The "Long War."

Stephen Bocskay.

This persecution raged most fiercely towards the end of what is

generally called "The Long War," which began in 1593, and lasted till

1606. It was a confused four-cornered struggle between the emperor and

the Turks, the Turks and Transylvania, Michael of Moldavia and

Transylvania, and Transylvania and the emperor, desultory and

languishing as regards the Turks (the one notable battle being Sigismund

Bathory's brilliant victory over the grand vizier in Walachia in 1595,

when the Magyar army penetrated as far as Giurgevo), but very bitter as

between the emperor and Transylvania, the principality being finally

subdued by the imperial general, George Basta, in August 1604. A reign

of terror ensued, during which the unfortunate principality was

well-nigh ruined. Basta was authorized to Germanize and Catholicize

without delay, and he began by dividing the property of most of the

nobles among his officers, appropriating the lion's share himself. In

royal Hungary the same object was aimed at by innumerable indictments

against the richer landowners, indictments supported by false

title-deeds and carried through by forged or purchased judgments of the

courts. At last the estates of even the most devoted adherents of the

Habsburgs were not safe, and some of them, like the wealthy Istvan

Illeshazy (1540-1609), had to fly abroad to save their heads.

Fortunately a peculiarly shameless attempt to blackmail Stephen Bocskay,

a rich and powerful Transylvanian nobleman, converted a long-suffering

friend of the emperor into a national deliverer. Bocskay (q.v.), a quiet

but resolute man, having once made up his mind to rebel, never paused

till he had established satisfactory relations between the Austrian

court and the Hungarians. The two great achievements of his brief reign

(he was elected prince of Transylvania on the 5th of April 1605, and

died on the 29th of December 1606) were the peace of Vienna (June 23,

1606) and the truce of Zsitvatorok (November 1606). By the peace of

Vienna, Bocskay obtained religious liberty and political autonomy, the

restoration of all confiscated estates, the repeal of all unrighteous

judgments and a complete retrospective amnesty for all the Magyars in

royal Hungary, besides his own recognition as independent sovereign

prince of an enlarged[32] Transylvania. This treaty is remarkable as

being the first constitutional compact between the ruling dynasty and

the Hungarian nation. Almost equally important was the twenty years'

truce of Zsitvatorok, negotiated by Bocskay between the emperor and the

sultan, which established for the first time a working equilibrium

between the three parts of Hungary, with a distinct political

preponderance in favour of Transylvania. Of the 5163 sq. m. of Hungarian

territory, Transylvania now possessed 2082, Turkish Hungary 1859, and

royal Hungary only 1222. The emperor, on the other hand, was freed from

the humiliating annual tribute to the Porte on payment of a war

indemnity of L400,000. The position of royal Hungary was still further

improved when the popular and patriotic Archduke Matthias was elected

king of Hungary on the 16th of November 1608. He had previously

confirmed the treaty of Vienna, and the day after his election he

appointed Illeshazy, now reinstated in all his possessions and

dignities, palatine of Hungary.[33] In Transylvania, meantime, Gabriel

Bathory had been elected (Nov. 11, 1608) in place of the decrepit

Sigismund Rakoczy, Bocskay's immediate successor.

Transylvanian Hegemony.

For more than fifty years after the peace of Vienna the principality of

Transylvania continued to be the bulwark of the liberties of the

Magyars. It owed its ascendancy in the first place to the abilities of

the two princes who ruled it from 1613 to 1648. The first and most

famous of these rulers was Gabriel Bethlen (q.v.), who reigned from 1613

to 1629, perpetually thwarted all the efforts of the emperor to oppress

or circumvent his Hungarian subjects, and won some reputation abroad by

adroitly pretending to champion the Protestant cause. Three times he

waged war on the emperor, twice he was proclaimed king of Hungary, and

by the peace of Nikolsburg (Dec. 31, 1621) he obtained for the

Protestants a confirmation of the treaty of Vienna, and for himself

seven additional counties in northern Hungary besides other substantial

advantages. Bethlen's successor, George I. Rakoczy, was equally

successful. His principal achievement was the peace of Linz (Sept. 16,

1645), the last political triumph of Hungarian Protestantism, whereby

the emperor was forced to confirm once more the oft-broken articles of

the peace of Vienna, to restore nearly a hundred churches to the sects

and to acknowledge the sway of Rakoczy over the north Hungarian

counties. Gabriel Bethlen and George I. Rakoczy also did much for

education and civilization generally, and their era has justly been

called the golden era of Transylvania. They lavished money on the

embellishment of their capital, Gyulafehervar, which became a sort of

Protestant Mecca, whither scholars and divines of every anti-Roman

denomination flocked to bask in the favour of princes who were as

liberal as they were pious. Yet both Bethlen and Rakoczy owed far more

to favourable circumstances than to their own cunning. Their reigns

synchronized with the Thirty Years' War, during which the emperors were

never in a position seriously to withstand the attacks of the malcontent

Magyars, the vast majority of whom were still Protestants, who naturally

looked upon the Transylvanian princes as their protectors and joined

them in thousands whenever they raided Moravia or Lower Austria, or

threatened to advance upon Vienna. In all these risings no battle of

importance was fought. Generally speaking, the Transylvanians had only

to appear, to have their demands promptly complied with; for these

marauders had to be bought off because the emperor had more pressing

business elsewhere. Yet their military efficiency must have been small,

for their allies the Swedes invariably allude to them as wild and ragged

semi-barbarians.

Turkish conflict.

Peace of Vasvar, 1664.

Another fortunate accident which favoured the hegemony of Transylvania

was the temporary collapse of Hungary's most formidable adversary, the

Turk. From the peace of Zsitvatorok (1606) to the ninth year of the

reign of George Rakoczy II., who succeeded his father in 1648, the

Turkish empire, misruled by a series of incompetent sultans and

distracted by internal dissensions, was unable to intervene in Hungarian

politics. But in the autumn of 1656 a great statesman, Mahommed Kuprili

(q.v.), obtained the supreme control of affairs at Constantinople, and

all Europe instantly felt the pressure of the Turk once more. It was

George Rakoczy II. (q.v.) who gave the new grand vizier a pretext for

interference. Against the advice of all his counsellors, and without the

knowledge of the estates, Rakoczy, in 1657, plunged into the troubled

sea of Polish politics, in the hope of winning the Polish throne, and

not only failed miserably but overwhelmed Transylvania in his own ruin.

