Conservative approach towards the Austrian identity in works by Friedrich von Gentz and Adam Muller von Nitterdorf (1816-1832)

The article deals with the issue of Austrian identity emergence and transformation in conservative intellectual discourse of 1816-1832, concentrating on the legacy of Friedrich von Gentz and Adam Muller von Nitterdorf. The author analyzed ideas presented in works by Friedrich von Gentz, e.g. Manifestos of Emperor Francis I he edited; his speculations on the political systems of Austria, Germany and Europe; his essays published in Osterreichischer Beobachter [Austrian Observer]. The author also analyzed works by Adam Muller von Nitterdorf, including his political essays, panegyric pamphlets addressed to Emperor Francis I and the didactic essay on school education based on dynastic patriotism. The correspondence of the two public figures was also studied. The research methodology is based on the history of concepts that deals with the emergence and evolution of a certain concept in its historical and political contexts. Besides, the author employed the terms and concepts “historical memory”, “historical discourse” and “identity”. The conservative political thought of the Austrian Empire was the main context for speculations on the Austrian identity and also referred to criticism against the French Revolution of the 18th century and to the revisiting of the Napoleonic Wars in the Vormarz period (1815-1848). The author came to the following conclusions. Both intellectuals had a similar approach towards the role of the monarch and loyalty towards him as a core self-identification element for the Austrian Empire's multiethnic population - a “family of peoples”, according to Gentz. This image was broadcast via periodicals monopolized by the officials after the Karlsbad decrees. The “organic constitution” concept played a vital role. According to both intellectuals, Francis I was also a formal symbol of Austrian leadership in German lands. At the same time, Gentz and Muller had a different understanding of an “Austrian”. Muller referred to universalist patterns from previous periods with his speculations on an “Austrian” as a sum of all communities living within the empire. On the contrary, Gentz referred to an “Austrian“ as a subject of the empire with German as a native language and belonging to German culture. Such contradictions were significant in distorting the identity policy of the Metternich government. At the same time, both intellectuals agreed that reinforcing this identity is possible only with the active support of the authorities. For the rest of the society it was to be implemented via school education. The Catholic church was also to play an important role in implementing the policy, with the Josephinism and neo-Josephinism approaches of active inclusion of the clergy into leading the public opinion in a required discourse. After the two intellectuals and the emperor passed away, the conservative doctrine failed to preserve its leadership in the Empire.

Keywords

Authors

References