The Teutonic Knights' Last Attempt at Returning to Hungary (1702–1731)Subsequent to the expulsion of the Turks the Teutonic Knights made a last attempt (1702–1731) at returning to Hungary after its abortive attempts in medieval times (1211–1228 and 1429–1432). Emperor Leopold I sold the Jazygian and the two Cumanian districts to the Order of Knights, who had participated in the anti-Turkish war form 1664 onwards. The Jazygian and Cumanian districts enjoyed privileges from medieval times on; being directly subordinate to the crown, the inhabitants had never been burdened by dues to the landed overlords. The population in the districts and the Hungarian estates at large promptly protested against the sale, but the Teutonic Order was unable to come into possession of the districts, for an anti-Habsburg uprising of the Hungarian noble estates broke out in 1703 led by the aristocrat Ferenc Rákóczi 2nd while the Imperial military were engaged in a war against France in the West. But the peace treaty putting an end to the uprising in 1711 did not confirm the position of the Knights, for the Emperor restored the Hungarian estates into their privileges and the Act of 1715 ruled that the transaction of 1702 had been unlawful and the districts should regain their liberties on condition that the estates pay back the purchase price the Knights had paid. This, however, did not materialize owing to the renewed warfare againsts the Turks. With regard to a possible compensation, the Teutonic Order did not implement any settlement or any economic investment in the Jazyigian or Cumanian districts, nor did it draw any profit from them. In 1731, the Grand Master sold the title to the Jazygian and Cumenian districts to the House of Invalids in Pest and the Teutonic Order left Hungary for good.
Cette première analyse des relations politiques et militaires entre la France et les principautés Carpatho-danubiennes de la fin du XVIe siècle à la fin du XVIIIe siècle, montre qu'il s'est forgé un partenariat entre le « Roi Très-Chrétien » (c'est-à-dire le roi de France) et le « Grand Turc ». Depuis le début de l'alliance ottomane, la cour de France s'est efforcée d'établir un lien direct avec la cour de Transylvanie d'Alba Julia et avec les cours romaines de Jassy et Bucarest. L'objectif principal de ces liens était de faire diversion sur le plan militaire en arrière de la monarchie des Habsbourgs. Lors de la guerre de Trente Ans, la cour française signa en 1645 le premier traité militaire avec le prince de Transylvanie György Rákóczi mais la coopération militaire avec le corps expéditionnaire de Walachie et de Moldavie était, elle, plus ancienne (1644). Un autre traité militaire entre la France et la Transylvanie fut signé en 1677, lorsqu'une mission militaire française organisa la diversion de Transylvanie contre les Habsbourgs en « Hongrie supérieure » lors de la guerre de Hollande (1672-1678). Par la trêve de la diplomatie française, la Transylvanie entra dans le traité Nimwergen, comme ce fut le cas pour la paix de Westphalie, en tant qu'allié de la France. Même si les princes Hongrois de Transylvanie avaient pris parti de soutenir l'alliance franco-ottomane anti-Habsbourg, les princes roumains de Walachie et de Moldavie penchaient plutôt vers la politique traditionnelle de croisade. Avec le XVIII e siècle, la situation changea. Une partie non négligeable de l'élite roumaine soutint la politique française en Europe de l'Est et en mer Noire pour lutter contre l'expansion des Russes et des Habsbourgs. Les cours de Bucarest et de Jassy, les familles princières de Racovitza et Mavrocordato se joignirent aux efforts de l'ambassade de France à Constantinople dans le soutien à la résistance des Polonais et des Tartares contre les tsars. Forte de l'assentiment de la « Sublime Porte », la Moldavie devint même une base pour le soutien français au soulèvement révolutionnaire de Koscinsko de 1794. L'expédition en Égypte de Napoléon Bonaparte (1798) provoqua un véritable bouleversement de la politique traditionnelle en Orient et l'avènement d'une nouvelle ère dans les relations franco-roumaines.
