^{page 61 note 1} Examples are Rachfahl, F.: Deutschland und die Weltpolitik, 1971–1914 (1923), pp. 367–369Google Scholar; Heller, E., Das deutsch-österreichisch-ungarische Bündnis in Bismarcks Aussenpolitik (1925), pp. 70–71Google Scholar; Meyer, A. O., Bismarcks Friedenspolitik (1930), p. 11Google Scholar; Langer, W. L., European Alliances and Alignments (1931), pp. 211–212Google Scholar. This interpretation is usually followed in the numerous German inaugural dissertations and similar studies dealing with Bismarck's later diplomacy. A recent example is Fricke, Gert, Bismarcks Ostpolitik … (1871–1888) (1938), pp. 61–69. Bismarck's own Gedanken und Erinnerungen contains no reference to the alliance.Google Scholar

^{page 62 note 1} Simpson, J. Y. (ed.), The Saburov memoirs (1929)Google Scholar. The important Russian monograph by S. Skazkin, Konets avstro-russko-germanskogo soyusa (1928) is based on the Russian foreign office archives, but does not use the Saburov memoirs.

^{page 62 note 2} The first volume of A. F. Pribram's Die politischen Geheimverträge Oesterreich-Ungarns (1919) contains the text of the treaty (signed on 18 June 1881); the second volume, which has never appeared, was to have included an account of the negotiations. Great secrecy was maintained by the Austrian foreign office during and after the negotiations; all the relevant embassy correspondence in Berlin and St. Petersburg was sent to Vienna immediately after the signature of the treaty. The whole documentation is in the Wiener Staatsarchiv : Geheim Liasse iii and iv.

^{page 63 note 1} Medlicott, W. N., The Congress of Berlin and after (1938), pp. 154–162, 177–80, 183–9.Google Scholar

^{page 63 note 2} Dr. Irene Grüning's careful study of the Russian press. Die russische öffentliche Meinung und ihre Stellung zu den Grossmdchten, 1878–1894 (1929), shows that the Russian press campaign was due in the first instance to these measures, and was not linked with the eastern question for some weeks (pp. 63–71). Cp. H. L. von Schweinitz, Denkwürdigkeiten (1927), ii. 58, and the discussion in Medlicott, op. dt., pp. 370–1.

^{page 63 note 3} The Saburov memoirs, p. 56; Saint-Vallier to Waddington, 27 June 1879, Documents diplomatiques français (1871–1914), first series, ii. 519–20.

^{page 63 note 4} von Ballhausen, Lucius, Bismarck Erinnerungen (1920), p. 174.Google Scholar

^{page 64 note 1} Cp. Sumner, B. H., Russia and the Balkans, 1870–1880 (1937), PP. 557–560Google Scholar; Erdmann, Ada v., Nikolaj Karlovič Giers (1936), pp. 4–5, 39–43.Google Scholar

^{page 65 note 1} Gorchakov had asked for information on this point. ‘L'entente intime qu'on suppose d'être établie entre Berlin et Vienne est un signe du temps. II n'échappe pas à notre attention. Vous nous renseignerez sur ce qu'on pense à Londres.’ Gorchakov to Shuvalov, 12/24 Fetb. 1879; Shuvalov to Gorchakov, 18 Feb./2 March 1879, Russian embassy archives, London. Cp. Gorchakov to Novikov, 14 Feb. 1879, quoted inE. Cyon, Histoire de l'entente franco-russe (1895), p. 21.

^{page 65 note 2} Medlicott, op. cit., pp. 375–81.

^{page 65 note 3} Extract from a second conversation, 14/26 July 1879, The Saburov memoirs, pp. 55–6; 60.

^{page 65 note 4} Széchenyi to Haymerle, 5 June 1880, W.S.A., Varia Prusse, lii, 121.

^{page 66 note 1} The Saburov memoirs, pp. 136–7.

^{page 66 note 2} Saburov to Giers, 28 April/10 May 1880, Russian embassy archives.

^{page 67 note 1} Giers to Saburov, 6/18 May 1880, ibid., lettre confidentielle.

^{page 68 note 1} Medlicott, op, cit., pp. 382–4; 396. Lobanov received instructions on these lines when he succeeded Shuvalov as ambassador in London : R.E., Gorchakov to Lobanov, 31 Dec. 1879/12 Jan. 1880. Cp. ibid., Giers to Lobanov, 7/19 May 1880.

^{page 68 note 2} W.S.A., ‘Notizen über den Berliner Congress, 1878’ (v. Schwegel), pp. 37, etc.; Fürst zu Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst, Memoirs (1906), ii. 222; L. Ritter von Przibram, Erinnerungen eines alten Oesterreichers (1910), pp. 107–8.

