¹ See a marginal notation in the hand of Chancellor Enno R. Brenneysen on Niedersächsisches Staatsarchiv Aurich, hereafter referred to as StAA, Rep. 4 C III b 5 (b), Petition of Sunntke Poppinga of Upgant-Utwarfer Hörn, presented January 21, 1727: “[ SHD] laßen es bey der in den Kayserlichen respectivè und Commissarischen Patenten denen gehohrsahmen Unterthanen, darunter die Supplicanten mitgehöhren, enthaltener Versicherung bewenden und wenden… daß die Supplicanten deren Genuß würcklich erhalten mögen” (i.e., “was sie etwa hinführo gezwungen thun müsten, ihnen solches condoniret werden möge”).

² StAA Rep. 4 C III b 30, Jibbo Poppinga and Dirk Imels Agena, “Klag und Bitt-Schrifft der Eingesessenen im Nord-Brockmer-Land, wegen der von denen Rebellen ihnen angedrohten Gewalt,” presented December 6, 1726.

³ For the ban against signing rebellious manifestos or paying Wochengeld, see StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, February 20, 1726. A marginal note on this document indicates that the ban was announced with a ringing of the church bell and posted on church doors in villages of Pogum, Ditzum, Critzum, and Hatzum. Ten days later, the ban went out to villages in the rural districts of Emden and Greetsiel and was posted in the villages of Pewsum, Canum, Freepsum, Midlum, Hinte, Westerhusen, Loppersum, Larrelt, Twixlum, and Woltzeten. See StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, “Fürstl. Mandat an die Eingeseßenen Embder- und Greetmer Ambts,” March 1, 1726.

⁴ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 61, “Acta in Regierungs-Sachen contra Abbo Poppinga und Peter Abben, item Hinrich Jansen von Osteel 1727.”

⁵ For Europe in general, see Blickle, Peter, Ellis, Steven, and Österberg, Eva, “The Commons and the State: Representation, Influence, and the Legislative Process, in Resistance, Representation, and Community, ed. Blickle, Peter (Oxford: Clarendon, 1997), 115–54.Google Scholar For the Empire and its territories, see Würgler, Andreas, “Voices from Among the ‘Silent Masses’: Humble Petitions and Social Conflicts in Early Modern Central Europe,” International Review of Social History 46 Supplement (2001): 11–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Neuhaus, Helmut, Reichstag und Supplikationsausschuβ (Berlin: Dunker & Humblot, 1977), esp. 87–147Google Scholar; Scribner, Robert W., “Police and the Territorial State in Sixteenth-Century Württemberg,” in Politics and Society in Reformation Europe: Essays for Sir Geoffrey Elton, eds. Kouri, E. I. and Scott, Tom (New York: St. Martin's, 1987), 103–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hohkamp, Michaela, Herrschaft in der Herrschaft: Die vorderösterreichische Obervogtei Triberg von 1737 bis 1780 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998)Google Scholar; Landwehr, Achim, Policey im Alltag: Die Implementation frühneuzeitlicher Policeyordnungen in Leonberg (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 2000)Google Scholar; and the studies by Fuhrmann, Rosi, Würgler, Andreas, and Holenstein, André in Gemeinde und Staat im Alten Europa, ed. Blickle, Peter (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1998).Google Scholar For France, see Hodler, Beat, “Doléances, Requêtes und Ordonnances: Kommunale Einflußnahme auf den Staat in Frankreich im 16. Jahrhundert,” in Gemeinde und Staat, ed. Blickle, P., 23–67Google Scholar; and Markoff, John, The Abolition of Feudalism: Peasants, Lords, and Legislators in the French Revolution (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1996).Google Scholar For Britain, see Zaret, David, “Peritions and the ‘Invention’ of Public Opinion in the English Revolution,” American Journal of Sociology 10 (1996): 1497–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Zaret, David, Origins of Democratic Culture: Printing, Petitions, and the Public Sphere in Early-Modern England (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000)Google Scholar; Hart, James S., Justice upon Petition: The House of Lords and the Reformation of Justice, 1621–1675 (London: HarperCollins, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kümin, Beat, “Parish und Local Government: Die englische Kirchengemeinde als politische Institution, 1350–1650,” in Gemeinde und Staat, ed. P. Blickle, 209–238.Google Scholar For the Dutch Republic, see van Nierop, Henk, “Popular Participation in Politics in the Dutch Republic,” in Resistance, Representation, and Community, ed. P. Blickle, 272–90Google Scholar; Nierop, , “Private Interests, Public Policies: Petitions in the Dutch Republic,” in The Public and Private in Dutch Culture of the Golden Age, eds. Wheelock, Arthur K. Jr, and Seef, Adele (Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press, 2000), 33–39.Google Scholar

⁶ Quoted in Nubola, Cecilia, “Supplications between Politics and Justice: The Northern and Central Italian States in the Early Modern Age,” International Review of Social History 46 Supplement (2001): 25–56, here 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷ Fuhrmann, Rosi, Kümin, Beat, and Würgler, Andreas, “Supplizierende Gemeinden: Aspekte einer vergleichenden Quellenbetrachtung,” in Gemeinde und Staat, ed. P. Blickle, 319–321.Google Scholar

