplé (après la Russie et l' Empire allemand ). L'Empire a construit la quatrième plus grande industrie de construction de machines au monde, après les États-Unis, l' Allemagne et le Royaume-Uni . [8]L'Autriche-Hongrie est également devenue le troisième fabricant et exportateur mondial d'appareils électroménagers, d'appareils électriques industriels et d'appareils de production d'électricité pour les centrales électriques, après les États-Unis et l'Empire allemand. [9] [10]
Le compromis austro-hongrois est resté amèrement impopulaire parmi les électeurs hongrois ethniques [11] parce que les Hongrois ethniques n'ont pas voté pour les partis pro-compromis au pouvoir aux élections parlementaires hongroises. Par conséquent, le maintien politique du compromis austro-hongrois (donc l'Autriche-Hongrie elle-même) était principalement le résultat de la popularité du Parti libéral au pouvoir favorable au compromis parmi les électeurs des minorités ethniques du Royaume de Hongrie .
Après 1878, la Bosnie-Herzégovine passa sous la domination militaire et civile austro-hongroise [12] jusqu'à son annexion totale en 1908, provoquant la crise bosniaque parmi les autres puissances. [13] La partie nord du Sandjak ottoman de Novi Pazar était également sous occupation conjointe de facto pendant cette période, mais l'armée austro-hongroise s'est retirée dans le cadre de son annexion de la Bosnie. [14] L'annexion de la Bosnie a également conduit à la reconnaissance de l' islam comme religion d'État officielle en raison de la population musulmane de Bosnie . [15]
L'Autriche-Hongrie était l'une des puissances centrales de la Première Guerre mondiale , qui a commencé par une déclaration de guerre austro-hongroise contre le Royaume de Serbie le 28 juillet 1914. Elle était déjà effectivement dissoute au moment où les autorités militaires ont signé l' armistice de Villa Giusti le 3 novembre 1918. Le Royaume de Hongrie et la Première République autrichienne furent traités comme ses successeurs de jure , tandis que l'indépendance des Slaves occidentaux et des Slaves sud de l'Empire en tant que Première République tchécoslovaque , Seconde République polonaise, et le Royaume de Yougoslavie , respectivement, et la plupart des revendications territoriales du Royaume de Roumanie ont également été reconnues par les puissances victorieuses en 1920.
Création
| Histoire de l' Autriche |
|---|
 |
 Portail Autriche |
| Histoire de la Hongrie |
|---|
 |
 Portail de la Hongrie |
Le compromis austro-hongrois de 1867 (appelé Ausgleich en allemand et Kiegyezés en hongrois), qui a inauguré la double structure de l'empire à la place de l'ancien Empire autrichien (1804-1867), est né à une époque où l'Autriche avait décliné en force et au pouvoir, à la fois dans la péninsule italienne (à la suite de la deuxième guerre d'indépendance italienne de 1859) et parmi les États de la Confédération allemande (elle avait été dépassée par la Prusse en tant que puissance germanophone dominante après la guerre austro-prussienne de 1866). [16] Le compromis rétabli [17]la pleine souveraineté du Royaume de Hongrie, qui avait été perdue après la Révolution hongroise de 1848 .
D'autres facteurs dans les changements constitutionnels étaient l'insatisfaction hongroise continue envers la domination de Vienne et l'augmentation de la conscience nationale de la part d'autres nationalités (ou ethnies) de l'Empire autrichien. Le mécontentement hongrois est né en partie de la suppression par l'Autriche, avec le soutien de la Russie , de la révolution libérale hongroise de 1848-1849. Cependant, le mécontentement à l'égard de la domination autrichienne s'était accru pendant de nombreuses années en Hongrie et avait de nombreuses autres causes.
À la fin des années 1850, un grand nombre de Hongrois qui avaient soutenu la révolution de 1848-1849 étaient prêts à accepter la monarchie des Habsbourg. Ils ont fait valoir que, alors que la Hongrie avait le droit à une indépendance intérieure complète, en vertu de la sanction pragmatique de 1713 , les affaires étrangères et la défense étaient « communes » à la fois à l'Autriche et à la Hongrie. [18]
Après la défaite autrichienne à Königgrätz , le gouvernement se rend compte qu'il doit se réconcilier avec la Hongrie pour retrouver le statut de grande puissance. Le nouveau ministre des Affaires étrangères, le comte Friedrich Ferdinand von Beust , voulait conclure les négociations dans l'impasse avec les Hongrois. Pour sécuriser la monarchie, l'empereur François-Joseph a entamé des négociations pour un compromis avec la noblesse hongroise , dirigée par Ferenc Deák . Le 20 mars 1867, le parlement hongrois rétabli à Pestcommencé à négocier les nouvelles lois à accepter le 30 mars. Cependant, les dirigeants hongrois ont reçu le couronnement de l'empereur en tant que roi de Hongrie le 8 juin comme une nécessité pour que les lois soient promulguées sur les terres de la Sainte Couronne de Hongrie . [18] Le 28 juillet, François-Joseph, en sa nouvelle qualité de roi de Hongrie, approuva et promulgua les nouvelles lois, qui donnèrent officiellement naissance à la double monarchie.
Nom et terminologie
Le nom officiel du royaume était en allemand : Österreichisch-Ungarische Monarchie et en hongrois : Osztrák–Magyar Monarchia (anglais : monarchie austro-hongroise ), [19] bien que dans les relations internationales Autriche-Hongrie ait été utilisé ( allemand : Österreich-Ungarn ; hongrois : Autriche-Magyarország ). Les Autrichiens ont également utilisé les noms kuk Monarchie (anglais : kuk monarchy ) [20] (en détail allemand : Kaiserliche und königliche Monarchie Österreich-Ungarn; Hongrois : Császári és Királyi Osztrák–Magyar Monarchia ) [21] et Danubian Monarchy ( allemand : Donaumonarchie ; hongrois : Dunai Monarchia ) ou Dual Monarchy ( allemand : Doppel-Monarchie ; hongrois : Dual-Monarchia ) et The Double Eagle ( allemand : Der Doppel-Adler ; hongrois : Kétsas ), mais aucun de ceux-ci ne s'est répandu ni en Hongrie ni ailleurs.
Le nom complet du royaume utilisé dans l'administration interne était Les royaumes et terres représentés au Conseil impérial et les terres de la Sainte Couronne hongroise de Saint-Étienne .
- Allemand : Die im Reichsrat vertretenen Königreiche und Länder und die Länder der Heiligen Ungarischen Stephanskrone
- Hongrois : A Birodalmi Tanácsban képviselt királyságok és országok és a Magyar Szent Korona országai
A partir de 1867, les abréviations en tête des noms des institutions officielles en Autriche-Hongrie reflètent leur responsabilité :
- kuk ( kaiserlich und königlich ou impérial et royal ) était le nom d'institutions communes aux deux parties de la monarchie, par exemple la kuk Kriegsmarine (flotte de guerre) et, pendant la guerre, la kuk Armee (armée). L'armée commune n'a changé son étiquette de kk à kuk qu'en 1889 à la demande du gouvernement hongrois.
- K. k. ( kaiserlich-königlich ) ou impérial-royal était le terme désignant les institutions de Cisleithanie (Autriche); "royal" dans cette étiquette faisait référence à la couronne de Bohême .
- K. u. ( königlich-ungarisch ) ou M. k. ( Magyar királyi ) ("Royal hongrois") fait référence à la Transleithanie , les terres de la couronne hongroise. Dans le Royaume de Croatie et de Slavonie , ses institutions autonomes détiennent k. ( kraljevski ) (" Royal ") comme selon le règlement croate-hongrois , la seule langue officielle en Croatie et Slavonie était croate , et ces institutions étaient " seulement " croate.
À la suite d'une décision de Franz Joseph I en 1868, le royaume portait le nom officiel de monarchie/royaume austro-hongrois ( allemand : Österreichisch-Ungarische Monarchie/Reich ; hongrois : Osztrák–Magyar Monarchia/Birodalom ) dans ses relations internationales. Il a souvent été contracté à la double monarchie en anglais ou simplement appelé Autriche . [22]
Structure
Le Compromis a transformé les domaines des Habsbourg en une véritable union entre l' Empire autrichien ("Terres représentées au Conseil impérial", ou Cisleithanie ) [5] dans la moitié ouest et nord et le Royaume de Hongrie (" Terres de la couronne de Saint-Étienne ", ou Transleithanie ). [5] dans la moitié est. Les deux moitiés partageaient un monarque commun, qui régnait en tant qu'empereur d'Autriche [23] sur la moitié ouest et nord et en tant que roi de Hongrie [23] sur la partie orientale. [5] Relations extérieureset la défense étaient gérées conjointement, et les deux pays formaient également une union douanière . [24] Toutes les autres fonctions de l'État devaient être gérées séparément par chacun des deux États.
Certaines régions, comme la Galicie polonaise en Cisleithanie et la Croatie en Transleithanie, jouissaient d'un statut autonome, chacune avec ses propres structures gouvernementales uniques (voir : Autonomie polonaise en Galice et règlement croate-hongrois ).
La division entre l'Autriche et la Hongrie était si marquée qu'il n'y avait pas de citoyenneté commune : on était soit un citoyen autrichien, soit un citoyen hongrois, jamais les deux. [25] [26] Cela signifiait aussi qu'il y avait toujours des passeports autrichiens et hongrois séparés, jamais un commun. [27] [28] Cependant, ni les passeports autrichiens ni hongrois n'ont été utilisés dans le Royaume de Croatie-Slavonie . Au lieu de cela, le Royaume a délivré ses propres passeports, écrits en croate et en français, et arborait les armoiries du Royaume de Croatie-Slavonie-Dalmatie. [29] La Croatie-Slavonie disposait également d'une autonomie exécutive concernant la naturalisation et la citoyenneté, définie comme « citoyenneté hongroise-croate » pour les citoyens du royaume.[30] On ne sait pas quel type de passeports ont été utilisés en Bosnie-Herzégovine, qui était sous le contrôle de l'Autriche et de la Hongrie. [ citation nécessaire ]
Le Royaume de Hongrie a toujours maintenu un parlement séparé, la Diète de Hongrie , même après la création de l'Empire autrichien en 1804. [31] L'administration et le gouvernement du Royaume de Hongrie (jusqu'à la révolution hongroise de 1848-49) sont restés en grande partie la structure gouvernementale de l'empire autrichien global. Les structures du gouvernement central hongrois sont restées bien séparées du gouvernement impérial autrichien. Le pays était gouverné par le Conseil de Lieutenance de Hongrie (le Gubernium) – situé à Presbourg et plus tard à Pest – et par la Chancellerie royale hongroise à Vienne. [32]Le gouvernement hongrois et le parlement hongrois ont été suspendus après la révolution hongroise de 1848 et ont été rétablis après le compromis austro-hongrois en 1867.
Bien que l'Autriche et la Hongrie partagent une monnaie commune, elles étaient des entités fiscalement souveraines et indépendantes. [33] Depuis les débuts de l'union personnelle (à partir de 1527), le gouvernement du Royaume de Hongrie a pu conserver son budget séparé et indépendant. Après la révolution de 1848-1849, le budget hongrois a été fusionné avec l'Autrichien, et ce n'est qu'après le compromis de 1867 que la Hongrie a obtenu un budget séparé. [34] De 1527 (création de l' union personnelle monarchique ) à 1851, le royaume de Hongrie maintint ses propres contrôles douaniers, qui le séparaient des autres parties des territoires gouvernés par les Habsbourg. [35]Après 1867, l'accord d'union douanière autrichien et hongrois doit être renégocié et stipulé tous les dix ans. Les accords ont été renouvelés et signés par Vienne et Budapest à la fin de chaque décennie parce que les deux pays espéraient tirer des avantages économiques mutuels de l'union douanière. L'Empire d'Autriche et le Royaume de Hongrie ont contracté leurs traités commerciaux étrangers indépendamment l'un de l'autre. [5]
Vienne était la capitale principale de la monarchie. La partie cisleithanienne (autrichienne) contenait environ 57 pour cent de la population totale et la plus grande part de ses ressources économiques, par rapport à la partie hongroise.
Gouvernement
Il y avait trois parties à la règle de l'Empire austro-hongrois: [36]
- la politique étrangère, militaire et financière commune (uniquement pour les dépenses diplomatiques, militaires et navales) sous le monarque
- le gouvernement « autrichien » ou cisleithanien (Terres représentées au Conseil impérial)
- le gouvernement « hongrois » ou transleithanien (Terres de la Couronne de Saint-Étienne)
|
← empereur-roi commun, ministères communs ← entités ← États partenaires | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gouvernement conjoint
Le gouvernement commun était dirigé par un Conseil ministériel ( Ministerrat für Gemeinsame Angelegenheiten ), qui avait la responsabilité de l' armée commune , de la marine , de la politique étrangère et de l' union douanière . [18] Il se composait de trois ministères conjoints impériaux et royaux ( kuk gemeinsame Ministerien ) :
- Ministère de la Maison impériale et royale et des Affaires étrangères , connu sous le nom de Chancellerie impériale avant 1869 ;
- Ministère impérial et royal de la guerre , connu sous le nom de ministère impérial de la guerre avant 1911 ;
- Ministère impérial et royal des Finances, connu sous le nom de Ministère impérial des Finances avant 1908, responsable uniquement des finances des deux autres ministères conjoints. [37]
En plus des trois ministres, le Conseil ministériel comprenait également le premier ministre de Hongrie, le premier ministre de Cisleithanie, quelques archiducs et le monarque. [38] Le chef d'état-major général était également présent. Le conseil était généralement présidé par le ministre de la Maison et des Affaires étrangères, sauf lorsque le monarque était présent. En plus du conseil, les parlements autrichien et hongrois ont élu chacun une délégation de 60 membres, qui se sont réunis séparément et ont voté sur les dépenses du conseil ministériel, donnant aux deux gouvernements une influence dans l'administration commune. Cependant, les ministres ne répondaient finalement qu'au monarque, qui avait la décision finale sur les questions de politique étrangère et militaire. [37]
Le chevauchement des responsabilités entre les ministères conjoints et les ministères des deux moitiés a causé des frictions et des inefficacités. [37] Les forces armées ont particulièrement souffert du chevauchement. Bien que le gouvernement unifié déterminât l'orientation militaire globale, les gouvernements autrichien et hongrois restèrent chacun en charge du recrutement, de l'approvisionnement et de la formation. Chaque gouvernement pourrait avoir une forte influence sur les responsabilités gouvernementales communes. Chaque moitié de la double monarchie s'est avérée tout à fait prête à perturber les opérations communes pour faire avancer ses propres intérêts. [38]
Les relations au cours du demi-siècle après 1867 entre les deux parties de la double monarchie ont été marquées par des différends répétés sur les accords tarifaires extérieurs partagés et sur la contribution financière de chaque gouvernement au trésor commun. Ces questions ont été déterminées par le compromis austro-hongrois de 1867, dans lequel les dépenses communes ont été allouées à 70 % à l'Autriche et à 30 % à la Hongrie. Ce partage devait être renégocié tous les dix ans. Il y a eu des troubles politiques pendant la préparation de chaque renouvellement de l'accord. En 1907, la part hongroise était passée à 36,4 %. [39] Les différends ont culminé au début des années 1900 dans une crise constitutionnelle prolongée . Il a été déclenché par un désaccord sur la langue à utiliser pour le commandement dans l'armée hongroiseunités et approfondi par l'arrivée au pouvoir à Budapest en avril 1906 d'une coalition nationaliste hongroise. Des renouvellements provisoires des arrangements communs ont eu lieu en octobre 1907 et en novembre 1917 sur la base du statu quo . Les négociations de 1917 se terminèrent par la dissolution de la double monarchie. [37]
Parlements
La Hongrie et l'Autriche ont maintenu des parlements séparés , chacun avec son propre premier ministre : la Diète de Hongrie (communément appelée l'Assemblée nationale) et le Conseil impérial ( allemand : Reichsrat) en Cisleithanie. Chaque parlement avait son propre gouvernement exécutif, nommé par le monarque. En ce sens, l'Autriche-Hongrie est restée sous un gouvernement autocratique, car l'empereur-roi a nommé les premiers ministres autrichien et hongrois ainsi que leurs cabinets respectifs. Cela rendait les deux gouvernements responsables devant l'empereur-roi, car aucune des deux moitiés ne pouvait avoir un gouvernement avec un programme contraire aux vues du monarque. L'Empereur-Roi pouvait par exemple nommer des gouvernements non parlementaires, ou garder un gouvernement qui n'avait pas de majorité parlementaire au pouvoir afin de bloquer la formation d'un autre gouvernement qu'il n'approuvait pas.
Le Conseil impérial était un organe bicaméral : la chambre haute était la Chambre des Lords ( allemand : Herrenhaus ), et la chambre basse était la Chambre des députés ( allemand : Abgeordnetenhaus ). Les membres de la Chambre des députés étaient élus selon un système de « curiae » qui pesait la représentation en faveur des riches mais a été progressivement réformé jusqu'à l' introduction du suffrage universel masculin en 1906. [40] [41] Pour devenir loi, les projets de loi devaient être adopté par les deux chambres, signé par le ministre du gouvernement compétent et sanctionné ensuite par l'Empereur.
La Diète de Hongrie était également bicamérale : la chambre haute était la Chambre des magnats ( hongrois : Főrendiház ), et la chambre basse était la Chambre des représentants ( hongrois : Képviselőház ). Le système de la « curie » était également utilisé pour élire les membres de la Chambre des représentants. La franchise était très limitée, avec environ 5 % d'hommes éligibles au vote en 1874, atteignant 8 % au début de la Première Guerre mondiale [42] Le parlement hongrois avait le pouvoir de légiférer sur toutes les questions concernant la Hongrie, mais pour la Croatie- la Slavonie que sur les affaires qu'elle partageait avec la Hongrie. Seules les questions concernant la Croatie-Slavonie relevaient de la Diète croato-slave(communément appelé Parlement croate). Le monarque avait le droit d'opposer son veto à tout type de projet de loi avant qu'il ne soit présenté à l'Assemblée nationale, le droit d'opposer son veto à toute législation adoptée par l'Assemblée nationale et le pouvoir de proroger ou de dissoudre l'Assemblée et de convoquer de nouvelles élections. Dans la pratique, ces pouvoirs étaient rarement utilisés.
Administration publique et collectivités locales
Empire d'Autriche (Cisleithanie)
Le système administratif de l'Empire autrichien se composait de trois niveaux : l'administration centrale de l'État, les territoires ( Länder ) et l'administration communale locale. L'administration de l'État comprenait toutes les affaires relatives aux droits, devoirs et intérêts « qui sont communs à tous les territoires » ; toutes les autres tâches administratives étaient laissées aux territoires. Enfin, les communes disposaient d'une autonomie dans leur propre sphère.
Les autorités centrales étaient connues sous le nom de « Ministère » ( Ministerium ). En 1867, le Ministerium se composait de sept ministères ( Agriculture , Religion et Éducation , Finances , Intérieur , Justice , Commerce et Travaux publics , Défense ). Un ministère des Chemins de fer a été créé en 1896, et le ministère des Travaux publics a été séparé du Commerce en 1908. Les ministères de la Santé publique et de la Protection sociale ont été créés en 1917 pour traiter des questions découlant de la Première Guerre mondiale. Les ministères avaient tous le titre kk("Impérial-Royal"), faisant référence à la couronne impériale d'Autriche et à la couronne royale de Bohême.
Chacun des dix-sept territoires avait son propre gouvernement, dirigé par un gouverneur (officiellement Landeschef , mais communément appelé Statthalter ou Landespräsident ), nommé par l'empereur, pour servir de son représentant. Habituellement, un territoire équivalait à un territoire de la Couronne ( Kronland ), mais les immenses variations de superficie des territoires de la Couronne signifiaient qu'il y avait quelques exceptions. [43] Chaque territoire avait sa propre assemblée territoriale ( Landtag ) et son exécutif ( Landesausschuss ). L'assemblée territoriale et l'exécutif étaient dirigés par leLandeshauptmann (c'est-à-dire premier ministre territorial), nommé par l'empereur parmi les membres de l'assemblée territoriale. De nombreuses branches des administrations territoriales présentent de grandes similitudes avec celles de l'État, de sorte que leurs domaines d'activité se chevauchent fréquemment et s'entrechoquent. Cette « double voie » administrative, comme on l'appelait, résultait en grande partie de l'origine de l'État – pour la plupart par une union volontaire de pays qui avaient un sens fort de leur propre individualité.
Au-dessous du territoire se trouvait le district ( Bezirk ) sous la direction d'un chef de district ( Bezirkshauptmann ), nommé par le gouvernement de l'État. Ces chefs de district réunissaient presque toutes les fonctions administratives qui étaient réparties entre les divers ministères. Chaque district était divisé en un certain nombre de municipalités ( Ortsgemeinden ), chacune avec son propre maire élu ( Bürgermeister ). Les neuf villes statutaires étaient des unités autonomes au niveau du district.
La complexité de ce système, en particulier le chevauchement entre l'État et l'administration territoriale, a conduit à des démarches de réforme administrative. Dès 1904, le premier ministre Ernest von Koerber avait déclaré qu'un changement complet des principes de l'administration serait indispensable si l'appareil d'État devait continuer à fonctionner. Richard von BienerthLe dernier acte de Premier ministre autrichien en mai 1911 fut la nomination d'une commission nommée par l'Empereur pour élaborer un projet de réforme administrative. Le rescrit impérial ne présentait pas les réformes comme une question d'urgence ni ne leur exposait une philosophie d'ensemble. Le progrès continu de la société, a-t-il déclaré, avait imposé des exigences accrues à l'administration, c'est-à-dire qu'il était supposé que la réforme était nécessaire en raison de l'évolution des temps, et non des problèmes sous-jacents de la structure administrative. La commission de réforme s'est d'abord occupée de réformes sur lesquelles il n'y avait pas de controverse. En 1912, il publie des "Propositions pour la formation des fonctionnaires de l'Etat". La commission a produit plusieurs autres rapports avant que ses travaux ne soient interrompus par le déclenchement de la Première Guerre mondiale en 1914.Ce n'est qu'en mars 1918 que le SeidlerLe gouvernement a décidé d'un programme d'autonomie nationale comme base de la réforme administrative, qui n'a cependant jamais été mis en œuvre. [44]
Royaume de Hongrie (Transleithanie)
Le pouvoir exécutif en Transleithanie était confié à un cabinet responsable devant l'Assemblée nationale, composé de dix ministres, dont : le Premier ministre , le ministre de Croatie-Slavonie , un ministre outre le roi , et les ministres de l'Intérieur , de la Défense nationale , de la Religion. et Éducation publique , Finances , Agriculture, industrie et commerce , Travaux publics et transports , et Justice. Le ministre outre le roi était responsable de la coordination avec l'Autriche et la cour impériale et royale de Vienne. En 1889, le ministère de l'Agriculture, de l'Industrie et du Commerce a été divisé en ministères distincts de l' Agriculture et du Commerce. Le ministère des Travaux publics et des Transports a été intégré au nouveau ministère du Commerce.
A partir de 1867, les divisions administratives et politiques des terres appartenant à la couronne hongroise ont été remodelées en raison de quelques restaurations et d'autres changements. En 1868, la Transylvanie fut définitivement réunifiée à la Hongrie proprement dite, et la ville et le district de Fiume conservèrent leur statut de Corpus separatum ("corps séparé"). La « frontière militaire » a été abolie par étapes entre 1871 et 1881, le Banat et Šajkaška étant incorporés à la Hongrie proprement dite et les frontières militaires croates et slaves rejoignant la Croatie-Slavonie.
