Copyright
Edward Raymond Turner.

Europe since 1870 online

. (page 26 of 49)
Online LibraryEdward Raymond TurnerEurope since 1870 → online text (page 26 of 49)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


authorities at Vienna declared that German should be the
language of command throughout the army; but the
Hungarians sternly insisted that their language should be
used for the troops which Hungary furnished. This ques-
tion threatened at times to destroy the Ausgleich, and in
1897 it was not possible to come to any agreement. The
use of German was enforced, however, by decree of the
emperor-king. Meanwhile, recruiting and the appointing
of oflBcers were left to the governments of the two parts.

During all of this time the two partners were held to-
gether because people in Austria and in Hungary saw that
the two countries could not easily stand alone in the midst
of their hostile subjects and surrounded by more powerful
neighbors. There were always many differences between
them; and at times disputes were so furious and bitter



Renewing

the

Ausgleich



Language of
command in
the army



Ties con-
necting Aus-
tria and
Hungary



308



EUROPE SINCE 1870



Need of

mutual

support



The end of
the House
of Hapsburg



Death of

Franz

Joseph



that to outsiders it seemed impossible for them to live to-
gether longer; but always the fundamental need of associa-
tion remained and was well understood. Furthermore,
there was a strong connecting link in the person of Franz
Josef, emperor of Austria and king of Hungary. Per-
sonal qualities and the continuance of a long reign made
him popular in both parts of his domain, and a long train
of personal misfortunes endeared him to his subjects still
further. Much about his character and motives remains
ill understood, but the series of strange and terrible
calamities which came to him made him the most ro-
mantic and pathetic of all the great figures of Europe.

He came to his throne young and in the midst of the
disasters of 1848. Not many years later he lost in wars
with France and with Prussia the Italian provinces, which
seemed then his brightest possession, and the position of
leadership in Germany which Austria had so long had.
The State was constituted anew, and much prosperity
came to it. But in the year after the disastrous war with
Prussia, his brother, Maximilian, who had been made
emperor of Mexico by France, and then deserted on the
intervention of the United States, was captured by the
enraged Mexicans and shot as a conspirator against them.
In 1889 his only son, the Archduke Rudolph, died, sup-
posedly by suicide, in the midst of mysterious and romantic
circumstances never entirely cleared up. Eight years
after this the emperor's wife, the beautiful Elizabeth,
from whom he had long been estranged, was stabbed to
death by an anarchist at Geneva. Finally, after the
fates had dealt with his house as in some olden tragedy
of Greece, his nephew, the Archduke Franz Ferdinand,
heir now to the throne, was assassinated at Sarajevo in
Bosnia, In 1916, during the war which followed hard
on this deed, the aged emperor, who had survived all the
members of his house, passed away just before his empire
was destroyed.




o

B

P

<

o



809



310



EUROPE SINCE 1870



Parts of the
Dual Mon-
archy



The govern-
ment of
Austria



In the Dual Monarchy the Empire of Austria included
the archduchies of Upper Austria and Lower Austria, the
kingdoms of Bohemia, Dalmatia, and Galicia, and the
various districts of Bukowina, Carinthia, Carniola, Istria,
INIoravia, Salzburg, Styria, and Trieste. The Kingdom of
Hungary included Hungary, Transylvania, and Croatia-
Slavonia. The total area of Austria was 116,000 square
miles, a little less than the territory of the Kingdom of
Hungary, which was 125,000. In 1910, at the time of the
last census, the population of Austria was 28,000,000
while that of Hungary was 21,000,000. The total popula-
tion, including that of Bosnia-Herzegovina — which was
annexed to Austria-Hungary jointly, in somewhat the
way that Alsace-Lorraine had been made a Reichsland
in the German Empire— was 51,000,000. Of the inhabit-
ants of the Monarchy a fifth were Germans and a little
less than a fifth were Magyars. The remaining popula-
tion embraced a diversity of peoples. In Austria, besides
the Germans, there were: West Slavs (Czechs) in Bohemia
and Moravia; West Slavs (Poles) and Little Russians
(Ruthenians) in Gahcia ; Rumanians in Bukowina; Itahans
in the Trentino; and South Slavs (Slovenes) in Carniola.
In Hungary, besides the Magyars, were the Rumanians of
Transylvania, West Slavs (Slovaks) in the north, and
South Slavs (Serbs and Croatians) in Croatia-Slavonia in
the south. The population of Bosnia and Herzegovina
was entirely Jugo (South) Slavic.

