CAPMUN

2024

The Constitutional Diet of 1911: The

Second Austro-Hungarian Compromise
March 22 to March 24, 2024
Capital Model United Nations
 Table of Contents
Committee Director Introduction Letters................................3

Introduction............................................................................5
History of Austria-Hungary...............................................5
A new
1910.................................................................................7

Agenda Item 1: The Structure of the Empire.........................8

How should shared institutions be
structured?.......................................................................8
What should the Empire’s subdivisions be?....................9

Agenda Item 2: Rights in the Empire...................................10

Voting rights...................................................................10
Language Education Rights ..........................................11
Language Service rights................................................13

Current Climate....................................................................14

Equity in Committee.............................................................14

Final Remarks......................................................................16

Regional Profiles..................................................................17

Helpful
Resources...........................................................................24

2
 Letter from your committee directors
Hello everyone!
My name is Daniel Vorotyntsev, and together with my very
dear friend Darwin Pitts, I'm one of the Co-directors for the
Austria-Hungary Committee for CAPMUN 2024! Over the
weekend, I'll be filling the role of editor-in-chief (Crisis director).
I'm a third year philosophy student, and I've been doing model
UN ever since my first year of university. Since then, I've been
a delegate, a VP-training (alongside Darwin!), and now a
Committee Director.

Darwin and I first conceived of this committee one year ago in

a hotel lobby in Montreal, and have been working ever since at
bringing it to life. By happy luck, it perfectly reflected this year's
CAPMUN theme. The making of a new constitution, whether for an old or a new state, is
a milestone that will guide the country for decades to come. But it comes about not
through a great leader's flash of inspiration, or a splendid decree from on high; it comes
about through the long hard work of individuals that campaign, argue, protest, publish,
and vote on each clause and foundational principle. It's the sum of those moments that
make a milestone constitution, and I hope that you will get to experience that process
during this committee.

It's also worth noting that while the Austro-Hungarian Empire seems an ancient state from
another era, the questions it faces in this committee are still very much with us in today’s
Canadian politics. Questions about national language and multicultural identities, about
government power and local representation, about unifying symbols from the past and
bold strides into the future. As you debate during the weekend, I encourage you to reflect
about what your experiences in modern times can help you bring to the committee set
long ago, and what your time in committee can teach you about the world of today. I wish
you all a wonderful time at CAPMUN 2024!

All the very best,

Daniel Vorotyntsev

3
 Hello there!
My name is Darwin Pitts, and alongside my good friend and
colleague Daniel Vorotyntsev, I am one of your co-directors
for this exciting committee! Over the weekend of CAPMUN
2024, I will be playing the role of the President of the
Convention (effectively, the Chair). I am a fourth-year
student in history and philosophy, and I’ve been active in
Model UN ever since my last year in high school. During
that time, I’ve attended CAPMUN as a delegate, chair, and
crisis staff, and last year I was the Committee Director for
Moon Madness. I have also worked as VP Training for the
uOttawa Model United Nations Association (uOMUNA) for
two years, planning and running numerous in-house
committees.

Those committees (many of which I had the good fortune to plan together with Daniel)
covered a wide range of themes and topics, from modern-day politics to science fiction
and beyond. But my favourites have always been historical and alternate history
committees: the chance to dive into the past, put yourself in the shoes of a real
character, and take history in a new direction has always been exciting for me. I hope
that this committee affords you the same excitement, and the opportunity to look at
important questions from a new perspective.

I have been fascinated with Austria-Hungary and the Habsburgs for a long time: with how
much it evolved during its existence as a country, and what unique potential it had before
it was abruptly shattered in the First World War. Set at a crucial moment in an alternate
history that diverges just a few years before that war, this committee will give you the
chance to explore what Austria-Hungary might have become. You will get to take up the
role of politicians, intellectuals, writers, and activists, and imagine how they might have
shaped the Habsburg state given the opportunity. Through your debate and discussions
this weekend, I encourage you to use your imagination—to transport yourself to a
different time and place, explore its possibilities, and look at big issues with fresh eyes.

With all of that in mind, I am very much looking forward to welcoming you all to
participate in this committee, which I hope will give you an enriching and exciting
experience to remember for a lifetime!

Best wishes and good luck,

Darwin Pitts

4
 INTRODUCTION
“Kaiser ruft Reichstag auf!” “Kaiser volá Reichstag!“
“Císař vyhlašuje císařský sněm!” “Kaiser felhívja a
Reichstagot!” “Kaiser zove Reichstag!” “Cesarz
wzywa Reichstagu!” “Kaiser sună la Reichstag!”
“Кайзер скликає Рейхстаг!”

