SION, WAR OF.) But the change of regime in England, the quarrel between Queen Anne and the Whigs, and her growing dislike of Marl borough was disastrous for the allies' conduct of the war. The greatest change was, however, brought about by the death of Joseph I. (April 171 1) and the succession of Charles VI. 0711- 40). The same danger to the balance of power which had led the maritime powers to oppose the establishment of the Bourbons in France and Spain, now threatened them from the Habsburgs in Spain and Central Europe. England signed a separate treaty with France (Treaty of Utrecht, April I I, 1713) ; and the emperor had finally to submit to a compromise. On March 7, 1714, the Peace of Rastatt was signed. Charles finally renounced the terri tories in Alsace, but received Naples, Milan, Sardinia, the Tuscan sea-board and the Spanish Netherlands. The recognition by the emperor of the Bourbon Philip V. in Spain was not expressed in the treaty, but was implicit in it. When Philip, secretly supported by the duke of Savoy, attempted in 1717 to recover part of the Italian possessions, the emperor, in 1718, joined the alliance concluded in 1716 between England, Holland and France. The duke of Savoy was forced to cede Sicily to the emperor, receiv ing Sardinia in return. The support of the Saxon candidature in Poland (1733) led Charles VI. to war with France, Savoy and Spain. Charles, abandoned by the maritime powers, his allies, and supported too late by Russia, was defeated, and ceded No vara and Tortona to Savoy, the kingdoms of Naples and Sicily and the sea-board in Tuscany to Don Carlos, receiving in return the duchies of Parma and Piacenza (preliminary peace of Vienna with the king of France, Oct. 3, 1735; Peace of Vienna, Nov. 1738).
A war with Turkey (1736-39), in which Charles was allied with Russia, brought still graver losses : Bosnia, Serbia and the two Wallachias. The Peace of Belgrade (Sept. 1739) defined the lower Unna, the Save, and the Danube as far as Orsova as the Austro-Turkish frontier.
Maria Theresa; the Wars of the Austrian Succession.— On the death of Charles VI. (Oct. 174o) the male line of the Habsburgs became extinct. He was succeeded in Austria, Bohemia and Hungary by his daughter, Maria Theresa (1740-80) (b. I 717) who, in 1736 married Francis Stephen of Lorraine (which he ex changed against Tuscany in 1737). The Estates of her dominions recognized Maria Theresa's succession unreservedly, but Bavaria, Saxony and Spain laid claim to Habsburg territories, and Frederick II. of Prussia, claiming that old treaties entitled his house to parts of Silesia, declared war. His first great victory at Mollwitz (1741), encouraged France, Bavaria, Spain, Saxony and Sardinia to attack Maria Theresa, who, allied with the Maritime Powers, resisted with varying success. (See AUSTRIAN SUCCESSION, WAR OF.) At the Peace of Breslau (June 1742), concluded at Eng land's advice, she ceded most of Silesia to Prussia. In hoping to compensate herself in Bavaria for this loss, she occu pied that state, but Prussia intervened (1744), and the war was again victorious. The Treaty of Dresden (Dec. 1745) confirmed the provisions of the Treaty of Breslau without territorial altera tions. Fortunately for Maria Theresa, the Elector Charles of Bavaria (as Emperor Charles VII.) died early in 1745 ; his son concluded peace in April and in September Maria Theresa's hus band, Francis I., was crowned emperor The other enemies prosecuted the war in the Spanish Nether lands and Italy. But despite successes, won chiefly by the French commander, Maurice of Saxony (q.v.) in the Spanish Netherlands in 1746-7, France inclined to peace, as Russia had been induced by the Maritime Powers to help Austria, and England prosecuted the war against France at sea with increasing success. By the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (Oct. 18, 1748) Austria ceded Parma, Piacenza and Guastalla to the Spanish Infante, Philip.
Despite her territorial losses in these wars, Austria's prestige had risen. She had shown unexpected vitality, and in some re spects, notably the improved quality of her army and greater experience of her generals, was stronger than at the beginning of the struggle.
The period 1748-58 was occupied in preparations for carrying into effect Maria Theresa's determination to recover her lost possessions. The influence of Wenzel, Prince Kaunitz (q.v.) was predominant in convincing the cautious, hesitating empress that a reversal of Austria's foreign policy was necessary to the fulfil ment of these ambitions. Increasing differences, mainly of com mercial policy, with the Maritime Powers made the continuance of the old alliance impracticable, and Kaunitz, recognizing that Prussia, not France, was now Austria's chief enemy, persuaded Maria Theresa to ally herself with France. The Treaty of May I, 1756, confirmed and extended in 1757, ended the long Bourbon Habsburg rivalry. In the Seven Years' War (q.v.), France and Austria were ranged against England and Prussia. Despite the alliance with France and (later) Russia and some smaller powers, and the support of the empire, Maria Theresa failed to recover Silesia. The Peace of Hubertusberg (Feb. 15, 1763) restored the status quo ante bellurn. Austro-Prussian rivalry, however, sub sisted, and led to fresh conflicts when Joseph II., who succeeded his father as emperor in 1765, becoming simultaneously co-regent with his mother in the Habsburg dominions, planned on the death, without children of the Bavarian Elector (17 7 7) to annex Bavaria as compensation for Silesia. Frederick II., however, advanced into Bohemia, and as Maria Theresa shrank from another cam paign against Frederick, the Peace of Teschen was concluded (May 1779), whereby Austria received the Inn district, renounc ing all other claims on Bavaria.
The contemporary theories of state supremacy and anti-papal feeling (Febronianism), wide-spread in the monarchy, in ecclesi astical as well as lay circles, deeply influenced the Government's relations with the Catholic Church. Various measures were de vised to strengthen the state in clerical questions. A new law forbade publication of papal bulls without the consent of the crown, and direct intercourse between the bishops and Rome ; the privileges of the religious orders were curtailed. Maria Theresa herself was a devout Catholic, distinctly hostile towards the Jews, against whom she issued several severe decrees, including decrees of expulsion, a fate shared on occasions by the Protestants. Her government devoted particular attention to taxation. Negotia tions with the Estates led to a considerable increase in the pro vincial contributions ; the basis of the land tax was revised, the estates of nobles and the Church submitted to the regular taxa tion. The customs system was revised (1775), although still in adequately. Maria Theresa also claimed the codification of the law as her prerogative, wishing to replace the extraordinarily numerous systems current by a single, unified code. In 1768 a unified criminal code and procedure (the Theresianische Halsge richtsordnung) was introduced for the German-Bohemian lands. Torture, retained here, was abolished in 1776. A civil code was completed in 1767, but not approved by the sovereign.
Joseph's intervention in ecclesiastical conditions in his do minions was drastic. The Patent of Tolerance (Oct. 1781) granted extensive concessions to the non-Catholic Christian creeds, while the Jews were freed from many restrictions imposed on them from earlier centuries. Joseph maintained the absolute power of the State even in ecclesiastical matters and wished to exclude the pope from influence over internal ecclesiastical conditions in his domains. No papal bull might be published without previous permission from the Government. Appeals to Rome and the pro cural of dispensations were forbidden. In 1782 the abolition of all purely contemplative monasteries was decreed and their prop erty confiscated by the State, which assumed control over the remaining monasteries. Theological instruction was completely taken over by the State and State general seminaries established. The Marriage Patent (1783) declared marriage a civil contract validated only by civil law. The pope's personal intervention with Joseph proved fruitless.
