100th Anniversary of the Assassination of HIH Archduke Franz-Ferdinand of Austria-Este

Tags

Archduke, Archduke of Austria, Assassination, Austria-Hungary, causes of World War I, Emperor of Austria, Franz-Ferdinand, Franz-Joseph, Gavrilo Princip, Sarajevo, Sophie Chotek, World War I

100th Anniversary of the Assassination of HIH Archduke Franz-Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary

On this day, June 28, 1914 Archduke Franz-Ferdiand of Austria-Hungary and his wife, Sofie Duchess of Hohenberg, were assassinated in Sarajevo. This murder would, within weeks, spark a European war that became known as World War I. In its time it was known as either the Great War or the World War.

It is often said that this assassination caused World War I. I don’t think that is the entire truth. I view the assassination of Archduke Franz-Ferdinand as the initial spark that set off the war, however there were many issues that evolved over years, centuries even, that built up the tension to where War became almost inevitable. I don’t want this blog entry to be about the causes of the war nor a biography on the Archduke. I will write about some aspects of his life and what happened on that fateful day.

I have an affinity with Archduke Franz-Ferdinand. We were born about 100 years apart. I was born in October of 1963 and he was born in 1863, making him 50 years old at the time of his assassination. He held what were radical views at the time and it was his views that were his undoing. More on that in a moment.

He was the eldest son of Archduke Karl Ludwig of Austria (a younger brother of Emperor Franz Joseph and Maximilian) and of his second wife, Princess Maria Annunciata of Bourbon-Two Sicilies. When he was only eleven years old, his cousin Duke Francis V of Modena died, naming Franz Ferdinand his heir on condition that he add the name Este to his own. Franz Ferdinand thus became one of the wealthiest men in Austria. In 1889 his cousin, Crown Prince Rudolph of Austria committed suicide (after murdering his mistress Baroness Mary Vetsera at his hunting lodge in Mayerling. This tragedy left Franz-Ferdinand’s father as hier to the throne. Emperor Franz Joseph had only one son and the throne had to pass to a male heir for women were barred from the throne. Karl Ludwig renounced the throne in favor of Franz Ferdinand almost immediately, and died of typhoid fever in 1896.

As hier to the throne he garnered controversy. Franz-Ferdinad was more liberal than his uncle the emperor. In 1894 Franz-Ferdinand met Countess Sophie Chotek at a ball in Prague. The down side to this meeting was that Countess Sophie was not of equal rank with Franz-Ferdinand so marriage was out of the question. To be eligible to marry a member of the Imperial House of Habsburg, one had to be a member of one of the reigning or formerly reigning dynasties of Europe. Countess Sophie was rejected by the emperor as a suitable mate for the Archduke despite being a descendant of the princes of Baden, tyhe Catholic branch of the House of Hohenzollern (Hohenzollern-Hechingen), and the Princes of Liechtenstein. One of Sophie’s direct ancestors was Albert IV, Count of Habsburg; she was descended from Elisabeth of Habsburg, a sister of King Rudolph I of Germany.

Franz-Ferdinand would not consider marrying another. Even with Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany and Czar Nicholas II of Russia tried to assist and spoke to Pope Leo XIII to presuade the Emperor. This took years to accomplish and in 1899 the emperor relented and allowed the couple to marry morganatically. This meant that their descendants would not have succession rights to the throne. Sophie would not share her husband’s rank, title, precedence, or privileges; as such, she would not normally appear in public beside him. The Emperor granted her the title Duchess of Hohenberg and it was by this title their children (and descendants) were known. Because of this morganatic marriage Sofie was treated coldly by many members of the Habsburg Dynasty.

One of the other things I admire about Franz-Ferdinand is that he seemed more progressive and liberal minded than the emperor. Austria was a conglomerate of ethnic groups. Germans, Hungarians and in an era where nationalism was desired many of these ethnic groups desired independence. In 1908 Austria had annexed the Bosnia-Herzegovina region where many ethnic Serbs lived. This action thwarted the desires of many in Serbia that wanted the Serbian regions of Bosnia to join Serbia in alarger kingdom. Franz-Ferdinand’s progressive ideas would have put an end to these desires.

