(pop. 19,604 the town itself 6,411). These figures are from the census of 1920. In 1900, 92-1% of the soil was productive and the productive areas included 38-1% arable; 20-1% meadow; 2-7% grazing land; 36-9% forestal and 2-2% gardens. The salt production of Upper Austria forms nearly 60% of the whole Austrian output.
Urfahr is now incorporated with Linz. The Postlingberg '(1,762 ft.), a favourite resort, is connected with Linz by mountain railway. The pop. of Steyr increased by only 150 between 1900 and 1910 because of a decline in the iron industry, and the in- crease afterwards was due to the opening during the World War of a munitions factory which was later converted into engineering works.
AUSTRIAN EMPIRE, 1908-18. The external designation of the state "unofficially known as Austria" (see 3.2) was for a long time unsettled.[1] The official name since 1867 for the Austrian half of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, as including
the Habsburg possessions W. of the river Leitha, was " the
Kingdoms and Territories represented in the Reichsrat " (Die
im Reichsrate vertrctcncn Konigsreiche und Lander). It was
cumbrous and but little calculated to arouse patriotic sentiments
in its citizens. In the style of the Government offices this mass of
territories was known as " Cisleithania." But the population
was accustomed to talk of an Austrian Empire and of the Austrian
Emperor, neither of which designations was quite happy or
accurate. It was not till the World War that the dynasty
felt the necessity for giving this group of countries a definite
name and state arms of its own (as was done on Oct. 10 1915),
the term " Austrian Empire " being adopted with the motive of
giving " precise expression to the political unity of the Austrian
territories " and " displaying tangibly the Austrian state as a
unity." This proceeding might be compared to a death-bed
baptism.
Nationalities. The Austrian state had from its first origins always had a self-imposed political mission; its very name of origin, Ostmark (The Eastern March), marked it geographically as a bulwark, a gate-keeper, to defend Europe on the W. against encroachments from the E. From this original task arose a second, that of affording shelter to the fragments of peoples heaped together in inextricable confusion in this corner of the earth. With a few exceptions (Poland, Bosnia) it was through their free will that the Empire had come into being. The external legal forms of the union were marriages, inheritance and election; it was essentially the self-determination of the nations which brought them together. For 500 years Austria had fulfilled this double task fairly adequately; but in its third task, that of turning a mechanical combination into an intimate union, a symbiosis of the nationalities, the State failed. If it had achieved this as well, it would have given a model solution of the most difficult European problem; for Austria was Europe in miniature. There was no lack of attempts to do so; the methods varied, experiments were made as on a subject for vivisection; the object of the experiment suffers under it, but the method is perfected step by step.
Till late in the i8th century the nationality question remained untouched, and the Austrian peoples got on well with one another. Maria Theresa and Joseph II. were the first who thought it desirable to form these nationalities into a uniform nation coextensive with the state. The attempt failed, and the nationalities became self-conscious and split apart. The next stage was to take one people and train it as the representative par excellence of the State idea; and this people could only be the Germans. This attempt also failed ; for the Germans were numerically too weak, and not vigorous enough in their methods (Bach period, 1850-60). A third experiment took the form of distributing over many backs a burden too heavy for one. In 1867 the Magyars accepted with alacrity this role in Hungary, the eastern half of the Dual Monarchy, while in the Cisleithanian tern tones the cooperation of the Poles was also sought. But this way too had to be given up, since even the smallest nationality would not allow itself to be absorbed, and during Taaffe's administration (1878) the idea came into favour of treating each nationality, and allowing it to grow up, according to its own idiosyncrasies; they were only to be restricted so far as the unity of the state rendered it absolutely necessary. What Austria desired to be was a state at once conciliatory and just, and it opposed no national demand which did not overstep the limits of state security; but this loosing of bonds unchained at the same time a number of national passions before which the state retired step by step.
