Nienbrugge (Hamm)

Nienbrügge was the name of a castle (Novus Pons) and a town northwest of today's downtown Hamm .

location

Nienbrügge Castle rose on the north bank of the Lippe , to the north of today's port of the city of Hamm .

The city of Nienbrügge was located south of the Lippe, roughly in the area of ​​the port authority and the main fire station at Hafenstrasse 45 in Hamm . It was connected to the castle by a wooden bridge over the Lippe. Next to this wooden bridge ran one of the largest stone bridges of that time, which from around 1202 as a customs bridge with a storage area shortened the trade routes between north and south.

The presumed location of Nienbrügge Castle is now called Flur Borgstätte . Evidence of Borchstedde for the said area can already be found on a map from the 16th century , as Eggenstein has worked out. So far it has not been noticed that in 1789 it was confirmed that land rent master Johann Vorster († 1852) had a “Weidekamp, ​​the FisHofe or also called 'Borgstedde', located in front of the local Nordenthor”, from the widow of the preacher Kartenberg zu Lünen for 1280 Reichstaler acquired. This borders in the east on the Lippe and small Borgstätte, but in the north on the Voss am Killwinck and the Lord Vorster Weidekamp. In addition, this Borgstedde is known as the Clev-Märkisches Lehen. This trail can be followed further; because the aristocratic estate no.10 listed by Richtering in an overview from 1804 (the castle site, a Klevian fief with a cost of 1200 talers owned by the rent master Vorster zu Hamm) - and assigned by this to Burg Mark - is rather with the Nienbrügger Identify castle site. The erroneous attribution can be explained by the fact that in 1823 Haus Mark was owned by the Vorster family.

Cityscape

Moritz Friedrich Essellen speculated in 1851 that the course of Ahse as part of the city's founding by Hamm was artificially modified. Trench-like depressions near Nienbrügge are a clear indication that the Ahse previously flowed into the Lippe at Nienbrügge. Otherwise there is no apparent reason that Nienbrügge was built at this location.

Finds and excavations in the 19th and early 20th centuries show how the castle and city of Nienbrügge were laid out. The castle was on the elevated north bank of the Lippe . Accordingly, the square was called the high castle site (1790: Hooge Borgstette ) in the 18th century . The fortifications, especially the mighty keep, were made of green sandstone. This had been taken from the stone pits by the hairline, which were twenty kilometers south. If you came from the north, you entered the area through a gate that was bordered on one side by the Lippe and on the other by the ramparts with a wall.

The castle could be passed over a large stone bridge to the right. At this older bridge, several roads converged, which had mediated traffic between southern and northern Westphalia since ancient times. Behind the bridge, the city proper opened up to form a square with an attached rectangle. Parallel to the old bridge, a wooden bridge led directly from the city into the castle at a distance of about 10 meters. After this bridge, the fortress was also called Die Burg an der neue Brücke , in Low German that is, an der nien Brugge or Nienbrügge for short .

The thoroughfare from north to south divided the square with the city's most important buildings into two parts and then led past a city wall on the left and the quarter for craftsmen on the right through a second city gate to the south (Werl) and out of the city again.

history

Emergence

County Hövel

In the literature, Count Arnold von Altena is regularly mentioned as the builder of Nienbrügges. He is said to have built the castle north of the Lippe between 1180 and 1200 . This is plausible because the Altenaische inheritance in 1175 resulted in the loss of his ancestral castle Altena for Arnold . Since Arnold also had to cede Hövel Castle to his brother Friedrich von Berg-Altena , Nienbrügge became his new headquarters.