By the constitutional laws of 1867 the government of
Austria was vested in the emperor and in the Reichsmth
(imperial assembly), a parliament composed of two houses,
a house of lords consisting of peers hereditary or appointed
by the emperor for life, and a house of representatives,
consisting of members elected at first by the provincial
diets or assemblies, but after 1873 chosen directly by a
narrow electorate. The franchise was widened by an
electoral reform in 1896, and in 1907 equal and direct



\USTRIA, TURKEY, BALKANS 311



ood sufTrage was established. 'I'lie government, was
I on by ministers, responsible to the Rcirhsndh in
cneory, but aetually dependent mostly on the emperor.
He was also easily able to eontrol the licir/i.srafJi, (jf which
the upper house was extremely eonservative and arist(j-
eratic, and the lower divided among numerous polilieal
parties and constantly torn by bitter racial disputes.

The general policy of the Austrian Government was the
maintenance of the power and privileges of the (jerman
inhabitants who had brought together the parts and long
been the masters. Out of 28,000,000 inliabitants they
numbered only 10,000,000; and with the development of
greater national feeling in the different parts their task
became constantly harder. Some local self-government
was granted to the different parts, but not enough to
satisfy the local populations. The Czechs of Boliemia
had long wanted an autonomy like that which had
been granted to the Hungarians, and often in their fury
and disappointment they adopted such tactics in the
Ahgeordnetenhaus, the lower chamber of the Reichsrath,
that the uproar and confusion made it impossible for any-
thing to be done. The Slovaks and the Soutli Slavs
nursed their grievances, and, in spite of no little advance
in prosperity, longed for their freedom. In Galicia the
Austrian Government succeeded better than anywhere
else, but that was because it conserved the privileges
of the Polish upper class, and so won their good will, while
it left the Ruthenians and the Polish masses in lowly
condition.

The system of government in Hungary had been
gradually worked out through a long course of time, but it
was founded directly upon a series of laws passed during
the Hungarian uprising in 1848, suppressed as soon as the
uprising failed, but guaranteed in 1807 when the Aus-
gleich was agreed on. It was vested in the king of
Hungary, who was emperor of Austria, and exercised by



Peoples in
Austria



The govern-
ment of
Hungary



312



EUROPE SINCE 1870



In the hands
of the
Magyars



General
character of
govern-
ment in the
Dual Mon-
archy



Foreign
policy



his ministers who were responsible to a parhament. This
parHament consisted of an upper aristocratic house, the
Table of Magnates, most of them hereditary noblemen, and
a lower, the Chamber of Deputies, consisting of members
almost all of whom were elected from Hungary proper by
a narrow electorate rigidly limited by property quali-
fications. This electorate was so arranged as to keep
power altogether in the hands of the 10,000,000 Hungar-
ians, who were a little less than half of the entire popula-
tion. Local self-government was given to the subject
peoples in Hungary, the Rumanians of Transylvania, and
the South Slavs of Croatia-Slavonia, more grudgingly than
the Germans of Austria gave it to the peoples in their
portion.

Altogether, in the Hapsburg Monarchy while govern-
ment was modelled on the British system of ministers
responsible to a parliament dependent on the people,
such government was actually established only in small
part. In Hungary most of the people had no voice in
electing representatives, and until 1896 this had been the
case in Austria also. In both parts of the Dual Monarchy
government was in the hands of ministers controlled by
the crown, and a bureaucracy, cumbersome and ineffi-
cient, also dependent on the crown.

The foreign policy of Austria-Hungary during this
period had to do with ambitions in the Balkans and at-
tempts to extend to the south. With the new German
Empire cordial relations were soon established. With
respect to Italy the old ambitions were completely given
over. In the latter part of the nineteenth century, while
other European powers were making themselves greater by
colonial expansion, the Dual Monarchy hoped to reach
southward along the eastern shore of the Adriatic and
down through the Balkans to an outlet, perhaps at Salon-
ica. As early as the War for Greek Independence it
was evident that Austria and Russia were suspicious of



AUSTRIA, TURKEY, BALKANS 313



each other in rivalry over the Balkans. This was more
apparent in 1877, when the Russo-Turkish War began.
In the next year, at the Congress of Berlin, when Russia
was forced to let a great part of what she had aofoiiiplished
be undone, Austria-Hungary was given the achniiiislration
of the two Turkish provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
peopled with South Slavs, and conveniently adjoining her
own Slavic provinces of Dalniatia and Croatia-Slavonia.
In the following year she joined the German Empire in
alliance, from which she got added protection against
Russia, though Germany was not yet disposed to forfeit
the friendship of Russia.