Kuprili, who had forbidden the Polish enterprise, at once occupied

Transylvania, and, in the course of the next five years, no fewer than

four princes, three of whom died violent deaths, were forced to accept

the kaftan and kalpag of investiture in the camp of the grand vizier.

When, at the end of 1661, a more stable administration was set up with

Michael Apaffy (1661-1690) as prince, Transylvania had descended to the

rank of a feudatory of the Turkish empire. On the death of Mahommed

Kuprili (Oct. 11, 1661) his son Fazil Ahmed succeeded him as grand

vizier, and pursued his father's policy with equal genius and

determination. In 1663 he invaded royal Hungary, with the intention of

uniting all the Magyars against the emperor, but, the Magyars steadily

refusing to attend any diet summoned under Turkish influence, his plan

fell through, and his only notable military success was the capture of

the fortress of Ersekujvar (Neuhausel). In the following year, thanks to

the generalship and heroism of Miklos Zrinyi the younger (q.v.), Kuprili

was still less successful. Zrinyi captured fortress after fortress, and

interrupted the Turkish communications by destroying the famous bridge

of Esseg, while Montecuculi defeated the grand vizier at the battle of

St Gothard (Aug. 1, 1664). Yet, despite these reverses, Kuprili's

superior diplomacy enabled him, at the peace of Vasvar (Aug. 10, 1664)

to obtain terms which should only have been conceded to a conqueror. The

fortress of Ersekujvar and surrounding territory were now ceded to the

Turks, with the result that royal Hungary was not only still further

diminished, but its northern practically separated from its southern

portion. On the other hand the treaty of Vasvar gave Hungary a respite

from regular Turkish invasions for twenty years, though the border

raiding continued uninterruptedly.

Catholic reaction.

Pazmany's work.

Of far more political importance than these fluctuating wars of

invasion and conquest was the simultaneous Catholic reaction in

Hungary. The movement may be said to have begun about 1601, when the

great Jesuit preacher and controversialist, Peter Pazmany (q.v.), first

devoted himself to the task of reconverting his countrymen. Progress was

necessarily retarded by the influence of the independent Protestant

princes of Transylvania in the northern counties of Hungary. Even as

late as 1622 the Protestants at the diet of Pressburg were strong enough

to elect their candidate, Szaniszlo Thurzo, palatine. But Thurzo was the

last Protestant palatine, and, on his death, the Catholics, at the diet

of Sopron (1625), where they dominated the Upper Chamber, and had a

large minority in the Lower, were able to elect Count Miklos Esterhazy

in Thurzo's stead. The Jesuit programme in Hungary was the same as it

had been in Poland a generation earlier, and may be summed up thus:

convert the great families and all the rest will follow.[34] Their

success, due partly to their whole-hearted zeal, and partly to their

superior educational system, was extraordinary; and they possessed the

additional advantage of having in Pazmany a leader of commanding genius.

During his primacy (1616-1637), when he had the whole influence of the

court, and the sympathy and the assistance of the Catholic world behind

him, he put the finishing touches to his life's labour by founding a

great Catholic university at Nagyszombat (1635), and publishing a

Hungarian translation of the Bible to counteract the influence of Gaspar

Karoli's widely spread Protestant version. Pazmany was certainly the

great civilizing factor of Hungary in the seventeenth century, and

indirectly he did as much for the native language as for the native

church. His successors had only to build on his foundations. One most

striking instance of how completely he changed the current of the

national mind may here be given. From 1526 to 1625 the usual jubilee

pilgrimages from Hungary to Rome had entirely ceased. During his primacy

they were revived, and in 1650, only seventeen years after his death,

they were as numerous as ever they had been. Five years later there

remained but four noble Protestant families in royal Hungary. The

Catholicization of the land was complete.

Habsburg repression.

Unfortunately the court of Vienna was not content with winning back the

Magyars to the Church. The Habsburg kings were as jealous of the

political as of the religious liberties of their Hungarian subjects.

This was partly owing to the fact that national aspirations of any sort

were contrary to the imperial system, which claimed to rule by right

divine, and partly to an inveterate distrust of the Magyars, who were

regarded at court as rebels by nature, and therefore as enemies far more

troublesome than the Turks. The conduct of the Hungarian nobles in the

past, indeed, somewhat justified this estimate, for the fall of the

ancient monarchy was entirely due to their persistent disregard of

authority, to their refusal to bear their share of the public burdens.

They were now to suffer severely for their past misdoings, but

unfortunately the innocent nation was forced to suffer with them.

Throughout the latter part of the 17th and the beginning of the 18th

century, the Hungarian gentry underwent a cruel discipline at the hands

of their Habsburg kings. Their privileges were overridden, their

petitions were disregarded, their diets were degraded into mere

registries of the royal decrees. They were never fairly represented in

the royal council, they were excluded as far as possible from commands

in Hungarian regiments, and were treated, generally, as the members of

an inferior and guilty race. This era of repression corresponds roughly

with the reign of Leopold I. (1657-1705), who left the government of the

country to two bigoted Magyar prelates, Gyorgy Szelepesenyi (1595-1685)

and Lipot (Leopold) Kollonich (1631-1707), whose domination represents

the high-water mark of the anti-national regimen. The stupid and

abortive conspiracy of Peter Zrinyi and three other magnates, who were

publicly executed (April 30, 1671), was followed by wholesale arrests

and confiscations, and for a time the legal government of Hungary was

superseded (Patent of March 3, 1673) by a committee of eight persons,

four Magyars and four Germans, presided over by a German governor; but

the most influential person in this committee was Bishop Kollonich, of

whom it was said that, while Pazmany hated the heretic in the Magyar,

Kollonich hated the Magyar in the heretic. A gigantic process against

leading Protestant ministers for alleged conspiracy was the first act of

this committee. It began at Pressburg in March 1674, when 236 of the

ministers were "converted" or confessed to acts of rebellion. But the

remaining 93 stood firm and were condemned to death, a punishment

commuted to slavery in the Neapolitan galleys. Sweden, as one of the

guarantors of the peace of Westphalia, and several north German states,

protested against the injury thus done to their coreligionists. It was

replied that Hungary was outside the operation of the treaty of

Westphalia, and that the Protestants had been condemned not _ex odio

religionis_ but _crimine rebellionis_.

