Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T02:20:33.932Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

R. W. Seton-Watson and British Anti-Hapsburg Sentiment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

Arthur J. May
Arthur J. May*
Affiliation:
University of Rochester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

From the onset of World War I British intellectuals actively concerned with European problems engaged in a lively and searching debate on the treatment to be meted out to multi-nationality Austria-Hungary if and when the Entente achieved victory. During the first years of the struggle British partisans of the preservation of the Monarchy—largely if not wholly as it existed before 1914—effectively counteracted the advocates of national fulfillment and of dismemberment, but emphases and arguments set in motion by the latter school anticipated a more vehement campaign for the destruction of the venerable realm on the Danube in the second half of the war.

This instructive and revealing controversy in unofficial circles stands in sharp contrast to the comparative indifference of the British cabinet, Winston Churchill alone excepted—that judgment at any rate is warranted by the scanty evidence presently available.

Type
Articles
Information
American Slavic and East European Review , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , February 1961 , pp. 40 - 54
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies 1961

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Headlam-Morley, James H., “The Fall of Austria,” Atlantic Monthly, CXIV (1929), 555–63.Google Scholar

2 Pribram, Alfred F., Austria-Hungary and Great Britain, 1908-1914 (London, 1951),Google Scholar a convenient survey, disputes the theory of a “traditional friendship” between the two countries and then proceeds to demonstrate that interpretation.

3 Anon, , “The Fate of Austria,” (London)Google Scholar Nation, reprinted in The Living Age, CCLXXXIII (1914), 435–37.Google ScholarPubMed

4 Brittanicus, , “A New Map of Europe,” English Review, XVIII (1914), 480–91.Google Scholar On the anti-Hapsburg posture of some other British authors, see Lothar, Ernst, “Entgegnung auf die Angriffe englischer Dichter gegen Österreich,” Österreichische Rundschau, XLI (1914), 318–24.Google Scholar

6 Anon., “The Future of the Poles,” and Wells, H. G., “The Liberal Fear of Russia,“ (London) Nation, Aug. 22, 1914;Google ScholarPubMed Wells to the editor, London Times, Sept. 22, 1914.

6 May, Arthur J., “Woodrow Wilson and Austria-Hungary to the End of 1917,” in Hantsch, Hugo and Novotny, Alexander, eds., Festschift filr Heinrich Benedikt (Vienna, 1957), pp. 213–44,Google Scholar n. 19.

7 Barker, J. E., “The Ultimate Disappearance of Austria-Hungary,” Nineteenth Century, LXXVI (1914), 1003–31;Google Scholar Barker, “The Chances of Peace and the Problem of Poland,“ ibid., LXXVII (1915), 84-114; Barker, , The Great Problems of British Statesmanship (London, 1917), pp. 105–145.Google Scholar

8 Bryce, James, Essays and Addresses in Wartime (New York, 1918), pp. 156,Google Scholar 162-63.

9 Toynbee, Arnold J., Nationality and the War (London, 1915), pp. 92–111,Google Scholar 246-66; ibid., The New Europe (London, 1916), pp. 45, 81-84. Only slight consideration is devoted to the “Danubian Hapsburg Monarchy” by Toynbee, in A Study of History (10 vols., London, 1934–54).Google Scholar Its doom is charged to turbulent nationalism, and, cutting through the verbiage, it would appear that the mellow scholar posted the disappearance of the cosmopolitan realm on the debit side of his learned ledger. II, pp. 177-188; VIII, pp. 537- 538; IX, p. 475.

10 Cole, Margaret I., Beatrice Webb&s Diaries (2 vols. London, 1952), I, p. 33.Google Scholar

11 Wallace, Edgar [Richard H. E.], “1925,” The Story of a Fatal Peace (London, 1915), pp. 17–20,85.Google Scholar

12 Brand, Carl F., British Labour&s Rise to Power (Stanford, 1941), pp. 61–62,Google Scholar 75-76, 80.

13 For appreciations of Steed at his death, see London Times, January 14, 17, 18, 1956. His experiences of the war years are recorded in the second volume of Through Thirty Years, 1892-1922 (2 vols., London, 1924) . To round out understanding of Steed's wartime career, the present writer requested permission to study his papers. Steed replied, ”…There may be odds and ends among my own papers… but I doubt if there is anything of outstanding value … In those days I was far too busy in doing, or trying to do, urgent things, to trouble much about keeping records of what was done.” Acknowledging that “there may, indeed, be a number of things that could not be put into Through Thirty Years,” he suggested an interview, and he added, “My memory is still pretty accurate, and it remembers clearly the imponderabilia, such as ‘atmosphere,’ which no documents can fully reflect.” March 10, 1955. Before an interview could be arranged. Steed had passed away. See, also, Slavonic and East European Review, XXX (1952), 334-35, and Steed, H. W., The Doom of the Hapsburgs (London, 1937).Google Scholar

14 Benes, Edouard, Souvenirs de guerre et de revolution (2 vols., Paris, 1928) I, 174–75;Google Scholar Dresler, Adolf, “Henry Wickham Steed, der gekaufte Hetzjournalist,” Berliner Monatshefte, XX (1942), 546–51;Google Scholar ibid., “Lord Northcliffe's Generalstabchef,” Suddeutsche Monatshefte, XXII (1924-25), 41-45, 72-73.

