The 1840's were a decade of dynamism for Hungarian liberals. Two important developments had produced a measure of unity in the liberal camp. As the Habsburgs increased their colonial treatment of Hungary, the Hungarians attempted to counter that policy with an economic program and, simultaneously, drafted a political platform. This collision between Habsburg reactionary policy and Hungarian liberalism made it imperative that the liberals unify, clarify their ideology, and shape a political strategy. More than anything else, the liberals needed a resolute leader who could consolidate the various reform factions into a united body. Ferenc Deák was considered the figure of greatest stature among all the liberals and the natural head of the nascent liberal party. Yet he was at his most undecided stage during this prerevolutionary period of ferment.

In his classic analysis of state building by the Austrian Habsburgs in early modern Central Europe, R. J. W. Evans argues that the dynasty's eventual success in asserting its will over a conglomerate of separate, coherent territories with time-honored claims to political liberties followed the sometimes troubled trajectory of crown-aristocratic relations. The cultural impetus for political centralization was the mix of reform within the Catholic Church and counterreform measures taken against powerful Protestant subjects among the nobles and civic elites. By the 1650s the ability of Habsburg officials in Vienna to govern effectively the dynasty's various holdings rested firmly on a dyarchy of the ruling house and regional nobles who shared a common baroque Catholic faith and an investment in a system of court patronage that fostered collaboration rather than resistance in the far-flung empire.

If scholarly articles could have intricate subtitles, as did treatises published long ago, the heading of this essay would be much longer. The larger scheme of things into which the career of Václav Eusebius z Lobkovic, head of the Habsburg government from 1669 to 1674, fits is armed service and nobility. Assuming that the latter was synonymous with what Marc Bloch called the “seignorial” class—i. e., Central Europe's dominant or ruling social group prior to the industrial epoch—one may argue that for more than a millennium, from Merovingian times onward, a symbiotic, if fluid and complex, relationship existed between the waging of war and the establishment of that control over land which constituted the tangible foundation for noble power and authority.

I should like to begin by recalling my own occasional points of contact with Robert Kann. When his first book, the great two-volume work on the nationality problem in the Habsburg Empire, was published, I was a student about to embark on research on eighteenth-century Austria, and took little notice of any large works not on my research period. Later, teaching nineteenth-century European history, I came to appreciate its wide range and deep insights. By the time his highly original Study in Austrian Intellectual History was published in 1960, my career as a historian had prospered sufficiently for me to be offered this book for review by a leading British historical periodical. I commented very positively on his analysis of Abraham a Sancta Clara. Turning to the chapters on Joseph von Sonnenfels, however, I took the opportunity of presenting some results of my own research on Sonnenfels, which had only just been published and which I thought called some of his judgments into question. Unlike many Central European academics of his generation, Robert Kann did not resent criticism by a younger colleague; hence I have memories of some pleasant and stimulating meetings with him in Vienna during the time he held an honorary professorship there.

The Utraquist Church of Bohemia was unique among the late medieval defections in Western Christendom from the Church of Rome in that it involved the separation of an entire church, organized on a national territory, not merely an underground resistance of relatively isolated and scattered groups of sectarians, like the Waldensians or the Lollards. Moreover, the Bohemian Reformation was linked with a major social upheaval, the Hussite Revolution, lasting from 1419 to 1434, which historians have viewed as an early specimen, if not a prototype or the first link in the chain, of the revolutions of the early modern period in the Euroatlantic world: the Dutch, the English, the American, and the French revolutions. Building mainly on the Bohemian Reform movement that had gathered momentum since the mid-fourteenth century, the Utraquists' defiance of Rome, leading to the Hussite Revolution, was sparked by the burning of Jan Hus at the Council of Constance on July 6, 1415.