Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 9th, 2013, 08:54 AM   #1

MarshallBudyonny's Avatar
EUtopian
 
Joined: Apr 2013
From: New Verulamium
Posts: 7,296
Blog Entries: 3
Why did Austria not seek a colonial empire?


The Austrian army in the 18th century was mighty and it's ships had access to the mediterranean so the Austrians could have landed in Africa. Most major powers sought colonies in the Americas or Africa, but not Austria. My question is why not? They had the men and the means to achieve this so why didn't they?
MarshallBudyonny is offline  
Remove Ads
Old June 9th, 2013, 09:01 AM   #2

Ancientgeezer's Avatar
Revisionist
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: The Dustbin, formerly, Garden of England
Posts: 8,669

Austria WAS a colonial Empire. It just wasn't outside of Europe.
Ancientgeezer is offline  
Old June 9th, 2013, 09:07 AM   #3

MarshallBudyonny's Avatar
EUtopian
 
Joined: Apr 2013
From: New Verulamium
Posts: 7,296
Blog Entries: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancientgeezer View Post
Austria WAS a colonial Empire. It just wasn't outside of Europe.
No I meant, why didn't it seek a colonial empire outside of Europe. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough.
MarshallBudyonny is offline  
Old June 9th, 2013, 09:21 AM   #4

Underlankers's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 6,724

Technically Austria couldn't seek anything in the 18th Century because Austria didn't exist. What we call Austria was a hasty concoction to let the Habsburgs keep the Imperial title after Napoleon abolished the HRE. The reason it couldn't seek an extra-European empire is that it had more problems staying intact to the point where simply doing that was a major feat. It didn't have the internal stability to colonize outside of Europe.
Underlankers is offline  
Old June 9th, 2013, 09:49 AM   #5

funakison's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 5,328
Blog Entries: 1

In the 18th and 19th Century both Russia and Austria had more important things to worry about than gaining an overseas empire. Their ambitions for further territorial expansion were directed more towards their immediate neighbours rather than in far away lands. The formation and domination of a confederation of German states was top of the Austrian agenda and limited naval acess to the atlantic was doubtless another consideration.
funakison is offline  
Old June 9th, 2013, 09:54 AM   #6
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: Las Cruces, NM
Posts: 743

Quote:
Originally Posted by Underlankers View Post
Technically Austria couldn't seek anything in the 18th Century because Austria didn't exist. What we call Austria was a hasty concoction to let the Habsburgs keep the Imperial title after Napoleon abolished the HRE. The reason it couldn't seek an extra-European empire is that it had more problems staying intact to the point where simply doing that was a major feat. It didn't have the internal stability to colonize outside of Europe.
Well stated.
Strontium90 is offline  
Old June 9th, 2013, 10:30 AM   #7

Grimald's Avatar
Civilized Barbarian
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Hercynian Forest
Posts: 5,861

Quote:
Originally Posted by Underlankers View Post
Technically Austria couldn't seek anything in the 18th Century because Austria didn't exist. What we call Austria was a hasty concoction to let the Habsburgs keep the Imperial title after Napoleon abolished the HRE. The reason it couldn't seek an extra-European empire is that it had more problems staying intact to the point where simply doing that was a major feat. It didn't have the internal stability to colonize outside of Europe.
That's a new one - so Austria didn't exist in the 18th century? This shows a thinking that is based on the Western European model of nationalism and state organization. Well, things in Central Europe were different.

Did you ever hear of the Pragmatic Sanction of 1713? Of course we can discuss how we would like to call the state that was ruled by the Habsburgs, and maybe Austria is not even the best name. However, the state existed, and showed a tendency towards centralization during the whole of the 18th century.
Grimald is offline  
Old June 9th, 2013, 10:41 AM   #8
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: Las Cruces, NM
Posts: 743

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimald View Post
That's a new one - so Austria didn't exist in the 18th century? This shows a thinking that is based on the Western European model of nationalism and state organization. Well, things in Central Europe were different.

Did you ever hear of the Pragmatic Sanction of 1713? Of course we can discuss how we would like to call the state that was ruled by the Habsburgs, and maybe Austria is not even the best name. However, the state existed, and showed a tendency towards centralization during the whole of the 18th century.
That's not the point. Underlankers was 100% right that Austria had it's hands full in Europe.
Strontium90 is offline  
Old June 9th, 2013, 10:58 AM   #9

Kotromanic's Avatar
McCartneynite-Lennonist
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Iowa USA
Posts: 3,988
Blog Entries: 1

100% right?

More like 13% right, since 13 out of 100 years of the century in question was the relation of Hapsburgs to HRE as UL represented?
Kotromanic is offline  
Old June 9th, 2013, 10:59 AM   #10

Grimald's Avatar
Civilized Barbarian
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Hercynian Forest
Posts: 5,861

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strontium90 View Post
That's not the point. Underlankers was 100% right that Austria had it's hands full in Europe.
And I didn't object to this observation, but to the explicit assertion that Austria didn't exist in the 18th century. Of course, Austria had many problems during the 18th century, e.g. other powers not accepting the succession to the throne, which led to the war of the same name. Austria also had to accept a new rival power that annexed one of its richest provinces.

Indeed, the countries that colonized had much more access to the sea, and were more homogenous internally. Austria only had a very small access to the Mediterranean, and not to the really open sea (e.g. the Atlantic), and it did not have a tradition of seafaring. The main point is probably that Austria, like the Holy Roman Empire, was in a middle position that required defense on multiple land borders. The contrast to countries like Britain and Spain with their advantageous geographic isolation is obvious.

Is it a bad thing that not all countries followed the Western European tradition of exploiting and enslaving whole continents...?
Grimald is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
austria, colonial, empire, seek



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Italian colonial empire Romanianboy2013 General History 4 June 29th, 2014 10:21 PM
Austrian Empire and Austria-Hungary books? mighty bear History Book Reviews 13 May 21st, 2013 12:07 PM
Austria: little state, great Empire AlpinLuke European History 35 May 20th, 2012 09:27 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.