¹ Most of the major contributions to the debate are collected in Aston, T.S. (ed.), Crisis in Europe 1360–1660: Essays from Past and Present (London, 1965)Google Scholar; and Parker, N.G. & Smith, L.M. (eds.), The General Crisis of the seventeenth century (London, 1978)Google Scholar.

² English-speaking historians of Germany sometimes refer to the crisis: valuable contributions on aspects of the crisis are made by Friedrichs, C.R., ‘German town revolts and the seventeenthcentury crisis’, Renaissance and modern studies, 26 (1982), andCrossRefGoogle ScholarHagen, W.W., ‘Seventeenth-century crisis in Brandenburg: The Thirty Years War, the destabilization of serfdom, and the rise of absolutism’, American historical review (1989), 302–35.Google ScholarBenecke, G., ‘The Thirty Years War and its place in the General Crisis of the seventeenth century: Review article’, Journal of European economic history, 9 (1980) mentions the crisis in the title without dealing with it in the text. Two historians of the German Democratic Republic reviewed the crisis debate at its high point around 1970Google Scholar: Schilfert, G., ‘Revolutioncn beim Übergang vom Feudalismus zum Kapitalismus’, Zeitschrifl für Geschichte, 1-2 (1969)Google Scholar; Langer, H., ‘Eine neue “Krise des Feudalismus”? Zur Diskussion urn die sogenannte Krise des 17. Jahrhunderts’, Zeitschrift für Geschichiswissenschaft, 19 (1971).Google ScholarKriedte's, P.Spätfeudalismus und Handelskapital (Gottingen, 1980)Google Scholar, translated as Peasants, landlords and merchant capitalists: Europe and the world economy, 1300–1800 (Leamington Spa, 1983), places the economic crisis (although not the debate about it) at centre stage, pp. 79–126Google Scholar.

³ An exception is Koenigsberger, H.G. in ‘Die Krise des 17. Jahrhunderts’, Zeitschrift für historische Forschung, 9 (1982)Google Scholar, appearing in shortened form as ‘The crisis of the 17th century: farewell’ in Koenigsberger, H.G., Politicians and virtuosi: Essays in early modern history (London, 1986), which emphasizes the importance of ‘composite states’ such as the Empire in shaping the crisisGoogle Scholar.

⁴ Koenigaberger, H.G., The Habsburgs and Europe 1516–1660 (Ithaca/London, 1971), p. 219Google Scholar.

⁵ Hobsbawm, E.J., ‘The crisis of the seventeenth century’, in Aston, Crisis, pp. 5–58Google Scholar.

⁶ Porshnev, B., Les soulèvements populaires en France de 1633 à 1648 (Paris, 1963)Google Scholar; and ‘Das Wesen des Feudalstaats’, Sowjetwissenschaft GA (1952), 248–77Google Scholar.

⁷ Hroch, M. and Petràn, J., Das 17. Jahrhundert – Krise der Feudalgasellschaft? (Hamburg, 1981; Czech orig. Prague, 1976)Google Scholar.

⁸ Kosminski, J.A., ‘Das Problem des Klassenkampfes in der Epoche des Feudalismus’, Sowjetwtissenschafi GA (1952), 248–77, esp. p. 260 criticising PorshnevGoogle Scholar; and Cistozvonov, A.N., ‘Die Genesis des Kapitalismus und ihre Widerspiegelung in den regionalen Typen der Bauernbewegungen in Europa im XVI. bis XVIII. Jahrhundert (Problemstellung)’Google Scholar, in al, G. Heitz et. (eds.), Der Bauer im Klassenkampf: Studien zur Geschichte des deutschen Bauernkrieges und der bàuerlichen Klassenkämpfe im Spätfeudalismus (Berlin/GDR, 1975), pp. 1–26Google Scholar.

⁹ For instance, Langer, , ‘Krise’, p. 1398Google Scholar.

¹⁰ The debate on this question up to the mid-1960s is summarized in Netschkins, M. W., ‘Zu den Ergebnisten der Diskussion ilber das “aufsteigende” und das “absteigende” Stadium des Feudalismus’, Sowjetwissenschaft: Gesellschqflswissenschafiliche Beiträge, 11 (1964)Google Scholar; see also Hroch, & Petràn, , Das 17. Jahrhundert, pp. 57–60.Google Scholar

¹¹ Chaunu, P., Seville et l'Atlantique (1304–1650) (Paris, 1955–9), VII, 39Google Scholar.

¹² Romano, R., ‘Between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: The economic crisis of 1619–22’, in Parker & Smith, Crisis, pp. 165–225Google Scholar.

¹³ Eddy, J.A., ‘The “Maunder Minimum”: Sunspots and climate in the reign of Louis XIV’Google Scholar, in Parker & Smith, Crisis, pp. 226–68;Google ScholarUtterstroem, G., ‘Climatic fluctuations and population problems in early modern history’, Scandinavian economic history review, 3 (1955), esp. 39–44Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Ladurie, E. Le Roy, Les paysans de Languedoc (Paris, 1966), esp. 1, pp. 8, 652–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁵ Faber, J.A, ‘The decline of the Baltic grain-trade in the second half of the seventeenthGoogle Scholar century’, Acla Msloriae Neerlandica, 1, has subsequently argued that the demographic downswing, as manifested in the decline in grain shipments through die Oeresund in the second half of the seventeenth century, explains the crisis (p. 130).

¹⁶ Seventeenth-century writers aware of the contemporaneous revolts are quoted extensively in Parker, N.G. & Smith, L.M., ‘Introduction’Google Scholar, in Parker & Smith, Crisis, pp. 1–4; and inGoogle ScholarKoenigsberger, , ‘Crisis’, pp. 149–59Google Scholar.

¹⁷ The two earliest discussions of the crisis (which did not, however, advance explanations for it) were Merriman, R.B., Six contemporaneous revolutions (Glasgow, 1937)Google Scholar; and Mousnier, R., Les XVle el XVIIe siècles: Le progres de la civilisation ewropéement et le declin de L'Orient (1492–1715) (2 vols., Paris, 1954), II, Le XVIIe siècle (1598–1715)Google Scholar.