Willi E. Schroeder, former local home keeper from Bockum-Hövel , assumes, however, that there has been a (significantly smaller) castle at this point since around 1150. Schroeder names Count Eberhard I von Berg-Altena , the son of Adolf II von Berg, as the builder . Nienbrügge Castle was located at the Lippeübergang on the old Heerstraße that ran from Hellweg via Münster to the Baltic Sea, about 2 km south of Hövel Castle . The region was initially ruled from this non-preserved castle complex in today's Hammer district of Hamm-Bockum-Hövel . Eberhard moved his seat to the new Nienbrügge Castle because it was in a more favorable position to control his allodies . It also served as a bridgehead over the Lippe, which connected the lands north of the Lippe to the Altenai holdings. Hövel Castle lost its importance as a residence. From 1161 to 1180 Eberhard ruled as Count von Altena. His son Arnold received the County of Hövel in 1166 and thus had the title comes de Huvili ( Count of Hövel ), as he had received the Hövel estates of Heessen Castle and Westerwinkel Castle as an inheritance . With this, Nienbrügge also passed into his possession.

Eberhard was not only the father of Count Arnold von Altena, but also Count Friedrich von Berg-Altena and thus the grandfather of his son Adolf I. von der Mark , the founder of the city of Hamm and founder of the County of Mark . Both sons were entitled to inheritance from their father. For example, Eberhard acquired the Wiseberg parcel , which was very close to Nienbrügge, in favor of his son Friedrich .

Altenaische inheritance

Eberhard I. von Berg-Altena died on January 23, 1180. This year at the latest there was a dispute between his sons Arnold von Altena and Friedrich von Berg-Altena, whose relationship did not seem to have been entirely free of tension the paternal inheritance was meticulously divided. According to Uta Vahrenholt-Huland, Friedrich von Altena was the initiator of the division of the estate, of which there is no example in Westphalia. In contrast to the Berg-Altenaische territorial division of 1161, this is a mixture division. Justice , allodes and fiefdoms were meticulously separated according to the following principle of division:

• Both brothers had a common, indivisible right to the same object.
• Both brothers had separate rights to the same property.
• Both brothers had different goods or rights in the same place.
• Both brothers had rights and possessions in neighboring towns.

According to this mode of division, the division of the County of Hövel also went to work, which, like the counties of Bochum and Altena, was split up. The Großgrafschaft Hövel consisted of three Comitaten, the counties Warendorf, Ahlen and Unna. Warendorf and Ahlen were north of the Lippe in the Diocese of Münster, while the Comitat Unna was south of the Lippe. The comitate were now divided between the brothers. The Go Warendorf went to Arnold, the Go Telgte went to Friedrich.

In the case of Ahlen Comitat, the Go Rinkerode, which also contained the old ancestral castle Hövel, which had previously been in Arnold's possession, came to Friedrich von Altena. The Go Ahlen was assigned to Arnold. When the Comitat Unna was divided, Arnold received the Go Benker Heide, Friedrich the Go Unna. In Go Benker Heide, directly on the Lippe, only a few kilometers from his former Hövel Castle, was Nienbrügge.

The county of Bochum was probably not divided until the 1990s. Here Friedrich received the bigger Go Bochum. Arnold was resigned to the smaller Go Hattingen and the subsequent bailiwick of the imperial abbey of Essen. He was also awarded Crooked County .

Even when the county of Altena was divided, Arnolds was part of the smaller one. The Go Elsey fell to him, the Dwarf Lordship Osteric / Oesterich and the northern part of the former Arnsberg half of Menden County, which was divided between Cologne and Arnsberg in 1103. Friedrich got the southern part, as well as the Go Iserlohn and the big Go Lüdenscheid. The Altenai rights to the county of Valbert-Plettenberg were also transferred to Friedrich.

The Altenaische division was not a process that was carried out in one go, but probably lasted until the 1990s. When Friedrich von Altena died in 1199, however, it must have been irreversible. Otherwise Friedrich's son, Count Adolf I von Altena, who later became Adolf I von der Mark , would hardly have been able to inherit the father's inheritance without being contradicted.