En ce qui concerne le gouvernement local, la Hongrie était traditionnellement divisée en environ soixante-dix comtés ( hongrois : megyék , singulier megye ; croate : croate : županija) et une panoplie de quartiers et de villes à statut particulier. Ce système a été réformé en deux étapes. En 1870, la plupart des privilèges historiques des subdivisions territoriales ont été abolis, mais les noms et territoires existants ont été conservés. À ce stade, il y avait un total de 175 subdivisions territoriales : 65 comtés (49 en Hongrie proprement dite, 8 en Transylvanie et 8 en Croatie), 89 villes avec droits municipaux et 21 autres types de municipalités (3 en Hongrie proprement dite et 18 en Transylvanie). Dans une nouvelle réforme en 1876, la plupart des villes et autres types de municipalités ont été incorporés dans les comtés. Les comtés de Hongrie étaient regroupés en sept circuits [34] qui n'avaient aucune fonction administrative. La subdivision de niveau le plus bas était le district ou processus ( hongrois: szolgabírói járás ).
Après 1876, certaines municipalités urbaines sont restées indépendantes des comtés dans lesquels elles étaient situées. Il y avait 26 de ces municipalités urbaines en Hongrie : Arad, Baja, Debreczen, Győr, Hódmezővásárhely, Kassa, Kecskemét, Kolozsvár, Komárom, Marosvásárhely, Nagyvárad, Pancsova, Pécs, Pozsony, Selmeczárnébad, Bélabatzárbadanya, , Székesfehervár, Temesvár, Újvidék, Versecz, Zombor et Budapest, la capitale du pays. [34] En Croatie-Slavonie, il y en avait quatre : Osijek, Varaždin et Zagreb et Zemun. [34] Fiume a continué à former une division distincte.
L'administration des municipalités était assurée par un fonctionnaire nommé par le roi. Ces municipalités avaient chacune un conseil de vingt membres. Les comtés étaient dirigés par un chef de comté ( hongrois : Ispán ou croate : župan ) nommé par le roi et sous le contrôle du ministère de l'Intérieur. Chaque comté avait un comité municipal de 20 membres, [34] comprenant 50 % de virilistes (personnes payant les impôts directs les plus élevés) et 50 % d'élus remplissant le recensement prescrit et ex officiomembres (chef de comté adjoint, notaire principal et autres). Les pouvoirs et les responsabilités des comtés ont été constamment diminués et ont été transférés aux agences régionales des ministères du royaume.
Bosnie Herzégovine
En 1878, le Congrès de Berlin place le Vilayet de Bosnie de l' Empire ottoman sous occupation austro-hongroise. La région a été officiellement annexée en 1908 et était gouvernée par l'Autriche et la Hongrie conjointement par le biais du bureau bosniaque du ministère impérial et royal des Finances ( allemand : Bosnische Amt ). Le gouvernement de Bosnie-Herzégovine était dirigé par un gouverneur ( allemand : Landsschef), qui était également le commandant des forces militaires basées en Bosnie-Herzégovine. Le pouvoir exécutif était dirigé par un Conseil national, qui était présidé par le gouverneur et comprenait l'adjoint du gouverneur et les chefs de département. Au début, le gouvernement n'avait que trois départements, administratif, financier et législatif. Plus tard, d'autres départements, y compris la construction, l'économie, l'éducation, la religion et la technique, ont également été fondés. [45]
La Diète de Bosnie , créée en 1910, avait des pouvoirs législatifs très limités. Le principal pouvoir législatif était entre les mains de l'empereur, des parlements de Vienne et de Budapest et du co-ministre des finances. La Diète de Bosnie pouvait faire des propositions, mais elles devaient être approuvées par les deux parlements à Vienne et à Budapest. La Diète ne pouvait délibérer que sur des questions qui concernaient exclusivement la Bosnie-Herzégovine ; les décisions concernant les forces armées, les liaisons commerciales et routières, les douanes et autres questions similaires étaient prises par les parlements de Vienne et de Budapest. La Diète n'avait pas non plus de contrôle sur le Conseil national ou les conseils municipaux. [46]
Les autorités austro-hongroises ont laissé intacte la division ottomane de Bosnie-Herzégovine et n'ont changé que les noms des unités divisionnaires. Ainsi, le Vilayet de Bosnie a été renommé Reichsland , les sanjaks ont été renommés Kreise (Circuits), les kazas ont été renommés Bezirke (Districts) et les nahiyahs sont devenus Exposituren . [45] Il y avait six Kreise et 54 Bezirke . [47] Les chefs des Kreises étaient des Kreiseleiters, et les chefs des Bezirkeétaient des Bezirkesleiters . [45]
Système judiciaire
Empire d'Autriche
La Constitution de décembre 1867 a rétabli l' état de droit , l' indépendance du pouvoir judiciaire et les procès publics devant jury en Autriche. Le système des tribunaux généraux avait les mêmes quatre échelons qu'il a encore aujourd'hui :
- Tribunaux de district ( Bezirksgerichte );
- Tribunaux régionaux ( Kreisgerichte );
- Tribunaux régionaux supérieurs ( Oberlandesgerichte );
- Cour suprême ( Oberster Gerichts- und Kassationshof ).
Les sujets des Habsbourg pourront désormais poursuivre l'Etat en justice en cas de violation de leurs droits fondamentaux. [48] Étant donné que les tribunaux ordinaires ne pouvaient toujours pas passer outre la bureaucratie, et encore moins le législateur, ces garanties ont nécessité la création de tribunaux spécialisés qui pourraient : [49]
- Le tribunal administratif ( Verwaltungsgerichtshof ), prévu par la loi fondamentale de 1867 sur le pouvoir judiciaire ( Staatsgrundgesetz über die richterliche Gewalt ) et mis en œuvre en 1876, avait le pouvoir de contrôler la légalité des actes administratifs, en veillant à ce que le pouvoir exécutif reste fidèle au principe de la règle de droit.
- La Cour impériale ( Reichsgericht ), prévue par la Loi fondamentale sur la création d'une Cour impériale ( Staatsgrundgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Reichsgerichtes ) en 1867 et mise en œuvre en 1869, a décidé des conflits de démarcation entre les tribunaux et la bureaucratie, entre ses territoires constitutifs, et entre territoires individuels et l'Empire. [50] [51] La Cour impériale a également entendu les plaintes de citoyens qui prétendaient avoir été violés dans leurs droits constitutionnels, bien que ses pouvoirs ne soient pas cassatoires : elle ne pouvait justifier le plaignant qu'en déclarant que le gouvernement avait tort, et non en annulant en fait ses décisions erronées. [50] [52]
- La Cour d'État ( Staatsgerichtshof ) a tenu les ministres de l'Empereur responsables des fautes politiques commises dans l'exercice de leurs fonctions. [53] [54] Bien que l'Empereur ne puisse pas être traduit en justice, plusieurs de ses décrets dépendaient maintenant du ministre compétent pour les contresigner. L'approche à deux volets consistant à rendre l'empereur dépendant de ses ministres et également à rendre les ministres pénalement responsables des mauvais résultats permettrait d'une part, d'autre part, de motiver les ministres à faire pression sur le monarque. [55]
Royaume de Hongrie
Le pouvoir judiciaire était également indépendant de l'exécutif en Hongrie. Après le règlement croate-hongrois de 1868, la Croatie-Slavonie avait son propre système judiciaire indépendant (la Table des Sept était le tribunal de dernière instance pour la Croatie-Slavonie avec une juridiction civile et pénale finale). Les autorités judiciaires en Hongrie étaient :
- les tribunaux de district à juges uniques (458 en 1905) ;
- les tribunaux départementaux à magistrature collégiale (au nombre de 76) ; à ceux-ci étaient rattachés 15 tribunaux judiciaires pour délits de presse. Il s'agissait de tribunaux de première instance. En Croatie-Slavonie, elles étaient connues sous le nom de tables de cour après 1874 ;
- Tables royales (12 au nombre), qui étaient des tribunaux de deuxième instance, établies à Budapest, Debrecen, Győr, Kassa, Kolozsvár, Marosvásárhely, Nagyvárad, Pécs, Presbourg, Szeged, Temesvár et Ban's Table à Zagreb.
- La Cour suprême royale à Budapest et la Cour suprême de justice, ou Table des Sept, à Zagreb, qui étaient les plus hautes autorités judiciaires. Il y avait aussi un tribunal de commerce spécial à Budapest, un tribunal naval à Fiume et des tribunaux militaires spéciaux. [34]
Politique
Le premier Premier ministre de Hongrie après le compromis était le comte Gyula Andrássy (1867-1871). L'ancienne Constitution hongroise a été restaurée et François-Joseph a été couronné roi de Hongrie. Andrássy a ensuite été ministre des Affaires étrangères d'Autriche-Hongrie (1871-1879).
L'Empire s'appuyait de plus en plus sur une bureaucratie cosmopolite - dans laquelle les Tchèques jouaient un rôle important - soutenue par des éléments fidèles, dont une grande partie de l'aristocratie allemande, hongroise, polonaise et croate. [56]
Luttes politiques dans l'Empire
L'aristocratie traditionnelle et la classe aristocratique de la terre ont progressivement fait face à des hommes de plus en plus riches des villes, qui ont atteint la richesse grâce au commerce et à l'industrialisation. Les classes moyennes et supérieures urbaines avaient tendance à rechercher leur propre pouvoir et à soutenir les mouvements progressistes à la suite des révolutions en Europe.
Comme dans l'Empire allemand, l'Empire austro-hongrois a fréquemment utilisé des politiques et des pratiques économiques libérales. A partir des années 1860, des hommes d'affaires réussissent à industrialiser certaines parties de l'Empire. Les membres nouvellement prospères de la bourgeoisie ont érigé de grandes maisons et ont commencé à jouer un rôle de premier plan dans la vie urbaine qui rivalisait avec celui de l'aristocratie. Au début, ils ont encouragé le gouvernement à rechercher des investissements étrangers pour construire des infrastructures, telles que des chemins de fer, au profit de l'industrialisation, des transports et des communications, et du développement.
L'influence des libéraux en Autriche, pour la plupart d'origine allemande, s'affaiblit sous la direction du comte Eduard von Taaffe , premier ministre autrichien de 1879 à 1893. Taaffe utilisa une coalition de clergé, de conservateurs et de partis slaves pour affaiblir les libéraux. En Bohême , par exemple, il autorisa le tchèque comme langue officielle de la bureaucratie et du système scolaire, brisant ainsi le monopole des germanophones sur l'exercice des fonctions. De telles réformes ont encouragé d'autres groupes ethniques à réclamer également une plus grande autonomie. En jouant les nationalités les unes contre les autres, le gouvernement a assuré le rôle central de la monarchie dans la cohésion des groupes d'intérêts concurrents à une époque de changement rapide.
Pendant la Première Guerre mondiale, la montée des sentiments nationaux et des mouvements ouvriers ont contribué aux grèves, aux protestations et aux troubles civils dans l'Empire. Après la guerre, les partis républicains et nationaux ont contribué à la désintégration et à l'effondrement de la monarchie en Autriche et en Hongrie. Des républiques ont été établies à Vienne et à Budapest. [57]
La législation pour aider la classe ouvrière a émergé des conservateurs catholiques. Ils se sont tournés vers la réforme sociale en utilisant les modèles suisses et allemands et en intervenant dans l'industrie privée. En Allemagne, le chancelier Otto von Bismarck avait utilisé de telles politiques pour neutraliser les promesses socialistes. Les catholiques étudièrent la loi suisse sur les usines de 1877, qui limitait les heures de travail pour tous et accordait des prestations de maternité, et les lois allemandes qui assuraient les travailleurs contre les risques industriels inhérents au lieu de travail. Celles-ci ont servi de base à l'amendement autrichien au code du commerce de 1885. [58]
Le compromis austro-hongrois et ses partisans sont restés amèrement impopulaires parmi les électeurs hongrois de souche, et le succès électoral continu du Parti libéral favorable au compromis a frustré de nombreux électeurs hongrois. Alors que les partis libéraux favorables au compromis étaient les plus populaires parmi les électeurs des minorités ethniques, les partis des minorités slovaque, serbe et roumain sont restés impopulaires parmi les minorités ethniques. Les partis nationalistes hongrois, soutenus par l'écrasante majorité des électeurs de souche hongroise, sont restés dans l'opposition, sauf de 1906 à 1910 où les partis nationalistes hongrois ont pu former le gouvernement. [59]
Relations ethniques
En juillet 1849, le Parlement révolutionnaire hongrois a proclamé et adopté les droits des ethnies et des minorités (les prochaines lois de ce type étaient en Suisse), mais celles-ci ont été annulées après que les armées russe et autrichienne eurent écrasé la révolution hongroise. Après que le royaume de Hongrie eut atteint le compromis avec la dynastie des Habsbourg en 1867, l'un des premiers actes de son Parlement restauré fut d'adopter une loi sur les nationalités (loi numéro XLIV de 1868). C'était une loi libérale et offrait des droits linguistiques et culturels étendus. Il ne reconnaissait pas aux non-hongrois le droit de former des États dotés d'une quelconque autonomie territoriale. [60]
Le « Compromis austro-hongrois de 1867 » a créé l'union personnelle des États indépendants de Hongrie et d'Autriche, liés sous un monarque commun ayant également des institutions communes. La majorité hongroise a affirmé davantage son identité au sein du Royaume de Hongrie, et elle est entrée en conflit avec certaines de ses propres minorités. La puissance impériale des germanophones qui contrôlaient la moitié autrichienne était ressentie par d'autres. En outre, l'émergence du nationalisme dans la Roumanie et la Serbie nouvellement indépendantes ont également contribué aux problèmes ethniques dans l'empire.
L'article 19 de la « Loi fondamentale de l'État » de 1867 ( Staatsgrundgesetz ), valable uniquement pour la partie cisleithanienne (autrichienne) de l'Autriche-Hongrie, [61] disait :
Toutes les races de l'empire ont des droits égaux, et chaque race a un droit inviolable à la conservation et à l'usage de sa nationalité et de sa langue. L'égalité de toutes les langues coutumières (« landesübliche Sprachen ») à l'école, au bureau et dans la vie publique, est reconnue par l'État. Dans les territoires où vivent plusieurs races, les institutions publiques et éducatives doivent être aménagées de telle sorte que, sans appliquer la contrainte d'apprendre une seconde langue nationale (" Landessprache "), chacune des races reçoive les moyens nécessaires d'enseignement dans sa propre langue. . [62]
La mise en œuvre de ce principe a donné lieu à plusieurs litiges, car il n'était pas clair quelles langues pouvaient être considérées comme « coutumières ». Les Allemands, l'élite bureaucratique, capitaliste et culturelle traditionnelle, exigeaient la reconnaissance de leur langue comme langue coutumière dans toutes les parties de l'empire. Les nationalistes allemands, en particulier dans les Sudètes (partie de la Bohême), se tournaient vers Berlin dans le nouvel empire allemand. [63] Il y avait un élément de langue allemande en Autriche proprement dite (à l'ouest de Vienne), mais il n'a pas montré beaucoup de sens du nationalisme allemand. C'est-à-dire qu'il n'exigeait pas un État indépendant ; il a plutôt prospéré en occupant la plupart des hautes fonctions militaires et diplomatiques de l'Empire.
L'italien était considéré comme une ancienne « langue de culture » ( Kultursprache ) par les intellectuels allemands et avait toujours eu des droits égaux en tant que langue officielle de l'Empire, mais les Allemands avaient du mal à accepter les langues slaves comme égales à la leur. À une occasion , le comte A. Auersperg (Anastase Grün) entré dans le régime de Carniola portant ce qu'il a prétendu être l'ensemble corpus de la littérature slovène sous le bras; il s'agissait de démontrer que la langue slovène ne pouvait se substituer à l'allemand comme langue de l'enseignement supérieur.
Les années suivantes ont vu la reconnaissance officielle de plusieurs langues, au moins en Autriche. À partir de 1867, les lois accordent au croate un statut égal à celui de l'italien en Dalmatie . A partir de 1882, il y avait une majorité slovène à la Diète de Carniole et dans la capitale Laibach (Ljubljana) ; ils ont remplacé l'allemand par le slovène comme langue officielle principale. La Galice a désigné le polonais au lieu de l'allemand en 1869 comme langue coutumière du gouvernement.
En Istrie , les Istro-roumains , un petit groupe ethnique composé d'environ 2 600 personnes dans les années 1880, [64] ont subi de graves discriminations. Les Croates de la région, majoritaires, tentent de les assimiler, tandis que la minorité italienne les soutient dans leurs demandes d'autodétermination. [65] [66] En 1888, la possibilité d'ouvrir la première école pour les Istro-roumains enseignant dans la langue roumaine a été discutée à la Diète d'Istrie . La proposition était très populaire parmi eux. Les députés italiens montrèrent leur soutien, mais les croates s'y opposèrent et tentèrent de montrer que les Istro-roumains étaient en fait des Slaves. [67]Pendant la domination austro-hongroise, les Istro-roumains vivaient dans des conditions de pauvreté [68] et ceux qui vivaient sur l'île de Krk étaient pleinement assimilés en 1875. [69]
Les conflits linguistiques ont été le plus férocement combattus en Bohême , où les locuteurs tchèques formaient une majorité et recherchaient un statut égal pour leur langue à l'allemand. Les Tchèques vivaient principalement en Bohême depuis le 6ème siècle et les immigrants allemands avaient commencé à s'installer dans la périphérie de Bohême au 13ème siècle. La constitution de 1627 a fait de la langue allemande une deuxième langue officielle et égale au tchèque. Les germanophones perdent leur majorité à la Diète de Bohême en 1880 et deviennent minoritaires face aux locuteurs tchèques dans les villes de Prague et de Pilsen (tout en conservant une légère majorité numérique dans la ville de Brno (Brünn) ). L'ancienne université Charles de Prague, jusqu'alors dominé par les germanophones, a été divisé en facultés germanophones et tchèques en 1882.
Dans le même temps, la domination hongroise était confrontée à des défis de la part des majorités locales de Roumains en Transylvanie et dans le Banat oriental , de Slovaques dans la Slovaquie d'aujourd'hui , et de Croates et de Serbes dans les terres de la couronne de Croatie et de Dalmatie (la Croatie actuelle), en Bosnie-Herzégovine. , et dans les provinces connues sous le nom de Voïvodine (aujourd'hui le nord de la Serbie ). Les Roumains et les Serbes ont commencé à militer pour l'union avec leurs compatriotes nationalistes et locuteurs de langues dans les nouveaux États de Roumanie. (1859-1878) et la Serbie.
Les dirigeants hongrois étaient généralement moins disposés que leurs homologues autrichiens à partager le pouvoir avec leurs minorités soumises, mais ils ont accordé une large mesure d'autonomie à la Croatie en 1868. Dans une certaine mesure, ils ont modelé leur relation avec ce royaume sur leur propre compromis avec l'Autriche du année précédente. Malgré l'autonomie nominale, le gouvernement croate était une partie économique et administrative de la Hongrie, ce que les Croates en voulaient. Dans le Royaume de Croatie-Slavonie et de Bosnie-Herzégovine, beaucoup ont défendu l'idée d'une monarchie austro-hongroise-croate trialiste ; parmi les partisans de l'idée se trouvaient l' archiduc Léopold Salvator , l' archiduc François-Ferdinand et l'empereur et roi Charles Ierqui pendant son court règne a soutenu l'idée trialiste seulement pour se voir opposer le veto du gouvernement hongrois et du comte Istvan Tisza . Le comte a finalement signé la proclamation trialiste après de fortes pressions du roi le 23 octobre 1918. [70]
La langue était l'une des questions les plus controversées de la politique austro-hongroise. Tous les gouvernements ont été confrontés à des obstacles difficiles et conflictuels pour décider des langues de gouvernement et d'enseignement. Les minorités recherchaient les possibilités les plus larges d'éducation dans leur propre langue, ainsi que dans les langues « dominantes » : le hongrois et l'allemand. Par « l'ordonnance du 5 avril 1897 », le premier ministre autrichien, le comte Kasimir Felix Badeni, accorda au tchèque un statut égal à celui de l'allemand dans le gouvernement interne de la Bohême ; cela a conduit à une crise en raison de l'agitation nationaliste allemande dans tout l'empire. La Couronne a rejeté Badeni.
La loi sur les minorités hongroises de 1868 a donné aux minorités (Slovaques, Roumains, Serbes, etc.) des droits individuels (mais pas aussi communaux) d'utiliser leur langue dans les bureaux, les écoles (bien qu'en pratique souvent seulement dans celles fondées par elles et non par l'État), les tribunaux et les municipalités (si 20% des députés l'ont demandé). À partir de la loi sur l'enseignement primaire de 1879 et de la loi sur l'enseignement secondaire de 1883, l'État hongrois a fait davantage d'efforts pour réduire l'utilisation des langues non magyares, en violation flagrante de la loi sur les nationalités de 1868. [71] Après 1875, toutes les écoles de langue slovaque supérieures à l'élémentaire ont été fermées, y compris les trois seuls lycées (gymnases) à Revúca (Nagyrőce), Turčiansky Svätý Martin (Turócszentmárton) etKláštor pod Znievom (Znióváralja). À partir de juin 1907, toutes les écoles publiques et privées de Hongrie ont été obligées de veiller à ce qu'après la quatrième année, les élèves puissent s'exprimer couramment en hongrois . Cela a conduit à une nouvelle fermeture des écoles des minorités, consacrées principalement aux langues slovaque et rusyne.
Les deux royaumes se divisaient parfois leurs sphères d'influence . Selon Misha Glenny dans son livre, Les Balkans, 1804-1999 , les Autrichiens ont répondu au soutien hongrois des Tchèques en soutenant le mouvement national croate à Zagreb .
Reconnaissant qu'il régnait dans un pays multiethnique, l'empereur François-Joseph parlait (et utilisait) couramment l'allemand, le hongrois et le tchèque, et dans une certaine mesure le croate, le serbe, le polonais et l'italien.
les Juifs
Vers 1900, les Juifs étaient au nombre d'environ deux millions sur l'ensemble du territoire de l'Empire austro-hongrois ; [72] leur position était ambiguë. La politique populiste et antisémite du Parti chrétien-social est parfois considérée comme un modèle pour le nazisme d' Adolf Hitler . [73] Les partis et mouvements antisémites existaient, mais les gouvernements de Vienne et de Budapest n'ont pas lancé de pogroms ni mis en œuvre des politiques antisémites officielles. [ citation nécessaire ] Ils craignaient qu'une telle violence ethnique n'enflamme d'autres minorités ethniqueset escalade hors de contrôle. Les partis antisémites sont restés à la périphérie de la sphère politique en raison de leur faible popularité auprès des électeurs lors des élections législatives. [ citation nécessaire ]
À cette époque, la majorité des Juifs d'Autriche-Hongrie vivaient dans de petites villes ( shtetls ) en Galicie et dans des zones rurales de Hongrie et de Bohême ; cependant, ils avaient de grandes communautés et même des majorités locales dans les quartiers du centre-ville de Vienne, Budapest et Prague. Des forces militaires d'avant la Première Guerre mondiale des principales puissances européennes, l'armée austro-hongroise était presque la seule à promouvoir régulièrement des Juifs à des postes de commandement. [74] Alors que la population juive des terres de la double monarchie était d'environ cinq pour cent, les Juifs représentaient près de dix-huit pour cent du corps des officiers de réserve. [75]Grâce à la modernité de la constitution et à la bienveillance de l'empereur François-Joseph, les Juifs autrichiens en vinrent à considérer l'ère austro-hongroise comme un âge d'or de leur histoire. [76] En 1910, environ 900 000 Juifs religieux représentaient environ 5 % de la population de la Hongrie et environ 23 % de la population de Budapest. Les Juifs représentaient 54 % des propriétaires d'entreprises commerciales, 85 % des directeurs et propriétaires d'institutions financières dans le secteur bancaire et 62 % de tous les employés du commerce, [77] 20 % de tous les élèves des écoles de grammaire générale et 37 % de toutes les grammaires scientifiques commerciales. étudiants des écoles, 31,9% de tous les étudiants en génie et 34,1% de tous les étudiants des facultés humaines des universités. Les Juifs représentaient 48,5 % de tous les médecins, [78]et 49,4 % de tous les avocats/juristes en Hongrie. [79] Note : Les nombres de Juifs ont été reconstitués à partir de recensements religieux. Ils n'incluaient pas les personnes d'origine juive converties au christianisme, ni le nombre d'athées. [ citation nécessaire ] Parmi de nombreux parlementaires hongrois d'origine juive, les membres juifs les plus célèbres de la vie politique hongroise étaient Vilmos Vázsonyi en tant que ministre de la Justice, Samu Hazai en tant que ministre de la Guerre, János Teleszky en tant que ministre des Finances et János Harkányi en tant que ministre du Commerce. , et József Szterényi comme ministre du Commerce.
