Research for this essay was supported by the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD) and the Yale University Council on Western European Studies. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1991 annual meeting of the Social Science History Association.

1. Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe (hereafter GLA) 113:260, 149r–150v, “Bitt wegen der Unruohigen verursachten Sterben des Michel Ebners seel. zu Immenaich, seiner hinderlassenen Witwee und Waissen betreffent,” 23 December 1745. The victorious force numbered about two hundred, the vanquished about seventy.

2. On East Frisia see Kappelhoff, Bernd, Absolutistisches Regiment oder Ständeherrschaft? Landesherr und Landstände in Ostfriesland im ersten Drittel des 18. Jahrhunderts (Hildesheim, 1982);Google Scholar on Hohenlohe see Robisheaux, Thomas, Rural Society and the Search for Order in Early Modern Germany (Cambridge UK, 1989);CrossRefGoogle Scholar on Hessen see Trossbach, Werner, Soziale Bewegung und politische Erfahrung: Bäuerlicher Protest in hessischen Territorien, 1648–1805 (Weingarten, 1987);Google Scholar and on Swiss cantons see Suter, Andreas, ‘Troublen’ im Fürstbistum Basel (1726–1740): Eine Fallstudie zum bäuerlichen Widerstand im 18. Jahrhundert (Göttingen, 1985)Google Scholar and Felder, Pierre, “Ansätze zu einer Typologie der politischen Unruhen im scweizerischen Ancian Régime,” Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Geschichte 26 (1976): 324–89.Google Scholar

3. See Luebke, David M., “Community and the Politics of Discord: A Case Study of Peasant Rebellion in Early Modern Germany” (Ph.D. Diss., Yale University, 1990).Google Scholar Claudia Ulbrich first described these conflict as a “civil war” in her “Der Charakter bäuerlichen Widerstands in vorderösterreichischen Herrschaften,” in Schulze, Winfried, ed., Aufstände—Revolten—Prozesse: Beiträge zu bäuerlichen Widerstandsbewegungen im frühneuzeitlichen Europa (Stuttgart, 1983), 202–15, here 206.Google Scholar See also Haselier, Günther, Die Streitigkeiten der Hauensteiner mit ihren Obrigkeiten: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte Vorderösterreichs und des süddeutschen Bauernstandes im 18. Jahrhundert (Karlsruhe, 1940), 76–117.Google Scholar

4. The present essay employs what P. M. Jones calls a “maximalist” definition of “peasant,” i.e., “that portion of the population engaged in agricultural pursuits and who, by virtue of their close links to the soil, shared a common lifestyle and common outlook” on their social and political environment, with the proviso that this “common outlook” did not dictate political consensus; see Jones, P. M., The Peasantry in the French Revolution (Cambridge UK, 1988), 7.Google Scholar

5. See Blickle, Peter, Landschaften im alten Reich: Die staatliche Funktion des Gemeinen Mannes in Oberdeutschland (Munich, 1973);Google Scholar and Wunder, Heide, Die bäuerliche Gemeinde in Deutschland (Göttingen, 1986).Google Scholar

6. For overviews of social stratification in rural Germany see Boelcke, Willi A., “Wandlungen der dörflichen Sozialstruktur während Mittelalter und Neuzeit,” in Haushofer, Heinz and A. Boelcke, Willi, eds., Neue Wege und Forschungen der Agrargeschichte (Frankfurt, 1967), 80–103;Google Scholar and Irsliger, Franz, “Gross-und Kleinbesitz im westlichen Deutschland vom 13. bis 18. Jahrhundert: Versuch einer Typologie,” in Gunst, Péter and Hoffman, Tamàs, eds., Grand domaine et petites exploitations en Europe au Moyen Age et dans les temps modernes: Rapports nationaux (Budapest, 1982), 33–59.Google Scholar

7. See Schulze, Winfried, “Die veränderte Bedeutung sozialer konflikte im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert,” in Wehler, Hans-Ulrich, ed., Der Deutsche Bauernkrieg 1524–1526 (Göttingen, 1976), 277–302.Google Scholar

8. An overview of this conflict may be found in Wernet, Karl Friedrich, “St. Blasiens Versuche, sich der Grafschaft Hauenstein pfandweise zu bemächtigen,” Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins (hereafter ZGO) 107 (1959): 161–82Google Scholar. Claudia Ulbrich provides a detailed account of the conflict's earliest, late medieval phase in her Leibherrschaft am Oberrhein im Spätmittelalter (Göttingen, 1979).