Although Arnold and Friedrich, both in equal parts, took their ancestral castle Altena from Cologne as a fief, Arnold withdrew from it early. He did not sell his share to his brother, but to his liege lord, Archbishop Philipp von Heinsberg. After Philip's death, the portion of the castle was returned to him until he sold it to his brother Adolf von Altena , the former Archbishop of Cologne and Duke of Westphalia, in 1200 . The sale of his share in the castle can possibly be seen as a hostile act against his brother, as the archbishop lent the share to strangers who now moved into the castle next to Friedrich.

It is also conceivable, however, that the archbishop was the actual initiator of the Altenaische inheritance. The year of death of Eberhard, the year 1180 is also the year in which Emperor Frederick Barbarossa because of the award-Saxon princes with the Gelnhäuser document his cousin Henry the Lion , the most powerful empire in princes, including the Duchy of Saxony withdrew. Part of the former Saxony was given into the hands of the Archbishop of Cologne, who from now on held the title of Duke of Westphalia. The Duchy of Westphalia , which was created in this way, by no means encompassed the entire Saxon or Westphalian area and therefore had to fear the emergence of significant, competing territories in its immediate vicinity. The Altenaische inheritance could have been one of the means with which Archbishop and Duke Philipp von Heinsberg tried to prevent the emergence of a great territorial rule in competition with his duchy. So he could have forced Arnold von Altena to sell.

This is also supported by Philip's further action with regard to the neighboring nobles and their goods. The nobility of this time were in constant financial need due to their social obligations and the excessive lifestyle that followed. Philipp von Heinsberg invested large sums of money to buy up the allodies and feudal rights to the possessions of such noblemen. He then mortgaged the goods acquired in this way back to the seller, at the same time securing his vassal loyalty. In this way he secured and increased his influence, initially in the fight against Henry the Lion, later to consolidate his rule over the Duchy of Westphalia. Friedrich von Berg-Altena also sold the Wiseberg plot of land near Nienbrügge , which his father Eberhard had acquired for him, to the Archbishop of Cologne. From this sale came the money for the purchase or construction and expansion of the Brandenburg properties, the Oberhof Mark and the area of ​​the later castle hill, on which for the benefit of Friedrich's son Adolf, the later Count Adolf I von der Mark , the castle Mark was built. The area of ​​the Oberhof and the castle came into the possession of the Archbishop of Cologne in this way. Philip had bought the Brandenburg goods around 1170 from the nobleman of Rüdenberg Rabodo von der Mark. When the von Rüdenberg family died out a little later in the male line, the property of the Mark fell back to the Archbishop of Cologne, who later handed it over to Friedrich von Berg-Altena.

Friedrich's brother Arnold proceeded very similarly with Nienbrügge Castle. The expansion of Nienbrügge had become necessary because Count Arnold had to cede the former residence, Burg Hövel, to his brother Friedrich von Berg-Altena in the course of the Altenaische inheritance and the Altena castle was also lost to him. Shortly after its completion, Arnold pledged Nienbrügge Castle with the two arable estates Westerwinkel and Heessen to the Archbishop of Cologne. Philipp von Heinsberg enfeoffed the property back to Arnold after Arnold's vassal oath. So Nienbrügge Castle was handed back to Arnold, who received 500 gold pieces for the sale. After the new tenancy, he created new accommodation for the nuns who lived in the Hövel cloister courtyard, about 2 km east of Nienbrügge Castle, and made the female order subject to the house rules of the Cistercians. In 1193 Arnold again became the owner of the property. Adolf von Altena , the new Archbishop of Cologne, supported the nobles, some of whom were closely related to him, by giving them back the castles and allodes that Philipp von Heinsberg had bought.

Count Arnold was also the first Count von Hövel, after local home keeper Schroeder, to issue his own coins, the Nienbrügger Pfennig. (The minting may have happened in Altena, the residence of his brother Friedrich von Altena.) Probably by 1150 at the latest there was already a small settlement on the lower south bank of the Lippe, the location of the city of Nienbrügge. Under these circumstances, the construction work carried out by Count Arnold von Altena-Isenberg before 1190 is very likely to be an extension of the castle complex already built by his father.

