In the last three decades, few ceremonies have enjoyed as much scholarly attention as early modern inaugurations, coronations and joyous entries formally sealing the assumption of power by the new prince. Moreover, several perspectives can be distuinguished in the historical literature. In many cases, the changing relationship between prince and subjects was at the heart of the analysis. The proceedings of inaugurations and coronations with all the side-ritual adding to their splendour, usually reflected the balance of power between the prince, his/her vassals and other subjects at a given moment. Prior negotiations and concessions, iconographic messages during the ceremony and subtle modifications of the setting all have been analysed as criteria for the ambitions of the parties involved. Even though these ceremonies centred on the prince or his/her representative, many more actors participated, ranging from the region’s nobility and estates’ members to city councils, urban chambers of rhetoric, confraternities and craft guilds, to humble folks merely gazing at what happened. The meaning these different groups ascribed to these ceremonies constitutes a second angle from which inaugurations and coronations have been viewed. Addressing the prince was not at all the sole concern for those organizing the ceremonies. Thirdly, an art historian’s line of research can be discerned, whether focusing on the staging of the ceremonies as in theatre, or analysing the iconographic program contained in and artistic value of the stages, triumphal arches and other ornamentation.

However, a closer look at the historiographical output also reveals that major gaps in our understanding remain, certainly when we consider the aforementioned ceremonies over a longer time frame. It appears that sixteenth- and early seventeenth-century inaugurations and coronations have been investigated much more thoroughly than later ones. Perhaps it is even appropriate to claim that the latter have been taken less seriously. The idea that their eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century counterparts were merely the exaltation of princely glory and spectacle for passive onlookers prevailed until recently. Nevertheless, early modern absolutism has for quite some time been unmasked as an aspiration rather than an achievement. This understanding has, in its turn, led some scholars to call eighteenth- and nineteenth-century inaugurations and coronations still relevant within particular political contexts. Furthermore, recent reinterpretations of ceremonial as a constitutive element of every institutional order stress the importance of ritual until well into the eighteenth century. Early modern politics and ceremonial should not be considered as separate spheres. Rather, all politicals acts can be seen as symbols to which every person could ascribe his/her own meaning, thus leaving room for negociations and conflicts. This paves the way for a new approach to ceremonial.

This conference seeks to explore what precise meaning inaugurations, coronations and joyous entries had in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century in one of the largest European state conglomerates: the Habsburg Monarchy – the Austrian Empire as from 1804. Its bewildering array of lands had divergent experiences of Habsburg rule and different constitutional arrangements that were even confirmed through the proclamation of the Austrian Empire. Therefore, although the revolutionary and Napoleonic period saw the end of the old regime in some of the Habsburg lands, in its core territories the old regime endured until 1848. It is even appropriate to speak of a revival of inaugurations and coronations after Joseph II’s death.

The different constitutional arrangements resulted in different traditions regarding the prince’s assumption of power and the accompanying ceremonies, whether coronations or inaugurations. Furthermore, over the years the context changed profoundly, as the eighteenth century experienced the consciously pursued rationalization of state power, the Enlightenment and democratic revolutions. Moreover, sovereigns as different as the baroque Charles VI and the enlightened and overtly anti-ceremonial Joseph II ruled the monarchy. What is more, until the beginning of the nineteenth century the dynasty had an intimate but not at all uncomplicated relationship with the Holy Roman Empire, the coronation of the emperor being one of the most important ceremonies. All of these aspects presumably affected the ways in which the assumption of power by the ruler in his different lands was ceremonially sealed.

Whether presenting casestudies or offering wider analyses, the participants are invited to explore the following questions:

- What legal function did inaugurations and coronations and the accompanying joyous entries have in eighteenth-century composite monarchies, or in its different lands?
- How did the eighteenth-century prince regard these ceremonies at the start of his/her reign?
- How did the other participants view these ceremonies?
- What messages were spread through these ceremonies, and to whom?
- Which transitions or ruptures can be discerned in the evolution of these ceremonies within a given polity?
- In what way were inaugurations and coronations adapted to the new political circumstances?
- What role was left for tradition and for the past within eighteenth-century inaugurations and coronations?
- How can variations and diverging evolutions with regards to these ceremonies within one and the same composite state be explained?

Practical information:
The organization welcomes papers in either English or German. Candidates are invited to submit a title and abstract of 300 words maximum before March 10, 2016. These, accompanied by the affiliation and address data of the candidate can be sent to Klaas.VanGelder@UGent.be. Candidates will be informed regarding the acceptance of their proposals by the end of March.

Scientific committee:
Klaas Van Gelder (Universiteit Gent), René Vermeir (Universiteit Gent), Werner Thomas (KU Leuven), Violet Soen (KU Leuven), Griet Vermeesch (Vrije Universiteit Brussel), Michèle Galand (Université libre de Bruxelles).