Both the revolutionary contents of these reforms and the auto cratic severity of their execution elicited wide-spread resistance, particularly among influential circles. Hungary resented deeply the violation of the Estates' traditional rights and the attempts at Germanization, and Belgium the anti-Catholic measures. In both countries there were revolts which the emperor could pos sibly have repressed, had he not been engaged simultaneously on an ambitious foreign policy as impracticable as his internal re forms. His hope of exchanging Bavaria for the Spanish Nether lands had to be abandoned when Frederick II. of Prussia founded a League of Princes (1785). He was equally unlucky in his at tempt to expand his territories eastwards, allied with Russia. Loudon's Turkish campaign of 1789 reversed the Austrian armies' ill-success in 1788 and Belgrade was captured, but the foreign and internal situation made it impossible to follow up the victories. Prussia, allied since 1788 with the Maritime Powers, concluded treaties with Turkey and Poland and armed. Russia, Austria's ally was weakened by an attack by Sweden, France by her revo lution. Simultaneously open revolt broke out in the Austrian Netherlands against Joseph's ecclesiastical and administrative innovations. The discontent in Hungary also became formidable and the Galician nobles were preparing a movement with Prussia's connivance, and opposition to Joseph's methods was growing even in the Austrian and Bohemian territories. Further, the treasury was empty. Joseph had to recognize that his plans were premature. He revoked most of his reforms in Hungary and the Austrian Netherlands.
Leopold's attitude towards the French Revolution was dictated by the wish to preserve peace and avoid implications in European entanglements. To restore internal tranquillity he revoked almost all Joseph's reforms. In Hungary he sanctioned a number of laws framed to guarantee the Hungarian constitution against further violations and safeguard the independence of the internal ad ministration. Latin was introduced as the official language of ad ministration in Hungary, the office of Palatine restored. Here and in the German-Bohemian territories, the diets were again con voked, and many of their demands granted. The central ad ministration also reverted to Maria Theresa's system ; their ac tivities were reduced, the co-operation between different offices became less close. Leopold held most firmly to his brother's ecclesiastical policy. The State retained control over schools ; toleration, etc. was maintained intact. Although Leopold restored theological education to the bishops, abolished the General Semi nary and re-instituted some of the monasteries, priests were still looked on as servants of the State.
An armistice, followed by a preliminary peace (April 18) was concluded at Leoben, the definitive peace being signed on Oct. 17 at Campoformio. Austria renounced Belgium, which was united to France, and the duchies of Milan and Mantua, incorporated in the new Cisalpine republic, but received a great part of the terri tory of the Venetian republic (whose independence was abolished by Bonaparte), including Venetian Istria and Dalmatia. The Emperor further consented that France should receive most of the left bank of the Rhine on concluding peace with the empire. At the congress of Rastatt, opened Dec. 1797, France obtained the cession from the empire of the whole left bank of the Rhine. Before the indemnification due to the imperial estates con cerned had been determined, war broke out again (Second Coali tion War, 1798-1801). Austria at first won considerable successes in Germany and Switzerland, and, allied with Russia, in Italy; but their effect was nullified through the disunity of the com manders. The Tsar Paul, imputing egotistical motives to the Austrians, recalled his troops, and Austria was left (i800) alone to face the French, whose troops in Italy were now again com manded by Bonaparte, returned from Egypt. Bonaparte's victory at Marengo (q.v.) (June 14), and Moreau's at Hohenlinden (Dec. 3, 1800) forced Francis to conclude the treaty of Luneville (Feb. 9, 1801), in his own name and that of the empire. This treaty repeated in essence the provisions of Campaformio and Rastatt.
Austria took no part in the Napoleonic wars of the following years; but the patriotic feelings of her inhabitants (and especially of the Germans) awoke. This movement was encouraged by the new foreign minister, Count Philip Stadion (q.v.), and assisted by the Archdukes Charles (q.v.) and John. Although here, and always, Francis remained cold and averse from any popular movement, he recognized the necessity of providing against future dangers. Austria's greatest difficulty, which seemed ir reparable, was financial. The value of the paper currency sank continually ; and a severe commercial crisis broke out in 1808. Nevertheless, Stadion accomplished sundry reforms, and the Archduke Charles attempted to raise the morale of the standing army, by the side of which he created a national force or Land wehr, to include all able-bodied men between 18 and 25. In 1809 Stadion and his supporters persuaded the emperor to undertake a fresh campaign against Napoleon. After initial reverses, the Austrian army, led by Charles, inflicted his first defeat on Na poleon at Aspern (May 21 and 22, 1809) ; but Austria's hopes were destroyed at Wagram (July 6). An armistice was concluded. After hesitating long between the rival parties of war and peace in his entourage Francis declared for the latter. Stadion fell, his successor, Count (later Prince) Clemens Wenzel Lothar Metter nich (q.v.), undertook negotiations with Napoleon, which, after long parleying, led to the Peace of Schonbrunn (Oct. 14, 1809), which imposed on Austria the severest sacrifices, including the loss of Salzburg, the Inn district and West Galicia.
Metternich and the French Alliance.—An immediate re sumption of hostilities was unthinkable; clever diplomacy was the essential, until the hour came to recover these losses. Metternich won over his sovereign for this policy. Austria courted Napoleon's friendship; his marriage to the emperor's daughter Marie Louise, enabled Metternich in Paris to get alleviations for the payment of the indemnity, although these were insufficient to ward off the state bankruptcy in Austria admitted by the Patent of Feb. 20, 1811. The financial crisis, mistrust in Austria's forces, the deep conflicts between Austria and Russia, and the hope that a French alliance would bring compensation for past losses, induced Metternich to recommend the emperor to conclude a treaty with Napoleon (March 14, 1812), whereby Austria undertook to supply 30,000 men for the Russian campaign, Napoleon promising his ally an indemnity and territorial gains should the campaign prove suc cessful. Whether Metternich, convinced of Napoleon's invinci bility, wished to link Austria's fate permanently with France, or only awaited a suitable moment to strike for freedom, is still undecided. Recent research tends to the latter assumption. It is certain that even after Napoleon's disastrous Russian campaign, Metternich still advocated caution for Austria. He concluded an armistice with Russia and armed, but would not join the Russo Prussian alliance of March 1813. The French alliance was, however, denounced (April 6, 1813), and simultaneously Austria's armed neutrality proclaimed. Another step was taken when Napoleon, after his victories at Liitzen and Bautzen (May 1813), concluded an armistice with his opponents (early June) to gain time for fur ther armaments. Austria armed, concentrated large masses of troops in Bohemia and assumed the part of intermediary. As, however, Napoleon refused to accept the sacrifices suggested to him, involving the overthrow of his entire political system in cen tral Europe, Austria declared her adherence to the Russo-Prussian alliance (Aug. io, 1813) and soon after declared war. The battle of Leipzig (Oct. 16-18, 1813) brought Napoleon's defeat. As, however, he refused to make peace, the war continued until his abdication and the first Peace of Paris (May 30, 1814).
Treaty of Paris and Congress of Vienna.— This treaty laid down the Po, the Ticino and Lago Maggiore as Austria's frontier in Italy, whereupon the incorporation of Lombardy and Venice in the Austrian monarchy was proclaimed (July 12). On June 3 Bavaria restored Tirol, Vorarlberg, Salzburg and, later, the Haus ruck and the Inn districts. The other questions were settled at the Congress of Vienna (Sept. 1814–July 1815). Austria received the "Illyrian provinces" ceded in 1805 and 1809, with Dalmatia and the Republic of Ragusa, the district of Tarnopol, Wieliczka and the Veltlin. The secundogeniture of the Habsburgs in Tuscany and the tertiogeniture in Modena were restored. Austria renounced all other territory lost since 1792. At Metternich's advice, Francis did not re-assume the title of Roman Emperor, since Metternich thought that a loose association of sovereign states under Austrian presidency, "powerful for defence, powerless for offence" would form a guarantee of the peace of central Europe and of Austrian preponderance, and in its councils Austrian diplomacy, backed by the weight of the Habsburg power outside Germany, would exer cise more influence than any possible prestige derived from a ven erable title that had become a byword for the union of unlimited pretensions with practical impotence. By renouncing Belgium and minor possessions in Western Germany, Metternich thought he was increasing the power of the Habsburgs, which now rested on a coherent territorial complex. He failed to see, however, that by this action, and by acquiescing in the establishment of Prussia in the Rhine provinces, Austria abdicated to Prussia her position as the bulwark against France.