⁸ Holenstein, André, “‘Local-Untersuchung’ und ‘Augenschein’: Reflexionen auf die Lokalität im Verwaltungsdenken und -handeln des Ancien Régime,” Werkstatt Geschichte 16 (1997): 19–33Google Scholar; Schnabel-Schüle, Helga, “Kirchenvisitationen und Landesvisitationen als Mittel der Kommunikation zwischen Herrscher und Untertanen,” in Im Spannungsfeld von Recht und Ritual. Soziale Kommunikation in Mittelalter und Früher Neuzeit, eds. Duchhardt, Heinz and Melville, Gerd (Cologne: Böhlau, 1997), 173–86Google Scholar; and Sabean, David W., “The Sins of Belief: A Village Remedy for Hoof-and-Mouth Disease (1796),” in his Power in the Blood: Village Discourses in Early Modern Germany (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 174–98.Google Scholar

⁹ Landwehr, , Policey im Alltag, 97–140Google Scholar; Jütte, Robert, “Sprachliches Handeln und kommunikative Situation: Der Diskurs zwischen Obrigkeit und Untertan am Beginn der Neuzeit,” in Kommunikation und Alltag in Spätmittelalter und Früher Neuzeit: Internationaler Kongress—Krems an der Donau, 9. bis 12. Oktober 1990 [ Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch- Historische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte, vol. 596] (Vienna: Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1992), 159–82.Google Scholar

¹⁰ A note on terminology for clarity's sake: My use of “repression” refers to the application of state violence, loosely defined to include judicial penalization, within the broader context of “pacification,” a term I use to encompass the entire panoply of tactics employed to restore order, including symbolic action, social bribery, and the redress of grievances deemed “legitimate.”

¹¹ Most do not analyze repression at all or relegate it to narrative epilogue. See, for example, Neveux, Hugues, Les révoltes paysannes en Europe (XIV^e–XVII^e siècles) (Paris: Albin Michel, 1997).Google Scholar Some notable exceptions are Suter, Andreas, Der Schweizerische Bauernkrieg von 1653: Politische Sozialgeschichte—Sozialgeschichte eines politischen Ereignisses (Tübingen: Bibliotheca Academica, 1997), 525–34Google Scholar; and Landolt, Niklaus, Untertanenrevolten und Widerstand auf der Basler Landschaft im sechszehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert (Liestal: Verlag des Kantons Basel-Landschaft, 1996), 654–91Google Scholar, both of which treat the Swiss Peasants' War of 1653. The situation is no better with respect to late medieval repressions; see the lament of Jan Dumolyn in “The Legal Repression of Revolts in Late Medieval Flanders,” Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 68 (2000): 479–521.Google Scholar

¹² For the use of “well-intentioned” (wohlititentioniert) to describe the prince's loyalists, see, for example, StAA Rep. 4 C III b 29, “Bericht der Beamten zu Greetsiehl,” August 5, 1726. Another term was wohlgesinnet; ibid., “Bericht der Beamten und des Rentmeisters zu Greetsiehl,” August 6, 1726.

¹³ Arnade, Peter J., Realms of Ritual: Burgundian Ceremony and Civic Life in Late Medieval Ghent (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1996), 199.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Suter, , Der Schweizerische Bauernkrieg, 529–30Google Scholar; Heusler, Andreas, Der Bauernkrieg von 1653 in der Landschaft Basel (Basel: Neukirch, 1854), 145–46.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Bierbrauer, Peter, “Bäuerliche Revolten im Alten Reich: Ein Forschungsbericht,” in Aufruhr und Empörung? Studien zum bäuerlichen Widerstand im Alten Reich, ed. Blickle, Peter (Munich: Beck, 1980), 1–68Google Scholar; Holenstein, André, Die Huldigung der Untertanen. Rechtskultur und Herrschaftsordnung (800–1800) (Stuttgart and New York: G. Fischer, 1991), 409–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁶ By far the most sophisticated analysis of such border-crossings is Suter, Der Schweizerische Bauernkrieg. For the distinction between “latent,” “manifest,” and “violent” forms of resistance, see Schulze's, Winfried seminal Bäuerlicher Widerstand und feudale Herrschaft in der frühen Neuzeit (Bad Canstatt: Frommann-Holzboog, 1980), 89–114.Google Scholar