9. Electoral franchise extended to all males above sixteen years of age; see GLA 113:231, 11r–14v, “Ohngefehrlicher Bericht wie die Redtman undt Einungs-Meister, auch Vögt, Steurer undt Geschwohrene ins Ambt genohmen werdten undt was ein oder der zue thuen undt zue verrichten habe” [n.d.]; on the authorities of cantonal magistrates see GLA 67:644, “Hauensteinische Landtsordnung, Freyheit und Begnadigungsbriefe de a[nn]o 1517, 1530, 1542, 1563.” On the institutional structure of the Outer Austrian estates, and the role of peasant representatives in it, see Quarthal, Franz, “Die habsburgischen Landstände in Südwestdeutschland,” in Bradler, Günther and Quarthal, Franz, eds., Von der Ständeversammlung zum demokratischen Parlament: Die Geschichte der Volksvertretung in Baden-Württemberg (Stuttgart, 1982), 79–92.Google Scholar

10. See Luebke, “Community and the Politics of Discord,” 99–115; Wernet, “St. Blasiens Versuche,” 161–82; and Haselier, Streitigkeiten, 7–16.

11. Generally, the term “faction’ is preferred here over “party” because the latter connotes a degree of institutionalized political organization that neither group possessed. By the same token, it is worth noting that Hauensteiners often used the term “Parthey” to describe factions, which in its eighteenth-century meaning referred to the participants in legal disputes; see, for example, GLA 113:258, 2r-10v, Interrogation of Joseph Fluem, Rheinfelden, 16 March 1744; and see “Faction, Factio, Parthie,” in Zedler, Johann H., ed., Grosses vollständiges Lexicon aller Wissenschaften und Künste, 64 vols. (Halle and Leipzig, 1732–1759), 9:64;Google Scholar and “Partheyen, Parteyen, Part, Parten, Gegen-Parten, Widerpart,” in ibid., 26:1051–57. “Factionalism” is used here to describe the condition of factional politics, not the process by which factions formed.

12. Brady, Thomas A. Jr., Turning Swiss: Cities and Empire, 1450–1550 (Cambridge UK, 1985), 34–36.Google Scholar

13. This was Joseph Tröndle of Unteralpfen. on Tröndle and his clan see Ebner, Jakob, Eine Müllerdynastie auf dem Schwarzwald (Radolfzell, 1908). Unlike their opponents, müllerisch peasants also availed themselves of the official nomenclature for factions.Google Scholar

14. The label salpeterich may have originated with “obedient” peasants; see GLA 113:229, 9r–10v [Letter of Martin Thoma of Haselbach to Joseph Tröndles of Schmitzingen], 21? May 1728.

15. GLA 113:261 [entire fond] and GLA 113:264 [entire fond], December 1745.

16. Blickle, Peter, Unruhen in der ständischen Gesellschaft 1300–1800 (Munich, 1988), 87CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Indeed, this proposition was one of few points of agreement between historians in what were then two German states. For a French articulation of the same idea see Pillorget, René, Les mouvemants insurrectionnels de Provence entre 1596 et 1715 (Paris, 1975).Google Scholar

17. This summary represents a distillation of Peter Blickle's programmatic arguments in Deutsche Untertanen: Ein Widerspruch (Munich, 1981). It should be noted that in this form, the communal revolt thesis overlooks documented occurrences of agrarian rebellion prior to the dissolution of the demesne system; see Epperlein, Siegfried, “Bäuerlicher Widerstand im frühen und hohen Mittelalter: Resultate, Probleme, Aufgaben der Forschung,” Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft 37 (1989): 314–28.Google Scholar

18. See Trossbach, Soziale Bewegung, 77; Blickle, Unruhen, 108; and Gerhard Heitz, “Agrarstruktur, bäuerlicher Widerstand, Klassenkampf im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert,” in Schulze, ed., Aufstände—Revolten—Prozesse, 149–65. These characterizations recall Yves-Marie Bercé's argument that the phenomenology of rebellion is strongly homologous with patterns of village ritual; see his Fête et révolte: Des mentalités populaires du XVIe au XVIIIe siècle (Paris, 1976).Google Scholar

19. Suter, ‘Troublen’, 106–7, 368–69; see also his “Die Träger bäuerlicher Widerstandsaktionen beim Bauernaufstand im Fürstbistum Basel 1726–1740; Dorfgemeinde—Dorffrauen—Knabenschaften,” in Schulze, ed., Aufstände—Revolten—Prozesse, 89–111.

