¹ See especially Haas, Arthur G., Metternich, Reorganization and Nationality, 1813–1818: A Story of Foresight and Frustration in the Rebuilding of the Austrian Empire. In Veröffentlichungen des Instituls für Europäische Geschichte, Mainz, No. 28 (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1963)Google Scholar; Haas, Arthur G., “Metternich and the Slavs,” Austrian History Yearbook, Vol. IV–V (1968–1969), pp. 120–150 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kraehe, Enno E., Metlemich's German Policy, Vol. I: The Contest with Napoleon, 1799–1814 (Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1963)Google Scholar; and Schroeder, Paul W., Metternich's Diplomacy at its Zenith, 1820–1823 (Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1962).Google Scholar

² Schroeder, Paul W., “Bruck versus Buol. The Dispute over Austrian Eastern Policy,” The Journal of Modern History, Vol. XL, No. 2 (June, 1968), pp. 193–217 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Schroeder, Paul W., “A Turning Point in Austrian Policy in the Crimean War. The Conferences of March, 1854,” Austrian History Yearbook, Vol. IV–V (1968–1969), pp. 159–202 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Schroeder, Paul W., “Austria and the Danubian Principalities, 1853–56,” Central European History, Vol. II, No. 3 (September, 1969), pp. 216–236 Google Scholar; and Schroeder, Paul W., Austria, Great Britain and the Crimean War. The Destruction of the European Concert (Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University Press, 1972).Google Scholar

³ In addition to the works listed in note 2, see Winfried, Baumgart, Der Friede von Paris. Studien zum Verhällnis von Kriegsführung, Politik und Friedensbewahrung (Munich, 1972)Google Scholar; and Waltraud, Heindl, Graf Buol-Schauenstein in St. Petersburg und London (1848–1852). Zur Genesis des Antagonismus zwischen Österreich und Rufiland. In Studien zur Geschichte derÖsterreichisch-ungarischen Monarchie, Vol. IX (Vienna: BÖhlau, 1970).Google Scholar

⁴ See his “The Early Career of Count Buol, 1837–1852” (unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, 1969).

⁵ See Schwarzenberg's interpretation of this concept, as reported by Baron Carl Kiibeck von KÜbau on October 11,1851: “Confession by Prince Schwarzenberg that the entrance of all Austria in the German Confederation is a bogey that is not seriously believed.” Friedrich Walter (ed.), Aus dem Nachlaβ des Freiherrn Carl Kübeck von Kübau. Tagebücher, Briefe, Aktenstücke (1841–1855), In Verböffentlichungender Kommission für Neuere Geschichte österreichs, Vol. XLV (Graz, 1960), p. 79. Kübeck's remarks have to be considered with great care, since Schwarzenberg's interpretation was made as an afterthought.

⁶ See, for instance, Schwarzenberg's struggles to obtain a responsible ministry, as discussed in Helmut, Rumpler, Ministerral und Ministerratsprotokolle 1848–1867. Behördengeschichiliche und aklenkundliche Analyse. Introductory volume of Die Protokolle des österreichischen Ministerrates 1848–1867 (Vienna: Bundesverlag, 1971), pp. 31–44.Google Scholar

⁷ Buol wrote about the detrimental effects of his lack of knowledge in this respect and the difficulties in obtaining insight into other technical matters to which this exposed him in his apologia of July, 1859, which was published in Josef, Redlich, Das österreichische Staats- und Reichsproblem. Geschichlliche Darsiellung der habsburgischen Monarchie bis zum Umergang des Reiches (3 vols., Leipzig: Neuer Geist Verlag, 1920–1926), Vol. I, Pt. 2, pp. 234–240.Google Scholar

⁸ See ante, p. 187, n. 50.

⁹ Redlich, , Das österreichische Staats- und Reichsproblem, Vol. I, Pt. 2, p. 235.Google Scholar

¹⁰ It should be pointed out that the memoir deals exclusively with Austrian internal affairs and consequently with material that goes beyond the topic to which Austensen has limited his essay.

¹¹ Ante, p. 188.

¹² Schroeder, Austria, Great Britain, and the Crimean War, p. 368.