¹⁷ An important exception is Würgler, Andreas, “Diffamierung und Kriminalisierung von ‘Devianz’ in frühneuzeitlichen Konflikten: Für einen Dialog zwischen Protestforschung und Kriminalitätsgeschichte,” in Devianz, Widerstand, und Herrschaftspraxis in der Vormoderne. Studien zu Konflikten im südwestdeutschen Raum (15.-18. Jahrhundert), ed. Häberlein, Mark (Konstanz: Universitätsverlag, 1999), 317–47.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Jakubowski-Tiessen, Manfred, Sturmflut 1717. Die Bewältigung einer Naturkatastrophe in der frühen Neuzeit (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1992), Tabellen, 270–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jakubowski-Tiessen, , “Ostfriesland in der Krise: Die große Flut von 1717 und ihre Folgen,” in Kopfschatzung 1719, ed. Schulte, Erhard (Aurich: Upstalsboom-Gesellschaft, 1999), 7–11.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Uphoff, Rolf, “Viehseuche in Ostfriesland im 18. Jahrhundert,” Ostfreesland. Ein Kalender für Jedermann (1997): 121–131Google Scholar; (1998): 125–30; and Hollweg, Walter, Die Geschichte des älteren Pietismus in den Reformierten Gemeinden Ostfrieslands von den Anfängen bis zur Grossen Erweckungsbewegung (um 1650–1750) (Aurich: Ostfriesische Landschaft, 1978), 58–61.Google Scholar The quotation is from Hollweg.

²⁰ ” The definitive account of these events is Kappelhoff, Bernd, Absolutistisches Regiment oder Ständeherrschaft? Landesherr und Landstände in Ostfriesland im ersten Drittel des 18. Jahrhunderts (Hildesheim: August Lax, 1982). Much was at stake in maintaining these distinctions, since two members of the Hausmannstand sat on a committee that oversaw the day-to-day administration of county finances.Google Scholar

²¹ StAA Rep. 4 B II w 13, “Conferenz Protocoll consilii intimi dd 11. Mart. 1726 wegen des den vormahligen Administratoren erregten Aufruhrs w. der im Amte Lehr und sonst continuirenden Streittereyen und Gewallthätigkeiten, und dagegen vorzukehrenden Anstalten.”

²² According to rules laid down in 1620, franchise also extended to any male who owned full or half hide (Herd) in East Frisia's poorer sandy hinterlands. These provisions excluded poorer freeholders, village artisans, and all rent-paying tenant farmers. For overviews of territorial law governing the electoral franchise of the Third Estate, see König, Joseph, Verwaltungsgeschichte bis zum Aussterben seines Fürstenhauses (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1955), 326–28Google Scholar; Wiemann, Harm, “Die Bauern in der ostfriesischen Landschaft im 16. bis 18. Jahrhundert,” in Bauernschaft und Bauerstand 1500–1970. Büdinger Vorträge 1971–1972, ed. Franz, Günther (Limburg: August Starke, 1975), 153–64Google Scholar; Kappelhoff, , Absolutistisches Regiment, 32–34Google Scholar; and Heissler, Sabine, “Die ‘ostfriesische Singularität’: Die politische und soziale Stellung der ostfriesichen Landstände im beginnenden Absolutismus, 1660–1690” (Ph.D. diss., University of Mannheim, 1995), 81–85.Google Scholar

²³ Heissler, , “Ostfriesische Singularität.”Google Scholar

²⁴ This according to a new Kanzleioranung promulgated in 1720; see König, , Verwaltungsgeschichte, 42, 91–92.Google Scholar

²⁵ On Wochengeld, see StAA Rep. 4 C III b 29, “Bericht des Drosten [ von Specht] zu Pewsum,” October 18, 1726.

²⁶ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 21, “Vereinigung der Ämter Emden und Greetsiel,” February 26, 1726. Over the following months, the resolution appears to have been ratified at district assemblies and village communes. See, for example, StAA Rep. 4 C III b 34, Resolution of the Ostervogtei, Amt Greetsiel, April 11, 1726.

²⁷ See, for example, StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, Supplication of the Niederreiderland communes, July 11, 1726.

²⁸ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, Report of Jacob Haits, Heuermann in Canhusen, March 5, 1726.

²⁹ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 29, “Des Jacob Claesen Anzeige wegen der ihm … zugefügten Gewaltthätigkeiten,” October 9, 1726. In May 1726, it was resolved to impose Wochengeld on the tenants of noble lands; StAA Rep. 4 C III b 34, Report of Rentmeister Schmidt, Greetsiel, May 27, 1726. During the Estates’ muster of troops and funds in July and August 1726, domain tenants came under especially intense pressure to pay Wochengeld or suffer the consequences. See StAA Rep. 4r C III 29, Supplication der fürstl. Heuerleute zu Dünebroeck,” [ July] 1726.

³⁰ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 29, “Registratur Commissionis die von denen Renitenten in Nieder-Reiderland verübte Spoliationes betr.,” August 13, 1726.Google Scholar

³¹ “.… bächten, daß man ihnen Instruction und Anweisung geben möchte, wie sie sich in dieser Sache zu verhalten”; StAA Rep. 4 C III b 29, Heuerleute of Grasshaus Pewsum to E. R. Brenneysen, September 5, 1726. See also ibid., Supplication of Erbpächter and Heuerleute in Amt Berum, September 2, 1726.