20. Blickle, Peter, The Revolution of 1525: The German Peasants' War from a New Historical Perspective, trans. Brady, Thomas A. Jr, and Midelfort, H. C. Erik (Baltimore, 1981), 125–54. For similar arguments in an urban setting see Brady, Turning Swiss.Google Scholar

21. Suter, ‘Troublen’, 196.

22. Ibid., 107–8.

23. Thomas Robisheaux suggests that Blickle's concept of the “common man,” for example, “perpetuates an aristocratic stereotype of peasants…as a mass of undifferentiated agricultural laborers”; see his “Peasant Ravolts in Germany and Central Europe after the Peasants' War: Comments on the Literature,” Central European History 17 (1984): 384–403, here 392–94. Robert H. Lutz argues further that term “common man” referred not to the whole Third Estate, but to the enfranchised adult male population of villages and towns; the “common man” was properly the “man of the commune,” or Gemeinde-Mann; see his Wer war der Gemeine Mann? Der dritte Stand in der Krise des Spätmittelalters (Munich, 1979), 61–69, 87–92, passim.

24. The reference here is to what E. P. Thompson once characterized as the “spasmodic view” of preindustrial protest movements in “The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth Century,” Past and Present 50 (1971): 76–136. For a German sample see Schiff, Otto, “Die deutschen Bauernaufstände von 1525 bis 1789,” Historische Zeitschrift 130 (1924): 189–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25. The quote is from Suter ‘Troublen’, 371; see also Trossbach, Soziale Bewegung, 82.

26. See, for example, GLA 113:223, 127r–v, “Extract aus denen Beschreibungen der acht…Einungen,” 17 January 1747.

27. In 1745, only the hamlets of Lindau, Kutterau, Haselbach, and Rhina were uniformly müllerisch, while only Attlisberg and Fröhnd were all-salpeterisch. None of these localities could claim a population of more than a few dozen. See GLA 113:261 and GLA 113:264, December 1745.

28. See Luebke, “Community and the Politics of Discord,” 145–83.

29. Ibid., 154–70.

30. Ibid., 180, figure 5.

31. Compare GLA 113:222, 215r–16v, “Specification der ruehig und ohnruehigen Leüthen in denen 8 Einungen,” [1738]; GLA 113:244, 44r–47v, “1739 den 10. Tag Hornung hat das gantze Lant in der Graffschaft Hauwenstein die Vollmacht undersuocht…”; ibid., 103r–4v, “Specification oder Beschreibung der jenigen Manschafft… welche mit dem Berlaten undt allten Einungsmeystern haben,” 10 February 1739; GLA 113:261 and GLA 113:264, December 1745.

32. See Luebke, “Community and the Discord,” 172, graph 1.

33. Müllerisch peasants reported widespread support for Hans Friedle Albiez in 1726; see GLA 99:979, Joseph Tröndle of Unteralpfen to St Blasien, 12 February 1726.

34. GLA 113:225, 168r–169v, Birndorf Canton to Outer Austrian provincial government, 29 April 1727.

35. GLA 113:222, 215r–16v, “Specification der ruehig und ohnruehigen Leüthen” [1738].

36. GLA 113:244, 44r–47v, “1739 den 10. Tag Hornung”; and ibid., 103r–4v, “Specification oder Beschreibung der… Manschafft,” 10 Febuary 1739.

37. GLA 113:261 and GLA 113:264 [December 1745]; see also GLA 113:223, 127r–v, “Extract aus denen Beschreibungen der acht Einungen,” 12 January 1747.

38. According to his own testimony, Albiez was born in about 1654, and possessed a personal worth of about twenty thousand gulden. On his activities as cantonal magistrate see GLA 62:10170 [Public account books]. On his land tenures see GLA 67:1739, 143r, 5 May 1770; and GLA 66:7296, 143r, “Zinsrodel dess Waldambts,” 1709.

