² When the industrial age began in Austria is still an open question. Historians, though they know better, face the practical necessity of setting exact dates—in this case 1848. Certainly the term “proto-industrial” is appropriate for roughly the preceding century and a half. Among other works, see Rudolph, Richard L., “The Pattern of Austrian Industrial Growth from the Eighteenth to the Early Twentieth Century,” Austrian History Yearbook, Vol. XI (1975), pp. 3–25.Google Scholar

³ For a fuller elaboration of this conceptual framework, see Barker, Thomas M., “Military Entrepreneurship and Absolutism: Habsburg Models,” Journal of European Studies, Vol. IV (1974), pp. 19–42;CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Barker, Thomas M., “Armed Service and Nobility in the Holy Roman Empire: General Aspects and Habsburg Particulars,” Armed Forces and Society, Vol. IV, No. 3 (05, 1978), pp. 449–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴ The originator of the concept of military entrepreneurship is Fritz Redlich. See his study. The German Military Enterpriser and His Work Force. In Vierleljahrsehrifl für Sozial- und Wirtschaflgeschichte, Supplements 47–48 (2 vols., Frankfurt a. M.: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1964–65).Google Scholar

⁵ Lack of male heirs was a major reason for extinction. However, subdivision of property among sons could also be a cause of decline and disappearance, especially for members of the knightly estates, who had lesser amounts of land to parcel out. PolinŠenský, Josef, The Thirty Years' War (Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 1971), p. 35.Google Scholar

⁶ Prof. Nikolaus Lobkowicz, rector of the University of Munich, a prominent scientist and a specialist in Marxist studies, is the son of the last prince.

⁷ The guide to the documents in this case is Státni archiv v Litoměřicich, Průvodce po archivnich fondech [Guidebook to Archival Holdings] (2 vols., Prague: Archivni ministerstva vnitra, 1956, 1963).Google Scholar The second volume contains good capsule family histories. For a general introduction to the Czechoslovak archives, see PoliŠenský, Josef, Der Krieg und die Gesellschaft in Europa 1618–1648. In Documema Bohemwa Bellum Tricennale lllustraniia. Vol. I (Vienna: Hermann Bohlaus Nachf., 1971), pp. 16–25;Google Scholar and PoliŠenský, Josef, Olázky studia obecnýych dějin [ Some Questions about Historical Studies] (2 vols., Prague: Universita Karlova, 1957, 1963).Google Scholar A revised edition of Krieg, Derund die Gesellschaft in Europa was published in English under the same title by Cambridge University Press in 1978.Google Scholar

⁸ The word “vladysivo” has variant meanings. While it does signify the gentry as a whole, it can also indicate only this group's upper stratum. See Klassen, John M., The Nobility and the Making of the Hussite Revolution (New York: Columbia University Press, 1978), p. 7.Google Scholar Klassen's main conclusion is that after all the turmoil of the Hussite period the position of the nobility was stronger than ever before.

⁹ Průvodce po archivnich fondech, pp. 93–100; Ottův slovnik naučny, Vol. XVI (1900), pp. 221–229.Google Scholar By assuring the indivisibility of the electorates, Charles IV's Golden Bull served as a model for late fourteenth and fifteenth century ruling princes, but the nobility seems to have lagged behind the rulers for roughly two centuries. See Barraclough, Geoffrey, The Origins of Modern Germany (Oxford: University Press, 1962), p. 320, especially n. 4.Google Scholar

¹⁰ The title went jointly to the two brothers, Mikulአna Hasištejne and Jan Popel z Lobkovic na Hluboké. The award should be seen in light of the political mariage de convenance between Bohemia's king, George of Poděbrady (1458–1471), and Emperor Frederick 111 (1457–1493).Google Scholar

¹¹ Průvodce pro archivnich fondech, p. 99; Kneschke, Ernst. Neues allgemeines deutsches Adeh-Lexikon (9 vols., Leipzig: Voigt, 1859–70), Vol. V, pp. 484–485; and Riegeruv slovnik naucny. Vol. Ill (1863), pp. 1,352–1,357. While the involvement of Bohemian noblemen as military enterprisers in the Thirty Years' War is well known, no survey has been made of their late fifteenth and sixteenth century predecessors. Since German condottieri of the Reformation Era have received so much attention, a study of their Bohemian counterparts would be useful.Google Scholar