¹⁸ Trevor-Roper, H.R., ‘The General Crisis of the seventeenth century’, inGoogle ScholarAston, , Crisis, pp. 59–96Google Scholar.

¹⁹ Mousnier, R., Fureurs paysannes (Paris, 1967), and ‘Research into the popular uprisings France before the Fronde’Google Scholar, in Coveney, P.J. (ed.), France in crisis, 1630–1673 (London/Basingstoke, 1977)Google Scholar; Poliŝenský, J.V., ‘The Thirty Years War and the crises and revolutions of seventeenth-century Europe’, Past and present, 39 (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Zur Problematik des DreiBigjährigen Krieges und der Wallensteinfrage’, Aus 500 Jahrtn deutsch-tschechoslowakischer Geschichte (Berlin, 1958), pp. 106ff, 116Google Scholar; and ‘The Thirty Yean War’, Past and present, 6 (1954)Google Scholar. Clark, P. (ed.), The European crisis of the 1590s: Essays in comparative history (London, 1985)Google Scholar; Topolski, , Narodziny kapitalionu w Europit XIV-XVH wicku (Warsaw, 1965), quoted extensively inGoogle ScholarLanger, , ‘Krise’, e.g. p. 1413; IGoogle Scholar. Schoeffer, , ‘Did Holland's Golden Age coincide with a period of crisis?’, Acta historiae Neerlandica, 1 (1966), p. 88Google Scholar; Elliott, J.H., ‘Revolution and continuity in early modern Europe’, inGoogle ScholarParker & Smith, Crisis, pp. 112–3Google Scholar; ‘Yet another crisis?’, in Clark, , Crisis, p. 301–3Google Scholar.

²¹ Brenner, R., ‘Agrarian class structure and economic development in pre-industrial Europe’, Past and present, 70 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²² See the essays in Aston, T. H. & Philpin, C. H. E. (eds.), The Brenner debate: Agrarian stnutwre and economic development in pre-industrial Europe (Cambridge, 1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²³ Steensgaard, N., ‘The seventeenth-century crisis’Google Scholar, in Parker & Smith, Crisis, pp. 26–56; this passage. P. 44Google Scholar.

²⁴ Indeed, German regional diversity has given rise to a long controversy about whether German economic decline was caused by die Thirty Years War or predated it: see Rabb, T.K., ‘The effects of the Thirty Years War on the German economy’, Journal of modern history, 34 (1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Kamen, H., ‘The economic and social consequences of the Thirty Year's War’, Journal of modern history, 39 (1968)Google Scholar.

²⁵ The Habsburg lands, die Black Forest, the Upper Rhine, and Upper Swabia experienced frequent serious revolts from the late sixteenth century on, while in the north and east there were hardly any, and central Germany was relatively peaceful until the first half of die seventeenth century (see Langer, , ‘Krise’, p. 1398)Google Scholar; this timing does not reflect the performance of the regional economies.

²⁶ Walker, M., German home towns: Community, stale, and general estate 1648–1871 (Ithaca/London, 1971)Google Scholar.

²⁷ Hoffmann, A., ‘Zur Typologie der Bauernaufstande in Oberosterreich’, in Schulze, W. (ed.), Europdische Bautrnrevoltem der frühen Neuzerit (Frankfurt, 1982), pp. 309–22Google Scholar; on this, p. 317.

²⁸ Walker, German home towns; Ogilvie, S.C., ‘Coming of age in a corporate society: Capitalism, Pietism and family authority in rural Wurttemberg’, Continuity and change, I (1986)Google Scholar; Heitz, G., ‘Der Zusammenhang zwischen den Bauembewegungen und der Entwicldung des Absolutismus in Mitteleuropa’, in Schulze, Europdischt Bauernrmolten, pp. 171–90 (on this, p. 173)Google Scholar.

²⁹ Schultz, H., ‘Bäuerlicher Klassenkampf und “zweite Leibeigenschaft”. Einige Probleme des Kampfes in der Zeit zwischen frühburgerlicher Revolution und Dreiβigjährigem Krieg’, in Heitz et al., Bauer im Klassenkampf, pp. 401–4Google Scholar; Heitz, G., ‘Bauerliche KJassenkampfe im Spatfeudalismus’, in Brendler, G. & Laube, A. (eds.), Der deutsche Bauernkrieg 1524/35 (Berlin, 1977), p. 207Google Scholar.

³⁰ Friedrichs, ‘Revolts’; and Friedrichs, C. R., ‘Urban conflicts and the Imperial constitution in seventeenth-century Germany’, Journal of modern history, 58 suppl. (1986), S98–S123CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³¹ Reinhard, W., ‘Theorie und Empirie bei der Erforschung Fruhneuzeidicher Volksaufstande’, in Fenske, H., Reinhard, W., & Schulin, E. (eds.), Historic Integra: Festschrift für Erich Hassinger zum 70. Geburtstag (Berlin, 1977), p. 174Google Scholar.

³² Friedrichs, ‘Revolts’; C. R. Friedrichs, ‘Urban conflicts’, passim.

³³ Vries, J. de, European urbanization, 1500–1800 (1984), p. 153Google Scholar.

³⁴ Rausch, W. (ed.), Die Städle Mittleuropas im 17. und 18. Jahrhmdert (Linz, 1981)Google Scholar; Gerteis, K., Die deutschen Städte in der frühen Neuzeit. Eur Vorgeschichte der ‘bürgerlichen Welt’ (Darmstadt, 1986), pp. 75–81Google Scholar.

³⁵ Wunder, H., ‘Peasant organization and class conflict in eastern and western Germany’, in Aston & Philpin, Brenner debate, pp. 91–100Google Scholar.

