1Early modern genealogy – in the sense of knowledge and records of princely kinship – did not enjoy legal status. But it was legally important, because it provided data that might become relevant in deciding legal conflicts and executing legal stipulations in documents, such as provisions for the succession to the throne (“Sukzessionsordnungen”) or dynastic treaties (“Erbverträge” or “Hausverträge”).1 In fact there was a whole distinct genre in early modern Germany which served as the missing link between genealogical information on the one hand and legal and political claims to rule in certain territories on the other hand. It was called “Deductionen” and consisted of treatises which were written mainly by legal scholars and commissioned, funded and issued by the involved dynasties and princes.2 The sheer number of these texts accounted for the publication of a pertinent compilation in folio and in two volumes (1712 and 1727) and of two printed bibliographies, the first (1717 and 1745) ultimately comprising more than 1,600 pages and the later one (1778-1783), even more than 2,200 pages.3

2The political significance of genealogy within a hierarchical society of princes ruling over predominantly hereditary monarchies is also manifested by the institutional setting of genealogical prints. The bulk of genealogical literature in the Holy Roman Empire4 consisted of so-called special genealogies (“Special Genealogien”) that dealt exclusively with a single ruling house and its marriage alliances. These writings were also instigated, financed and published by the dynasty in question in order to confirm and demonstrate its princely status – quite unlike the other sub-genre of the universal genealogies (“Universal=Genealogien”).5

3Any genealogical record, however, had to cope with a technical or rather a media problem: in many cases, a straightforward narrative or a simple list was unable to convey the required information in a book, let alone on a single sheet of paper or parchment, since a linear text or a limited surface could not adequately reproduce the ramifications and parallel branches so typical of kin relations. The expedient used within the genealogical works is of course familiar to every historian: they resorted to diagrams and images which were mainly modelled after a tree to construct and to structure complex kin groups.6 The following paper will mainly consist of the presentation and explanation of a sequence of three arboreal images that were used in a genealogical context and are in turn more closely linked to legal reasoning.

Status and law: a classical genealogical tree (1621)

4The majority of images to be found in genealogical writings belong to two types: there are portraits of members of the respective dynasty turning the book in question into a veritable printed gallery of ancestors, or there is at least one genealogical tree (“Stammbaum”) whose branches provide a defined diachronic and synchronic position for every single person within the family being represented. The Saxoniae Electorvm, Et Qvorvndam Dvcvm Agnatorvm genuinae effigies (1621), a special genealogy of the House of Wettin ruling over Saxony, which was authored and published by Wolfgang Kilian (1581–1663), combines both types.7 It presents 22 dukes and electors of Saxony ranging from Friedrich Bellicosus (1370-1428) to August, administrator of the Bishopric of Naumburg (1589–1615). Each prince is recorded on a double page (fig. 1), the left one with a biographical text and the right one with an engraved, emblematic portrait. The kinship relations between all the persons mentioned are elucidated by the large print of a genealogical tree (fig. 2) which largely conforms to the conventions of this type of image.

5Thus the “Stammbaum” in this case consists of a reasonably realistic picture of a domestic tree – at least it shows the traits of a tree familiar to Europeans. Its branches are employed to display the bifurcations of the Wettin kin group and for this purpose they bear nametags including biographical data and headdress symbolising the exercise of power (crowns and mitres). The main ancestor (“Spitzenahn”), Friedrich Bellicosus, is shown at the root, whereas the most recent descendants of the male lineage, the agnates, are to be found at the top. Mostly they belong to the generation born between 1590 and 1610.8 The synchronisation of the biological growth of the tree and the development of the noble house in question, which can be observed here, is by no means self-evident, but the result of a longer process,9 as Christiane Klapisch-Zuber’s seminal works have repeatedly pointed out.10

6In addition to its capacity to display the course of time, the genealogical tree also enables hierarchization of the members of a dynasty, since the positions at the root and on or near the trunk (or the vertical axis) are the most prestigious, normally reserved for the most important persons, e.g. rulers. Kilian’s tree is a good example of this, since the first two electors of the unified house are positioned on the trunk, whereas the later electors belonging to one of the two opposed branches are to be found on those limbs that curve back to the central axis of the picture. Genealogical trees thus favour the concept of an agnatic and vertically focused kin group, culminating in primogeniture and generally downplaying the dynastic role of women.

7This may also have to do with the character of the “Stammbaum” as an image. Because, unlike a diagram, an image cannot be continued over several pages, it is limited to a single surface and can thus only convey a limited amount of information. Unless an extremely large format is chosen, a genealogical tree therefore requires strict data selection, and this could be achieved by only including agnatic kin. In principle, that is exactly what Kilian did in his image, but he nevertheless found a way to at least hint at the existence of cognatic descendants: only the nameplates of those women who had offspring were furnished with leaves, as one can see in the case of the sisters Sibylla and Sidonia on the upper right. The latter’s tag appears undecorated, because her unhappy marriage remained without issue.