Hungarian resistance.

Liberation from the Turks.

Peace of Karlowitz.

But a high-spirited nation cannot be extinguished by any number of

patents and persecutions. So long as the Magyar people had any life

left, it was bound to fight in self-defence, it was bound to produce

"malcontents" who looked abroad for help to the enemies of the house of

Habsburg. The first and most famous of the malcontent leaders was Count

Imre Tokoli (q.v.). Between 1678 and 1682 Tokoli waged three wars with

Leopold, and, in September 1682, was acknowledged both by the emperor

and the sultan as prince of North Hungary as far as the river Garam, to

the great relief of the Magyar Protestants. The success of Tokoli

rekindled the martial ardour of the Turks, and a war party, under the

grand vizier Kara Mustafa, determined to wrest from Leopold his twelve

remaining Hungarian counties, gained the ascendancy at Constantinople in

the course of 1682. Leopold, intent on the doings of his perennial rival

Louis XIV., was loth to engage in an eastern war even for the liberation

of Hungary, which he regarded as of far less importance than a strip or

two of German territory on the Rhine. But, stimulated by the

representations of Pope Innocent XI., who, well aware of the internal

weakness of the Turk, was bent upon forming a Holy League to drive them

out of Europe, and alarmed, besides, by the danger of Vienna and the

hereditary states, Leopold reluctantly contracted an alliance with John

III. of Poland, and gave the command of the army which, mainly through

the efforts of the pope he had been able to assemble, to Prince Charles

of Lorraine. The war, which lasted for 16 years and put an end to the

Turkish dominion in Hungary, began with the world-renowned siege of

Vienna (July 14-Sept. 12, 1683). There is no need to recount the

oft-told victories of Sobieski (see John III. Sobieski, King of Poland).

What is not quite so generally known is the fact that Leopold slackened

at once and would have been quite content with the results of these

earlier victories had not the pope stiffened his resistance by forming a

Holy League between the Emperor, Poland, Venice, Muscovy and the papacy,

with the avowed object of dealing the Turk the _coup de grace_ (March 5,

1684). This statesmanlike persistence was rewarded by an uninterrupted

series of triumphs, culminating in the recapture of Buda (1686) and

Belgrade (1688), and the recovery of Bosnia (1689). But, in 1690, the

third of the famous Kuprilis, Mustafa, brother of Fazil Ahmed, became

grand vizier, and the Turk, still further encouraged by the death of

Innocent XI., rallied once more. In the course of that year Kuprili

regained Servia and Bulgaria, placed Tokoli on the throne of

Transylvania, and on the 6th of October took Belgrade by assault. Once

more the road to Vienna lay open, but the grand vizier wasted the

remainder of the year in fortifying Belgrade, and on August 18th, 1691,

he was defeated and slain at Slankamen by the margrave of Baden. For the

next six years the war languished owing to the timidity of the emperor,

the incompetence of his generals and the exhaustion of the Porte; but on

the 11th of September 1697 Prince Eugene of Savoy routed the Turks at

Zenta and on the 13th of November 1698 a peace-congress was opened at

Karlowitz which resulted in the peace of that name (Jan. 26, 1699).

Nominally a truce for 25 years on the _uti possidetis_ basis, the peace

of Karlowitz left in the emperor's hands the whole of Hungary except

Syrmia and the territory lying between the rivers Maros, Theiss, Danube

and the mountains of Transylvania, the so-called Temeskoz, or about

one-eleventh of the modern kingdom. The peace of Karlowitz marks the

term of the Magyar's secular struggle with Mahommedanism and finally

reunited her long-separated provinces beneath a common sceptre.

But the liberation of Hungary from the Turks brought no relief to the

Hungarians. The ruthless suppression of the Magyar malcontents, in which

there was little discrimination between the innocent and the guilty, had

so crushed the spirit of the country that Leopold considered the time

ripe for realizing a long-cherished ideal of the Habsburgs and changing

Hungary from an elective into an hereditary monarchy. For this purpose a

diet was assembled at Pressburg in the autumn of 1687. It was a mere

rump, for wholesale executions had thinned its numbers and the

reconquered countries were not represented in it. To this weakened and

terrorized assembly the emperor-king explained that he had the right to

treat Hungary as a conquered country, but that he was prepared to

confirm its constitutional liberties under three conditions: the

inaugural diploma was to be in the form signed by Ferdinand I., the

crown was to be declared hereditary in the house of Habsburg, and the

31st clause of the Golden Bull, authorizing armed resistance to

unconstitutional acts of the sovereign, was to be abrogated. These

conditions the diet had no choice but to accept, and, in October 1687,

the elective monarchy of Hungary, which had been in existence for nearly

seven hundred years, ceased to exist. The immediate effect of the peace

of Karlowitz was thus only to strengthen despotism in Hungary.

Kollonich, who had been created a cardinal in 1685, archbishop of

Kalocsa in 1691 and archbishop of Esztergom (Gran) and primate of

Hungary in 1695, was now at the head of affairs, and his plan was to

germanize Hungary as speedily as possible by promoting a wholesale

immigration into the recovered provinces, all of which were in a

terrible state of dilapidation.[35]

Francis Rakoczy.

Peace of Szatmar, 1711.