¹² The year 1547 was crucial for the consolidation of Habsburg power in Bohemia (although the estates regained ground later). Ladislav and Jan belonged to a minority of the politically astute, collaborationist members of the estates. See Paula Sutter Fichtner, “When Brothers Agree: Bohemia, the Habsburgs, and the Schmalkaldic Wars, 1546–1547,” Austrian History Yearbook, Vol. XI (1975), pp. 67–78.Google Scholar Until 1618, except for the tactless and overly ambitious Jiři I of the Zbiroh (Chlumec) branch, who incurred Rudolph ll's disfavor in 1594 and died both financially ruined and sonless, the Lobkovci showed a collective genius for wise political judgment. See Václav Tomek, “Spiknuti Jiřiho z Lobkovic r. 1593” [The Conspiracy of Jiři z Lobkovic], Časopis českeho museum. Vol. XXVII (1853), pp. 215–245. For the complex question of agricultural development and its social effects, see Polišenský, The Thirty Years' War, pp. 31–36 and 80–85. See aho post, p. 37, n. 14.Google Scholar

¹³ Josef BoroviŠka, “Počátky kancléřováni Zdenka z Lobkovic. Diplomatický rozbor roudnických rukopisů” [The Beginnings of the Chancellorship of Zdeněk of Lobkovic], Sborník praci, 1939, pp. 435–455; ZdenSk Kalista, “Zděngk Popel z Lobkovic,” Čechové, kleři ivořili dějiny světa [Czechs Who Shaped World History] (Prague: Českomoravský Kompas, 1939), pp. 62–82; Fred Snider, “The Bohemian Nobility, 1550–1650. Metamorphosis of a Ruling Class.“ Typescript, 1978, passim. See also Tomek, “Spiknuti Jiřiho z Lobkovic r. 1593” [The Conspiracy of Jifi z Lobkovic,[ Časopis českého museum, Vol. XXVII (1853), pp. 215–245. For the complex question of agricultural development and its social effects, see Polišenský, The Thirty Years' War, pp. 31–36 Carinthian heiress and survivor of five earlier husbands, Anna von Neumann. The fortune which became his at her death six years later provided the foundation for the splendor of the Schwarzenberg family. Polyxena's wealth was probably not of equal magnitude, and the marriage made at least as much sense politically as economically. See post, p. 37, n. 16. The Schwarzenbergs, of humble Franconian ministerial origin, inherited the Bohemian spoils (Krumau-Čestý Krumlov) of the Styrian-born Eggenbergs in 1719, thereby becoming one of the two or three richest families in the monarchy. Karl zu Schwarzenberg, Geschichte des reichsstdmlischen Houses Schwarzenberg (Neustadt a. d. Aisch: Verlag Degener, 1963).

¹⁴ Schwarz, Henry F., The Imperial Privy Council in the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1943). pp. 290–292Google Scholar and passim. Schwarz. whose study remains immensely useful for the biographies of aulic grandees, is mistaken in equating Zdeněk'stress on the authority of the Bohemian Crown with “absolutism,” at least in the sense of an articulated political credo. See post, p. 38, n. 18.

¹⁵ As was characteristic of most noble dynasties, other Lobkovci were also involved on both sides of the controversy in 1618–1620. Děpold Matouš z Lobkovic (1564–1619), of the Duchcov or Dux (Bilina) branch line, grand prior of the Maltese Order and a loyalist, was in Prague Castle at the time of the defenestration but escaped harm. Also present was Vilem the Elder Popel z Lobkovic (d. 1626), of the Horšovský Týn-Tachov branch line. Thinking that the Habsburgs had ignored him, he later served as the winter king`s lord high steward and died in prison, saved from a worse fate by his distant cousin Vaclav. Václav`s brother Ladislas (1566–1621) was a strong bastion of the Catholic cause in Moravia, of which he ultimately became governor. See Josef Poli šenský, Der Beginn cles Dreissigjahrigen Krieges. Der Kampf urn Bbhmen 1618–1621. In Documema Bohemica Bellum Tricennale Illustrantia, Vol. II (Prague: Academia, 1972), passim; and Snider, “The Bohemian Nobility, 1550–1650.” passim.Google Scholar

