Seehausen

Prosperous Hanseatic Town with Extensive Rights

Seehausen was first mentioned in 1174, and in 1196 it was designated as an oppidum (small town). The emerging citizenry oriented itself on Magdeburg law but adapted it to Flemish influences so that with the so-called Seehausen law, its own variant was created. This was passed on to the town of Pritzwalk in the Prignitz region in 1256. There, the statute of the butchers used in Seehausen was also adopted in 1355.

Relatively late, only in 1321, the first mention of aldermen and councilors in Seehausen follows, which, however, may have been formed much earlier. The council tried to expand its legal competencies, which it succeeded in doing in 1335, especially with the acquisition of the office of the mayor and the town court. This fended off the influence of the competing jurisdiction in municipal affairs, which was linked to the sovereign. This was also a clear indication of urban autonomy, which many Brandenburg towns were able to unfold in the 14th century.[1]

Fig. 1: The historic town center of Seehausen is, to a great extent, characterized by half-timbered houses.

Seehausen achieved economic prosperity, in particular through relations with the Hanseatic League. Located on the River Aland, the shipping route to Hamburg was open to the citizenry. The ships passed through the town of Boitzenburg, where the Aland flows into the Elbe and where a lucrative customs post was located. In 1371, Duke Albrecht II of Mecklenburg had a ship coming from Seehausen stopped here. During an inspection of the loaded cargo, goods had been discovered that belonged to Magdeburg citizens and had not been properly cleared through customs. Corresponding markings were missing. This incident suggests that Magdeburg’s staple right had been circumvented on the overland route to Seehausen, where the goods were loaded onto the ship.[2] The ship belonged to a Seehausen citizen named Hein Fredeland, who hired himself out as a carter and pretended to be innocent. Such services of the inhabitants of Seehausen were probably not uncommon and illustrate the growing livelihood of the citizenry. A guild of garment tailors is documented in Seehausen for the year 1460.

Fig. 2: The River Aland in Seehausen was an important object of council legislation in the Middle Ages.

The Seehausen council had a major share in the economic boom. It continuously pursued an expansion of its rights. The extension of trade played an important role, as can be seen in the acquisition of the so-called Kammerhof (today Kamps) on the Elbe. The council of Seehausen received this estate as a fief from Margrave Jost in 1409. Several decades of systematic development as a transhipment center followed, the ownership of which was confirmed to the town by Margrave Friedrich II in 1449.[3]  In addition to shipping, a ferry was operated at the Kammerhof. A castle served to monitor the traffic; renewed as well as expanded dikes were to protect the surrounding countryside from flooding. In 1429, Seehausen acquired a second ferry on the Elbe in Ritfeld, which again shows the council’s interest in river traffic. On the basis of its rights and with various construction measures, it created an important infrastructure that was under municipal ownership and had considerable relevance for the area lying between Altmark, Prignitz and Havelland.

The right of the citizens of Seehausen to take action against robbers and peace-breakers, confirmed in 1340, had an effect far beyond the town’s borders. Margrave Ludwig even waived fines in this context. The council also watched over the Aland, the use of which had to be coordinated with the margrave. In 1481, the council brought an action against a person who had illegally navigated the river with a ship.[4]

When the Hohenzollerns took over as Margraves of Brandenburg in 1411/12, Friedrich I confirmed Seehausen and the other Altmark towns their centuries-old privileges. Nevertheless, the relationship with the sovereigns did not remain unclouded. Like Gardelegen, Stendal and other civic communities in the Altmark, Seehausen had to tolerate interventions in the municipal constitution. This concerned, among other things, a dispute over the Bierziese (beer penny, beer tax) in 1488. In 1502, the sovereign again intervened in the municipal constitution of Seehausen.[5]

Fig. 3: The Beuster Gate in Seehausen demonstrated civic self-confidence and fortitude.

An important testimony to the legal history of the town of Seehausen is the law book that has survived from the Middle Ages, the contents of which are mixed in a not untypical way and contain both land transactions, hereditary regulations, court records and council statutes. This source, which is valuable beyond Seehausen, offers exciting insights into the lived law of the small town in the Altmark. Here it also becomes evident that the council and aldermen of Seehausen frequently made inquiries to the Magdeburg aldermen and presented their judgments at the court sessions. The town court in Seehausen consisted of the judge and the aldermen as well as the mayor. They met three times during the year for so-called “Dingetagen” (“court days”). Those who could afford it had the possibility to convene more Dingetagen by paying money.