Year by year the rivalry of Austria-Hungary and
Russia for greater power and influence in the Balkans in-
creased, and the small countries which had recently arisen
from the decay of Turkey were the scene of continued
plots and intrigue. In 1897 an agreement was made
between Austria and Russia, and their "superior interest"
in the provinces of European Turkey was recognized by
the Great Powers. About that very time, however, began
the new direction of German policy which tended toward
expansion in Asiatic Turkey, and which therefore sup-
ported Austria-Hungary. The two powers now worked
together in close understanding, for predominant influence
in the Balkans and at Constantinople, for the gradual ex-
clusion of Russia, and the connecting of the German-
planned Bagdad Railway with the road running from
Constantinople to Vienna and Berlin. The first great
clash came in 1908-9 when the Dual INIonarchy annexed
Bosnia and Herzegovina, in defiance of Russia, who
yielded to German threats. Four years later came the
Balkan Wars in \\hich Germany and Austria lost influence
and prestige, since in the first war they favored Turkey
and in the second Bulgaria, both of whom were completely
defeated. It was partly because they were trying to
recover what had been lost that the ultimatum was sent



Rivalry with
Russia



Austria-
Hungary,
Russia, and
the Balkans



314



EUROPE SINCE 1870



The Dual
Monarchy
and the Bal-
kan States



Neighbor-
ing South-
Slavic
states



to Servia in 1914, which occasioned the conflict that
shattered German power and destroyed the Austro-
Himgarian state.

It was not merely ambition but sound poHcy that
caused statesmen of the Dual Monarchy to take interest
in Balkan afl'airs. As the Ottoman Empire had shrunk
and decayed in Europe part of the South Slavic and
Rumanian people whom Turkey ruled were incorporated
in Austria and in Hungary, while part of them afterward
shook off the sultan's yoke and set up independent states
for themselves. In Transylvania and Bukowina there
were more than 3,000,000 Rumanians, while in Rumania,
just across the Carpathian Mountains, there were 8,000,000
more. In the southern provinces of the Monarchy just
before the war there were 7,000,000 Jugo-Slavs, while
across the border in Montenegro and Servia there were
5,000,000. Once these people had been glad to escape the
Turkish yoke by being taken into the Austrian dominions,
and now in the Dual Monarchy they had no little pros-
perity and progress. But meanwhile, Rumania and Servia
had grown up, and in course of time, as the Ruman and
South Slavic subjects of Austria-Hungary saw themselves
treated as inferiors and debarred from equal rights, they
began to yearn for the day when they might be united
with their brethren. Thus the statesmen of the Dual
Monarchy saw it threatened with disintegration. Just
before the Great War, it is said, the ill-fated Archduke
Franz Ferdinand cherished the scheme of admitting the
Slavs to a partnership with Magyars and Germans; but
this plan, which would probably have failed to cure the
ills of the state, was never tried. Generally it had seemed
best to the leaders to pursue an aggressive policy, and try
to control the small neighboring states in the Balkans,
and thus make it impossible to draw parts of the Mon-
archy away. In 1883 an alliance was made with Rumania
which became thus an appendage of the Triple Alliance.



AUSTRIA, TURKEY, BALKANS 315 ^

For some time very friendly relations were established

with Servia, while Russia had great influence in Bulgaria;

but after a while Bulgaria was drawn close to the Teutonic

Powers, and Servia came under the influence of Russia.

For more than a decade previous to the Great War The Dual

Servia dreamed of future greatness, to come when the Monarchy

I 1 1 • 1 ^°" Servia
Dual Monarchy broke up. She was overwhelmed with

fury and despair when Bosnia and Herzegovina were
annexed, because she had hoped to get them for herself,
but she was compelled to submit. From that time on
Austria seemed resolved to make Servia completely sub-
servient, and thus, as she thought, lessen the possible
danger from her. During the First Balkan War she
prevented Servia from getting an outlet on the Adriatic
Sea, and in the Second Balkan War slie encouraged
Bulgaria to attack her. After 1913 Servia, stronger than
before, was also more ambitious, and altogether hostile to
her neighbor. Discontented South Slavs in the Dual
Monarchy were encouraged and supported by Servians,
until finally the menace became a grave one. So Austria-
Hungary resolved to reduce Servia to vassalage, and
wished to attack her in 1913. In the next year the assas-
sination at Sarajevo was ascribed to Servian plotting,
though no proofs were ever given, and tlien the ultimatum
was sent from Austria to Servia which led straight to the
War of the Nations.