Every headline in the Austro-Hungarian Empire reads: “Emperor calls for an Imperial Diet!” The
year is 1911, and the Emperor Franz Joseph has died. Franz Ferdinand, his newly crowned heir,
sees that the new century promises great challenges for his increasingly moribund Empire. Rising
nationalism, increased literacy, economic challenges, and growing calls for democracy and
effective government threaten to tear apart the Empire, and with it the Habsburg crown. In
response, Franz Ferdinand calls a Diet made up of delegates representing every corner of the
Empire to create a new constitution, able to deal with these challenges and usher in a new age for
the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

In this alternate-history Specialized Committee, delegates will represent various politicians and
advocates from across Austria-Hungary as they work to renegotiate the basic structure of the
Habsburg state. Delegates will draft the core elements of a new constitution, all while having to
grapple with the consequences of their decisions and the ever-shifting demands of the people, the
Hungarian Parliament, and Emperor Franz Ferdinand himself.

The History of Austria-Hungary

A map of Austria-Hungary, with the Empire of Austria (aka Cisleithania) in
red, the Kingdom of Hungary (aka Transleithania) in green, and the
Condominium of Bosnia-Herzegovina (jointly administered by both) coloured
in blue.
The state of Austria-Hungary, for all its existence, was
one of the most peculiar polities of Europe. While the
Habsburg family had controlled territory in the lands of
Austria-Hungary since the middle ages, the history of
the state itself begins in 1867. In that year, the lands of
the Habsburg house were reorganised from a unified
empire to a Dual Monarchy—a union of two co-equal
kingdoms sharing a single monarch and some key
institutions.

The Empire of Austria retained the lands called Cisleithania (coloured in red), while the Kingdom
of Hungary controlled the lands of Transleithania (coloured in green). Each kingdom was given
and continues to have its own legislature, its own judiciary, and its own citizenship, with
the only shared institutions between the two kingdoms being a combined military, a
minister for foreign affairs and, most importantly, a monarch. This last point means the
Emperor is both the Emperor of Austria and the King of Hungary. From this derives the term
“Imperial and Royal”, making reference to both the Austrian and Hungarian parts of the state.
5
The relationship between the Austrian and Hungarian parts of the empire has been far from
smooth. A failed revolution in Hungary in 1848 saw the Kingdom occupied by Austria, and ruled
unilaterally from the Austrian capital of Vienna. The Compromise of 1867 came about as a result
of numerous political and economic struggles in Austria, which forced the Empire to grant
concessions to the Hungarians in exchange for support.

The most important of these

concessions was a joining of
legislative authority, meaning that
changes to the Empire as a
whole could only be undertaken
with the support of both the
Austrian and Hungarian halves.
Despite the Union of ‘67, the two
Kingdoms remain culturally and
economically distinct, with Austria
being more industrialised and
more open to progressive ideas,
while Hungary’s population The old Emperor, Franz Joseph, in discussion with István Tisza, a prominent
Hungarian politician. The relationship between Hungary and the Austrian
remains poorer and its legislature
Habsburg monarchy has always been a complicated one.
more conservative.

The most important tension in the Dual Monarchy, however, comes from its many national
minorities. For its entire history, Austria-Hungary has comprised significant numbers of diverse
people, all of which have their own culture, language, and national interests: Czechs, Italians,
Croats, Poles and Romanians, for example, are just some of the many peoples who live under the
Dual Monarchy. During the 19th century, each group united around a shared language, and they
became increasingly conscious of their distinct nationalities. They began agitating for recognition
and national rights, and these calls grew ever stronger as more and more people became
educated and engaged in politics.