In 1867 the Kingdom of Hungary (ruled by the Habsurgs since the Battle of Mohács in 1526) was granted an equal standing within the Austrian Empire (this changed the name of the Empire to Austria-Hungary). Franz-Ferdinad envisoned granting this same privilage to other ethnic groups creating a United States of Austria, with himself as Emperor. If Bosnian Serbs were granted such status within the Empire the chances of Bosnia becoming part of a larger Serbian Kingdom would be over. National groups such as the Black Hand viewed the assassination of the Archduke as essential to their plans of Serbian unity. One factor giving Serbia and the Black Hand confidence was knowing that Russia was on their side for greater Serbian independence.

June 28, 1914.

Generally, Sofie, Duchess of Hohenberg did not attend her husband on such official duties but she was there with him on this fateful day. In late 1913 Emperor Franz Joseph commanded Archduke Franz Ferdinand to observe the military maneuvers in Bosnia scheduled for June 1914. After the maneuvers Franz Ferdinand and his wife planned to visit Sarajevo to open the state museum in its new premises there. Generally such engagements are announced in the court circular months in advance so the assassins tagged him for murder months in advance.

There were six assassins ready for the Archduke that morning. When Franz-Ferdinand and Sofie arrived they were greeted by Governor Oskar Potiorek with six automobiles were waiting. Security was limited because many soldiers were on the military maneuvers that the Archduke witnessed the day before. The motorcade passed the first two assassins who failed to act. Nedeljko Čabrinović was on the opposite side of the street near the Miljacka River arming him with a bomb.

At 10:10 am Franz Ferdinand’s car approached and Čabrinović threw his bomb. The bomb bounced off the folded back convertible cover into the street and the timed detonator caused it to explode under the next car wounding 16–20 people. Čabrinović swallowed a cyanide pill and jumped into the Miljacka river. Čabrinović’s suicide attempt failed, as the cyanide only induced vomiting. Police dragged Čabrinović out of the river, and he was severely beaten by the crowd before being taken into custody.

A visably shaken Archduke arrived at his first destination which was Sarajevo’s Town Hall. He gave the speech he originally had written for the occasion but at the end added a few words about the bombing and the people of Sarajevo “as I see in them an expression of their joy at the failure of the attempt at assassination.” His entourage wanted to change plans fearing more assassination attempts would be made. Baron Rumerskirch proposed that the couple remain at the Town Hall until troops could be brought into the city to line the streets. Governor-General Oskar Potiorek vetoed this suggestion on the grounds that soldiers coming straight from maneuvers would not have the dress uniforms appropriate for such duties. The Royal couple did decide to postpone the rest of the schedualed activities and desired to visit the hospital to see those wounded in the morning’s bomb attack.

After hearing about the failed bomb attack one assassin, Gavrilo Princip, stood in front of a nearby food shop (Schiller’s delicatessen), on Appel Quay near the Latin Bridge waiting for the Archdukes return from the National Museum In the confusion the drivers of the motorcade were not told of the change in plans. When the motorcade was on Appel Quay, Governor Potiorek told the driver to turn off that road and take another route to the Hospital. The driver stopped the car and put it in reverse. As fate would have it they stopped directly in front of where Gavrilo Princip was standing.

Standing only 5 feet away (1.5 meters) Princip took two shots at the Archduke and Sofie. Franz-Ferdinand was shot in the jugular vein while Sofie was hit in the abdomen. Both The Archduke and Sofie remained sitting upright as they were taken to the Governor’s residence for medical treatment. Count Harrach reports that Franz Ferdinand’s last words were “Sophie, Sophie! Don’t die! Live for our children!” followed by six or seven utterances of “It is nothing.” These utterances were followed by a long death rattle. Sophie was dead on arrival at the Governor’s residence while Franz Ferdinand died 10 minutes later.

The death shocked all the crowned heads of Europe and Emperor Franz Joseph took the news very hard. Although in that moment it was not clear that this event would spark a global war, the assassination of the Archduke raised tentions between allied states within two days. Austria-Hungary and Germany advised Serbia that it should open an investigation, but Secretary General to the Serbian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Slavko Gruic, replied “Nothing had been done so far and the matter did not concern the Serbian Government.”

The beginning of the end had just happened.
Join me here this Friday for the aftermath and the start of the war.