The history of the Balkans in the nineteenth century is The former
largely a story of the disintegration of the Turkish Em- greatness
pire in Europe and the establishment of separate states
from its ruins. The Turks, who two centuries before
had been dreaded by all Christian peoples, were now weak
and decadent, and would undoubtedly have suffered the
fate of the Poles liad they not been farther removed from
strong neighbors, and had the Great Powers not been too
jealous to unite to despoil tluMii. They had come into
Europe from Asia INIinor in the fourteenth century. In



of Turkey



316



EUROPE SINCE 1870



Ottoman
power estab-
lished in
Europe



Decline of
the Ottoman
power



1361 they took Adrianople. In 1389 they broke the
power of Servia; and soon afterward overran Bulgaria
and ^Yallachia. A pitiful renmant of the Eastern Roman
Empire survived on the Bosporus, but in 1453 they cap-
tured Constantinople, which was thenceforth the center
of their power. Their dominion was rapidly extended
up through the Balkans; Hungary was overrun ; and turn-
ing to the east theyL_siibjected4heJRiissians and the Tar-
tars along the northern shore of the Black Sea. For a
while they were the greatest naval power in the world;
their galleys swept the eastern Mediterranean; they con-
quered the islands and much of the north African shore.
In 1571 the Christian powers of the west combined to
defeat them in the great naval battle of Lepanto, and
this was in fact a decisive triumph. But for another
century the Ottoman power continued to be mighty and
terrible on land. The king of Poland was reduced to pay
tribute, and in 1683 Vienna itself was besieged by a Turk-
ish host.

But the foundations of this mighty structure presently
began to decay, and though the edifice long stood erect in
apparent splendor, it was destined to collapse completely.
Gradually the vigor of the rulers declmed amidst the lux-
ury and the pleasures of Constantinople. The Janissaries,
the terrible organized mercenaries, who had so long de-
feated all their enemies, fell behind rival armies in
discipline and military equipment, and were finally able
to inspire terror only in the Turkish Government itself.
Moreover, the Turks had never perfected any strong
organization in their empire. Always deficient in political
ability, they depended on force and chicane for holding
together their dominions. Like the Mongols once in
Russia, the Turks ruled their Christian subjects in the
Balkans by taking advantage of differences in race and
religion to keep them apart, and by punishing them
savagely if they resisted or failed to pay tribute. They



AUSTRIA, TURKEY, BALKANS 317



did not attempt really to incorporate the Servians, tlie
Bulgarians, the Hungarians, and the Greeks in a compact
Ottoman empire, but reduced them to serfdom or put
them under tribute, otherwise leaving them largely to
themselves, so long as they continued sul)niissive. Always
the Turks were a minority of the population, and so far as
they lived among their subjects they lived as an upper,
ruling class, never winning atiection or loj-alty or grati-
tude from their subjects, and never mingling with them
to form one united people. Misgovernment and oppres-
sion of subject Christians by the Turks proceeded less from
Turkish brutality than incapacity. And it must be
remembered that during the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries, at a time when Catholics in Ireland and Knglaiid
and Protestants in the Austrian dominions suffered under
disabilities and persecution, the Ottoman Empire allowed
the greatest measure of religious freedom permitted by any
government in Europe. In Turkey Christians exercised
their religion, as a rule, unmolested, and were freely ad-
mitted to hold office in the State.

Such an empire, like the ancient empires of the east,
could be held together only so long as its military organiza-
tion remained strong enough to crush all rebellions within
and meet its enemies without. Diiring the .sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries this was sOv The turning-point
car^in 1699, when by the Treaty of Carlowitz the Turks
were forced to yield their outlying possessions in Hun-
gary, in Transylvania, on the northeastern Adriatic, and
about the Sea of Azov. In the eighteenth century the
Ottoman Empire continued to yield before Austria and
Russia. In the nineteenth it began to break up from
within.

