I Waste Not: Criminalizing Wastefulness in Early Modern
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Waste Not: Criminalizing Wastefulness in Early Modern Germany by Ashley Lynn Elrod Department of History Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Thomas Robisheaux, Supervisor ___________________________ John Martin ___________________________ Jocelyn Olcott ___________________________ Marjorie E. Plummer Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the Graduate School of Duke University 2017 i v ABSTRACT Waste Not: Criminalizing Wastefulness in Early Modern Germany by Ashley Lynn Elrod Department of History Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Thomas Robisheaux, Supervisor ___________________________ John Martin ___________________________ Jocelyn Olcott ___________________________ Marjorie E. Plummer An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the Graduate School of Duke University 2017 i v Copyright by Ashley Lynn Elrod 2017 Abstract This dissertation analyzes the development of legal strategies to restrict “wastefulness” or “prodigality” during the economic crises of the long sixteenth century in Southwest Germany, as the state, community and small town families struggled to preserve family and household resources. Using local, state, and imperial court trials of “spendthrifts” from early modern Württemberg, the thesis shows that prodigality laws provided litigants with a flexible, multifaceted tool to prevent reckless financial mismanagement. Once laws began to criminalize wastefulness in the mid-sixteenth century, lawmakers, litigants, and judges used this concept to intervene in family affairs and brand heads of households as legally incompetent. Although litigants largely applied spendthrift laws against male heads of households, family members and the authorities also challenged women with property, accusing them of squandering precious family resources and transgressing gender- and class specific standards of proper household management. The new legal and social culture of thrift and wastefulness not only had profound consequences for gender- and class-based norms of economic behavior but also transformed those economic norms into prerequisites for legal personhood. Finally, the thesis suggests ways in which early modern guardianship and spendthrift laws shaped wider concepts of citizenship, rationality, disability, and iv deviance, pointing to long-lasting influences that shaped state policies in Germany into the twentieth century. v Dedication To my family, both at home and at Duke vi Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ xii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. xiii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... xiv 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Terminology ..................................................................................................................... 3 1.2. Historiography ................................................................................................................. 4 1.2.1. Confessionalization and Social Discipline .............................................................. 4 1.2.2. Marriage, Gender, and the Household ................................................................... 9 1.2.3. Guardianship Law .................................................................................................... 13 1.2.4. Disability Studies ...................................................................................................... 21 1.3. Sources and Methods .................................................................................................... 24 1.3.1. Prescriptive Literature and Legislation ................................................................. 25 1.3.2. Local, State, and Imperial Court Records ............................................................. 29 1.4. Dissertation Structure ................................................................................................... 33 2. The Criminalization of Wastefulness ................................................................................... 38 2.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 38 2.1.1. Württemberg in the German Southwest ............................................................... 39 2.2. Verschwendung in Criminal and Civil Law ............................................................. 44 2.2.1. Roman Origins and Renaissance Revivals ........................................................... 46 vii 2.2.2. A Case Study of Württemberg ............................................................................... 50 2.2.2.1. Wastefulness in the Württemberg Urfehde, ca. 1500-1550 .............................. 52 2.2.2.2. Incapacitation and Guardianship of Spendthrifts, ca. 1550-1600 ................... 60 2.3. Protecting the Family, the Public Welfare, and the State ........................................ 70 2.3.1. Reckless Hausväter .................................................................................................. 73 2.3.2. Untrustworthy Neighbors ....................................................................................... 83 2.3.3. Sinful Subjects ........................................................................................................... 89 2.4. Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 95 3. Practical Enforcement and Its Limits ................................................................................... 98 3.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 98 3.1.1. Sources & Methodology ........................................................................................ 100 3.1.2. The Benders of Bietigheim .................................................................................... 104 3.1.3. Historical & Institutional Settings ........................................................................ 108 3.1.3.1. Bietigheim, its Stadtgericht, and local Verschwender ............................... 108 3.1.3.2. The Bietigheim Verschwender ......................................................................... 110 3.1.3.3. The Württemberg Ducal Council (Oberrat) ................................................ 116 3.1.3.4. Albertus Dretsch, the Hofgericht, and the Tübingen Legal Faculty ....... 118 3.2. Proving Prodigality ..................................................................................................... 121 3.2.1. Escalating Conflict .................................................................................................. 121 3.2.2. Recruiting an Expert Legal Opinion .................................................................... 124 3.2.3. Prodigality and Insanity ........................................................................................ 126 3.2.4. Distinguishing Prodigality from Common Vice ................................................ 128 viii 3.2.5. Outstanding Debts ................................................................................................. 133 3.2.6. Drinking, Gambling, and Extravagant Spending .............................................. 135 3.2.7. Jeopardizing Family and Inheritance .................................................................. 139 3.3. Defiance and Disobedience ........................................................................................ 141 3.3.1. Resisting Rehabilitation ......................................................................................... 142 3.3.2. Counter-Accusations .............................................................................................. 146 3.3.3. Attacks on Local Authority: Brosi Buß (1584-1585) ........................................... 151 3.3.4. The Benders Request a Retrial .............................................................................. 156 3.4. Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 161 4. Categories of Legal Incompetency: Intersections of Age, Gender, and Disability ...... 167 4.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 167 4.1.1. Guardianship and Incompetency in Regional Laws ......................................... 171 4.1.2. Sources and Methods ............................................................................................. 179 4.1.2.1. The Reichskammergericht (RKG), its Records, and Patterns ....................... 179 4.1.2.2. Identifying Common Tropes ........................................................................