The Austrian Empire
Austria, it has been said, was an imperial organization, not a country. In the 19th century, it consisted of a hodgepodge of eleven major nationalities and a number of minor ethnic groups who inhabited much of Eastern Europe and comprised about one-seventh of Europe’s population in 1800.
Because no nationality represented an absolute majority in the empire, no one culture molded Habsburg imperial society to the extent that Russian culture did in the tsarist empire. And although German, which was the language of the most influential nationality in the Habsburg Empire, predominated in the army and bureaucracy, the Habsburg Empire’s most striking characteristic was its ethnic diversity.In expanding its sovereignty over its subjects, the Habsburg dynasty did not, at least at the outset, tamper with the traditional forms of government in the various kingdoms, duchies, provinces, and cities that it acquired. It was not merely that the Habsburgs did not wish needlessly to arouse opposition, but they lacked the strong, centralized institutions necessary to standardize administration. Therefore, well into the 18th century, their empire was a ramshackle, uncoordinated conglomerate, which was frequently in a state of crisis because of internal discord or external pressure.
In the 1740s, Empress Maria Theresa concluded that for the empire to survive, reforms were necessary. Despite fierce opposition from local nobilities, she pushed through a series of measures that strengthened central ruling institutions and created offices of local government. In order to staff these positions, she expanded the bureaucracy. She also laid the foundations for a large, permanent military establishment. A prudent politician, she did not, however, attempt to impose complete uniformity. In dealing with the recalcitrant Hungarians, for example, she would often choose a compromise solution rather than demand total compliance with her wishes.
An even more ardent reformer was Maria Theresa’s son, Joseph 11. Committed to current Western ideas of good government, he resolved to make his reign the epitome of enlightened absolutism. In the words of an English historian, “it was enlightened because Joseph II believed that it was a monarch’s duty to promote the welfare of his subjects… and absolute because it was for him alone to say in what that welfare consisted and how it should be achieved.”9
The emperor made it his goal to improve the lot of the peasants, invigorate the stagnant economy, raise the efficiency of the bureaucracy, and improve educational facilities throughout the empire. True to his absolutist principles, he also intended to eliminate the particularistic rights and privileges that his various lands enjoyed and that greatly impeded the implementation of his reforms. Inevitably, to Joseph II’s bitter disillusionment and frustration, only some of these ambitious goals could be realized. Nonetheless, Joseph II’s reign marked a high point in the empire’s will and ability to invigorate and renovate itself.
The aforementioned reforms were of tremendous relevance for Ukrainians because they came precisely at the time of Galicia’s incorporation into the empire. Thus, from their point of view at least, Ukrainians were introduced to the Habsburg imperial system at its best.