Dorfliche Gesellschaft und Kriminalitat: Das Fallbeispiel Lippe, 1650-1800.

Two interwoven questions drive Frank's study of criminality in a rural town, Heiden, in the "Grafschaft" of Lippe. One is quite specific: to what extent were the relationships among the town's different social groups changed by state attempts to "discipline" its subjects? Frank tries to answer this question through the methodology of microhistory, which, in turn, gives rise to the second, more general, question: what are the advantages of this approach, as opposed to a macrohistorical approach? This monograph, thus, serves not only as a practical attempt to interpret a facet of early modem European history, but also as a discourse on methodology.

Before discussing Heiden, Frank presents the necessary background material for his investigation. The first piece is a solid review of the pertinent literature on "Sozialdisziplinierung" (i.e., Oestereich, Foucault, Wunder et al.). Central to this review is the well-established point that Oestereich's "model is one-sided and deterministic," reducing the common people to "passive statistics." (p. 31) Instead, Frank advocates Keith Wrightson's model of a "dialectical process" between interest groups. Following this exposition is a rehearsal of the pan-European demographic, socio-economic, cultural, and political trends that occurred between 1650 and 1800. During the second half of the eighteenth century, these trends, especially the burgeoning rural population, culminated in a widespread socio-economic crisis throughout Lippe. Internal state policies, which were, after 1746, almost entirely determined by the Stande, recognized these hard times and did, in fact, try to alleviate them through reforms.

With the framework laid out, Frank reconstructs, from the usual serial sources, the social stratification and local administration of Heiden. He argues that distinct socio-economic lines divided the upper, middle, and lower strata, with the local elite holding a firm, albeit surreptitious, control of the local government. Criminality is, however, the crux of Frank's study, and here he turns to the records of the town court, the "Gogericht," which was responsible for adjudicating local misdemeanors. Beginning in the seventeenth century, the sessions of this court were closed, involving only the "Amtsvogt," the "Bauerrichter," the plaintiff, the defendant, and any necessary witnesses. From the minutes of such proceedings between 1690 and 1795, Frank statistically analyzes the sentences, the frequency of crime, and the social background and relationships of the participants. Money penalties were the most frequent sentence (58.4%), with acquittal the next likely outcome (16%). These verdicts, according to Frank, evidence the Gogericht's desire to solve "local conflicts at the town level," rather than inculcating social discipline. (p. 217) Some instances, like the regulation of "Wanderarbeit," however, led the town elite to form an "alliance" with the state against the lower stratum. (p. 312) And yet, other forms of criminality provided the state with the unequaled opportunity to mediate between the strata of Heiden, thus opening up the entire town to state concepts of orderliness. These nuances, Frank concludes, show that the traditional system of local order was hard-pressed by the socio-economic crisis, which was particularly deleterious for the smallest landowners (i.e., the Strassenkotter), some of whom owned "not even a square-foot besides their house." (p. 137) Moreover, it is, according to Frank, his microhistorical approach which reveals these nuances; otherwise, they would have been lost in the superficiality of the general statistics and trends.

Frank's interpretation of Heiden is, in general, plausible. Unfortunately though, his case study never convinces the reader, because it does not adequately explain the motives of the interest groups. In fact, in his conclusion Frank fails to return to the model of interest groups, which he had advocated. This dissonance stems almost exclusively from Frank's unexplainable lack of "thick description." There are numerous instances where he could have provided much more "contextual analysis" of the sources, thus producing not only more insight into the relationships among the interest groups in Heiden, but also a stronger case for his general interpretations. The discussion of verbal abuse and other "offenses against one's honor," (p. 333) for example, rarely goes beyond the statistical analysis. Here is an excellent opportunity, where a "thick description," if done well, would have elucidated the questions at hand. Indeed, in his widely-acclaimed work on Neckarhausen, David Sabean used this tool in a masterful way to extract every last shred of meaning from the court records. (For some astonishing reason, even though Frank's study shares so much in common with Sabean's, he draws no parallels or comparisons with Neckarhausen.) Ironically, these shortcomings reinforce the axiom that good microhistory must incorporate contextual analysis of quantitative and qualitative sources.

Dennis A. Frey, Jr. Syracuse University