³² StAA Rep. 4 C III b 29, Gerd Wessels to E. R. Brenneysen, September 10, 1726; ibid., “Des Jacob Claesen Anzeige,” October 9, 1726.Google Scholar

³³ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, Report and Petition for Relief from Pastor J. E. Emmius to “Vielgelehrter Freund” [ E. R. Brenneysen], Klein Midlum, March 16, 1726. See also ibid., “Des Rentmeisters zu Greetsyl… Bericht vom 30 Marty 1726” concerning the Estates’ attempt to collect dike maintenance contributions from his tenant, Dirk Jansen of Freepsum. These supplemental exactions continued well into February 1727; see ibid., “Extract uit een brief van Emden,” February 14, 1727.Google Scholar

³⁴ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 29, Albert Betten to E. R. Brenneysen, October 12, 1726. As if to drive the point home, Betten was compelled to supply fodder for the horses and cattle that the Estates’ militia had confiscated from domain tenants in the nearby villages of Marienhafe and Upgant. See StAA Rep. 4 C III b 29, “Registratur von der Rauberey und Gewalt so an des H. Geh. Rat und Cantzlers Brenneysen Heuermann ausgeübet worden,” December 12, 1726.

³⁵ Pastor Emmius kept Brenneysen well informed on developments in the Niederreiderland district; see, for example, StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, J. E. Emmius to E. R. Brenneysen, February 17, 1726. Emmius served in Klein-Midlum from 1712 to 1748.

³⁶ A good example of this is a report by the presiding officer (Drost) of Greetsiel district, which conveyed the information contained in a petition for relief from Arend Willems of Cirkwehrum and Wilke von Asse of Uttum, both of whom begged that their names be kept secret; StAA Rep. 4 C III b 30, Report of Drost Christian Eberhard von Specht, April 13, 1726.

³⁷ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, Report and Petition for Relief from Pastor Emmius, J. E. to Brenneysen, E. R., Klein-Midlum, March 16, 1726.Google Scholar

³⁸ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, Emmius, J. E. to Brenneysen, E. R., Klein-Midlum, July 21, 1726.Google Scholar

³⁹ See StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, Emmius, J. E. to “Wehrtester Freund” [ E. R. Brenneysen], Klein- Midlum, March 11, 1726.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 19, “Anzeige was für gottlose Reden der Goeke Tholen und Johann Kreffting zu Kritzum von Sr. HochFr. Durchl. geführet haben,” April 28, 1726.Google Scholar

⁴¹ “Ferner machen ihnen auch bekant, daß wir von Ditzum es immer aufhalten, ja von einer Woche zur andern aufhalten, aber wir können es nicht länger aufhalten … So wir dan Geld geben müßen, so ersuchen wir Ew. Hochmögende Herr es nicht übel zu mögen nehmen”; StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, Schreiben der Eingeseßenen zu Ditzum darinn sie sich beschweren über die Drohungen derer von Jemgum und Ober-Reiderland wegen unrechtmäßiger Geld-Forderungen etc.,” praes. March 5, 1726.

⁴² “Wat kan ju dat nu helpen, dat jy furstlick sind?… jy holen hehn wat ju nu overkumt”; StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, “Registratur von den ärgerl. Reden, so der Rathsverwandter Haickes aus Embden auf öffentl. Teich geführet,” July 15, 1726.Google Scholar

⁴³ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 29, “Anzeige einiger Eingeseßene Auricher Ambts,” October 10, 1726.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 2, “Extract derer, von denenjenigen gehorsahmen Eingeseßenen unter derer Renitenten Zwange stehen, dem Commissarischen Patent vom 5tn Aug. 1726 zufolge eingelangten Anzeigen, worin sie anders nicht als aus Noth und Zwang es mit denenselben halten müsten, declariret, deswegen depreciret, und ihre vorige Submissions-Erklährung wiederhohlet” [ ca. September 18, 1726].

⁴⁵ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 33, “Protocollum wegen des Wiederstandes des Amts Friedeburg wieder den Überfall der im Lande herumbschweifenden Rebellen,” August 29, 1726.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ StAA Rep. 4 B V f, 101, 281r-284v, “Supplicatio … an Seiten Johann Peters zu Wirdumb den ihm bey jüngster Ermächtigung einiger Leüthen … in seinem Haus verursachten Schaden … betr.,” presented February 28, 1726.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Thus Severin Schröder, a prominent organizer of the Estates’ militia, demanded “with harsh words” from Warner Ter Braeck an explanation of “why he, as an Administrator of the Third Estate, did not have the inhabitants of his district under better control [Zwange] and subject to their will”; StAA Rep. 4 C III 34, “Der Beamten zu Greetsyhl Bericht,” April 29, 1726.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ It is difficult to imagine, for example, how Chancellor Brenneysen's tenant could have escaped plunder, even if he complied fully with the Estates' demands. And sure enough the tenant, Albert Betten, lost six of his best horses and four of his cattle, a loss worth seven hundred gulden, and that even after satisfying an earlier requisition for fodder; StAA Rep. 4 C III b 29, “Registratur von der Rauberey und Gewalt,” December 12, 1726.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ To no surprise, the princely regime prosecuted acts of defiance wherever it continued to hold the upper hand. Throughout 1725 and 1726, for example, the regime prosecuted Harm Addicks, Bene Engelcke, Claes Ludwigs, Broer Linesch, and Peter Hansen for writing and disseminating a text critical of an official sluice inspection; see StAA Rep. 4 C III b 61.