The border counties, now formed into a military zone, were planted

exclusively with Croatian colonists as being more trustworthy defenders

of the Hungarian frontier than the Hungarians themselves. Moreover, a

_neo-acquisita commissio_ was constituted to inquire into the

title-deeds of the Magyar landowners in the old Turkish provinces, and

hundreds of estates were transferred, on the flimsiest of pretexts, to

naturalized foreigners. Transylvania since 1690 had been administered

from Vienna, and though the farce of assembling a diet there was still

kept up, even the promise of religious liberty, conceded to it on its

surrender in 1687, was not kept. No wonder then if the whole country was

now seething with discontent and only awaiting an opportunity to burst

forth in open rebellion. This opportunity came when the emperor,

involved in the War of the Spanish Succession, withdrew all his troops

from Hungary except some 1600 men. In 1703 the malcontents found a

leader in Francis Rakoczy II. (q.v.), who was elected prince by the

Hungarian estates on the 6th of July 1704, and during the next six years

gave the emperor Joseph I., who had succeeded Leopold in May 1705,

considerable anxiety. Rakoczy had often as many as 100,000 men under

him, and his bands penetrated as far as Moravia and even approached

within a few miles of Vienna. But they were guerillas, not regulars;

they had no good officers, no serviceable artillery, and very little

money; and all the foreign powers to whom Rakoczy turned for assistance

(excepting France, who fed them occasionally with paltry subsidies)

would not commit themselves to a formal alliance with rebels who were

defeated in every pitched battle they fought. On the other hand, if the

Rakoczians were easily dispersed, they as quickly reassembled, and at

one time they held all Transylvania and the greater part of Hungary. In

the course of 1707 two Rakoczian diets even went so far as formally to

depose the Habsburgs and form an interim government with Rakoczy at its

head, till a national king could be legally elected. The Maritime

Powers, too, fearful lest Louis XIV. should materially assist the

Rakoczians and thus divert part of the emperor's forces at the very

crisis of the War of the Spanish Succession, intervened, repeatedly and

energetically, to bring about a compromise between the court and the

insurgents, whose claims they considered to be just and fair. But the

obstinate refusal of Joseph to admit that the Rakoczians were anything

but rebels was always the insurmountable object in all such

negotiations. But when, on the 7th of April 1711, Joseph died without

issue, leaving the crown to his brother the Archduke Charles, then

fighting the battles of the Allies in Spain, a peace-congress met at

Szatmar on the 27th of April, and, two days later, an understanding was

arrived at on the basis of a general amnesty, full religious liberty and

the recognition of the inviolability of the ancient rights and

privileges of the Magyars.

Charles III.

Pragmatic Sanction, 1723.

Thus the peace of Szatmar assured to the Hungarian nation all that it

had won by former compacts with the Habsburgs; but whereas hitherto the

Transylvanian principality had been the permanent guardian of all such

compacts, and the authority of the reigning house had been counterpoised

by the Turk, the effect and validity of the peace of Szatmar depended

entirely upon the support it might derive from the nation itself. It was

a fortunate thing for Hungary that the conclusion of the War of the

Spanish Succession introduced a new period, in which, at last, the

interests of the dynasty and the nation were identical, thus rendering a

reconciliation between them desirable. Moreover, the next century and a

half was a period of domestic tranquillity, during which Hungary was

able to repair the ruin of the long Turkish wars, nurse her material

resources, and take the first steps in the direction of social and

political reform. The first reforms, however, were dynastic rather than

national. Thus, in 1715, King Charles III.[36] persuaded the diet to

consent to the establishment of a standing army, which--though the diet

reserved the right to fix the number of recruits and vote the necessary

subsidies from time to time--was placed under the control of the

Austrian council of war. The same centralizing tendency was shown in the

administrative and judicial reforms taken in hand by the diet of 1722. A

Hungarian court chancery was now established at Vienna, while the

government of Hungary proper was committed to a royal stadholdership at

Pressburg. Both the chancery and the stadholdership were independent of

the diet and responsible to the king alone, being, in fact, his

executive instruments. It was this diet also which accepted the

Pragmatic Sanction, first issued in 1713, by which the emperor Charles

VI., in default of his leaving male heirs, settled the succession to his

hereditary dominions on his daughter Maria Theresa and her heirs. By the

laws of 1723, which gave effect to the resolution of the diet in favour

of accepting the principle of female succession, the Habsburg king

entered into a fresh contract with his Hungarian subjects, a contract

which remained the basis of the relations of the crown and nation until

1848. On the one hand it was declared that the kingdom of Hungary was an

integral part of the Habsburg dominions and inseparable from these so

long as a male or female heir of the kings Charles, Joseph and Leopold

should be found to succeed to them. On the other hand, Charles swore, on

behalf of himself and his heirs, to preserve the Hungarian constitution

intact, with all the rights, privileges, customs, laws, &c., of the

kingdom and its dependencies. Moreover, in the event of the failure of a

Habsburg heir, the diet reserved the right to revive the "ancient,

approved and accepted custom and prerogative of the estates and orders

in the matter of the election and coronation of their king."

The reign of Charles III. is also memorable for two Turkish wars, the

first of which, beginning in 1716, and made glorious by the victories of

Prince Eugene and Janos Pallfy, was terminated by the peace of

Passarowitz (July 21, 1718), by which the Temeskoz was also freed from

the Turks, and Servia, Northern Bosnia and Little Walachia, all of them

ancient conquests of Hungary, were once more incorporated with the

territories of the crown of St Stephen. The second war, though

undertaken in league with Russia, proved unlucky, and, at the peace of

Belgrade (Sept. 1, 1739), all the conquests of the peace of Passarowitz,

including Belgrade itself, were lost, except the banat of Temesvar.

Maria Theresa.

With Maria Theresa (1740-1780) began the age of enlightened despotism.

Deeply grateful to the Magyars for their sacrifices and services during

the War of the Austrian Succession, she dedicated her whole authority to

the good of the nation, but she was very unwilling to share that

authority _with_ the people. Only in the first stormy years of her reign

did she summon the diet; after 1764 she dispensed with it altogether.

