Day 9 8/10: If only I could be as rich as a dead Habsburg ruler!

Today’s lesson and readings helped me understand a part of Viennese/Austrian history that I did not quite have a grasp on before: the wars with the Ottoman Empire (1299-1923) that shaped the destiny of the ruling dynasties and established much of European power-politics that were established during and after these conflicts. Beller’s book explains that on August 26 1526 the Hungarian army was decimated by the Turks at the battle of Mohacs, where King Louis II Jagellon was killed. This meant that the Habsburg ruler Ferdinand I was, according to a dynastic marriage alliance in 1515, heir to the Hungarian and Bohemian thrones. Yet these two positions were supposedly elected positions, and Ferdinand faced a hard time getting the amount of support that he needed in Hungary in order to ascend the throne. In the middle of this struggle, the Turks decided to make things more complicated. In September of 1529 Suleiman the Magnificent led his Turkish troops to the gates of Vienna and laid siege to the city. It was the Austrian winter that forced the Turks to abandon the siege, even though they were close to taking the city. With this defeat, Hungary was divided into three parts. Ferdinand did eventually gain power over a sizeable swath of the empire, but not as much as his ‘rights’ granted him.
Fast forward to the middle of the 17th century where we see the Habsburgs under Leopold I in a power struggle across Europe mostly because of religious differences and the empire’s intolerance to anything non-Catholic. France, concerned with the growth of Habsburg land-holdings, allies itself with the Turks in a move to hedge against Leopold gaining any more power. This move is very peculiar to me because, as it was explained in class, France at this time is a very Christian nation and the Turks are a very Islamic entity. Whereas many monarchies and governments during this time period were conducting domestic and foreign affairs with religion as the heuristic, this decision by France demonstrates that they value power-politics over religious identity. I take this as an early step to a more modern approach to politics on the world stage that culminates in the theory of realism, which states that each state is an independent actor that seeks power for itself. But I digress, back to the killing. Beller continues to explain that Hungarians were forming a movement at liberation from the Habsburgs at the same time that France was encouraging the Turks under Grand Vizier Kara Mustapha to attack Austria. And so it was that the years of 1682-1683 saw the second Turkish siege of Vienna. It was in Vienna’s time of need that Prince Eugene of Savoy made his grand entrance into Austrian history by leading the Viennese troops stationed in the woods (see day 2) to rescue the city and drive the Turks back for a second time. Prince Eugene makes more of a name for himself by defeating the Turks at Belgrade.
Aside from this hard-core history, I learned two things that were very interesting and surprising to me. The first lesson was that, as legend has it, the second defeat of the Turks was the reason for the invention of the croissant. This crescent shaped pastry was made in order to celebrate the defeat of the Turkish enemy. The second lesson that I learned was in class: evidently during this time period there was much more religious tolerance in the Ottoman than there was in the Christian lands. This was so primarily because they took to heart the scripture of the Quran which states that Muslims, Christians, and Jews are all “people of the book.” There was even a saying at the time, “a Turk is a Lutheran’s luck,” as compared to the Habsburgs who were infamous for religious intolerance at the time. When I contrast the reality then with the world today it seems as though we have gone complete 180 degrees! The western world, which is predominantly Christian, is much more tolerant than the Muslim world where infidels are cause for war and jihad. Oh, how the world turns.
After being intrigued by how little people learn throughout the centuries, it was off to the Schatzkammer (imperial treasury) in both the Hofburg and the Kaisergruft. Both of these sites house many of the Habsburg Empire’s elaborate treasures, and the Kaisergruft plays host to some of the tombs and coffins of the empire’s past rulers. Visiting these sites impressed upon me just how excessive and grandiose the Habsburgs really were. They made sure that their power was well-displayed by erecting elaborate buildings and hiring the best craftsmen of the time to produce gold crowns, scepters, and just about everything else. This becomes apparent in the Hofburg, where the only lights are on the objects so that they sparkle and attract attention only to them. Here I saw the crown of Kaiser Rudolf II that was made in 1602 (at least, that’s what I think. All of the titles were in German). This crown, as you can see, is embossed with solid gold and is made with the intention of decorating a royal head of state (pun!). The purpose of such ceremonial was to send the message to all lands and peoples that the Habsburg monarchy was not only powerful, but also permanent. In laymen’s terms, they needed to have bigger and better bling than everyone else. They even had an Imperial crib decorated with angels and eagles that was more expensive than most people’s houses! In addition to making the appearance to the world as a powerful monarchy, they wanted to display to God that they were established and worthy of blessing. In the Hofgurg there are several reliquaries, ornate containers that ostensibly hold actual pieces of saints. The idea was to decorate their faith as much as they decorated their empire, and thus gain favor with the Lord.
All of these ideas and practices fall under the paradigm of absolutism, which is the practice of consolidating all power and authority within the monarch. Although certain heads of the Catholic Church could advise the monarchs of the Hapsburgs to some effect, they basically had unilateral control of their empire. The Habsburgs also typified the absolute government because they held dynastic control over their lands, with children inheriting the reins of power. The baroque artistic/architectural style is very indicative of an absolute monarchy (although, according to Beller, it arrived in Salzburg before it made an appearance in Vienna). It places a heavy emphasis on over-the-top ornate structure with huge buildings and opulent golden decorations to display power and wealth. Also unique to the baroque style is the idea of tricking the eye by making the actual building seem to blend with the equally elaborate paintings that adorn the interior, making the observer have to look hard to tell where the building stops and the art begins.
The Habsburgs even heaped lavish amounts of pomp and circumstance upon their deceased royalty. At the Kaisergruft, many tombs can be found that belong to the Habsburg rulers of centuries past. The Habsburgs had mortuary rituals that usually included much of the pomp and circumstance of their dealings in life. The tomb that I think most exemplified this was the tomb of Kaiser Karl VI, with hues of gold and ornate carvings of humans and skeletons embossed on all of its sides. It was customary, as Beller writes, that the tombs of deceased monarchy has images of skeletons with crowns to signify that dead royalty resides in the tomb. In addition to this, the practice was to have different body parts at various churches around Vienna so that they could extend their influence as wide in death as they had in life. What I find interesting is the distinction between the tombs of Maria Theresia and her son, Kaiser Joseph I. Maria Theresia is considered the most notable female ruler of the dynasty, and one of the most influential rulers in general. She oversaw the monarchy during many moments of flux, including warfare with the Turks. Her gravesite is one of the most ornate in the whole Kaisergruft, with beautiful and haunting figures of veiled females and bodies everywhere. Joseph I, on the other hand, was known as a great pragmatist, breaking the Habsburg tradition of lavishness in favor of that which was practical (he even mandated that the empire employ re-usable coffins that had a lever which would drop the body from the bottom when the ceremony was over). His tomb is about as plain as they come, with a cross on top and no carvings whatsoever. Had I not known who was in it, I would have questioned why it was even in the museum. It was interesting to see that one of the leaders of a dynasty that so favored its opulence would turn 180 degrees from his mother and all of the rulers before him. I almost respect him for it, and wish that maybe our own government would incorporate some of this practice into its functions. We do not need a $100 ash-tray in the white-house! All-in-all, it was a good day to learn and to see what this monarchy did in death as well as in life.
Today’s blog was brought to you by the German word ‘autobahn,’ which means ‘highway.’