Metternich's Sway (1815-48) .—From 1815-48 Metternich controlled Austria's foreign policy. The great successes he had achieved against Napoleon, and the predominant position assumed by him, and thus by Austria, at the Congress of Vienna, induced Francis, although he sometimes disagreed with his minister's polit ical views, to leave the conduct of foreign affairs almost entirely to him, especially as Metternich was an adept at clothing his advice in such a form as to enable Francis to look on the decisions he took as the outcome of his own initiative. The principles followed by Metternich have been described as "stability and legitimacy." Metternich wished to preserve the status quo formulated at the Congress of Vienna, because he saw no other certain way of insur ing lasting peace in Europe, which he thought indispensable for her war-weary and exhausted states, particularly Austria. Suffi cient measures should be taken against revolution from without, or any possible upheaval from within. This preservation of the existing order in the foreign and internal organization of the states of Europe was the essence of what Metternich called the "sta bility of things," and as progress and change in any direction seemed to him an unjustified attempt against the legitimate rights of existing authorities, he became the champion of "legitimacy." The alliance of Chaumont uniting the four powers, Austria, Russia, Prussia and England, renewed in Nov. 1815 and adhered to after 1818 by France, was to ensure the balance of power as restored in 1815. The great powers were to avoid conflicts with one another and prevent them between the other states, and between rulers and ruled within them, by their intervention, armed if necessary. He attempted to instill this principle into the congresses held on his initiative between 1818 and 1822, and on later occasions. Even the unrest which followed the French July revolution in many parts of Germany, and increased the power of the democratic par ties where constitutions were already in force, failed to alter Met ternich's conviction that his methods alone could be the salvation of all proper-thinking persons. He found confirmation in the apparent success of this policy within the Austrian monarchy. The occasional meetings of the Estates were mere forms, and the Hun garian diet, which functioned again after 1825, was not yet trouble some. The police, under Count Leopold Sedlnitzki, were every where supreme. Paid or voluntary spies reported every utterance made at meetings; any person of importance was under regular supervision ; all letters were opened. The draconic censorship suppressed any free literary activity. The government paid spe cial attention to the upper schools, and saw that the instruction conformed with conservative principles.
Francis I.: Internal Stagnation.—Francis's influence in the inner affairs of Austria was much stronger than in foreign policy, which he left increasingly to Metternich. Convinced that a reor ganization of the administration was necessary, and determined to create order, he began reforms, principally in the central govern ment offices, soon after his accession. His first, ill-considered ex periments, proved unsuccessful. Only in Aug. 1802, were the ar rangements perfected, which then remained practically unchanged till 1848. The political administration of all the German and Bo hemian hereditary provinces, Galicia and the Italian districts, was entrusted to the "United court chancelry" (V ereinigte Ho f kanzlei) , while the supreme judicial instance was revived for the judicature in those territories; the court chamber (Ho f kammer) and Banco Deputation took charge of all the state economic action throughout the monarchy. The State Council was replaced in Aug. 18o1 by an advisory Ministry (Staats- and Konferenzministerium), over whose debates the emperor presided, as highest instance for all state affairs. This institution, however, proved unsatisfactory, as the other central authorities had no direct communication with one another, all matters submitted for imperial decision being sent to the imperial cabinet under a chef de cabinet. As Francis also preferred, rather than attending conferences, to discuss questions with individual members, or to call for written opinions from the councillors, the conferences became ever rarer. In 1808 this Min istry was abolished, and the Council of State restored. In 1814 a further "advisory council" (Kon f erenzrat) was established, where especially important questions were treated after discussion in the Council of State. Nevertheless, the administration remained most imperfect. Its conduct still lacked any uniformity. The jurisdic tion of the departmental heads was strictly defined, and whatever lay outside this was reserved for imperial decision. Thus the em peror came gradually to represent alone any synthesis of the vari ous administrative departments, while the officials, high or low, avoided any responsibility, and the minutest questions were handed up through all the stages of the bureaucratic hierarchy, to be shelved and forgotten in the imperial cabinet ; for, industrious as he was, Francis could not permanently fulfil his self-imposed task. The re-organization of the provincial administration was equally unsuccessful. The introduction, on Jan. 1, 1812, of the general civil code, was beneficial for justice. Metternich recognized the dan gers inherent in the slow, inconsistent working of the machine of state, and would have liked to introduce reforms, where compatible with his "system." But Francis, naturally mistrustful, shrank more and more from radical changes. He contented himself with meeting immediate necessities, buried himself in details, and thus as Metternich said, "Austria was administered, but not ruled." Francis's ever-growing terror of popular movements made him averse from any tendency to give the people larger participation in political life. Thus Metternich's attempt in 1832 to persuade the emperor to grant a new constitution, to reconcile the "opposi tion between the monarchist principle and the democratic" failed. Accordingly, although the forms of the Estates remained un changed, their activity was steadily reduced. The diets were allowed to enact no legislation ; taxes were raised without consult ing them ; the rights of the Estates in the recovered provinces of Tirol and Carniola reduced. Even in Hungary, whose constitution was unaltered, Francis attempted, from 1813 to 1825, to rule with out a diet, demanding subsidies and troops direct from the coun ties. Only when the counties refused compliance with their king's commands, was the diet again convoked (1825), and promised regular convocation every three years, and the sole right of approv ing taxes and recruits.
Fear of the influence of oppositional politicians and liberal writ ers on the popular mind was the cause of Francis's severe repres sion of all assaults on the existing organization of the state and society. Political prisoners were tortured, not out of vindictive ness, but in the expectation that the "criminal spirit of enlighten ment" could thus be brought into the right path. All attempts to convince the emperor that these methods could never perma nently improve public conditions—a view shared by Metternich remained unsuccessful. Francis became ever deafer to such advice. In his will he warned his successor, Ferdinand I. (1835-48) to "displace nothing of the foundations of the edifice of state. Rule, and change nothing." Ferdinand I.—The new sovereign, weak-minded and incapable of really ruling, followed his father's advice so far as to leave to Metternich the conduct of foreign affairs. He was, however, in duced by court circles to establish the Conference of State (1836), as supreme administrative body. Its members were the Arch dukes Louis and Francis Charles, Metternich and Count Francis Anton Kolowrat. The ever-increasing rivalry between the two last-named impeded business, and Archduke Louis's dislike of novelty thwarted any reforms proposed by the ministers, or at best delayed their execution. Nevertheless, Austria followed other civilized States, although hesitatingly, in building railways, im proving communications, concluding commercial treaties, abolish ing many customs barriers, etc.
Hungary answered the imposition of the constitution by con voking a Rump Parliament at Debreczin (April 14, 1848) which declared Hungary, with its partes adnexae, an independent State and the dynasty of Habsburg-Lorraine dethroned. Francis Joseph thereupon asked Tsar Nicolas I. for help, which was readily granted. The united Austrian and Russian forces proved too strong for the Hungarians. On Aug. 13, 1849, Arthur Gorgei (q.v.), with the main army, capitulated to Russia at Vilagos. Rus sia delivered the Hungarians to the discretion of the Viennese Government, which took severe reprisals. The Hungarian consti tution was declared annulled, Hungary reduced to an Austrian crownland, its partes adnexae created independent crownlands (see HUNGARY).
