Search

Border delimitations and border disputes were an important part of the early modern process of state formation and the consolidation of power. As such, they are often taken into consideration when studying political and dynastic issues, such as succession disputes, while maps are frequently studied as a form of visualisation to depict territories and borders. So far, however, neither the administrative activities involved in these processes nor the border treaties (Grenzrezesse) which constitute the most important type of source for this area of research have been studied. The aim of this paper is to examine this topic using the principality of Braunschweig-Wolfenbüttel as an example. This principality saw the creation and later on the expansion of administrative structures concerned with border issues from the 16th century onwards. The central aspect analysed in this paper is the process of how border disputes were settled. This was mostly achieved through border commissions. Each party involved in the conflict assigned representatives, both officials of the administrative institutions responsible for border issues (Grenzbehörden) as well as privy councillors (Geheime Räte) to serve as commissioners on these commissions. The result of their work were border treaties. These include narrationes explaining the circumstances of the conflict and of the commission, while the dispositiones comprise the articles listing the terms that had been agreed upon. Compared to administrative records pertaining to border disputes (Grenzakten), border treaties generally offer more information. This is why, when researching these phenomena, this distinctly early modern type of charter is of particular importance. It can serve as a compendium of an entire border dispute and, if there is a proper archival description, as a sort of finding aid for the record in question. This paper therefore also analyses the history of the development of this type of charter. Boundary maps, the third type of source discussed served to visualize and delineate the demarcation of borders, but seem to have been of rather minor importance at the time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to examine the use of charters during the early modern period. The Cistercian monastery of Mariental near Helmstedt, which became part of the principality (Fürstentum) of Braunschweig-Wolfenbüttel in 1571, has been chosen to serve as a case study. Due to its valuable assets in the eastern parts of the Holy Roman Empire, i.e. in the Hochstift Halberstadt and the Prince-Archbishopric (Erzstift) of Magdeburg, it was constantly involved in legal disputes with these territories throughout the early modern period. These disputes must be considered in the context of the state-building process of the time. Charters were the most important evidence which could be provided to prove rights of possession and were therefore studied by archivists and lawyers. Specialised methods of handling these sources were developed and refined in the 17th century. When studying a document, the decisive goal was not so much to determine its authenticity, but rather to collect and arrange the relevant information in order to provide proof of the monastery's rights. In addition to the legal appraisal of the Mariental documents, they were used as sources for historiographical texts by scholars of the University of Helmstedt as early as the 16th century. While these two approaches - the historiographical and the jurisprudential - both had a mutual influence on each other, it was mostly the historiographical approach which was informed by the jurisprudential one. The latter went on to have a marked influence on how information was presented in historiographical writings in the 19th century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the first patents of nobility (Adelsbriefe) in the Holy Roman Empire were granted as early as the 14th and 15th centuries, they are essentially an early modern genre of charter that has been insufficiently studied until now. The aim of this paper is to analyse both the patents of nobility themselves as well as the process of creation and authentication. This process was one of cooperation between the person seeking to have a title of nobility conferred on themselves, the emperor and the territorial lord (Landesherr). In many cases, it is not possible to clearly distinguish between the acts of ennoblement (Nobilitierung) and of elevation to a higher rank (Standeserhöhung). Both were initially requested from and approved by the emperor, but subsequently had to be confirmed by the respective territorial lord. During the 17th century, a structured procedure of recognition emerged, which is examined in this study using the Principality of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel as an example. The approval of both the emperor and the territorial lord were usually granted, but did not guarantee that the newly ennobled person's would be accepted by their peers. Of course, the initiative almost invariably came from those wishing to be ennobled. Over the course of the early modern period, the forms used for patents of nobility underwent marked changes. The narratio, in particular, was progressively tailored to fit each individual applicant, although it must be noted that these phrases which, however, only reflected the image the applicant wished to convey. After 1806, the German princes were able to issue patents of nobility independently and the forms used in these documents became increasingly abbreviated and less specific to the applicant in question. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]