¹⁶ The bulk of Polyxena's first husband's wealth went to his famous brother, Petr Vok z Rožmberka. She and Lobkovic had heavy debts in the first years of their marriage and were remiss in their taxes. Adam Wolf, Füirst Wenzel Lobkowitz. erster geheimer Rath Kaiser Leopold's I. 1609–1677. Sein Leben uncl Wirken (Vienna: Braumiiller, 1869), p. 37.Google Scholar In order to escape financial pressure Zdeněk may have exploited brother Ladislas' loyalty to the crown. He inherited the latter's Moravian holdings—of which Holešov was the center—and sought fiscal relief because of Ladislav's “37 years of faithful service” and the deceased's debts and damage to the manors resulting from hostilities. Miloš Kouřil and Josef Polišenský, Der Kampf cles Houses Habsburg gegen die Niederlande und Hire Verbündeten 1621–1625. In Documema Bohemica Bellum Tricennale Illustrantia, Vol. Ill (Prague: Academia, 1976), pp. 152, 216, and 218. Such petitions for exemption may be found in other family archives as well—for instance, in that of the Buquoys now at Třeboň (Wittingau)—and possibly represent tax dodges, notwithstanding the fact that soldiers did loot indiscriminately.Google Scholar

¹⁷ The term “dyarchy” derives from Jean Berenger, the author of an unpublished 1970 dissertation at the Sorbonne on Habsburg finances in the baroque era.

¹⁸ Polišsenský suggests that Zdeněk Vojtech should be considered a “Czech conservative.” See Polišenský, Der Krieg und die Gesellschafi in Europa 1618–1648, p. 157.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Kneschke. Neues allgemeines deulsches Adels-Lexikon, Vol. V, p. 485.

²⁰ Wolf, Fürsi Wenzel Lobkowitz, p. 17.

²¹ A figure worthy of study is Maria Magdalena Buquoy, née Countess Biglia (d.1654), widow of the rapacious Walloon condottiere, Charles Bonaventura Buquoy (d. 1621), who managed to preserve and consolidate her late husband&s seignorial plunder in a corner of southern Bohemia. See ante, p. 37, n. 16.

²² Wolf, Fürst Wenzel Lobkowilz, pp. 18–20.

²³ Alphons Wrede, Geschichie der k. u. k. Wehrmacht (6 vols., Vienna: Seidel, 1895–1901), Vol. II, p. 438.Google Scholar

²⁴ Wolf, Fürsi Wenzel Lobkowitz, pp. 24 and 27–28.

²⁵ The Habsburgs had been creating too many princes in the first half of the seventeenth century to suit the existing holders of that rank, for, sociologically speaking, the prestige of any position is determined in large measure by its exclusiveness. Another feature of aristocratic sociopsychology at that time were noblemen's efforts to accumulate positions of repute or, more precisely, to get themselves admitted and accepted by as many corporate entities as possible. Lobkovic, for example, received Hungary's grand indigénal (i. e., citizenship) and was accorded the rank of magnate—synonymous with dietal status in that kingdom-in 1654, alongside all his other dignities in Bohemia, Silesia, and the Holy Roman Empire. (Dynastic political considerations were surely also a factor.) Průvodce po archivnich fondech, p. 101.Google Scholar

²⁶ Státni Archiv v Litoměřficich (Žitenicich), Rodinný Archiv Lobkovic, Lobkowicz Korrespondenzen: an Fürsl Wenzel Eusebius, III-c, Mililaria, Anhang: “Bittgesuche und Intercessionen wegen Avancement, Dienstanträge und andere Particularangelegenheiten hoher Militärpersonen und andere Officiere.”

²⁷ Letter from Count Johann Septimus von Jörger (1596–1667), dated Nürnberg, March 3/13, 1665. In ibid. Financially hard-pressed, the father of twelve children and a voluntary exile, the cultivated and high-minded count was the last Protestant scion of an old and distinguished Upper Austrian family. He was seeking reemployment for his son, Andreas Christian (c. 1630–1700), who had been discharged from the army after the conclusion of peace with Ottoman Turkey the preceding September. Since Johann's own comital rank, granted in 1659, was a sign of Habsburg forgiveness, he could hope for a positive response to his petition. Andreas Christian was, in fact, readmitted to the army. Although he also had career problems at a later date, he was a Catholic convert and a particularly tough soldier who was later promoted to general. He acquired property in Hungary, where he did much of his fighting, and if his own two sons had not died in or as the result of battle, this cadet branch of the Jorgers would have represented an example of renewed upward social mobility. Heinrich Wurm, Die Jörger von Toilet. In Forschungen zur Geschichte Ösierreichs, No. 4 (Graz: Böhlau, 1955), passim.Google Scholar