Austria was completely successful in Italy without foreign assistance. Sardinia having again declared war (March 1849), Austria was victorious at Novara ; in August Venice was retaken. Austria again ruled directly over the Lombard-Venetian kingdom; indirectly in Parma, Modena, Tuscany and the Romagna. These successes enabled Schwarzenberg to restore Austria's hegemony in Germany. The struggle between Grossdeutsch and Kleindeutsch in Frankfurt is discussed elsewhere (see GERMANY, History). Here it suffices to remark that Schwarzenberg's ambition of a seventy-million state in Central Europe, including all peoples of the Austrian empire and Germany under Austrian leadership, was not realized. The plan of the majority of the Frankfurt Parliament, a German feudal state under Prussia, excluding Aus tria, was also frustrated through Frederick William IV.'s refusal of the crown. All other schemes to weaken Austria in Germany were thwarted by Schwarzenberg. Prussia dared not embark on war in support of her policy of unification, and submitted at 01 mutz (Nov. 185o). The problem of Germany's future constitu tion remained, for the time, open ; but soon of ter, the old German federal constitution and diet were restored.
More unlucky still was the outcome of Austria's conflict with Sardinia in 1859 (see ITALIAN WARS). The Austrian troops were defeated, Lombardy was lost (Treaty of Villa-franca : Peace of Zurich) . This great victory for the movement for Italian unity, led by the house of Savoy, was succeeded by the declaration of Parma, Modena, the Romagna and Tuscany that they wished to unite themselves with Sardinia. Austria retained only Venice.
The new constitution, in its attempt to reconcile provincial autonomy with Imperial unity, satisfied no parties. The German "centralists" thought themselves disregarded. The discontent among the Liberal middle classes of German Austria grew when the provincial statutes compiled by Goluchowski, the new "min ister of State," gave small rights to the diets but large ones to the nobles and clergy. The Czechs welcomed the concessions to the lands of the Bohemian Crown, but like the Germans, they (the feudal nobility excepted) condemned the favours shown to the nobles and clergy. In Hungary, too, only the Conservatives were content, while the Liberals grumbled because the old rights of the Hungarian diet to pass taxation and vote recruits were transferred to the Vienna Reichsrat. Led by Franz Deak (q.v.) they de manded unrestricted restoration of the 1848 laws.
The ill success of the rapprochement with the "federalists" brought a reaction towards "centralism." Goluchowski was dis missed, and replaced (Dec. 186o) by the Liberal Anton Ritter von Schmerling (q.v.). In Feb. 1861, the ministry of Archduke Rainer (president) and Schmerling (minister of State) was formed. Rechberg remained minister for foreign affairs, Joseph Freiherr von Lasser, an excellent administrator, became minister of the interior. A new constitution, largely the work of Hans von Perthaler and Freiherr Tadaus von Lichtenfels, was issued on Feb. 26, 1861. The reinforced Reichsrat was replaced by a Staatsrat and a Reichsrat. The latter consisted of two houses : the Upper House (Herrenhaus) and the House of Deputies (Abgeordnete haus). The Reichsrat was to represent the whole State; a "nar rower Reichsrat," was to include only representatives of Austria proper and deal only with questions common to its various Crown lands. The competence of the provincial diets was restricted, the central parliament given the chief weight. In this parliament the electoral system was weighted to give the Germans the predomi nant position, and among them the great landed proprietors; franchise was indirect, members being deputed by the provincial diets, which were composed on the system of representation of in terests. Schmerling hoped thus to establish a unified centralist State under German control at the expense of the provinces and other nationalities. But the constitution satisfied only the German Liberals ; the advocates of absolutism in the army and bureau cracy and the supporters of feudalism and clericalism protested against its Liberal principles. The Slavonic provinces were vio lently opposed to it. The Bohemian diet condemned the electoral system and demanded that Francis Joseph be crowned king of Bohemia. The Poles, Slovenes and Italians also attacked the con stitution as dangerous to nationalist ambitions. The elections to the Reichsrat were consequently widely boycotted.
The opposition was strongest in Hungary, where the diet re jected the constitution decisively. Deak still maintained that the Hungarian constitution was still legally valid, while the Govern ment of Vienna declared it had been annulled by the revolution. The Hungarians now determined not to attend the Reichsrat. When the House of Deputies was opened (April 1861), the repre sentatives of Hungary, Croatia, Transylvania and Venice were absent. The various German Liberal groups, known as the "Con stitutional Party," dominated the assembly, which, the Hun garian representatives being absent, was taken as a "narrower Reichsrat." In 1863 the Czechs, disappointed in their expecta tions, withdrew from the parliament. The Reichsrat and Govern ment made praiseworthy attempts to reconstruct the State fi nances. The deficit was not abolished, but considerable economies were introduced and trade improved.
The grant of constitutional conditions was acclaimed enthusiasti cally by the Liberal parties in Germany; the more so when the constitutional conflict broke out soon after in Prussia. Schmerling hoped to utilize this feeling to reform the Bund on "Grossdeutsch" lines, giving Austria the preponderance in Germany, and the Ger man nation in Austria. He gained Francis Joseph for this plan, despite Rechberg's opposition. Francis Joseph convoked and opened a diet of Princes in Frankfurt (1863), but the reform was not effected, Bismarck (q.v.) having persuaded William I. of Prussia not to attend. The tension between Prussia and Austria grew, although they were reconciled once more (1864) over the Schleswig-Holstein question (q.v.).
Meanwhile Rechberg had resigned (Oct. 1864). His Schleswig Holstein policy was unpopular among the Liberals of Austria and Germany and his failure to win concessions from Germany in the customs question entailed his fall. Schmerling soon followed. Francis Joseph, who disliked him personally, abandoned him as soon as he lost the support of the Constitutional party; especially as the emperor had drawn closer to the Magyars after visiting Hungary (June 1865) and Deak's proposals offered hope of a compromise including the recognition of matters common to the whole State. Schmerling was replaced, at the instance of the in fluential Count Moritz Esterhazy, by Count Richard Belcredi, who aimed at restoring the old absolutism with a diet for each province, and maintenance of the Concordat. To this end the 17 provincial diets were convoked for November, and on Sept. 20, the Reichs rat was suspended by manifesto, the Government being empow ered by Patent to conduct necessary business in the interim. The Government's new course was recognized and strongly approved by the diets of Bohemia, Galicia, Istria and Bukovina, while the diets of the German provinces protested, though unsuccessfully, against the suspension of the constitution. In Hungary a diet was opened by Francis Joseph in person (Dec. i865). The speech from the throne recognized the validity of the 1848 laws, but de manded their prior revision on the lines of the October Diploma, while the Hungarians made any change conditional on prior rein troduction of the laws. Agreement was not quickly reached; but Deak prevented a rupture and obtained the appointment of 67 members (March 1, 1866) of a Parliamentary Commission of Compromise. In June a sub-committee presented a memorandum formulating conditions for the regulation of relations between Hungary and Austria. Deak and Julius Andrassy were the princi pal advocates of this compromise. (See HUNGARY.) Negotiations were still proceeding when war broke out with Italy and Prussia. Austria, though victorious on land and sea against Italy (Custozza, Lissa) was decisively defeated by Prussia at KL niggratz (July 3, 1866) and forced to yield. The negotia tions at Nikolsburg, terminating in the Peace of Prague (Aug. 1866), led to Austria's exit from the German federation and the cession of Venice to Italy; thus she lost for ever the hegemony in Germany and Italy conquered in 1815 and re-conquered in The Hungarian Compromise.—The military disasters inevi tably reacted on internal conditions. The policy of suspension was abandoned, for the disordered finances could not be reorganized nor the indispensable reforms achieved without restoration of the constitution. All parties agreed in this; but disagreed entirely on the next step. The "federalists" demanded equal rights for all nationalities; the extreme "centralists" a unified state under Ger man leadership; others a compromise between these extremes. For some time Belcredi's plan of a feudal-conservative, federative State with an absolute monarch at the head, seemed most prob able. But the opposition of the Hungarian moderates under Deak and Andrassy, and the German and Liberal parties in the German and Slavonic provinces, was too strong. Belcredi was replaced as minister president (Feb. 7, 1867) by the Saxon statesman Ferdi nand, Freiherr, later Count, Beust, who had succeeded Count Alex ander Mensdorff-Pouilly as foreign minister in Oct. 1866. Beust convinced Francis Joseph of the necessity of satisfying the Hun garians and Germans, convoked the "Narrower Reichsrat" in Austria and simultaneously appointed a ministry in Hungary to conclude the negotiations for a compromise, already far advanced. A responsible ministry was appointed in Hungary in Feb. 17, 1867, with Julius Andrassy as president, with whom, and with Deal, the conditions of the compromise were agreed. Francis Joseph made peace with the dominant party in Hungary on a basis which left his dominions a remnant of unity and left him complete control of the armed forces. By this compromise which, after receiving the emperor's sanction, was issued in various re scripts, the Habsburg dominions received the name of the Austro Hungarian monarchy. They fell into the Austrian and Hungarian halves, which were united only in the person of the sovereign and their common institutions, which included the ministries of foreign affairs, war and finance (the two last-named only for affairs of common interest) and the Austrian and Hungarian delegations composed of representatives of both halves of the empire, which were to debate on common affairs in Vienna and Budapest alternately.