 

Advertisements

The Fall of Louis XVI of France and Navarre: Part V

Tags

Austria, Emperor Leopold II, Friedrich Wilhelm III of Prussia, Holy Roman Empire, Leopold II, Louis XIV of France, Louis XVI of France, Marie Antoinette, Tuileries Palace

Part V

Despite the Kings flight from the Palace the Legislative Assembly still favored a constitutional monarchy. After a new Constitution was written and Louis agreed to swear an oath to uphold it, there was still a chance the monarchy could survive. What most people often think is that that the Enlightenment ideals were against a monarchy because the French Revolution came so quickly on the heels of the American Revolution where the former British Colonies said “No” to being ruled by a king. That is not the case. The Enlightenment ideals supported many types of government as long as it was the will of the people and that they had a say in the process of government. While an absolute monarchy, which was the type Louis XVI inherited, was not congenial to Enlightenment principles but a constitutional or limited monarchy was favorable because it limited the powers of the monarch and allowed for elected officials that represented the populace.

However, it seems with what transpired next, it wasn’t so much that a constitutional monarchy was against the Enlightenment or the Revolution, it seems that those in the French government grew tired of Louis. One of the events that lead to the toppling of Louis and his crown was the war between France and the Holy Roman Empire in April of 1792. At this time Marie-Antoinette’s brother, was Leopold II, the Holy Roman Emperor. Leopold, along with King Friedrich-Wilhelm III of Prussia and French Émigrés issued the Declaration of Pillnitz, which declared that in the interest of the all European monarchs of Europe that the well-being of Louis and his family was essential, and threatened vague but severe consequences if anything should befall them. Shortly after this deceleration the Legislative Assembly, with the support of Louis, ironically, declared war on the Holy Roman Empire.

This war solidified many factions within the Revolution. To these revolutionaries this war was not about the protection of the Royal Family but against French sovereignty itself. When the leader of the Prussian-Austrian army Prince Carl-Wilhelm-Ferdinand, Duke of Brunswick issued a proclamation called the Brunswick Manifesto on July 25, 1792, written by Louis’s émigré cousin, Louis Joseph de Bourbon the Prince de Condé, declaring the intent of the Austrians and Prussians to restore the king to his full powers and to treat any person or town who opposed them as rebels to be condemned to death by martial law, this was the final blow for Louis.

Paris mobs had reached their boiling point. With foreign powers threatening to give Louis his full absolute powers and threatening French sovereignty, Paris mobs marched on the Tuileries Palace where both the Royal Family and the monarchist members of the Legislative Assembly had taken refuge. On August 13, 1792 Louis XVI and his family were formally arrested. The Legislative Assembly was replaced by a National Assembly which formally abolished the Monarchy on September 21, 1792.

It is difficult to evaluate Louis’ actions and figure where did he go wrong? One of Louis’ problems was that he was a kind man yet indecisive. If he had been a powerful presence would the outcome have been the same? I really don’t know. It seems even with a powerful ruler the Revolution was larger than one man. In the light of the revolution many of Louis’ actions are understandable.

As a prisoner in the Tuileries Palace he had but little choice but to go along with the revolutionary government. I don’t think all of his actions with the government were insincere. While he was an absolute monarch at heart he did show some level of willingness to work with the government. I do not really think Louis would have objected to a role as a Constitutional monarch. I do see the radical nature of the Revolutionary assemblies as having much to do with Louis’ downfall. It was not all of his fault.

He did, however, play a role. The two largest issues seem to be his flight from the Tuileries Palace and his plotting with foreign powers to end the revolution and to be restored to his full powers. I do think those were the two major points that brought Louis down. However, I can have empathy for him. I do not blame him for trying to regain power. Who wouldn’t have under those circumstances? Plus after a couple of years being a prisoner in his own palace, I can’t blame him for trying to flee that condition.

For myself, I think the larger problem was the absolute monarchy itself. The seeds were sown and the threads for its downfall were laid in the times of Louis XIV. His hunger for power, territory and war was something his successor Louis XV strived for. In some lesser extent so did Louis XVI. Another key ingredient was by placing the court at Versailles and isolating the King from his people, the monarchy lost touch with the common man and his sufferings. That was the true issue that brought down the monarchy.

