Austrian Neoabsolutismus: Constitution and Administration

This volume presents the elaborated papers and discussions of a conference held in April 2011 on Austrian Neoabsolutism. The term `Neoabsolutism` has generally been used by historians to characterize the postrevolutionary phase of Austrian history which extended from the formal abolition of the 1849-Constitution in 1851/52 till to the decree of the `Reich`-Constitution 1860/61. Often the phase of `virtual constitution` (1849-51) tends to be included because of actual military suppression and of unrestricted bureaucratic rule as being the first step to Neoabsolutism. (The Hungarian tradition extends the period of `arbitrary dominance` to 1867.) Starting point of our conference was the recent criticism against this concept of `Neoabsolutism` because it should be orientated too closely at the criterion of constitutional questions. At the same time this criticism alludes to problems of historical period-building: One may, indeed, deny a special profile of a `neoabsolutist` phase because it is embedded in a long term modernization process. On the other hand there are good reasons to insist on a distinct and prominent role of that phase: Post-revolutionary founding and consolidating a central state by precedence of administration instead of constitution. Moreover one should emphasize the far reaching consequences which this unique push of reform had on the further history of the Hapsburg Monarchy. A different and competing way to characterize that decade recently proposes to hold fast to its unity from 1851 to 1867, but to typify it in terms of constitutional history as a `monarchy restricted by modernized estates`. According to this thesis the new estates had been prepared in the fifties and realized in the constitutional framework of 1860/61. The historians assembled in Würzburg to discuss these problems have been profiled by doing research on the period in question. Not all aspects of the ambiguous period could be reconsidered by their performances (also because of cancellations), but the most important have been presented by papers and discussions: post- revolutionary repression, restructuring monarchical power, centralizing administration, at the same time economic liberalism, cultural development also having regard to the multi-ethnicity of the realm, last but not least the drafts and conflicting discussions to establish participation of the governed below the threshold of constitutionalism, at the same time aiming to overcome the nationality-problems by introducing class-representation on the base of (material) `interests`. In the conference two types of papers have been presented: some explained and confirmed the fundamental positions mentioned above, others offered new research on crucial subjects as: establishing the new autocracy, administrative restructure and staff politics, economic policy, university and school reforms, art promotion, then the controversial complex of municipal (self-)government and provincial consultative participation. At the end intense debates dealt with the constitutional or non-constitutional essence of the `Februarpatent`, and with the question of continuity or discontinuity from the planning of the fifties to the results of 1861. Still, there was unanimous consent about the serious consequences of the electoral regime then established for Austrian parliamentary life in the later 19th century. Besides the elaborated articles the volume includes the discussions which were revised in cooperation, which was done only slightly in order to conserve their vivid character. An introductory sketch embeds the Austrian `josefinian` tradition into the structural predominance of administration over constitution being significant for all of central Europe. The editor finally also has made a comment on the results of the conference which was offered to all participants for revision to prevent the `résumé raisonné` to become a `résumé raisonneur`.