8An image, moreover, constitutes an object of perception in its own right, isolated from any accompanying texts. This effect is enhanced by the fact that the usual Western reading direction is reversed by the “Stammbaum”, which has to be read bottom-up, commencing at the roots. So to begin with, the reader of Kilian’s book, who might just have read one of its texts, has to indentify the starting point of the genealogy being presented in the image. For this reason the roots are conspicuously emphasized. Here they are located in the close foreground and seem to be zoomed out of the surrounding landscape. Additionally, they grow out of very dark soil, immediately attracting the attention of any viewer.

9Kilian’s print shows yet another trait typical of the genre: just as the tree is obviously domestic and familiar, belonging to a European habitat, the topographical setting is equally identifiable. It stands to reason that the riverside town in the background is Wittenberg. This fact not only stresses the general verisimilitude of the whole picture. It also highlights the insoluble connection between the dynasty and the territory depicted. This is of special importance here, because the whole point of the “Stammbaum” is not simply the genealogy of the House of Saxony or the sequence of its respective rulers, but rather their quality and dignity as electors of the Holy Roman Empire.

10Since this status was linked to the territory of Wittenberg, the so-called “Kurkreis”, the depiction of the eponymous town and its surroundings referred directly to their membership of this exclusive group of privileged rulers. Aside from that, the tree starts with Friedrich Bellicosus, who acquired this title in 1423, and after and above him every single ruling elector is marked by the appropriate crown (“Kurfürstenhut”) and numbered by Roman numerals (I.-XI.) Thus, the transfer of the electorate from the Ernestine to the Albertine branch of the House of Saxony is also visible by the leap from the left (No. VI) to the right (No. VII) of the tree.

11The “Stammbaum” definitely does not claim or possess any legal validity as such. But by illustrating the current rulership of the Albertine Wettins over the “Kurkreis” and by stylising their membership of the venerable college of electors as the outcome of a bicentennial tradition it displays and buttresses the elevated status of this line. In an age when social rank and reputation were dependent on the exercise of rights and power and on their public display, Kilian’s genealogical tree thus had a clear political as well as a legal message. It is a statement about the constitutional role of the Albertine branch.

12It is not by chance that this kind of tree is to be found within a special genealogy. Firstly, every special genealogy was supposed to be an official publication of the respective dynasty or at least approved by it. Consequently, their authors had no choice but to praise the subject of their genealogical account and to confirm its claims. In other words, there are only affirmative, panegyric special genealogies. Secondly, the economic effects of using illustrations have to be taken into consideration too. In the early modern period, reproducible images had to be produced in woodcuts or engravings, which were both rather expensive techniques. For this reason, they are regularly found in the special genealogies, which after all were paid for by the respective courts and dynasties. In contrast, universal genealogies were commercial enterprises and had to bring a financial return on the book market and so their producers simply could not afford the inclusion of costly illustrations and tended to resort to mere diagrams.

Genealogy as a legal document: German proof of nobility (1748)

13However, the “Stammbaum” was not the only type of tree whose image was used in early modern Germany in order to structure genealogical data. One alternative was called “ancestral tree” (“Ahnenbaum”) by the contemporaries.11 Its underlying principle is a simple diagrammatic bifurcation encompassing the respective direct parents of any person up to a certain number of generations. Unlike the “Stammbaum”, it assumed a fixed shape: starting with a noble or princely person, his or her parents are registered, then these latter’s parents (i.e. the four grandparents of the initial subject), then the eight great-grandparents etc. The number of individuals doubles with each generation of direct ancestors, and the female ancestors are at least as important as the male ones.

14Early modern genealogical literature abounds with this type of visualization of kinship, usually in the form of diagrams based on the use of typography. They were called “Ahnentafeln” (“ancestral charts”) and mostly ran horizontally from the left to the right side of the page, thus leading the reader back in time. The algorithmic regularity creates what basically is a form, which allows for the printing of general, blank charts with general terms for the different relations instead of personal names (fig. 3).12 The identical, predefined structure of an “Ahnentafel” made it particularly suitable to serve as proof of nobility by a candidate for an office, a benefice or membership of an exclusive group. In these cases, the naming of the ancestors covered was of course compulsory. Several institutions in the Reich, such as cathedral chapters and many abbeys, stipulated that candidates should provide proof of a certain number of ancestors of a certain rank, and ancestral charts in the form of images drawn by hand were used to this end. In other words: they took over the function of legal documents (“Urkunden”).13