²⁸ See, for instance, Jürgen Freiherr von Krüdener, Die Rolle cles Hofes im Absolulismus (Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer Verlag, 1973). The book has been inspired in part by the seminal ideas of the great, German-born historical sociologist, Norbert Elias.Google Scholar

²⁹ The words in the original German text of the letter are “Huld” and “Gnaden”.The primordial meaning of the latter is “inclination” or “condescension” (to do something). The initial, Early High German context of usage was religious, i. e., the Christian concept of grace. However, in Middle High German there was already a secular application as well: the (positive) disposition of a social superior toward an inferior. “Huld” appears at this time in an identical sense. Latin “gratia” (“inclination to do good for”) and “favor” (from “favere:” “to wish well”) reflect similar semantic developmental patterns. The same seems to hold true for the Czech words “milost” (the title of Bohemia's kings) and “přizeň”. Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm, Deutsches Wörterbuch (reprint), Vol. VI, Pt. I, Sec. 5 (Leipzig: Hirzel, 1958), pp. 530 and 540;Google ScholarThesaurus Linguae Lalinae, Vol. VI, Pt. I (Leipzig: Teubner, 1912–26 [seriatim]), p. 373; Vol. VI, Pt. 2 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1925–34 [seriatim]),Google Scholar p. 2,205; Slovník spisoveho jazyka ceského [Dictionary of the Czech Literary Language], Vol. 1 (University, Alabama: University of Alabama Press, 1965), p. 1,230Google Scholar

³⁰ Průvodce po archivnich fondech, p. 101.

³¹ Although the origin of “Gnaden” as a form of address or title is Middle High German, its use in connection with supplication is baroque. Grimm, Deötsches Worterbuch, Vol. VI, Pt. I, pp. 552–553. Until 1664Google Scholar “Your Grace” was the predicate of all imperial princes, that of imperial counts being only “High and Weil-Born.” The inflation of honors rule then caused the more powerful ruling princes, beginning with the duke of Wiirttemberg, to seek greater distinctiveness as “Your Serenity” (“Eure Durchlaucht”), which had been the title of electors since 1375. By 1712 these older princes found it necessary to add the superlative “(ig)st.” In 1735 some of the more recently created princes managed to secure approval for becoming “durchlauchtig.” The emperor, for his part, had to be labeled first as “allergnädigst” and thereafter as “allerdärchlduchtigst.” He also gradually lost his monopoly on “majesty.” Accelerated by the promotions which Napoleon had handed out, the process continued in the German Confederation. Meyers Conversations-Lexikon (17 vols., Leipzig: Verlag des Bibliographischen Instituts, 1888–90), Vol. V (1888), p. 240; Vol. Vll (1890), p. 455.Google Scholar

³² At various occasions, for instance, both Ottavio Piccolomini (1589–1656) and Raimondo Montecuccoli (1609–1680) felt the intensity of anti-Italian prejudices. Barker, Thomas M., The Military Intellectual and Battle: Raimonclo Montecuccoli and the Thirty Years' War (Albany, N. Y.: State University of New York Press, 1975), pp. 41 and 222, n. 105.Google Scholar It may be recalled that two of the three main plotters and beneficiaries of Wallenstein's downfall, Piccolomini and Matteo Galasso or Matthias Gallas (1584–1647), were ethnic Italians. So also were the Clarys, the heirs of the third conspirator, the Lorraine-born Johann Aldringen (1588–1634).

³³ Schwarz, The Imperial Privy Council, passim.

³⁴ Lobkovic was also related by marriage to German ruling houses, and this, too, was regarded as perilous. Ibid., pp. 289–290. Lobkovic's second wife, Palsgravine Augusta Sophie von Sulzbach, was a Lutheran and refused to come to Vienna. The reasons for the union, which was an arranged one, are not clear. The princess had little money of her own; consequently status improvement and politics may have been factors. Wolf, Fürsl Wenzel Lobkowitz, pp. 39–50. Lobkovic's first marriage, to a Czech gentrywoman, had been a love match, however. Yet other instances of romantic wedlock may be cited. Further research on the important subject of connubial patterns will greatly assist in understanding the aulic nobility as a social stratum.