In the days of their greatness, after Constantinople fell
and the Janissaries encamped before Vienna, the Turks
had been a concern and a danger to all Europe, though the
protection of Christian Europe usually fell to Austria



Organiza-
tion of the
Ottoman
power



Rapid
decline



Rivalry
concerning
the spoils



318



EUROPE SINCE 1870



The Balkan
Question



England,
then Austria,
opposes
Russia



alone. During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries,
while the strength of the Turks was ebbing, their European
provinces became a great international question, until at
last the Balkans were recognized as the principal danger
spot of Europe. This was because of the intense rivalry
which arose for possession of the spoils. In the latter
part of the eighteenth century, especially under Catherine
II, Russia expanding southward took the Turkish terri-
torie^^ong the north of the Black Sea, and afterward
threatened to go slowly forward until she dominated the
Balkans and arrived at Constantinople. Austria was
mu'ch interested in this, for already she had many sub-
jects who had once belonged to Turkey, and expected
to get more. At first, however, she was not greatly hostile
to Russian expansion, and in 17Q.0 an arrangement was
planned by which the Ottoman dominions should be
divided between Austria and Russia. England, however,
already dreaded the appearance of a great European
power on the ruins of Turkey, and exerted herself then, as
afterward, to save the Ottoman state from destruction.

During the first half of the nineteenth century England
was the principal supporter of Turkey, and, along with
France, fought the Crimean War in 1854 to save her from
Russian aggression. She intervened decisively also in
1878, and again saved Turkey from destruction. But
after that time Austria came more and more to be Russia's
principal opponent in the Balkans, dreading, as she did,
to see the extension of Russian power southward, or the
bringing of the new Balkan states into dependence on her.
During much of this time either Russia or Austria would
gladly have taken the Ottoman provinces, but failing that,
each was resolved that no other power should get them.
Gradually it was recognized that a European war might
very easily grow out of attempted aggrandizement by any
of the great powers in the Balkans; and so, for the most
part, the powers exerted themselves to preserve the Otto-



AUSTRIA, TURKEY, BALKANS .'519

man state. It wa.s due almost solely to this that Turkey
survived down to ihe time of the Great War, and owin^ to
similar rivalries and international conditions part of her
has still been allowed to remain.

But by 1914 only a vesti^'e of Ottoman power remained
in Europe. In less than a century she had lost all her
possessions in Africa, and in Europe saved only a small
district around Constantinople. The principal steps in
the dismemberment of European Turkey since the time of
the French Revolution were: the Treaty of Adrianople
between Russia and Turkey in 1829, which ended the
War for Greek Independence; the Treaty of San Stefano
and the Congress of Berlm which brought to an end the
struggle between Russia and Turkey in 1877-8; and the
Treaty of London, 1913, which concluded the First Bal-
kan W'ar. All of the crises that led to these settlements
were brought about partly because of misgovernment and
oppression of Christian subjects by the Turkish author-
ities, partly because of the indignation which tliis aroused
either in Russia or among the Balkan peoples themselves,
and partljTbecause of the desire of Russia or Austria at
first, and later of the Balkan States, to seize for them-
selves what was slipping away from the weakening grasp of
the Turks.

In the early part of the nineteenth century the sub-
merged peoples of Turkey began to seek their freedom at
the same time that the Turkish dominions were beginning
to crumble from internal decay. Ali, pasha of Janina,
first made himself almost independent in Albania, then
as governor of Rumelia began to intrigue with foreign
powers. In 1804 the Serbs, still under Turkish rule, began
a long struggle for their independence, and in 1817 some
of them won their autonomy, thus laying the foundation
of the Servian kingdom .

;Meanwhile, the Greeks had begun a struggle which
aroused sympathy all over Europe. They had, indeed,



The dis-
member-
ment of Tur-
key, 1829-
1913



The be-
ginning of
Servia



Revolt of the
Greeks



320



EUROPE SINCE 1870



Condition of
the Greeks



The inde-
pendence of
Greece



been treated with considerable moderation, and in the
islands of the Mgean they were already practically in-
dependent. They had retained their distinctive character.
In the Greek Catholic Church they had a strong organiza-
tion which served to maintain their national spirit and
urge them forward to obtain their independence. The
spirit of nationality was aroused among them early in the
nineteenth century by revived study of the Greek classics
and recollections of the Hellas of old. In 1814 was
founded the Hetairia Philike (friendly union), a secret so-
ciety something like the Carho7iari in Italy later on. Re-
volt broke out in 1821. It was led by Prince Ypsilanti
in the north and by various others of the Hetairia
in the Peloponnesus or Morea. The northern movement
was broken at once, but in the south the Greeks had com-



Online LibraryEdward Raymond TurnerEurope since 1870 → online text (page 26 of 49)