⁵⁰ See Davis, Natalie Zemon, Fiction in the Archives: Pardon Tales and their Tellers in Sixteenth-Century France (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987), 3–4.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Zedler's, Johann HeinrichUniversal-Lexikon Aller Wissenschaften und Künste, vol. 41 (Leipzig: Zedler, 1744), col. 365.Google Scholar

⁵² Würgler, , “Voices from Among the ‘Silent Masses’,” 15.Google Scholar

⁵³ Here I take my conceptual cues from Koziol, Geoffrey, Begging Pardon and Favor: Ritual and Political Order in Early Medieval France (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1992), 59–77Google Scholar; and Althoff, Gerd, “Demonstration und Inszenierung: Spielregeln der Kommunikation in mittelalterlicher Öffentlichkeit,” Frühmittelalterliche Studien 27 (1993): 27–50.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ See Groebner, Valentin, Gefährliche Geschenke. Ritual, Politik und die Sprache der Korruption in der Eidgenossenschaft im späten Mittelalter und am Beginn der Neuzeit (Constance: UVK, 2000).Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Thus Dirk Herlyn and Rolf Ebbels, for example, allowed themselves to be elected as delegates from their respective villages to “rebellious” assemblies of Greetsiel district; but they also attended a rump diet convened in Aurich by Georg Albrecht. Herlyn even did some spying for Brenneysen; see StAA Rep. 4 C III b 34, March 19, 1726 and ibid., “Der Beamten zu Greetsyhl.… Bericht vom 29. April den Umbständen der am 25. in Grothusen anmaßentlich gehaltnenen Ambts-Versammlung und dabey genommene Resolution betr.”

⁵⁶ StAA Rep. 4 B II w 17, 9r-12r, Privy Council Protocol, entry for June 4, 1727; StAA Rep. 4 C III b 70, vol. 1, “Specification dererjenigen Renitenten, welcher Heuren bey ihren Heuer-Leuthen verarrestiret sind” [ December 1727].

⁵⁷ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 70, vol. 1, Instruction to Beamte in Emden, Leer, Berum, Greetsiel, Aurich, and Stickhausen “wegen Arrestierung der Heuergelder der Eingeseßenen in der Stadt Emden und in den Ämtern,” November 24, 1727; ibid., “Registratur wegen der auf Serenissimi … Befehl verarrestirten Heuer-Gelder betr.,” November 26, 1727.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ On an ad hoc basis, Brenneysen also forgave rents in arrears owed on lands belonging to Emden patricians. See StAA Rep. 4 C III b 79, “Memoriale … ab Seiten Reind Hildebrands zu Twixlum die Supplicantis Eignern, dem Syndicus Hessling bey dem … Amtsgerichte zu Emden erschleichene… Mandata… betr.” (n.d.).

⁵⁹ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 70, vol. 1, “Specification derer bey der Kaiserl. Subdelegierten Commission ad depositum eingekommene Heuergelder,” [ 1728].

⁶⁰ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 70, vol. 1, “Die Arrestierte Heuer-Gelder des H. B. Penneborgs Heuerleute betr.” [ 1727].

⁶¹ StAA Rep 4 C III b 70, vol. 1, “Specification derer bey der Kayserl. Subdelegirten Commission ad depositum eingekommene Heuergelder” [ 1728].

⁶² StAA Rep. 28, 2834, Amtsgerichtsprotokoll Greetsiel, 1725–1731, pp. 160–1 (entry for December 21, 1727).

⁶³ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 63, “Designation … derjenigen Gühtern so mir… Lücke Tammen Dircks von die Renitenten oder Rebellen so des Vaterlandes haben abgeraubet oder sonsten Schaden zugefüget sind wie folgt,” Canum, December 3, 1727.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ A process of review adjusted this sum down to “only” 51,474 Reichstaler; Kappelhoff, , Absolutistisches Regiment, 346–47.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 32, October 9, 1726. In his peridon, Claesen made explicit this connection to Georg Albrecht's failure to protect a dependent from depredation by the Estates' faction.

⁶⁶ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 79, “Bericht des Amtsmanns zu Lehr … wegen zwischen Eignere u. Heuerleute über die … Wacht etc. vorkommenden Disputen,” November 19, 1727.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ StAA Rep. 4 C II b 79, “Fürstl. VO wie es zwsichen Eigneren und Heuerleuten wegen der … Wochengelder und sonsten zu halten sey,” December 9, 1727.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ StAA Rep 4 C III b 79, Decree of the Imperial Sub-Delegated Commission, Aurich, January 7, 1728. Claims against damage to moveable goods belonging to tenants would be liquidated out of money fines collected from “ringleaders” and “rebels.”