Affaires étrangères
L'empereur était officiellement chargé des affaires étrangères. Son ministre des Affaires étrangères dirigeait la diplomatie. Voir Ministres de la Maison impériale et royale et des Affaires étrangères d'Autriche-Hongrie (1867-1918) . [80]
La double monarchie a été créée à la suite de la guerre perdue en 1866 avec la Prusse et l'Italie. La guerre a pris fin par la paix de Prague (1866) . [81] Pour rebâtir le prestige des Habsbourg et se venger de la Prusse, le comte Friedrich Ferdinand von Beust devient ministre des Affaires étrangères (1866–1871). Il détestait le chef de la Prusse, Otto von Bismarck , qui l'avait déjoué à plusieurs reprises. Beust s'est tourné vers la France et a négocié avec l'empereur Napoléon III et l'Italie une alliance anti-prussienne. Aucun terme n'a pu être atteint. La victoire décisive des armées prusso-allemandes dans la guerre de 1870 avec la France et la fondation de l'Empire allemand mettent fin à tout espoir de vengeance et Beust se retire. [82]
Après avoir été chassée d'Allemagne et d'Italie, la double monarchie s'est tournée vers les Balkans, qui étaient en tumulte alors que les mouvements nationalistes se renforçaient et réclamaient l'indépendance. La Russie et l'Autriche-Hongrie ont vu une opportunité de se développer dans cette région. La Russie a assumé le rôle de protecteur des Slaves et des chrétiens orthodoxes. L'Autriche envisageait un empire multiethnique et religieusement diversifié sous le contrôle de Vienne. Le comte Gyula Andrássy , un Hongrois qui fut ministre des Affaires étrangères (1871 à 1879), fit de sa politique l'élément central de sa politique d'opposition à l'expansion russe dans les Balkans et de blocage des ambitions serbes de dominer une nouvelle fédération sud-slave. Il voulait que l'Allemagne s'allie avec l'Autriche, pas avec la Russie. [83]
Lorsque la Russie a vaincu la Turquie dans une guerre, le traité de San Stefano qui en a résulté a été considéré en Autriche comme beaucoup trop favorable à la Russie et à ses objectifs orthodoxes-slaves. Le Congrès de Berlin en 1878 laissa l'Autriche occuper (mais pas annexer) la province de Bosnie-Herzégovine , une région à prédominance slave. En 1914, les militants slaves en Bosnie ont rejeté le plan de l'Autriche d'absorber complètement la région ; ils assassinèrent l'héritier autrichien et précipitèrent la Première Guerre mondiale. [84]
Droit de vote
Vers la fin du XIXe siècle, la moitié autrichienne de la double monarchie s'oriente vers le constitutionnalisme . Un système constitutionnel avec un parlement, le Reichsrat a été créé, et une déclaration des droits a également été promulguée en 1867. Le suffrage à la chambre basse du Reichstag a été progressivement étendu jusqu'en 1907, lorsque le suffrage égal pour tous les citoyens de sexe masculin a été introduit.
Les élections législatives cisleithaniennes de 1907 ont été les premières élections tenues au suffrage universel masculin , après qu'une réforme électorale abolissant les exigences de paiement des impôts pour les électeurs ait été adoptée par le conseil et approuvée par l'empereur François-Joseph plus tôt dans l'année. [85] Cependant, les attributions de sièges étaient basées sur les recettes fiscales des États. [85]
Démographie
Les données suivantes sont basées sur le recensement officiel austro-hongrois effectué en 1910.
Population et superficie
| Zone | Territoire (km 2 ) | Population |
|---|---|---|
| Empire d'Autriche | 300 005 (≈48% de l'Autriche-Hongrie) | 28 571 934 (≈57,8% de l'Autriche-Hongrie) |
| Royaume de Hongrie | 325 411 (≈52 % de l'Autriche-Hongrie) | 20 886 487 (≈ 42,2 % de l'Autriche-Hongrie) |
| Bosnie-Herzégovine | 51 027 | 1 931 802 |
| Sandžak (occupé jusqu'en 1909) | 8 403 | 135 000 |
Langues
En Autriche (Cisleithania), le recensement de 1910 a enregistré Umgangssprache , langue courante. Les Juifs et ceux qui utilisent l'allemand dans les bureaux ont souvent déclaré l'allemand comme leur Umgangssprache , même lorsqu'ils ont un Muttersprache différent . 36,8% de la population totale parlaient l'allemand comme langue maternelle et plus de 71% des habitants parlaient un peu allemand.
En Hongrie (Transleithania), où le recensement était basé principalement sur la langue maternelle, [86] [87] 48,1% de la population totale parlaient le hongrois comme langue maternelle. Sans compter la Croatie-Slavonie autonome, plus de 54,4% des habitants du Royaume de Hongrie étaient des locuteurs natifs du hongrois (cela comprenait également les Juifs – environ 5% de la population – car ils étaient pour la plupart de langue hongroise). [88] [89]
Notez que certaines langues étaient considérées comme des dialectes de langues plus largement parlées. Par exemple : dans le recensement, les langues rhéto-romaines étaient comptées comme « italienne », tandis que l' istro-roumain était compté comme « roumain ». Le yiddish était considéré comme « allemand » en Autriche et en Hongrie.
| Linguistic distribution of Austria–Hungary as a whole | |
|---|---|
| German | 23% |
| Hungarian | 20% |
| Czech | 13% |
| Polish | 10% |
| Ruthenian | 8% |
| Romanian | 6% |
| Croat | 6% |
| Slovak | 4% |
| Serbian | 4% |
| Slovene | 3% |
| Italian | 3% |
| Language | Number | % |
|---|---|---|
| German | 12,006,521 | 23.36 |
| Hungarian | 10,056,315 | 19.57 |
| Czech | 6,442,133 | 12.54 |
| Serbo-Croatian | 5,621,797 | 10.94 |
| Polish | 4,976,804 | 9.68 |
| Ruthenian | 3,997,831 | 7.78 |
| Romanian | 3,224,147 | 6.27 |
| Slovak | 1,967,970 | 3.83 |
| Slovene | 1,255,620 | 2.44 |
| Italian | 768,422 | 1.50 |
| Other | 1,072,663 | 2.09 |
| Total | 51,390,223 | 100.00 |
| Land | Most common language | Other languages (more than 2%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bohemia | 63.2% | Czech | 36.45% (2,467,724) | German | ||||
| Dalmatia | 96.2% | Serbo-Croatian | 2.8% | Italian | ||||
| Galicia | 58.6% | Polish | 40.2% | Ruthenian | 1.1% | German | ||
| Lower Austria | 95.9% | German | 3.8% | Czech | ||||
| Upper Austria | 99.7% | German | 0.2% | Czech | ||||
| Bukovina | 38.4% | Ruthenian | 34.4% | Romanian | 21.2% | German | 4.6% | Polish |
| Carinthia | 78.6% | German | 21.2% | Slovene | ||||
| Carniola | 94.4% | Slovene | 5.4% | German | ||||
| Salzburg | 99.7% | German | 0.1% | Czech | ||||
| Silesia | 43.9% | German | 31.7% | Polish | 24.3% | Czech | ||
| Styria | 70.5% | German | 29.4% | Slovene | ||||
| Moravia | 71.8% | Czech | 27.6% | German | 0.6% | Polish | ||
| Gorizia and Gradisca | 59.3% | Slovene | 34.5% | Italian | 1.7% | German | ||
| Trieste | 51.9% | Italian | 24.8% | Slovene | 5.2% | German | 1.0% | Serbo-Croatian |
| Istria | 41.6% | Serbo-Croatian | 36.5% | Italian | 13.7% | Slovene | 3.3% | German |
| Tyrol | 57.3% | German | 38.9% | Italian | ||||
| Vorarlberg | 95.4% | German | 4.4% | Italian | ||||
| Language | Hungary proper | Croatia-Slavonia | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| speakers | % of population | speakers | % of population | |
| Hungarian | 9,944,627 | 54.5% | 105,948 | 4.1% |
| Romanian | 2,948,186 | 16.0% | 846 | <0.1% |
| Slovak | 1,946,357 | 10.7% | 21,613 | 0.8% |
| German | 1,903,657 | 10.4% | 134, 078 | 5.1% |
| Serbian | 461,516 | 2.5% | 644,955 | 24.6% |
| Ruthenian | 464,270 | 2.3% | 8,317 | 0.3% |
| Croatian | 194,808 | 1.1% | 1,638,354 | 62.5% |
| Others and unspecified | 401,412 | 2.2% | 65,843 | 2.6% |
| Total | 18,264,533 | 100% | 2,621,954 | 100% |
Historical regions:
| Region | Mother tongues | Hungarian language | Other languages |
|---|---|---|---|
| Transylvania | Romanian – 2,819,467 (54%) | 1,658,045 (31.7%) | German – 550,964 (10.5%) |
| Upper Hungary | Slovak – 1,688,413 (55.6%) | 881,320 (32.3%) | German – 198,405 (6.8%) |
| Délvidék | Serbo-Croatian – 601,770 (39.8%) | 425,672 (28.1%) | German – 324,017 (21.4%) Romanian – 75,318 (5.0%) Slovak – 56,690 (3.7%) |
| Transcarpathia | Ruthenian – 330,010 (54.5%) | 185,433 (30.6%) | German – 64,257 (10.6%) |
| Fiume | Italian – 24,212 (48.6%) | 6,493 (13%) |
|
| Őrvidék | German – 217,072 (74.4%) | 26,225 (9%) | Croatian – 43,633 (15%) |
| Prekmurje | Slovene – 74,199 (80.4%) – in 1921 | 14,065 (15.2%) – in 1921 | German – 2,540 (2.8%) – in 1921 |
Religion
| Religion | Austria–Hungary | Austria/Cisleithania |
Hungary/Transleithania |
Bosnia and Herzegovina |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Catholics (both Roman and Eastern) | 76.6% | 90.9% | 61.8% | 22.9% |
| Protestants | 8.9% | 2.1% | 19.0% | 0% |
| Eastern Orthodox | 8.7% | 2.3% | 14.3% | 43.5% |
| Jews | 4.4% | 4.7% | 4.9% | 0.6% |
| Muslims | 1.3% | 0% | 0% | 32.7% |
Solely in the Empire of Austria:[90]
| Religion | Austria |
|---|---|
| Latin Catholic | 79.1% (20,661,000) |
| Eastern Catholic | 12% (3,134,000) |
| Jewish | 4.7% (1,225,000) |
| Eastern Orthodox | 2.3% (607,000) |
| Lutheran | 1.9% (491,000) |
| Other or no religion | 14,000 |
Solely in the Kingdom of Hungary:[91]
| Religion | Hungary proper & Fiume | Croatia & Slavonia |
|---|---|---|
| Latin Catholic | 49.3% (9,010,305) | 71.6% (1,877,833) |
| Calvinist | 14.3% (2,603,381) | 0.7% (17,948) |
| Eastern Orthodox | 12.8% (2,333,979) | 24.9% (653,184) |
| Eastern Catholic | 11.0% (2,007,916) | 0.7% (17,592) |
| Lutheran | 7.1% (1,306,384) | 1.3% (33,759) |
| Jewish | 5.0% (911,227) | 0.8% (21,231) |
| Unitarian | 0.4% (74,275) | 0.0% (21) |
| Other or no religion | 0.1% (17,066) | 0.0 (386) |
Largest cities
| Rank | Current English name | Contemporary official name[93] | Other | Present-day country | Population in 1910 | Present-day population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Vienna | Wien | Bécs, Beč, Dunaj | Austria | 2,031,498 (city without the suburb 1,481,970) | 1,840,573 (Metro: 2,600,000) |
| 2. | Prague | Prag, Praha | Prága | Czech Republic | 668,000 (city without the suburb 223,741) | 1,301,132 (Metro: 2,620,000) |
| 3. | Trieste | Triest | Trieszt, Trst | Italy | 229,510 | 204,420 |
| 4. | Lviv | Lemberg, Lwów | Ilyvó, Львів, Lvov, Львов | Ukraine | 206,113 | 728,545 |
| 5. | Kraków | Krakau, Kraków | Krakkó, Krakov | Poland | 151,886 | 762,508 |
| 6. | Graz | Grác, Gradec | Austria | 151,781 | 328,276 | |
| 7. | Brno | Brünn, Brno | Berén, Börön, Börénvásár | Czech Republic | 125,737 | 377,028 |
| 8. | Chernivtsi | Czernowitz | Csernyivci, Cernăuți, Чернівці | Ukraine | 87,128 | 242,300 |
| 9. | Plzeň | Pilsen, Plzeň | Pilzen | Czech Republic | 80,343 | 169,858 |
| 10. | Linz | Linec | Austria | 67,817 | 200,841 |
| Rank | Current English name | Contemporary official name[93] | Other | Present-day country | Population in 1910 | Present-day population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Budapest | Budimpešta | Hungary | 1,232,026 (city without the suburb 880,371) | 1,735,711 (Metro: 3,303,786) | |
| 2. | Szeged | Szegedin, Segedin | Hungary | 118,328 | 170,285 | |
| 3. | Subotica | Szabadka | Суботица | Serbia | 94,610 | 105,681 |
| 4. | Debrecen | Hungary | 92,729 | 208,016 | ||
| 5. | Zagreb | Zágráb, Agram | Croatia | 79,038 | 803,000 (Metro: 1,228,941) | |
| 6. | Bratislava | Pozsony | Pressburg, Prešporok | Slovakia | 78,223 | 425,167 |
| 7. | Timișoara | Temesvár | Temeswar | Romania | 72,555 | 319,279 |
| 8. | Kecskemét | Hungary | 66,834 | 111,411 | ||
| 9. | Oradea | Nagyvárad | Großwardein | Romania | 64,169 | 196,367 |
| 10. | Arad | Arad | Romania | 63,166 | 159,074 | |
| 11. | Hódmezővásárhely | Hungary | 62,445 | 46,047 | ||
| 12. | Cluj-Napoca | Kolozsvár | Klausenburg | Romania | 60,808 | 324,576 |
| 13. | Újpest | Hungary | 55,197 | 100,694 | ||
| 14. | Miskolc | Hungary | 51,459 | 157,177 | ||
| 15. | Pécs | Hungary | 49,852 | 145,347 |
Education
Austrian Empire
Primary and secondary schools
The organization of the Austrian elementary schools was based on the principle of compulsory school attendance, free education, and the imparting of public instruction in the child's own language. Side by side with these existed private schools. The proportion of children attending private schools to those attending the public elementary schools in 1912 was 144,000 to 4.5 millions, i.e. a thirtieth part. Hence the accusation of denationalizing children through the Schulvereine must be accepted with caution. The expenses of education were distributed as follows: the communes built the schoolhouses, the political sub-districts (Bezirke) paid the teachers, the Crown territory gave a grant, and the State appointed the inspectors. Since the State supervised the schools without maintaining them, it was able to increase its demands without being hampered by financial considerations. It is remarkable that the difference between the State educational estimates in Austria and in Hungary was one of 9.3 millions in the former as opposed to 67.6 in the latter. Under Austria, since everywhere that 40 scholars of one nationality were to be found within a radius of 5 km. a school had to be set up in which their language was used, national schools were assured even to linguistic minorities. It is true that this mostly happened at the expense of the German industrial communities, since the Slav labourers as immigrants acquired schools in their own language. The number of elementary schools increased from 19,016 in 1900 to 24,713 in 1913; the number of scholars from 3,490,000 in 1900 to 4,630,000 in 1913.[citation needed]
Universities in Austrian Empire
The first University in the Austrian half of the Empire (Charles University) was founded by H.R. Emperor Charles IV in Prague in 1347. The second oldest university (University of Vienna) was founded by Duke Rudolph IV in 1365.[94]
The higher educational institutions were predominantly German, but beginning in the 1870s, language shifts began to occur.[95] These establishments, which in the middle of the 19th century had had a predominantly German character, underwent in Galicia a conversion into Polish national institutions, in Bohemia and Moravia a separation into German and Czech ones. Thus Germans, Czechs and Poles were provided for. But now the smaller nations also made their voices heard: the Ruthenians, Slovenes and Italians. The Ruthenians demanded at first, in view of the predominantly Ruthenian character of East Galicia, a national partition of the Polish university existing there. Since the Poles were at first unyielding, Ruthenian demonstrations and strikes of students arose, and the Ruthenians were no longer content with the reversion of a few separate professorial chairs, and with parallel courses of lectures. By a pact concluded on 28 January 1914 the Poles promised a Ruthenian university; but owing to the war the question lapsed. The Italians could hardly claim a university of their own on grounds of population (in 1910 they numbered 783,000), but they claimed it all the more on grounds of their ancient culture. All parties were agreed that an Italian faculty of laws should be created; the difficulty lay in the choice of the place. The Italians demanded Trieste; but the Government was afraid to let this Adriatic port become the centre of an irredenta; moreover the Southern Slavs of the city wished it kept free from an Italian educational establishment. Bienerth in 1910 brought about a compromise; namely, that it should be founded at once, the situation to be provisionally in Vienna, and to be transferred within four years to Italian national territory. The German National Union (Nationalverband) agreed to extend temporary hospitality to the Italian university in Vienna, but the Southern Slav Hochschule Club demanded a guarantee that a later transfer to the coast provinces should not be contemplated, together with the simultaneous foundation of Slovene professorial chairs in Prague and Cracow, and preliminary steps towards the foundation of a Southern Slav university in Laibach. But in spite of the constant renewal of negotiations for a compromise it was impossible to arrive at any agreement, until the outbreak of war left all the projects for a Ruthenian university at Lemberg, a Slovene one in Laibach, and a second Czech one in Moravia, unrealized.
Kingdom of Hungary
Primary and secondary schools
One of the first measures of newly established Hungarian government was to provide supplementary schools of a non-denominational character. By a law passed in 1868 attendance at school was obligatory for all children between the ages of 6 and 12 years. The communes or parishes were bound to maintain elementary schools, and they were entitled to levy an additional tax of 5% on the state taxes for their maintenance. But the number of state-aided elementary schools was continually increasing, as the spread of the Magyar language to the other races through the medium of the elementary schools was one of the principal concerns of the Hungarian government, and was vigorously pursued. In 1902 there were in Hungary 18,729 elementary schools with 32,020 teachers, attended by 2,573,377 pupils, figures which compare favourably with those of 1877, when there were 15,486 schools with 20,717 teachers, attended by 1,559,636 pupils. In about 61% of these schools the language used was exclusively Magyar, in about 6 20% it was mixed, and in the remainder some non-Magyar language was used. In 1902, 80.56% of the children of school age actually attended school. Since 1891 infant schools, for children between the ages of 3 and 6 years, were maintained either by the communes or by the state.
The public instruction of Hungary contained three other groups of educational institutions: middle or secondary schools, "high schools" and technical schools. The middle schools comprised classical schools (gymnasia) which were preparatory for the universities and other "high schools", and modern schools (Realschulen) preparatory for the technical schools. Their course of study was generally eight years, and they were maintained mostly by the state. The state-maintained gymnasia were mostly of recent foundation, but some schools maintained by the various churches had been in existence for three or sometimes four centuries. The number of middle schools in 1902 was 243 with 4705 teachers, attended by 71,788 pupils; in 1880 their number was 185, attended by 40,747 pupils.
Universities in Kingdom of Hungary
In the year 1276, the university of Veszprém was destroyed by the troops of Péter Csák and it was never rebuilt. A university was established by Louis I of Hungary in Pécs in 1367. Sigismund established a university at Óbuda in 1395. Another, Universitas Istropolitana, was established 1465 in Pozsony (now Bratislava in Slovakia) by Mattias Corvinus. None of these medieval universities survived the Ottoman wars. Nagyszombat University was founded in 1635 and moved to Buda in 1777 and it is called Eötvös Loránd University today. The world's first institute of technology was founded in Selmecbánya, Kingdom of Hungary (since 1920 Banská Štiavnica, now Slovakia) in 1735. Its legal successor is the University of Miskolc in Hungary. The Budapest University of Technology and Economics (BME) is considered the oldest institute of technology in the world with university rank and structure. Its legal predecessor the Institutum Geometrico-Hydrotechnicum was founded in 1782 by Emperor Joseph II.
