Status
Available
Call number
Collection
Publication
Cambridge, Massachusetts : The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2016.
Description
"Moving beyond older approaches to the history of the Habsburgs in Central Europe in which nations are the main actors and nationalist conflict the inevitable moving force in the monarchy's trajectory, Pieter Judson offers an alternate narrative framework for the history of Habsburg Central Europe from the eighteenth century to the demise of the empire in World War I. He investigates how shared imperial institutions, administrative practices, and cultural programs helped to shape local society in every region of the empire. He shows how all of these elements gave imperial citizens fundamentally common experiences that crossed linguistic, confessional, and regional divides--experiences that even shaped nationalists' understandings of nationhood. And he traces what happened to the common or shared elements of imperial practice when the Habsburg monarchy formally ceased to exist in 1918."--Provided by publisher.… (more)
User reviews
LibraryThing member Schmerguls
The Habsburg Empire A New History, by Pieter M. Judson (read 6 Sep 2016) I have been fascinated by Austrian history ever since on 24 June 1945 I read Golden Fleece, by Bertita Harding--a novel-like life of Franz Josef and his wife Elizabeth. Books such The Fall of the House of Habsburg, by Edward
Show More
Crankshaw (read 7 Dec 1969); Thunder at Twilght, by Frederic Morton (read 12 Oct 1996); The Eagles Die, by George R. Marek (read 28 Sep 2004); and A Nervous Splendor by Frederic Mortaon (read 28 May 2012) enthralled me. But this book by Judson seemed to be eager to take all the drama out of tthe history,making events seem as dry as dust. Much prose not telling what happened but expounding on why it happened fills this book. One paragraph suffices for the war in 1866. Crown Prince Rudolph's death is not mentioned at all. The book is full of argument as to reasons why some things happened--often not even telling what happened except by indirection. I am afraid I am not enough of a scholar to appreciate this book. Show Less
LibraryThing member Scapegoats
Pieter Judson looks at the internal workings of the Habsburg Empire based in Vienna from the late 18th until its end after WWI. He focuses on attempts by the Habsburg's to modernize the empire amid continuing wars and its international decline. He looks at the devolution of power away from the
The main thrust of the book is the multi-national character of the empire and the dynasty's attempts to modernize its governance. This was a difficult period because the Habsburg's had traditional ruled (although that is a loose term) the Holy Roman Empire but then established the Austrian Empire after its dissolution during the Napoleonic wars. Then the revolutions of 1848 put new pressure on the dynasty, leading to a new constitution based on a strong bureaucracy. That was eventually overturned with a new constitution which included the official divisions between Hungary and Austria. This division, which was made for political reasons at the time, reflected the different traditions of the two regions (which encompassed a lot more than the modern countries) and the growing power of nationalism within the empire. The division, and later concessions to nationalists, made it difficult for the Austrian government to modernize because it limited its ability to mobilize the resources of its empire in a uniform way.
Judson rarely discusses wars except in passing. He says that they happened and what their effects were, but glosses over all the details. He admits he will do this in the beginning of the book, but it is still a little frustration because he blames the wars of the 19th century for many of the economic and fiscal difficulties of the empire. He calls Austria's attempts in Crimea and against Prussia to be disastrous, but he doesn't say much about why the army couldn't do better, leaving the question hanging of whether this was a reflection of the internal difficulties of the empire. He does mention the issues of language, where conscripts were commanded in their own language even though German was used at higher levels. Other than that, it is hard to say what the connection was between internal and external problems.
He finished the book with WWI and its aftermath. He doesn't see the war as the final nail in the coffin, but as a traumatic event that created entirely new problems on a new scale. I see his point, but since one of the major points of the entire book is about conflicting loyalties between nation and empire and then he shows how the war exacerbated that tension, the problems of the war seem to be similar to what the empire faced before hand.
The final section is one of the most interesting. As he discusses the food shortages in the empire, he shows how it shifts many of the empire's subjects toward more loyalty toward the nation. There were rumors across the empire that other areas and nationalities were eating better and were exporting food, widening the divisions between the groups. When the war ended, the empire broke apart, but not in an orderly fashion. Each nationality tried to grab as much land as it could by force, regardless of whether the people living there belonged to their nation. The fundamental problem was that the peace treaty recognized national self-determination, but smaller ethnicities were swallowed up by larger ones and many people were left on the wrong side of the border, divided from the rest of their nation. Interestingly, the had the right to immigrate to their national territory, but many states, such as Germany and Italy, encouraged them to remain so that they would have cause to claim the territory in the future.
This is a good book as far as it goes. It's main interest is the inner workings the empire and the politics of nation vs. empire. I found it interesting and informative. It is a little dry at times, but that is the nature of this kind of analysis. And I would have liked more on foreign affairs, as mentioned earlier.
Show More
monarchy because of the growth of nationalism and the demand for natural rights caused by the enlightenment and French Revolution.The main thrust of the book is the multi-national character of the empire and the dynasty's attempts to modernize its governance. This was a difficult period because the Habsburg's had traditional ruled (although that is a loose term) the Holy Roman Empire but then established the Austrian Empire after its dissolution during the Napoleonic wars. Then the revolutions of 1848 put new pressure on the dynasty, leading to a new constitution based on a strong bureaucracy. That was eventually overturned with a new constitution which included the official divisions between Hungary and Austria. This division, which was made for political reasons at the time, reflected the different traditions of the two regions (which encompassed a lot more than the modern countries) and the growing power of nationalism within the empire. The division, and later concessions to nationalists, made it difficult for the Austrian government to modernize because it limited its ability to mobilize the resources of its empire in a uniform way.
Judson rarely discusses wars except in passing. He says that they happened and what their effects were, but glosses over all the details. He admits he will do this in the beginning of the book, but it is still a little frustration because he blames the wars of the 19th century for many of the economic and fiscal difficulties of the empire. He calls Austria's attempts in Crimea and against Prussia to be disastrous, but he doesn't say much about why the army couldn't do better, leaving the question hanging of whether this was a reflection of the internal difficulties of the empire. He does mention the issues of language, where conscripts were commanded in their own language even though German was used at higher levels. Other than that, it is hard to say what the connection was between internal and external problems.
He finished the book with WWI and its aftermath. He doesn't see the war as the final nail in the coffin, but as a traumatic event that created entirely new problems on a new scale. I see his point, but since one of the major points of the entire book is about conflicting loyalties between nation and empire and then he shows how the war exacerbated that tension, the problems of the war seem to be similar to what the empire faced before hand.
The final section is one of the most interesting. As he discusses the food shortages in the empire, he shows how it shifts many of the empire's subjects toward more loyalty toward the nation. There were rumors across the empire that other areas and nationalities were eating better and were exporting food, widening the divisions between the groups. When the war ended, the empire broke apart, but not in an orderly fashion. Each nationality tried to grab as much land as it could by force, regardless of whether the people living there belonged to their nation. The fundamental problem was that the peace treaty recognized national self-determination, but smaller ethnicities were swallowed up by larger ones and many people were left on the wrong side of the border, divided from the rest of their nation. Interestingly, the had the right to immigrate to their national territory, but many states, such as Germany and Italy, encouraged them to remain so that they would have cause to claim the territory in the future.
This is a good book as far as it goes. It's main interest is the inner workings the empire and the politics of nation vs. empire. I found it interesting and informative. It is a little dry at times, but that is the nature of this kind of analysis. And I would have liked more on foreign affairs, as mentioned earlier.
Show Less
Subjects
Awards
Language
ISBN
9780674047761