³⁵ Oswald Redlich, Weltmacht des Barock. Öslerreich in der Zeil Kaiser Leopolds I (Vienna: Rohrer Verlag, 1961), pp. 137–139.Google Scholar

³⁶ It should be pointed out that Lobkovic was not the wealthiest magnate in Bohemia. He was not as affluent as the emperor, the Eggenbergs, the Slavatas, or the Buquoys. But he was not far behind them and may be ranked alongside the Trauttmansdorfs, the Liechtensteins, the Colloredos, and the Gallases. He appears to have been one of the nine wealthiest heads of family in the kingdom. His chief seigniory of Chlumec, with 520 and 7/8th taxable farmsteads was, in fact, statistically the ninth most valuable individual unit in Bohemia; the largest, the Eggenbergs' Krumau-Český Krumlov, counted 1723 farmsteads. When one considers his manors in Moravia, the Duchy of Sagan. and his holdings in Germany proper and in Hungary, he almost certainly belonged to an inner circle of no more than a dozen super-rich imperial paladins. Karel Doskocčil (ed.), Berni rula. Popis Čech R. 1654 [The Tax Roll: The Bohemian Census of 1654] (3 vols., Prague: Ministerstvo kultury, 1950–54). passim. Exact comparisons of wealth are virtually impossible; there is no Berni rula for Moravia or Silesia, much less for the Alpine lands. The standards used in the Berni rula itself are not entirely consistent; falsehood in reporting assets and the varying productivity of manors must also be taken into account.Google Scholar

³⁷ Wolf, Fürsi Wenzel Lubkowitz, p. 3.

³⁸ The main, Catholic branch of the Jörgers belonged to both the aulic nobility and the strategic elite drawn from it. The Sinzendorfs are another example of a family one of whose members sinned against the Habsburgs but which carried on as if nothing had happened. Indeed Count Georg (1616–1680), the imperial treasurer, who was dismissed for corruption, was only lightly punished himself. Franz von Krones, Geschichte Österreichs (5 vols., Berlin and Vienna: Griiben [Vols. 1–1V]; Hoffmann [Vol. V], 1876–81), Vol. Ill, pp. 567–568, 571, and 631. One can only conclude that clemency towards aristocrats was as much rooted in the sociology of power as in Christian charity or the personality traits of rulers.Google Scholar

³⁹ The Dauns (Dhauns), a clan of Rhenish origin whose blue blood was traceable to the twelfth century, made no substantial material progress before they became military enterprisers during and after the Thirty Years' War. Leopold's grandfather, Johann Wilhelm Anton (d. 1706), was responsible for amassing the family's fortune in Austria, while his dashing son, Wierich Philipp (1669–1741), a comrade of Eugene of Savoy, consolidated the family's wealth. The family records are located mainly in the Ústredný Štatny Archiv in Bratislava.

⁴⁰ For Laudon's family background, see Kunisch, Johannes, Feldmarschall Laudon. Jugencl und ersie Kriegsjahre. In Archiv für ösierreichische Geschichie, 3rd ser., No. 128 (Vienna: Bohlau, 1972).Google Scholar For the Moravian Kounci. see the fine monograph by Grete Klingenstein on Der Aufsiieg des Houses Kauniiz. In Schrifienreihe der Hisiorischen Commission bei der Bayrischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, No. 12 (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1975).Google Scholar

⁴¹ Ludwig Jedlicka, “Erzherzog Karl, der Sieger von Aspern,” in Hantsch, Hugo (ed.), Gestalter der Geschicke ÖOsierreichs (Vienna: Tyrolia Verlag, 1962), pp. 311–323.Google Scholar