³⁶ Conze, W., ‘The effects of nineteenth-century liberal agrarian reforms on social structure in Central Europe’, in Crouzet, F. et al. (eds.), Essays in European economic history (London, 1969), pp. 56–7Google Scholar.

³⁷ Hamisch, H., ‘Die Gutsherrschaft: Forschungsgeschichte, Entwicklungszusammenhänge und Stmkturelemente’, Jahrbuch für Geschichte des Feudalisms, 9 (1985), esp. 231–4Google Scholar, where he argues that the legal characteristics of peasant leases were probably the most important factor distinguishing areas of Gutsherrschaft from those of greater personal liberty for peasants.

³⁸ Schulze, W., ‘Europaische und deutsche Bauernrevolten der fruhen Neuzeit — Probleme der vergleichenden Betrachtung’, in Schulze, , Europäische Bauernrevolten, pp. 40–1Google Scholar; Franz, G., Geschiehte des deutschen Bauernstandes vom fruhen Mittelalter bis zum 19. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart, 1976), pp. 214ffGoogle Scholar; Lesczynski, J., ‘Forschungsergebnisse der polnischen Historiographie auf dem Gebiete des Klassenkampfes der schlesischen Bauern im Spatfeudalismus’, in Heitz et al., Bauer im Klassenkampf, p. 483Google Scholar.

³⁹ Robisheaux, T., ‘Peasants and pastors: rural youth control and the Reformation in Hohenlohe, 1540–1680’, Social history, 6 (1981), 281–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Robisheaux, T., Rural society and the search for order in early modern Germany (Cambridge, 1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rebel, H., Peasant classes: The bureaucratization Of property and family relations under early Habsburg absolutism 1511–1636 (Princeton, 1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Schulze, W., Bäuerlicher Widerstand und feudale Herrschaft in der fruhen Neuzeit (Stuttgart, 1980), pp. 117–8Google Scholar; Barnett-Robisheaux, T., ‘Peasant revolts in Germany and Central Europe after the Peasants’ War: Comments on the literature’, Central European history, 17 (1984), 384–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar(here 394–9); Hoffmann, , ‘Typologie’, p. 316Google Scholar; Heitz, , ‘Zusammenhang’, pp. 175–7Google Scholar; Lesczynski, ‘Forschungsergebnisse’.

⁴⁰ These were close to 1500 in number, according 10 the estimate of Redlich, R., The German military tnUrpriser and his workforce (2 vols., Wiesbaden, 1964–1965), 1, 170Google Scholar. Polisensky, , ‘Crises and revolutions’, refers to them as a ‘new nobility’ (p. 34)Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Goubert, P. & Meyer, J., ‘Les problemes de la noblesse au XVIIe siècle’, Thirteenth International Historical Congress (Moscow, 1970), pp. 7Google Scholar, 9, 11; on this phenomenon within the Austrian Hofkanzlai, Williams, E. N., The Ancien Regime in Europe (New York, 1970), pp. 369–70Google Scholar; for a detailed territorial study, with material on the seventeenth century, Lampe, J., Anstokratu, Hofadel und Staatspatriziat in Kurhannover 1714–1760 (2 vols., Hannover, 1963Google Scholar.

⁴² Hagen, ‘Crisis’; generalized by Villari, R., ‘Rivoltee coscienza rivoluzionaria nel secolo XVII’, Studi storici, 12 (1971), 235–64Google Scholar, parts of whose argument are summarized in Koenigsberger, , ‘Crisis’, p. 156Google Scholar.

⁴³ Langer, , ‘Krise’, remarks that ‘there was an increase in conflicts between individual fractions of the feudal class for the growth in the traditional feudal rent, and increasingly for the income from trade and commerce as well as from production’ (p. 1412)Google Scholar.

⁴⁴ On Brandenburg, see Hagen, ‘Crisis’; on how the suppression of peasants in Pomerania took place ‘without great class struggle’, see Wachowiak, B., Gospodarczt polozenie chtopdu u domenach Ksiqstwa Szcztcuiskugo w XVII w pierwsztj polowie XVII wieku (Szdzeèin, 1967), p. 353Google Scholar, cited in Langer, , ‘Krise’, p. 1412Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ Reinhard, , ‘Theorie’, p. 174Google Scholar; Bierbrauer, P., ‘Bauerliche Revolten im Alten Reich. Ein Forschungsbericht“, in Blickle, P. et al. (eds). Aufndtr md Empdrung? Studun zum bauerluhen Widerstand im Alten Reich (Munich, 1980), pp. 52–5Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ Hoffmann, , ‘Typologic’, pp. 309–13Google Scholar; Hagen, ,‘Crisis’, esp. pp. 308–10;Google ScholarSchulze, W., ‘Peasant resistance in sixteenth and seventeenth-century Germany in a European context’, in Greyerz, K. von (ed.), Religion, politics and social procest: Three studies an early modem Germany (London, 1984), pp. 82–5Google Scholar. On how anti-seigneurial grievances often developed out of anti-fiscal grievances in France as well, see Neveux, H., ‘Die ideologische Dimension der franzosischen Bauernauistande im 17. Jahrhundert’, Historische Zeitschrift, 238 (1984), esp. 277–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁷ This is remarked on by both Bamett-Robisheaux, , ‘Revolts’, pp. 391–2Google Scholar; and Scott, T., ‘Peasant revolts in early modern Germany’, Historical journal, 28 (1985), 455–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁸ Despite problems with the evidence, this view of the state is applied to early modern Germany by Heitz, , ‘Zusammenhang’, e.g. p. 171Google Scholar: ‘The absolute monarchy is the dictatorship of the class of the nobility, more exactly, the dictatorship in the interest of this class’; it is disputed by Asch, R. G., ‘Estates and princes after 1648: The consequences of the Thirty Years War’, German history, 6 (1988), 113–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar, here esp. 121–2.

