Page 223 - Weiss, Jernej, ur./ed. 2023. Glasbena društva v dolgem 19. stoletju: med ljubiteljsko in profesionalno kulturo ▪︎ Music societies in the long 19th century: Between amateur and professional culture. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 6
P. 223
the foundation of a free state is a free (music) association? continuity and change ...
dežela; Lat. terra) and their legal traditions, constantly in one of my fo-
cuses,19 I am trained to look upon any of the Acts (Gesetz, zakon; statute),
passed after 1849 not only in the synchronic but above all in the diachron-
ic historic contexts, as well. To put it differently. To any change, alluded to
in the title in general, and to that of the Associations’ Act of 1867, in par-
ticular, one cannot really attribute its hard conceptual contours, without
looking first for the existent continuities. These are always there, but many
times neglected by the official or indeed later historical accounts, in order
for the alleged novelty, i. e. conceptualised as change, to shine. As already
pointed out, in our case, the alleged change, ascribed to this Act in the lit-
erature almost proverbially, as indeed in the official commentaries and in-
structions of that time, as well, was its liberality. Without entering into any
prolonged conceptual debate on the notion myself, and adopting in princi-
ple the analysis of Judson, I will give a short explanation on what the 1867
Act differed in wording from its predecessor from 1852. In so doing, I will
also draw attention to the commentary on the Act by Samuel Freund, tell-
ingly revealing legal understandings, self-evident at the time. The commen-
tary was written as a guidance for the administration in 1894, the daily
practice of which by then had already been rooted in several decades of cas-
es and interpretive experience.20
I will narrow my explanation to two key freedoms, as introduced, at
least on the face of it, by the 1867 Act as a part and parcel of the renewed
constitutional era in Habsburg monarchy post-1867: to the freedom of asso-
ciation and to that of assembly.21
torical one for earlier periods, cf. Sergej Vilfan, Rechtsgeschichte der Slowenen (Graz:
Leykam, 1968).
19 Katja Škrubej, “Rechtsräume als (Fragestellungs-) Konzept und Versuch einer Re-
chtsraumtypologie im Rahmen der slowenischen Rechtsgeschichte,” in Endpunkte.
Und Neuanfänge: geisteswissenschaftliche Annäherungen an die Dynamik von
Zeitläuften, eds. Sašo Jerše and Kristina Lahl (Köln: Böhlau, 2022), 51–8.
20 Freund, Vereins-und Versammlungs-Gesetz.
21 In his Wien brennt, Judson gives a convincing explanation on why the liberal elite,
which succeeded to gain a decisive influence on the running of the country after
1861, by adopting the Associations’ Act of 1867 in fact intentionally limited the free-
dom of assembly, especially that of the political associations, the evolution and in-
deed the application of which was key to their own gaining the public voice in the
revolution period of 1848/49 and the first constitution era. As it happens so often,
once in power, and in order to secure their own prominent newly gained political
influence, they limited it for their potential opponents, especially the working class.
Not surprisingly, the Act came under attack from the liberal newspapers of the ep-
och, as well. Judson, Wien brennt, 117–8.
221
dežela; Lat. terra) and their legal traditions, constantly in one of my fo-
cuses,19 I am trained to look upon any of the Acts (Gesetz, zakon; statute),
passed after 1849 not only in the synchronic but above all in the diachron-
ic historic contexts, as well. To put it differently. To any change, alluded to
in the title in general, and to that of the Associations’ Act of 1867, in par-
ticular, one cannot really attribute its hard conceptual contours, without
looking first for the existent continuities. These are always there, but many
times neglected by the official or indeed later historical accounts, in order
for the alleged novelty, i. e. conceptualised as change, to shine. As already
pointed out, in our case, the alleged change, ascribed to this Act in the lit-
erature almost proverbially, as indeed in the official commentaries and in-
structions of that time, as well, was its liberality. Without entering into any
prolonged conceptual debate on the notion myself, and adopting in princi-
ple the analysis of Judson, I will give a short explanation on what the 1867
Act differed in wording from its predecessor from 1852. In so doing, I will
also draw attention to the commentary on the Act by Samuel Freund, tell-
ingly revealing legal understandings, self-evident at the time. The commen-
tary was written as a guidance for the administration in 1894, the daily
practice of which by then had already been rooted in several decades of cas-
es and interpretive experience.20
I will narrow my explanation to two key freedoms, as introduced, at
least on the face of it, by the 1867 Act as a part and parcel of the renewed
constitutional era in Habsburg monarchy post-1867: to the freedom of asso-
ciation and to that of assembly.21
torical one for earlier periods, cf. Sergej Vilfan, Rechtsgeschichte der Slowenen (Graz:
Leykam, 1968).
19 Katja Škrubej, “Rechtsräume als (Fragestellungs-) Konzept und Versuch einer Re-
chtsraumtypologie im Rahmen der slowenischen Rechtsgeschichte,” in Endpunkte.
Und Neuanfänge: geisteswissenschaftliche Annäherungen an die Dynamik von
Zeitläuften, eds. Sašo Jerše and Kristina Lahl (Köln: Böhlau, 2022), 51–8.
20 Freund, Vereins-und Versammlungs-Gesetz.
21 In his Wien brennt, Judson gives a convincing explanation on why the liberal elite,
which succeeded to gain a decisive influence on the running of the country after
1861, by adopting the Associations’ Act of 1867 in fact intentionally limited the free-
dom of assembly, especially that of the political associations, the evolution and in-
deed the application of which was key to their own gaining the public voice in the
revolution period of 1848/49 and the first constitution era. As it happens so often,
once in power, and in order to secure their own prominent newly gained political
influence, they limited it for their potential opponents, especially the working class.
Not surprisingly, the Act came under attack from the liberal newspapers of the ep-
och, as well. Judson, Wien brennt, 117–8.
221