15 Steed, H. W., “A Programme for Peace,” Edinburgh Review, CCXXIII (April, 1916), 373–92.Google Scholar

16 The History of the [London] Times (4 vols., London, 1935-52), IV, 237.

17 London Times, March 31, 1916.

18 For the career and importance of Seton-Watson, see May, Arthur J., “Seton-Watson and the Treaty of London,” Journal of Modern History, XXIX (1957) , 42–47, n. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 R. W. Seton-Watson to George [?] Morianu, Oct. 28, 1914, Seton-Watson Papers. See also, Seton-Watson, R. W., et al., The War and Democracy (London, 1914),Google Scholar a series of lectures for working class students, Seton-Watson presenting addresses on “Austria-Hungary and the South Slavs” and “The Issues of the War.“

20 R. W. Seton-Watson to Lord Cromer, Sept. 12, 1915, Seton-Watson Papers. In this note appeared the observation “ … I can never cease to regret lost hopes which I had centered upon the late Archduke and his genuine determination to work for internal reform.“

21 His major books of the war era were Roumania and the Great War (1915), The Balkans, Italy, and the Adriatic (1915), German, Slav and Magyar (1916), and The Rise of Nationality in the Balkans (1917) , the last a work of solid learning which lacked a preface and conclusion due to the fact that the author was hurriedly called up for military duty. See also, Seton-Watson, R. W., “Austria and her Neighbors,” Slavonic Review, XIII (1934-35), 549–70.Google Scholar

22 Seton-Watson, R. W., The Historian as a Political Force in Central Europe (London, 1922), pp. 34–35.Google Scholar

23 Seton-Watson, R. W., Masaryk in England (Cambridge, 1943), pp. 33–50.Google Scholar

24 May, “Seton-Watson and the Treaty of London,” op. cit.

25 London Times, July 6, 1915; cf. Spectator, CXV (July 10, 1915), 38.

26 Remarks on January 10, 1916, by Seton-Watson, , reported in Geographical Review XLVII (1916), 261–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27 Seton-Watson, R. W., “The Pan-German Plan and its Antidote,” Contemporary Review, CIX (1916), 422–28.Google Scholar

28 London Morning Post, Aug. 22, 23, 24, 28, Sept. 1, 1916.

29 Seton-Watson, Masaryk in England, pp. 35-36, 84-88.

30 Seton-Watson to George Glasgow, Sept. 27, 1916; ibid, to George P. Gooch, Oct. 16, 1916, Seton-Watson Papers. Glasgow shared editorial responsibilities with Seton-Watson.

31 Although physically disqualified for military service, Seton-Watson was nevertheless summoned to the colors. Picked for special duty in Russia, the assignment was canceled just before he was to start; then and throughout his life he greatly regretted the turn of events, for had he gone to Russia he would have witnessed at first hand the epochal revolutionary movement. “You can imagine me terrifying the good citizens of Perth by drilling in a kilt for the first time in my life,” he confided to friends, but he was “perfectly game to become a private… and so escape for the rest of the war from all need of thinking and all sense of responsibility.” Actually, he was exempted, but called up again and offered a job as censor of prisoner's letters; later he was posted to menial labor in the medical corps. Seton-Watson was inclined to think, no doubt accurately, that he was the victim of bureaucratic red tape or of the determination by highly placed officials of the government to silence his waspish pen. His case appears to have been discussed at length in the British war cabinet and was the subject of lively exchanges in the House of Commons. In time intercession by friends secured his release from the armed forces. Seton-Watson to Sir Edward Boyle, Sept. 19, 1916; to David Davies, Nov. 22, 1916, Jan. 10, 1917; to J. Holland Rose, Dec. 21, 1916; R. A. Burrows to Mrs. R. W. Seton-Watson, Apr. 17, 1917. Seton-Watson Papers. H. of C, Parliamentary Debates, XCIV (June 5, 1917), 3.

32 Gooch, George P., Under Six Reigns (London, 1958), p. 178.Google Scholar

33 Seton-Watson, Masaryk in England, pp. 88-96.

34 Spectator, CXVIII (1917), 306.

35 Nicolson, Harold, Peacemaking (Boston, 1933), pp. 32–33.Google Scholar

36 Seton-Watson to Steed, Oct. 8, 1920, Seton-Watson Papers.