As to the details, the following observations[2] may be made for the last phase of the empire which expired in 1918. The Germans had for long past given up all efforts at Germanization; their watch- word was " maintenance of the national status quo " that is to say, not an aggressive but a defensive principle. It was in Bohemia that they championed the principle most openly, where they were striving for national separation and protection against the Czechs of the territories which they had inhabited since the Middle Ages. The Germans of the Alpine lands were less ready to carry out the same principle in Tirol and the regions leading down to the Adriatic. The divided policy of the Germans led on all sides to their failure. In Tirol they lost even purely German territories; they were pressed back from the Adriatic ; and in the lands S. of the Sudetic Mountains they were brought under a Czech national state, which inherited, with them, the problem of nationality.
The Czechs came under the sceptre of the Habsburgs after the battle with the Turks at Mohacs (1526), through an inheritance treaty confirmed by the vote of their Estates; -an unsuccessful rebellion which they made in 1621 against the ruling house as protagonist of the counter-Reformation, brought them under the power of a ruthless conqueror, who wished to crush both their faith and their national independence. The reign of terror which followed the battle of the White Mountain was intended to remove all possibility of a fresh rising in the future. The Czechs rightly refer to this period 300 years ago when they describe themselves as a once oppressed nation. But in more recent times the position was different ; the conquered race recovered, and a learned work, Die bohmische Nation, published in 1916 by the intellectual leaders of the nation, enlightens us as to their position. Dr. V. Zdeako Tobolka, leader of the " Young Czechs " (i.e. the party which had frustrated the efforts of the Old Czechs for a reconciliation with the Germans) produced this magnificent work in collaboration with 22 professors, artists, industrial leaders and writers of Czech nationality, supported by a national subsidy ; it can therefore be accepted as a trustworthy Czech autobiography. This comprehensive book describes the collective life of the " Bohemian " people, as the Czechs called themselves in contrast to their present appellation of the Czechoslovak state. It describes its material development, " its physical constitution and warlike prowess," of which they make a special boast, and after that its intellectual progress. In the sphere of education attention is drawn to the fact that 96-69 % of the population of the Sudetic territories can both read and write: "Our education is, next to the German, the best organized and stands decidedly the highest " (p. 122). Next follow chapters on the literary renaissance of the nation, its progress in art, mathematics, chemistry and natural science; the magnificent development of agriculture, modern industry, commerce and finance; and in particular its flourishing self-government, " which will be exercised in the fullest freedom," and in which " the communal organization embodies in the highest degree the conception of self-government " (p. 234), and " the independent sphere of activity unlimited in its fundamental principle " (p. 235) in that " State control is exercised seldom and discreetly " (p. 236). " The control which is exercised over the land is in Czech hands since we possess a majority ; the territorial authorities for the greater part belong to our nation " (p. 242). The influence of German culture is also remembered with gratitude. Of Palacky, the father of the nation, it says: " It was under the influence of German culture that Palacky was aisle to give a firm foundation to this conscious Bohemian ideal of his. To cut oneself off from external cultural influences, especially from German ones, he declared to be a mistake." Besides mentioning the encouragement bestowed by leading Germans like Goethe, Herder, Raumer, etc., on Czech poets and scholars, the book gives an appreciative account of the Emperor Joseph. The article by Jakubel on " the literary renaissance " says: " The Prague theatre, which had vegetated miserably up to now, developed under the reign of Joseph II. into a powerful instrument of culture. Joseph's
- ↑ For HUNGARY, as the other constitutional half of the old Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, see the separate article under that heading; also BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA, and the articles on the different " succession states " which were formed on the break-up of the monarchy in 1918. As a matter of convenience, the account of Austro-Hungarian foreign policy (i.e. the Dual Monarchy as a whole) in 1909-18, dealing, from the Austrian standpoint, with the political developments resulting in the World War, is included as a final section under the present heading. The Austro-Hungarian army is dealt with under ARMY. (Ed. E. B.)
- ↑ As elsewhere throughout this article, the point of view is that of a fair-minded Austrian historian. (Ed. E. B.)