Competition with Burg Mark

Count Arnold's headquarters was initially the Nienbrügge Castle, which Philipp von Heinsberg gave him as a fief. But Friedrich also created a new seat for himself with Burg Mark in the immediate vicinity of his brother, a few kilometers to the east. The expansion of Nienbrügge had become necessary against this background, as Arnold initially had no more suitable property. Nienbrügge was obviously in competition with Burg Mark and its owners from the start. In a document from the year 1200, the Archbishop of Cologne, Adolf von Altena, stated that his brother Count Arnold had previously transferred the Oberhof Heessen as a widow's property to his wife Mechtildis, along with other goods. But because the proximity of Nienbrügge Castle (Novus pons) was dangerous for this court , in a second solemn legal act it replaced it with the court at Hagen. In the course of this construction work, the settlement was expanded by Arnold into the city of Nienbrügge around the year 1200 in order to strengthen the place.

The city was connected to the castle by a new bridge and therefore called "Nienbrügge" (also Nienbrück, Nygenbrugghe, Nuwenbruche, Ruebruke ). Both fortifications, castle and town, belonged together and complemented each other. Levold von Northof , the historian of the Brandenburg house, who was born on a neighboring farm in the 13th century and knew the conditions by sight, speaks of the castle on the new bridge and the town that was connected with it (Castra Nyenbrugge cum oppido sibi conhaerente). Also in the correspondence from the end of the 16th century, which was carried out because of the state border between Mark and Münsterland, is mentioned: A castle with its associated patch or small town called Newenbrugk or the castle and Stetlin Newenbrügk . The perimeter of the city at the new bridge could still be determined at the beginning of the 20th century by a moat that surrounded the whole.

According to a document, the town charter dates back to 1213 and is derived from Lippstadt law . Later, it was often mistakenly mistaken for Hamm's charter. However, there are doubts as to the authenticity of this document. According to Schroeder, Nienbrügge never had town charter, but only served as a security post for the county of Hövel. However, Nienbrügge met the requirements for being awarded city rights. It was at a strategically important place, namely at a ford, and two highways met at the old Hövel Castle. Nevertheless, Schroeder doubts that a town of Mark or Nienbrügge should have emerged because of some brushwood apartments. He considers this, just like the founding of Hamm at Easter 1226, to be legends of Leovold von Nordhof; the historian, whose family name goes back to the Nordhof in Pelkum , is the only one who specifically describes the processes surrounding the establishment of Hamm in his chronicle of the Counts of the Mark from 1357/58. The city of Hamm cannot document its founding - it is said to have arisen from wild roots instead . What speaks against Schroeder's assumption, however, is that the town charter of Nienbrügges apparently passed to Hamm as early as 1226. This results from the fact that Eberhard I. von der Mark , who confirmed Hamm's town charter in 1279, explicitly referred to the document from 1213. It is hard to imagine that only fifty years after the event in question, the incumbent Count von der Mark no longer knew whether his ancestors founded a city or not. If the document were forgery, Eberhard would not have mentioned it in his remarks in 1279 with a probability bordering on certainty.

In the original sources, Count Arnold is referred to as Arnoldus Comes de Hurde . Hurde means Hövel Castle. Since the estate of the Altena Counts was divided in 1174/1175, Arnold also received the County of Dortmund (excluding the Free Imperial City of Dortmund). From 1193 to 1199 he had Isenberg Castle built near Hattingen and was named after this new residence. The expansion of Nienbrügge is therefore to be seen in close connection with other structural measures with which the count sought to consolidate his influence in the area of ​​the Lippe and to protect his possessions.

Count Friedrich von Isenberg

The destruction of Nienbrügge in 1225 is closely related to the German throne dispute between the Guelph Otto IV and the later Friedrich II over the imperial crown. The details are described in the article on Friedrich von Isenberg .