The high schools included the universities, of which Hungary possessed five, all maintained by the state: at Budapest (founded in 1635), at Kolozsvár (founded in 1872), and at Zagreb (founded in 1874). Newer universities were established in Debrecen in 1912, and Pozsony university was reestablished after a half millennium in 1912. They had four faculties: theology, law, philosophy and medicine (the university at Zagreb was without a faculty of medicine). There were in addition ten high schools of law, called academies, which in 1900 were attended by 1569 pupils. The Polytechnicum in Budapest, founded in 1844, which contained four faculties and was attended in 1900 by 1772 pupils, was also considered a high school. There were in Hungary in 1900 forty-nine theological colleges, twenty-nine Catholic, five Greek Uniat, four Greek Orthodox, ten Protestant and one Jewish. Among special schools the principal mining schools were at Selmeczbánya, Nagyág and Felsőbánya; the principal agricultural colleges at Debreczen and Kolozsvár; and there was a school of forestry at Selmeczbánya, military colleges at Budapest, Kassa, Déva and Zagreb, and a naval school at Fiume. There were in addition a number of training institutes for teachers and a large number of schools of commerce, several art schools – for design, painting, sculpture, music.
| Major nationalities in Hungary | Rate of literacy in 1910 |
|---|---|
| German | 70.7% |
| Hungarian | 67.1% |
| Croatian | 62.5% |
| Slovak | 58.1% |
| Serbian | 51.3% |
| Romanian | 28.2% |
| Ruthenian | 22.2% |
Economy
The heavily rural Austro-Hungarian economy slowly modernised after 1867. Railroads opened up once-remote areas, and cities grew. Many small firms promoted capitalist way of production. Technological change accelerated industrialization and urbanization. The first Austrian stock exchange (the Wiener Börse) was opened in 1771 in Vienna, the first stock exchange of the Kingdom of Hungary (the Budapest Stock Exchange) was opened in Budapest in 1864. The central bank (Bank of issue) was founded as Austrian National Bank in 1816. In 1878, it transformed into Austro-Hungarian National Bank with principal offices in both Vienna and Budapest.[97] The central bank was governed by alternating Austrian or Hungarian governors and vice-governors.[98]
The gross national product per capita grew roughly 1.76% per year from 1870 to 1913. That level of growth compared very favorably to that of other European nations such as Britain (1%), France (1.06%), and Germany (1.51%).[99] However, in a comparison with Germany and Britain, the Austro-Hungarian economy as a whole still lagged considerably, as sustained modernization had begun much later. Like the German Empire, that of Austria–Hungary frequently employed liberal economic policies and practices. In 1873, the old Hungarian capital Buda and Óbuda (Ancient Buda) were officially merged with the third city, Pest, thus creating the new metropolis of Budapest. The dynamic Pest grew into Hungary's administrative, political, economic, trade and cultural hub. Many of the state institutions and the modern administrative system of Hungary were established during this period. Economic growth centered on Vienna and Budapest, the Austrian lands (areas of modern Austria), the Alpine region and the Bohemian lands. In the later years of the 19th century, rapid economic growth spread to the central Hungarian plain and to the Carpathian lands. As a result, wide disparities of development existed within the empire. In general, the western areas became more developed than the eastern ones. The Kingdom of Hungary became the world's second-largest flour exporter after the United States.[100] The large Hungarian food exports were not limited to neighbouring Germany and Italy: Hungary became the most important foreign food supplier of the large cities and industrial centres of the United Kingdom.[101] Galicia, which has been described as the poorest province of Austro-Hungary, experienced near-constant famines, resulting in 50,000 deaths a year.[102] The Istro-Romanians of Istria were also poor, as pastoralism lost strength and agriculture was not productive.[68]
However, by the end of the 19th century, economic differences gradually began to even out as economic growth in the eastern parts of the monarchy consistently surpassed that in the western. The strong agriculture and food industry of the Kingdom of Hungary with the centre of Budapest became predominant within the empire and made up a large proportion of the export to the rest of Europe. Meanwhile, western areas, concentrated mainly around Prague and Vienna, excelled in various manufacturing industries. This division of labour between the east and west, besides the existing economic and monetary union, led to an even more rapid economic growth throughout Austria–Hungary by the early 20th century. However, since the turn of the twentieth century, the Austrian half of the Monarchy could preserve its dominance within the empire in the sectors of the first industrial revolution, but Hungary had a better position in the industries of the second industrial revolution, in these modern sectors of the second industrial revolution the Austrian competition could not become dominant.[103]
The empire's heavy industry had mostly focused on machine building, especially for the electric power industry, locomotive industry and automotive industry, while in light industry the precision mechanics industry was the most dominant. Through the years leading up to World War I the country became the 4th biggest machine manufacturer in the world.[104]
The two most important trading partners were traditionally Germany (1910: 48% of all exports, 39% of all imports), and Great Britain (1910: almost 10% of all exports, 8% of all imports), the third most important partner was the United States, it followed by Russia, France, Switzerland, Romania, the Balkan states and South America.[5] Trade with the geographically neighbouring Russia, however, had a relatively low weight (1910: 3% of all exports /mainly machinery for Russia, 7% of all imports /mainly raw materials from Russia).
Automotive industry
Prior to World War I, the Austrian Empire had five car manufacturer companies. These were: Austro-Daimler in Wiener-Neustadt (cars trucks, buses),[105] Gräf & Stift in Vienna (cars),[106] Laurin & Klement in Mladá Boleslav (motorcycles, cars),[107] Nesselsdorfer in Nesselsdorf (Kopřivnice), Moravia (automobiles), and Lohner-Werke in Vienna (cars).[108] Austrian car production started in 1897.
Prior to World War I, the Kingdom of Hungary had four car manufacturer companies. These were: the Ganz company[109][110] in Budapest, RÁBA Automobile[111] in Győr, MÁG (later Magomobil)[112][113] in Budapest, and MARTA (Hungarian Automobile Joint-stock Company Arad)[114] in Arad. Hungarian car production started in 1900. Automotive factories in the Kingdom of Hungary manufactured motorcycles, cars, taxicabs, trucks and buses.[citation needed]
Electrical industry and electronics
In 1884, Károly Zipernowsky, Ottó Bláthy and Miksa Déri (ZBD), three engineers associated with the Ganz Works of Budapest, determined that open-core devices were impractical, as they were incapable of reliably regulating voltage.[115] When employed in parallel connected electric distribution systems, closed-core transformers finally made it technically and economically feasible to provide electric power for lighting in homes, businesses and public spaces.[116][117] The other essential milestone was the introduction of 'voltage source, voltage intensive' (VSVI) systems'[118] by the invention of constant voltage generators in 1885.[119] Bláthy had suggested the use of closed cores, Zipernowsky had suggested the use of parallel shunt connections, and Déri had performed the experiments;[120]
The first Hungarian water turbine was designed by the engineers of the Ganz Works in 1866, the mass production with dynamo generators started in 1883.[121] The manufacturing of steam turbo generators started in the Ganz Works in 1903.
In 1905, the Láng Machine Factory company also started the production of steam turbines for alternators.[122]
Tungsram is a Hungarian manufacturer of light bulbs and vacuum tubes since 1896. On 13 December 1904, Hungarian Sándor Just and Croatian Franjo Hanaman were granted a Hungarian patent (No. 34541) for the world's first tungsten filament lamp. The tungsten filament lasted longer and gave brighter light than the traditional carbon filament. Tungsten filament lamps were first marketed by the Hungarian company Tungsram in 1904. This type is often called Tungsram-bulbs in many European countries.[123]
Despite the long experimentation with vacuum tubes at Tungsram company, the mass production of radio tubes begun during WW1,[124] and the production of X-ray tubes started also during the WW1 in Tungsram Company.[125]
The Orion Electronics was founded in 1913. Its main profiles were the production of electrical switches, sockets, wires, incandescent lamps, electric fans, electric kettles, and various household electronics.
The telephone exchange was an idea of the Hungarian engineer Tivadar Puskás (1844–1893) in 1876, while he was working for Thomas Edison on a telegraph exchange.[126][127][128][129][130]
The first Hungarian telephone factory (Factory for Telephone Apparatuses) was founded by János Neuhold in Budapest in 1879, which produced telephones microphones, telegraphs, and telephone exchanges.[131][132][133]
In 1884, the Tungsram company also started to produce microphones, telephone apparatuses, telephone switchboards and cables.[134]
The Ericsson company also established a factory for telephones and switchboards in Budapest in 1911.[135]
Aeronautic industry
The first airplane in Austria was Edvard Rusjan's design, the Eda I, which had its maiden flight in the vicinity of Gorizia on 25 November 1909.[136]
The first Hungarian hydrogen-filled experimental balloons were built by István Szabik and József Domin in 1784. The first Hungarian designed and produced airplane (powered by a Hungarian built inline engine) was flown at Rákosmező on 4 November[137] 1909.[138] The earliest Hungarian airplane with Hungarian built radial engine was flown in 1913. Between 1912 and 1918, the Hungarian aircraft industry began developing. The three greatest: UFAG Hungarian Aircraft Factory (1914), Hungarian General Aircraft Factory (1916), Hungarian Lloyd Aircraft, Engine Factory at Aszód (1916),[139] and Marta in Arad (1914).[140] During the First World War, fighter planes, bombers and reconnaissance planes were produced in these factories. The most important aero-engine factories were Weiss Manfred Works, GANZ Works, and Hungarian Automobile Joint-stock Company Arad.
Locomotive engine and railway vehicle manufacturers
The locomotive (steam engines and wagons, bridge and iron structures) factories were installed in Vienna (Locomotive Factory of the State Railway Company, founded in 1839), in Wiener Neustadt (New Vienna Locomotive Factory, founded in 1841), and in Floridsdorf (Floridsdorf Locomotive Factory, founded in 1869).[citation needed][141][142][143]
The Hungarian Locomotive (engines and wagons bridge and iron structures) factories were the MÁVAG company in Budapest (steam engines and wagons) and the Ganz company in Budapest (steam engines, wagons, the production of electric locomotives and electric trams started from 1894).[144] and the RÁBA Company in Győr.
Infrastructure
Telecommunication
Telegraph
The first telegraph connection (Vienna – Brno – Prague) had started operation in 1847.[145] In Hungarian territory the first telegraph stations were opened in Pressburg (Pozsony, today's Bratislava) in December 1847 and in Buda in 1848. The first telegraph connection between Vienna and Pest–Buda (later Budapest) was constructed in 1850,[146] and Vienna–Zagreb in 1850.[147]
Austria subsequently joined a telegraph union with German states.[148] In the Kingdom of Hungary, 2,406 telegraph post offices operated in 1884.[149] By 1914 the number of telegraph offices reached 3,000 in post offices and further 2,400 were installed in the railway stations of the Kingdom of Hungary.[150]
Telephone
The first telephone exchange was opened in Zagreb (8 January 1881),[151][152][153] the second was in Budapest (1 May 1881),[154] and the third was opened in Vienna (3 June 1881).[155] Initially telephony was available in the homes of individual subscribers, companies and offices. Public telephone stations appeared in the 1890s, and they quickly became widespread in post offices and railway stations. Austria–Hungary had 568 million telephone calls in 1913; only two Western European countries had more phone calls: the German Empire and the United Kingdom. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was followed by France with 396 million telephone calls and Italy with 230 million phone calls.[156] In 1916, there were 366 million telephone calls in Cisleithania, among them 8.4 million long distant calls.[157] All telephone exchanges of the cities, towns and larger villages in Transleithania were linked until 1893.[146] By 1914, more than 2000 settlements had telephone exchange in Kingdom of Hungary.[150]
Electronic Audio Broadcasting
The Telefon Hírmondó (Telephone Herald) news and entertainment service was introduced in Budapest in 1893. Two decades before the introduction of radio broadcasting, people could listen to political, economic and sports news, cabaret, music and opera in Budapest daily. It operated over a special type of telephone exchange system.
Transport
Railways
By 1913, the combined length of the railway tracks of the Austrian Empire and Kingdom of Hungary reached 43,280 kilometres (26,890 miles). In Western Europe only Germany had more extended railway network (63,378 km, 39,381 mi); the Austro-Hungarian Empire was followed by France (40,770 km, 25,330 mi), the United Kingdom (32,623 km, 20,271 mi), Italy (18,873 km, 11,727 mi) and Spain (15,088 km, 9,375 mi).[158]
Railway network of the Austrian Empire
Rail transport expanded rapidly in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Its predecessor state, the Habsburg Empire, had built a substantial core of railways in the west, originating from Vienna, by 1841. Austria's first steam railway from Vienna to Moravia with its terminus in Galicia (Bochnie) was opened in 1839. The first train travelled from Vienna to Lundenburg (Břeclav) on 6 June 1839 and one month later between the imperial capital in Vienna and the capital of Moravia Brünn (Brno) on 7 July. At that point, the government realized the military possibilities of rail and began to invest heavily in construction. Pozsony (Bratislava), Budapest, Prague, Kraków, Graz, Laibach (Ljubljana) and Venedig (Venice) became linked to the main network. By 1854, the empire had almost 2,000 km (1,200 mi) of track, about 60–70% of it in state hands. The government then began to sell off large portions of track to private investors to recoup some of its investments and because of the financial strains of the 1848 Revolution and of the Crimean War.
From 1854 to 1879, private interests conducted almost all rail construction. What would become Cisleithania gained 7,952 km (4,941 mi) of track, and Hungary built 5,839 km (3,628 mi) of track. During this time, many new areas joined the railway system and the existing rail networks gained connections and interconnections. This period marked the beginning of widespread rail transportation in Austria–Hungary, and also the integration of transportation systems in the area. Railways allowed the empire to integrate its economy far more than previously possible, when transportation depended on rivers.
After 1879, the Austrian and the Hungarian governments slowly began to renationalize their rail networks, largely because of the sluggish pace of development during the worldwide depression of the 1870s. Between 1879 and 1900, more than 25,000 km (16,000 mi) of railways were built in Cisleithania and Hungary. Most of this constituted "filling in" of the existing network, although some areas, primarily in the far east, gained rail connections for the first time. The railway reduced transportation costs throughout the empire, opening new markets for products from other lands of the Dual Monarchy. In 1914, of a total of 22,981 km (14,279.73 mi) of railway tracks in Austria, 18,859 km (11,718 mi) (82%) were state-owned.
Railway network in the Kingdom of Hungary
The first Hungarian steam locomotive railway line was opened on 15 July 1846 between Pest and Vác.[159] In 1890 most large Hungarian private railway companies were nationalized as a consequence of the poor management of private companies, except the strong Austrian-owned Kaschau-Oderberg Railway (KsOd) and the Austrian-Hungarian Southern Railway (SB/DV). They also joined the zone tariff system of the MÁV (Hungarian State Railways). By 1910, the total length of the rail networks of Hungarian Kingdom reached 22,869 kilometres (14,210 miles), the Hungarian network linked more than 1,490 settlements. Nearly half (52%) of the empire's railways were built in Hungary, thus the railroad density there became higher than that of Cisleithania. This has ranked Hungarian railways the 6th most dense in the world (ahead of Germany and France).[160]
Electrified commuter railways: A set of four electric commuter rai lines were built in Budapest, the BHÉV: Ráckeve line (1887), Szentendre line (1888), Gödöllő line (1888), Csepel line (1912)[161]
Metropolitan transit systems
Tramway lines in the cities
Horse-drawn tramways appeared in the first half of the 19th century. Between the 1850s and 1880s many were built : Vienna (1865), Budapest (1866), Brno (1869), Trieste (1876). Steam trams appeared in the late 1860s. The electrification of tramways started in the late 1880s. The first electrified tramway in Austria–Hungary was built in Budapest in 1887.
Electric tramway lines in the Austrian Empire:
- Austria: Gmunden (1894); Linz, Vienna (1897); Graz (1898); Trieste (1900); Ljubljana (1901); Innsbruck (1905); Unterlach, Ybbs an der Donau (1907); Salzburg (1909); Klagenfurt, Sankt Pölten (1911); Piran (1912)
- Austrian Littoral: Pula (1904).
- Bohemia: Prague (1891); Teplice (1895); Liberec (1897); Ústí nad Labem, Plzeň, Olomouc (1899); Moravia, Brno, Jablonec nad Nisou (1900); Ostrava (1901); Mariánské Lázně (1902); Budějovice, České Budějovice, Jihlava (1909)
- Austrian Silesia: Opava (Troppau) (1905), Cieszyn (Cieszyn) (1911)
- Dalmatia: Dubrovnik (1910)
- Galicia: Lviv (1894), Bielsko-Biała (1895); Kraków (1901); Tarnów, Cieszyn (1911)[162][163][164]
Electric tramway lines in the Kingdom of Hungary:
- Hungary: Budapest (1887); Pressburg/Pozsony/Bratislava (1895); Szabadka/Subotica (1897), Szombathely (1897), Miskolc (1897); Temesvár/Timișoara (1899); Sopron (1900); Szatmárnémeti/Satu Mare (1900); Nyíregyháza (1905); Nagyszeben/Sibiu (1905); Nagyvárad/Oradea (1906); Szeged (1908); Debrecen (1911); Újvidék/Novi Sad (1911); Kassa/Košice (1913); Pécs (1913)
- Croatia: Fiume (1899); Pula (1904); Opatija – Lovran (1908); Zagreb (1910); Dubrovnik (1910).[165][166][167][168]
Underground
The Budapest Metro Line 1 (originally the "Franz Joseph Underground Electric Railway Company") is the second oldest underground railway in the world[169] (the first being the London Underground's Metropolitan Line and the third being Glasgow), and the first on the European mainland. It was built from 1894 to 1896 and opened on 2 May 1896.[170] In 2002, it was listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.[171] The M1 line became an IEEE Milestone due to the radically new innovations in its era: "Among the railway’s innovative elements were bidirectional tram cars; electric lighting in the subway stations and tram cars; and an overhead wire structure instead of a third-rail system for power."[172]
Canals and river regulations
In 1900 the engineer C. Wagenführer drew up plans to link the Danube and the Adriatic Sea by a canal from Vienna to Trieste. It was born from the desire of Austria–Hungary to have a direct link to the Adriatic Sea[173] but was never constructed.
Regulation of the lower Danube and the Iron Gates
In 1831 a plan had already been drafted to make the passage navigable, at the initiative of the Hungarian politician István Széchenyi. Finally Gábor Baross, Hungary's "Iron Minister", succeeded in financing this project. The riverbed rocks and the associated rapids made the gorge valley an infamous passage for shipping. In German, the passage is still known as the Kataraktenstrecke, even though the cataracts are gone. Near the actual "Iron Gates" strait the Prigrada rock was the most important obstacle until 1896: the river widened considerably here and the water level was consequently low. Upstream, the Greben rock near the "Kazan" gorge was notorious.
Regulation of the Tisza River
The length of the Tisza in Hungary used to be 1,419 kilometres (882 miles). It flowed through the Great Hungarian Plain, which is one of the largest flat areas in central Europe. Since plains can cause a river to flow very slowly, the Tisza used to follow a path with many curves and turns, which led to many large floods in the area.
After several small-scale attempts, István Széchenyi organised the "regulation of the Tisza" (Hungarian: a Tisza szabályozása) which started on 27 August 1846, and substantially ended in 1880. The new length of the river in Hungary was 966 km (600 mi) (1,358 km (844 mi) total), with 589 km (366 mi) of "dead channels" and 136 km (85 mi) of new riverbed. The resultant length of the flood-protected river comprises 2,940 km (1,830 mi) (out of 4,220 km (2,620 mi) of all Hungarian protected rivers).
Shipping and ports
The most important seaport was Trieste (today part of Italy), where the Austrian merchant marine was based. Two major shipping companies (Austrian Lloyd and Austro-Americana) and several shipyards were located there. From 1815 to 1866, Venice had been part of the Habsburg empire. The loss of Venice prompted the development of the Austrian merchant marine. By 1913, the commercial marine of Austria, comprised 16,764 vessels with a tonnage of 471,252, and crews number-ing 45,567. Of the total (1913) 394 of 422,368 tons were steamers, and 16,370 of 48,884 tons were sailing vessels[174] The Austrian Lloyd was one of the biggest ocean shipping companies of the time. Prior to the beginning of World War I, the company owned 65 middle-sized and large steamers. The Austro-Americana owned one third of this number, including the biggest Austrian passenger ship, the SS Kaiser Franz Joseph I. In comparison to the Austrian Lloyd, the Austro-American concentrated on destinations in North and South America.[175][176][177][178][179][180] The Austro-Hungarian Navy became much more significant than previously, as industrialization provided sufficient revenues to develop it. The ships of the Austro-Hungarian navy were built in Trieste's shipyards. Pola (Pula, today part of Croatia) was also especially significant for the navy.
The most important seaport for the Hungarian part of the monarchy was Fiume (Rijeka, today part of Croatia), where the Hungarian shipping companies, such as the Adria, operated. On the Danube, the DDSG had established the Óbuda Shipyard on the Hungarian Hajógyári Island in 1835.[181] The largest Hungarian shipbuilding company was the Ganz-Danubius. The commercial marine of the Kingdom of Hungary in 1913 comprised 545 vessels of 144,433 tons, and crews numbering 3,217. Of the total number of vessels 134,000 of 142,539 tons were steamers, and 411 of 1,894 tons were sailing vessels.[182] The first Danubian steamer company, Donaudampfschiffahrtsgesellschaft (DDSG), was the largest inland shipping company in the world until the collapse of Austria-Hungary.
Military
The Austro-Hungarian Army was under the command of Archduke Albrecht, Duke of Teschen (1817–1895), an old-fashioned bureaucrat who opposed modernization.[183] The military system of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy was similar in both states, and rested since 1868 upon the principle of the universal and personal obligation of the citizen to bear arms. Its military force was composed of the common army; the special armies, namely the Austrian Landwehr, and the Hungarian Honved, which were separate national institutions, and the Landsturm or levy-en masse. As stated above, the common army stood under the administration of the joint minister of war, while the special armies were under the administration of the respective ministries of national defence. The yearly contingent of recruits for the army was fixed by the military bills voted on by the Austrian and Hungarian parliaments and was generally determined on the basis of the population, according to the last census returns. It amounted in 1905 to 103,100 men, of which Austria furnished 59,211 men, and Hungary 43,889. Besides 10,000 men were annually allotted to the Austrian Landwehr, and 12,500 to the Hungarian Honved. The term of service was two years (three years in the cavalry) with the colours, seven or eight in the reserve and two in the Landwehr; in the case of men not drafted to the active army the same total period of service was spent in various special reserves.[184]
The common minister of war was the head for the administration of all military affairs, except those of the Austrian Landwehr and of the Hungarian Honved, which were committed to the ministries for national defence of the two respective states. But the supreme command of the army was nominally vested in the monarch, who had the power to take all measures regarding the whole army. In practice, the emperor's nephew Archduke Albrecht was his chief military advisor and made the policy decisions.[184]
The Austro-Hungarian navy was mainly a coast defence force, and also included a flotilla of monitors for the Danube. It was administered by the naval department of the ministry of war.[185]
Foreign policy: 1897–1914
Disputed land: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Russian Pan-Slavic organizations sent aid to the Balkan rebels and so pressured the tsar's government to declare war on the Ottoman Empire in 1877 in the name of protecting Orthodox Christians.[18] Unable to mediate between the Ottoman Empire and Russia over the control of Serbia, Austria–Hungary declared neutrality when the conflict between the two powers escalated into a war. With help from Romania and Greece, Russia defeated the Ottomans and with the Treaty of San Stefano tried to create a large pro-Russian Bulgaria. This treaty sparked an international uproar that almost resulted in a general European war. Austria–Hungary and Britain feared that a large Bulgaria would become a Russian satellite that would enable the tsar to dominate the Balkans. British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli moved warships into position against Russia to halt the advance of Russian influence in the eastern Mediterranean so close to Britain's route through the Suez Canal.[187]
The Congress of Berlin rolled back the Russian victory by partitioning the large Bulgarian state that Russia had carved out of Ottoman territory and denying any part of Bulgaria full independence from the Ottomans. Austria occupied Bosnia and Herzegovina as a way of gaining power in the Balkans. Serbia, Montenegro and Romania became fully independent. Nonetheless, the Balkans remained a site of political unrest with teeming ambition for independence and great power rivalries. At the Congress of Berlin in 1878 Gyula Andrássy (Minister of Foreign Affairs) managed to force Russia to retreat from further demands in the Balkans. As a result, Greater Bulgaria was broken up and Serbian independence was guaranteed.[188] In that year, with Britain's support, Austria–Hungary stationed troops in Bosnia to prevent the Russians from expanding into nearby Serbia. In another measure to keep the Russians out of the Balkans, Austria–Hungary formed an alliance, the Mediterranean Entente, with Britain and Italy in 1887 and concluded mutual defence pacts with Germany in 1879 and Romania in 1883 against a possible Russian attack.[189] Following the Congress of Berlin the European powers attempted to guarantee stability through a complex series of alliances and treaties.
