Page - 313 - in Maximilian Hell (1720–92) - And the Ends of Jesuit Science in Enlightenment Europe

313Disruption of Old Structures Toleration, promulgated for the German and Bohemian provinces on October 13, 1781 (and for the rest of the monarchy at different dates over the following months), removed the civil disabilities of Lutherans, Calvinists, and the Ortho- dox and thus expanded the pool of competent citizens as assets for the state. It was followed on January 2, 1782 by a similar Edict of Tolerance for the Jews. In the same month (in separate decrees for Austria–Bohemia and Hungary) the monasteries of purely contemplative orders were suppressed, and then an in- quiry began into those maintained by other orders to ascertain whether they were performing any “useful functions” (including not only education and medical services but also pastoral care). Although about half of them eventu- ally survived this test (with significant regional variation),13 their resources be- came severely curbed and strictly controlled, their independence and integrity as communities undermined, and their members intimidated. The noble estates, especially of Hungary, where they stood up in staunch resistance whenever they felt their “ancient liberties and immunities” under threat, were also exposed to the offensive of enlightened government. The lat- ter’s attitude to them was ambivalent in ways similar to the case of the Catholic Church and the religious orders. The traditions of social and political leader- ship accumulated and fostered among the members of the nobility were wel- come insofar as they could be harnessed into the service of the newly defined “goals of the state,” but to the extent that these traditions were intertwined with a system of constitutional and fiscal-economic privilege, they were seen as an obstacle to good government and undermining the achievement of those goals. Any intention of social leveling was far from the intentions of Viennese policy-makers and the administrative rank-and-file, but the political influence of the nobility was to be counterbalanced and kept in check by the perpetual creation of new offices and reorganizing old ones. Simultaneously, every effort was made to squeeze out of the nobles—by constitutional bullying or black- mail or by other means—some contribution to the financial burden of effi- cient governance. A conspicuous manifestation of the antagonism that arose was the session of the Hungarian diet in 1764–65. At this assembly, the Hungar- ian estates, jealous of their privileges, but also infuriated by a series of publica- tions apparently commissioned by the government and directly challenging those privileges, refused the ruler’s demand for increased war tax, a general overhaul of the entire system of taxation, and military reform at their own ex- pense. In response, Maria Theresa’s government decided to implement its plan by abandoning the dialogue with the estates, and neglecting the diet in its 13 Beales, “Joseph ii and the Monasteries,” 246–48.