⁴² Major General (later Lieutenant Field Marshal) Josef Franz Lobkowicz (1803–1875), lord of the smaller family manor of Dolni Beřkovice (near Mělnik) and third son of the head of the older princely line, was commandant of the Prague National Guard and the General Command's contact with the court during the 1848 Revolution. Shortly thereafter he served as Emperor Ferdinand's adjutant and promoted the views of Windischgrätz and Schwarzenberg (see n. 43). Josef Polišenský, Aristocrats and the Crowd in the Revolutionary Year 1848 (typescript translation of the original Czech text by Fred Snider; it will be published by the State University of New York Press),Google Scholarpassim. This study shows that ties of aristocratic kinship were most significant for the cohesion of the army and its effectiveness as an instrument of suppression, i.e., as an instrument of social control. Prof. Gunther Rothenberg has also examined the predominance of aristocrats in the officer corps. See his “Nobility and Military Careers: The Habsburg Officer Corps, 1740–1914.” Military Affairs, Vol. XL (1976), pp. 182–187.Google Scholar While an increase in officers of non-noble origin was evident after 1740, the Vormärz and Bach eras witnessed a temporary resurgnce of the aristocracy. Rothenberg's book, The Army of Francis Joseph (West Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue University Press, 1975),Google Scholar Analyzes at greater length the nature of the “conservative” hold on the military, including still meaningful vestiges of regimental proprietorship. See pp. 8–21. The volume is also important for civil-military relations in toto.

⁴³ Jelačić, of petty noble descent and representative of the thoroughly martial traditions of limitrophic Croatia, exercised a similar function in his native land in the capacity of ban. The case of Lieutenant Field Marshal Felix zu Schwarzenberg (1800–1852), second son of the elder line of his clan and the brother-in-law of Windischgrätz, merits special attention. Although he was trained as a soldier and was the recipient of regular promotions in the military hierarchy and a participant in the Italian campaign of 1848, he falls into a civilian rather than a military mold, at least in this writer's opinion. He spent most of his career holding diplomatic posts. His role as a militarily-backed strong man after 1848 is not necessarily incongruent with a basically civilian orientation. See Kenneth W. Rock, “Felix Schwarzenberg, Military Diplomat,” with “Comments” by Helmut Rumpler and the author's “Reply,” in the Austrian History Yearbook, Vol. XI (1975), pp. 85–112.Google Scholar What is most intriguing about Schwarzenberg's life is its overall civil-military context—a fact which has apparently been overlooked by both Rock and Rumpler—and the support of the existing sociopolitical system provided at that time by cadet aristocrats, whether employed in the army, the bureaucracy, or the Church. This would also help to make the prince's “anational, supranational and grossb'sterreichisch” policies more comprehensible. Altogether one may submit that Habsburg history from 1848 to 1859 represents the final, rear-guard action of the baroque ruling establishment and its nucleus of a strategic elite—final because of the fundamental, economically conditioned social evolution now underway. The phenomenon of concurrent rank in the army and civil service (including its baroque antecedents), of which Schwarzenberg was not the sole example, should be investigated as part of a putative aristocratic social-defense mechanism, with which the increase in high noble officers may conceivably be linked. See also Alan Sked, “Civil-Military Relations within the Habsburg Empire during the Revolution of 1848–1849,” a paper presented at the City University of New York's conference on “War and Society in East-Central Europe during the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries,” on March 13, 1978.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ In his The Army of Francis Joseph, pp. 78–80, Rothenberg discusses Albrecht's vain attempt to preserve strong dynastic control of the army. This suggests that his political influence, if important, had its limits.

⁴⁵ See Peball, Kurt (ed.), Conrad von Hötzendorf, Private Aufzeichnungen (Vienna: Amalthea Verlag, 1976).Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Gunther Rothenberg has impressed on the author the significance of the different kind of military leadership called for by conditions in the latter part of the nineteenth century. Greatly accelerated technological development and the new emphasis on massive armies and their movement over great distances demanded a “managerial” style, otherwise known as “professionalization.” Foreshadowed in the eighteenth century by the predominance of non-nobles in the artillery and engineers'corps, this phenomenon implied novi homines, persons with attributes that the old, high nobility either lacked or did not care to cultivate. Morris Janowitz' empirical models, beginning with the “feudal-aristocratic” variety, are also highly relevant here. See his sketch “Military Elites and the Study of War,” in Morris Janowitz, Military Conflict: Essays in the Institutional Analysis of War and Peace (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1975), pp. 56–69. Civil-military relations likewise deserve an overall, Habsburg-centered historical treatment. See note 43.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Those who survived the upheavals of two world wars were either fortunate enough to have possessed widely scattered domains (e. g., the Fiirstenbergs, Liechtensteins, and Schwarzenbergs) or to have been indigenes of the German Alpine lands (the Abensberg-Trauns, Harrachs, Herbersteins, Starhembergs, and Thurn-Valsassinas). The Esterházys and Batthyanys of Burgenland (former western Hungary) are perhaps the most striking examples of families that experienced political-geographic good luck since, thanks to the vagaries of the Versailles era, they ended up, in part at least, just inside the frontiers of the Republic of Austria.