39. On Thoma see GLA 65:11419 [Nachlass J. L. Meyer], 5r–v; 61:13148 [Court protocols of the Forest Bureau, Waldshut], 2 May 1718; GLA 229:37381, II, Obervogteiamt Gurtweil to St Blasien, 3 December 1725; GLA 229:453, 25r, “Specification der Rosencrantz Bruederschafft Einkünfften zu Weilheimb,” 4 April 1709; and GLA 66:7296, “Zinsrodel dess Waldambts,” 1709.

40. GLA 65:11419 [Nachlass J. L. Meyer], 14r, “Relation über das Strafurtheil,” Innsbruck, 4 April 1730. His sentence was commuted to forced labor for life in a Hungarian mine. Thoma's personal worth was estimated at two thousand gulden; GLA 113:81, 130r–148v, “Repartition deren Kösten, so auss die Miliz-Comission, auch anderwärthig aufgegangen,” 1728.

41. GLA 66:7326, 34r [Renovation in Dogern], 1731. With an estimated personal worth of six thousand gulden, Binkert was one of the wealthiest residents of Hauenstein; see GLA 113:81 “Repartition deren Kösten,” 1728. With two thousand gulden, Brutschi, too, was well off; see GLA 113:248, A1 [Interrogation of Leonzi Brutschi[, 6–27 April 1739.

42. GLA 65:11419 [Nachlass J. L. Meyer], 48r–49v.

43. On Thoma-ab-Egg's personal worth see GLA 113:254, 96r–98v, Waldvogteiamt to Imperial Commission, 7 October 1730. On his seigneurial offices see capitular protocols of St Fridolin Convent, Säckingen, in GLA 61:10506, 301 April 1715; GLA 61:10507, 224–25, 4 December 1730; ibid., 360–61, 4 July 1736; and see GLA 229:6685, “Den sog. Amtszehent zu Bergalingen, Egg u. Jungholz betr.,” 1556–1785. On the individual fates of salpeterisch leaders see Luebke, “Community and the Politics of Discord,” 219–22; and Wohleb, Ludolph, “Salpeterführer und ihre Schicksale,” Die Pyramide: Wochenschrift zum Karlsruher Tagblatt 15 (1926): 87–89, 92–93.Google Scholar

44. GLA 113:81, “Repartition deren Kösten,” 1728.

45. GLA 65:11419 [Nachlass J. L. Meyer], 46r–v.

46. Luebke, “Community and the Politics of Discord,” 212–14. The fifty-one first-class ringleaders also contained numerous rural proffessionals:four millers, two innkeepers, two blacksmiths, a glassmaker, a wheelwright, and a shingler.

47. Two ringleaders, Adam Schmiedle and Conrad Binkert, received lessened sentences for their willingness to obey; Binkert was a former headman of Dogern. See GLA 65:11419 [Nachlass J. L. Meyer], 14r, “Relation über das Strafurtheil,” Innsbruck, 4 April 1730. Most of the 229 were sentenced to a few days or weeks of forced labor on road repair and deprived of their electoral privileges; see GLA 113:237, 83r–84v, “Specification deren jenigen in der lezten vorgewesten… ohnruhe interessierten Unterthanen welche… von activâ et passivâ bey denen Ämbterwahlen perpetuò vel ad tempus priviert,” Vienna, 28 March 1730.

48. See GLA 229:75482, Obervogt Reble to Kanzleiverwalter Dr. Schmid, 27 February 1706; and ibid., 61r–68v, “Güterbeschreib vom Frohnhof zu Nöggenschwiel,” 1733.

49. Bächle received a ten pound fine for attending a salpeterisch rally in 1726; see GLA 113:224, 52r–57v. In his letter of resignation as bailiff in 1751, Bächle remarked that he had “had to endure much aversion and antipathy” during the rebellions, and that while he “had wanted to settle the matter with them,” he had “become suspect within the village”; GLA 229:75480, 3r–4v, Johannes Bächle of Nöggenschwiel to Obervogteiamt, 20 September 1751.

50. Data linkages between ganealogical data found in GLA 65:11632 [Heriot for Nöggenschwiel], 1727–1730, and factional rosters in GLA 113:264, “Specification der Gemeint Neggenschwiel wass für rüehige Leüth verheürath, und lethig” [December 1745]; and ibid., “Specification der V. Ö. Reg. Underdona der Gemaint Neggenschwiel … so genambte Salbeterische” [December 1745]. Generally speaking, family structure in Hauenatein was patrilineal although inheritance was by custom partible.