Anxious about Balkan instability and Russian aggression, and to counter French interests in Europe, Austria–Hungary forged a defensive alliance with Germany in October 1879 and in May 1882. In October 1882 Italy joined this partnership in the Triple Alliance largely because of Italy's imperial rivalries with France. Tensions between Russia and Austria–Hungary remained high, so Bismarck replaced the League of the Three Emperors with the Reinsurance Treaty with Russia to keep the Habsburgs from recklessly starting a war over Pan-Slavism.[190] The Sandžak-Raška / Novibazar region was under Austro-Hungarian occupation between 1878 and 1909, when it was returned to the Ottoman Empire, before being ultimately divided between kingdoms of Montenegro and Serbia.[191]
On the heels of the Great Balkan Crisis, Austro-Hungarian forces occupied Bosnia and Herzegovina in August 1878 and the monarchy eventually annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina in October 1908 as a common holding of Cisleithania and Transleithania under the control of the Imperial & Royal finance ministry rather than attaching it to either territorial government. The annexation in 1908 led some in Vienna to contemplate combining Bosnia and Herzegovina with Croatia to form a third Slavic component of the monarchy. The deaths of Franz Joseph's brother, Maximilian (1867), and his only son, Rudolf, made the Emperor's nephew, Franz Ferdinand, heir to the throne. The Archduke was rumoured to have been an advocate for this trialism as a means to limit the power of the Hungarian aristocracy.[192]
A proclamation issued on the occasion of its annexation to the Habsburg Monarchy in October 1908 promised these lands constitutional institutions, which should secure to their inhabitants full civil rights and a share in the management of their own affairs by means of a local representative assembly. In performance of this promise a constitution was promulgated in 1910. This included a Territorial Statute (Landesstatut) with the setting up of a Territorial Diet, regulations for the election and procedure of the Diet, a law of associations, a law of public meetings, and a law dealing with the district councils. According to this statute Bosnia-Herzegovina formed a single administrative territory under the responsible direction and supervision of the Ministry of Finance of the Dual Monarchy in Vienna. The administration of the country, together with the carrying out of the laws, devolved upon the Territorial Government in Sarajevo, which was subordinate and responsible to the Common Ministry of Finance. The existing judicial and administrative authorities of the Territory retained their previous organization and functions. That statute introduced the modern rights and laws in Bosnia – Herzegovina, and it guaranteed generally the civil rights of the inhabitants of the Territory, namely citizenship, personal liberty, protection by the competent judicial authorities, liberty of creed and conscience, preservation of the national individuality and language, freedom of speech, freedom of learning and education, inviolability of the domicile, secrecy of posts and telegraphs, inviolability of property, the right of petition, and finally the right of holding meetings.[193]
The Diet (Sabor) of Bosnia-Herzegovina set up consisted of a single Chamber, elected on the principle of the representation of interests. It numbered 92 members. Of these 20 consisted of representatives of all the religious confessions, the president of the Supreme Court, the president of the Chamber of Advocates, the president of the Chamber of Commerce, and the mayor of Sarajevo. In addition to these were 72 deputies, elected by three curiae or electoral groups. The first curia included the large landowners, the highest taxpayers, and people who had reached a certain standard of education without regard to the amount they paid in taxes. To the second curia belonged inhabitants of the towns not qualified to vote in the first; to the third, country dwellers disqualified in the same way. With this curial system was combined the grouping of the mandates and of the electors according to the three dominant creeds (Catholic, Serbian Orthodox, Muslim). To the adherents of other creeds the right was conceded of voting with one or other of the religious electoral bodies within the curia to which they belonged.[13]
Bosnian Crisis of 1908-1909
The principal players in the Bosnian Crisis of 1908-09 were the foreign ministers of Austria and Russia, Alois Lexa von Aehrenthal and Alexander Izvolsky. Both were motivated by political ambition; the first would emerge successful, and the latter would be broken by the crisis. Along the way, they would drag Europe to the brink of war in 1909. They would also divide Europe into the two armed camps that would go to war in July 1914.[194][195]
Under the Treaty of Berlin, The Ottomans controlled the Dardanelles straight connecting the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. The Treaty prohibited the passage of any warships from any country into or out of the Black Sea. This treaty bottled up a major portion of the Russian Fleet, making it useless in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 when it was urgently needed. Izvolsky wanted this changed to allow the passage of Russian ships through the straits. Aehrenthal wanted full control of Bosnia-Herzogovina.Austria-Hungary had administered the provinces since 1878 but the Ottoman Empire remained the nominal legal owner. Aehrenthal concocted a grand diplomatic deal that proposed major benefits for both sides. Austria would gain full ownership of Bosnia with Russian approval. Turkey would get full control of the territory knoiwn as the Sanjak of Novi Pazar, plus cash. Russia would get the right of passage for its warships through the Straits. Serbia would get zero. Before approaching the Russians, Aehrenthal met with Austrian official and won the approval of Emperor Franz Joseph I. On September 15–16 Aehrenthal and Izvolsky held a secret meeting. No record was kept—and afterwards both sides remembered it very differently. Aehrenthal assumed he had full Russian approval for his scheme, but he not give out planned dates. Izvolsky assumed he would be informed before any actual move happened. Aehrenthal vaguely informed all the major countries but gave no details. The world was astonished on October 6, 1908, when a press release in Vienna announced that Bosnia was fully annexed. Inside Austria there was general approval except in Czech areas—that minority strongly felt its demands had been deliberately ignored. Aehrenthal had expected wide European approval and instead he faced a hostile volcanic eruption from every direction. Izvolsky vehemently denounced the treachery demanded an international conference on Bosnia. After decades of low level activity, pan-slavic forces inside Russia suddenly mobilized in opposition. Mass demonstrations broke out across the continent. Rome took advantage of the situation by reversing its friendship with Vienna. Berlin officials were surprised and appalled. The British were especially angry, denouncing the violation of an international agreement signed by both Austria and Britain.[196] France denounced the scheme. Turkey was surprised by the unexpected development, but it was quieted by the cash payment. By far the angriest reaction came from Serbia, which called for revenge, and began setting up secret guerrilla bands, plotting insurection in Bosnia. All across Europe the chief blame was placed on Berlin, not Vienna. Europeans feared the powerful German army and took the episode as proof of its expansionist intentions. Berlin now realized it stood alone, with Austria its only friend. It therefore decided it would firmly support Austria despite doubts about the wisdom of annexing Bosnia, Berlin explicitly warned St Petersburg that continued demands for an international conference constituted a hostile action that increase the risk of war with Germany. Russia backed down. Thanks to the German intervention, Austria scored a complete short-term diplomatic success in taking control of Bosnia. in the long run however, Germany and Austria both made many too enemies, as the battle lines of World War I started to harden.[197]
Aehrenthal had started with the assumption that the Slavic minorities could never come together, and the Balkan League Would never accomplish any damage to Austria. He turned down an Ottoman proposal for an alliance that would include Austria, Turkey and Romania. However his policies alienated the Bulgarians, who turned instead to Russia and Serbia. Although Austria had no intention to embark on additional expansion to the south, Aehrenthal encouraged speculation to that effect, expecting it would paralyze the Balkan states. Instead, it incited them to feverish activity to create a defensive block to stop Austria. A series of grave miscalculations at the highest level thus significantly strengthened Austria's enemies.[198]
1914: Coming of World War
Sarajevo assassination
On 28 June 1914, Archduke Franz Ferdinand visited the Bosnian capital, Sarajevo. A group of six assassins (Cvjetko Popović, Gavrilo Princip, Muhamed Mehmedbašić, Nedeljko Čabrinović, Trifko Grabež, Vaso Čubrilović) from the nationalist group Mlada Bosna, supplied by the Black Hand, had gathered on the street where the Archduke's motorcade would pass. Čabrinović threw a grenade at the car, but missed. It injured some people nearby, and Franz Ferdinand's convoy could carry on. The other assassins failed to act as the cars drove past them quickly. About an hour later, when Franz Ferdinand was returning from a visit at the Sarajevo Hospital, the convoy took a wrong turn into a street where Gavrilo Princip by coincidence stood. With a pistol, Princip shot and killed Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie. The reaction among the Austrian people was mild, almost indifferent. As historian Z. A. B. Zeman later wrote, "the event almost failed to make any impression whatsoever. On Sunday and Monday [June 28 and 29], the crowds in Vienna listened to music and drank wine, as if nothing had happened."[201]
Escalation of violence in Bosnia
The assassination excessively intensified the existing traditional religion-based ethnic hostilities in Bosnia. However, in Sarajevo itself, Austrian authorities encouraged[202][203] violence against the Serb residents, which resulted in the Anti-Serb riots of Sarajevo, in which Catholic Croats and Bosnian Muslims killed two and damaged numerous Serb-owned buildings. Writer Ivo Andrić referred to the violence as the "Sarajevo frenzy of hate."[204] Violent actions against ethnic Serbs were organized not only in Sarajevo but also in many other larger Austro-Hungarian cities in modern-day Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina.[205] Austro-Hungarian authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina imprisoned and extradited approximately 5,500 prominent Serbs, 700 to 2,200 of whom died in prison. 460 Serbs were sentenced to death and a predominantly Muslim[206][207] special militia known as the Schutzkorps was established and carried out the persecution of Serbs.[208]
Decision for war
While the empire's military spending had not even doubled since the 1878 Congress of Berlin, Germany's spending had risen fivefold, and the British, Russian, and French expenditures threefold. The empire had lost ethnic Italian areas to Piedmont because of nationalist movements that had swept through Italy, and many Austro-Hungarians perceived as imminent the threat of losing to Serbia the southern territories inhabited by Slavs. Serbia had recently gained considerable territory in the Second Balkan War of 1913, causing much distress in government circles in Vienna and Budapest. Former ambassador and foreign minister Count Alois Aehrenthal had assumed that any future war would be in the Balkan region.
Hungarian prime minister and political scientist István Tisza opposed the expansion of the monarchy in the Balkans (see Bosnian crisis in 1908) because "the Dual Monarchy already had too many Slavs", which would further threaten the integrity of the Dual Monarchy.[209] In March 1914, Tisza wrote a memorandum to Emperor Franz Joseph with a strongly apocalyptic, predictive and embittered tone. He used the hitherto unknown word "Weltkrieg" (meaning World War). "It is my firm conviction that Germany's two neighbors [Russia and France] are carefully proceeding with military preparations, but will not start the war so long as they have not attained a grouping of the Balkan states against us that confronts the monarchy with an attack from three sides and pins down the majority of our forces on our eastern and southern front."[210]
On the day of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, Tisza immediately traveled to Vienna where he met Minister of Foreign Affairs Count Leopold Berchtold and Army Commander Count Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf. They proposed to solve the dispute with arms, attacking Serbia. Tisza proposed to give the government of Serbia time to take a stand as to whether it was involved in the organisation of the murder and proposed a peaceful resolution, arguing that the international situation would settle soon. Returning to Budapest, he wrote to Emperor Franz Joseph saying he would not take any responsibility for the armed conflict because there was no proof that Serbia had plotted the assassination. Tisza opposed a war with Serbia, stating (correctly, as it turned out) that any war with the Serbs was bound to trigger a war with Russia and hence a general European war.[211] He did not trust in the Italian alliance, due to the political aftermath of the Second Italian War of Independence. He thought that even a successful Austro-Hungarian war would be disastrous for the integrity of Kingdom of Hungary, where Hungary would be the next victim of Austrian politics. After a successful war against Serbia, Tisza foresaw a possible Austrian military attack against the Kingdom of Hungary, where the Austrians want to break up the territory of Hungary.[212]
Some members of the government, such as Count Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf, had wanted to confront the resurgent Serbian nation for some years in a preventive war, but the Emperor, 84 years old and an enemy of all adventures, disapproved.
The foreign ministry of Austro-Hungarian Empire sent ambassador László Szőgyény to Potsdam, where he inquired about the standpoint of the German Emperor on 5 July. Szőgyény described what happened in a secret report to Vienna later that day:
I presented His Majesty [Wilhelm] with [Franz Joseph's] letter and the attached memorandum. The Kaiser read both papers quite carefully in my presence. First, His Majesty assured me that he had expected us to take firm action against Serbia, but he had to concede that, as a result of the conflicts facing [Franz Joseph], he needed to take into account a serious complication in Europe, which is why he did not wish to give any definite answer prior to consultations with the chancellor....
When, after our déjeuner, I once again emphasized the gravity of the situation, His Majesty authorized me to report to [Franz Joseph] that in this case, too, we could count on Germany's full support. As mentioned, he first had to consult with the Chancellor, but he did not have the slightest doubt that Herr von Bethmann Hollweg would fully agree with him, particularly with regard to action on our part against Serbia. In his [Wilhelm's] opinion, though, there was no need to wait patiently before taking action.
The Kaiser said that Russia's stance would always be a hostile one, but he had been prepared for this for many years, and even if war broke out between Austria–Hungary and Russia, we could rest assured that Germany would take our side, in line with its customary loyalty. According to the Kaiser, as things stood now, Russia was not at all ready for war. It would certainly have to think hard before making a call to arms.[213]
But now the leaders of Austria–Hungary, especially General Count Leopold von Berchtold, backed by its ally Germany, decided to confront Serbia militarily before it could incite a revolt; using the assassination as an excuse, they presented a list of ten demands called the July Ultimatum,[214] expecting Serbia would never accept. When Serbia accepted nine of the ten demands but only partially accepted the remaining one, Austria–Hungary declared war. Franz Joseph I finally followed the urgent counsel of his top advisers.
Over the course of July and August 1914, these events caused the start of World War I, as Russia mobilized in support of Serbia, setting off a series of counter-mobilizations. In support of his German ally, on Thursday, 6 August 1914, Emperor Franz Joseph signed the declaration of war on Russia. Italy initially remained neutral, although it had an alliance with Austria–Hungary. In 1915, it switched to the side of the Entente powers, hoping to gain territory from its former ally.[215]
World War I
Wartime foreign policy
The Austro-Hungarian Empire played a relatively passive diplomatic role in the war, as it was increasingly dominated and controlled by Germany.[216][217] The only goal was to punish Serbia and try to stop the ethnic breakup of the Empire, and it completely failed. Instead as the war went on the ethnic unity declined; the Allies encouraged breakaway demands from minorities and the Empire faced disintegration. Starting in late 1916 the new Emperor Karl removed the pro-German officials and opened peace overtures to the Allies, whereby the entire war could be ended by compromise, or perhaps Austria would make a separate peace from Germany.[218] The main effort was vetoed by Italy, which had been promised large slices of Austria for joining the Allies in 1915. Austria was only willing to turn over the Trentino region but nothing more.[219] Karl was seen as a defeatist, which weakened his standing at home and with both the Allies and Germany.[220]
As the Imperial economy collapsed into severe hardship and even starvation, its multi-ethnic army lost its morale and was increasingly hard-pressed to hold its line. In the capital cities of Vienna and Budapest, the leftist and liberal movements and opposition parties strengthened and supported the separatism of ethnic minorities. As it became apparent that the Allies would win the war, nationalist movements, which had previously been calling for a greater degree of autonomy for their majority areas, started demanding full independence. The Emperor had lost much of his power to rule, as his realm disintegrated.[221]
Homefront
The heavily rural Empire did have a small industrial base, but its major contribution was manpower and food.[222][223] Nevertheless, Austria–Hungary was more urbanized (25%)[224] than its actual opponents in the First World War, like the Russian Empire (13.4%),[225] Serbia (13.2%)[226] or Romania (18.8%).[227] Furthermore, the Austro-Hungarian Empire had also more industrialized economy[228] and higher GDP per capita[229] than the Kingdom of Italy, which was economically the far most developed actual opponent of the Empire.
On the home front, food grew scarcer and scarcer, as did heating fuel. Hungary, with its heavy agricultural base, was somewhat better fed. The Army conquered productive agricultural areas in Romania and elsewhere, but refused to allow food shipments to civilians back home. Morale fell every year, and the diverse nationalities gave up on the Empire and looked for ways to establish their own nation states.[230]
Inflation soared, from an index of 129 in 1914 to 1589 in 1918, wiping out the cash savings of the middle-class. In terms of war damage to the economy, the war used up about 20 percent of the GDP. The dead soldiers amounted to about four percent of the 1914 labor force, and the wounded ones to another six percent. Compared all the major countries in the war, the death and casualty rate was toward the high-end regarding the present-day territory of Austra.[222]
By summer 1918, "Green Cadres" of army deserters formed armed bands in the hills of Croatia-Slavonia and civil authority disintegrated. By late October violence and massive looting erupted and there were efforts to form peasant republics. However, the Croatian political leadership was focused on creating a new state (Yugoslavia) and worked with the advancing Serbian army to impose control and end the uprisings.[231]
Military events
The Austro-Hungarian Empire conscripted 7.8 million soldiers during the WW1.[232] General von Hötzendorf was the Chief of the Austro-Hungarian General Staff. Franz Joseph I, who was much too old to command the army, appointed Archduke Friedrich von Österreich-Teschen as Supreme Army Commander (Armeeoberkommandant), but asked him to give Von Hötzendorf freedom to take any decisions. Von Hötzendorf remained in effective command of the military forces until Emperor Karl I took the supreme command himself in late 1916 and dismissed Conrad von Hötzendorf in 1917. Meanwhile, economic conditions on the homefront deteriorated rapidly. The Empire depended on agriculture, and agriculture depended on the heavy labor of millions of men who were now in the Army. Food production fell, the transportation system became overcrowded, and industrial production could not successfully handle the overwhelming need for munitions. Germany provided a great deal of help, but it was not enough. Furthermore, the political instability of the multiple ethnic groups of Empire now ripped apart any hope for national consensus in support of the war. Increasingly there was a demand for breaking up the Empire and setting up autonomous national states based on historic language-based cultures. The new Emperor sought peace terms from the Allies, but his initiatives were vetoed by Italy.[233]
Serbian front 1914–1916
At the start of the war, the army was divided into two: the smaller part attacked Serbia while the larger part fought against the formidable Imperial Russian Army. The invasion of Serbia in 1914 was a disaster: by the end of the year, the Austro-Hungarian Army had taken no territory, but had lost 227,000 out of a total force of 450,000 men. However, in the autumn of 1915, the Serbian Army was defeated by the Central Powers, which led to the occupation of Serbia. Near the end of 1915, in a massive rescue operation involving more than 1,000 trips made by Italian, French and British steamers, 260,000 Serb surviving soldiers were transported to Brindisi and Corfu, where they waited for the chance of the victory of Allied Powers to reclaim their country. Corfu hosted the Serbian government in exile after the collapse of Serbia and served as a supply base to the Greek front. In April 1916 a large number of Serbian troops were transported in British and French naval vessels from Corfu to mainland Greece. The contingent numbering over 120,000 relieved a much smaller army at the Macedonian front and fought alongside British and French troops.[234]
Russian front 1914–1917
On the Eastern front, the war started out equally poorly. The Austro-Hungarian Army was defeated at the Battle of Lemberg and the great fortress city of Przemyśl was besieged and fell in March 1915. The Gorlice–Tarnów Offensive started as a minor German offensive to relieve the pressure of the Russian numerical superiority on the Austro-Hungarians, but the cooperation of the Central Powers resulted in huge Russian losses and the total collapse of the Russian lines and their 100 km (62 mi) long retreat into Russia. The Russian Third Army perished. In summer 1915, the Austro-Hungarian Army, under a unified command with the Germans, participated in the successful Gorlice–Tarnów Offensive. From June 1916, the Russians focused their attacks on the Austro-Hungarian army in the Brusilov Offensive, recognizing the numerical inferiority of the Austro-Hungarian army. By the end of September 1916, Austria–Hungary mobilized and concentrated new divisions, and the successful Russian advance was halted and slowly repelled; but the Austrian armies took heavy losses (about 1 million men) and never recovered. The Battle of Zborov (1917) was the first significant action of the Czechoslovak Legions, who fought for the independence of Czechoslovakia against the Austro-Hungarian army. However the huge losses in men and material inflicted on the Russians during the offensive contributed greatly to the revolutions of 1917, and it caused an economic crash in the Russian Empire.
Italian front 1915–1918
In May 1915, Italy attacked Austria–Hungary. Italy was the only military opponent of Austria–Hungary which had a similar degree of industrialization and economic level; moreover, her army was numerous (≈1,000,000 men were immediately fielded), but suffered from poor leadership, training and organization. Chief of Staff Luigi Cadorna marched his army towards the Isonzo river, hoping to seize Ljubljana, and to eventually threaten Vienna. However, the Royal Italian Army were halted on the river, where four battles took place over five months (23 June – 2 December 1915). The fight was extremely bloody and exhausting for both the contenders.[236]
On 15 May 1916, the Austrian Chief of Staff Conrad von Hötzendorf launched the Strafexpedition ("punitive expedition"): the Austrians broke through the opposing front and occupied the Asiago plateau. The Italians managed to resist and in a counteroffensive seized Gorizia on 9 August. Nonetheless, they had to stop on the Carso, a few kilometres away from the border. At this point, several months of indecisive trench warfare ensued (analogous to the Western front). As the Russian Empire collapsed as a result of the Bolshevik Revolution and Russians ended their involvement in the war, Germans and Austrians were able to move on the Western and Southern fronts much manpower from the erstwhile Eastern fighting.
On 24 October 1917, Austrians (now enjoying decisive German support) attacked at Caporetto using new infiltration tactics; although they advanced more than 100 km (62.14 mi) in the direction of Venice and gained considerable supplies, they were halted and could not cross the Piave river. Italy, although suffering massive casualties, recovered from the blow, and a coalition government under Vittorio Emanuele Orlando was formed. Italy also enjoyed support by the Entente powers: by 1918, large amounts of war materials and a few auxiliary American, British, and French divisions arrived in the Italian battle zone.[237] Cadorna was replaced by General Armando Diaz; under his command, the Italians retook the initiative and won the decisive Battle of the Piave river (15–23 June 1918), in which some 60,000 Austrian and 43,000 Italian soldiers were killed. The multiethnic Austro-Hungarian Empire started to disintegrate, leaving its army alone on the battlefields. The final battle was at Vittorio Veneto; after 4 days of stiff resistance, Italian troops crossed the Piave River, and after losing 90,000 men the defeated Austrian troops retreated in disarray pursued by the Italians. The Italians captured 448,000 Austrian-Hungarian soldiers (about one-third of the imperial-royal army), 24 of whom were generals,[238] 5,600 cannons and mortars, and 4,000 machine guns.[239] The military breakdown also marked the start of the rebellion for the numerous ethnicities who made up the multiethnic Empire, as they refused to keep on fighting for a cause that now appeared senseless. These events marked the end of Austria–Hungary, which collapsed on 31 October 1918. The armistice was signed at Villa Giusti on 3 November.