⁴⁹ Lütge, F., Geschichte der deulschen Agrarverfasung von der frühen Neuzeit bis zum 19. Jahrhundert (2nd edn Stuttgart, 1967), pp. 127ffGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁰ Hagen, W. W., ‘Capitalism and the countryside in early modern Europe: Interpretations, models, debates’, Agricultural history, 62 (1988), esp. pp. 31, 41Google Scholar.

⁵¹ Schulze, Bämtrlichtr Widerstand. On East Elbian areas, see e.g. Hagen, , ‘Capitalism’, p. 41Google Scholar, and Hagen, ‘Crisis’. Trossbach, W., in ‘Bauernbewegungen in deutschen Kleinterritorien zwiscben 1648 und 1789’, in Schulze, W. (ed.), Aufstände, Revolten, Prozesst: Beiträgt zu bäuerlichen Widerstmndsbewtgungm im fürutmeuztitluhen Europe (Stuttgart, 1983), p. 250Google Scholar, argues that ‘the peasants made these institutions [the Imperial courts] very much their own and transformed them in their own interest’.

⁵² Ibid. pp. 247–53.

⁵³ Schulze, W., ‘“Geben Aufruhr und Aufetand Anlass zu neuen heilsamen Gesetzen”. Beobachtungen Uber die Wirkungen bäuerlichen Widerstands in der friihen Neuzeit’, in Schulze, Aufsämde, p. 273Google Scholar.

⁵⁴ Valentinitsch, H., ‘Advokaten, Winkelschreiber und Bauernprokuratoren in Innerosterreich in der fruhen Neuzeit’, in Schulze, Auftände, pp. 191–2Google Scholar; Schulze, , Bäuerlicher Widerstand, pp. 77–80Google Scholar.

⁵⁵ Schulze, W., ‘Die veranderte Bedeutung sozialer Konflikte“, in Schulze, Europäische Bamentrevolten, p. 286Google Scholar.

⁵⁶ Schulze, , Bäuerlicher Widerstand, p. 78Google Scholar; Hagen, , ‘Crisis’, p. 308Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ Schulze, , ‘Geben Aufruhr’, p. 265Google Scholar; Hagen, , ‘Crisis’; Trossbach, ‘Bauernbewegungen’, p. 248Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ This was the formal complaint of the Upper Austrian nobility in the aftermath of the peasant uprising of 1597. The Estates of Vorderösterreich had made similar complaints in 1594. Trossbach, , ‘Bauernbewegungen’, pp. 247–8Google Scholar; Schulze, , Bäuerlicher Wider stand, p. 96Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ Schulze, , ‘Geben Aufruhr’, p. 265Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ As is argued, for example, by Heitz, , ‘Zusammenhang’, pp. 184–6Google Scholar; by Schultz, , ‘Klassenkampf’, p. 397Google Scholar; and by Leszczynski, J., ‘Forschungsergebnisse’, p. 483Google Scholar. Their positions are disputed by Petran, J., in ‘Typologie der Bauernbewegungen in Mitteleuropa unter dem Aspekt des Ubergangs vom Feudalismus zum Kapitalismus’, in Heitz et al., Bauer im Klassenkampf, P 458Google Scholar.

⁶¹ For example, Brunner, O., Neue Wtgt der Verfassvngs und Sozialgesehichte (2nd edn, Gottingcn, 1968), pp. 199–212Google Scholar.

⁶² As portrayed, e.g., by Heitz, , ‘Zusammenhang’, pp. 184–6Google Scholar. On the German Kleins tool, see Zande, J. van der, Burger und Beamier: Johann Gtorg Schlosser 1739–1799 (Stuttgart, 1986), esp. pp. 138–46Google Scholar.

⁶³ As argued by Langer, , ‘Krise’, p. 1410Google Scholar.

⁶⁴ Quoted in Carsten, F.L., Princes and parliaments in Germany from the fifteenth to the eighteenth century (Oxford, 1959), p. 229Google Scholar.

⁶⁵ Ibid. pp. 177–8.

⁶⁶ On Brandenburg see Hagen, ‘Crisis’; on German territories in general see Schulze, , Bäuerlicher Widerstand, pp. 69–73Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ Press, V., ‘Herrschaft, Landschaft und “Gemeiner Mann” in Oberdeutschland vom 15. bis zum fruhen 19Google Scholar. Jahrhundert, , Zeitschrift für die Geschichtt des Oberrheins, NF 84 (1975), esp. 210Google Scholar. Trossbach, ‘Bauernbewegungen’, argues that the courts judging peasant litigation against lords ‘made it dear to the Duodetfursten [princes of small states] that even the early modern state could not survive without a minimal consensus and a certain recognition by the governed’ (p. 248). This is consistent with certain recent developments in the economic theory of interest groups and political processes: Becker, G.S., ‘A theory of competition among pressure groups for political influence’, Quarterly journal of economics, 93 (1983), 371–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Peltzman, S., ‘Toward a general theory of regulation“, Journal of law and economics (1976), 211–40Google Scholar.

⁶⁸ Schattenmann, P., ‘Eigenart und Geschichte des deutschen Fruhpietismus mit besonderer Berucksichtigung von Wurttembergisch-Franken’, Blätter fur württembergische Kirchengesckickte, 40 (1936), 1–32Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ Mousnier, , ‘Uprisings’, pp 161Google Scholar, 164; and Le XVlle siècle, pp. 249–56.

⁷⁰ Mousnier, R., Les institutions de la France, I, 85–93Google Scholar.

⁷¹ The original Württemberg nobility, by refusing to attend meetings of the Estates, became directly subject to the Emperor in the early sixteenth century, and could levy taxes independently. See Vann, J. A., The making of a state: Württemberg, 1593–1793 (Ithaca/London, 1984)Google Scholar.

⁷² Scott, ‘Revolts’; but for other examples such as Lubeck and Koenigsberg cf. also Pelus, M. L., ‘Lübeck au milieu du XVIIe siècle: Confliu politiques et sociaux, conjoncturc economique“, Revue à histoire diplomatique, 92 (1978)Google Scholar; Koenigsberger, , ‘Krise’, p. 165Google Scholar.