51. GLA 113:264, “Specification der V. Ö. Reg. Underdona der Gemaint Neggenschwiel … so genambte Salbeterische” [December 1745]. On the factional reputation of Nöggenschwiel see GLA 113:250a, 13, “Remonstration über das von der Gemeind Noggenschwihl eingegebene Memoria die E[inun]gsm[eiste]r Wahl betreffend von neü und alten Einungsmeister auch Ausschuss der Dogemer Canton,” 22 April 1739. Uncommitted peasants were called nederal (“neutral”).

52. See Ebner, Eine Müllerdynastie.

53. The political heirs of Hans Friedle Albiez were his sons Friedle and Jacob, who in 1739 was described as his father's “living spirit”; see GLA 65:11419 [Nachlass J. L. Meyer], 36r.

54. See GLA 113:259, 302r–14v, Interrogation of Bläsi Hottinger of Niedergebisbach, 2–7 May 1746.

55. GLA 113:241, 83r–92v, Interrogation of Hans Friedle Gerpach of Bergalingen, 12 July 1737.

56. See GLA 113:230, 293r–v, Interrogation of Christa Thoma of Birndorf, 28 June 1739.

57. Blickle, Landschaften. See also his “Die staatliche Funktion der Gemeinde—die politische Funktion der Bauern: Bemerkungen aufgrund von oberdeutschen ländlichen Rechtsquellen,” in Blickle, Peter, ed., Deutsche ländliche Rechtsquellen: Probleme und Wege der Weistumsforschung (Stuttgart, 1977), 205–23.Google Scholar

58. GLA 113:231, 11r–14v, “Ohngefehrlicher Bericht.” Hans Denz of Wolpadingen and Friedle Albiez of Wilfingen, for example, succeeded each other almost without interruption from 1714 to 1726; see GLA 61:13148 [Court protocols of the Waldvogteiamt].

59. GLA 65:11419 [Nachlass J. L. Meyer], 60r; Alfred Straub has identified a similar oligarchic trend in the neighboring Margraviate of Baden; see his Das badische Oberland im 18. Jahrhundert: Die Transformation einer bäuerlichen Gesellschaft vor der Industrialisierung (Husum, 1977), 32–35.Google Scholar

60. On population growth in Hauenstein see Luebke, “Community and the Politics of Discord,” 191; and Wernet, Karl Friedrich, “Die Bevölkerung der Grafschaft Hauenstein,” ZGO 104 (1956): 245–57.Google Scholar

61. Stadtarchiv Freiburg im Breisgau, Cl Landstände 90, “Specification der Dritt. Ständ, Städten, Dörffern, Orthschafften” [1745]; and ibid., Cl Landstände 90, “Ohngefehrlicher Entwurff der ganzen Graffschafft Hauwenstein” [1745].

62. GLA 229:19644, “Rustical-Fassions Tabella,” circa 1761.

63. On Württemberg, see Wunder, Gerd, “Bäuerliche Oberschichten im alten Wirtenberg,” in Ülshofer, Kuno, ed., Bauer, Bürger, Edelmann: Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Sozialgeschichte von Gerd Wunder (Sigmaringen, 1984), 132–46;Google Scholar on Bavaria, see Endres, Rudolf, “Sozialer Wandel in Franken und Bayern auf der Grundlage der Dorfordnungen,” in Hinrichs, Ernst and Wiegelmann, Günther, eds., Sozialer und kultureller Wandel in der ländlichen Welt des 18. Jahrhunderts (Wolfenbüttel, 1982), 211–27.Google Scholar

64. Compare GLA 113:116, 26r–v, “Ohngefährlicher Auffsatz der fallbaren Leüthen in der Graffschaft Hawenstein,” 28 Feburay 1738; and GLA 113:98, “Graffschafft Hauwensteinische Seelenbeschreibung,” 20 November 1754.

65. For the original manumission treaty between Hauenstein and St. Blasien, see GLA 11:3135, “Recess zwischen St. Blasien und Hauenstein wegen Befreiung von der Leibeigenschaft und der Fallbarkeit,” 15 January 1738. The threat was contained in a letter from magistrate Joseph Tröndle of Unteralpfen to Waldvogt von Schönau dated 19 September 1737; see GLA 113:241, 180r–81v.