In this manner, for example, a wealthy widow wrote down her will before the council and the aldermen.[6] After her death, she wanted to bequeath parts of her possessions and income to various places of worship, whose clergy would then pray for the salvation of the founder and her relatives. The Seehausen council also received donations, as did the St. Gertrauden Hospital and the town’s Holy Cross Guild. She bequeathed clothes, boxes, robes, sheets and blankets to her nieces, while other clothes of the everyday life and the workday were to be given as donations to poor inhabitants of Seehausen. This confirms both central habits of Magdeburg law and a flourishing charity among laymen in the 15th century.

 

 

Author: Sascha Bütow

Citation:

Sascha Bütow, Seehausen. Prosperous Hanseatic Town with Extensive Rights, 08.12.2021, https://magdeburg-law.com/historic-city/seehausen/

 

Footnotes:

[1] On this, in general, Jan Winkelmann, Die Mark Brandenburg des 14. Jahrhunderts. Markgräfliche Herrschaft zwischen räumlicher „Ferne“ und politischer Krise (= Studien zur brandenburgischen und vergleichendes Landesgeschichte 5), Berlin 2011, p. 168.

[2] Cf. Sascha Bütow, Jeetzel – Aland – Stepenitz: Gedanken zur wirtschaftlichen Nutzung kleiner Flüsse im sogenannten hansischen Hinterland während des Spätmittelalters, in Biuletyn Polskiej Misji Historycznej 14 (2019), pp. 387–409, here pp. 397-398.

[3] Adolf Friedrich Riedel (ed.), Codex Diplomaticus Brandenburgensis, series A, vol. 6, Berlin 1846, no. 51, pp. 373-374.

[4] Georg Wilhelm Raumer, Das Gerichtsbuch der Stadt Seehausen in der Altmark, in Allgemeines Archiv für die Geschichtskunde des preußischen Staates 13 (1834), pp. 167–179, here p. 172.

[5] On this development, in general, Felix Escher, Die Mark Brandenburg unter den frühen Hohenzollern. Eine historische Einführung, in Die Mark Brandenburg unter den frühen Hohenzollern. Beiträge zu Geschichte, Kunst und Architektur im 15. Jahrhundert 8, edited by Peter Knüvener and Dirk Schumann (= Schriften der Landesgeschichtlichen Vereinigung für die Mark Brandenburg N.F. 5), Berlin 2015, pp. 17–34, here p. 32.

[6] Same as note 4, p. 179.

 

Images:

Fig. 1: Wikimedia Commons, photo: Nephantz!

Fig. 2: Wikimedia Commons, photo: Ulamm

Fig. 3: Wikimedia Commons, photo: Karin Martin

Stendal

A Medieval Municipal Community of Magdeburg Character between Consensus and Conflict

In the context of the state historical tradition, the development of Stendal in terms of market law begins with a privilege granted by Albrecht the Bear around 1160, the interpretation of which ranges from a forgery to a copy compiled from two genuine copies.[1] With his document, Albrecht granted the citizens of Stendal unlimited freedom from customs duties in the towns of Brandenburg, Havelberg, Werben, Arneburg, Tangermünde, Osterburg, Salzwedel and all associated localities, which also belonged to him or were claimed by him. Albrecht exempted the Stendal market itself from any customs duties, which flowed to it for five years. Furthermore, Stendal was allowed to live according to the same legal customs as the citizens of Magdeburg did. In connection with this, in the event of a disagreement over questions of interpretation of the law adopted from Magdeburg, the citizens of Stendal were to turn to the aldermen there for judgments. With regard to the house sites in Stendal, Albrecht ordered an annual interest of four pfennigs for their owners. In return, these properties were to be left to them freely and hereditarily. The judicial relations were also regulated in the aforementioned document. A vassal of Albrecht named Otto acted as judge in Stendal and received one third of all court revenues. The remaining two-thirds went to the Brandenburg margrave himself. Another decree provided for the numerous new settlers coming to Stendal to have equal use of the communal possessions such as waters, pastures and woodlands.

Fig 1: Above a cordon of walls stands Albrecht the Bear (1123-1170) wearing a helmet, armor, sword and shield, with a domed tower on each side. The circumscription +BRANDEBURG refers to the place of minting. There are also speculations that the bracteate could have been minted in 1150 by Pribislav-Heinrich or Jacza von Köpenick.