She did not fill up the dignity of palatine, vacant since the 26th of

October 1765, and governed Hungary through her son-in-law, Albert of

Saxe-Teschen. She did not attack the Hungarian constitution; she simply

put it on one side. Her reforms were made not by statute, but by royal

decree. Yet the nation patiently endured the mild yoke of the great

queen, because it felt and knew that its welfare was safe in her

motherly hands. Her greatest achievement lay in the direction of

educational reform. She employed the proceeds of the vast sums coming to

her from the confiscation of the property of the suppressed Jesuit order

in founding schools and colleges all over Hungary. The kingdom was

divided into ten educational districts for the purpose, with a

university at Buda. Towards all her Magyars, especially the Catholics,

she was ever most gracious; but the magnates, the Batthyanis, the

Nadasdys, the Pallfys, the Andrassys, who had chased her enemies from

Bohemia and routed them in Bavaria, enjoyed the lion's share of her

benefactions. In fact, most of them became professional courtiers, and

lived habitually at Vienna. She also attracted the gentry to her capital

by forming a Magyar body-guard from the cadets of noble families. But

she was good to all, not even forgetting the serfs. The _urberi

szabalyzat_ (feudal prescription) of 1767 restored to the peasants the

right of transmigration and, in some respects, protected them against

the exactions of their landlords.

Joseph II.

Joseph II. (1780-1790) was as true to the principles of enlightened

despotism and family politics as his mother; but he had none of the

common sense which had led her to realize the limits of her power.

Joseph was an idealist and a doctrinaire, whose dream was to build up

his ideal body politic; the first step toward which was to be the

amalgamation of all his dominions into a common state under an absolute

sovereign (see AUSTRIA-HUNGARY; and JOSEPH II., Emperor). Unfortunately,

the Hungarian constitution stood in the way of this political paradise,

so Joseph resolved that the Hungarian constitution must be sacrificed.

Refusing to be crowned, or even to take the usual oaths of observance,

he simply announced his accession to the Hungarian counties, and then

deliberately proceeded to break down all the ancient Magyar

institutions. In 1784 the Language Edict made German the official

language of the common state. The same year he ordered a census and a

land-survey to be taken, to enable him to tax every one irrespective of

birth or wealth. Protests came in from every quarter and a dangerous

rebellion broke out in Transylvania; but opposition only made Joseph

more obstinate, and he endeavoured to anticipate any further resistance

by abolishing the ancient county assemblies and dividing the kingdom

into two districts administered by German officials.

In taking this course Joseph made the capital mistake of neglecting the

Machiavellian maxim that in changing the substance of cherished

institutions the prince should be careful to preserve the semblance. In

substance the county assemblies were worse than ineffective: mere

turbulent gatherings of country squires and peasants, corrupt and

prejudiced, representing nothing but their own pride of race and class;

and to try and govern without them, or to administer in spite of them,

may have been the only expedient possible to statesmen. But to the

Magyars they were the immemorial strongholds of their liberties, the

last defences of their constitution; and the attempt to suppress them,

which made every county a centre of disaffection and resistance, was the

action not of a statesman, but of a visionary. The failure of Joseph's

"enlightened" policy in Hungary was inevitable in any case; it was

hastened by the disastrous Turkish war of 1787-92, which withdrew Joseph

altogether from domestic affairs; and on his death-bed (Feb. 22, 1790)

he felt it to be his duty to annul all his principal reforms, so as to

lighten the difficulties of his successor.

Leopold II., 1790-1792.

Francis I., 1792-1835.

Leopold II. found the country on the verge of revolution; but the wisdom

of the new monarch saved the situation and won back the Magyars. At the

diet of 1790-1791 laws were passed not only confirming the royal

prerogatives and the national liberties, but leaving the way open for

future developments. Hungary was declared to be a free, independent and

unsubjected kingdom governed by its own laws and customs. The

legislative functions were to be exercised by the king and the diet

conjointly and by them alone. The diets were henceforth to be triennial,

and every new king was to pledge himself to be crowned and issue his

credentials[37] within six months of the death of his predecessor. Latin

was still to be the official language, but Magyar was now introduced

into the university and all the schools. Leopold's successor Francis I.

(1792-1835) received a declaration of war from the French Legislative

Assembly immediately on ascending the throne. For the next quarter of a

century he, as the champion of legitimacy, was fighting the Revolution

on countless battle-fields, and the fearful struggle only bound the

Magyar nation closer to the Habsburg dynasty. Ignaz Jozsef Martinovics

(1755-1795) and his associates, the Hungarian Jacobins, vainly attempted

a revolutionary propaganda (1795), and Napoleon's mutilations of the

ancient kingdom of St Stephen did not predispose the Hungarian gentry in

his favour. Politically, indeed, the whole period was one of

retrogression and stagnation. The frequent diets held in the earlier

part of the reign occupied themselves with little else but war

subsidies; after 1811 they ceased to be summoned. In the latter years of

Francis I. the dark shadow of Metternich's policy of "stability" fell

across the kingdom, and the forces of reactionary absolutism were

everywhere supreme. But beneath the surface a strong popular current was

beginning to run in a contrary direction. Hungarian society, not

unaffected by western Liberalism, but without any direct help from

abroad, was preparing for the future emancipation. Writers, savants,

poets, artists, noble and plebeian, layman and cleric, without any

previous concert, or obvious connexion, were working towards that ideal

of political liberty which was to unite all the Magyars. Mihaly

Vorosmartyo, Ferencz Kolcsey, Ferencz Kazinczy and his associates, to

mention but a few of many great names, were, consciously or

unconsciously, as the representatives of the renascent national

literature, accomplishing a political mission, and their pens proved no

less efficacious than the swords of their ancestors.

Hungarian revival.