⁷³ Hagen, ‘Crisis’.

⁷⁴ Carsten, , Princes, pp. 176ffGoogle Scholar.

⁷⁵ Koenigsberger, ‘Crisis’.

⁷⁶ Polisensky, , ‘Thirty Years War’; ‘Crises and revolutions’; ‘Problematik’, pp. 106ff, 116Google Scholar.

⁷⁷ Carsten, , Princes, p. 226Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ This is best documented for France: Pillorget, R., Les mouvements insurrectwnnels de Provence et 1715 (Paris, 1975)Google Scholar, ennumerates 108 popular movements in Provence for the ‘peaceful’ period 1596–1635, but many more per annum 1635–48, and no fewer than 66 in the five years of the Fronde, 1648–53 (p. 988); Bercè, Y. M., Histoire dts croquanls. Etude dts soulevanents populaires au XVIIe siicle dans It sud-ouest de la France (2 vols., Geneva, 1974)Google Scholar, counts almost five hundred revolt in southwest France in the period 1590–1715, of which sixty per cent occurred in the period from 1635 to 1650 (pp. 680ff).

⁷⁹ Harnisch, H., ‘Klassenkampfe der Bauern in der Mark Brandenburg zwischen fruhbiirgerlicher Revolution und DreiBigjahrigem Krieg’, Jahrbiuhfür Regionalgeschichte, 5 (1975), 171Google Scholar.

⁸⁰ Ulbrich, C., ‘Der Charaktcr bauerlichen Widerstands in vorderosterreichischen Herrjchaften“, in Schulze, Aufständt, p. 215Google Scholar.

⁸¹ Bierbraucr, , ‘Bauerliche Revolten’, p. 52Google Scholar.

⁸² Trossbach, , ‘Bauernbcwegungen’, pp. 255–7Google Scholar.

⁸³ Schulze, , ‘Europäische und deutsche Baucrnrcvolten’, p. 27Google Scholar.

⁸⁴ Steensgaard, , ‘Crisis’, pp. 36–44Google Scholar. For England, Braddick, M., ‘State formation in early modern England’, Social history, 16 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, suggests that between the 1590s and the 1670s the tax revenue of the state increased by a factor of sixteen (p. 2); according to Morrill, J., ‘What was the English Revolution?’, History today (1984)Google Scholar, the English crown doubled its real income between 1603 and 1637 (pp. 11–2). According to Ladurie, E. Le Roy, Lespaysans de Languedoc (Paris, 1966), pp. 294, 481–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar, direct taxation alone doubled as a share of gross product in Languedoc in the three decades before the Fronde; the figures in Bonney, R., The king's debts: Finance and politics in France 1589–1661 (Oxford, 1981)Google Scholar, suggest that total taxation in France may have more than doubled in the fifty years before 1630, and may have quadrupled from 1630 to 1640. According to Braudel, F., The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean world in the age of Philip II (2 vols., London, 1972), 1Google Scholar, the Venetian and Spanish state budgets tripled in the second half of the sixteenth century, while prices rose by less than two-thirds (p. 33).

⁸⁵ According to Parker, N. G., ‘The “military revolution, 1560–1660” — a myth?’, Spain and the Netherlands 1559–1659 (London, 1979)Google Scholar, in the forty years before 1630, the armies of Spain increased by half again, those of France doubled, those of England and the Dutch Republic more than doubled, and those of Sweden tripled (p. 96); Parker argues that the cost of putting each of these soldiers in the field rose by a factor of five between 1530 and 1630.

⁸⁶ Schulze, , Bauerluher Widerstand, pp. 68–9Google Scholar; Schulze, W., Reich und Turkengefahr im spaten 16. Jahrhundert (Munich, 1978), p. 301Google Scholar.

⁸⁷ Asch, , ‘Estates’, p. 129Google Scholar; Schormann, G., Der Dreifiigjährige Krieg (Götttingen, 1985), pp. 85–111Google Scholar; Livet, G., La Guerre de Trente Ans (Paris, 1963), p. 84Google Scholar; Loebl, A., Der Sitg des Furstenreehts ouch aufdem Cebiet der Finanzen — vor dem zojänrigen Krieg (Munich-Leipzig, 1916)Google Scholar; and the summary in Mayer, T., Handbuch der Finanzwissenschqft (2 vols., Tubingen, 1952), 1, 236–72Google Scholar.

⁸⁸ Schulze, W., Landesdefension tad Staalsbildung. Studien zum Kriegswesen des innerdsUrreichischen Territorialstaatts (1564–1619) (Graz/Colognc/Vienna, 1973), pp. 112ffGoogle Scholar. A parallel to this can be seen in the situation in the Netherlands, with its repercussions on the Spanish state, especially Castile.

⁸⁹ Ulbrich, , ‘Character’, pp. 207, 213, 215Google Scholar.

⁹⁰ Evans, R.J.W., The making of the Habsburg monarchy, 1550–1700 (Oxford, 1979), pp. 198–200;Google ScholarRichter, K., ‘Die bohmischen Lander von 1471–1740’, in Bosl, K. (ed.), Handbuch der Geschichu der bdhmischen Lander (Stuttgart, 1966–1972), II, 293–313Google Scholar.

⁹¹ Dollinger, H., Studien zur Finanzreform Maximilians I. von Bayern in den Jahren 1508–1618: Ein Beitrag zur Gtschichie des Friihabsolutismus (Gottingen, 1968), p. 10Google Scholar.

⁹² Dollinger, , Studien; also Carsten, , Princes, p. 394Google Scholar.

⁹³ Quoted in Schulze, , Bäuerlicher Wider stand, p. 69Google Scholar; there is a pun on ‘teutschlich’, between ‘Deutschlich’ (‘in German’) and ‘deutlich’ (‘clearly’).

⁹⁴ Schulze, , Bduerlicher Wider stand, p. 69Google Scholar.

⁹⁵ Carsten, , Princes, p. 228Google Scholar.

