| This study investigates how peasant subjects contributed to political development in one south German territory, the Imperial and Cistercian abbey of Salem. It explores the relationship between community and lordship in a process of political quickening, characterized by the consolidation of various forms of authority at the territorial level. Two legal treaties frame the period, one in 1473 between Salem and the subjects of its central jurisdiction and the other in 1637 between Salem and Heiligenberg, the abbey's major political adversary. Both agreements settled long-standing disputes through arbitration and compromise, and both emphasized the centrality of law in the construction of territorial identity.;Authority in Salem was built upon institutions, personal relationships, and documentation. This study addresses all three. Although framed primarily as a political narrative, long-term changes in rural economy and social life occupy a central position in its argument. The decades around 1600 are crucial in this context, and the density of sources from this period appears as no coincidence. Serial records of court cases, petitions, and chancery documents, all starting in the 1580s, illuminate subjects' political activities. Imperial tax lists, rent registers, and serf lists support an analysis of village demography, wealth, property relations, and kinship. The local and territorial officials who mediated between the abbey and its subjects receive special analysis, as do the courts and councils that provided territorial peace, integration, and stability.;Salem's peasants maintained influence in numerous ways, most notably through the abbey's central court, petitions, and office-holding. This study finds that the strengthening of territorial authority did not occur at peasants' expense and did not run counter to their interests. This is chiefly because communal principles were integrated within territorial rule and because subjects were involved both directly and indirectly in political decision-making. In addition, local and territorial levels of governance were neither exclusive nor fundamentally opposed. While relations within the territory contained the potential for conflict and cooperation, they were most often characterized by negotiation and compromise. The example of Salem challenges linear notions of historical progress and presents a case for effective, small-scale political development in early modern Europe. |