It was a direct attack upon the constitution which, to use the words of

Istvan Szechenyi, first "startled the nation out of its sickly

drowsiness." In 1823, when the reactionary powers were meditating joint

action to suppress the revolution in Spain, the government, without

consulting the diet, imposed a war-tax and called out the recruits. The

county assemblies instantly protested against this illegal act, and

Francis I. was obliged, at the diet of 1823, to repudiate, the action of

his ministers. But the estates felt that the maintenance of their

liberties demanded more substantial guarantees than the dead letter of

ancient laws. Szechenyi, who had resided abroad and studied Western

institutions, was the recognized leader of all those who wished to

create a new Hungary out of the old. For years he and his friends

educated public opinion by issuing innumerable pamphlets in which the

new Liberalism was eloquently expounded. In particular Szechenyi

insisted that the people must not look exclusively to the government,

or even to the diet, for the necessary reforms. Society itself must

take the initiative by breaking down the barriers of class exclusiveness

and reviving a healthy public spirit. The effect of this teaching was

manifest at the diet of 1832, when the Liberals in the Lower Chamber had

a large majority, prominent among whom were Francis Deak and Odon

Beothy. In the Upper House, however, the magnates united with the

government to form a conservative party obstinately opposed to any

project of reform, which frustrated all the efforts of the Liberals.

The alarm of the government at the power and popularity of the Liberal

party induced it, soon after the accession of the new king, the emperor

Ferdinand I. (1835-1848), to attempt to crush the reform movement by

arresting and imprisoning the most active agitators among them, Louis

Kossuth and Miklos Wesselenyi. But the nation was no longer to be cowed.

The diet of 1839 refused to proceed to business till the political

prisoners had been released, and, while in the Lower Chamber the

reforming majority was larger than ever, a Liberal party was now also

formed in the Upper House under the brilliant leadership of Count Louis

Batthyany and Baron Joseph Eotvos. Two progressive measures of the

highest importance were passed by this diet, one making Magyar the

official language of Hungary, the other freeing the peasants' holdings

from all feudal obligations.

Kossuth.

The results of the diet of 1839 did not satisfy the advanced Liberals,

while the opposition of the government and of the Upper House still

further embittered the general discontent. The chief exponent of this

temper was the Pesti Hirlap, Hungary's first political newspaper,

founded in 1841 by Kossuth, whose articles, advocating armed reprisals

if necessary, inflamed the extremists but alienated Szechenyi, who

openly attacked Kossuth's opinions. The polemic on both sides was

violent; but, as usual, the extreme views prevailed, and on the

assembling of the diet of 1843 Kossuth was more popular than ever, while

the influence of Szechenyi had sensibly declined. The tone of this diet

was passionate, and the government was fiercely attacked for interfering

with the elections. Fresh triumphs were won by the Liberals. Magyar was

now declared to be the language of the schools and the law-courts as

well as of the legislature; mixed marriages were legalized; and official

positions were thrown open to non-nobles.

Revolution of 1848. The March Laws.

The interval between the diet of 1843 and that of 1847 saw a complete

disintegration and transformation of the various political parties.

Szechenyi openly joined the government, while the moderate Liberals

separated from the extremists and formed a new party, the Centralists.

Immediately before the elections, however, Deak succeeded in reuniting

all the Liberals on the common platform of "The Ten Points": (1)

Responsible ministries, (2) Popular representation, (3) The

incorporation of Transylvania, (4) Right of public meeting, (6) Absolute

religious liberty, (7) Universal equality before the law, (8) Universal

taxation, (9) The abolition of the _Aviticum_, an obsolete and anomalous

land-tenure, (10) The abolition of serfdom, with compensation to the

landlords. The ensuing elections resulted in a complete victory of the

Progressives. All efforts to bring about an understanding between the

government and the opposition were fruitless. Kossuth demanded not

merely the redress of actual grievances, but a reform which would make

grievances impossible in the future. In the highest circles a

dissolution of the diet now seemed to be the sole remedy; but, before it

could be carried out, tidings of the February revolution in Paris

reached Pressburg[38] (March 1), and on the 3rd of March Kossuth's

motion for the appointment of an independent, responsible ministry was

accepted by the Lower House. The moderates, alarmed not so much by the

motion itself as by its tone, again tried to intervene; but on the 13th

of March the Vienna revolution broke out, and the king, yielding to

pressure or panic, appointed Count Louis Batthyany premier of the first

Hungarian responsible ministry, which included Kossuth, Szechenyi and

Deak. The Ten Points, or the March Laws as they were now called, were

then adopted by the legislature and received the royal assent (April

10). Hungary had, to all intents and purposes, become an independent

state bound to Austria only by the fact that the palatine chanced to be

an Austrian archduke.

The non-Magyar races.

In the assertion of their national aspirations, confused as these were

with the new democratic ideals, the Magyars had had the support of the

German democrats who temporarily held the reins of power in Vienna. On

the other hand, they were threatened by an ominous stirring of the

subject races in Hungary itself. Croats, Vlachs, Serbs and Slovaks

resented Magyar domination--a domination which had been carefully

secured under the revolutionary constitution by a very narrow franchise,

and out of the general chaos each race hoped to create for itself a

separate national existence. The separatist movement was strongest in

the south, where the Rumans were in touch with their kinsmen in Walachia

and Moldavia, the Serbs with their brethren in Servia, and the Croats

intent on reasserting the independence of the "Tri-une Kingdom."

Jellachich.

The attitude of the distracted imperial government towards these

movements was at first openly suspicious and hostile. The emperor and

his ministers hoped that, having conceded the demands of the Magyars,

they would receive the help of the Hungarian government in crushing the

revolution elsewhere, a hope that seemed to be justified by the

readiness with which Batthyany consented to send a contingent to the

assistance of the imperialists in Italy. That the encouragement of the

Slav aspirations was soon deliberately adopted as a weapon against the

Hungarian government was due, partly to the speedy predominance at Pest

of Kossuth and the extreme party of which he was the mouthpiece, but

mainly to the calculated policy of Baron Jellachich, who on the 14th of

April was appointed ban of Croatia. Jellachich, who as a soldier was

devoted to the interests of the imperial house, realized that the best

way to break the revolutionary power of the Magyars and Germans would be

to encourage the Slav national ideas, which were equally hostile to

both; to set up against the Dualism in favour at Pest and Vienna the

federal system advocated by the Slavs, and so to restore the traditional

Habsburg principle of _Divide et impera_. This policy he pursued with

masterly skill. His first acts on taking up his office were to repudiate

the authority of the Hungarian diet, to replace the Magyar officials

with ardent "Illyrians," and to proclaim martial law. Under pressure

from the palatine of Batthyany an imperial edict was issued, on the 7th

day of May, ordering the ban to desist from his separatist plans and

take his orders from Pest. He not only refused to obey, but on the 5th

of June convoked to Agram the Croatian national diet, of which the first

act was to declare the independence of the Tri-une Kingdom. Once more,

at the instance of Batthyany, the emperor intervened; and on the 10th an

imperial edict stripped Jellachich of all his offices.