While Austria has generally been

more receptive to the demands of
minorities, most notably in allowing
various minority language schools,
Hungary has pursued a more
assimilationist policy called
Magyarization (from Magyar, the
name Hungarians use for
themselves) which explicitly banned
minority language schools and
sought to form a unified Magyar
nation.
A map of the distribution of ethnicities in Austria-
Hungary, showing where each ethnolinguistic group
makes up a majority.
6
1848
Major revolutions in the Austrian Empire and failed War of Hungarian
Independence

1861
A portrait of
His Imperial
and Royal
Austrian Parliament established in the February Patent Apostolic
Majesty,

1867
Franz
Ferdinand.
Austria-Hungary formed in the Ausgleich (Compromise)

1878
Austria-Hungary occupies the Ottoman province of
Bosnia-Herzegovina (formally annexed in 1908)

1907
Universal male suffrage passed in Cisleithania

1910
Emperor Franz Joseph dies (this is where the committee diverges from
history)

1911
The Constitutional Diet (Convention) begins

A New 1910
This committee’s timeline diverges from history in 1910 with the death of Franz
Joseph, reigning Emperor since 1848. Upon his death, the crown passed to Franz
Ferdinand, the late monarch’s nephew and heir. Conscious of the growing tensions
within his Empire and the need to adapt to changing times, Franz Ferdinand called
an Imperial Constitutional Diet in 1911 to restructure and renew the Empire. Made up
of elected and appointed delegates from all corners of the Empire, the Diet now
convenes in Vienna to once again decide the fate of Austria-Hungary. In decades
past, moments like this one decided the future of the Empire; each of these
milestones evolved the Habsburg domain, one resolution at a time, to the form it has
today. Your work in this committee shall continue this legacy.

7
7
 Franz Ferdinand’s Agenda
In calling the Diet, the Emperor laid out a clear agenda; two major themes must be addressed,
each comprising several specific questions. The Agenda Items must be tackled in order, since
answers to prior questions will inform later questions in crucial ways. It’s also important to note
that, as per the Compromise of 1867, a majority of both Cisleithanian and Transleithian
delegates must agree to any resolution. Although the Emperor has set the agenda, delegates
need to be cognisant of other questions that might be raised by the press and the people over the
course of the summit. In this new century, the will of the people is beginning to matter more than
ever before…

Item 1. The Structure of the Empire

How should shared institutions be structured? The first fundamental decision that must be
made is about the number and nature of the shared institutions of the Empire. It is these
institutions that make for a single united country, so the decisions made here will determine the
character of the new Empire, regardless of territorial divisions. Delegates must pick between
one of the three options presented below. Should the Habsburg Monarchy be a..

Real Union – This is the status quo option, as Austria and Hungary are already in a Real
Union. This means that the only shared institutions are the department of foreign affairs, the
military, a joint financial policy, and the monarchy. If delegates decide to stick with this option,
they may, during the next point of the agenda, choose to add other constituent members to
the Real Union—however, the relation between those members will remain at arms length.
Federal State – This would involve much broader shared institutions, such as a shared
legislature and single head of government. The constituent parts of the Empire (to be
decided during the next point of the agenda) will retain all authority not explicitly given to the
Federal government, and will each be co-equal states of the federation. An example of a
Federal State is the United States of America.
Unitary State – This would be the most radical option. It would involve a very strong central
government, which has ultimate authority on all issues facing the country. While subdivisions
may exist, all are ultimately subordinate to the Unitary government. France is an example of
a Unitary State.

Real Union Federal Unitary

Shared Monarch? YES YES YES

Shared Prime Minister & Cabinet? NO YES YES

Shared legislature? NO YES YES

Legislature for each subdivision? YES YES NO

Subdivisions subordinate to central government? NO NO YES 8

 Item 1, continued:
What should the Empire’s subdivisions be?
After deciding on the structure of the government, the next question to tackle will be
what subdivisions should be codified in the constitution. Although
municipalities, counties, parishes etc. will still be around, constitutionally recognised
subdivisions will have a much more important and foundational status. They will have
significant responsibilities and autonomy in governance, and will also shape how the
Empire is viewed by its citizens. Smaller subdivisions are more representative and
responsive, but risk fragmenting the Empire. Delegates are limited to working with
the regions of the Empire laid out in the Regional Profiles. The options
presented below are potential solutions that are popularly discussed, although
delegates are free to modify them as they see fit.

Dual Monarchy – This is the status quo, as there are

only two constitutionally recognised subdivisions:
Cisleithania and Transleithania, with Bosnia shared
between the two.

Triple Monarchy – A proposal to create a third South

Slavic kingdom, incorporating lands in Croatia, Dalmatia,
Bosnia, and possibly Slovenia. Delegates may also
consider adding North Slavic lands in Czechia and
Galicia to the Third Kingdom, or creating an entirely new
North Slavic kingdom.

The Five Crownlands – This is a solution to make several

traditional kingdoms constitutionally recognised
subdivisions. This solution is attractive in that it avoids
putting nationalist ideas directly into the constitution, basing
itself instead on traditions of crown authority. The full set of
five would be Austria, Bohemia, Galicia, Hungary and
Croatia.