⁹⁶ Electoral debts rose from 3.3m guilders in 1622, to 7.1m by 1628, to 11.9m by 1657, despite generous grants and taxes: ibid. pp. 229–30.

⁹⁷ Ibid. p. 232.

⁹⁸ Ibid. p. 239.

⁹⁹ Ibid. p. 232.

¹⁰⁰ Ibid. p. 53.

¹⁰¹ Ibid. p. 180.

¹⁰² Ibid. p. 182.

¹⁰³ Hahn, P.M., ‘Landesstaat und Standetum im Kurfurstentum Brandenburg wahrend des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts’, in Baumgart, P. (ed.), Städetum and Statsbildung in Brandenburg-Preussen (Berlin, 1983), pp. 41–79Google Scholar; Hagen, , ‘Crisis’, pp. 314–8Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁴ Hagen, , ‘Crisis’, pp. 314–5Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁵ Redlich, F., ‘Contributions in the Thirty Years’ War’, Economic history review, 2nd ser. 12 (1959)Google Scholar, shows the ways in which the new forms of finance developed during the war by Spinola, Mansfeld, Tilly and Wallenstein circumvented traditional institutional barriers to tax-raising, and were subsequently adopted by princes.

¹⁰⁶ Carsten, , Princes, pp. 72–3Google Scholar; Asch, , ‘Estates’, pp. 128–32Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁷ Trossbach, ‘Bauembewegungen’, concludes that die common denominator explaining simultaneous waves of popular rebellion in small territories of different political structure and geographical position was’ taxation by Empire and Imperial Circle, which accompanied the great wan of die seventeenth and eighteenth centuries’ (pp. 940–1).

¹⁰⁸ Kriedte, M P., Medick, H., Schlumbohm, J., Industrialization before industrialization: Rural industry in the genesis of capitalism (Gottingen, 1977), pp. 26ffGoogle Scholar; Vries, J. de, The economy of Europe in an age of crisis, 1600–1750 (Cambridge, 1976), pp. 30ffGoogle Scholar.

¹⁰⁹ Kriedte, Peasants.

¹¹⁰ For studies of corporatism in action in German economies, see Walker, German home towns, and the literature surveyed in Ogilvie, ‘Coming of age’. The extraordinary prominence of the corporation as an organizational pivot in German socio-political and legal structures is apparent from the work of Gierke, O. von, Das deutsche Genqfienschaftsrecht (4 vols., Berlin, 1868–1913)Google Scholar; Hegel, G. W. F., Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (Leipzig, 1911), e.g. p. 394Google Scholar; Sombart, W., Dei moderne Kapitalismus (2nd edn, Munich, 1928)Google Scholar; Carus, A.W., ‘Christian Thomasius, corporatism, and the ethos of the German professional classes in the early Enlightenment’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, 1981)Google Scholar; and Black, A., Guilds and civil society in European political thought from the twelfth century to the present (Ithaca, 1984)Google Scholar.

¹¹¹ Quoted in Hagen, , ‘Crisis’, p. 317Google Scholar.

¹¹² Schulze, , Bäuerlicher Wiaerstand, pp. 69–73Google Scholar; for instance, one grievance of the rebellious Upper Austrian peasants in 1626 was their lords use of legal monopolies to hinder access to the growing markets for agricultural products: Hoffmann, , ‘Typologie’, pp. 314Google Scholar, 318.

¹¹³ These policies included the forcible conversion of leaseholds to hereditary tenures, the compulsory imposition of single-heir inheritance, the development of unified legal structures, and the strengthening of corporate village institutions: Lütge, F., Gesckichte der deutschem Agrarverfassung, pp. 127ff.Google ScholarHoctzsch, O., ‘Der Bauernschutz in den deutschen Territorien vom 16. bis ins 19. Jahrhundert’, Schwibische Jahrbuch, 16 (1902), 239–271Google Scholar; Patzelt, E., ‘Bauernschutz in Osterreich vor 1848’, Mitteilungat des Institute for Österreichische GeschichU, 58 (1950), 637–55Google Scholar; Hagen, ‘Crisis’.

¹¹⁴ Schulze, ‘Peasant resistance’; Schulze, ‘Europäische und deutsche Bauernrevolten’.

¹¹⁵ Conze, ‘Agrarian reforms’.

¹¹⁶ Lutge, Agrarverfassung; Abel, W., Geschiche der deutschen Landwirtschaft vomfrunen Mittlealter bis zum 19. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart, 1959)Google Scholar; Weis, E., ‘Ergcbnissc eines Vergleichs der grundherrschafdichen Strukturen Deutschlands und Frankreichs vom 13. bis zum Ausgang des 18. Jahrhunderts’, Vierteijahrschrifi Jür Social und Wirtschaftsgeschichte, 57 (1970), 1–14Google Scholar; Robisheaux, ‘Peasants and pastors’; Robisheaux, Rural society.

¹¹⁷ Topolski, J., ‘La refeodalisation dans 1'èconomie des grands domaincs en Europe central et orientale (XVIe-XVIIIe ss.)’ Studio historiae oeconomicat, 6 (1971), 51–63;Google ScholarNichtweiss, J., ‘Zur Frage der zweiten Leibeigenschaft und des sogenannten preussischen Weges der EntwickJung des Kapitalismus in der landwirtschaft Ostdeutschlands’, Zeitschnftfur Geschichtswissenschaft, 1 (1953), 687–717Google ScholarKuczynski, J., ‘Zum Aufsatz von Johannes Nichtweiss Uberdie zweite Leibeigenschaft’, in Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft, 2 (1954), 467–71Google Scholar; Conze, ‘Agrarian reforms’.

