Summary and criticism of book chapter Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Summary and criticism of book chapter - Essay Example Defeat in the war led to the break-up of the Monarchy, and this was unforeseen even until the summer of 1918 (Sked, 1989 ). The Habsurg army persevered till the very end. Had they been victorious, their Monarchy would not only have survived, but would also have expanded. In The Dual Monarchy chapter of the Decline and Fall of the Habsburg Empire, analyzes the position of Hungary within the Empire, the nationalist and economic growth problems, the rise of fresh political and social forces, cultural pessimism, and the foreign policy issues prior to 1914. These analyses are conducted in the light of the commonly known weaknesses that afflicted the Dual Monarchy, and it is meant to deduce what condition the Habsburg Empire was in before its collapse. The Habsburg Monarchy stretched from the territories that were under the rule of the junior Austrian branch of the House of Habsburg (1278–1780). This branch of rulers was succeeded by House of Habsburg-Lorraine (from 1780), between 1 526 and 1867/1918. Vienna was the official capital until it was temporarily replaced from 1583 to 1611, with Prague. The Habsburg ruled over the Austrian Empire from 1804 to 1867 the Habsburgs and the they moved onto ruling Austria-Hungary from 1867 to 1918 ruled the Austrian Empire and from 1867 to 1918 Austria-Hungary. ... The Hungarians were agitated significantly owing to the suppression they felt was being exerted on their call for a revolution. This suppression was backed by the Russians. However, the entire Hungarian agitation with Austria had been festering for many years, and the reasons for this were manifold. Towards the end of the 1850’s, a lot of Hungarian practiced a change of attitude, inclined to recognize the Habsburg dominion and scavenge the idea of a revolt. Their validation for this rest in the fact that while Hungary had right to full independence and self-government, the Pragmatic Sanction of 1713 foreign affairs were the similar for Austria and Hungary, When the Austrians were beaten at Koniggratz, it became crucial for them to counterfeit reconciliatory ties with Hungary in order to accomplish their lost esteem and power. The new foreign minister wanted to substantiate the previously stalled round of discussions with the previously delayed round of consultations with the H ungarians. In order seek Hungary’s hold up for the Monarchy, Emperor Franz Joseph compiled a deal with Hungarian powers yielding them the popular coronation as King, a separate parliament at Budapest, and the powers to set up laws for the lands that were to be governed by the Hungarian Crown. Initiating from1867, the allocation of common spending was set at 70% for Austria and 30% for the Hungarians. It was decided that this allocation would be revisited every 10 years, and by the year 1907, the Hungarian allocation was raised to 36.4% common expenditure was allocated 70% to Austria and 30% to Hungary. This split had to be discussed every 10 years, and, by 1907, the Hungarian allocation had