⁶⁹ StAA Rep. C III b 79, “Index der zwischen denen Heuerleuthen und ihren Eignern bey der Käys. Subdelegierten Commission wegen der von jenen pendente rebellione bezahlten Wacht- und Wochen und andere Gelder ventilirten Acten” [ 1728].

⁷⁰ StAA Rep. C III b 70, “Memoriale von Seythen des Hn. Barons von Schefferts Heuerleuthen zu Wehner, Heetie Albers and Geriet Jürgens dererselben eingeschickte Rechnungen von denen tempore rebellionis abgezwungene Wacht- und Commando Geldern … betreffend.”

⁷¹ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 79, Protocollum Commiss. Caesar, die Streitigkeiten zwischen Eigenem und Heüerleüthen derer zur Zeit der vorgewesenen Rebellion ausgezahlten Wacht- und Wochen- Gelder betr. An: 1728.

⁷² StAA Rep. 4 B IV d 109, 8r-9v, “Unterthänige Supplication um … Salvation derer durch der vorgewesener Rebellion einzutreiben, versperrter, nunmehro aber durch von denen Eignerern verfügte Conscription praecludirter Liquiden Forderungen ab Seiten Meindert Helmers zu Jemmingen,” praes. February 28, 1728.

⁷³ See the case of Reind Hildenbrand v. Gerhard Hessling, Synic of Emden, StAA Rep. 4 C III b 79, no. 198 [1728].

⁷⁴ StAA Rep 4 C III b 51, vol. 1, “Register, waß innenbenante Renitenten … liefern sollen,” 1727.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ See Kappelhoff, , Abolutistisches Regiment, 344–346.Google Scholar Money fines for criminal behavior continued to be paid decades after the disturbances in East Frisia had run their course. Indeed, the major “Ringleaders” were still paying them off long after the native Cirksena dynasty died out and East Frisia was absorbed into the Kingdom of Prussia in 1743–1744. At the time of Prussian annexation, the Kriegs- und Domänenkammer conducted a comprehensive audit of the dynasty's debts and incomes; among the latter was the unpaid balance of a 150,000 Thaler penalty imposed on the principal “ringleaders.” Predictably, these ringleaders hoped that Prussia would excuse the obligation, but the fiscally ever-watchful Prussian administration adopted a policy of strict adherence to the status quo and investigated the matter thoroughly. According to a list compiled for the occasion in 1748, 180 individual ringleaders still owed fines in 1744. Among them were Bernhard Heinrich von dem Appelle, the Emden mayors Wermelskirchen and Budde, Syndicus Gerhard Hessling, Hauwo P. Penneborg, Adolph Christoph Stoschius.Jacque de Pottere, and Sebastian Anton Homfeld—a veritable social register both of Emden's patrician elite and the leadership of the Estates’ party against Prince Georg Albrecht in 1725–1727. The list can be found in StAA Rep. 6 (Preußische Kriegs- und Domänenkammer 1744–1806), Nr. 248 (Untersuchungen zu dem Fürsten von der kaiserlichen Kommission 1730 zugesprochenen Entschädigungsgelder von 150000 Reichsthaler). The breakdown by administrative district was this: Stickhausen two; Aurich four; Rysum four; Berum seven; Norden eleven; Greetsiel twenty-eight; Emden, more than thirty; Leer, more than one hundred. Thorsten Melchers is convinced that no fines were imposed after the Prussian annexation of East Frisia in 1744, and that the list served purely informational purposes. I am indebted to him for drawing my attention to these records (private communication, September 20, 1999).

⁷⁶ By comparing the 1727 Renitentenregister with head tax records from 1719, it is possible to get a rough idea of the wealth distributions in East Frisia. This comparison shows that resident enfranchised freeholders—the Hausmannstand—in the rural district headquartered in Greetsiel, north of Emden, had an average personal worth of just more than 29,800 gulden. In the rural district headquartered at Emden itself, the corresponding figure was approximately 12,600. These figures must be approached carefully, however, because they are based on on-the-spot inspections taken in 1727; they do not, therefore, take indebtedness into account, and they exclude people who entered a farm between 1719 and 1727 as well as the wealth of “loyalist” freeholders. An alternative approach is to examine average farm size in 1719, which yields approximately eighty-one Grasen for the Greetsiel district and sixty-two Grasen for the Emden district. But without precise data on land values, it is impossible to translate these data into estimates of personal worth. Using the first of these methods, we can say that the average personal worth of day laborers resident in the Greetsiel district was in the neighborhood of 960 gulden. The data for the Emden district are too scant to warrant an estimate.

⁷⁷ StAA Rep 4 C III b 51, vol. 1, “Register, waß innenbenante Renitenten … liefern sollen,” 1727Google Scholar. These percentages do not include a certain number of persons who were fined but whose classification was not recorded.

⁷⁸ The equivalent sum in East Frisian gulden was 8,200. These figures exclude fines imposed on the inhabitants of three towns—Emden, Norden, and Leer—who were convicted of criminal involvement in the rebellion.