These institutions were to be permanent, but the financial con cessions and customs and commercial accord were to be revised every ten years. Austria was to bear 70%, Hungary 3o% of the common expenditure. The coronation of Francis Joseph as king of Hungary (June 1867) was the outward token of his reconcilia tion with the Hungarians.
The Reichsrat having approved the Hungarian compromise, the first common ministers were appointed (Dec. 1867) and the first Delegations met in Jan. 1868. Meanwhile a new ministry had been formed in Austria (Dec. 1, 1867) composed of leaders of the Lib eral majority of the House of Deputies with two aristocrats, and Prince Carlos Auersperg as president. Its first important act (March 1868) was to bring forward in the upper house a Liberal marriage law already passed by the lower house (Oct. 1867), re storing the civil marriage law suspended by the Concordat, and civil judicature in marriage questions. Two further laws, the rela tion between school and church and the regulation of inter-confes sional conditions, were passed by both houses. All three Liberal laws received the emperor's sanction on May 25, 1868. The State was recognized as enjoying supreme control and supervision over all education and instruction, and inter-confessional conditions regulated on the lines of equality of rights. The Government dis regarded the sharp protests of the pope; recalcitrant bishops were punished.
Parliament also attacked administrative reform. The judicature was separated from the executive, the political service reorganized and the provinces divided into smaller units (Bezirkshauptrnann scha f ten) . Peasant entails, where still existing, were everywhere abolished in favour of free disposal, unless the provincial legisla tion prohibited the partition of peasant properties. Energetic measures were taken to improve the State finances ; some, as the Ground Tax Law, were carried through, others were still incom plete when the ministry resigned. In i868 a Military Service Law was passed, increasing the armed forces considerably; in 1869 a law introducing juries for political and press offences, and the Primary Schools Law.
The ecclesiastical and educational activities of the German Liberals were strongly opposed by the Clericals, and their central izing tendencies by the Slavonic peoples. The national struggle, which henceforward, until the monarchy fell, absorbed unremit tingly the best powers of all nationalities in Austria-Hungary, took open form after the institution of Dualism. Galicia was abandoned to the Poles, Polish introduced as the internal official language of most authorities, and other concessions granted which gave Galicia a separate status in Austria proper. Still the Poles were discontented; the Galician diet demanded a separate minis ter, responsible to the Galician diet, and entirely independent na tional administration and legislation. The Czechs aimed higher still. They denied the legality of the Reichsrat, and the 81 Czech deputies who abstained from the Bohemian diet, presented a dec laration (Aug. 23) denying the competence of the Reichsrat to pass laws valid for Bohemia, and demanded the restoration of the unified kingdom of the crown of King Wenceslaus (Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia). The Czechs of Moravia proceeded on simi lar lines. Counter-measures by the German majority—rejection of the declaration and suspension of Belcredi's Language Law of January, 1866—led to Czech excesses, which were repressed by force (Oct. 1868) .
Differences between Beust and Auersperg had led meanwhile to Auersperg's dismissal (Sept. 26, 1868) , and Taaffe, a child hood's friend of the emperor, became minister-president. Yet dis cord continued in Bohemia, in Carniola and in Trieste. In Dal matia there was an open rebellion in 1869; the Bocchesi refused to enrol in the Austrian Landwehr. To meet all these centrifugal tendencies a strong and harmonious Government was needed; whereas, actually, the cabinet was divided; the majority advo cated centralism and the methods hitherto adopted ; the minority (Taaffe, Potocki and Berger), reconciliation with the nationalist opposition. Both parties submitted their opinions in a memo randum to the emperor (Dec. 1869). He decided for the majority; Taaffe and his supporters resigned. Hasner became minister president.
To survive, the new cabinet had to make the Reichsrat inde pendent of the provincial diets, the centre of the opposition. The two-thirds majority necessary to introduce direct election to the Reichsrat was, however, unobtainable. Giskra, the chief sup porter of parliamentary reform, thereupon resigned (March 20, 187o). A few days later the Poles, Rumanians, Slovenes and Italians left the Parliament, which the Clericals had already for saken. The cabinet asked the emperor to dissolve those diets whose members had left the Reichsrat, and when he refused, re signed (April 187o). At Beust's suggestion, Francis Joseph invited Count Alfred Potocki to form a new cabinet. This was formed with difficulty and consisted principally of officials.
Potocki's efforts to reach a friendly compromise with the Czechs and Poles on the basis of the memorandum of December, 1869, to which he had been a signatory, broke down on the in creasing demands of the two nations. As the Germans were hos tile to the new ministry from the first, the latter dissolved the House of Deputies (May 1870) and all diets (the Bohemian not till late July), and convoked the new diets for late August, the Reichsrat for mid-September. The Government attempted to con ciliate the national parties, but could not grant the extensive de mands of the Czechs, who demanded recognition of the Bohemian State rights. The Czechs of both Bohemia and Moravia there upon refused to attend the House of Deputies. In the new House of Deputies the Constitutional Party and the Federals were evenly balanced; but new direct elections in Bohemia, over the head of the diet, gave the former the majority. It opposed the federalist ambitions of the Czechs, but also attacked the Government for attempting a compromise at the expense of the constitution. The ministry resigned (Nov. 24, 1870), but remained in office till Feb. 1871.
Two important events occurred during this ministry ; the Franco-German War (q.v.) and the abolition of the Concordat. After 1866 an influential party in Austria still hoped to recover Austria's hegemony in Germany, and was prepared to try a new campaign with Prussia. Not only the military party under Arch duke Albert (q.v.), but also politicians, notably Prince Richard Metternich, the Austrian ambassador in Paris, held this view. Beust, too, hoped for revenge ; but in the negotiations with Napoleon III., which lasted till the outbreak of the Franco-Ger man War, he watched over Austria's interests, which did not al ways coincide with Napoleon's. Francis Joseph was cautious, although he, too, cherished hopes of recovering Austria's hegem ony in Germany. When the war broke out, the negotiations be tween Austria, France and Italy, were almost complete ; but the peace party in Vienna, headed by the Hungarian minister-presi dent, Julius Andrassy, prevailed at the decisive Crown Council ( July 187o) ; it was resolved to remain neutral, provisionally. After the great military success of the Germans, this party defi nitely conquered ; Austria remained a neutral spectator of the foun dation of united Germany.