^{page 69 note 1} Bismarck to Reusz, 13 May 1880 (extract, communicated to Haymerle), W.S.A., Varia Prusse iii. 121; Széchenyi to Haymerle, 28 May, ibid.; The Saburov memoirs, pp. 140–1.

^{page 69 note 2} He made various attempts in May to persuade Granville to enter into an unreserved exchange of views with Austria before communicating proposals about the Balkans to any other powers. Elliot to Granville, 3 May, F.O. 7/990, no. 201; Haymerle to Károlyi, 10 May, W.S.A., tel.; Granville to Elliot, 11 May, F.O. 7/985, no. 221A; Elliot to Granville, 14 May, F.O. 7/990, no. 236; Haymerle to Károlyi, 18 May, W.S.A., dispatch; Elliot to Granville, 20 May, F.O. 7/990, no. 244.

^{page 69 note 3} Haymerle to Emperor Francis Joseph (d.d. Stift Neuburg), 9 Sept. 1880, W.S.A., Geheim iii.

^{page 69 note 4} Cp. Bismarck–s, remarks to Dr.Cohen, E., 25 Sept.: ‘Dulcigno sei ein Unsinn … Gladstone sei ein verrückter Professor, seine Bulgarenschwärmerei reiner Blödsinn’ (Brauer, Marcks, Müller, Erinnerungen an Bismarck (1924), p. 313)Google Scholar; and Gladstone's remark to Granville: ‘Misericordial Patience is a great virtue, but really the heavy-going Teuton is too slow …’ (Gladstone to Granville, 1 Oct., G. & D. 29/123). There is some evidence that the sultan's final surrender on the Montenegrin question early in October was due to Bismarck's intervention at Constantinople : Documents diplomatiques français (1871–1914), first ser., no. 268; The Saburov memoirs, pp. 158–61.

^{page 70 note 1} The Saburov memoirs, p. 83.

^{page 70 note 2} The meeting appears to have been due to Bismarck's initiative : Kállay to Haymerle, 2 Aug. 1880, W.S.A., Geheim iii, tel.

^{page 71 note 1} Haymerle to Kállay, 5 Sept. 1880, W.S.A., Geheim iii, tel.

^{page 71 note 2} Saburov to Giers, 6/18 August, 11/23 August, Russian embassy archives, reporting conversations on this point with Hohenlohe; ‘Telegramm Hohenlohes durch Fürst Bismarck mitgetheilt in Friedrichsruhe, am 4 September 1880’, W.S.A., Geheim iii.

^{page 71 note 3} Russia and Austria would, in fact, have been prepared, in certain circumstances, to concede these two points at the Congress of Berlin. Andrássy had not attached great importance to the retention by Turkey of control of the Balkan Mountain frontier; Russia had agreed conditionally to the annexation of Bosnia and the Hercegovina in the Budapest Convention of March 1877. Andrassy's decision at the Congress to be content with occupation was due to considerations of internal policy, rather than to Russian opposition; Medlicott, op. cit., pp. 41, 42.

^{page 72 note 1} These references to the Friedrichsruh discussions are taken from Haymerle's telegram of 8 September to Kállay, and from his two dispatches to the emperor, 9 September, all in W.S.A., Geheim iii.

^{page 73 note 1} The Saburov memoirs, pp. 144–7, 156, 172. 2

^{page 73 note 2} ibid., pp. 173–4, 195–6, 207–8.

^{page 74 note 1} Note by Haymerle of conversation with Reusz, 23 Jan. 1881, W.S.A., Geheim Liasse iv.

^{page 74 note 2} Haymerle, ‘Notizen über ein Gespräch mit dem Prinzen Reusz am 30 Jänner’, – Jan., W.S.A., Geheim iv.

^{page 74 note 3} Bismarck to Reusz, 1 Feb., tel. no. 8, Die Grosse Politik der Europäischen Kabinette, iii, no. 165; Haymerle, note of conversation with Reusz, 3 Feb., W.S.A., Geheim iv.

^{page 75 note 1} ‘Auszug aus einer Depesche des Fürsten Bismarck übergeben vom deutschen Botschafter’, 11 Feb.; Haymerle, ‘Gesprach mit Reusz’, 10 Feb.; ‘Notiz über eine Unterredung mit Pr. Reusz am 17 Februar’; W.S.A., Geheim iv.

^{page 75 note 2} ‘Notizen über Mittheilungen des deutschen Botschafters übergeben am 1 Marz 1881’, ibid.

^{page 75 note 3} The Saburov memoirs, pp. 223–4; Schweinitz, op. cit., ii. 156.

^{page 75 note 4} ibid., pp. 227–32.

^{page 76 note 1} ‘Skizze einer Depesche des Fürsten Bismarck an Prinzen Reuss von letzterem vorgelesen am 29 April 1881’ : W.S.A., Geheim iv. Bismarck appears to have finally agreed at this point to the exchange of ministerial declarations that the Austro-German treaty should not be in any way affected by the new treaty.

