Abstract
It has now been fifty years since historians – most influentially Winfried Schulze – began to emphasize that in the aftermath of the Bauernkrieg of 1524-6, German peasant resistance increasingly took on the form of litigation as a substitute for (and at times as a supplement to) violent rebellion. Variously interpreted as a more pragmatic strategy for the realization of reform and as a form of false consciousness which only perpetuated peasant oppression, this process of juridification is now the subject of an extensive literature. Most of this scholarship is devoted to high-profile lawsuits filed by entire peasant communities, a focus understandable on grounds both logistical (large-scale lawsuits are easier to identify and leave more extensive records) and interpretive (collective litigation seems a more recognizable outgrowth of mass uprisings). Yet just as older scholarship on the Bauernkrieg was hampered by the questionable presumption of a unitary and revolutionary peasant consciousness, the focus on collective litigation has narrowed our understanding of the extent and political implications of juridified resistance. The present paper seeks to broaden our understanding by drawing attention to two relatively neglected forms of peasant legal action: litigation against overlords by individual peasants in defense of their own private interests, and collaborative participation by rural communities in state-directed anti-corruption investigations aimed at punishing abusive officials. Neither form ranged entire communities against their titular sovereign, but each in its own way could produce tangible resolution of peasant grievances