On the basis of these rights, a municipality was subsequently established in Stendal that was constituted according to Magdeburg law with a council constitution documented in 1215, whose proof thus came earlier than in Magdeburg itself.[2] Against this background, various municipal institutions developed, which are lined up in a typical manner in a document of the year 1280: sovereign bailiff, aldermen, council and citizenry.[3]  As in other towns, the importance of the bailiff gradually declined in Stendal, while that of the council grew steadily. However, this body, composed of representatives of the most distinguished trades, had to take into account the interests of the citizens, who, just as in Magdeburg, met regularly in the so-called Burding – a citizens’ assembly – and struggled there for a say in municipal matters. The importance of the Burding was reflected above all in the fact that the Stendal council had to consult it before setting new legal regulations, as a corresponding agreement of 1297 indicates.[4]

The aldermen also gained an important position by serving as a source of information for numerous towns that had adopted Magdeburg law via Stendal. The so-called Stendal law demonstrably reached Wusterhausen a. d. Dosse (1233), Prenzlau (1234/35), Kyritz (1237), Osterburg (1238), Stargard/Szczecinski (1243), Friedland (1244), Wittstock a. d. Dosse (1248) and Neuruppin (1256). Gardelegen and, since the late Middle Ages, Salzwedel also adopted Stendal legal customs, which were also transferred to Wilsnack via Wittstock in 1471.[5]

Fig. 2: Statue of Roland in Stendal in front of the town hall with the characteristic Gerichtslaube (court house). Today’s figure, created in 1974, is a faithful copy of the Roland of 1525. He is a symbol of the urban freedoms and rights of the citizens of Stendal.

A peculiarity of the Stendal law compared to the Magdeburg model was a change in the law of inheritance.[6] In Stendal, half of the inheritance was to go to the widow of the deceased and half to the joint children. The assets “Gerade” (“straight-line”) and “Heergewäte” (“set of military equipment”), which were important in Magdeburg law, were previously separated from the inheritance and left to the female and male heirs to be endowed with them. In contrast to Magdeburg, Stendal was thus subject to a right of half-division brought in by Flemish settlers, which was also passed on to the other municipalities already mentioned above and, moreover, was characteristic of towns throughout the Mark Brandenburg.[7]

In the context of the adoption of Magdeburg law, the Stendal council also oriented itself to the model of the city on the Elbe with regard to the trades. According to this, the two Brandenburg margraves Johann and Otto had decreed in 1231 that the garment cutters should follow the same legal customs as the garment cutters in Magdeburg. From Stendal, these rules were incorporated in 1245 in an exact wording in the statute of the garment cutters’ guild of the town of Kyritz. As in Stendal, this group formed the most distinguished trade in the town and sent its representatives to the council again and again over the centuries. Elected here, they pursued a policy focused on long-distance trade.[8] In addition to the actual transfer of town law, this reveals another component of the network of relationships between the towns of Magdeburg law with regard to the economic orientation of the townspeople. For it was especially the garment cutters who made high profits by selling their wares in areas outside Brandenburg. Within the town, therefore, the cloth cutters sought to severely restrict the rights of the cloth manufacturers to sell their wares. Over generations, the Stendal council, with its need to shape urban politics and maintain its own position, increasingly sealed itself off from other social groups within the citizenry.

Fig. 3: Atonement picture in the central buttress of the apse of St. Mary’s Church in Stendal. The sandstone sculpture, called the “Little Crucifixion,” is the work of four sons from four respected merchant families. In 1428, they had slain Albert Querstedt in a quarrel and were obliged to make atonement in addition to a considerable monetary payment. They were subsequently banished from Stendal. Thus, the atonement picture is an important monument of legal history.

In the long run, this power-political attitude led to internal conflicts, as the citizens who felt neglected, especially the poorer ones, rebelled against the council. The fundamental conflict between the poor and the rich was intermingled with political and lordly factions in the context of the conflict over the Altmark, which Margrave Ludwig of Brandenburg and Duke Otto of Brunswick fought out in war. The rebels had even managed to drive out of the town representatives of preying Stendal families who, like those of Jerichow, Schadewachten, Buch or Bismarck, took the margrave’s side.[9] A compromise between the conflicting parties was reached in 1345 with the participation of Margrave Ludwig von Brandenburg. The council’s constitution was changed in such a way that from then on, representatives from all the important trades were to move into one of the twelve offices available in the Stendal council according to a fixed distribution key. Furthermore, the council had to consult with the town’s guild masters before issuing new commandments and laws for the citizens. The latter, in turn, should first consult with their cronies. When unanimity was finally reached, the adopted commandments and regulations were to be announced at town meetings and in churches so that they would be known to all inhabitants.[10]