Count Arnold von Altena probably died in the course of 1209 on the Albigensian Crusade . His eldest son and heir Eberhard (Everhard), who accompanied his father on the crusade, had no children and therefore no heir to the throne from his own line. Since one had to expect that Eberhard, like his father, would find death on the crusade, Friedrich von Altena-Isenberg , who had previously been canon of Cologne, had to retire from the clergy. If necessary, he should secure the succession and take care of the possessions of his absent brother. Friedrich became a knight and became co-regent of the brother. After Eberhard's death (1209 or 1210) he became sole ruler. Nienbrügge was now in the possession of Friedrich von Isenberg, who was the next and at the same time the last Count of Hövel-Nienbrügge.

In 1214 Friedrich von Isenberg married Sophia von Limburg, the daughter of Walram III. (Count of Luxembourg and from 1221 Duke of Limburg ad Maas).

Obviously Friedrich von Isenberg identified himself particularly with his ownership of the new bridge. From 1216 he called himself Fridericus de Novo Ponte , even when his main seat from 1217 was Isenburg near Hattingen .

The conflict with the Archbishops of Cologne

After Friedrich had his uncle (2nd degree) Engelbert I von Berg , the Archbishop of Cologne, murdered by followers on November 7, 1225 in a narrow road near what is today Gevelsberg , he was first heard about at the Nuremberg Court Day on December 1, 1225 and then again on the Diet of Frankfurt by King Henry the imperial ban imposed. Nienbrügge Castle was destroyed in the same year by Count Adolf I von der Mark , a nephew of Arnold's who had sided with Kurköln . The details of this conflict can be found in the article on Friedrich von Isenberg .

After the archbishop's death, Engelbert's successor Heinrich von Molenark applied in Nuremberg, where a Reichstag was held immediately after the act, to pronounce the eight over Friedrich II. Von Altena. The request was granted. It was decided that Isenberg Castle near Hattingen an der Ruhr and Nienbrügge Castle north of the Lippe and the accommodation of the brushwood south of the Lippe should be razed to the ground. The allodes should be fed. Friedrich was sentenced to death.

In 1226 Friedrich traveled to Rome, where he tried in vain to convince the Pope of his innocence. On the way back he moved into Liège. There he was recognized by a noble named Baldwin of Gennep. This invited Friedrich to a meal, at which he was captured by the henchmen of Archbishop Heinrich von Molenark and brought to Cologne. The noble one received the offered reward from the archbishop. On November 14th, Friedrich was executed on the wheel at Severinstor in Cologne, where he died the next day. As a result, the county of Hövel, whose last heir was Friedrich, also became extinct.

The destruction of the castle

Engelbert's successor, Heinrich von Molenark , had Isenburg destroyed in 1225. Friedrich's main heir, on the other hand, was the murderer's cousin, Count Adolf von Altena-Mark, whose loyalty to Emperor Friedrich was in no doubt as he had not been on Otto's side at the time of the German controversy. In order to avoid being ostracized by the new Archbishop of Cologne, which also extended to relatives, he took the side of the Cologne Church alongside others . In gratitude for this he received most of the goods. Since then he has only called himself Count Adolf von der Mark because he probably believed that the addition “Altena” was shameful.

Adolf von der Mark had to demonstratively destroy Nienbrügge Castle immediately, still in 1225. Over time, a turf formed over the ruins of the castle, so that a small hill rose up to 2.5 m above the surrounding pasture. The Lippe had previously washed away parts of it during floods. Therefore, the owner of the property, Baron von Böselager zu Heessen , decided in 1877 to regulate the banks in order to counteract further destruction. The stones from the rubble heap should also be used. Remnants of the old castle and many everyday items came to light. The last debris was found in 1912 during a regulation of the lip. The presumed remains of the castle - a castle moat - can be viewed in the Steinwinkel corridor in Bockum-Hövel , a district of Hamm.