⁴⁸ While dérogeance did not exist in law and some heads of both major and minor lines practiced a kind of manorial mercantilism, it seems that commercial vocations were considered degrading. For the attitude of the minority of enlightened, entrepreneurial noblemen toward the end of the seignorial epoch, see Herman Freudenberger, “Progressive Bohemian and Moravian Aristocrats,” in Winters, Stanley B. and Held, Joseph (eds.). Intellectual and Social Developments in the Habsburg Empire from Maria Theresa to World War I. Essays in Honor of Robert A. Kann (Boulder, Colo.: East European Quarterly, 1975), pp. 115–130.Google Scholar It is worth noting that by law one-half of the students admitted by the tuition and expense free Wiener Neustadt military academy founded by Maria Theresa in 1751 were noble youths and the other half were sons of superior officers (who generally also were members of the nobility). An associated Viennese preparatory school was specifically, although not exclusively, intended to be a school for “poor” lordlings. Mikoletzky, Hanns Leo. Österreich. Das grosse 18. Jahrhundert (Vienna: Österreichisches Bundesverlag für Unterricht, Wissenschaft und Kunst, 1967), p. 227.Google Scholar The academy's commander after 1779 and one of its most precocious alumni. Major General Franz Joseph Kinsky (1739–1805), was a non-inheriting son of a junior line and, along with his wife, a Countess Trauttmansdorf, the beneficiary of the empress' largesse. Prior to Joseph ll's reforms the dynastic privy purse appears to have been used, inter alia, to maintain the proper status of “needy” children from large noble families. Constant von Wurzbach, Biographisches Lexikon des Kaiserthums Österreich, enlhaltend die Lebensskizzen derjenigen Personen, welche seit 1750 in den österreichischen Kronldndern gelebt und gewirkl haben (60 vols., Vienna: Universitats-Buchdruckerei von Zamarski, 1856–91), Vol. XI pp. 290–295;Google Scholar Hans Wagner, “The Pension Payments and Legal Claims of Maria Theresa and Their Withdrawal by Joseph 11,” in Winters and Held, Intellectual and Social Developments in the Habsburg Empire, pp. 5–30. The question of incipiently declasse and “proletarian” nobility is in sore need of investigation.

⁴⁹ Wurzbach, Biographisches Lexikon des Kaiserthums Österreich, Vol. XV, pp. 310–337 and passim.

⁵⁰ See ante, p. 47, n. 42.

⁵¹ Only after completing this essay did I have occasion to read Evans'essay, R. J. W., “The Austrian Habsburgs: the Dynasty as a Political Institution,” The Courts of Europe: 1400–1800 (London: Thames and Hudson, 1977), pp. 120–145Google Scholar The study, which includes a solid bibliography, is a fine introduction to the subject. Although Evans appears to forswear a social scientific approach, his impression that the political influence of soldiers at court was limited parallels the argument presented here. However, his assertion that a low social premium was placed on military achievement is questionable, at least with respect to valor in combat. The history of the Daun and Pálffy families (see ante, p. 46, n. 40) are but two pieces of evidence to the contrary (for others, see Barker, “Armed Service and Nobility in the Holy Roman Empire,” passim). Likewise, Evans probably overstresses commoners' chances of social ascent, and his (inferential) argument that an aristocratic set of values did not predominate at court is highly debatable. With the brothers and cousins of courtiers seeing constant action, it seems likely that the chivalric ethic was also part of it. See also Rauchensteiner, Manfred. Kaiser Franz und Erzherzog Karl. Dynastie und Heerwesen in Österreich. In Schriftenreihe des lnstiluts fur Osterreichkunde (Munich: Oldenbourg Verlag, 1976),Google Scholar which is highly relevant to civil-military relations; and Dillon, Kenneth J., Kings and Estates in the Bohemian Lands, 1526–1564. In Studies presented to the International Commission for the History of Representative and Parliamentary Institutions, Vol. LVII (Brussels: Les éditions de la librairie encyclopédique. 1976).Google Scholar