The Fall of Louis XVI of France and Navarre: Part IV

Tags

Austria, Constitutional Monarchy, French Émigrés, French Revolution, Legislative Assembly, Louis XVI of France, Marie Antoinette, Tuileries Palace, Varennes

Part IV

Things took a turn for the worse for Louis XVI and family in 1791 when the Constituent Assembly was replaced with the Legislative Assembly. This assembly consisted of two factions. One group, known as the Freuillants were wealthy middle class men that supported a Constitutional Monarchy and felt the revolution had runs its course. The second group, the Democratic faction did not trust the king and felt the revolutionary principles had to continue to reform society and the government.

The reason the Democratic faction did not trust the king? That came on 1791. Louis was very discontent being a prisoner of the revolution. He had been conspiring behind closed doors with diplomats favorable to the king. Louis envisioned a congress consisting of French Émigrés that would, along with foreign troops, restore the king to his full powers and end the revolution.

This was not occurring swiftly enough and on the night of June 21, 1791 (223 years ago tomorrow)  Louis XVI, Marie-Antoinette their two surviving children fled from the Palace. They were soon recognized, making it as far a Varennes where they were apprehended and arrested and returned to the Palace. The Legislative Assembly stripped Louis of his remaining powers. This flight was seen as a betrayal of the revolution and it greatly shocked the French people, who, up until then, saw Louis and the Royal Family as symbols of the revolution and champions for progress and change. The flight from the Tuileries Palace changed all of that and from that moment the monarchy lost considerable support.

Was this the point of no return for Louis? Was this his fatal mistake? As we shall see in the next section this was a monumental moment in the reign of Louis XVI. With the notion of absolute monarchy and the divine right of kings gone forever in France, the notion of popular sovereignty was keeping the monarchy alive. As long as a majority of the people supported the king then the throne was stable. This betrayal greatly weakened that support.

We shall see in the next and last section that this stumble was Louis’ last mistake. For the final events that toppled the crown from his head were not of his doing.

 

The Fall of King Louis XVI of France and Navarre. Part III

Tags

1789, Bastille, comte d'Artois, comte de Provence, French Revolution, July 14, Louis XVI of France, Marie Antoinette, Palace of Versailles, Prince Charles-Philippe, Prince Louis-Stanislas, Tuileries Palace

Part III

Now we are getting to the meat of this topic. What did Louis do wrong during the French Revolution? What was the point of no return for Louis, and could he have done something differently to save his throne?

Also, in doing my research for this topic I realized this part of the topic is very complex so I will be adding a part IV and Part V.

The French Revolution began on July 14, 1789 with the storming of the Bastille. It has been reported that Louis XVI failed to mention the raid on the Bastille in his journal that evening. I am not sure if that story is apocryphal but it does indicate how out of touch with what was going on around him.

Within a short few months of the start of the revolution the anger of the revolutionaries turned on the members of the Royal Family. On October 5th, 1789 an angry mod of Parisians lead by working women stormed the Palace of Versailles with an attempt to kill the very unpopular queen, Marie Antoinette. The mob was unsuccessful and were defused only be the intervention of General La Fayette. In the aftermath of this skirmish it was decided to move the Royal Family to the Tuileries Palace where it was thought that with the Royal Family located in Paris among the people they would be more aware of the nations problems making them more accountable.

For Louis it was a long nightmare.

One of the ideals of the Revolution was the Enlightenment belief in popular sovereignty. Popular sovereignty was the belief that individual citizens had a say in who ran the Government and who represented them. It ran counter to the divine right of Kings which said those who ruled over you were placed their divinely by God and were answerable only to God. However, as the Revolution became more radical many of those politicians that sought for reform began to question those Enlightenment ideals. One such individual was Honoré Mirabeau Riqueti, comte de Mirabeau, finance minister. A favorite of the people, and considered their spokesperson, began to side with the crown and switched to a moderate position, favoring a constitutional monarchy built on the model of Great Britain.

In 1791 another French noble, Armand Marc, comte de Montmorin, replaced the comte de Mirabeau as finance minister and secretly began to organize covert resistance to the revolutionaries by diverting money from the Civil List to cover expenses for the preservation of the monarchy. The kings own brothers, Prince Louis-Stanislas, comte de Provence, and Prince Charles-Philippe, comte d’Artois were also trying to launch counter revolutionary movements until their brother, the king, discovered their plans and demanded them to stop. Also at this time the revolutionary Government did not want to abolish the monarchy yet they did not know what role the king should play in the government. By this time the king was a virtual prisoner of the Tuileries Palace and decided he had had enough and it was time to flee.