The destruction of the Homburg may also be seen in this context. The Homburg was a large castle that was located in Herringen and probably served to secure the Lippe region. Like Nienbrügge, it was owned by the Berg-Altena-Isenberg-Nienbrügge family . Archaeological excavations have shown that the castle must have burned down around 1200 or in the first decades of the thirteenth century.

The fate of the city

With regard to the fate of the opposite city, the sources are inconsistent.

Variant 1: The city of Nienbrügge was not only a fortress , but also a bourgeois settlement , and so the execution of the imperial ban was limited to the destruction of the fortifications. As a result, the houses of the citizens were preserved. This was also due to the fact that the winter time ruled out an emigration of the population. The residents dismantled their half-timbered houses and brought them to the new settlement.

Variant 2: The city of Nienbrügge was - like the castle - burned down to the ground. Nothing was left of the half-timbered buildings for the craftsmen. However, in several places still worked blocks of Rüthener sandstone were found , which were brought to Nienbrügge on ox carts, as can be seen today between the ravines between Hamm and Werl and in the Hellweg area. Since this material survived the fire, it was mostly used for the “new town of Hamm”. However, in the first few years this “new city” consisted of nothing more than a defensive and residential complex for the milites ( knights and soldiers) of Count Adolf, surrounded by a few miserable huts.

This second variant is also supported by the archaeological excavations, which have also uncovered clear traces of fire on the town's site.

In 1253, the pastor of Herringen, to whose parish Nienbrügge belonged, was confirmed by the Count von der Mark that he should continue to receive compensation for his income from the Nienbrügge area that had been lost after the destruction. In 1325, a Dietrich de Novo Ponte, apparently a descendant of a resident or Burgmann of Nienbrügge, is named as councilor of the city of Hamm.

Despite the complete destruction of Nienbrügge, knowledge of its former location was never lost. In a map from the 16th century there is a note on a marked place on the northern bank of the Lippe: Deß orths up der Lipp (...) is a place (e) n, itzo is still nomped Borchstedde, since oldinges a graiff (...) a penance or borch had thosampt a stedgin g (enan) nt Niggenbrugge, as there are still painful ser olde mailtheichen latenn in small water . On a card from 1707 there is the entry: Here old Hamm stood in front of this, and there are still some rudera (according to remains) . To this day, the hall name for the area is Borgstätte .

Relocation

Count Adolf offered the residents of the city of Nienbrügge a new settlement a few hundred meters upstream at the point where the Ahse River flowed into the Lippe. The city of Hamm was founded on Ash Wednesday , March 4th, 1226. In the writings it says: That the Lyppe and Aisse tho hoppe are coming, Greve Adolf has tuned and confirmed a city, called tom hamme. The ruins of the castle, the city wall, the customs station and the defense and housing complex for the milites, and depending on the sources, the half-timbered houses of the inhabitants were used as building material for the new settlement. The urban area south of the Lippe is now completely overbuilt by harbor and industrial facilities.

Adolf I. von der Mark had demonstratively sided with the Cologne people. This enabled him to save the Altena possessions for himself. The lands that had been so laboriously divided between Adolf's father Friedrich and his brother Arnold in the course of the Altena inheritance from 1180 onwards, after the Archbishop of Cologne had given them to him as a fief, Adolf I held them again in one hand. The territories that Adolf I could not take over were given to the gentlemen who had meanwhile occupied them. For this, the areas were north of the lip, now on the prince bishop of Münster Gogerichtsbarkeit exercised. As a result, Adolf I no longer had power of his own, so that he gave up his claim to the remains of the former county of Hövel . Nevertheless, Adolf I von der Mark laid the foundation stone for the most powerful and important territory of medieval Westphalia, the county of Mark .