Margrave Ludwig supported the cause of his followers who had been expelled from the town and confirmed their rights, whereby this was to apply explicitly to their property in the town of Stendal. The court of the margravial bailiff in Tangermünde was established as a special instance of jurisdiction for the expellees, where hearings were to take place in the event of challenges regarding their property.[11] With this, Stendal is a striking example of a so-called civil struggle in the Middle Ages, whose characteristics consisted of a conflict between the poor and the rich paired with disputes over the town’s rights.[12] An internal town solution could not be found within the framework of the ruling conflict between the Wittelsbachs and the Guelphs, so that it was only through the mediation of the Brandenburg margrave that a reconstruction of the council constitution took place, which was to integrate larger parts of the citizenry and prevent hard-fought internal conflicts for the future.

Author: Sascha Bütow
(English translation: Uli Nickel)

 

Notes:

[1] The text of the document, as well as a translation of it, are printed at Partenheimer, Lutz, Die Entstehung der Mark Brandenburg. Mit einem lateinischen-deutschen Quellenanhang, Cologne/Vienna 2007. The comprehensive state of research is described by Partenheimer, Lutz, Albrecht der Bär, die Altmark und die erste Erwähnung Stendals, in 850 Jahre Hansestadt Stendal – das Stendaler Markt- und Stadtgründungsprivileg, edited by Hansestadt Stendal and the Altmärkisches Museum, Oschersleben 2015, pp. 7–64.

[2] Schich, Winfried, Die slawische Burgstadt und die frühe Ausbreitung des Magdeburger Rechts ostwärts der Elbe, in Wirtschaft und Kulturlandschaft. Gesammelte Beiträge 1977 bis 1999 zur Geschichte der Zisterzienser und der “Germania Slavica” (= Bibliothek der brandenburgischen und preußischen Geschichte 12), edted by Winfried Schich, Ralf Gebuhr and Peter Neumeister, Berlin 2007, pp. 223–261, here p. 258.

[3] Riedel, Adolph Friedrich (ed.), Codex Diplomaticus Brandenburgensis (in the following CDB), series A, vol. 15, Berlin 1858, no. 35, pp. 24–25.

[4] Ibid., no. 58, pp. 45–46.

[5] Ibid., vol. 2, Berlin 1842, no. 25, pp. 163–164.

[6] Enders, Lieselott, Die Altmark. Geschichte einer kurmärkischen Landschaft in der Frühneuzeit (Ende des 15. bis Anfang des 19. Jahrhunderts). Berlin 22016, p. 799.

[7] Ebel, Friedrich, Brandenburg und das Magdeburger Recht, in Unseren fruntlichen grus zuvor. Deutsches Recht des Mittelalters im mittel- und osteuropäischen Raum. Kleine Schriften, edited by Friedrich Ebel et al., Cologne/Vienna 2004, pp. 237–252, here p. 249.

[8] Schulze, Hans K., Kaufmannsgilden und Stadtentstehung im mitteldeutschen Raum. Stendal, Halberstadt, Magdeburg, in Hans Kurt Schulze, Siedlung, Wirtschaft und Verfassung im Mittelalter. Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Geschichte Mittel- und Ostdeutschlands (= Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte Sachsen-Anhalts 5), Cologne/Vienna 2006, pp. 133–176.

[9] On this, in detail, Götze, Ludwig, Urkundliche Geschichte der Stadt Stendal, Stendal 1873, pp. 137–142.

[10] CDB, series A, vol. 14, no. 168, pp. 124–126.

[11] CDB, series A, vol. 15, no. 175, pp. 132–133.

[12] Isenmann, Eberhard, Die deutsche Stadt im Mittelalter 1150–1550. Stadtgestalt, Recht, Verfassung, Stadtregiment, Kirche, Gesellschaft, Wirtschaft, Cologne/Vienna 2012, p. 256.

 

Cite as:

Sascha Bütow, Stendal: A Medieval Municipal Community of Magdeburg Character between Consensus and Conflict, in: Magdeburg Law. A building block of modern Europe, 24/06/2024, https://magdeburg-law.com/historic-city/stendal/

 

Photo credit:

Fig. 1: Kulturhistorisches Museum Magdeburg, Münzkabinett, inv. no. 162/1962.

Fig. 2: Magdeburg, Zentrum für Mittelalterausstellungen.

Fig. 3: Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 3.0 DE), photo: Schiwago.