Romanian front 1916–1917
On 27 August 1916, Romania declared war against Austria–Hungary. The Romanian Army crossed the borders of Eastern Hungary (Transylvania), and despite initial successes, by November 1916, the Central Powers formed by the Austro-Hungarian, German, Bulgarian, and Ottoman armies, had defeated the Romanian and Russian armies of the Entente Powers, and occupied the southern part of Romania (including Oltenia, Muntenia and Dobruja). Within 3 months of the war, the Central Powers came near Bucharest, the Romanian capital city. On 6 December, the Central Powers captured Bucharest, and part of the population moved to the unoccupied Romanian territory, in Moldavia, together with the Romanian government, royal court and public authorities, which relocated to Iași.[240]
In 1917, after several defensive victories (managing to stop the German-Austro-Hungarian advance), with Russia's withdrawal from the war following the October Revolution, Romania was forced to drop out of the war.[241]
Whereas the German army realized it needed close cooperation from the homefront, Habsburg officers saw themselves as entirely separate from the civilian world, and superior to it. When they occupied productive areas, such as southern Romania,[242] they seized food stocks and other supplies for their own purposes and blocked any shipments intended for civilians back in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The result was that the officers lived well, as the civilians began to starve. Vienna even transferred training units to Serbia and Poland for the sole purpose of feeding them. In all, the Army obtained about 15 percent of its cereal needs from occupied territories.[243]
Role of Hungary
Although the Kingdom of Hungary composed only 42% of the population of Austria–Hungary,[244] the thin majority – more than 3.8 million soldiers – of the Austro-Hungarian armed forces were conscripted from the Kingdom of Hungary during the First World War. Roughly 600,000 soldiers were killed in action, and 700,000 soldiers were wounded in the war.[245]
Austria–Hungary held on for years, as the Hungarian half provided sufficient supplies for the military to continue to wage war.[188] This was shown in a transition of power after which the Hungarian prime minister, Count István Tisza, and foreign minister, Count István Burián, had decisive influence over the internal and external affairs of the monarchy.[188] By late 1916, food supply from Hungary became intermittent and the government sought an armistice with the Entente powers. However, this failed as Britain and France no longer had any regard for the integrity of the monarchy because of Austro-Hungarian support for Germany.[188]
Analysis of defeat
The setbacks that the Austrian army suffered in 1914 and 1915 can be attributed to a large extent by the incompetence of the Austrian high command.[188] After attacking Serbia, its forces soon had to be withdrawn to protect its eastern frontier against Russia's invasion, while German units were engaged in fighting on the Western Front. This resulted in a greater than expected loss of men in the invasion of Serbia.[188] Furthermore, it became evident that the Austrian high command had had no plans for possible continental war and that the army and navy were also ill-equipped to handle such a conflict.[188]
From 1916, the Austro-Hungarian war effort became more and more subordinated to the direction of German planners. The Austrians viewed the German army favorably, on the other hand by 1916 the general belief in Germany was that Germany, in its alliance with Austria–Hungary, was "shackled to a corpse". The operational capability of the Austro-Hungarian army was seriously affected by supply shortages, low morale and a high casualty rate, and by the army's composition of multiple ethnicities with different languages and customs.
The last two successes for the Austrians, the Romanian Offensive and the Caporetto Offensive, were German-assisted operations. As the Dual Monarchy became more politically unstable, it became more and more dependent on German assistance. The majority of its people, other than Hungarians and German Austrians, became increasingly restless.
In 1917, the Eastern front of the Entente Powers completely collapsed.
The Austro-Hungarian Empire then withdrew from all defeated countries. By 1918, the economic situation had deteriorated. Leftist and pacifist political movements organized strikes in factories, and uprisings in the army had become commonplace. During the Italian battles, the Czechoslovaks and Southern Slavs declared their independence. On 31 October Hungary ended the personal union with Austria, officially dissolving the Monarchy. At the last Italian offensive, the Austro-Hungarian Army took to the field without any food and munition supply and fought without any political supports for a de facto non-existent empire. On the end of the decisive joint Italian, British and French offensive at Vittorio Veneto, the disintegrated Austria–Hungary signed the Armistice of Villa Giusti on 3 November 1918.
The government had failed badly on the homefront. Historian Alexander Watson reports:
across central Europe ... The majority lived in a state of advanced misery by the spring of 1918, and conditions later worsened, for the summer of 1918 saw both the drop in food supplied to the levels of the 'turnip winter', and the onset of the 1918 flu pandemic that killed at least 20 million worldwide. Society was relieved, exhausted and yearned for peace.[246]
Dissolution
The Austro-Hungarian Monarchy collapsed with dramatic speed in the autumn of 1918. In the capital cities of Vienna and Budapest, the leftist and liberal movements and politicians (the opposition parties) strengthened and supported the separatism of ethnic minorities. These leftist or left-liberal pro-Entente maverick parties opposed the monarchy as a form of government and considered themselves internationalist rather than patriotic. Eventually, the German defeat and the minor revolutions in Vienna and Budapest gave political power to the left/liberal political parties. As it became apparent that the Allied powers would win World War I, nationalist movements, which had previously been calling for a greater degree of autonomy for various areas, started pressing for full independence. The Emperor had lost much of his power to rule, as his realm disintegrated.[247]
Alexander Watson argues that, "The Habsburg regime's doom was sealed when Wilson's response to the note[specify], sent two and a half weeks earlier, arrived on 20 October." Wilson rejected the continuation of the dual monarchy as a negotiable possibility.[248] As one of his Fourteen Points, President Woodrow Wilson demanded that the nationalities of Austria–Hungary have the "freest opportunity to autonomous development". In response, Emperor Karl I agreed to reconvene the Imperial Parliament in 1917 and allow the creation of a confederation with each national group exercising self-governance. However, the leaders of these national groups rejected the idea; they deeply distrusted Vienna and were now determined to get independence.
On 14 October 1918, Foreign Minister Baron István Burián von Rajecz[249] asked for an armistice based on the Fourteen Points. In an apparent attempt to demonstrate good faith, Emperor Karl issued a proclamation ("Imperial Manifesto of 16 October 1918") two days later which would have significantly altered the structure of the Austrian half of the monarchy. The Polish majority regions of Galicia and Lodomeria were to be granted the option of seceding from the empire, and it was understood that they would join their ethnic brethren in Russia and Germany in resurrecting a Polish state. The rest of Cisleithania was transformed into a federal union composed of four parts—German, Czech, South Slav and Ukrainian. Each of these was to be governed by a national council that would negotiate the future of the empire with Vienna. Trieste was to receive a special status. No such proclamation could be issued in Hungary, where Hungarian aristocrats still believed they could subdue other nationalities and maintain the "Holy Kingdom of St. Stephen".
It was a dead letter. Four days later, on 18 October, United States Secretary of State Robert Lansing replied that the Allies were now committed to the causes of the Czechs, Slovaks and South Slavs. Therefore, Lansing said, autonomy for the nationalities – the tenth of the Fourteen Points – was no longer enough and Washington could not deal on the basis of the Fourteen Points anymore. In fact, a Czechoslovak provisional government had joined the Allies on 14 October. The South Slavs in both halves of the monarchy had already declared in favor of uniting with Serbia in a large South Slav state by way of the 1917 Corfu Declaration signed by members of the Yugoslav Committee. Indeed, the Croatians had begun disregarding orders from Budapest earlier in October.
The Lansing note was, in effect, the death certificate of Austria–Hungary. The national councils had already begun acting more or less as provisional governments of independent countries. With defeat in the war imminent after the Italian offensive in the Battle of Vittorio Veneto on 24 October, Czech politicians peacefully took over command in Prague on 28 October (later declared the birthday of Czechoslovakia) and followed up in other major cities in the next few days. On 30 October, the Slovaks followed in Martin. On 29 October, the Slavs in both portions of what remained of Austria–Hungary proclaimed the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs. They also declared that their ultimate intention was to unite with Serbia and Montenegro in a large South Slav state. On the same day, the Czechs and Slovaks formally proclaimed the establishment of Czechoslovakia as an independent state.
In Hungary, the most prominent opponent of continued union with Austria, Count Mihály Károlyi, seized power in the Aster Revolution on 31 October. Charles was all but forced to appoint Károlyi as his Hungarian prime minister. One of Károlyi's first acts was to cancel the compromise agreement, officially dissolving the Austro-Hungarian state.
By the end of October, there was nothing left of the Habsburg realm but its majority-German Danubian and Alpine provinces, and Karl's authority was being challenged even there by the German-Austrian state council.[250] Karl's last Austrian prime minister, Heinrich Lammasch, concluded that Karl was in an impossible situation, and persuaded Karl that the best course was to relinquish, at least temporarily, his right to exercise sovereign authority.
Consequences
On 11 November, Karl issued a carefully worded proclamation in which he recognized the Austrian people's right to determine the form of the state and relinquished his right to take part in Austrian state affairs. He also dismissed Lammasch and his government from office[251] and released the officials in the Austrian half of the empire from their oath of loyalty to him. Two days later, he issued a similar proclamation for Hungary. However, he did not abdicate, remaining available in the event the people of either state should recall him. For all intents and purposes, this was the end of the Habsburg rule.
|
Since my ascent to the throne, I have been constantly trying to lead my people out of the horrors of war, which I am not responsible for. I have not hesitated to restore constitutional life and have opened the way for peoples to develop their own state independently. Still filled with unchangeable love for all My peoples, I do not want to oppose the free development of My Person as an obstacle. I recognize in advance the decision that German Austria will make regarding its future form of government. The people took over the government through their representatives. I waive any share in state affairs. At the same time, I am releasing My Austrian Government from office. May the people of German Austria create and consolidate the reorganization in harmony and forgiveness. The happiness of my peoples has been the goal of my hottest wishes from the beginning. Only inner peace can heal the wounds of this war. |
Seit meiner thronbesteigung war ich unablässig bemüht, Meine Volker aus den Schrecknissen des Krieges herauszuführen, an dessen Ausbruch ich keinerlei Schuld trage. Ich habe nicht gezögert, das verfassungsmaßige Leben wieder herzustellen und haben den Völkern den Weg zu ihrer selbständingen staatlichen Entwicklung eröffnet. Nach wie vor von unwandelbarer Liebe für alle Meine Völker erfüllt, will ich ihrer freien Entfaltung Meine Person nicht als Hindernis entgegenstellen. Im voraus erkenne ich die Entscheidung an, die Deutschösterreich über seine künftige Staatsform trifft. Das Volk hat durch seine Vertreter die Regierung übernommen. Ich verzichte auf jeden Anteil an den Staatsgeschäften. Gleichzeitig enthebe ich Meine österreichische Regierung ihres Amtes. Möge das Volk von Deutschösterreich in Eintracht und Versöhnlichkeit die Neuordnung schaffen und befestigen. Das Glück Meiner Völker war von Anbeginn das Ziel Meiner heißesten Wünsche. Nur der innere Friede kann die Wunden dieses Krieges heilen. |
Karl's refusal to abdicate was ultimately irrelevant. On the day after he announced his withdrawal from Austria's politics, the German-Austrian National Council proclaimed the Republic of German Austria. Károlyi followed suit on 16 November, proclaiming the Hungarian Democratic Republic.
The Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye (between the victors of World War I and Austria) and the Treaty of Trianon (between the victors and Hungary) regulated the new borders of Austria and Hungary, leaving both as small landlocked states. The Allies assumed without question that the minority nationalities wanted to leave Austria and Hungary, and also allowed them to annex significant blocks of German- and Hungarian-speaking territory. As a result, the Republic of Austria lost roughly 60% of the old Austrian Empire's territory. It also had to drop its plans for union with Germany, as it was not allowed to unite with Germany without League approval. The restored Kingdom of Hungary, which had replaced the republican government in 1920, lost roughly 72% of the pre-war territory of the Kingdom of Hungary.
The decisions of the nations of the former Austria–Hungary and of the victors of the Great War, contained in the heavily one-sided treaties, had devastating political and economic effects. The previously rapid economic growth of the Dual Monarchy ground to a halt because the new borders became major economic barriers. All the formerly well-established industries, as well as the infrastructure supporting them, were designed to satisfy the needs of an extensive realm. As a result, the emerging countries were forced to make considerable sacrifices to transform their economies. The treaties created major political unease. As a result of these economic difficulties, extremist movements gained strength; and there was no regional superpower in central Europe.
The new Austrian state was, at least on paper, on shakier ground than Hungary. Unlike its former Hungarian partner, Austria had never been a nation in any real sense. While the Austrian state had existed in one form or another for 700 years, it was united only by loyalty to the Habsburgs. With the loss of 60% of the Austrian Empire's prewar territory, Vienna was now an imperial capital without an empire to support it. However, after a brief period of upheaval and the Allies' foreclosure of union with Germany, Austria established itself as a federal republic. Despite the temporary Anschluss with Nazi Germany, it still survives today. Adolf Hitler cited that all "Germans" – such as him and the others from Austria, etc. – should be united with Germany.
By comparison, Hungary had been a nation and a state for over 900 years. Hungary, however, was severely disrupted by the loss of 72% of its territory, 64% of its population and most of its natural resources. The Hungarian Democratic Republic was short-lived and was temporarily replaced by the communist Hungarian Soviet Republic. Romanian troops ousted Béla Kun and his communist government during the Hungarian–Romanian War of 1919.
In the summer of 1919, a Habsburg, Archduke Joseph August, became regent, but was forced to stand down after only two weeks when it became apparent the Allies would not recognise him.[253] Finally, in March 1920, royal powers were entrusted to a regent, Miklós Horthy, who had been the last commanding admiral of the Austro-Hungarian Navy and had helped organize the counter-revolutionary forces. It was this government that signed the Treaty of Trianon under protest on 4 June 1920 at the Grand Trianon Palace in Versailles, France.[254][255]
In March and again in October 1921, ill-prepared attempts by Karl to regain the throne in Budapest collapsed. The initially wavering Horthy, after receiving threats of intervention from the Allied Powers and the Little Entente, refused his cooperation. Soon afterward, the Hungarian government nullified the Pragmatic Sanction, effectively dethroning the Habsburgs. Two years earlier, Austria had passed the "Habsburg Law," which both dethroned the Habsburgs and banished all Habsburgs from Austrian territory. While Karl was banned from ever returning to Austria again, other Habsburgs could return if they gave up all claims to the throne.
Subsequently, the British took custody of Karl and removed him and his family to the Portuguese island of Madeira, where he died the following year.
Successor states
The following successor states were formed at the dissolution of the former Austro–Hungarian monarchy:[256]
- German Austria (which became the First Austrian Republic)
- Hungarian Democratic Republic (which after a few other short-lived intermediaries became the Kingdom of Hungary)
- First Czechoslovak Republic ("Czechoslovakia" from 1920 to 1938)
- Second Polish Republic
- Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes
Additionally, the duchies of Bukovina, Transylvania and two-thirds of the Banat were joined to the Kingdom of Romania.
Austro-Hungarian lands were also ceded to the Kingdom of Italy. The Principality of Liechtenstein, which had formerly looked to Vienna for protection, formed a customs and defense union with Switzerland, and adopted the Swiss currency instead of the Austrian. In April 1919, Vorarlberg – the westernmost province of Austria – voted by a large majority to join Switzerland; however, both the Swiss and the Allies disregarded this result.
 |
 New borders of Austria–Hungary after the Treaty of Trianon and Saint Germain Border of Austria–Hungary in 1914 Borders in 1914 Borders in 1920 Empire of Austria in 1914 Kingdom of Hungary in 1914 Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1914 |
Territorial legacy
 Kingdoms and countries of Austria–Hungary: Cisleithania (Empire of Austria[5]): 1. Bohemia, 2. Bukovina, 3. Carinthia, 4. Carniola, 5. Dalmatia, 6. Galicia, 7. Küstenland, 8. Lower Austria, 9. Moravia, 10. Salzburg, 11. Silesia, 12. Styria, 13. Tyrol, 14. Upper Austria, 15. Vorarlberg; Transleithania (Kingdom of Hungary[5]): 16. Hungary proper 17. Croatia-Slavonia; 18. Bosnia and Herzegovina (Austro-Hungarian condominium) |
The following present-day countries and parts of countries were within the boundaries of Austria–Hungary when the empire was dissolved:
Empire of Austria (Cisleithania):
- Austria (except Burgenland)
- Czech Republic (except the Hlučínsko area)
- Slovenia (except Prekmurje)
- Italy (Trentino, South Tyrol, parts of the province of Belluno and small portions of Friuli-Venezia Giulia)
- Croatia (Dalmatia, Istria)
- Poland (voivodeships of Lesser Poland, Subcarpathia, southernmost part of Silesia (Bielsko and Cieszyn))
- Ukraine (oblasts of Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ternopil (except its northern corner) and most of the oblast of Chernivtsi)
- Romania (county of Suceava)
- Montenegro (bay of Boka Kotorska, the coast and the immediate hinterland around the cities of Budva, Petrovac and Sutomore)
Kingdom of Hungary (Transleithania):
- Hungary;
- Slovakia
- Austria (Burgenland)
- Slovenia (Prekmurje)
- Croatia (Croatian Baranja and Međimurje county, Fiume as corpus separatum along with Slavonia and Central Croatia were not part of Hungary proper, the latter two were part of the sovereign Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia)
- Ukraine (oblast of Zakarpattia)
- Romania (region of Transylvania, Partium and parts of Banat, Crișana, and Maramureș)
- Serbia (autonomous province of Vojvodina and northern Belgrade region)
- Poland (Polish parts of Orava and Spiš)
- Bosnia and Herzegovina (the villages of Zavalje, Mali Skočaj and Veliki Skočaj including the immediate surrounding area west of the city of Bihać)
- Montenegro (Sutorina – western part of the Municipality of Herceg Novi between present borders with Croatia (SW) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (NW), Adriatic coast (E) and the township of Igalo (NE))
- Sandžak-Raška region, Austro-Hungarian occupied 1878 until withdrawal in 1908 whilst formally part of the Ottoman Empire
Possessions of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy
- The Empire treated Bosnia-Herzegovina in much the same way the other powers treated their overseas colonies. However the Empire decided not to attempt any overseas colonies.[257]
- Its only possession outside of Europe was its small concession inside the city of Tianjin, China. It was granted in return for supporting the Eight-Nation Alliance in suppressing the Boxer Rebellion. However although the zone was only an Austro-Hungarian possession for 16 years, the Austro-Hungarians left their mark on that area of the city, in the form of architecture that still stands in the city.[258]
Other provinces of Europe had been part of the Habsburg monarchy at one time before 1867.
See also
- Aftermath of World War I
- Austrian nobility
- Corporative federalism, a form of administration adopted by the Austro-Hungarian Empire
- Diplomatic history of World War I
- Austro-Hungarian entry into World War I
- Ethnic composition of Austria–Hungary
- Former countries in Europe after 1815
- Hungarian nobility
- Lands of the Bohemian Crown (1867–1918)
- United States of Greater Austria
Notes
- ^ The concept of Eastern Europe is not firmly defined, and depending on some interprertations, some territories may be included or excluded from it; this holds for parts of Austria–Hungary as well, although the historical interpretation clearly place the Monarchy into Central Europe.
References
- ^ Citype – Internet – Portal Betriebsges.m.b.H. "Austro-Hungarian Empire k.u.k. Monarchy dual-monarchic Habsburg Emperors of Austria". Wien-vienna.com. Archived from the original on 23 November 2011. Retrieved 11 September 2011.
- ^ Fisher, Gilman. The Essentials of Geography for School Year 1888–1889, p. 47. New England Publishing Company (Boston), 1888. Retrieved 20 August 2014.
- ^ From the Encyclopædia Britannica (1878), although note that this "Romani" refers to the language of those described by the EB as "Gypsies"; the EB's "Romani or Wallachian" refers to what is today known as Romanian; Rusyn and Ukrainian correspond to dialects of what the EB refers to as "Ruthenian"; and Yiddish was the common language of the Austrian Jews, although Hebrew was also known by many.
- ^ a b Geographischer Atlas zur Vaterlandskunde, 1911, Tabelle 3.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i Headlam, James Wycliffe (1911). . In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. 3 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 2–39.
- ^ McCarthy, Justin (1880). A History of Our Own Times, from 1880 to the Diamond Jubilee. New York, United States of America: Harper & Brothers, Publishers. pp. 475–476.
- ^ Dallin, David (November 2006). The Rise of Russia in Asia. ISBN 978-1-4067-2919-1.
- ^ Schulze, Max-Stephan. Engineering and Economic Growth: The Development of Austria–Hungary's Machine-Building Industry in the Late Nineteenth Century, p. 295. Peter Lang (Frankfurt), 1996.
- ^ Publishers' Association, Booksellers Association of Great Britain and Ireland (1930). The Publisher, Volume 133. p. 355.
- ^ Contributors: Austria. Österreichische konsularische Vertretungsbehörden im Ausland; Austrian Information Service, New York (1965). Austrian information. p. 17.
- ^ Cieger András. Kormány a mérlegen – a múlt században (in Hungarian)
- ^ Minahan, James. Miniature Empires: A Historical Dictionary of the Newly Independent States, p. 48.
- ^ a b "Jayne, Kingsley Garland (1911). . In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. 4 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 279–286.
- ^ Anderson, Frank Maloy and Amos Shartle Hershey, Handbook for the Diplomatic History of Europe, Asia, and Africa 1870–1914.- The Austrian occupation of Novibazar, 1878–1909 Archived 22 April 2014 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ "Imperial Gazette −1912". IGGIO Islamische Glaubensgemeinschaft in Osterreich. 2011. Archived from the original on 6 June 2014. Retrieved 4 June 2014.
- ^ Kann (1974); Sked (1989); Taylor (1964)
- ^ André Gerrits; Dirk Jan Wolffram (2005). Political Democracy and Ethnic Diversity in Modern European History. Stanford University Press. p. 42. ISBN 978-0-8047-4976-3.
- ^ a b c d Kann 1974
- ^ Manuscript of Franz Joseph I. – Stephan Vajda, Felix Austria. Eine Geschichte Österreichs, Ueberreuter 1980, Vienna, ISBN 3-8000-3168-X, in German
- ^ Eva Philippoff: Die Doppelmonarchie Österreich-Ungarn. Ein politisches Lesebuch (1867–1918), Presses Univ. Septentrion, 2002, Villeneuve d’Ascq, ISBN 2-85939-739-6 (online, p. 60, at Google Books)
- ^ Kotulla, Michael (17 August 2008). Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. ISBN 978-3-540-48707-4. Archived from the original on 27 March 2019 – via Google Books.
- ^ Kay, David (1878). . In Baynes, T. S. (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. 3 (9th ed.). New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. pp. 116–141.
- ^ a b "Who's Who – Emperor Franz Josef I". First World War.com. Archived from the original on 10 May 2009. Retrieved 5 May 2009.
- ^ "The kingdom of Hungary desired equal status with the Austrian empire, which was weakened by its defeat in the German (Austro-Prussian) War of 1866. The Austrian emperor Francis Joseph gave Hungary full internal autonomy, together with a responsible ministry, and in return it agreed that the empire should still be a single great state for purposes of war and foreign affairs, thus maintaining its dynastic prestige abroad." – Compromise of 1867, Encyclopædia Britannica, 2007
- ^ Roman, Eric (2009). Austria–Hungary and the Successor States: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present. Infobase Publishing. p. 401. ISBN 978-0-8160-7469-3. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
- ^ The New Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica. 2003. ISBN 978-0-85229-961-6. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
- ^ Szávai, Ferenc Tibor. "Könyvszemle (Book review): Kozári Monika: A dualista rendszer (1867–1918): Modern magyar politikai rendszerek". Magyar Tudomány (in Hungarian). p. 1542. Archived from the original on 28 July 2013. Retrieved 20 July 2012.
- ^ Szávai, Ferenc (2010). Osztrák–magyar külügyi ingatlanok hovatartozása a Monarchia felbomlása után (PDF) (in Hungarian). p. 598. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 December 2012.
- ^ Antun Radić, "Hrvatski pašuši (putnice)" Dom, 15 January 1903, page 11)
- ^ Kosnica, Ivan (2017). "Citizenship in Croatia-Slavonia during the First World War". Journal on European History of Law. 8 (1): 58–65.
- ^ "In 1804 Emperor Franz assumed the title of Emperor of Austria for all the Erblande of the dynasty and for the other lands, including Hungary. Thus Hungary formally became part of the Empire of Austria. The Court reassured the diet, however, that the assumption of the monarch's new title did not in any sense affect the laws and the constitution of Hungary." Laszlo, Péter (2011), Hungary's Long Nineteenth Century: Constitutional and Democratic Traditions, Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, the Netherlands, p. 6
- ^ Éva H. Balázs: Hungary and the Habsburgs, 1765–1800: An Experiment in Enlightened Absolutism. p. 320.
- ^ Flandreau, Marc (April 2006). European Review of Economic History. 10. Cambridge University Press. pp. 3–33. ASIN B00440PZZC. doi:10.1017/S1361491605001607. S2CID 153255836. 1361–4916. Archived from the original on 15 November 2013. Retrieved 18 December 2012.