Fleeing the Tuileries Palace will be covered in the next section.

My thoughts. Thus far from 1789 until 1791 the government and its officials were willing to work with the king. One thing I failed to mention in the body of this blog, was, at this time, because of Louis’ known support of Enlightenment ideals, the general population saw the King as a symbol of the revolution and gave great support to the monarchy. However, his treatment in the Palace was less than stellar and I think one of the contributing factors of his down fall. Louis has gone down in history as being an indecisive monarch and that will play a role in his demise. However, not supporting the counter-revolutionaries while the revolutionary government still supported him was a wise thing do.

The Fall of Louis XVI of France and Navarre: Part II

Tags

Ancien Régime, Austria, Encyclopédie, Franz I, French Revolution, Holy Roman Emperor Franz I, Holy Roman Empire, Louis XVI of France, Maria Theresa, Marie Antoinette, Rousseau, The Enlightenment

On May 10, 1774 King Louis XV of France and Navarre died after a reign of 59 years leaving the throne to his grandson who became King Louis XVI of France and Navarre. Tracking the fall of Louis XVI isn’t always easy because proving that one event caused another can be rather difficult to prove. However, there were a few things that do weight heavily in the direction of Louis’ downfall.

Louis came to the throne amidst many changes in Europe and France in particular. This was the Age of Enlightenment when things such as tradition and religion were being questioned in favor of reason, individualism and along with the scientific method were being explored with the goal of changing society. Skepticism and intellectualism were being praised as logic and empiricism was now the yardstick in measuring knowledge and wisdom. In France, the Enlightenment ideas were discussed in salons all over Paris and larger cities which culminated in the great Encyclopédie (1751–72) edited by Denis Diderot (1713–1784) and Jean le Rond d’Alembert (1717–1783). This historic tome was developed with contributions by leading intellectuals, notably Voltaire (1694–1778), Rousseau (1712–1778) and Montesquieu (1689–1755).

The ideals heavily influenced Louis’ early reign and he attempted reforms that agreed with these principles. These reforms included efforts to abolish serfdom, remove the taille, and increase tolerance toward non-Catholics. The reaction by the more tradition bound and conservative French nobility angrily opposed their implementation with great success. The failure to enforce his reforms increased discontent among the common people who felt that Louis should have been bold in his leadership when confronting the French Nobility.

During the early part of his reign came the American Revolution from Great Britain, France’s long time enemy. The American Revolution was also influenced by Age of Enlightenment ideals which Louis supported. From 1776 Louis XVI actively supported the North American colonists, by supplying troops, food and money. The French were very instrumental in assisting the colonies in their war for independence which was realized in the 1783 Treaty of Paris. Although the French were triumphant against Britain, the ensuing debt and financial crisis contributed to the unpopularity of the Ancien Régime which culminated at the Estates-General of 1789 for the first time in over one hundred years.

Although Louis was favorable toward Enlightenment ideals he was still an absolute monarch and the principles of absolute monarchy were also well instilled within him and his queen, Marie-Antoinette. I could do a whole series on Marie-Antoinette and in the future I am sure I will. Louis married Marie-Antoinette when she was only 15 and he was 16. I am that placing these strangers together at such a young age contributed to their development. Part of the Palace system was living in isolation at court which helped them live lives cut off from the common people and their circumstances.

Maria Antonia Josepha was born an Archduchess of Austria, was Dauphine of France from 1770 to 1774 and Queen of France and Navarre from 1774 to 1792. She was the fifteenth and penultimate child of Holy Roman Empress Maria Theresa, Archduchess of Austria and Holy Roman Emperor Franz I. Was she the villain revolutionaries made her out to be? Was she a victim of her times? That is a question for another blog entry. The French people initially fell in love with the young princess from Austria, but after a few scandals and rumors of her extravagant lifestyle she became very disliked among the French population. As we shall see in the final chapter her greatest ‘sin” is that helped her husband and herself in their own downfall was the principles of absolute monarchy which helped place her and Louis so out of touch with the people and their times.