United States of Greater Austria – This is a proposal

to create a large number of conditionally recognized
states to represent all the many ethnic groups of the
empire. The exact boundaries will have to be
determined, but this is certainly the maximalist option
when it comes to subdivisions.
9
 Agenda Item 2: Rights in the Empire
The next question to decide is what rights should be guaranteed by the constitution, and so
enforced across the entire country. While the equal dignified status of citizens has been a core
principle (at least on paper) of the Empire for decades, the actual rights enjoyed by citizens
continue to vary across regions and localities. A unified declaration of rights would do much to
unify the empire. Any rights not specified in the Constitution will be left to the discretion of
local governments; it does not necessarily mean that citizens will be denied the right. This
question is especially pressing for Federal or Unitary governments, since citizens expect a
stronger and more comprehensive central authority.

A protest for universal suffrage in Prague, 1905.

Voting rights
The question of suffrage has rocked Europe for decades, and is still at
the forefront of Austro-Hungarian political consciousness. The Empire is
currently divided in terms of suffrage rights; all men have had the right to
vote in Cisleithania since 1907, but Transleithania still maintains
minimum property requirements in order to be allowed to vote. The
Hungarian Parliament has however had a standing promise since 1906 to
implement universal suffrage, although its sincerity is widely doubted
due to numerous delays. Any voting rights enshrined in the constitution
must specify two things:

1. The Franchise – In a word, who gets the vote. Several options are available, although
any choice made would represent a change for some citizens of the Empire. It’s
important to note that while today we firmly see suffrage as universal, a limited or
restricted suffrage was seen as reasonable and even self-evident for much of history,
including in Austria-Hungary.
a. The most conservative option is a census franchise, which ties the right and/or
weight of the ballot to some property requirement – this would represent a
regression in Cisleithania, and is liable to prove unpopular.
b. A universal male franchise would see every man being given the vote. This
would disrupt the long-standing status quo in Hungary, where voting is limited to a
small set of Hungarian aristocrats.
c. Women’s suffrage is seen as radical by most Austro-Hungarians, but a
movement to promote it does exist in the Empire. While it can be combined with a
census franchise, the ideal is to see all men and women having an equal vote.

10
 2. Scope of Franchise – In what elections is the above franchise guaranteed? The norm
at this period is that different elections (municipal, regional, national) all have different
franchises and rules, so a patchwork of voting rights is seen as normal. It’s important to
note that the larger the scope of the franchise, the more resources will be required to
enforce and guarantee these rights.
a. Shared institutions only – The voting franchise above would apply only to
elections for shared institutions. This would mean that, for example, all men
across the Empire could cast a vote for the Imperial Congress, but only wealthy
landlords would vote for the Hungarian parliament
b. Shared institutions and subdivisions – This would expand the franchise to
the legislatures of the constitutionally recognised subdivisions, but not to more
local and traditional elections such as those for mayors or city councillors
c. Universal guarantee – The franchise would be guaranteed in all elections in all
parts of the Empire. Although on one hand, some communities will see this as an
encroachment on their traditional governance and it will require significant
resources to enforce, it will also help do much to strengthen shared citizenship
and civic duty.

The Austrian Parliament Building in Vienna, where the

Constitutional Diet will meet to decide the future of the Dual
Monarchy.

Language Education Rights

Perhaps the most recurring point of contention in Austria-Hungary is the question of
language. The language an individual speaks at home, uses in their community and teaches
to their children (termed their “mother-tongue” or first language) is seen to define their
nationality, and the development and fostering of a language is seen as essential to building
a nation. Over the past century, national movements have built themselves around shared
languages, and increasing literacy in local languages has pushed more and more people to
identify with their nation, rather than the Empire or the Habsburg dynasty. The question of
language education is so crucial because within it is implied the question of how
multinational the Empire should be, and who those constituent nations are.
11
For many decades, the question of what languages are taught in schools has been a
serious political controversy. A dispute over whether to open a Slovenian school in the
small town of Celje, for example, led to a breakdown of government in the Austrian
parliament – Slovenes and their allies demanded that linguistic rights be respected,
while Germans rallied to preserve their cultural influence. In Hungary, the policy of
Magyarization has actively pushed for the teaching of Hungarian at the expense of other
languages, going so
far as to demand that
teachers swear an
oath to ensure their
pupils know
Hungarian. The
question of
language rights
remains a fraught
problem.