66. GLA 113:79, [Joseph Tröndle of Rotzel] “Ungefehrliche Vorstellung des Fallbarke[its]-Geschäffts so jeder Einungsmeister seinen Leüthen in dem Einung hinderbringen…solle” [1738]. The manumission fee was paid in full by the end of 1742; the receipt is preserved in GLA 11:3140.

67. Schulze, Winfried, “‘Geben Aufruhr und Aufstand Anlass zu heilsamen Gesetzen’: Beobachtungen über die Wirkungen bäuerlichen Widerstands in der Frühan Neuzeit,” in Schulze, ed., Aufstände—Revolten—Prozesse, 261–85;Google Scholar and Blickle, Peter, “The Criminalization of peasant Resistance in the Holy Roman Empire: Toward a History of the Emergence of High Treason in Germany,” Journal of Modern History 58 Suppl. (1986): S88–S97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar See also Diestelkamp, Bernhard, “Das Reichskammergericht im Rechtsleben des 16. Jahrhunderts,” in Rechtsgeschichte als Kulturgeschichte (Aalen, 1976), 435–80Google Scholar. On the possibilities of litigation within Austrian Crown Lands see Helfried Valentinisch, “Advokaten, Winkelschreiber und Bauernprokuratoren in lnnerösterreich in der frühen Neuzeit,” in Schulze, ed., Aufstände—Revolten—Prozesse, 183–201; and Schulze, Winfried, Bäuerlicher Widerstand und feudale Herrschaft in der Frühen Neuzeit (Bad Cannstatt, 1980), 77.Google Scholar

68. Schulze, “Veränderte Bedeutung.” See also his Bäuerlicher Widerstand, 76–85. See also Leiser, Wolfgang, Die Stragerichtsbarkeit in Süddeutschland: Formen und Entwicklungen (Cologne, 1971).Google Scholar

69. See Trossbach, Soziale Bewegung, 101–54, 179–90; Suter, ‘Troublen’, 156–60, 198–237; Hughes, Michael, Law and Politics in Eighteenth-Century Germany (Woodbridge UK, 1988); and Robisheaux, “Peasant Revolts”, 403.Google Scholar

70. For summaries see Heitz, Gerhard, “Agrarstruktur, bäuerlicher Widerstand, Klassenkampf im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert”, in Schulze, ed., Aufstände—Revolten—Prozesse, 149–65Google Scholar; and Schulze, Bäuerlicher Widerstand, 93–95.

71. See the imperial resolutions of 22 May 1728, 8 August 1731, 18 Feburay 1733, 25 Feburay 1733, and 26 March 1733 (excerpted in Bader, Joseph, “Urkundenregeste über die ehemaligen sankt-blasischen Niedergerichte” ZGO 7 (1856): 228–56, 328–50, here 330–32, 335–38).Google Scholar

72. For a narrative of the case see Haselier, Streitigkeiten, 72–76; for Linder's brief on behalf of Hauenstein see GLA 113:84, änige Remonstrationes undt Beschwährungspuncten allertrewgehorsambsten Cameralunderthanen der Graffschaft Hawenstein contra Ihro Hochwürden Gnaden den Herrn Prälathen”, 8 June 1728. On the lobbying efforts of Hauensteiners in Vienna see Ortner, Josef P., Marquard Herrgott (1694–1762): Sein Leben und Wirken als Historiker und Diplomat (Vienna, 1972)Google Scholar. As a diplomat, Marquard Herrgott represented the interests of St. Blasien against Hauenstein at the imperial court.

73. On salpeterisch delegations to Vienna (and elsewhere), see Luebke, “Community and the Politics of Discord”, 298–314. In the prefactional era, Hauensteiners had employed tactics of direct appeal with modest success; see GLA 67:1809, 414–20, and the account by Joseph Tröndle of Unteralpfen of a delegation to Vienna led by his father, Adam Tröndle; and ibid., 422–27, a diary of that deputation.

74. See Walker, Mack, German Home Towns: Community, State, and General Estate 1648–1871 (Ithaca, 1971), 1–2.Google Scholar

75. Trossbach, Soziale Bewegung, 19–36; and idem, “Bauernprotest als politisches Verhalten: Zu den Agrarkonflikten im Wetterau-Vogelsberg-Gebiet, 1648–1806”, Archiv für hessische Geschichte und Alterumskunde 24 (1984): 65–106.Google Scholar

76. Trossbach, Soziale Bewegung, 101–47.

77. See the controversies surrounding the actions of delegate Niclas Diemer in 1715 and 1716, described in ibid., 246–56. Peasant delegates from the Wetterau-Vogelsberg area frequently encouraged policies too militant for the majority of their constituents.

