The Holy Roman European Empire?

Why didn't the EU follow the only successful pan-European state as a template, rather than following Napoleon's model?

Everyone knows the Austro Hungarian empire fell apart at the end of World War 1. It was the final coda for some institutions and a military force which had a lineage dating back over two and a half millennia to Rome itself. Just because the empire fell after the European cataclysm of 1914-1918, doesn’t mean that the century spanning multi-national state which had endured so long was always weak. Endings, by their nature, look like failures - here we are looking at the long succession of success and what it could have meant as a model for wider Europe.

It’s an interesting thought experiment for me, and one that has its relatives. Boris Johnson, erstwhile British prime minister and comedy panel show contestant, was long in favour of reforming the European Union, before the the unexpected Brexit referendum gave him the opportunity to throw his beliefs out the window in return for the top job. He had a short TV series, and accompanying book, comparing the EU to the Roman empire and recommending things like Turkish and North African integration, and the continent-wide study of Virgil's Aeneid.

The Hapsburg empire had many features which could recommend it as a better model for Europe than the bureaucratic, Napoleonic, one which the EU has instead chosen. It had a figurehead and a central system, but was capable of maintaining the appearance and traditions of multiple kingdoms within the empire - the monarchy was underpinned by the idea of being Kaiserlich und Königlich, that is both Imperial and Royal.

Whilst modern Austria is essentially a German speaking country whose population boasts a mixed Celtic and Germanic heritage - many of the most pivotal Celtic “type” sites are in and around Austria. The empire of a century ago was pluralistic, and always required a fine dance between different nations, peoples, languages and religions. Some of the same flash points as were seen in the early 20th century, through the Balkans, Galicia and Ruthenia are Europe’s more dangerous borders still a century later.

Having nine languages on the banknotes and many different religions and confessions within its borders is perhaps better seen as an achievement than inherent weakness - indeed, being the heir to the western Roman empire meant that such differences had always been part of the empire’s genetic code.

One of the great advantages of the empire, unrivalled in the modern equivalent, is a sense of cultural homogeneity. The person of the emperor, and the Catholic church they followed and defended, were the soul of this state of many nations. The last emperor, the Blessed Karl, is on his way to becoming a saint - something I’d be doubtful many Eurocrats would wish for or aspire to.

Living outside the cultural or religious mainstream was tolerated, and as I’ve said before Vienna enjoyed half a century of cultural and artistic prominence which brings it close to classical Athens. With the recent Oppenheimer film, it’s interesting to note just how many of the scientists involved were born within the Twin-Monarchy’s borders. The empire not only had a standard of high culture, but its foods and coffee houses spread through Mitteleuropa.

It’s not the first time I’ve written about my esteem for this part of the world and period, and I have often considered it a European high point. I feel that an empire with soul and purpose would serve European peoples far better than the union of legalism and one-size-fits-all thinking which has increasingly gone on an ideological crusade in favour of a brand of “liberal democracy” which is neither of those things.

Boris Johnson’s Dream of Rome often settles on the light and small bureaucracy, and minimal external pressure which Rome put on far-flung provinces as being a model to which the early 21st century European Union should have aspired. It’s not far from the “night-watchman state” which the British empire exported to the pink parts of the globe. I must admit though, that it’s hard to remember Boris for his classical liberal phase when we’ve now got more of a “Monty Python does Churchill wearing a mop on his head” image of the man.

Sadly, I doubt any international empire, or nation state for that matter, is likely to allow its people to live freely under the lightest of governmental reins, or around a preferred spiritual purpose and identity. Generations of political ideas sliding to one side or other have left our pseudo-elite with the belief that the populace cannot be trusted to make their own decisions or choose their own beliefs.

---

Over the past couple of years, the following books on this theme have been enlightening

• Blessed Charles of Austria - Coloumbe

• Last Days in Old Europe - R. Basset

• Ring of Steel- Germany and Austria-Hungary at War

• Radetzky March - Roth

• Between the Woods and the Water - Fermor

• The Habsburg Way - Habsburg