The big question in terms of language education rights has to do with their scope:

Who has a right to a mother-tongue education, and where?

1. Official language education only – This option is one in which only the official
language(s) may be taught in the Empire’s schools. The list of official languages is
at the delegates’ discretion, and will surely depend upon the chosen regional
structure of the Empire. In a sufficiently federated Empire, this option may
guarantee enough language rights to be acceptable to the majority of citizens.
2. Recognized minority language education – This option would see significant
linguistic minorities be given a right to teach their language within their
communities or regions, but not across the empire more broadly. It would not
obligate schools teaching languages from the other end of the empire, but it would
mean that a family can only send their children to a mother-tongue institution if
they live in designated areas. Delegates need not provide a list and scope for
minority languages, as this will be determined by local authorities.
3. Individual right to mother-language education – This option would have every
Austro-Hungarian citizen be guaranteed an education in their mother tongue
regardless of where they live in the Empire. Although a simple solution to the
language right problem, it may prove too costly to implement.

12
 Language Service Rights
Closely related to the right to language education is the right to language service. This
right guarantees that a citizen will be able to interact with authority, whether
bureaucratic, legal, or military, in the language of their choice. Just like the right to
language education, this is a fraught issue – the Badeni ordinance, requiring some
bureaucrats in Bohemia to speak both Czech and German, led to riotous mobs and
the resignation of its namesake minister, plus a decade of gridlock in parliament.

The question of language service rights has two dimensions. From a practical point of
view, every guaranteed service language requires the state to train and employ more
workers capable of speaking the language in question. From a more fundamental
point of view, the languages chosen will also have the effect of shaping the national
identity of the Empire. Most nationalist movements are driven by the desire to secure
bureaucratic positions for their people, and the easiest way to do this is through
guaranteed service languages. On the other hand, the Empire requires a unifying
force, and a shared language of service would be one of the strongest.

The questions to consider for guaranteeing service language rights have to do with
scope of rights, and then the specific languages in question:
1. Scope of service – Are language service rights guaranteed only when interacting
with the shared institutions, or will the subdivisions or even municipalities of the
Empire also have to guarantee service?
2. Languages of service – In determining the guaranteed service languages, the
Empire could either have a central list of official languages, or allow subdivisions
to each have their own list of official languages. In any case, the question of which
languages the shared services would use will still have to be settled.

The streets of Vienna around the

turn of the century.

13
 Current Climate
The Constitutional Diet is taking place in a very dynamic political climate. Emperor Franz
Ferdinand has great vision for the Empire and especially the monarchy, and hopes to
secure both for the century to come. Believing first and foremost in the military and the
monarchy’s key place in the Empire, he is nonetheless cognizant that serious reforms must
be undertaken for the survival of the State. One area of significant interest to the Emperor
is Hungary – ever since the Hungarian parliament was forcibly (but briefly) dismissed in
1906 for reticence, Franz Ferdinand has sought to limit the domination of the Magyar upper
class. A strengthening of democracy and national consciousness might be just the way to
accomplish this task. On the other hand, the Habsburg monarchy lost much due to Italian
nationalism in the past, and fighting against destructive national movements must be a first
priority.

The Hungarian Parliament Building in Budapest in 1911.

The Hungarian Parliament, representing the Magyar aristocracy of Transleithania, is
concerned first and foremost with securing its rightful place within the new constitution.
They consider Hungary to be the moral and political equal to Austria, and will fight tooth
and nail to avoid subordination to Austria. All the while, the Hungarian aristocracy is
divided between the interests of the gentry (the old-blood Magyar aristocracy) and the
magnates. The gentry’s economic and social position have become closely tied to
bureaucratic positions provided by the Dual Monarchy. They are happy to trade Hungarian
independence in foreign policy and military affairs for privileges at home, most notably the
guarantee of rights and powers for the Magyar upper classes of Hungary. In opposition to
them are the magnates, landowners whose wealth and power depends on agricultural
revenue. They foster a more assertive Hungarian nationalism, but always with the goal of
ensuring economic concessions from the Cisleithanian half of the Empire.

Equity in Committee
This committee takes place in a time where women and other minorities were expereincing
extreme disenfranchisement. While delegates will be representing characters who may have
strong and often radical opinions on women’s right to vote and ethnic minorities, these views are
not the aim of committee. We are expecting delegates to perform a higher-level of debate than
that of the turn of the century, and so characters with radical views should choose their words
carefully so as not to push any harmful rhetoric in committee. If you have questions about the
content of your speeches, ask a member of staff 14
Alongside these major players, several political movements vie for public opinion, each with its
own vision for what Austria-Hungary should become.

