John W. Boyer

Some Reflections on the Problem of Austria, Germany, and Mitteleuropa

The dual assignment of this presentation was to review some of the issues facing historians of Austria as they try to situate Austrian history within the wider cultural and social realm of “Central Europe” and to present some brief reflections to my colleagues who study Germany on the possible role of Austrian history in shaping the interpretive choices they may make in the future. Since these remarks were offered in a self-consciously “German” symposium (organized with the support of the DAAD), I took it as a given that internal interpretive problems of Hapsburg and/or successor state history peculiar to those arenas would not necessarily be relevant, even though they did intrude in any event. Although these brief comments were conceived in September 1989 and presented the following month, the events of November 1989 and October 1990 have only enhanced my concerns, and subsequent revisions to this text have not changed the basic character of my remarks.

Silent War and Bitter Peace: The Revolution of 1918 in Austria

My Subject Today is the Austrian Revolution of 1918 and its aftermath, a staple subject in the general history of the empire and the republic, but one that has not seen vigorous historiographical discussion for a number of years. In a recent review of new historiography on the French Revolution, Jeremy Popkin has argued that recent neoliberal and even neo-Jacobin scholarship about that momentous event has confirmed the position of the revolution in the “genealogy of modern liberalism and democracy.” The endless fascination engendered by the French Revolution is owing to its protean nature, one that assayed the possibilities of reconciling liberty and equality and one that still inspires those who would search for a “usable liberal past.” 1 After all, it was not only a watershed of liberal ideas, if not always liberal institutions and civic practices, but it was also a testing ground for the possibility of giving practical meaning to new categories of human rights.

Religion and Political Development in Central Europe around 1900: A View from Vienna

To view the church-state problem from Vienna in 1900 is to view it from the capital of an ancient Catholic state in a multiethnic cultural arena, a world in which Catholicism strove, at least officially, to be supranational, and in which, although there was no Catholic nation, there was a preeminent and distinguished Catholic dynasty. This was a world in which large numbers of Austrians—many of them in rural areas—continued to affirm popular religious affections and loyalties throughout the century—values and practices that if not always consonant with official Catholic doctrine, at least afforded the hierarchical church and sympathetic aristocratic and bourgeois elites the ready opportunity to claim Catholicism as not only a historic and true but also a public and mass religion. At the same time, the long-term heritage of Josephinist state control of the church had powerful negative effects on active religiosity and religious identity, especially among the emergent Burgertum and urban inhabitants of the monarchy. The Concordat of 1855—coming after the failed revolution of 1848–49 and on the heels of the imposition of neoabsolutist rule—was an imprudent decision precisely because it alienated both the Josephinist state and incipient burgerlich society.

Lydia Goodwin Steinway Cochrane

It is with deep sadness that the editors inform our readership of the death of Lydia Goodwin Steinway Cochrane on January 5, 2016. A skillful and widely published translator of both Italian and French, Lydia was the person on whom the Journal relied for more than three decades to convert our article and book review manuscripts in those languages into lucid English prose. Her faithfulness to the meaning and nuances of the originals was as exemplary as the idiomatic naturalness of her English renderings. Moreover, the good cheer with which she assumed and carried out these translation projects made her a pleasure to work with. Although she was technically a freelancer, we always regarded her as a member of the Journal family. We will miss her greatly.

Charles Montgomery Gray

It is the editors’ sad duty to inform our readership of the death of Professor Charles Montgomery Gray in Chicago on April 22, 2011. Together with Professor Hanna H. Gray, Charles Gray served as the editor of The Journal of Modern History for five years, from 1966 to 1971. A leading expert in British legal and political history, Charles Gray was the author of Copyhold, Equity and the Common Law; Hugh Latimer and the Sixteenth Century; Renaissance and Reformation England, 1509–1714; and volumes 1–4 of The Writ of Prohibition: Jurisdiction in Early Modern English Law. Charles was an influential scholar; a generous, compassionate, and witty colleague; and a demanding editor. During his time at the helm of The Journal of Modern History, the Journal maintained its high standards, consistently publishing manuscripts of outstanding quality in early modern and modern European history; it also made considerable progress in sustaining a robust record of subscriptions and sales. Together with the scholarly community at large, we mourn the passing of our friend and colleague, Charles Gray.