78. Ibid., 82, 84.

79. Ibid., 230–35.

80. See Kappelhoff, Absolutistisches Regiment; and Swart, Friedrich, Zur friesischen Agrargeschichte (Leipzig, 1910).Google Scholar

81. The estates encountered so much difficulty keeping “obedient” peasants in line that in late 1726, 150 soldiers were dispatched to exact a thirty-thousand-gulden penalty from one hinterland district; see Kappelhoff, Absolutistisches Regiment, 251–55, 325–26, 374–76.

82. The predominantly “resistant” villages in the coastal lowlands were mainly Reformed, while “obedient” peasants were more often Lutheran, like the prince. See Engelbrecht, Jörg, Die reformierte Landgemeinde in Ostfriesland im 17. Jahrhundert (Frankfurt, 1982).Google Scholar

83. Kappelhoff, Abolutistisches Regiment, 311–2, 320, 331–2; on the extreme social inequalities among East Frisian peasants see also Swart, Zur friesischen Agrargeschichte, 263–70, 307–23.

84. Blickle, Peter, “Bäuerliche Rebellionen im Fürststift St. Gallen”, in Aufruhr und Empörung, 215–95Google Scholar. Tensions in Toggenburg sparked a full-blown civil war within the Swiss Confederation known as the “War of the Twelve” (1712); see Im Hof, Ulrich, “Ancien Régime”, in Handbuch der schweizer Geschichte, 2 vols. (Zurich, 1975–1977), 2:694–700.Google Scholar

85. Blickle, “Fürststift St. Gallen”, 255, 290.

86. Suter, ‘Troublen’, 117–20; Felder, “Ansätze”, 359–60.

87. Felder, “Ansätze,” 341–42; Im Hof, “Ancien Régime,” 762–73; and Schalter, Dominik, “Geschichte der Linden und Harten in Schwyz”, Der Geschichtsfreund 21 (1866): 345–96; 22 (1867): 162–208.Google Scholar

88. Felder, “Ansätze”, 341, 343.

89. This interpretation draws on the work of British anthropologist Anthony P. Cohen; see his The Symbolic Construction of Community (Chichester, 1985),Google Scholar and idem, “Of Symbols and Boundaries, or, Does Ertie's Greatcoat Hold the Key?”, in Cohen, Anthony P., ed., Symbolising Boundaries: Identity and Diversity in British Cultures (Manchester UK, 1986), 1–19.Google Scholar

90. Sabean, David, Power in the Blood: Popular Culture and Village Discourse in Early Modern Germany (Cambridge Uk, 1984), 29.Google Scholar

91. Cohen calls this the “implicit negativity” of community: the meaning of community depends in part on the changing character of what lies beyond its symbolic boundaries; see Cohen, Symbolic Construction, 115 and idem, “of Symbols and Boundaries”, 1–19.

92. In 1728, representatives of both groups sat on a “grievance committee” to litigate against St. Blasien; see GLA 65:11419 [Nachlass J. L. Meyer], 7r. Moreover, the list of common grievances submitted to imperial arbitration in that year included each of the complaints which Hans Friedle Albiez raised in 1726; see GLA 113:224, 403r–404v, Hans Friedle Albiez to Conrad Binkert, 9 August 1726.

93. See Luebke, “Community and the Politics of Discord”, 230–71.

94. GLA 113:267, Joseph Jehle to Bläsi Hottinger, 12 March 1746. Jehle used the word “Gegentheil”.

95. On the concept of habitus see Bourdieu, Pierre, Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, trans. Nice, Richard (Cambridge UK, 1984), 101–2;Google Scholarand idem, Outline of a Theory of Practice, trans. Nice, Richard (Cambridge UK, 1977), 78–95Google Scholar. Trossbach alludes to the same phenomenon When he asserts that certain families in the Wetterau–Vogelsberg district of Hessen developed “traditions” of non-participation in communally authorized litigations and resistance actions; see his Soziale Bewegung, 68–69.