Christian Socials
The oldest important political party, the Christian Socials, represent the “small folk”
of the empire – peasants, farmers, shopkeepers, and small artisans. They represent
the ethos of conservatism, rejecting significant change in whichever form it appears;
liberalism, Marxism, nationalism, and capitalism are all seen as threats to the Empire.
Closely tied to a Catholic, clerical identity, the Christian Socials are widely seen as
engaging in demagoguery to appeal to the less educated and connected.

Social Democratic Party

The Social Democratic Party, founded in 1899, advocates for a socialist country.
Its membership is concentrated in Austria and Bohemia, and is connected to the
broader socialist Internationale. Despite their rhetoric, the party is less radical than it
might appear. They are not revolutionary, and they stand against nationalist
independence movements as this would weaken the shared market, seen as very
important for the working class. The main injustice in the Empire, in the eyes of the
Social Democrats, is not the monarchy but the privileged position and Magyarization
of Hungary. Their opponents accuse them of chauvinism, favouring Austrian
industrial workers at the expense of other peoples and labourers. Internal national
tensions also exist within the party between its German and Czech members.

The Liberal Vision

The idea of Liberalism is now fairly old, having come to prominence in the
revolutions of 1848. It calls for constitutional parliamentarism, a decline in the role of
the monarch, and self-determination for many (but not all) national groups. Many of
the rising middle-class intellectuals across all the Empire’s nations identify with the
Liberal vision, although not necessarily with all its practices. And while many liberal
policies are in place, especially in Cisleithania, Austria-Hungary is liberal in
appearance only. The late Emperor Franz Joseph had in recent times exercised more
and more direct rule, motivated by a lengthy string of dysfunctional parliaments and a
dissatisfaction at the work of democratic government. True democratic efforts are
often stifled by “rotten boroughs” with corrupt elections and unfair seat distribution,
while many minorities, especially in Hungary, have no right to language education or
national representation. The largest obstacle in the way of liberalism is the
monarchy’s outsized influence, but no serious opposition to it exists; the conventional
wisdom is that the monarchy is the heart of the Empire, and is essential to its survival.

15
 Nationalists
The final force in Austro-Hungarian politics is perhaps the strongest, but the least
unified – nationalists from all corners of the Empire have been shaping politics for
decades. Coalitions of different national groups have long been the primary players in
Cisleithania’s politics, and national questions have consistently been the most
divisive. While most nationalist movements seek to curb the dominance of German
and Hungarian language and culture, most rely on the Empire to bring resources,
legitimacy, and protection from other bellicose nations. Of course, German and
Hungarian nationalism plays an outsized role as well; these nationalists seek to
guarantee the primacy of their culture in the Empire, but are willing to make
concessions for the sake of their heartlands. The Whitsuntide program, for example,
adopted by German nationalists in 1899, calls for increased autonomy for Galicia and
Dalmatia while retaining German as a “language of convenience”.

Demonstration by university students in

Transylvania calling for greater rights for
the Romanian population living under
Hungarian rule.

Final Remarks
As the Imperial Diet gathers in the splendid Parliament of Vienna, all the Empire is abuzz with
hope and speculation. Newspapers print profiles of every delegate for a voracious public, with
coffee houses and taverns from Salzburg to Chernivsti alive with political discussion. Major
newspapers of all languages and political persuasions have sent correspondents to Vienna and
everyone, from Galician peasants gathered listening to the foreman read the paper, to the Magyar
noble browsing the news after breakfast, follows the Diet with bated breath. All have different
hopes; some hope for freedom and equality, some for power and influence, others for stability and
prosperity. The decisions made here will shape the destiny of 51 million people, and those people
will have more of a hand in their destiny than ever before – while Liberals and Socialists are hopeful
that the mobilisation of the masses will lead to democracy and new prosperity, many are not so
confident. The new nationalist movements, gaining strength by the day, threaten to tear apart the
Empire at its ethnic and cultural seams. The past hundred years of politics have proven that the
voice of a united people can shake the foundations of Kings and Emperors, but only time will tell if it
will bring rubble or renewal.