Excavations and finds

The important Nienbrügge was one of the most interesting sites in the entire area for researchers in the 19th century. In the months of August and September of 1877, Baron von Boeselager had a hill removed directly on the north bank of the Lippe as part of hydraulic engineering measures. This is said to have risen between 1 and 2.5 m above the surrounding pasture and had obviously already been affected by earlier flood events. Hofrat Moritz Friedrich Essellen accompanied the work and reported on it in detail in a two-part newspaper article. For him, the terrain played a major role in his research into the Romans.

First, the lawn cover was removed. Even then, building rubble came to light in the form of soot-blackened and heat-reddened green sandstones and pieces of mostly charred wooden beams, but also unburned limestone. Under this layer of rubble, on the south-east side of the hill, which was attacked by erosion, the round floor plan of a tower 4 m in diameter was excavated. This rested on strong, horizontally laid, uncut oak beams. A single step on its stone staircase was still preserved. According to Essellen, underneath the tower construction was a not completely flat area covered with slaked lime, about 2 1/2 rods long and 1 1/2 rod wide [that is approx. 9.4 x 5.6 m]. The calcareous layer, sixteen to twenty centimeters, contains many pieces of bone, apparently from animals of smaller size. They may come from pigs and sheep, fragments of bones found under the rubble. The limestone layer covered a layer of black-gray loose earth ten to fifteen centimeters thick, undoubtedly derived from rotten animals. Only then did the soil, which is mostly sandy at this point and still in its natural state, follow. The occurrence of the limestone layer and the loose earth beneath it, from rotting animals, is certainly very striking .

From today's perspective, the findings can no longer be clearly interpreted. Essellen tries to explain that the tower received such a very unusual foundation because it was believed that the limestone layer was not allowed to break through , a statement that does not help any further as slaked lime in medieval buildings in mortar, plaster or even in the Screed was used. The large lime surface may indicate an area where mortar or something similar has been mixed.

On the west side of the hill was a round fountain 1.3 m in diameter. It was built from green sandstone using the drywall technique and partially filled with rubble. Its sole is said to have been covered with 1.5 cm thick sandstone slabs. On the east side of the hill, a 1.25 m high, masonry canal was found, which was only partially exposed, so that its course and length have remained unknown.

Von Essellen does not give the exact position of the excavated hill. In older maps, for example in a brouillon of the Lippe from Heessen to Stockum from 1820, a hill signature can be seen in the area of ​​the Borgstätte , which is with some probability identical to the hill.

Essellen then lists a large number of archaeological finds that were recovered while clearing the rubble, etc. Below was a bronze candlestick, height 13 cm, weight 275 g, covered with verdigris; a bronze decorative nail, gilded, round head, diameter 3 cm, depicting a one-headed eagle with spread wings, nail shaft 2 cm long, weight 18 g; four iron keys, between 5 and 12 cm long, of which at least three are hollow keys. In terms of riding and horse accessories, Esselen mentions a complete spur, length 10 cm, and another fragmented spur, two complete horseshoes, one of which was 12 cm long, and fragments of others, as well as half of a bridle with a ring attached to the side, length included Ring 12 cm. There are also two arrowheads, 8 cm long, one with a pyramid-shaped tip and one with a leaf-shaped tip, several knives, one with an 8 cm long blade and a 7.5 cm long handle, and some up to 51 cm long iron parts of indefinite function . The pottery finds were extremely numerous. Among them were shards of light gray or bluish, thin-walled and hard-burnt turntable goods. There were also handles, handles and infusion stirrers, including one in the shape of an animal's head. Several blocks of volcanic rock were interpreted as architectural parts. Particularly interesting is a silver coin which, according to Esselen's description, was with some probability a Soest minted by the Archbishop of Cologne, Adolf von Altena (1193–1205).