^{page 76 note 2} Reusz to Bismarck, 2 May, W.S.A., Geheim iv; G.P., iii, nos. 528, 529; The Saburov memoirs, pp. 233–4.

^{page 76 note 3} ‘Abschrift eines geheimen Erlasses des Fürsten Bismarck an Prinz Reusz, dd Berlin 7 Mai 1881, no. viii’, Haymerle to Kálnoky, 20 May, W.S.A., Geheim iv.

^{page 76 note 4} Bismarck to Reusz, 12 June 1881, no. xi, Geheim; ‘Protocole annexe betreffend’; Haymerle to Széchényi, 15 June; W.S.A., ibid.

^{page 76 note 5} The Saburov memoirs, pp. 161–2, 167.

^{page 77 note 1} Skazkin, pp. 212 et seq. ; E. C. Corti, Alexander von Battenberg (1920); H. Hajnal, Le Droit du Danube International (1929); A. F. Pribram, ‘Milan IV von Serbien und die Geheimvertrage Österreich-Ungarns mit Serbien, 1881–1889,’ Historische Blaetter, 1922, pp. 478–83; M. Lhéritier, Histoire diplomatique de la Grèce (1926), iv. 160–1, 178–94.

^{page 77 note 2} R. W. Seton-Watson, ‘Russian commitments in the Bosnian Question and an early project of annexation’, Slavonic and East European Review, March 1930, pp. 585–8.

^{page 78 note 1} Giers to Mohrenheim, 15/27 Aug. 1882, Russian embassy archives.

^{page 78 note 2} Giers to Mohrenheim, covering letter and notice, 6/18 Aug. 1883, ibid. Cp. Giers' annual report for 1887, quoted by S. Goriainov, ‘The end of the alliance of the emperors’, American Historical Review, Jan. 1918, pp. 326–8.

^{page 79 note 1} The Saburov memoirs, p. 176. Cp. Skazkin, op. cit., p. 135.

^{page 79 note 2} Hatzfeldt (Berlin) to Reusz, 10 Feb. 1883, G.P., iii, no. 574; Hatzfeldt to Schweinitz, 6 Feb., ibid., no. 599; Schweinitz to Hatzfeldt, 9 March 1883, ibid., no. 601.

^{page 79 note 3} Goriainov, op. cit., pp. 326–8. Reusz to Bismarck, 12 Sept. 1883, G.P., iii, no. 609; Giers' remarks to Bismarck at the Berlin meeting on 14 Nov.: Bismarck to Emperor William, 16 Nov., ibid., no. 611. Giers told Herbert Bismarck in March 1884: ‘Mir personlich widerstrebt es tiberdies, eine Liquidation des turkischen Reichs auf Grand der Reichstädter Basis vorzunehmen, so lange letzteres noch besteht; ich würde einen derartigen Teilungstraktat für immoral halten …’ (ibid., no. 629). Schweinitz, Denkwürdigkeiten, ii. 224–5.

^{page 80 note 1} Busch : memorandum, 25 Aug., G.P., iii, no. 605.

^{page 80 note 2} By this stage he had thoroughly annoyed Bismarck: ‘Saburov hat den letzten Rest meiner guten Meinung durch seine Intrigen und Angriffe auf Giers vollständig eingebüsst. Icti halte seine Ablösung für beiderseitiges Bedürfnis’. Bismarck to Schweinitz, 5 Feb. 1884, ibid., iii, no. 622; cp. nos. 615, 617, 619.

^{page 80 note 3} ibid., nos. 625–8; The Saburov memoirs, pp. 280–1; Schweinitz, op. cit., ii, 257, 260–1, 293.

^{page 80 note 4} Bismarck to Reusz, 8 Sept. 1883, G.P., iii, no. 606. Cp. Goriainov, op. cit., p. 327; at the meeting between Bismarck and Giers at Friedrichsruh in November 1883 Bismarck again attacked Gladstone, ‘whose system was in no wise suitable to Germany’

^{page 80 note 5} G.P., iii, nos. 583–96.

^{page 81 note 1} Medlicott, W. N., ‘The powers and the unification of the two Bulgarias, 1885,’ English Historical Review, Jan. and April 1939, particularly pp. 68–69, 263–7, 278–84.Google Scholar

^{page 81 note 2} All later accounts of the negotiations are based on Goriainov, op. cit., pp. 330–8. The fullest general study is still that of the late J. V. Fuller, Bismarck's diplomacy at its zenith (1922), especially chaps. 4, 7, 9–12. Fuller, however, was obsessed with the idea of an anti-Russian plot on Bismarck's part, for which there is little evidence. A more judicious account is by Langer, op. cit., chap. 12.

^{page 82 note 1} The Saburov memoirs, p. 197.

^{page 82 note 2} ibid., p. 84.