16
 Regional Profiles

1 - Austria proper:

Administrative
Cisleithania
Division

Population 9 million

Majority Culture 90+% German

Significant
Italians in Tyrol
Minorities

Major Cities Vienna, Salzburg

Austria is truly the heart of the Empire, containing its capital, a large part of its industry,
and many citizens. While it is among the more liberal parts of the Dual Monarchy, the
German majority has in the past reacted aggressively to attempts to curb their cultural
dominance in other parts of the Empire. Appeasing Austria proper is an essential
element of any successful constitution.

17
 2 - Bohemia:

Administrative
Cisleithania
Division

Population 6 million

Majority Culture 70% Czech

Significant 30% German,

Minorities Poles in Silesia

Major Cities Prague, Brno

Bohemia has a rich tradition as an independent kingdom, and the Czechs are the closest
Imperial minority to achieving meaningful autonomy, or even independence. Conflicts
between a Czech identity, favoured by the local intelligentsia, and a German identity
pushed for by the influential German minority and especially the German establishment
outside of Bohemia have been one of the major dynamics in Cisleithanian politics.

3 - Slovenia/Carniola-Styria:

Administrative
Cisleithania
Division

Population 1.2 million

Majority Culture 90+% Slovenian

Although the Slovenes have a clear land to

Significant Italians in and call their own, a later start to nation-building
Minorities around Triest
has meant Slovenian national identity and
institutions are less developed than in other
Laibach (Slovenian
parts of the Empire. The Slovenes also see
Major Cities Ljubljana), Triest
(Italian Trieste)
Italian national ambitions, and aggressive
German cultural expansion, as serious
threats to their identity. Intellectuals in the
region therefore tend to ally themselves with
the Habsburg state, which serves as a
benefactor and protector.
18
 Administrative
Cisleithania
Division 4 - West Galicia:

Population 3.7 million

Majority Culture 80+% Polish

Significant
Ukrainians
Minorities

Major Cities Krakow

Western Galicia is predominantly Polish, although a major class divide between rich
landowners and exceptionally poor farmers is a major source of tension in the region.
Adding to the division, the Ukrainian minority is almost exclusively part of the poor
peasant class. This situation has led to several bloody bouts of sectarian violence in the
past, and major resentments to this day. Elections in Galicia are notoriously corrupt in
favour of the landed Polish nobility, at the expense of the lower class.

5 - East Galicia:

Administrative
Cisleithania
Division

Population 3.3 million

Although mostly inhabited by Ukrainians, the
economic and power structures of East
Majority Culture 80+% Ukrainian Galicia are similar to those found in the
Western half. A severe inequality of wealth
Poles, making up and power characterizes the region. In
Significant
majority in major
Minorities addition, the Polish minority of the region
cities
actually makes up the majority of urban
residents, adding a urban-rural divide on top
Lemberg of the cultural one. A recent blossoming of
(Ukrainian Lviv, Ukrainian nationalist sentiment, as well as
Major Cities
Polish Lwow),
more effective political representation, has
Stanislav
seen all of Galicia become more assertive in
the Austrian parliament in recent years.
19
 6 - Bukovina:

Administrative
Cisleithania
Division

Population 0.75 million

Majority 40% Ukrainian, A region with historical pedigree, Bukovina is

Culture 35% Romanian
inhabited by a mix of ethnic groups. The north of
the region is primarily inhabited by Ukrainians
Significant connected to the cultural centres in Galicia,
20% German
Minorities
while the south is inhabited by Romanians with
cultural ties to the neighbouring kingdom. Also
Major Cities Chernivtsi present are significant numbers of Germans
who tend to hold high social positions, but often
identify with Bukovina instead of Vienna.

7 - Dalmatia:

Administrative
Cisleithania
Division

Population 0.85 million

Majority 90%+ Croats

Culture and Serbs A Cisleithanian possession cut off from the rest
of the Austrian crown, Dalmatia remains in a
Significant peculiar situation. Although very culturally close
Italians
Minorities to Croatia, the Dalmatians are reluctant to fall
under repressive Hungarian administration and
Major Cities Split have been unenthusiastic about any prospect of
uniting with their north-western neighbour. On
the other hand, the South Slav movement more
broadly is vocal about its desire to unify
Dalmatia with the wider south Slav lands.

20
 Administrative 8 - Hungary proper:
Transleithania
Division

Population 4 million

Majority 80%
Culture Hungarian

Significant
15% German
Minorities

Budapest,
Major Cities
Szeged

The heartland of Transleithania, Hungarian society is divided between the gentry serving in
the Imperial bureaucracy, the Magnates controlling large profitable tracts of land
throughout the region, and poor Hungarian peasants largely shut out from political affairs.
The influence of Hungary proper is felt throughout Transleithania due to the Magyars’ hold
on the administration of the kingdom.

