made Napoleon?  There is only one possible answer:  the Germans.  This is the second act of our drama of the degradation of England to the level of Germany.  And it has this very important development; that Germany means by this time all the Germans, just as it does to-day.  The savagery of Prussia and the stupidity of Austria are now combined.  Mercilessness and muddleheadedness are met together; unrighteousness and unreasonableness have kissed each other; and the tempter and the tempted are agreed.  The great and good Maria Theresa was already old.  She had a son who was a philosopher of the school of Frederick; also a daughter who was more fortunate, for she was guillotined.  It was natural, no doubt, that her brother and relatives should disapprove of the incident; but it occurred long after the whole Germanic power had been hurled against the new Republic.  Louis XVI. himself was still alive and nominally ruling when the first pressure came from Prussia and Austria, demanding that the trend of the French emancipation should be reversed.  It is impossible to deny, therefore, that what the united Germanics were resolved to destroy was the reform and not even the Revolution.  The part which Joseph of Austria played in the matter is symbolic.  For he was what is called an enlightened despot, which is the worst kind of despot.  He was as irreligious as Frederick the Great, but not so disgusting or amusing.  The old and kindly Austrian family, of which Maria Theresa was the affectionate mother, and Marie Antoinette the rather uneducated daughter, was already superseded and summed up by a rather dried-up young man self-schooled to a Prussian efficiency.  The needle is already veering northward.  Prussia is already beginning to be the captain of the Germanics “in shining armour.”  Austria is already becoming a loyal sekundant.

But there still remains one great difference between Austria and Prussia which developed more and more as the energy of the young Napoleon was driven like a wedge between them.  The difference can be most shortly stated by saying that Austria did, in some blundering and barbaric way, care for Europe; but Prussia cared for nothing but Prussia.  Austria is not a nation; you cannot really find Austria on the map.  But Austria is a kind of Empire; a Holy Roman Empire that never came, an expanding and contracting-dream.  It does feel itself, in a vague patriarchal way, the leader, not of a nation, but of nations.  It is like some dying Emperor of Rome in the decline; who should admit that the legions had been withdrawn from Britain or from Parthia, but would feel it as fundamentally natural that they should have been there, as in Sicily or Southern Gaul.  I would not assert that the aged Francis Joseph imagines that he is Emperor of Scotland or of Denmark; but I should guess that he retains some notion that if he did rule both the Scots and the Danes, it would not be more incongruous than his ruling both the Hungarians and the Poles.  This cosmopolitanism of Austria has in it a kind of shadow of responsibility for Christendom.  And it was this that made the difference between its proceedings and those of the purely selfish adventurer from the north, the wild dog of Pomerania.