¹¹⁸ Risen, H., ‘From monopoly to laissez-faire: The early growth of the Wupper Valley textile trades’, Journal of European economic history, 1 (1972), 298–407Google Scholar; Troeltsch, W., Die Calwer Zntghandlungskompagmt und ihrt Arbtiter (Jena, 1897)Google Scholar; Medick, H., ‘“Freihandel fur die Zunft”: Ein Kapitel aus der Geschichte der Preiskampfe im worttembergischen Leinengewerbe des 18. Jahrhunderts’, in Vierhaus, R. (Festschrift), Mentaliäten und Lebensverhältmisse: Beispiele aus der Sozialgeschichte der Neuzeit (Göttingen, 1983)Google Scholar; Schlumbohm, J., ‘Seasonal fluctuations and social division of labour: Rural linen production in the Osnabrilck and Bielefeld regions and the urban woollen industry in the Niederlausitz, ca. 1700—ca. 1850’, in Berg, M., Hudson, P., & Sonenscher, M. (eds.), Manufacture in town and country before the factory (Cambridge, 1983)Google Scholar; Ogilvie, ‘Coming of age’; Ogilvie, S.C., ‘Women and proto-industrialisation in a corporate society: Wurttemberg woollen weaving, 1590–1760’, in Hudson, P. & Lee, W.R. (eds.), Women's work and the family economy in historical perspective (Manchester, 1990)Google Scholar.

¹¹⁹ Schilling, H., ‘The Reformation and the rise of the early modern state’, in Tracy, J.D. (ed.), Luthtr and the modem statt in Gtrmany (Kirkville (Missouri), 1986), esp. pp. 25–6Google Scholar; K. Blaschke, ‘The Reformation and the rise of the territorial state’, in ibid., esp. pp. 64–5.

¹²⁰ Rebel, Peasant classes; Robishcaux, ‘Peasants and pastors’.

¹²¹ Schilling, , ‘Reformation’, p. 26Google Scholar; Blaschke, , ‘Reformation’, p. 64Google Scholar.

¹²² Lehmann, H., Das Zeitalttr its Absolutisms (Stuttgart, 1980), pp. 58–61;Google ScholarHeckel, M., Stoat und Kirche nach dm Lehrtn der evangeliscJun Juristen Destschlands in der ersten Halfte des 17. Jakrhmnderts (Munich, 1968), pp. 67, 224ffGoogle Scholar.

¹²³ For an example of such regulation under Counter-Reformation Catholicism, see Bucking, J., Frühabsolutismus und Kirchenreform in Tirol (1566–1665): Ein Beitrag zem Ringen zwischtn ‘Stoat’ and ‘Kirch’ in der frühen Meuzeit (Wiesbaden, 1972), esp. pp. 63–98Google Scholar, 126–41, 175–89; for examples under Lutheranism and Calvinism, see Schilling, , ‘Reformation’, p. 25Google Scholar; on the replacement of communal by autoritarian organization in early Calvinism, see Schilling, H., Konfesstonskonftikt und Staatsbildung: Eine Failstudie über das Verhältnis von religiosem und sozialem Wandel in der Frühutntit am Beispiel der Grafschaft Lippe (Gütersloh, 1981), p. 189Google Scholar; on the forcible regulation of local religious observance by Calvinist rulers, see Strauss, G., Luther's house of learning: Indoctrination of Uuyoung in the German Reformation (Baltimore, 1978)Google Scholar.

¹²⁴ Rebel, Peasant classes; Robisheaux, ‘Peasants and pastors’; Blaschke, ‘Reformation’; Ogilvie, ‘Coming of age’; Strauss, Luther's house of learning; Deppermann, K., ‘Pietismus und moderne Staat’, in Aland, K. (ed.), Pietismus und moderne Welt (Witten, 1974)Google Scholar; Dorwart, R.A., ‘Church organization in Brandenburg-Prussia from die Reformation to 1704’, Harvard Theological Revitw, 31 (1938), 975–90Google Scholar; Sabean, D., Power in the blood: Popular culture and village discourse in early modern Germany (Cambridge, 1984)Google Scholar; Strauss, G., ‘Success and failure in the German Reformation’, Past and present, 67 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Vogier, B., ‘Die Entstehung der protestantischen Volksfrommigkeit in der rheinischen Pfalz zwischen 1555 und 1619’, Archiv fur Reformationsgeschichte, 72 (1981), 158–196Google Scholar; Safley, T.M., Let no man put asunder: The control of marriage in the German southwest: A comparative study 1550–1600 (Kirksville, Missouri, 1984)Google Scholar; Roper, L., ‘“Going to church and street”: Weddings in Reformation Augsburg’, Past and present, 106 (1985), 62–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹²⁵ See Strauss, ‘Success and failure’; and Kittelson, J.M., ‘Successes and failures in the German Reformation: The report from Strasbourg’, Archiv fur Reformationsgeschichte, 78 (1983)Google Scholar.

¹²⁶ Strauss, Luther's house of learning; Bucking, , Friihabsolutismus, esp. p. 73Google Scholar; Tracy, J.D., ‘With and without the Counter-Reformation: The Catholic church in the Spanish Netherlands and the Dutch Republic, 1570–1650’, Catholic historical review, 71 (1985), esp. 554–9Google Scholar.

¹²⁷ Bierbrauer, , ‘Bauerliche Revolten’, p. 54Google Scholar; according to Schulze, Bäuerlicher Wider stand, local irreligiousness, sectarianism, superstition and [religious] resistance' led to popular revolts against state imposition of religious orthodoxy in die late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries (p. 126).

¹²⁸ Bierbrauer, , ‘Bauerliche Revolten’, p. 54Google Scholar note 3, and Appendix pp. 65–6.

¹²⁹ Hoffmann, , ‘Typologie’, p. 313Google Scholar.

¹³⁰ Rebel, Peasant classes.

¹³¹ Koci, J., ‘Die Klassenkampfe der Untertanen in den bohmischen Landern wahrend des Dreiβigjahrigen Krieges’, in Heckenast, G. (ed.), Aus der Geschuhte der ostmitteleuropdischen Bautrnbewegungen im 16.—17. Jahrhundert (Budapest, 1977), pp. 341–9Google Scholar.