9 - Transylvania:

Administrative
Transleithania
Division

Population 2.6 million

Majority Culture 55% Romanian

A region with contested identity, the
majority of Transylvania’s inhabitants
Significant 35%
are Romanian, although significant
Minorities Hungarian
groups of Hungarians also live within the
region. Following the Compromise of
Major Cities Cluj
1867, the region has seen some
economic growth, although it remains
relatively poor and its Romanian citizens
remain marginalised by Magyarization.
21
 Administrative
Division
Transleithania 10 - Croatia:

Population 2.6 million

Majority Culture 60% Croatian

Significant
25% Serbian
Minorities

Major Cities Zagreb

The most politically autonomous region of Transleithania, Croatian identity has oscillated
between ideas of South Slav confederation and uniquely Croatian nationalism. The
Hungarian constitutional troubles in 1906 led to severe repression of Croatian nationalists,
far out of proportion to the demands they made. This has led to serious resentment of
Magyar dominance, and any sort of South Slavic entity created in the Empire will have
Croatia at its heart.

11 - Slovakia:

Administrative
Transleithania
Division

Population 1.8 million

Majority Culture 80+% Slovak

As part of Transleithania, Slovakia has

Significant had a much harder time developing a
Hungarians
Minorities national consciousness due to
Magyarization and other repression
Pressburg against minority nations. Slovak identity
Major Cities (Slovak
and nationalism has often been tied to
Bratislava)
that of the Czechs, and it remains to be
seen whether the two groups will seek an
alliance during the Diet.

22
 12 - Banat:

Administrative
Transleithania
Division

Population 2 million

Majority Culture 35% Romanian

A region at the crossroads of several cultures
25% Hungarian, and countries, Banat is inhabited by a diverse
Significant
20% German, mix of Romanians, Hungarians, Germans,
Minorities
Serbians
and Serbians. While cross-cultural relations
remain calm, the question of where Banat
Major Cities Timișoara should fit in might prove to be a contentious
issue.

13 - Transcarpathia:

Administrative
Transleithania
Division

Population 0.5 million

Majority Culture 70% Ukrainian

Significant
Minorities

Major Cities Uzhhorod

Among the least populated regions of the Empire, Transcarpathia is mostly inhabited by
disparate communities of Ukrainian speakers. Due to its location within Transleithania,
the Ukrainian nationalist movement of Galicia has had limited reach here. Therefore,
many inhabitants of Transcarpathia see themselves as Ruthenians or Little Russians,
distinct from the intellectuals of Lviv and Stanislav. Its many rotten boroughs also play an
important role in guaranteeing Magyar power in the Hungarian parliament.

23
 Administrative
Condominium
Division
14 - Bosnia-Herzegovina:
Population 1.9 million

43%
Majority
Orthodox,
Culture
32% Muslim

Significant
23% Catholic
Minorities

Major Cities Sarajevo

Despite being occupied by Austria-Hungary since 1878, the region of Bosnia-

Herzegovina was only officially annexed in 1908 as a condominium, part of neither
Cisleithanian nor Transleithania. Due in large part to the decades of jurisdictional turmoil,
Bosnia-Herzegovina is one of the poorest and least developed regions of the Empire.
While the region is currently in legal limbo, the South Slav movement looks favourably
upon adding Bosnia to any future kingdom. Political parties in Bosnia-Herzegovina are
largely based around its Catholic-Protestant-Muslim divisions.

Helpful Resources
How Did the Austro-Hungarian Empire Actually Work? (9 minute video):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTkgFak2gi4
Ten Minute History - The Austro-Hungarian Empire (Short Documentary):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=745HeLp-0sA
Britannica - Austria-Hungary, 1867–1918:
https://www.britannica.com/place/Austria/Austria-Hungary-1867-1918
Wikipedia - Government of Austria-Hungary:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Austria-Hungary
Franz Ferdinand: The conservative archduke (short article):
https://www.habsburger.net/en/chapter/franz-ferdinand-conservative-archduke
Austrian women fighting for women’s rights (short article):
https://www.habsburger.net/en/chapter/austrian-women-fighting-womens-rights
Internet Encyclopedia of Ukraine (relevant to Galicia and Transcarpathia):
https://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/

24
Capital Model United Nations 2024