Meanwhile, however, Jellachich had himself started for Innsbruck, where

he succeeded in persuading the emperor of the loyalty of his intentions,

and whence, though not as yet formally reinstated, he was allowed to

return to Croatia with practically unfettered discretion. The Hungarian

government, in fact, had played into his hands. At a time when

everything depended on the army, they had destroyed the main tie which

bound the Austrian court to their interests by tampering with the

relation of the Hungarian army to the crown. In May a national guard had

been created, the disaffected troops being bribed by increased pay to

desert their colours and join this; and on the 1st of June the garrison

of Pest had taken an oath to the constitution. All hope of crushing

revolutionary Vienna with Magyar aid was thus at an end, and Jellachich,

who on the 20th issued a proclamation to the Croat regiments in Italy to

remain with their colours and fight for the common fatherland, was free

to carry out his policy of identifying the cause of the southern Slavs

with that of the imperial army. The alliance was cemented in July by a

military demonstration, of which Jellachich was the hero, at Vienna; as

the result of which the government mustered up courage to declare

publicly that the basis of the Austrian state was "the recognition of

the equal rights of all nationalities." This was the challenge which

the Magyars were not slow to accept.

Jellachich invades Hungary.

In the Hungarian diet, which met on the 2nd of July, the influence of

the conservative cabinet was wholly overshadowed by that of Kossuth,

whose inflammatory orations--directed against the disruptive designs of

the Slavs and the treachery of the Austrian government--precipitated the

crisis. At his instance the diet not only refused to vote supplies for

the troops of the ban of Croatia, but only consented to pass a motion

for sending reinforcements to the army in Italy on condition that the

anti-Magyar races in Hungary should be first disarmed. On the 11th, on

his motion, a decree was passed by acclamation for a levy of 200,000 men

and the raising of L4,500,000 for the defence of the independence of the

country. Desultory fighting, in which Austrian officers with the tacit

consent of the minister of war took part against the Magyars, had

already broken out in the south. It was not, however, until the victory

of Custozza (July 25) set free the army in Italy, that the Austrian

government ventured on bolder measures. On the 4th of September, after

weeks of fruitless negotiation, the king-emperor threw down the gauntlet

by reinstating Jellachich in all his honours. Seven days later the ban

declared open war on Hungary by crossing the Drave at the head of 36,000

Croatian troops (see AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: _History_). The immediate result

was to place the extreme revolutionaries in power at Pest. Szechenyi had

lost his reason some days before; Eotvos and Deak retired into private

life; of the conservative ministers only Batthyany, to his undoing,

consented to remain in office, though hardly in power. Kossuth alone was

supreme.

Fall of Vienna.

The advance of Jellachich as far as Lake Balaton had not been checked,

the Magyar troops, though--contrary to his expectation--none joined him,

offering no opposition. The palatine, the Austrian Archduke Stephen,

after fruitless attempts at negotiation, laid down his office on the

24th of September and left for Vienna. One more attempt at compromise

was made, General Count Lamberg[39] being sent to take command of all

the troops, Slav or Magyar, in Hungary, with a view to arranging an

armistice. His mission, which was a slight to Jellachich, was conceived

as a concession to the Magyars, and had the general approval of

Batthyany. Unhappily, however, when Lamberg arrived in Pest, Batthyany

had not yet returned; the diet, on Kossuth's motion, called on the army

not to obey the new commander-in-chief, on the ground that his

commission had not been countersigned by a minister at Pest. Next day,

as he was crossing the bridge of Buda, Lamberg was dragged from his

carriage by a frantic mob and torn to pieces. This made war inevitable;

though Batthyany hurried to Vienna to try and arrange a settlement.

Failing in this, he retired, and on the 2nd of October a royal

proclamation, countersigned by his successor, Recssey, placed Hungary

under martial law and appointed Jellachich viceroy and commander of all

the forces. This proclamation, together with the order given to certain

Viennese regiments to march to the assistance of Jellachich, who had

been defeated at Pakozd on the 29th of September, led to the _emeute_

(Oct. 3) which ended in the murder of the minister of war, Latour, and

the second flight of the emperor to Innsbruck. The fortunes of the

German revolutionaries in Vienna and the Magyar revolutionists in Pest

were now closely bound up together; and when, on the 11th, Prince

Windischgratz laid siege to Vienna, it was to Hungary that the democrats

of the capital looked for relief. The despatch of a large force of

militia to the assistance of the Viennese was, in fact, the first act of

open rebellion of the Hungarians. They suffered a defeat at Schwechat on

the 30th of October, which sealed the fate of the revolutionists in

Vienna and thus precipitated a conflict _a outrance_ in Hungary itself.

Francis Joseph.

In Austria the army was now supreme, and the appointment of Prince Felix

Schwarzenberg as head of the government was a guarantee that its power

would be used in a reactionary sense without weakness or scruple. The

Austrian diet was transferred on the 15th of November to Kremsier,

remote from revolutionary influences; and, though the government still

thought it prudent to proclaim its constitutional principles, it also

proclaimed its intention to preserve the unity of the monarchy. A still

further step was taken when, on the 2nd of December, the emperor

Ferdinand abdicated in favour of his nephew Francis Joseph. The new

sovereign was a lad of eighteen, who for the present was likely to be

the mere mouthpiece of Schwarzenberg's policy. Moreover, he was not

bound by the constitutional obligations unwillingly accepted by his

uncle. The Magyars at once took up the challenge. On the 7th the

Hungarian diet formally refused to acknowledge the title of the new

king, "as without the knowledge and consent of the diet no one could sit

on the Hungarian throne," and called the nation to arms.