15The document presented here (fig. 4) shows a mid-18^th-century hand-drawn and hand-coloured ancestral chart proving the knightly origin (“Ritterbürtigkeit”) of Christiane Lucie von der Schulenburg (1718–1787), who was applying to join the Protestant ladies’ convent of Steterburg in Lower Saxony. The coloured drawing is based on the botanical model of a tree, equipped with bark and leaves.14 The candidate is at its bottom, near the root, while her ancestors are to be found in the symmetrical branches. At the top the 16 great-great-grandparents she was required to demonstrate are depicted. All these persons are labelled by nametags, but they are predominantly indicated by their families’ respective coats of arms. The testimony is confirmed by the seals and signatures of four male members of the regional nobility. Therefore these kinds of charts, like the one discussed here, are usually referred to as “Aufschwörungstafel”, because the signatories vouch upon oath for the genealogical veracity of the document.

16The use of a picture for this kind of legal certification is by no means exceptional, but corresponds to a tradition that dates back at least to the late Middle Ages and was still observed in the 18^th century.15 The outward appearance of Christiane Lucie’s proof of nobility very much resembles the design recommended in a widely read practical manual on this social practice, written by the professor of law Johann Georg Estor and published in 1750.16 Still, the choice of this type of image for a legal purpose is significant. The picture of the tree itself seems at first glance quite realistic, but it possesses an uncanny symmetry and grows into the past, the crown being populated by the forebears. It defies biological plausibility and thus testifies all the more to the deeply rooted attraction the tree model exerted within early modern genealogy.

17On the other hand the “Ahnenbaum” is easy to read and to check, particularly because of its colouring. The regular bifurcations are literally shielded by the coats of arms, which can conveniently be used by the reader to follow the descent of Christiane Lucie without even looking at the individual names. Although a valid proof of nobility required the naming of each single progenitor, its logic aimed at the accumulation of as many renowned ancestral houses as possible – which are, after all, represented heraldically. And finally the somewhat unusual notion of placing a descendant at the root of this tree proves beneficial to the reader, who sees the legally relevant 16 ancestors – upon whose verification everything depends – on the topmost row of the picture, at a first glance as it were. So on the one hand this ancestral tree transgresses a botanically correct image, but on the other hand the resulting layout is highly adequate to its legal purpose.

A frontispiece displaying the legal and genealogical self-regulation of the nobility (1739)

18In 1739, Johann Georg Cramer (1700-1763), professor of law at the University of Leipzig, published a book on hereditary nobility (nobilitas avita) and “Ahnen-Recht” as its foundation. Among the noble privileges treated in his Commentarii De Ivribvs Et Praerogativis Nobilitatis Avitae are the admission to tournaments and the membership in cathedral chapters, which both required a certain number of noble ancestors. Hence this noble group is called “Turnier=” or “Stiffts=Adel”.

19Cramer’s treatise starts by referring to Roman antiquity. The jurist discusses the Roman definition of nobility which is primarily based on the holding of certain offices and the ius imaginum derived from it. And indeed, the inextricable link of noble status to both law and images was still an issue in the early modern period, in which the notion of a law of images was dealt with in terms of heraldry.17 Cramer, however, stresses the fundamental difference between the ancient Roman and German understanding of nobility. According to his book, the latter does not rely on the ius imaginum, but instead depends on the noble blood which propagates from the grandparents, great-grandparents and ancestors to the descendants in a continuous succession.18 Consequently, Cramer highlights the traditional conviction of the German nobility that noble origin required a noble mother as well as a noble father, thus differing from Roman law.19

20The “distinction between noblemen and commoners” and the proof of nobility cannot, he continues, be deduced from the “law of nature”, but are rather founded on the “institutions of the peoples and the states” – which in turn are completely compatible with “sane reason and natural equity”.20 Therefore it is hardly surprising that the main sources Cramer uses for his legal reasoning on the privileges of the hereditary nobility consist of the numerous statutes of the diverse noble corporations who regarded themselves as autonomous and entitled to make their own rules. They were justified in doing so, Cramer argues, because they were originally founded and endowed with their resources by those noble families that later legitimately claimed exclusive right to access.21

21The frontispiece of the legal treatise (fig. 5), which was engraved by C.F. Boetius after I.A. Richter, reflects the view that the noble corporations themselves have the right to decide who to accept as their members.22 The image depicts a theatrical situation, marked by the curtain, the wooden frame and the label Capitvlvm. The whole scene obviously is set in the archive of a cathedral chapter filled with hundreds of books and manuscripts. In the foreground, two members of such a chapter, wearing the typical garb, verify the data of a proof of nobility and match it against the documents on the small side-table on the right. The verification of a claim to noble descent is solely the business of the respective noble institution. The legal expert can only describe this procedure from an exterior position, as an onlooker as it were, because he has no say in this matter.