The article deals with the historical and legal aspects of the formation of early absolutism and its influence on the development of Austria in the eighteenth century. It is specified, that in XVI–XVII centuries in Europe a process of transformation of the medieval state of monarchy into absolute monarchy took place. Political absolutism was a control system, in which the whole state power (legislative, executive, judicial), and partly even a spiritual (religious), was concentrated in the hands of the monarch. The regime of absolute monarchy possessed control over all spheres of public life (the monarch independently set taxes and was in charge of public finance, determined the direction of foreign policy. The Church, the regional elites (aristocracy) and the bureaucracy, which is actively growing, were the factors that to a certain extent limited the power of the monarch.It is argued that absolutism in Habsburg monarchy was formed in the mid-seventeenth century as emergency of state management. Austrian absolutism, considering the geographical location of the state, was formed as a combination of Western influences and Eastern traditions.It is shown that the element of early Austrian absolutism was the so-called «discipline of society». In the last third of the twentieth century in the scientific discourse the concept of the German researcher Gerhard Oistrakh of «social discipline» became widespread. Periodic dissatisfaction of the Czech State and Hungary were characteristic features of the development of the Austrian Empire. Under these circumstances there was an objective need both in the disciplinary intervention of the state in various spheres of human activity, and in the conscious and disciplined behavior of individuals. Consequently, the disciplined behavior of an official and officer, peasant and artisan, became a creative force that allowed not only systematically to organize the life of society, but as well to reform it creatively. These internal changes later formed the basis for educational reform within the framework of enlightened absolutism.The article deals with the historical and legal aspects of the formation of early absolutism and its influence on the development of Austria in the eighteenth century. It is specified, that in XVI–XVII centuries in Europe a process of transformation of the medieval state of monarchy into absolute monarchy took place. Political absolutism was a control system, in which the whole state power (legislative, executive, judicial), and partly even a spiritual (religious), was concentrated in the hands of the monarch. The regime of absolute monarchy possessed control over all spheres of public life (the monarch independently set taxes and was in charge of public finance, determined the direction of foreign policy. The Church, the regional elites (aristocracy) and the bureaucracy, which is actively growing, were the factors that to a certain extent limited the power of the monarch.It is argued that absolutism in Habsburg monarchy was formed in the mid-seventeenth century as emergency of state management. Austrian absolutism, considering the geographical location of the state, was formed as a combination of Western influences and Eastern traditions.It is shown that the element of early Austrian absolutism was the so-called «discipline of society». In the last third of the twentieth century in the scientific discourse the concept of the German researcher Gerhard Oistrakh of «social discipline» became widespread. Periodic dissatisfaction of the Czech State and Hungary were characteristic features of the development of the Austrian Empire. Under these circumstances there was an objective need both in the disciplinary intervention of the state in various spheres of human activity, and in the conscious and disciplined behavior of individuals. Consequently, the disciplined behavior of an official and officer, peasant and artisan, became a creative force that allowed not only systematically to organize the life of society, but as well to reform it creatively. These internal changes later formed the basis for educational reform within the framework of enlightened absolutism.It is substantiated that absolutism played a double role in the history of Austria: firstly, it served as the mechanism within which the reform of the state system took place; and secondly, it was a way to ethnic and political unification of the country. The absolute monarchy state in Europe reached the maximum degree of centralization, but in the case of Austria, it had its own peculiarities. The multinationality and heterogeneity of its provinces were the hindrance to complete centralization and unification of the local government. Therefore, such a concentration of power, as took place in Prussia, was not observed in Austria. And only the weakening of the Czech State after the Thirty Years War and Hungary after the suppression of the uprising F. Rakoczi contributed to the rise of the Austrian State. ; Розкрито історико-правові аспекти формування раннього абсолютизму та його вплив на державний розвиток Австрії у ХVІІІ ст. У XVI–XVII ст. в Європі відбувався процес перетворення середньовічної станової монархії в абсолютну монархію. Політичний абсолютизм формувався як система управління, за якого вся повнота державної влади (законодавчої, виконавчої, судової), а почасти навіть і духовної (релігійної), зосереджувалася в руках монарха. Режим абсолютної монархії передбачав встановлення контролю над усіма сферами суспільного життя (монарх самостійно встановлював податки і відав державними фінансами, визначав напрями зовнішньої політики). Чинниками, що певною мірою обмежували владу монарха виступали, хіба-що церква, регіональні еліти (аристократія) і бюрократичний апарат, який активно розростався.Аргументовано, що абсолютизм у монархії Габсбургів формувався із середини XVII ст. як система надзвичайного державного управління, що зумовлювалося зростаючими потребами збільшення військових податків. Австрійський абсолютизм, з огляду на географічне місце розташування держави, формувався як поєднання західних впливів і східних традицій.
