Complex legal and political use of right of domicile in the late Habsburg Monarchy

Modern citizenship embodies a triad of dimensions: a legal status granting rights, a principle underpinning democratic self-governance, and a conception of collective identity and membership [Joppke 2010]. This nuancedconcept of citizenship was partially introduced to the successor states following the dissolution of the Habsburg Monarchy. In the 19th century, the right of domicile (Heimatrecht) exhibited certain characteristics akin to modern citizenship but also served as a “technology” [Cruikshank 1999] for the practical management of mobility, encompassing both impoverished individuals and migrant workers. Political debates and policies regarding mobile populations during this period were pulled in two conflicting directions. On one side, there was a drive to control and secure the movement of these “dangerous” population groups. On the other, there was a need to meet labor demands, which necessitated greater freedoms [cf. Foucault 2007]. Immigrant men and women, particularly those experiencing temporary unemployment, improper behavior, incapacity to work, poverty, chronic illness, or those seeking access to local, municipal, and provincial politics, faced discrimination based on the right of domicile. They were often subjected to close scrutiny by municipal authorities and native-born residents. A change of residence within the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy could lead to an individual’s perception of themselves, and by others, as foreigners, regardless of the high mobility and multicultural nature of urban centers such as Vienna and Trieste. Nevertheless, the concept of “foreignness” is a variable construct, changing according to political, economic, and social circumstances and networks. Following the dissolution of the Habsburg Monarchy, the exclusionary tools of pertinency automatically granted citizenship to certain individuals, irrespective of their workplace or long absence from their domicile municipality. However, this right of pertinence also caused significant social trauma across post-Habsburg Europe, leaving many at risk of statelessness (Kirch-ner-Reill et al.). Despite the extensive and varied application of the right of domicile in different social contexts within the late 19th-century Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, some recent historical analyses reduce its meaning to a mere “legal mechanism that communities used to avoid the costs and presence of persons considered socially undesirable.”