⁷⁹ Härter, Karl, “Social Control and the Enforcement of Police-Ordinances in Early Modern Criminal Practice,” in Institutionen, Instrumente, und Akteure sozialer Kontrolle und Disziplinierung im frühneuzeitlichen Europa/Institutions, Instruments, and Agents of Social Control in Early Modern Europe, ed. Schilling, Heinz (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1999), 39–63, here 58–71Google Scholar; Härter, , “Strafverfahren im frühneuzeitlichen Territorialstaat: Inquisition, Entscheidungsfindung, Supplikation,” in Kriminalitätsgeschichte: Beiträge zur Sozial- und Kulturgeschichte der Vormoderne, eds. Blauert, Andreas and Schwerhoff, Gerd (Konstanz: UVK, 2000).Google Scholar See also Schwerhoff, Gerd, “Devianz in der alteuropäischen Gesellschaft: Umrisse einer historischen Kriminalitätsforschung,” in Zeitschrift für historische Forschung 19 (1992): 385–414.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ On the other hand, the regime also adjusted the fines of some thirty-four delinquents upwards. Their combined penalty trebled, from thirty-two Reichstaler to ninety-one.

⁸¹ Decrees that defined this or that behavior as rebellious and susceptible to prosecution after order had been restored were posted on church doors and read from the chancel throughout the rebellion. See, for example, entries in the official log-book of the Greetsiel district court in StAA Rep. 28, 3627, vol. 1, and StAA Rep. 28, 2834.

⁸² In case after case, the regime invoked the culprit's prior knowledge of the criminality of rebellious acts as an exacerbating factor; see, for example, StAA Rep. 4 C III b 6 1, “Acta in Regierungs-Sachen ex officio contra Johann Blancke [ et al.], October 1728-February 1729. In this case, Reiner Schattenborg admitted that he had participated in the election of the “rebellious” assembly of the Hausmannstand, despite having heard a ban against the election read from the pulpit in Engerhafe.

⁸³ StAA Rep. 4 C III b 61, “Attestatura daß diser Jan Einers gezwungen sey, ein sogenannter Commun-Herr zu werden,” April 18, 1727.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ StAA Rep. 4 B IV d 76, “Unterthänigste Supplicatio um gnädigste Verhelfung zu der von der Critzumer Gemeine auf der letztere Norder Expedition verdienten Besoldung ab Seiten Carsjen Jacobs zu Critzum und Berend Hindrichs zu Ditsum Emder Amts,” presented April 12, 1728.

⁸⁵ StAA Rep. 4 B IV d 76, “Attestatum für Carsjen Jacobs und Berend Hindricks wegen ihrer Verdingung zu'r Norder Expedition,” February 13, 1728.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ The Critzumers were not alone in making such extravagant claims. Tenants in the village of Oldendorf, for example, asked permission to deduct the costs of paying recruits for the Estates’ militia from the rent they owed to “rebellious” landlords; see StAA Rep. 4 C III b 79, “Supplicatio … um gnädige Approbation der gesuchten Bezahlung derer auf derer Renitenten Zwang gen Norden etc. gegangenen Mietlingen” [ 1728].

⁸⁷ See, for example, Giddens, Anthony, A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism, vol. 2, The Nation-State and Violence (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987)Google Scholar; and Ertman, Thomas, Birth of Leviathan: Building States and Regimes in Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tilly, Charles, “War Making and State Making as Organized Crime,” in Bringing the State Back In, ed. Skocpol, Theda (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 169–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tilly, , Coercion, Capital and European States, AD 990–1990 (London: Blackwell, 1990).Google Scholar

⁸⁸ The most noteworthy exceptions are Brake, Wayne te, Shaping History: Ordinary People in European Politics, 1500–1700 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 8–21Google Scholar; and Blickle, Peter, Kommunalismus: Skizzen einer gesellschaftlichen Organisationsform, 2 vols. (Munich: Oldenbourg, 2000).Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Bercé, Yves-Marie, Histoire des Croquants: Études des soulèvements populaires au XVII^e siècle dans le sud-ouest de la France (Geneva: Droz, 1974), 446–48Google Scholar; idem, History of Peasant Revolts: The Social Origins of Rebellion in Early Modern France, trans. Whitmore, Amanda (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990), 146–47.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Brown, Howard G., “Domestic State Violence: Repression from the Croquants to the Commune (French Revolution),” Historical Journal 42 (1999): 597–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Lebigre, Arlette, Les Grands Jours d'Auvergne: Désordres et Répression au XVII^e siècle (Paris: Hachette, 1976).Google Scholar For comparison, thirty rebels were sentenced to death after the relatively modest Roure revolt in the Viverais (1670) and another one hundred sent to the galleys.