The abolition of the Concordat followed Pope Pius IX.'s dec laration of the dogma of infallibility. In July 187o the Govern ment, urged by the minister of cults, Karl Stremayr, announced that the Concordat was not to be maintained, and that Beust had informed the pope of its formal abolition. Simultaneously, Stre mayr was empowered to draft the necessary legislation for the Reichsrat.
On Feb. 5, 1871, the cabinet of Count Karl Albert Hohenwart Schaffle took office, after long private negotiations, kept secret even from Beust, with the aim of adapting the constitution to the demands of the Slays and satisfying the feudal and clerical parties. On April 25, 1871, the first of a series of bills for increasing considerably the legislative and administrative autonomy of the provinces was submitted to the Reichsrat ; the provincial diets were to receive the right of initiative in legislation. As this bill was rejected by the House of Deputies, Hohenwart resorted to other expedients. To placate the Poles, he appointed a minister for Galicia, and in April introduced a bill giving Galicia great independence. In May he offered to allow the Czech opposition an equal measure of autonomy. The protests of the German majority of the House of Deputies were disregarded, as the em peror supported the Government's action. The Reichsrat was pro rogued; the negotiations of the Czech opposition leaders, Hein rich, Count Clam-Martinitz and Francis Ladislaus Rieger, were carried further. The seven "constitutional" diets were dissolved and the Government, by manipulating the elections, got the two thirds majority in the House of Deputies, necessary for constitu tional alterations. The negotiations in Bohemia were now con cluded. In an imperial Rescript issued Sept. 12, 1871, Francis Joseph offered to revive the rights of Bohemia with its coronation oath. Simultaneously, a bill was introduced guaranteeing Czechs and Germans equal rights in all questions, especially language, and the preservation of their national individuality. The diet was re quired to consider a settlement of Bohemia's constitutional status. Thereupon a committee drafted the "Eighteen Fundamental Articles." They recognized the compromise with Hungary, but demanded for Bohemia a status similar to Hungary's. All ques tions concerning Bohemia, and not common to Austria and Hun gary, should be decided by the Bohemian diet. Austria should be dismembered into separate States, with a congress of delegates and a senate as common representation. On Oct. 10 these articles were submitted to the emperor, who refused his assent, as not only the German Liberal Ministers, including Beust, but Andrassy also declared Hohenwart's plan a menace to the unity of the empire. Attempts to induce the Czech leaders to decrease their demands failed. This sealed the fate of Hohenwart's ministry, which fell on Oct. 27, 1871. Beust was also dismissed (Nov. 8) and replaced by Julius Andrassy.
After a short provisional ministry, a new Liberal Government took office under Prince Adolph Auersperg, which after first assur ing itself a constitutional majority in parliament, set about an electoral reform, with direct franchise, independent of the diets, for the house of deputies, whose membership was raised to 353. The bill was brought in in Feb. 1873. The high franchise quali fication admitted only a limited circle of voters, the large land owners, chambers of industry and commerce, and towns, being favoured. The Liberal Government, co-operating with both houses of the Reichsrat, carried through several reforms. A new criminal procedure was introduced (1873) and a special court (V er waltungsgerichthof) established (1875), to which any citizen might appeal for legal redress against encroachments by the administrative authorities. In Jan. 1874, the Government intro duced its substitute for the provisions of the Concordat. An abortive attempt at marriage law reform was also made in Financially, the period of the Liberal regime is noteworthy for the financial crisis (May 1873), which necessitated state inter vention. It was followed by a commercial crisis. The campaign for protective tariffs began. The Government's reputation was damaged by the implication of some of its members in the scan dals attending the financial crisis of 1873. It was, moreover, weakened by disunity in its own camp, and was often openly opposed by its own partisans. At the same time, the Slays renewed their attacks.
The result of the protracted negotiations with Hungary, skil fully led by Koloman Tisza, over the revision of the financial com promise of 1867, was most unsatisfactory to Austria. The two ministries agreed (1877), indeed, to renew the customs agree ment for ten years and leave the quota of contributions unaltered; but in the bank question, the Dualist principle being introduced in the control of the Austro-Hungarian Bank, and in fixing the tariffs, Hungary exacted concessions which were approved by the Austrian Constitutional party only with the greatest reluctance.
The Germans of Austria and the Magyars had disapproved of Andrassy's policy of occupation from the first. The considerable sacrifices in blood and money entailed by its execution increased their discontent. While, however, Tisza convinced the Magyars that the satisfaction of their own national ambitions depended on their retaining the favour of the court, the leaders of the Austrian Constitutional party attacked the Government vigorously, and thus estranging themselves from the emperor, who declared their opposition "factious," and accepted the resignation of Auersperg's cabinet (Oct. 1878), although leaving it in office pending appoint ment of its successor. The Constitutional party continued its opposition during this period, and by their impractical struggles drove the emperor into the camp of the Federalists and Ultra montanes, who had supported the occupation and agreed to all financial demands.
The two groups of the Constitutional party, the Liberals and the Progressives, united to defend the unity of the State, and their own nationality, and constituted themselves the "United Left" (1881) . In 1832, however, the Clerical-Czech majority granted the vote to all payers of five guldens direct taxation in towns and markets. In the elections of 1885 the German parties lost ground and split again. The Government leaned even more on the Right, whose wishes it had to meet. The discontent of the Austrian Germans grew; but their influence was weakened by their own increasing disunity.
In 188-2 a "German national league" had been founded on the basis of the "Linz programme," which proposed that Galicia and Dalmatia should be detached and Austria become a predominantly Germanic state, in closer connection with Germany. A few years later, however, this party split. The liberal thinking members were estranged by the increase of anti-Semitism, and the anti Semites themselves divided, as a party of them, under Karl Lueger (q.v.), disapproved of the German nationalist tendencies. In 1887 the "Christian socialist league" was founded. Lueger, whose influence over the masses, especially the lower middle classes, was growing, approved Schonerer's anti-Semitism, but not the increasing German nationalist tendencies in his party.
Renewed attempts in 1891-93 to achieve a compromise in Bohemia again proved fruitless, neither party accepting the Gov ernment's proposals. When, in 1893, the Government attempted to delineate the judiciary districts in Bohemia on national lines, riots occurred, fostered by the Young Czechs; these provoked the Government to energetic measures, culminating in the procla mation of a state of siege in Prague and district (Sept. 1893). The Government believed that these and other disturbances could best be countered by wide extension of the franchise. For years past, franchise reform bills had occupied parliament's at tention, some of them advocating general, equal and direct fran chise. The growth of Social Democracy in Austria and the victor ies of the sister parties in Belgium and Germany helped to strengthen the movement in Austria towards enfranchising the workman. On Oct. 1o, 1893, a bill was introduced in the House of Deputies, drafted by Steinbach and approved by Taaffe, abolish ing the privileges of the electoral colleges of municipal and country districts, and granting the franchise to almost all men of 24 years. The party leaders had not been informed of this bill, which created great astonishment and still greater aversion among the overwhelming majority of deputies. The German Left, Poles and Conservatives, united against it. On Oct. 28, Parliament was adjourned; on the following day Taaffe tendered his resignation. On Nov. II, 1893, he left office.