Constitutionally, in the Magyar opinion, Ferdinand was still king of

Hungary, and this gave to the revolt an excuse of legality. Actually,

from this time until the collapse of the rising, Louis Kossuth was the

ruler of Hungary.

War of Independence.

Battle of Kapolna.

The struggle opened with a series of Austrian successes. Prince

Windischgratz, who had received orders to reduce Hungary by fire and

sword, began his advance on the 15th of December; opened up the way to

the capital by the victory of Mor (Oct. 30), and on the 5th of January

1849 occupied Pest, while the Hungarian government and diet retired

behind the Theiss and established themselves at Debreczen. A last

attempt at reconciliation, made by the more moderate members of the diet

in Windischgratz's camp at Bieske (Jan. 3), had foundered on the

uncompromising attitude of the Austrian commander, who demanded

unconditional submission; whereupon the moderates, including Deak and

Batthyany, retired into private life, leaving Kossuth to carry on the

struggle with the support of the enthusiastic extremists who constituted

the rump of the diet at Debreczen. The question now was: how far the

military would subordinate itself to the civil element of the national

government. The first symptom of dissonance was a proclamation by the

commander of the Upper Danube division, Arthur Gorgei, from his camp at

Vacz (Jan. 5) emphasizing the fact that the national defence was purely

constitutional, and menacing all who might be led astray from this

standpoint by republican aspirations. Immediately after this

proclamation Gorgei disappeared with his army among the hills of Upper

Hungary, and, despite the difficulties of a phenomenally severe winter

and the constant pursuit of vastly superior forces, fought his way down

to the valley of Hernad--and safety. This masterly winter-campaign first

revealed Gorgei's military genius, and the discipline of that terrible

month of marching and counter-marching had hardened his recruits into

veterans whom his country regarded with pride and his country's enemies

with respect. Unfortunately his success caused some jealousy in official

quarters, and when, in the middle of February 1849, a commander-in-chief

was appointed to carry out Kossuth's plan of campaign, that vital

appointment was given, not to the man who had made the army what it was,

but to a foreigner, a Polish refugee, Count Henrik Dembinski, who, after

fighting the bloody and indecisive battle of Kapolna (Feb. 26-27), was

forced to retreat. Gorgei was immediately appointed his successor, and

the new generalissimo led the Honveds from victory to victory. Ably

supported by Klapka and Damjanich he pressed forward irresistibly.

Szolnok (March 5), Isaszeg (April 6), Vacz (April 10), and Nagysarlo

(April 19) were so many milestones in his triumphal progress. On the

25th of May the Hungarian capital was once more in the hands of the

Hungarians.

Proclamation of a united empire.

Meanwhile, the earlier events of the war had so altered the political

situation that any idea which the diet at Debreczen had cherished of a

compromise with Austria was destroyed. The capture of Pest had confirmed

the Austrian court in its policy of unification, which after the

victory of Kapolna they thought it safe to proclaim. On the 7th of March

the diet of Kremsier was dissolved, and immediately afterwards a

proclamation was issued in the name of the emperor Francis Joseph

establishing a united constitution for the whole empire, of which

Hungary, cut up into half a dozen administrative districts, was

henceforth to be little more than the largest of several subject

provinces. The news of this manifesto, arriving as it did simultaneously

with that of Gorgei's successes, destroyed the last vestiges of a desire

of the Hungarian revolutionists to compromise, and on the 14th of April,

on the motion of Kossuth, the diet proclaimed the independence of

Hungary, declared the house of Habsburg as false and perjured, for ever

excluded from the throne, and elected Kossuth president of the Hungarian

Republic. This was an execrable blunder in the circumstances, and the

results were fatal to the national cause. Neither the government nor the

army could accommodate itself to the new situation. From henceforth the

military and civil authorities, as represented by Kossuth and Gorgei,

were hopelessly out of sympathy with each other, and the breach widened

till all effective co-operation became impossible.

Intervention of Russia.

Meanwhile the humiliating defeats of the imperial army and the course of

events in Hungary had compelled the court of Vienna to accept the

assistance which the emperor Nicholas I. of Russia had proffered in the

loftiest spirit of the Holy Alliance. The Austro-Russian alliance was

announced at the beginning of May, and before the end of the month the

common plan of campaign had been arranged. The Austrian

commander-in-chief, Count Haynau, was to attack Hungary from the west,

the Russian, Prince Paskevich, from the north, gradually environing the

kingdom, and then advancing to end the business by one decisive blow in

the mid-Theissian counties. They had at their disposal 375,000 men, to

which the Magyars could only oppose 160,000. The Magyars, too, were now

more than ever divided among themselves, no plan of campaign had yet

been drawn up, no commander-in-chief appointed to replace Gorgei, whom

Kossuth had deposed. Haynau's first victories (June 20-28) put an end to

their indecisions. On the 2nd of July the Hungarian government abandoned

Pest and transferred its capital first to Szeged and finally to Arad.

The Russians were by this time well on their way to the Theiss, and the

terrible girdle which was to throttle the liberties of Hungary was all

but completed. Kossuth again appointed as commander-in-chief the brave

but inefficient Dembinski, who was utterly routed at Temesvar (Aug. 9)

by Haynau. This was the last great battle of the War of Independence.

The final catastrophe was now unavoidable. On the 13th of August Gorgei,

who had been appointed dictator by the panic-stricken government two

days before, surrendered the remnant of his hardly pressed army to the

Russian General Rudiger at Vilagos. The other army corps and all the

fortresses followed his example, Komarom, heroically defended by Klapka,

being the last to capitulate (Sept. 27). Kossuth and his associates, who

had quitted Arad on the 10th of August, took refuge in Turkish

territory. By the end of the month Paskevich could write to the Emperor

Nicholas: "Hungary lies at the feet of your Imperial Majesty."

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "Hudson River" to "Hurstmonceaux" Volume 13, Slice 8 · 第 16 / 27 题