Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:10:44.087Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Dynasty and the Imperial Idea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2009

Robert A. Kann
Robert A. Kann
Affiliation:
Rutgers University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It would be much easier to state what the relationship between the concepts of the “dynasty” and the “imperial idea” does not mean than to explain what it is supposed to mean. Before we can make any serious efforts to do so, we must, first of all, come to a clear understanding of the exact meaning of some of the terms involved. In English-speaking areas the word “empire” is generally understood to mean “an extended territory, usually comprised of a group of nations, states or peoples under the control or domination of a single sovereign power.” Frequently the determining factors are the assumption of a master-subject relationship between “a dominating conquering people and the conquered people,” either by way of a confederacy, in which “one strong member dominates its confederates,” or by even more direct subordination. Furthermore, the notion of an empire is generally associated with an area of considerable size and frequently “with the supreme or absolute power especially of an emperor.1

Type
The Centripetal Forces in the Monarchy
Information
Austrian History Yearbook , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , January 1967 , pp. 11 - 31
Copyright
Copyright © Center for Austrian Studies, University of Minnesota 1967

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 Webster's New Third International Dictionary of the English Language (3rd unabridged ed., Springfield, Mass.: G. & C. Merriam Company, 1965)Google Scholar.

2 Huber, A. and Dopsch, A., Österreichische Reichsgeschichte (2nd rev'd. ed., Vienna: F. Tempsky, 1901), especially pp. 146–232Google Scholar; Helbling, Ernst C., Österreichische Verfassungs- und Verwaltungsgeschichte (Vienna: Springer, 1956), especially pp. 210–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sándor, V., “Der Charakter der Abhángigkeit Ungarns im Zeitalter des Dualismus,” in V., Sándor and P., Hanák (eds.), Studien zur Geschichte der österreichisch-ungarischen Monarchie (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó;, 1961), pp. 303–336Google Scholar; P. Hanák, “Probleme der Krise des Dualismus am Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts,” in ibid., pp. 337–387; Zwitter, Fran, Les problèmes nationaux dans la monarchie des Habsbourg (Belgrade: Comité national Yougoslave des Sciences Historiques, 1960), pp. 86–147Google Scholar; Eann, Robert A., Das Nationalitätenproblem der Habsburgermonarchie (2nd rev'd. and enlarged ed., 2 vols., Graz: H. Böhlaus Nachf., 1964), Vol. I, pp. 17–39 and 344–356Google Scholar.

3 See Jellinek, Georg, Die Lehre von den Staatenverbindungen (Vienna: A. Hölder, 1882), pp. 226–252Google Scholar. See also Kann, , Das Nationalitätenproblem der Habsburgermonarchie, Vol. I, pp. 350–356Google Scholar.

4 Bidermann, Hermann I., Geschichte der österreichischen Gesamtstaatsidee 1526–1804 (Innsbruck: Wagner, 1867–1989), Pt. II (1705–40)Google Scholar; von Kralik, Richard, Entdeckungsgeschichte des österreichischen Staatsgedankens Reprinted from Kultur: Jahrbuch der österreichischen Leo Gesellschaft (Innsbruck: Tyrolia, 1917), passimGoogle Scholar; Wolkan, Rudolf, “Der österreichische Staatsgedanke im Zeitalter Franz Josephs,” Mitteilungen des österreichischen Institutes für Geschichtsforschung, Supplementary Vol. XI (Innsbruck, 1929)Google Scholar.

5 Jászi, Oscar, The Dissolution of the Habsburg Monarchy (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1929), pp. 133–212Google Scholar. For a largely favorable but critical analysis of this theory, see Kann, Robert A., Werden und Zerfall des Habsburgerreiches (Graz: Styria, 1962), pp. 27–30Google Scholar.

6 Redlich, Oswald, Das Werden einer Grossmacht. österreich von 1700–1740 (Brünn: Rohrer, 1942)Google Scholar; Redlich, Josef, Das österreichische Staatsund Reichsproblem (3 vols., Leipzig: Neuer Geist Verlag, 1920–1926)Google Scholar.

7 See the section prepared by Kann, Robert A. in Deutsch, Karl W., Burrell, S., et al. , Political Community and the North Atlantic Area (Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1957), pp. 33–34Google Scholar; and Kann, Werden und Zerfall des Habsburgerreiches, pp. 47 and 48.