The new ministry, under Prince Alfred Windischgratz, rested on the three great parties in the House of Deputies, Liberals, Poles and Clericals, led by Ernst von Plener, Apolinar von Jaworski and Count Karl Hohenwart respectively. Permanent co-operation between such dissimilar interests and personalities was improbable from the first. They at first united in defence of the privileged basis of parliament ; but dissension soon broke out between them, and even more between the three parties. Agree ment proved impossible, either in the question of electoral reform, which had to be reopened in deference to public opinion, or in the language question. The breach came on a question trivial in it self : the Government's proposal to establish an upper school with instruction in German and Slovene, in Cilli. The German Left seceded from the coalition, whereupon the ministry resigned ( June 1895) . A provisional ministry, consisting mainly of high officials, under the Governor of Lower Austria, Count Erich Kielmansegg, carried on. Two important acts, long debated and widely demanded, the new civil procedure and the new income tax law, were passed in this period.
His successor, Freiherr Max Vladimir Beck, managed by skil ful tactics to secure an agreement regarding electoral reform (Oct. 1906). In early December the House of Deputies passed the bill. Fresh opposition was encountered in the upper house, but, before the end of 1906, the government's concession of the numerics clausus bought the passage of the bill for the general, equal and direct suffrage for parliamentary elections. It was sanc tioned on Jan. 26, 1907, by Francis Joseph who hoped, by these concessions to modernity, to strengthen the dynasty, and to pre serve the unity of his dominions, as expressed in the unified con trol of the common army and of foreign policy against the separatist ambitions of the Hungarian " '48" party. This seemed to him and his ministers the more urgent in that relations between the monarchy and foreign powers had become so threatening that an appeal to arms seemed not impossible.
The Annexation of Bosnia and the Hercegovina.—Aus tria-Hungary's foreign policy changed when Baron, later Count, Alois Lexa Aehrenthal (q.v.) succeeded Goluchowski (Oct. 1906). As ambassador in Petersburg, Aehrenthal had believed it possible to establish permanently good relations with Russia, especially when her attention was concentrated on the Far East. When, how ever, Russia, defeated by Japan, returned to her earlier policy, planned to reach the coveted outlet in Europe by seizing the Dar danelles, and to this purpose endeavoured to extend her influence in the Balkans, Aehrenthal saw the danger threatening Austria Hungary. This danger became ever greater as the internal affairs of the Turkish empire became more critical. Aehrenthal wished to preserve this empire, but in the event of its final liquidation, he was firmly determined to safeguard Austria-Hungary's interests. It was necessary, above all, to secure permanent possession of Bos nia and Hercegovina. The Young Turks' revolution of July 1908, offered an immediate occasion to annex these territories. Without consulting the co-signatories of the Treaty of Berlin, Francis Joseph proclaimed the annexation (Oct. 6, 1908), at the same time announcing the withdrawal of the Austro-Hungarian troops from the Sanjak of Novi Pazar. Aehrenthal thought this move possible as he had previously made arrangements with the Russian foreign minister, Isvolski, whereby Isvolski had promised his consent to the annexation in return for a promise of a free hand for Russia in the Dardanelles question. Aehrenthal's action evoked violent and widespread objection, and led to ominous complications, espe cially as Isvolski, whose Dardanelles plan had found no favour in France and England, now declared he had been deceived by Aeh renthal and never consented to the annexation. Encouraged by the attitude of certain Great Powers, Serbia protested against the annexation, demanded autonomy for the territories under the guarantee of the Great Powers, and a port on the Adriatic with a strip of territory to connect it with Serbia. As Aehrenthal did not consent, Serbia armed. Turkey, too, assumed a threatening atti tude, and in Bulgaria the inclination to join Austria-Hungary's en emies grew. Aehrenthal, however, remained firm and reached his end, principally through Germany's intervention in Austria's fa vour. The differences with Turkey were composed (Feb. 1909), the signatories of Berlin recognized the annexation and Serbia had to submit and promise to further no more machinations against Austria-Hungary. It was a victory for Aehrenthal, but a Pyrrhic one, since it intensified the cleavage of Europe into two hostile camps, the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente (see EUROPE).
One party in Austria, led by the chief of the general staff, Franz Conrad (later Count) Hotzendorf, even at this time fav oured a decision by arms. After a violent conflict, however, Aeh renthal, supported by the emperor, who also advocated the main tenance of peace, carried his point. Aehrenthal attempted accord ingly to improve relations with Russia and to settle amicably the fresh differences with Italy regarding Albania. In every way Aehrenthal worked for peace in 191 o and 1911. He attempted to reconcile the ever-recurrent differences between England and Ger many. In the Moroccan question, indeed, he supported his ally, but carefully abstained from irritating the other side. He also prevented Austria-Hungary from intervening actively in the Ital ian-Turkish war of 1911, although the war party in Vienna wished to settle with the unreliable ally, Italy, as it had with Serbia in The Balkan Question.—The Italian-Turkish War was fol lowed by the Balkan War . (Oct. 1912), in which the allied armies of Bulgaria, Serbia and Greece proved victorious. Count Leopold Berchtold, who succeeded Aehrenthal on his death (Feb. 1912) , recognized the danger if the Balkan states, especially Serbia and Montenegro, were strengthened, but failed to prevent it. A strong party, again led by Conrad, once more urged armed intervention against the enemy in the Balkans, but again the peace party carried the day, especially as Austria's allies, Germany as well as Italy, were opposed to the war (1913). So Austria-Hungary had to watch the Balkan powers renew the war with Turkey and, despite un expectedly stubborn resistance, again prove victorious. The out come of the Second Balkan War (1913) brought another loss of prestige for Austria-Hungary. Serbia and Montenegro, especially the former, had extended their frontiers considerably, and hence forth, being no longer separated by the Sanjak of Novi Pazar, were in a position to join forces against the Habsburg monarchy when the time came. Bulgaria was discontented with Austria's atti tude, having expected active support in her war against the other Balkan states, while Rumania resented Berchtold's attempts to revise the Treaty of Bucharest in Bulgaria's favour. Anti-Austrian feeling made rapid headway every month. The agitation in Bucha rest in favour of the Hungarian Rumanians became ever more active. Rumania drew closer to the Entente Powers, and although King Carol renewed the secret treaty with the Triple Alliance (Feb. 1913) and could not be persuaded definitely to break with the Central Powers, yet the pro-Entente party in the Rumanian government won the upper hand. So the danger increased that a new Balkan alliance under the aegis of Russia and France might be formed against Austria-Hungary.
To hinder this encirclement became the principal endeavour of Viennese statesmen, who worked untiringly to compose Bulgaria's outstanding differences with Turkey and Rumania and, if possible, to win Greece to a closer adhesion to the Central Powers. All their efforts, however, were frustrated by the divergent interests and mutual distrust of the Balkan States, which were revealed during the negotiations conducted under the mediation of the Central Powers in the winter of 1913-14.
These failures were the more disappointing as the general situa tion during 1912-13 had become ever less favourable to the Cen tral Powers. Relations with Italy were increasingly strained, al though the Italian foreign minister, San Giuliano, maintained a correct attitude towards the Viennese Government, and although the Triple Alliance was renewed (for the last time) in Dec. 1912. But the attitude of the press and deputies with nationalist sympathies showed that influential circles were endeavouring to lead Italy into the Entente camp. Relations between England, France and Russia were also visibly growing ever closer, and all three powers were taking steps to increase their own military strength ; while Germany and Austria-Hungary did likewise.
