Holy Roman Empire
Chapter 61: Hungary

The Vienna government quashed the Prague Uprising and the Galician Uprising one after another. When news of this reached Hungary, the opposition, led by Kossuth, could no longer sit idly by.

From the present circumstances, it became evident that the Vienna government had no intentions of compromising with the revolutionary party. Their response was unyielding, primarily exemplified by the brutal suppression in Galicia, which sent a chill down the spines of many.

Ludwig von Benedek, the one tasked with suppressing the Galician Uprising, allowed the local population to seek revenge against the nobles and capitalists without intervention. The majority of the 20,000-plus casualties were a result of the people's own actions.

The Vienna government couldn't possibly execute such a large number of individuals all at once; Franz had his own image to protect. To ensure lasting peace in Austrian-controlled Poland, resorting to the people's vengeance became the only viable choice.

A local militia was assembled, leveraging their conflicts with exploitative factions to purge these abusive counter-revolutionaries.

Across the country, except for the ongoing war in the Italian region, nearly all uprisings had been brutally suppressed, leaving Hungary on the brink of fighting alone.

If we go back in time by a month, Hungary's cabinet government had not yet been established, and there was still a possibility of compromise. Even before the declaration of independence on April 14th, there was an opportunity to reconsider.

However, the Vienna government consistently refused to recognize the legitimacy of Hungary's cabinet, issuing repeated orders for the dissolution of their unlawful government.

Kossuth had always advocated for Hungary's separation from Austria and the establishment of an independent Hungarian Republic. Unfortunately, this ideology had limited appeal in the Hungarian market.

The majority of the nobility were concerned about the security issues that would arise after independence. After all, Hungary's union with Austria was not only due to the Habsburg family's marriage alliances but also their need for Austria's protection.

Compared to the Russians and the Ottomans, they preferred to align themselves with Austria. However, in recent years, the central government in Vienna had weakened and gradually lost its authority. Through a series of trials, they discovered that a crying baby gets milk.

In order to break free from Austria's constraints and gain greater benefits, the capitalists embraced the nationalism that had spread from France. The opposition forces in Austria, led by Kossuth, began to grow stronger.

However, this didn't mean that Hungary had the strength to achieve independence from Austria, and many still harbored doubts about armed revolution.

A young man hurriedly exclaimed, "Mr. Kossuth, something terrible has happened. The Vienna government has dispatched legal lecturers to enter Hungary, and it seems they are coming for us!"

Upon hearing this news, Kossuth's face turned pale. What could be the purpose of Austria sending legal lecturers? Was it merely to educate the Hungarian people about the law?

If Franz were here, he would say—yes, the purpose of dispatching legal lecturers is truly just to educate the people about the law.

Of course, declaring the establishment of the Hungarian cabinet as illegitimate was also inevitable. However, this can be considered a side issue. The main objective was to divide the Kingdom of Hungary.

Different social classes have different interests and demands. The series of laws enacted by the Vienna government were essentially aimed at buying off the common people.

There was no way around it. It's not that Franz didn't want to bribe the elite class; it's just that it's easier to bribe a few than the majority. The problem was that their demands were too high, and the government simply couldn't afford it.

In March, the Hungarian delegation, led by Kossuth, presented demands to the Vienna government for the establishment of an independent Hungarian government and the abolition of the feudal system.

Both sides engaged in a difficult round of negotiations, and Franz was indeed open-minded. He did not reject the idea of reforms and even advocated for more thorough changes.

However, they encountered a group of idealists and spokespersons for the bourgeois interest groups, making it clear that both sides were unlikely to reach an agreement.

If the Vienna government dared to accept their conditions, it would be Austria's turn to experience revolution.

Equality does not mean privilege. Franz could grant equal status to all ethnic groups, but he would never allow the Hungarian nation to dominate over others.

This brings us to the national situation of the Kingdom of Hungary. The country had a total population of over 13 million people, with more than 500,000 nobles, making them practically ubiquitous.

Hungarian capitalists had another layer of identity – nobility. Therefore, the relationship between Hungarian capitalists and nobles was highly complex. This less than 2% of the population held over 95% of the wealth in society.

During this period, the Hungarian nation, in reality, referred to these 500,000 nobles and capitalists. They held numerous privileges and constituted the true exploiting class in the country.

To a certain extent, Austria was not a true autocratic empire, but rather an alliance of the aristocracy. The central government's control over the regions relied on the will of the nobility.

The current outbreak of Hungarian nationalism was primarily driven by the middle and lower nobility as well as the capitalists. They merged the concept of the nation with their own interests, adorning their pursuit of self-interest with a veil of nationalism during their struggle for power.

This was also evident in the Hungarian government led by Kossuth. On one hand, they advocated for reform, but on the other hand, they rejected the implementation of the reform bills proposed by the Vienna government.

Even the consensus to abolish serfdom, which had been reached by all parties, was not carried out in Hungary. The nobles concealed the Vienna government's legislation on the abolition of serfdom.

Well, this responsibility cannot solely be attributed to Kossuth. After all, he, like a puppet leader, was a product of compromise rather than someone who attained power through strength.

This became apparent during the Hungarian elections on April 12, 1848. Despite proclaiming the intention to hold open elections for all, the reality was that the presidential election in Hungary remained confined to Budapest.

In Budapest, only 16,200 people had the right to vote. If we consider the understanding of "Hungarian nationality" at that time, it could be seen as a partial realization of universal suffrage within the city.

In the end, a total of 5,176 votes were cast, and Kossuth emerged as the winner with 1,639 votes. However, the officially announced results were certainly not those numbers.

From these figures, it was evident that Franz's butterfly effect had indeed taken effect, as there were more people choosing to observe from a distance than in historical instances.

"Nagy, immediately have them expelled from our land. Hungary does not welcome their presence!" Kossuth's expression grew somber as he spoke.

As the president who emerged through compromise, Kossuth faced widespread skepticism among the people of the Kingdom of Hungary. In the eyes of many, the Hungarian Republic was seen as nothing more than a farce, a notion reinforced by the general apathy observed during the elections.

Kossuth's anger was justified by the circumstances. Although the Hungarian Republic had been established, Ferdinand I still maintained his role as the King of Hungary.

Without a king, the nobility would cease to exist. Driven by their own vested interests, the Hungarian nobles staunchly opposed the abolition of the monarchy. Forced by the prevailing circumstances, Kossuth had no choice but to make concessions. As the president, he found himself in a subordinate position to the king, greatly compromising his authority and diminishing his power.