The so-called Political Testament, written by Charles Eusebius the Prince of Liechtenstein for his son and heir around 1680 includes, among other things, a substantial, detailed passage dedicated to music at the prince's court. Music is not just one element of court representation here. This key aspect, in the text of the instruction, comes with a detailed insight to possible problems with a music ensemble, as well as with the use and character of individual instruments. This study focuses primarily on the status of musical ensembles and musicians within the structure of the aristocratic court, beginning with Charles I (d. 1627), through a partial analysis of the situation at the court of his son Charles Eusebius (d. 1686) and finally brings an outline of the role of musicians and musical life with the third generation of princes from Liechtenstein. Certain continuity can be assumed, in particular, in attempting to adapt its own court to princely habits (for example, as regards the minimum number of trumpeters etc). In general, however, it must be stressed that the trumpeters or the trumpeter ensemble constituted an essential part of the princely court, whereas the existence of a musical ensemble always depended on the actual needs, preferences and economic possibilities of a particular prince.
This study deals with the relationship of Prince Joseph Adam von Schwarzenberg to music and theatre and with the way in which his theatrical preferences revealed themselves in the repertoire of his private castle theatre in Cesky Krumlov from 1766 until 1768. Through a careful study of the extant sources (correspondence, libretti, scores and parts, accounting books etc.), the author has managed to specify the reasons for the precipitous renovation of the castle theatre in late 1765 and early 66 and to determine what specific dramatic works were performed there. Among other things, she has succeeded in compiling the entire list of performances planned for the fourteen-day wedding celebration in the summer of 1768. The author furthermore focuses on information about the musicians who were then in the princes services and also about commissioned musical instruments and musical scores and parts., Helena Kazárová., Obsahuje seznam literatury, and Anglické resumé na s. 45.
In Czech history the theme of the Battle of White Mountain has repeatedly been used as a tool in political struggles. During the interwar period it was instrumentalized in connection with the extensive land reform and was presented as "redress for post-White Mountain grievances". This applied to the nobility in general and to the Liechtensteins in particular, where the actions of Charles of Liechtenstein were to be the main argument for expropriating their property without compensation. In the end, however, expropriation without compensation only affected the members of the Habsburg-Lothringen dynasty.
V diskusi o období raného středověku je z archeologického hlediska nadále třeba se vyrovnat s absencí sídel přiřaditelných ke vznikající šlechtě, z historického hlediska je neméně palčivým problémem otázka, co geneze šlechty signalizuje v rámci celospolečenských proměn. Pozorování základního uspořádání vybraných hradních a jiných elitních sídel v západním kulturním prostředí a jejich srovnání s podobou románských kostelů vybavených západní věží z českého území vede k předložení diskusního závěru, že rané české hrady se skrývají v objektech, jež dnes považujeme za výhradně církevní stavby. Výstavba raných hradů (tj. kostelů), jejichž terminologie je odvozena od latinského castellum, doprovázela společenské proměny spočívající v postupném rozpadu archaických příbuzenských společenství – klanů. and In discussions on the early medieval period it is still necessary from an archaeological perspective to deal with the absence of seats attributable to the emerging aristocracy; from a historical perspective, a no less vexing issue is what the genesis of the aristocracy signals as part of society-wide changes. The study of the basic arrangement of selected castles and other elite residences in the western cultural environment and their comparison with the form of Romanesque churches with western towers in Bohemia leads to the conclusion that early Bohemian castles are concealed in structures considered today exclusively as church buildings. The construction of early castles accompanied social transformations involving the gradual dissolution of archaic kinship communities – clans. The author discusses the terminological and semantic connection between the Latin castellum, Czech (Slavic) kostel and also Swedish kastal.
Different European states had different attitudes towards Jews and their social standing. In the Habsburg monarchy, several hundred people of the Jewish faith were ennobled between 1789 and 1918 (both in Austria and later in Hungary), while Jews were granted equal social status in 1867. In Prussia the social status of Jews had improved since the rule of Frederick II and in 1812 they were able to become Prussian citizens. However, Jewish emancipation reached a high point in July 1869 when a law on equal religious rights was declared in Prussia as well as in all the states of the North German Confederation. However, in Prussia the issue of granting aristocratic titles to people of the Jewish faith or of Jewish origin was, of course, more vexed and the ennoblement of these people was very rare.
In Czech historiography, Prince Charles I of Liechtenstein personifies the process of the post-White Mountain confiscations and the political and social changes in the post-White Mountain Czech lands. Between 1918 and 1945 he even became the subject of historiographical and journalistic discussion within Czech historiography, which was directly linked to the foundation and strengthening of the Czechoslovak Republic. These attitudes also led to discussions between historians standing on the side of the emergent Czechoslovak Republic and historians from the circle of the Prince of Liechtenstein. Contemporary research shows that the role of Charles I of Liechtenstein was by no means straightforward. This was due to the personal ambitions of the ruler of the emergent princely house, but also because of the complex historical context, when the representatives of the Central European aristocracy were searching for a place between the estates' community and the ruling dynasty. Charles I of Liechtenstein's case was also different due to geography and the individual countries where the Liechtensteins held positions, functions and offices. In the Margraviate of Moravia in particular, Charles I of Liechtenstein was the victim of confiscation declared during the Estates' Uprising. After the uprising had been defeated he could return to the country and reclaim his land. In Bohemia, Liechtenstein was rewarded for his loyalty to the Austrian house during the rebellion by soon becoming the emperor's commissar and then the emperor's governor. It was in that capacity that he arrested and tried the main rebels and presided over their execution at the Old Town Square. In the 1620s he organised the imperial confiscations in Bohemia. In Opava, which was gradually moving towards the Silesian principality, Liechtenstein attempted to enter as the supreme ruler and organise his own confiscations from this position. However, this manoeuvre came up against the interests of Emperor Ferdinand II and his central offices, which did not agree with such a division of the monarchy. But Charles I of Liechtenstein did make gains in Moravia, where he was awarded a large amount of property from his erstwhile opponent, the rebel provincial governor Ladislav Velen of Žerotín, the most important being the domain of Moravská Třebová. Charles I of Liechtenstein died in 1627 when, from the emperor’s perspective, peace and normality had finally returned to the Czech lands. His role in the confiscation process, albeit with certain dark shadows, nevertheless contributed towards the great advancement of the Princely House of the Liechtensteins, which would last for centuries.