⁹¹ In the canton of Basel, for example, only seven persons were condemned to death. Their families, however, were not penalized with the confiscation of goods. Only forty-two others were punished with exile, house arrest, forced labor, and/or fines—a far cry from the more than one thousand “rebels” fined in East Frisia seventy years later. The costs of suppressing the revolt in Basel were defrayed by a general tax of twenty-three thousand gulden, to be paid over four years. See Heusler, Andreas, Der Bauernkrieg von 1653 in der Landschaft Basel (Basel: Neukirch, 1854), 135–143.Google Scholar

⁹² Suter, Andreas, “Troublen” im Fürstbistum Basel, 1726–1740. Eine Fallstudie zum bäuerlichen Widerstand im 18. Jahrhundert (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985), 525–531.Google Scholar

⁹³ Schulze, Winfried, “Die veränderte Bedeutung sozialer Konflikte im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert,” in Der Deutsche Bauernkrieg, 1524–1526, ed. Wehler, Hans-Ulrich (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976), 277–302Google Scholar; Schulze, , Bäuerlicher Widerstand, 76–85.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Weitzel, Jürgen, Der Kampf um die Appellation ans Reichskammergericht. Zur politischen Geschichte der Rechtsmittel in Deutschland (Cologne: Böhlau, 1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁹⁵ Schmauder, Andreas, Württemberg im Aufstand. Der Arme Konrad 1514—Ein Beitrag zum bäuerlichen und städtischen Widerstand im Alten Reich und zum Territorialisierungsprozess im Herzogtum Württemberg an der Wende zur frühen Neuzeit (Leinfelden-Echterdingen: DRW, 1998).Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Renate Blickle, “‘Laufen gen Hof’: Die Beschwerden der Untertanen und die Entstehung des Hofrats in Bayern: Ein Beitrag zu den Varianten rechtlicher Verfahren im späten Mittelalter und in der frühen Neuzeit,” in Gemeinde und Staat, ed. Blickle, P., 241–66.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ See Troßbach, Werner, Soziale Bewegung und Politische Erfahrung. Bäuerlicher Protest in hessischen Territorien, 1648–1806 (Weingarten: Drumlin, 1987), 227–55.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ 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 Supplement (1986): S88–S97CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Schulze, , Bäuerlicher Widerstand, 73–76.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Dumolyn, , “Legal Repression,” 490–94Google Scholar; Cuttler, S. H., The Law of Treason and Treason Trials in Later Medieval France (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), 50–54.Google Scholar There are indications, according to Cuttler, that the Jacquerie of 1358 and the Tuchinat in Auvergne of the 1380s were already considered acts of treason.

¹⁰⁰ Sea, Thomas F., “Schwäbischer Bund und Bauernkrieg: Bestrafung und Pazifikation,” in Der Deutsche Bauernkrieg, ed. Wehler, 129–67.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ See Sreenivasan, Govind, The Peasants of Ottobeuren, 1487–1723: A Rural Society in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰² Sreenivasan, Govind, “The Social Origins of the Peasants' War of 1525 in Upper Swabia,” Past and Present 171 (2001): 30–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar As Blickle notes, this refusal to distinguish among degrees of resistance predated the Peasants’ War; “Criminalization,” S91–S92.

¹⁰³ Sea, “Schwäbischer Bund,” 131, 151–160.Google Scholar If we take evidence from around Augsburg as paradigmatic, only eleven percent of households were exempted, and a quarter of those on grounds of indigence; Sea, Thomas F., “The Economic Impact of the German Peasants' War: The Question of Reparations,” Sixteenth Century Journal 8 (1977): 75–97, here 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰⁴ Robisheaux, Thomas, Rural Society and the Search of Order in Early Modern Germany (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 191–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰⁵ For additional examples, see Blickle, Renate, “‘Spenn und Irrung’ im Eigen Rottenbuch,” in Aufruhr und Empörung?, ed. P. Blickle, 113, 133–40Google Scholar; Troßbach, Werner, Bauernbewegungen im Wetterau–Vogelsberg–Gebiet, 1648–1806 (Darmstadt: Historische Kommission für Hessen, 1985), 87–103, 179–88, 341–63, 435–37Google Scholar; Luebke, David M., His Majesty's Rebels: Communities, Factions, and Rural Remit in the Black Forest, 1725–1745 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997), 71–73, 78–79, 84–85, 117–46Google Scholar; Zürn, Martin, “Ir aigen libertet”: Waldburg, Habsburg und der bäuerliche Widerstand an der oberen Donau, 1590–1790 (Tübingen: Bibliotheca Academica, 1998), 453–589.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ For case studies of rebellions marked by sharp factional divisions, see Troßbach, Soziale Bewegung; Weber, Edwin Ernst, Städtische Herrschaft und bäuerliche Untertanen in Alltag und Konflikt. Die Reichsstadt Rottweil und ihre Landschaft vom 30jährigen Krieg bis zur Mediatisierung (Rottweil: Stadtarchiv, 1992)Google Scholar; Luebke, His Majesty's Rebels; von Friedeburg, Robert, Ländliche Gesellschaft und Obrigkeit. Gemeindeprotest und politische Mobilisierung im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997); Zürn, “Ir aigen libertet.”CrossRefGoogle Scholar