¹³² Schulze, , Bauerlicher Widerstand, pp. 51–4Google Scholar; Schulze, , ‘Europaische und deutsche Bauernrevohen’, p. 30Google Scholar.

¹³³ These were the Upper Austrian peasants' war of 1626; revolts in the Ennstal in 1637, in Krain in 1631, in the Hausruckviertel in 1632, in Upper Bavaria in 1633–4, in Lower Styria and Krain in 1635, in the Muehlviertel in 1635–6, in the Zillertal in 1645–7; and an attempted rebellion in Upper Austria in 1648 (Bierbraucr, , ‘Bauerliche Revohen’, p. 10 note 3, and p. 52)Google Scholar.

¹³⁴ Trossbach, , ‘Bauernbewegungen’, p. 240Google Scholar; Schulze, , Bäuerlicher Widerstand, p. 55Google Scholar.

¹³⁵ Harnisch, , ‘Klassenkampfe’, p. 171Google Scholar; Ulbrich, , ‘Charakter’, p. 215Google Scholar; Bierbrauer, , ‘Bauerliche Revohen’, p. 52Google Scholar; Trossbach, , ‘Bauernbewegungen’, pp. 255–7Google Scholar; Schulze, , ‘Europaische und deutsche Bauernrevolten’, p. 27Google Scholar.

¹³⁶ Koenigsberger, , ‘Crisis’, pp. 159, 166Google Scholar.

¹³⁷ Weber, H., ‘Empereur, Electeurs et Qiete de 1500 a 1650’, Reveue d'historie diplomatique, 89 (1975), here esp. 292–3, 297Google Scholar.

¹³⁸ Weber, , ‘Empereur, Electeurs et Diete’, pp. 292–3Google Scholar.

¹³⁹ Trossbach, , ‘Bauernbewegungen’, p. 234Google Scholar, argues that this was also true of the smaller territories; it is confirmed in Ulbrich, ‘Charakter’.

¹⁴⁰ Sec, for instance, Kriedte, Peasants; Rabb, ‘Effects’; Kamen, ‘Consequences’.

¹⁴¹ On the failure of inter-regional economic integration in Germany, see Bog, I., Der Reichsmerkantilismus (Stuttgart, 1959)Google Scholar; on its success in the Netherlands, see Vries, J. de, The Dutch rural economy in the golden age, 1500–1700 (New Haven, 1974)Google Scholar.

¹⁴² Rabb, ‘Effects’; Kamen, ‘Consequences’.

¹⁴³ Examples can be seen in Walker, German home towns; Ogilvie, ‘Coming of age’; Ogilvie, ‘Women’; Kisch, ‘Wupper Valley’; Medick, ‘Freihandel’.

¹⁴⁴ Schulze, , ‘Veranderte Bedeutung’, p. 279Google Scholar; Barnett-Robisheaux, , ‘Peasant revolts’, pp. 392–3Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁵ Schulze, , Bauerlicher Wider stand, pp. 62–6Google Scholar; Schulze, ‘Peasant resistance’. An interesting example of how rebels used competing state powers for their own ends (in the Schoenberg unrests in Saxony between 1647 and 1680/1) is provided in G. Heitz, ‘Agrarstruktur, bauerlicher Widcrstand, Klassenkampf im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert“, in Schulze, , Aufstande, p. 155Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁶ Schulze, , Bauerlicher Wider stand, pp. 76–85, 95–111Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁷ Friedrichs, , ‘Urban conflicts’, p. 101Google Scholar; Schulze, , ‘Veranderte Bedeutung’, p. 283Google Scholar. According to Schulze, , Baurrlichrr Wider stand, p. 106Google Scholar, Imperial Commissions were active in all the peasant revolts that have been investigated for the period 1580–1615.

¹⁴⁸ Bierbrauer, , ‘Bauerlicher Revolten’, p. 59Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁹ Schulze, , ‘Peasant resistance’, p. 83Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁰ Trossbach, , ‘Bauernbewegungen’, p. 254Google Scholar.

¹⁵¹ On the less violent nature of German revolts, see Schulze, , ‘Europaische und deutsche Bauernrevolten’, pp. 42–3Google Scholar, and Trossbach, , ‘Bauernbewegungen’, p. 246Google Scholar.

¹⁵² Trossbach, , ‘Bauernbewegungen’, p. 247Google Scholar.

¹⁵³ Press, , ‘Herrschaft’, pp. 189, 191, 205, 210Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁴ See Barnett-Robisheaux, , ‘Peasant revolts’, pp. 391–2Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁵ War created fiscal, military and economic strains which begot revolts: see Schulze, , Bäuerlicher Wider stand, p. 55Google Scholar. The measures states took in the 1650s and early 1660s to repay war debts, reorganize government and administration, and consolidate the advantages gained by wartime fiscal and bureaucratic precedenu and the breakdown or traditional institutions evoked final severe wave of popular revolts: Trossbach, , ‘Bauernbewegungen’, p. 236–240Google Scholar, counts 9 revolts in small German territories for the 1650s, 1 for the 1660s, 1 for the 1670s, 2 for the 1680s, for the 1690s, etc. (pp. 255–60).

¹⁵⁶ Indeed, as Jean Bodin had written in 1576, ‘the most certain means of protecting a state from rebellion, revolts and civil war, and of keeping the subjects contented, is to have an outside enemy’ (Six books of the republic (Paris, 1576), vol. 5)Google Scholar; quoted in Haan, H., ‘Prosperitat und Dreissigjahriger Krieg’, Geschichte und Gesellschaft, 7 (1981), 106Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁷ Trossbach, , ‘Bauernbewegungen’, p. 246Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁸ Wandruszka, A., ‘Zum “Absolutismus” Ferdinands II’, Mitteilungen des Obrroslerrachischen Landesarchivs, vol. 14Google Scholar, Beitrdge zur neurren Geschichte: Festschrift fur Hans Sturmberger zum 70. Gtburtstag (Linz, 1984), pp. 261–68, csp. p. 267Google Scholar.