- ^ a b c d e f One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Briliant, Oscar (1911). "Hungary". In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. 13 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 900.
- ^ Richard L. Rudolph: Banking and Industrialization in Austria–Hungary: The Role of Banks in the Industrialization of the Czech Crownlands, 1873–1914, Cambridge University Press, 2008 (page 17)
- ^ Kann, A History of the Habsburg Empire: 1526–1918 (1974)
- ^ a b c d Taylor 1964
- ^ a b Sked 1989
- ^ Günther Kronenbitter: "Krieg im Frieden". Die Führung der k.u.k. Armee und die Großmachtpolitik Österreich-Ungarns 1906–1914. Verlag Oldenbourg, Munich 2003, ISBN 3-486-56700-4, p. 150
- ^ Victor L. Tapié (1971). The Rise and Fall of the Habsburg Monarchy. New York: Praeger Publishers. p. 301.
- ^ Ernst Bruckmüller (2001). Der Reichsrat, das Parlament der westlichen Reichshälfte Österreich-Ungarns (1861–1918) (in German). Vienna: Schriften des Institutes für Österreichkunde. pp. 60–109. ISBN 3-209-03811-2.
- ^ Randolph L. Braham: The Politics of Genocide, Volume 1 – Third revised and updated edition 2016; p.5-6; ISBN 978-0-88033-711-3
- ^ The territory of Vorarlberg was governed by the governor of Tyrol, and Gorizia and Trieste shared a governor.
- ^ "Austrian Empire" Encyclopædia Britannica 1922
- ^ a b c Zovko 2007, p. 16.
- ^ Zovko 2007, p. 27-28.
- ^ Džaja 1994, p. 45.
- ^ Brauneder 2009, p. 157.
- ^
- ^ a b RGBl 1867/143, Staatsgrundgesetz über die Einsetzung eines Reichsgerichtes.
- ^ Hoke 1996, pp. 400, 403.
- ^
- ^ RGBl 1867/145, Staatsgrundgesetz über die Ausübung der Regierungs- und der Vollzugsgewalt.
- ^ Brauneder 2009, p. 161.
- ^ RGBl 1867/101, Gesetz über die Verantwortlichkeit der Minister.
- ^ "Analysis: Austria's troubled history". BBC News. 3 February 2000. Archived from the original on 23 June 2011. Retrieved 19 August 2010.
- ^ Aviel Roshwald (2002). Ethnic Nationalism and the Fall of Empires: Central Europe, the Middle East and Russia, 1914–23. Taylor & Francis. p. 116. ISBN 978-0-203-18772-2.
- ^ Margarete Grandner, "Conservative Social Politics in Austria, 1880–1890." Austrian History Yearbook 27 (1996): 77–107.
- ^ prof. András Gerő (2014). "Nationalities and the Hungarian Parliament (1867–1918)" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 April 2019.
- ^ "Slovakia – Hungary Relations in the European Union" (PDF). Suedosteuropa-gesellschaft.com. Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 March 2012. Retrieved 19 November 2013.
- ^ "Staatsgrundgesetz über die allgemeinen Rechte und Staatsbürger für die im Reichsrate vertretenen Königreiche und Länder (1867)". Verfassungen.de. Archived from the original on 15 June 2013. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
- ^ Headlam 1911, p. 39.
- ^ Solomon Wank and Barbara Jelavich, "The Impact of the Dual Alliance on the Germans in Austria and Vice-Versa," East Central Europe (1980) 7#2 pp 288–309
- ^ Nicoară, Vincențiu (1890). "Transilvania" (PDF). Asociația Transilvană Pentru Literatura Română și Cultura Poporului Român (in Romanian): 3–9.
- ^ Weigand, Gustav (1892). Romania. Recueil trimestriel consacré à l'étude des langes et des littératures romanes (in French). Émile Bouillon. pp. 240–256.
- ^ Zbuchea, Gheorghe (1999). O istorie a Românilor din Peninsula Balcanică: secolul XVIII-XX (in Romanian). Bucharest: Biblioteca Bucureștilor. ISBN 978-973-98918-8-2.
- ^ Popovici, Iosif (1914). "Dialectele române din Istria" (in Romanian). 9. Halle an der Saale: 21–32. Cite journal requires
|journal=(help) - ^ a b Burada, Teodor (1896). O călătorie prin satele românești din Istria. Iași: Tipografia Națională. pp. 119–198.
- ^ Spicijarić Paškvan, Nina (2014). "Vlachs from the Island Krk in the Primary Historical and Literature Sources". Studii și Cercetări – Actele Simpozionului "Banat – Istorie și Multiculturalitate" (in Croatian): 345–358.
- ^ Budisavljević, Srđan, Stvaranje-Države-SHS, Creation of the state of SHS, Zagreb, 1958, p. 132–133.
- ^ Robert Bideleux and Ian Jeffries, A History of Eastern Europe: Crisis and Change, Routledge, 1998, p. 366.
- ^ Vital, David (1999). A People Apart: A Political History of the Jews in Europe 1789–1939. Oxford University Press. p. 299. ISBN 978-0-19-821980-4.
- ^ Fareed Zacharia, The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad, Norton, 2003, 2007, p. 60
- ^ Rothenberg 1976, p. 118.
- ^ Rothenberg 1976, p. 128.
- ^ David S. Wyman, Charles H. Rosenzveig: The World Reacts to the Holocaust. (page 474)
- ^ "Hungary – Social Changes". Countrystudies.us. Archived from the original on 14 October 2012. Retrieved 19 November 2013.
- ^ László Sebők (2012). "A magyarországi zsidók a számok tükrében" [The Jews in Hungary in the light of the numbers] (in Hungarian). Archived from the original on 20 February 2015.
- ^ Victor Karady and Peter Tibor Nagy (eds.) (2012). "The numerus clausus in Hungary" (PDF). p. 42.CS1 maint: extra text: authors list (link)
- ^ F.R. Bridge, From Sadowa to Sarajevo: The Foreign Policy of Austria–Hungary 1866–1914 (1972).
- ^ See Randall Lesaffer, "The War of 1866 and the Undoing of Vienna" Oxford Public International Law (2021) online
- ^ Schmitt, Hans A. (1968). "Count Beust and Germany, 1866–1870: Reconquest, Realignment, or Resignation?". Central European History. 1 (1): 20–34. doi:10.1017/S000893890001476X. JSTOR 4545476.
- ^ William L. Langer, European Alliances and Alignments: 1871–1890 (2nd ed. 1950) p. 20
- ^ Langer, European Alliances and Alignments: 1871–1890 pp. 138, 155–6, 163
- ^ a b Dieter Nohlen & Philip Stöver (2010) Elections in Europe: A data handbook, p.184 ISBN 978-3-8329-5609-7
- ^ "Magyarország népessége". mek.oszk.hu (in Hungarian). Archived from the original on 22 July 2018. Retrieved 4 February 2019.
- ^ a b "1910. ÉVI NÉPSZÁMLÁLÁS 1. A népesség főbb adatai községek és népesebb puszták, telepek szerint (1912) | Könyvtár | Hungaricana". library.hungaricana.hu.
- ^ "Népszámlálások Erdély területén 1850 és 1910 között". bibl.u-szeged.hu (in Hungarian). Archived from the original on 7 February 2019. Retrieved 6 February 2019.
- ^ A. J. P. Taylor, The Habsburg Monarchy 1809–1918, 1948.
- ^ Wolfsgruber, Cölestin (1907). . In Herbermann, Charles (ed.). Catholic Encyclopedia. 2. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
- ^ 1910. évi népszámlálás adatai. (Magyar Statisztikai Közlemények, Budapest, 1912. pp 30–33)
- ^ Kogutowicz Károly, Hermann Győző: Zsebatlasz: Naptárral és statisztikai adatokkal az 1914. évre. Magyar Földrajzi Intézet R. T., Budapest 1913, S. 69, 105.
- ^ a b "Donaumonarchie Österreich-Ungarn". Donaumonarchie.com. Archived from the original on 29 October 2013. Retrieved 19 November 2013.
- ^ Mühlberger, Kurt (27 February 2015). "The beginnings of the Alma Mater Rudolphina". 650 Plus.
- ^ Strauss, Johann. "Language and power in the late Ottoman Empire" (Chapter 7). In: Murphey, Rhoads (editor). Imperial Lineages and Legacies in the Eastern Mediterranean: Recording the Imprint of Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman Rule (Volume 18 of Birmingham Byzantine and Ottoman Studies). Routledge, 7 July 2016. ISBN 1-317-11844-8, 9781317118442. Google Books PT196.
- ^ Robert B. Kaplan; Richard B. Baldauf (2005). Language Planning and Policy in Europe. Multilingual Matters. p. 56. ISBN 978-1-85359-811-1.
- ^ Barcsay, Thomas (1991). "Banking in Hungarian Economic Development, 1867–1919" (PDF). Ryeson Polytechnical Institute. p. 216. Archived from the original (PDF) on 17 November 2014. Retrieved 28 August 2016.
- ^ Peter F. Sugar, Péter Hanák: A History of Hungary (Publisher: Indiana University Press) Page: 262
- ^ Good, David. The Economic Rise of the Habsburg Empire
- ^ Max-Stephan Schulze (1996). Engineering and Economic Growth: The Development of Austria–Hungary's Machine-Building Industry in the Late Nineteenth Century. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. p. 80.
- ^ Commercial Relations of the United States: Reports from the Consuls of the United States on the Commerce, Manufactures, Etc., of Their Consular Districts. Publisher: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1881 (page: 371)
- ^ Norman Davies (24 February 2005). God's Playground A History of Poland: Volume II: 1795 to the Present. Oxford University Press. pp. 106–108. ISBN 978-0-19-925340-1. Archived from the original on 3 January 2014. Retrieved 17 August 2018.
- ^ Berend, Iván T. (2013). Case Studies on Modern European Economy: Entrepreneurship, Inventions, and Institutions. Routledge. p. 151. ISBN 978-1-135-91768-5.
- ^ Max-Stephan Schulze (1996). Engineering and Economic Growth: The Development of Austria–Hungary's Machine-Building Industry in the Late Nineteenth Century. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. p. 295.
- ^ Erik Eckermann: World History of the Automobile – Page 325
- ^ Hans Seper: Die Brüder Gräf: Geschichte der Gräf & Stift-Automobile
- ^ "Václav Laurin a Václav Klement" (in Czech). Archived from the original on 1 June 2004.
- ^ Kurt Bauer (2003), Faszination des Fahrens: unterwegs mit Fahrrad, Motorrad und Automobil (in German), Böhlau Verlag Wien, Kleine Enzyklopädie des Fahrens, "Lohner", pp. 250–1
- ^ Iván Boldizsár: NHQ; the New Hungarian Quarterly – Volume 16, Issue 2; Volume 16, Issues 59–60 – Page 128
- ^ Hungarian Technical Abstracts: Magyar Műszaki Lapszemle – Volumes 10–13 – Page 41
- ^ Joseph H. Wherry: Automobiles of the World: The Story of the Development of the Automobile, with Many Rare Illustrations from a Score of Nations (Page:443)
- ^ "The history of the biggest pre-War Hungarian car maker". Archived from the original on 22 February 2014. Retrieved 2 September 2013.
- ^ Commerce Reports Volume 4, page 223 (printed in 1927)
- ^ G.N. Georgano: The New Encyclopedia of Motorcars, 1885 to the Present. S. 59.
- ^ Hughes, Thomas P. (1993). Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society, 1880–1930. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. p. 95. ISBN 0-8018-2873-2.
- ^ "Bláthy, Ottó Titusz (1860–1939)". Hungarian Patent Office. Retrieved 29 January 2004.
- ^ Zipernowsky, K.; Déri, M.; Bláthy, O.T. "Induction Coil" (PDF). U.S. Patent 352 105, issued 2 Nov. 1886. Retrieved 8 July 2009.
- ^ American Society for Engineering Education. Conference – 1995: Annual Conference Proceedings, Volume 2, p. 1848.
- ^ Hughes (1993), p. 96.
- ^ Smil, Vaclav (2005). Creating the Twentieth Century: Technical Innovations of 1867–1914 and Their Lasting Impact. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 71. ISBN 978-0-19-803774-3.
ZBD transformer.
- ^ "Vízenergia hasznosítás szigetközi szemmel" (PDF) (in Hungarian). Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 October 2013.
- ^ United States. Congress (1910). Congressional Serial Set. U.S. Government Printing Office. pp. 41, 53.
- ^ "GE Lighting: Rövid történet – A Short History" (PDF). General Electric. 30 May 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 May 2005. Retrieved 23 December 2017.
- ^ See: The History of Tungsram 1896–1945" Page: 32
- ^ See: The History of Tungsram 1896–1945" Page: 33
- ^ Alvin K. Benson (2010). Inventors and inventions Great lives from history Volume 4 of Great Lives from History: Inventors & Inventions. Salem Press. p. 1298. ISBN 978-1-58765-522-7.
- ^ Puskás Tivadar (1844 - 1893) (short biography), Hungarian History website. Retrieved from Archive.org, February 2013.
- ^ "Puskás Tivadar (1844–1893)". Mszh.hu. Archived from the original on 8 October 2010. Retrieved 1 July 2012.
- ^ "Puskás, Tivadar". Omikk.bme.hu. Retrieved 1 July 2012.
- ^ "Welcome hunreal.com - BlueHost.com". Hunreal.com. Archived from the original on 16 March 2012. Retrieved 1 July 2012.
- ^ E und M: Elektrotechnik und Maschinenbau. Volume 24. page 658.
- ^ Eötvös Loránd Matematikai és Fizikai Társulat Matematikai és fizikai lapok. Volumes 39–41. 1932. Publisher: Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
- ^ Contributor Budapesti Történeti Múzeum: Title: Tanulmányok Budapest múltjából. Volume 18. page 310. Publisher Budapesti Történeti Múzeum, 1971.
- ^ Károly Jeney; Ferenc Gáspár; English translator:Erwin Dunay (1990). The History of Tungsram 1896–1945 (PDF). Tungsram Rt. p. 11. ISBN 978-3-939197-29-4.
- ^ IBP, Inc. (2015). Hungary Investment and Business Guide (Volume 1) Strategic and Practical Information World Business and Investment Library. lulu. p. 128. ISBN 978-1-5145-2857-0.
- ^ "Edvard Rusjan, Pioneer of Slovene Aviation". Republic of Slovenia – Government Communication Office. Archived from the original on 15 October 2015. Retrieved 13 April 2015.
- ^ ""Aircraft"(in Hungarian)". mek.oszk.hu. Archived from the original on 3 February 2017. Retrieved 25 January 2017.
- ^ The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA): History of Flight from Around the World Archived 4 May 2014 at the Wayback Machine: Hungary article.
- ^ "Mária Kovács: Short History of Hungarian Aviation" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 December 2013. Retrieved 5 May 2014.
- ^ Péter, Puskel. "Az aradi autógyártás sikertörténetéből". NyugatiJelen.com. Archived from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 9 April 2016.
- ^ "velocipedes" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 September 2018.
- ^ Czechoslovak Foreign Trade, Volume 29. Rapid, Czechoslovak Advertising Agency. 1989. p. 6.
- ^ Iron Age, Volume 85, Issue 1. Chilton Company. 1910. pp. 724–725.
- ^ "Hipo Hipo – Kálmán Kandó(1869–1931)". Sztnh.gov.hu. 29 January 2004. Archived from the original on 14 May 2013. Retrieved 25 March 2013.
- ^ Paula Sutter Fichtner: Historical Dictionary of Austria (p. 69)
- ^ a b "Google Drive – Megtekintő". Retrieved 25 March 2013.[dead link]
- ^ "Telegraph Vienna-Zagreb" (in Croatian). 28 September 2012. Archived from the original on 11 March 2016. Retrieved 11 March 2016.
- ^ Kiesewetter, Herbert: Industrielle Revolution in Deutschland. Regionen als Wachstumsmotoren. Stuttgart, Franz Steiner 2004, ISBN 3-515-08613-7, p. 246.
- ^ "Telegráf – Lexikon". Kislexikon.hu. Archived from the original on 29 April 2014. Retrieved 25 March 2013.
- ^ a b Dániel Szabó, Zoltán Fónagy, István Szathmári, Tünde Császtvay. "Kettős kötődés : Az Osztrák–Magyar Monarchia (1867–1918)". Archived from the original on 31 July 2013.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- ^ Museum of Moslavina Kutina, Jasmina Uroda Kutlić: 'Telefon – čudo Novoga vijeka' (Telephone the miracle of Modern era)
- ^ "125 godina telefonije u Hrvatskoj (125 years of Telephony in Croatia)" (in Croatian). Archived from the original on 11 March 2016. Retrieved 11 March 2016.
- ^ HT Muzej (Croatian Telecom Museum): '125 godina telefonije u Hrvatskoj' (125 years of Telephony in Croatia), Zagreb 2006., P.-2,
- ^ Telephone History Institute: Telecom History – Issue 1 – Page 14
- ^ Thomas Derdak, Adéle Hast: International Directory of Company Histories – Volume 5 – Page 315
- ^ See the above cited book: Stephen Broadberry and Kevin H. O'Rourke: The Cambridge Economic History of Modern Europe: Volume 2, 1870 to the Present, page: 80
- ^ Brousek; Karl M.: Die Großindustrie Böhmens 1848–1918, München: Oldenbourg 1987, ISBN 978-3-486-51871-9, p. 31.
- ^ Broadberry, Stephen; O'Rourke, Kevin H. (2010). The Cambridge Economic History of Modern Europe: Volume 2, 1870 to the Present. Cambridge University Press. p. 80. ISBN 978-1-139-48951-5.
- ^ Mikulas Teich, Roy Porter, The Industrial Revolution in National Context: Europe and the USA, p. 266.
- ^ Iván T. Berend (2003). History Derailed: Central and Eastern Europe in the Long Nineteenth Century (in Hungarian). University of California Press. p. 152. ISBN 978-0-520-23299-0.
- ^ István Tisza and László Kovács: A magyar állami, magán- és helyiérdekű vasúttársaságok fejlődése 1876–1900 között, Magyar Vasúttörténet 2. kötet. Budapest: Közlekedési Dokumentációs Kft., 58–59, 83–84. o. ISBN 963-552-313-0 (1996)(English: The development of Hungarian private and state owned commuter railway companies between 1876 – 1900, Hungarian railway History Volume II.
- ^ Tramways in Austria: Book: Buckley, Richard (2000). Tramways and Light Railways of Switzerland and Austria (2nd edition), pp. 129–135 ISBN 0-948106-27-1.
- ^ Tramways in Czech Republic: Book: Jan Vinař : Historické krovy (page 351)
- ^ Tramways in Poland (including Galicia), Book: Arkadiusz Kołoś, Uniwersytet Jagielloński. Instytut Geografii i Gospodarki Przestrzennej: Rozwój przestrzenny a współczesne funkcjonowanie miejskiego transportu szynowego w Polsce (page: 19)
- ^ History of Public Transport in Hungary. Book: Zsuzsa Frisnyák: A magyarországi közlekedés krónikája, 1750–2000
- ^ Tramways in Croatia: Book: Vlado Puljiz, Gojko Bežovan, Teo Matković, dr. Zoran Šućur, Siniša Zrinščak: Socijalna politika Hrvatske
- ^ "Trams and Tramways in Romania – Timișoara, Arad, Bucharest". beyondtheforest.com. Archived from the original on 20 September 2013. Retrieved 19 August 2013.
- ^ Tramways in Slovakia: Book: Július Bartl: Slovak History: Chronology & Lexicon – p. 112
- ^ Kogan Page: Europe Review 2003/2004, fifth edition, Wolden Publishing Ltd, 2003, page 174
- ^ "The History of BKV, Part 1". Bkv.hu. 22 November 1918. Archived from the original on 12 March 2013. Retrieved 25 March 2013.
- ^ UNESCO World Heritage Centre. "UNESCO World Heritage Centre – World Heritage Committee Inscribes 9 New Sites on the World Heritage List". whc.unesco.org. Archived from the original on 28 November 2009. Retrieved 10 April 2013.
- ^ "Budapest's Electric Underground Railway Is Still Running After More Than 120 Years". IEEE. 31 March 2020. Retrieved 8 October 2021.
- ^ Žmuc, Irena (2010). "Sustained Interest" (PDF). In Županek, Bernarda (ed.). Emona: Myth and Reality. Museum and Galleries of Ljubljana; City Museum of Ljubljana. p. 63. ISBN 978-961-6509-20-6. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 November 2013. Retrieved 19 June 2012.
- ^ John Scott-Keltie (1919). The Statesman's Yearbook. Macmillan. p. 670.
- ^ "Deutschlandfunk – Essay und Diskurs". Dradio.de. Archived from the original on 14 September 2011. Retrieved 11 September 2011.
- ^ Swiggum, Sue (3 May 2008). "Unione Austriaca (Austro-Americana) / Cosulich Line". Theshipslist.com. Archived from the original on 1 October 2011. Retrieved 11 September 2011.
- ^ "Baron Gautsch". Members.dame.at. 16 June 1908. Archived from the original on 30 August 2011. Retrieved 11 September 2011.
- ^ "Österreichischer Lloyd". Aeiou.at. 31 July 2001. Archived from the original on 7 December 2011. Retrieved 11 September 2011.
- ^ "Wörthersee Schifffahrt". Archived from the original on 28 March 2009. Retrieved 28 August 2016.
- ^ "DDSG Blue Danube GmbH". Ddsg-blue-danube.at. 13 November 2006. Archived from the original on 2 September 2011. Retrieved 11 September 2011.
- ^ Victor-L. Tapie, The Rise and Fall of the Habsburg Monarchy p. 267
- ^ John Scott-Keltie (1919). The Statesman's Yearbook. Macmillan. p. 683.
- ^ Gunther Rothenburg, The Army of Francis Joseph (1976).
- ^ a b One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Headlam, James Wycliffe (1911b). "Austria-Hungary". In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. 3 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 3.
- ^ Headlam 1911b, p. 4.
- ^ Wheatcroft, Andrew (28 April 2009). The Enemy at the Gate: Habsburgs, Ottomans and the Battle for Europe, p. 264. ISBN 978-0-7867-4454-1.
- ^ Rene Albrecht-Carrie, A Diplomatic History of Europe Since the Congress of Vienna (1973) CH 6
- ^ a b c d e f g "Austria". Britannica. Archived from the original on 13 March 2012. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
- ^ "Austria-Hungary - MSN Encarta". 28 August 2009. Archived from the original on 28 August 2009.
- ^ Rene Albrecht-Carrie, A Diplomatic History of Europe Since the Congress of Vienna (1973) pp 201–14
- ^ "The Austrian Occupation of Novibazar, 1878–1909". Mount HolyOak. Archived from the original on 19 January 2012. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
- ^ Rene Albrecht-Carrie, A Diplomatic History of Europe Since the Congress of Vienna (1973) ch 8
- ^ Rene Albrecht-Carrie, A Diplomatic History of Europe Since the Congress of Vienna (1973) pp 259–72
- ^ Gooch, 1936, pp 366-438.
- ^ Wank, 2020.
- ^ M.B. Cooper, "British Policy in the Balkans, 1908-9." Historical Journal 7.2 (1964): 258-279.
- ^ Arthur J. May, The Habsburg Monarchy 1867- 1914 (Harvard University Press, 1965) pp. 412-424.
- ^ F.R. Bridge, From Sadowa to Sarajevo: the foreign policy of Austria-Hungary, 1866-1914 (1972) pp 338-39.