At the outset of the war Austria-Hungary and Germany were joined by Turkey, and in Sept. 1915, after long hesitation, by Bulgaria. The Central Powers' efforts to gain further allies were fruitless; their two peace-time allies, indeed, Italy and Rumania, joined the increasing number of their enemies, the former in April 1915 (Treaty of London, April 26; declaration of war on Austria-Hungary, May 23, 1915) , the latter on Aug. 27, 1916. In vain had the two Foreign Ministers, Berchtold (up to Jan. 1915 ) and Count Stephen Burian (Jan. 1915 to Dec. 1916) attempted by ever more extensive concessions to prevent Italy from entering the enemy's camp. Their two-year long negotiations with Rumania were equally unsuccessful, chiefly owing to the refusal of the Hungarians, led by Tisza, to consent to the cession of Hungarian territory demanded by Rumania. The struggle against the increas ing superiority of the enemy was carried on with varying success throughout the world. Austro-Hungarian troops were engaged chiefly against Russia and Italy. An Italian offensive was repelled of ter heavy fighting (1915) but attempts to win a decisive victory over Italy failed, although initial successes were often gained. Lasting success against the superior forces of the Russians was achieved only when the German army joined the Austro-Hun garian and Rumania's rapid defeat was chiefly its work.
In judging the achievements of the Austro-Hungarian army, the increasing unwillingness of many troops, especially the Czechs, to fight for interests directly opposed to their own, must not be overlooked. Further, there was the increasing shortage of food stuffs in the monarchy, especially in the towns of Austria proper, and the enlistment of the youngest and oldest categories into the army brought into it subversive elements which corrupted the morale of the war-weary soldiers. Under these circumstances the party which advocated peace, even at the price of sacrifice, grew. Francis Joseph had never been disinclined for peace, but had in sisted that it must be made in concert with his allies, especially Germany, and without serious territorial losses to himself. All efforts to reach a result on this basis broke down, however, on the irreconcilability of the peace conditions of the Central Powers with the demands of their enemies. The difficulty of these nego tiations was increased by the discord between the allied Govern ments. Berlin wished Vienna to meet Italy's claims for Austrian territory generously, while Vienna wished Berlin to make con cessions to France in Alsace-Lorraine. There was the further complication of the Polish question, after Congress Poland had been conquered, and Warsaw occupied by the Central Powers (Aug. 1916) . None of the various proposals made by one or other of the Central Powers was fully accepted by both parties. Definite settlement was, therefore, postponed, but a proclamation issued to the Poles (Nov. 1916), in the vain hope of securing their active assistance in the war, promised the restoration of independent Poland as a hereditary constitutional monarchy.
Shortly before this, conversations had taken place between Aus tria and Germany, at Burian's suggestion, with the purpose of presenting the concrete peace conditions of the four allies to their enemies. No agreement had, however, been reached when Francis Joseph died on Nov. 21, 1916, after a reign of nearly 68 years. His successor, his grand-nephew Charles (q.v.), took over a peril ous heritage. The military and economic resources of the mon archy were beginning to fail. The blockade, the loss of supplies from Hungary and Galicia, and the diminution of home produc tion consequent on shortage of human and animal labour made the food situation in Austria desperate, especially in the towns; the country districts shut themselves off, held up supplies and put up prices, in defiance of the law. Anti-dynastic feeling was spread ing, especially in the non-German and non-Magyar territories. The young emperor's programme was to combat this feeling, to renew the splendour of the dynasty, to give his peoples the longed for peace and to reconcile their mutual differences. The first step, he thought, was to end the war. The negotiations with Germany were pursued energetically ; on Dec. 12, 1916, the peace offer of the Quadruple Alliance was made public. It was ill received by their enemies, who, in their answer, made claims which were brusquely rejected, especially by Germany, and led to the decision to continue the war by the employment of extreme measures, the most important and most promising of which was indicated to be unlimited submarine warfare.
Neither Count Ottakar Czernin, who had succeeded Burian (Dec. 1916), nor Charles shared the hope of the German states men, but they submitted to their allies' urgency. As, however, the submarine warfare failed to achieve the expected success, and the land warfare brought no decisive victory, while, by the revolu tion, the United States took the place of Russia against the Central Powers, Charles and Czernin were increasingly anxious for peace. All efforts to achieve it failed, however, although Charles, under the influence of his wife and her brother Sixtus of Parma, had taken steps in the spring of 1917 which, when revealed in 1918, evoked much indignation in Germany and forced Charles to make agreements with William II. which, if realized, would have made Austria-Hungary practically a vassal state of Germany. The Sixtus negotiations broke down on Italy's insistence on the claims admitted by her allies in the Treaty of London, which Charles refused to grant. Further negotiations in 1917 (Revertera-Armand and Mensdorff-Smutz) brought no result, as Czernin refused the offer of a separate peace.
His successor, Max Freiherr Hussarek, made fresh attempts to settle the internal differences, while preserving the unity of Austria, through granting extensive autonomy to the nationalities; but the military situation now made the idea of preserving the Habsburg monarchy, though in changed form, quite hopeless.
Czernin's efforts to secure peace on the basis of Wilson's Four teen Points (q.v.) failed, as the Allies laid down conditions in acceptable to Germany, who now hoped for victory. All attempts of the Viennese Government, which had become ever more de pendent on Berlin, or rather, on the military party predominant in Germany, especially since the revelation of Charles's separate negotiations with the western Powers, broke down on this resist ance. Only when Germany's anticipated victory in the West did not materialize, the Allies advanced and Ludendorff, the leader of the military party, declared that the military spirit of the enemy could not be broken by arms (Aug. 1918), did Burian, who had replaced Czernin in April, find no opposition on principle in Ger many ; differences of method still remained, which induced Burian to disregard Germany's opposition and ask all belligerents to attend a peace conference. The only result of his efforts was to redouble the enemies' vigour. The recognition (Aug. 1918) by the Entente of the Czechs, who had formed legions and rendered the Entente great services, especially in the East, as a belligerent and allied Power, was momentous to the fate of Austria-Hungary. All Slays of the monarchy now began to see that the break-up of Austria would give them more than its continued existence. They, therefore, now based their calculation on a break-up. The Aus trian Social Democrats had adapted their programme in their party conference, and that party in Hungary which demanded complete independence with democratic reforms and immediate peace grew very strong.
As a last attempt, the emperor issued a manifesto (Oct. 16) proclaiming that Austria should be transformed, in accordance with the will of her peoples, into a federal state, in which every race would be free to establish its own form of body politic on the territory occupied by it. For Hungary, the manifesto laid stress on the integrity of the Hungarian kingdom. But even this last attempt to preserve the monarchy, although with diminished territory and as a loose aggregation of separate territorial groups under the Habsburg-Lorraine dynasty, failed. In the course of the following weeks autonomous governments were formed in Prague, Laibach, Sarajevo, Trieste, Cracow and Lemberg. On Oct. 27 Heinrich Lammasch took over the government in Austria with the task of liquidating the central administration. Count Julius Andrassy, who had followed Burian as foreign minister (Oct. 24), recognized Wilson's claims regarding the rights of the nationalities, especially the Czechs, Slovaks and Yugoslays. He immediately opened negotiations for a separate peace, but these were as fruit less as the rest. On October 3o a national Hungarian government was formed in Budapest. As the troops, the Germans excepted, were leaving the front to return home, the Austro-Hungarian supreme command was forced to beg the Italians, who now ad vanced victoriously, for an armistice, which was granted on Nov. 3 under the severest conditions.
The process of dissolution ran its course in the old monarchy. On Nov. II the emperor renounced all share in the business of government in Austria, not, however, renouncing his crown, and the Lammasch government resigned. On the following day the Austrian National Assembly proclaimed a republic, which was at first intended to form a component part of the new German re public. On Nov. 16 the republican form was introduced in Hun gary. The ancient Austro-Hungarian monarchy thereupon ceased to exist. See AUSTRIA; HUNGARY.
(A. F. P.)