8 Kann, , Das Nationalitätenproblem der Habsburgermonarchie, Vol. II, pp. 139–159 and 336–342Google Scholar.

9 Braubach, Max, Prinz Eugen von Savoyen (5 vols., Vienna: Verlag för Geschichte und Politik, 1963–1965), Vol. III, pp. 293–380 and 444–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Ibid., pp. 295–296 and 302–310; Hantsch, Hugo, Die Geschichte Osterreichs (2 vols., Graz: Styria, 1959), Vol. II, pp. 112–115Google Scholar; Zöllner, Erich, Geschichte österreichs (Vienna: Verlag für Geschichte und Politik, 1961), pp. 266–268Google Scholar; Mayer, Franz Martin and Kaindl, Raimund, Geschichte und Kulturleben Deutschösterreichs, edited by Hans, Pirchegger (5th rev'd. ed., Vienna: Braumüller, 1957), Vol. II, pp. 226–228Google Scholar.

11 Bruford, Walter H., Germany in the Eighteenth Century: the Social Background of the Literary Revival (Cambridge, England: University Press, 1962), pp. 271–328Google Scholar; Hertz, Frederick, The Development of the German Public Mind (London: Allen and Unwin, 1957–1962), Vol. II, pp. 13–26 and 314–337Google Scholar; Mayer, and Kaindl, , Geschichte und Kulturleben öuml;sterreichs, Vol. II, pp. 127–185, 229–265, and 290–343Google Scholar; Marczali, Henry, Hungary in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, England: University Press, 1910), pp. 100–195Google Scholar.

12 Kann, Robert A., Kanzel und Katheder (Vienna: Herder, 1962), pp. 13–58 and 121–148Google Scholar.

13 According to the official statistics, in 1910 the Germans, Magyars, and Italians comprised 46.1 percent of the population of Austria-Hungary. The Slavs and Rumanians made up 53.6 percent.

14 It should be noted that after the mid-nineteenth century such Latin nationalities as the Italians and Rumanians no longer played any important role in this respect, for their center of gravity lay outside the monarchy.

15 Even rather large political entities like the Republic of Venice or the United Netherlands would not have qualified in this respect even in their heyday, since they lacked the comprehensiveness associated with the imperial idea as defined in the beginning of this study.

16 Turba, Gustav, Die pragmatische Sanktion (Vienna: Manz, 1906), pp. 2–131Google Scholar; Bidermann, , Geschichte der österreichischen Gesamtstaatsidee, Vol. II, pp. 26–76Google Scholar.

17 Lorenz, Willy, “Das heimliche römische Reich,” in Hermann Fillitz, Die österreichische Kaiserkrone (Vienna: Herold, 1959), pp. 7–16Google Scholar. See also Wandruszka, Adam, Das Haus Habsburg (Vienna: Verlag für Gepcbichte und Politik, 1956), pp. 21–25Google Scholar.

18 Kiszling, Rudolf, Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand von Österreich-Este (Graz: Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1953), pp. 245–247Google Scholar; Kann, Robert A., “Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand und die österreichischen Deutschen,” in Mittcilungen des österreichischen Staatsarchivs, Vol. XIII (1960), pp. 333–339Google Scholar.

19 Kiszling, , Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand, pp. 215–220Google Scholar; von Chlumecky, L., Erzherzog Franz Ferdinands Wirken und Wollen (Berlin: Verlag fur Kulturpolitik, 1929), pp. 205–279Google Scholar; von Sosnosky, Theodor, Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand (Munich: R. Oldenbourg, 1929), pp. 53–65Google Scholar; Kann, Robert A., “Count Ottokar Czernin and Archduke Francis Ferdinand,” Journal of Central European Affairs, Vol. XVI (1956), pp. 118–145Google Scholar.

20 Hayes, Carlton J. H., The Historical Evolution of Modern Nationalism (New York: R. Smith, 1931), especially pp. 13–42 and 303–311Google Scholar. In this brilliant analysis Hayes regarded prerevolutionary eighteenth century nationalism as too rigidly within the frame of humanitarian nationalism.

21 Kann, Werden und Zerfall des Habsburgerreiches, pp. 207–239; Kann, Robert A., “Wandel und Dauer im Donauraum,” Wort und Wahrheit, Vol. XIX, No. 3 (March, 1964), pp. 184–194Google Scholar.

22 Kann, Werden und Zerfall des Habsburgerreiches, pp. 80–87, 121, and 135.