Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen · 1907
Schullern’s methodological article presents Tyrolean Verfachbücher, registers preserving copies of legal documents, as an underused source for agrarian history and historical statistics. Its preliminary reconstructions challenge static images of peasant property, wealth, and population without claiming to constitute a statistical investigation based on mass observation.
More than 50,000 volumes had been assembled in the Innsbruck Statthalterei archive under Michael Mayr and arranged by court and year. Their chronological reach makes sustained reconstruction possible:
Die Verfachbücher von Schwaz-Freundsberg reichen bis 1604 zurück, jene von Rottenburg bis 1540 und jene von Fügen und Zell bis 1557 (bis 1627 gemischt).
English translation: The Verfachbücher (registers of deeds) of Schwaz-Freundsberg go back to 1604, those of Rottenburg to 1540, and those of Fügen and Zell to 1557 (mixed until 1627).
Recording chiefly the affairs of non-noble persons without sealing rights, these registers document property transactions, probate, movable wealth, credit, and disputes. Missing volumes, difficult handwriting, and variant copies nevertheless complicate their use. Schullern’s demonstration rests on approximately 1,000 regesta gathered for the history of a predominantly peasant lineage, designated “Oberauer” after its originating farm. Estate registers and parish records supplement the evidence across 1505–1800.
Linking these records requires distinguishing personal identity from the identity of a holding. Schullern notes a characteristic naming practice:
In den Verfachbüchern erscheinen dagegen meist schon durchaus sicherstehende Schreibnamen, meist ohne Hofnamen.
English translation: In the Verfachbücher, by contrast, there mostly appear already quite firmly established written surnames, mostly without farm names.
Stable surnames assist genealogical reconstruction, but the absence of farm names means that tracing a family and tracing a property remain separate tasks. The article accordingly follows both farms through successive owners and individuals through successive holdings.
Its geographical account anchors these movements in a specific landscape around Weerberg, Schwaz, and the Zillertal:
Auf dem Berge gleichen Namens breitet sich die Gemeinde Weerberg aus, südöstlich vom Dorfe Weer auf Fußpfaden und Holzwegen in Verbindung mit dem Dorfe und der Hauptstraße.
English translation: On the mountain of the same name the municipality of Weerberg extends, southeast of the village of Weer, connected with the village and the main road by footpaths and timber tracks.
Within this relatively small region, ownership could change surprisingly rapidly. One half of the Jakoberhof had sixteen owners between 1600 and 1738, averaging roughly nine years per owner. Widows’ succession, remarriage, transfers to sons or stepsons, and relatives’ intervention rights could move a farm between families and eventually restore it to an earlier lineage. Turnover therefore did not necessarily mean permanent separation from family property.
Nor was the farm an invariably fixed unit. Parcels, alpine shares, and grazing rights circulated separately. Individual accumulation could produce substantial landed and financial wealth that inheritance and sale subsequently dispersed. Bartholomäus Oberauer, whose father left an insolvent estate, acquired extensive property and nearly 50,000 florins in claims. His descendants illustrate the reversibility of accumulation, although Schullern does not treat the eventual impoverishment of Oberauer branches as representative of peasant society generally.
Credit helps explain this mobility. Loans, assignments, renewals, and receipts reveal extensive lending, commonly at five percent, with obligations sometimes continuing across generations. Purchasers often paid little immediately; financial difficulties could lead to resale and the transfer of debts. Such evidence also resists simple quantification. Renewals obscure the continuity of loans, acreage is rarely specified, and stated prices may incorporate debts or concessions between relatives rather than express market value. Probate accounts likewise handle assets and deductions inconsistently. Leases provide complementary evidence about cultivation.
The inquiry then extends from property to migration and demography. Repeated relocations undermine assumptions of peasant immobility. Urban employment, crafts, mining, inheritance, and the pursuit of profitable inns offer economic explanations for movement; the lineage’s particular prominence in innkeeping remains distinct from the broader argument. Demographic reconstruction is more tentative. Reliable ages survive for only 33 men and 13 women, while probate dates may exaggerate lifespan. Children disappearing from later records may have died, migrated, or received prior settlements. Apparent lineage extinction also depends on following male descent: tracing daughters’ descendants could yield a different picture.
Schullern concludes by proposing systematic examination of an entire district’s registers together with parish records. The article’s contribution is thus both substantive and methodological: its cases reveal mobile property and populations, while its evidential cautions define the broader research needed before family-selected observations can support statistical generalization.
This work was divided into 10 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 10 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian