MARIA THERESA OF AUSTRIA, Empress. - B. in Vienna on 13 May 1717, d. there on 29 Nov. 1780. Daughter and heiress of Emperor Charles VI, she married Francis Stephen of Lorraine (12 Feb. 1736), giving origin to the Habsburg-Lorraine line, the last reigning branch of the Habsburg dynasty. From this marriage also derives the so-called Habsburg "secondogeniture" of Tuscany, with the assignment of the grand-ducal throne to Francis of Lorraine (9 July 1737), to be transmitted in the cadet line.
The inheritance of the Habsburg domains fell to M. T. by virtue of the Pragmatic Sanction issued by Charles VI on 19 Apr. 1713, which established, in the absence of male heirs, direct female succession. However, at the death of her father (20 Oct. 1740), her rights were contested by the husbands of the daughters of Joseph I, the predecessor of Charles VI: Charles Albert of Bavaria and Frederick Augustus of Saxony.
In the War of the Austrian Succession the European powers intervened, eager to lower the Habsburg power and to aggrandize themselves at its expense. The conflict ended, after eight years, with the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle (18-23 Oct. 1748). M. T. succeeded in saving the unity, if not the integrity, of the ancestral possessions. Particularly painful was the loss of Silesia, ceded to Frederick II of Prussia, and the consequent shock to Habsburg prestige in Germany. However, the House of Habsburg regained the imperial crown, which Charles Albert of Bavaria had managed to wrest from it: at the death of the rival, Francis of Lorraine was elected and crowned emperor (13 Sept. - 4 Oct. 1745).
After Aix-la-Chapelle, the efforts of M. T. were directed toward preparing the revenge against the Prussian king. The old antagonism with the Bourbons was erased by the new one with the Hohenzollerns, in hatred of whom the chancellor Kaunitz (v.) succeeded in transforming the traditional rivalry with France into an alliance (1 May 1756). Russia too was won over to the coalition. In the Seven Years' War that followed (1756-63), Frederick II of Prussia nevertheless succeeded in surviving the test. M. T.'s attempt to annihilate the German rival had failed: there opened in German history that Austro-Prussian dualism which was to find its solution only a century later.
The assumption as co-regent of her son Joseph II, after the death of her husband (18 Aug. 1765), reduced the Empress's initiative in the field of foreign policy to a prevailing activity of control, exercised in a moderating sense. An important aspect of Theresian diplomacy is in matrimonial policy, which had its most brilliant affirmation in the marriage of Marie Antoinette to the Dauphin of France. The greatest political weight, however, was exercised by the Italian marriages: that of Maria Amalia to the Duke of Parma, that of Maria Carolina to the King of Naples, that of Ferdinand to Maria Beatrice d'Este, which secured the duchy of Modena to a Habsburg thirdogeniture, which thus came to be added to the Tuscan "secondogeniture." Having secured direct or indirect influence over the entire peninsula, the Empress could speak of her "four Italian colonies."
The historical importance of M. T. is not exhausted in the task of saving the monarchy from dissolution, and of preserving for it its rank among the European powers. M. T. occupies an eminent place among the great reforming sovereigns, for the work of reconstruction and renewal of the State undertaken by her. The stimulus arose from the need to remedy the financial crisis that afflicted the monarchy in the wake of continuous wars. Instead of resorting to the usual tax increases, the Empress confronted the problem of a radical revision of the system of collection, which would make it more productive for the State and less burdensome for the taxpayer. A radical reform of the administration led to an overcoming of local particularisms and to a strengthening of central power; the revision of the fiscal system, with the principle of the proportionality of burdens and the elimination of exemptions, had important social repercussions, affecting the prerogatives and the positions of privilege of the upper classes.
The Theresian reforms are distinguished from the subsequent ones of Joseph II by the absence of that doctrinaire inspiration that characterizes the latter. The distinction manifests itself with particular evidence on ecclesiastical ground. For Joseph II, to the eternal State-Church dissension was added the opposition of the "lights of the century" to tradition and to the Catholic religion. The Empress, animated by sincere religious faith, did not share this new spirit. The ecclesiastical measures occur almost exclusively in the period of the co-regency with her son: the initiative does not come from the Empress, who acts, rather, as a brake. If, as a reforming sovereign, she is disposed to vindicate the rights of the State against the Church, as a believer she does not intend the religious sphere in the name of a philosophy that remains entirely foreign to her. Nevertheless she does not succeed in preventing the reforming zeal of her son and of the chancellor Kaunitz from reaching beyond purely political limits. Thus, to the measures aimed at affirming state authority (royal placet, limitations of the ecclesiastical forum and of the right of asylum, etc.), to those of an economic-financial character (measures against fiscal exemptions, against mortmain; restriction of the power of acquisition of ecclesiastical bodies, control of their administration, etc.), are added others that invade the field of ecclesiastical organization, especially with regard to the religious Orders. The Enlightenment inspiration is clearly affirmed in the reform of the school carried out after the expulsion of the Jesuits: the extraordinary Aulic Commission for Studies aimed to emancipate the school from the religious influence until then predominant, to give it a lay imprint and reduce it to obedience to the State.
The attitude assumed with regard to the Jesuits significantly reflects the character of Theresian policy. She does not desire their expulsion and defers to papal decisions, but her respect for the will of the Pontiff stops before political and financial interests.
The interest for the State was the constant norm of the Empress in the forty years of her reign. The "matriarchal" character of her policy represents the initial phase of the reforming period, in which the realistic element still prevails over the doctrinaire factor, which would instead give the tone to the reign of her son, Joseph II.
Bibliography10 works
Franco Valsecchi