22The tournament taking place in the courtyard in the background supports this interpretation. Admission to a tournament was only granted to competitors of attested noble origin so that inclusion in the event itself could also serve as proof of nobility. The control over access to the venue lay in the hands of a herald who is standing next to the left column. Here again, an institution of noble society, rather than a lawyer, decides on the proper noble qualities of potential contestants. But this also applies to any other external authority, even including the Emperor23 and the Pope24 who, according to Cramer, both have no right to interfere with the self-regulation of the self-reproducing hereditary nobility.

23Thus the whole layout of the frontispiece conveys the message that the privileges of hereditary nobility and especially the proof of nobility are not subject to outside influence. They are presented in a showcase, together with the test procedures employed, and just like the early modern lawyers, we spectators are only allowed to look at the scene as if through a glass pane. The main object behind it, the sheet with the “Ahnenbaum”, is even more detached from the observer than the other objects depicted, since it is presented as a picture within a picture. By keeping the viewer at distance, the composition of the print succeeded in condensing the whole argument of the learned author so that it was comprehensible without having to consult the Latin text.

Conclusion

24The three examples of the use of images in a wider genealogical context presented here all draw on trees. One could claim that the whole imagery of early modern genealogy is largely dependent on the arboreal model.25 But of course this allowed for different pictorial solutions for different functions. Kilian’s “Stammbaum” shows a tree which depicts the chain of agnates of the House of Saxony over 200 years, with a clear focus on the ruling electors. At the same time the tree is firmly rooted in the soil around Wittenberg, seat and source of the electoral power of the dynasty. In his genealogical print Kilian thus manages to convincingly capture the two main components of legitimate hereditary rule in a single image, the continuity of kinship on the one hand, and the continuity of rule over a territory on the other hand. The artistic quality of the engraving and of the portraits in his book exudes a kind of high-gloss exclusivity befitting the high rank and the central constitutional role of electors.

25In the case of Christiane Lucie von der Schulenburg’s proof of nobility, the handmade character of the “Ahnenbaum” is crucial. The flawless descent of the candidate could be quickly and easily checked, because the hand-coloured coats of arms made them recognizable even at a cursory glance. But the fact that the whole image was hand-drawn is even more important. After all, we are dealing with an original document which only exists in one copy and its authenticity and legal force are as much attested to by the required signatures as by the individual hand of the writer and draughtsman.

26The accomplishment of the frontispiece to Cramer’s book lies in the fact that it can serve as a sophisticated pictorial abstract of a long-winded legal treatise. The complicated reasoning of the learned author is expertly transmitted into an intricate image. The viewer has to come to terms with at least five spatial dimensions (the frame, the theatrical columns and curtains, the interior of the archive, the courtyard and the landscape), three levels of perception (the whole staged image, the scenery depicted and the information on the upheld chart), three different media settings of the legally relevant information (printed books, archival documents, personal expertise of two canons and a herald) and corresponding social practices (proof of nobility, gatekeeping by herald and tournament).

27Images thus turn out to be not simple illustrations, but an indispensable element of early modern genealogy. The example of the abstract “Ahnentafel”, which could develop into a somewhat botanically correct “Ahnenbaum”, proves that a more or less realistic image of a tree provided a particularly reader-friendly arrangement of kinship data which facilitated a legal use. Evidently the specific functional role of the tree model within genealogy in general was to a large extent dependent on the degree of natural likeness of the given image. It must however be noted that the employment of images in genealogy was very much determined and, in fact limited, by economic conditions. The production of engravings was expensive and therefore only affordable in the case of special genealogies whose costs were covered by the courts. Universal genealogies in contrast had to make do with pure text and diagrams26 which could be produced by much cheaper typographic means. Early modern genealogy can only be understood and studied adequately if its arboreality is duly acknowledged.

Fig. 1 – W. Kilian, Serenissimorvm Saxoniae Electorvm […], Augsburg 1621, fol. 11v and 12r (HAB: Uo 4° 31).

Fig. 2 – W. Kilian, Serenissimorvm Saxoniae Electorvm […], Augsburg 1621, Arbor Genealogica (HAB: Uo 4° 31).

Fig. 3 – Philipp Jacob Spener, Tabvlae Progonologicae […], Stuttgart 1660, p. 1 (HAB: Ff 4 68 (2)).

Fig. 4 – Aufschwörungstafel (proof of nobility) of Christiane Lucie von der Schulenburg (1748) (Niedersächsisches Landesarchiv – Staatsarchiv Wolfenbüttel: 50 Neu 3 Stet Zg. 63/2004 Nr. 785).

Fig. 5 – Johann Georg Cramer, Commentarii De Ivribvs Et Praerogativis Nobilitatis Avitae […], vol. 1, Leipzig 1739, frontispiece (HAB: Graph A1: 228b).