- ^ Jeffrey Finestone; Robert K. Massie (1981). The last courts of Europe. Dent. p. 247. ISBN 978-0-460-04519-3.
- ^ David James Smith (2010). One Morning in Sarajevo. Hachette UK. ISBN 978-0-297-85608-5.
He was photographed on the way to the station and the photograph has been reproduced many times in books and articles, claiming to depict the arrest of Gavrilo Princip. But there is no photograph of Gavro's arrest – this photograph shows the arrest of Behr.
- ^ "European powers maintain focus despite killings in Sarajevo — History.com This Day in History — 6/30/1914". History.com. Archived from the original on 23 June 2011. Retrieved 11 September 2011.
- ^ Dimitrije Djordjević; Richard B. Spence (1992). Scholar, patriot, mentor: historical essays in honor of Dimitrije Djordjević. East European Monographs. p. 313. ISBN 978-0-88033-217-0.
Following the assassination of Franz Ferdinand in June 1914, Catholic Croats and Muslims in Sarajevo joined forces in an anti-Serb pogrom.
- ^ Reports Service: Southeast Europe series. American Universities Field Staff. 1964. p. 44. Retrieved 7 December 2013.
... the assassination was followed by officially encouraged anti-Serb riots in Sarajevo ...
- ^ Daniela Gioseffi (1993). On Prejudice: A Global Perspective. Anchor Books. p. 246. ISBN 978-0-385-46938-8. Retrieved 2 September 2013.
... Andric describes the "Sarajevo frenzy of hate" that erupted among Muslims, Catholics, and Orthodox believers following the assassination on June 28, 1914, of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo ...
- ^ Andrej Mitrović (2007). Serbia's Great War, 1914–1918. Purdue University Press. p. 19. ISBN 978-1-55753-477-4. Retrieved 7 December 2013.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, p. 485
The Bosnian wartime militia (Schutzkorps), which became known for its persecution of Serbs, was overwhelmingly Muslim.
- ^ John R. Schindler (2007). Unholy Terror: Bosnia, Al-Qa'ida, and the Rise of Global Jihad. Zenith Imprint. p. 29. ISBN 978-1-61673-964-5.
- ^ Herbert Kröll (28 February 2008). Austrian-Greek encounters over the centuries: history, diplomacy, politics, arts, economics. Studienverlag. p. 55. ISBN 978-3-7065-4526-6. Retrieved 1 September 2013.
... arrested and interned some 5.500 prominent Serbs and sentenced to death some 460 persons, a new Schutzkorps, an auxiliary militia, widened the anti-Serb repression.
- ^ William Jannen: Lions of July: Prelude to War, 1914 – PAGE:456
- ^ David G. Herrmann: The Arming of Europe and the Making of the First World War, p. 211, Princeton University Press (1997) ISBN 978-0-691-01595-8
- ^ Fischer, Fritz: Germany's Aims in the First World War, New York, W.W. Norton, 1967, ISBN 978-0-393-09798-6, p. 52
- ^ "First World War.com – Who's Who – Count Istvan Tisza de Boros-Jeno". firstworldwar.com. Archived from the original on 21 April 2014. Retrieved 28 February 2014.
- ^ Source: Ladislaus Count von Szögyény-Marich (Berlin) to Leopold Count von Berchtold (5 July 1914), in Ludwig Bittner, et. al., eds., Österreich-Ungarns Aussenpolitik von der Bosnischen Krise 1908 bis zum Kriegsausbruch 1914 [Austria–Hungary's Foreign Policy prior to the Bosnian Crisis of 1908 up to the Outbreak of War in 1914]. 8 vols, Vienna, 1930, vol. 8, no. 10,058.
- ^ "Primary Documents: Austrian Ultimatum to Serbia". 24 May 2003 [Originally published 23 July 1914]. Archived from the original on 30 October 2004. Retrieved 29 September 2019.
- ^ Christopher Clark, The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 pp. 420–30 (2013)
- ^ A. F. Pribram, Austrian Foreign Policy, 1908–18 (1923) pp 68–128.
- ^ Z.A.B. Zeman, A diplomatic history of the First World War (1971) pp 121–61.
- ^ Stevenson, The First World War and International Politics (1988) pp 139–48.
- ^ David Stevenson, "The failure of peace by negotiation in 1917." Historical Journal 34#1 (1991): 65–86.
- ^ Edward P. Keleher, "Emperor Karl and the Sixtus Affair: Politico-Nationalist Repercussions in the Reich German and Austro-German Camps, and the Disintegration of Habsburg Austria, 1916–1918." East European Quarterly 26.2 (1992): 163+.
- ^ Alexander Watson, Ring of Steel: Germany and Austria–Hungary at War, 1914–1918 (2014). pp 536–40.
- ^ a b Schulze, Max-Stephan (2005). "Austria–Hungary's economy in World War I" (PDF). In Broadberry, Stephen; Harrison, Mark (eds.). The Economics of World War I. Cambridge University Press. p. 95. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511497339.002. ISBN 978-0-521-85212-8. S2CID 16455027. Archived from the original (PDF) on 29 September 2018. Retrieved 6 June 2018.
- ^ Robert A. Kann, et al. eds. The Habsburg Empire in World War I: Essays on the Intellectual, Military, Political and Economic Aspects of the Habsburg War Effort (1977)
- ^ Mowat, C.L. (1968). The New Cambridge Modern History. volume xii. (CUP Archive)London: Cambridge University Press. p. 479. ISBN 978-0-521-04551-3.
- ^ Andreas Kappeler (2014). The Russian Empire: A Multi-ethnic History. Routledge. p. 287. ISBN 978-1-317-56810-0.
- ^ Sima M. Cirkovic (2008). The Serbs Volume 10 of The Peoples of Europe. John Wiley & Sons. p. 235. ISBN 978-1-4051-4291-5.
- ^ Marius Rotar (2013). History of Modern Cremation in Romania. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. p. 24. ISBN 978-1-4438-4542-7.
- ^ Stephen Broadberry; Kevin H. O'Rourke (2010). The Cambridge Economic History of Modern Europe: Volume 2, 1870 to the Present. Cambridge University Press. p. 70. ISBN 978-1-139-48951-5. Archived from the original on 15 October 2015. Retrieved 28 September 2015.
- ^ David Stevenson (2011). With Our Backs to the Wall: Victory and Defeat in 1918. Harvard University Press. p. 399. ISBN 978-0-674-06319-8.
- ^ Maureen Healy, Vienna and the Fall of the Habsburg Empire: Total War and Everyday Life in World War I (2007)
- ^ Ivo Banac, "'Emperor Karl Has Become a Comitadji': The Croatian Disturbances of Autumn 1918." Slavonic and East European Review 70#2 (1992): 284–305.
- ^ Spencer Tucker (1996). The European Powers in the First World War. p. 173. ISBN 978-0-8153-0399-2.
- ^ Alexander Watson, Ring of Steel: Germany and Austria–Hungary in World War I (2014)
- ^ "French forces occupy Corfu — History.com This Day in History — 1/11/1916". History.com. Archived from the original on 23 June 2011. Retrieved 11 September 2011.
- ^ Burgwyn, H. James (1997). Italian foreign policy in the interwar period, 1918–1940. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 4. ISBN 978-0-275-94877-1.
- ^ John R. Schindler, Isonzo: The Forgotten Sacrifice of the Great War (2001)
- ^ Gaetano V. Cavallaro (2010). The Beginning of Futility: Diplomatic, Political, Military and Naval Events on the Austro-Italian Front in the First World War 1914–1917 I. p. 339. ISBN 978-1-4010-8426-4.
- ^ Pier Paolo Cervone, Vittorio Veneto, l'ultima battaglia, Milano, Mursia, 1993.
- ^ Indro Montanelli; Mario Cervi, Due secoli di guerre, VII, Novara, Editoriale Nuova, 1981.
- ^ Glenn E. Torrey, Romania and World War I (Histria Books, 1998)
- ^ "Gary W. Shanafelt. Review of Torrey, Glenn E., Romania and World War I: A Collection of Studies. HABSBURG, H-Net Reviews. April, 1999".
- ^ Newman, John. "Serbian and Habsburg Military institutional legacies in Yugoslavia after 1918" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 25 February 2019. Retrieved 24 February 2019.
- ^ Watson, Ring of Steel p 396-97
- ^ See: 1910 census
- ^ Buranbaeva, Oksana; Mladineo, Vanja (2011). Culture and Customs of Hungary, Cultures and Customs of the World. Bonn, Germany: ABC-CLIO. p. 32. ISBN 978-0-313-38370-0.
- ^ Alexander Watson, Ring of Steel: Germany and Austria–Hungary in World War I (2014), p 536
- ^ Watson, Ring of Steel pp 536–40
- ^ Watson, Ring of Steel pp. 541–2
- ^ "Hungarian foreign ministers from 1848 to our days". Mfa.gov.hu. Archived from the original on 21 June 2006. Retrieved 28 August 2016.
- ^ Watson, Ring of Steel pp 542–56
- ^ The 1918 Karl's proclamation. British Library.
- ^ The Proclamation of the Abdication of Emperor Karl I of Austria. British Library.
- ^ "Die amtliche Meldung über den Rücktritt" (in German). Neue Freie Presse, Morgenblatt. 24 August 1919. p. 2. Archived from the original on 26 December 2015. Retrieved 2 June 2017.
- ^ "Trianon, Treaty of". The Columbia Encyclopedia. 2012. Archived from the original on 28 December 2008. Retrieved 28 August 2016.
- ^ Tucker, Spencer; Priscilla Mary Roberts (2005). Encyclopedia of World War I (1 ed.). ABC-CLIO. p. 1183. ISBN 978-1-85109-420-2.
Virtually the entire population of what remained of Hungary regarded the Treaty of Trianon as manifestly unfair, and agitation for revision began immediately.
- ^ Stangl, Andrea. "The successor states to the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy". habsburger.net. Retrieved 3 March 2021.
- ^ Samuel R. Williamson, Austria-Hungary and the origins of the First World War (Macmillan International Higher Education, 1990), states, "Through the occupation Austria-Hungary became a colonial power." p. 63.
- ^ For more information about the Austro-Hungarian concession, see: Concessions in Tianjin#Austro-Hungarian concession (1901–1917).
Bibliography
- Brauneder, Wilhelm (2009). Österreichische Verfassungsgeschichte (in German) (11th ed.). Vienna: Manzsche Verlags- und Universitätsbuchhandlung. ISBN 978-3-214-14876-8.
- Džaja, Srećko M. (1994). Bosnien-Herzegowina in der österreichisch-ungarischen Epoche 1878–1918 (in German). Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag. ISBN 3-486-56079-4.
- Hoke, Rudolf (1996). Österreichische und deutsche Rechtsgeschichte (in German) (2nd ed.). Vienna: Böhlau Studienbücher. ISBN 3-205-98179-0.
- Rothenberg, Gunther E. (1976), The Army of Francis Joseph, Purdue University Press
- Zovko, Ljubomir (2007). Studije iz pravne povijesti Bosne i Hercegovine: 1878. - 1941 (in Croatian). University of Mostar. ISBN 978-9958-9271-2-6.
Further reading
- Armour, Ian D. "Apple of Discord: Austria-Hungary, Serbia and the Bosnian Question 1867-71." Slavonic and East European Review 87#4 2009, pp. 629–680. online
- Bagger, Eugene S, Francis Joseph : emperor of Austria--king of Hungary (1927) online
- Bridge, F.R. From Sadowa to Sarajevo: the foreign policy of Austria-Hungary, 1866-1914 (1972) online
- Cipolla, ed., Carlo M. (1973). The Emergence of Industrial Societies vol 4 part 1. Glasgow: Fontana Economic History of Europe. pp. 228–278.CS1 maint: extra text: authors list (link) online
- Cornwall, Mark, ed. The Last Years of Austria–Hungary: Essays in political and military history, 1908-1918 (U of Exeter Press, 2002). online ISBN 0-85989-563-7
- Encyclopædia Britannica (12th ed. 1922) comprises the 11th edition plus three new volumes (30–32) that cover events since 1911 with very thorough coverage of World War I as well as every country and colony (partly online).
Pribram, Alfred Francis (1922). "Austrian Empire". In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. 30 (12th ed.). London & New York: The Encyclopædia Britannica Company. pp. 313–343.
- Evans, R. J. W. Austria, Hungary, and the Habsburgs (2008) doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199541621.001.0001
- Fichtner, Paula Sutter. Historical Dictionary of Austria (2nd ed 2009)
- Good, David. The Economic Rise of the Habsburg Empire (1984) excerpt
- Herman, Arthur. What Life Was Like: At Empire's End : Austro-Hungarian Empire 1848–1918 (Time Life, 2000); heavily illustrated
- Jelavich, Barbara. Modern Austria: empire and republic, 1815-1986 (Cambridge UP, 1987, pp 72–150.
- Judson, Pieter M. (2016). The Habsburg Empire. doi:10.4159/9780674969346. ISBN 978-0-674-96934-6. pp 264–436.
- Johnston., William M. The Austrian Mind: An Intellectual and Social History, 1848-1938 (U of California Press, 1972) 515 pp.
- Kann, Robert A. (1974). A History of the Habsburg Empire: 1526–1918. U of California Press.; highly detailed history; emphasis on ethnicity
- Macartney, Carlile Aylmer The Habsburg Empire, 1790–1918, New York, Macmillan 1969.
- Mason, John W. The dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian empire, 1867-1918 (Routledge, 2014).
- May, Arthur J. The Hapsburg Monarchy 1867–1914 (Harvard UP, 1951). online
- Milward, Alan, and S. B. Saul. The Development of the Economies of Continental Europe 1850-1914 (1977) pp 271–331. online
- Mitchell, A. (2018). The Grand Strategy of the Habsburg Empire. doi:10.23943/9781400889969. ISBN 978-1-4008-8996-9.
- Oakes, Elizabeth and Eric Roman. Austria–Hungary and the Successor States: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present (2003)
- Palmer, Alan. Twilight of the Habsburgs: The Life and Times of Emperor Francis Joseph. New York: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1995. ISBN 0-87113-665-1
- Redlich, Joseph. Emperor Francis Joseph Of Austria. New York: Macmillan, 1929. online free
- Roman, Eric. Austria-Hungary & the Successor States: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present (2003), 699pp online
- Rudolph, Richard L. Banking and industrialization in Austria-Hungary: the role of banks in the industrialization of the Czech crownlands, 1873-1914 (1976) online
- Sauer, Walter. "Habsburg Colonial: Austria-Hungary's Role in European Overseas Expansion Reconsidered,” Austrian Studies (2012) 20:5-23 ONLINE
- Sked, Alan (1989). The Decline and Fall of the Habsburg Empire, 1815–1918. London: Longman.
- Steed, Henry Wickham; et al. (1914). A short history of Austria–Hungary and Poland. Encyclopaedia Britannica Company. p. 145.
- Sugar, Peter F. et al. eds. A History of Hungary (1990), pp 252–294.
- Taylor, A.J.P. (1964). The Habsburg monarchy, 1809–1918: a history of the Austrian Empire and Austria–Hungary (2nd ed.). London: Penguin Books.; politics and diplomacy
- Tschuppik, Karl. The reign of the Emperor Fransis Joseph (1930) online
- Turnock, David. Eastern Europe: An Historical Geography: 1815-1945 (1989)
- Usher, Roland G. "Austro-German Relations Since 1866." American Historical Review 23.3 (1918): 577-595 online.
- Várdy, Steven, and Agnes Várdy. The Austro-Hungarian mind: at home and abroad (East European Monographs, 1989)
- Vermes, Gabor. "The Impact of the Dual Alliance on the Magyars of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy" East Central Europe (1980) vol 7 DOI: 10.1163/187633080x00211
World war
- Bassett, Richard. For God and Kaiser: The Imperial Austrian Army, 1619-1918 (2016) excerpt
- Boyer, John W. (2003). "Silent War and Bitter Peace: The Revolution of 1918 in Austria" (PDF). Austrian History Yearbook. 34: 1–56. doi:10.1017/S0067237800020427. S2CID 145716467. Archived from the original (PDF) on 11 February 2020.
- Cornwall, Mark (1992). "News, Rumour and the Control of Information in Austria–Hungary, 1914–1918". History. 77 (249): 50–64. doi:10.1111/j.1468-229X.1992.tb02392.x.
- Cornwall, Mark (2000). The Undermining of Austria–Hungary. doi:10.1057/9780230286351. ISBN 978-1-349-42240-1.
- Craig, Gordon A. (1965). "The World War I Alliance of the Central Powers in Retrospect: The Military Cohesion of the Alliance". The Journal of Modern History. 37 (3): 336–344. doi:10.1086/600693. JSTOR 1875406. S2CID 154381768.
- Crankshaw, Edward. The Fall of the House of Habsburg (Viking, 1963). Pp. 449.
- Deak, John, and Jonathan E. Gumz. "How to Break a State: The Habsburg Monarchy’s Internal War, 1914–1918" American Historical Review 122.4 (2017): 1105–1136. online
- Dedijer, Vladimir (1966). The Road to Sarajevo.
- Grátz, Gusztáv. he economic policy of Austria-Hungary during the war in its external relations (Yale UP, 1928) online
- Healy, Maureen (2007). Vienna and the Fall of the Habsburg Empire: Total War and Everyday Life in World War I.
- Herweg, Holger H. (2009). The First World War: Germany and Austria–Hungary 1914–1918.
- Jászi, Oszkár (1966). The Dissolution of the Habsburg Monarchy. University of Chicago Press. online
- Jung, Peter (2003). The Austro-Hungarian Forces in World War I (2). ISBN 1-84176-594-5.
- Kann, Robert A.; et al., eds. (1977). The Habsburg Empire in World War I: Essays on the Intellectual, Military, Political and Economic Aspects of the Habsburg War Effort. ISBN 0-914710-16-8.
- Katzenstein, Peter J. (1976). Disjoined partners: Austria and Germany since 1815. ISBN 9780520029453.
- Kapp, Richard W. (1984). "Divided Loyalties: The German Reich and Austria–Hungary in Austro-German Discussions of War Aims, 1914–1916". Central European History. 17 (2–3): 120–139. doi:10.1017/S0008938900016435.
- Kronenbitter, Günther. "Pre-war Military Planning (Austria–Hungary)." online
- Rauchensteiner, Manfried (2014). The First World War and the End of the Habsburg Monarchy, 1914–1918. Wien/Köln/Weimar: Böhlau Verlag. ISBN 978-3-205-79588-9.
- Sked, Alan. "Austria–Hungary and the First World War." Histoire@ Politique 1 (2014): 16–49. Online
- Tomasevich, Jozo (2001). War and Revolution in Yugoslavia: 1941–1945. Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-0-8047-7924-1. Retrieved 4 December 2013.
- Vermes, Gabor István Tisza: The Liberal Vision and Conservative Statecraft of a Magyar Nationalist (Columbia University Press, 1986); online review
- Wank, Solomon. In the Twilight of Empire. Count Alois Lexa von Aehrenthal (1854–1912): Imperial Habsburg Patriot and Statesman. Vol. 2: From Foreign Minister in Waiting to de facto Chancellor (Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2020).
- Watson, Alexander (2014). Ring of Steel: Germany and Austria–Hungary at War, 1914–1918. ASIN B00JZBA9MO.
- Wawro, Geoffrey (2014). A Mad Catastrophe: The Outbreak of World War I and the Collapse of the Habsburg Empire.
- Williamson, Samuel R. (1991). Austria–Hungary and the Origins of the First World War. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-21163-0. ISBN 978-0-333-42081-2.
- Zametica, John (2017). Folly and malice: the Habsburg empire, the Balkans and the start of World War One. London: Shepheard–Walwyn. p. 416.
Primary sources
- Austro-Hungarian Monarchy. Austro-Hungarian red book. (1915) English translations of official documents to justify the war. online
- Baedeker, Karl (1906). "Austria–Hungary, Including Dalmatia and Bosnia. Handbook for Travellers". Bulletin of the American Geographical Society. 38 (3): 208. doi:10.2307/197930. hdl:2027/mdp.39015004037399. JSTOR 197930.
- Gooch, G. P. Recent Revelations of European Diplomacy (1940), pp 103–59 summarizes memoirs of major participants
- Steed, Henry Wickham. The Hapsburg monarchy (1919) online detailed contemporary account
Historiography and memory
- Boyd, Kelly, ed. Encyclopedia of Historians and Historical Writers (Rutledge, 1999) 1:60–63, historiography
- Deak, John (2014). "The Great War and the Forgotten Realm: The Habsburg Monarchy and the First World War". The Journal of Modern History. 86 (2): 336–380. doi:10.1086/675880. S2CID 143481172.
- Körner, Axel. "Beyond Nation States: New Perspectives on the Habsburg Empire." European History Quarterly 48.3 (2018): 516-533. online
- Kożuchowski, Adam (2013). The Afterlife of Austria–Hungary. doi:10.2307/j.ctt7zw9vt. ISBN 978-0-8229-7917-3.
- Kwan, Jonathan (2011). "Review Article: Nationalism and all that: Reassessing the Habsburg Monarchy and its legacy". European History Quarterly. 41: 88–108. doi:10.1177/0265691410386424. S2CID 143745426.
- Sked, Alan. "Explaining the Habsburg Empire, 1830–90." in Pamela Pilbeam, ed., Themes in Modern European History 1830–1890 (Routledge, 2002) pp. 141–176.
- Sked, Alan. "Austria–Hungary and the First World War." Histoire Politique 1 (2014): 16–49. online free historiography
In German
- Geographischer Atlas zur Vaterlandskunde an der österreichischen Mittelschulen. (ed.: Rudolf Rothaug), K. u. k. Hof-Kartographische Anstalt G. Freytag & Berndt, Vienna, 1911.
External links
- Articles relating to Austria–Hungary at the International Encyclopedia of the First World War.
- Habsburg Empire Austrian line
- Microsoft Encarta: The height of the dual monarchy (Archived 31 October 2009)
- The Austro-Hungarian Military
- Heraldry of the Austro-Hungarian Empire
- Austria–Hungary at the Wayback Machine (archived 12 January 2008) – extensive list of heads of state, ministers, and ambassadors
- History of Austro-Hungarian currency
- Austria–Hungary, Dual Monarchy
- Map of Europe and the collapse of Austria–Hungary at omniatlas.com
- Mangham, Arthur Neal. The Social Bases of Austrian Politics: The German Electoral Districts of Cisleithania, 1900–1914. Ph.D. thesis 1974
- Austro-Hungarian Land Forces 1848–1918
- Oldphoto.info - Austro-Hungarian Imperial and Royal Army
- HABSBURG is a email discussion list dealing with the culture and history of the Habsburg Monarchy and its successor states in central Europe since 1500, with discussions, syllabi, book reviews, queries, conferences; edited daily by scholars since 1994
| ← Kingdom of Hungary (1686–1867) ← Austrian Empire |
Hungary → (1918–) Austria → | |
| Kingdom of Hungary as part of Austria–Hungary (Transleithania) | ||
| General | |
|---|---|
| National libraries | |
| Scientific databases | |
| Other | |
.svg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
- Austria-Hungary
- Former countries in the Balkans
- Former empires
- Former monarchies of Europe
- Habsburg Monarchy
- House of Habsburg-Lorraine
- Modern history of Austria
- Modern history of Hungary
- Hungary under Habsburg rule
- States and territories established in 1867
- 1867 establishments in Europe
- States and territories disestablished in 1918
- 1918 disestablishments in Austria-Hungary
- 1918 disestablishments in Europe
- Christian states