Essellen initially took possession of all the finds from 1877. Allegedly he sold most of it to Berlin at the beginning of the 1880s. The smaller part came into the possession of the Gustav Lübcke Museum, where it can be seen today in the city history exhibition. Two bovine teeth, a fragment of the lower jaw from a pig, a piece of bone, a square bronze sheet, length 2 cm, ten unspecific pottery shards, a halved spindle whorl with grooves, a limestone and a piece of basalt lava, which, according to an old inventory map, are located under the foundations of the tower of the castle, are preserved Nienbrügge have been recovered. A larger fragment of basalt lava comes from the tower of Nienbrügge Castle . Four spindle whorls with the location in the sand east of Nienbrügge could also have been picked up on the right side of the Lippe at a later occasion.

According to L. Hölzermann, heap of rubble and debris is also said to have been in the area of ​​the Steinwinkel, which is about a hundred meters upstream from the Borgstätte . The Steinwinkel property, bordering a Lippe loop to the west, is still today surrounded by a wide, arched and trench-like depression. Whether it is an artificial moat or a silted-up arm of the Lippe cannot be decided with certainty solely on the basis of external observation. Further archaeological investigations would be necessary for this.

From this area only individual pieces of broken glass from the 11th to 14th centuries that were picked up during inspections are known.

The bridges were obviously an essential feature of the square in the Middle Ages. But nothing is left of them today. In the map from the 16th century there is talk of huge ser olden mailtheichen , which can be seen in small water at low tide . What is meant are marks, i.e. clear traces of Nienbrügge. Von Esselen reported in 1857 about a bridge pillar that protruded from the Lippe when the water level was low. It consisted of hewn sandstones and is said to have had a triangular shape with a side length of approx. 4.5 m. About 40 m east of it, there were still some stumps of framed wooden posts near the bank. In his report from the year 1877, von Esselen repeated the information that was supported by consistent statements by the authors Hölzermann, Nordhoff and von der Mark. After that, around 1880, the remains of two bridge piers made of green sandstone were left on the right bank of the Lippe. It was not until September 1886 that the hydraulic engineering inspector Röder from Hamm had a pillar foundation in the river near the north bank removed.

On the southern bank of the river, i.e. opposite the Borgstätte , according to the consistent portrayal of Esselenes, Hölzermanns, Nordhoffs and von der Marcks, there was an area of ​​several hectares with striking structures. It is most clearly described in the oldest publication. Square, slightly raised areas were separated from one another by ditches. In some fields rubble from masonry was exposed under the lawn, but not in others. To the south, the area is said to have been enclosed by a ditch. This condition would have lasted until the middle of the 19th century. In the 1870s and 1880s, when the works of Hölzermann, Nordhoff and von der Marck appeared, however, it was only recognizable in small rudiments. The authors, who knew the area personally, have not seen these formations themselves and rely on older information. From today's perspective, this phenomenon cannot be interpreted. Entries in old maps, most clearly in the Brouillon from 1820, do not provide any further information. Esselen describes found fragments from the entire site, which from today's perspective can be interpreted as high medieval ceramics.

In the immediate vicinity, south of this area, stood the Krause Linde , an ancient linden tree, which was considered to be of special importance at the time , until the 1920s . The legend tells that the last knight von der Homburg in northern Herringen had his seat in court here and judged his subjects cruelly on an iron chair. One day, however, a bolt of lightning killed the knight on his iron chair and threw him in the lip. When the summer nights are lit up by the lightning, you can see the knight rise from the lip on the iron chair in the pale light of lightning. Another version of the story tells of the fact that the Knight von der Homburg no longer liked his castle and therefore built a new one on the Krausen Linde. Often the peasants claim to have seen him sitting on the iron chair that stood high above the Lippe river on a bridge. The iron knight may have a real model in Friedrich von Isenberg (Isenberg = Eisenberg). Friedrich exercised the jurisdiction in Nienbrügge and the surrounding area and was, with some probability, also the owner of the Homburg before it was burned down after Friedrich participated in the killing of Archbishop Engelbert in 1225.

There is a last photo of the Krausen Linde from August 1922. There is also an exact cadastral survey. Otherwise nothing is left of the tree. Museum director Lübcke, port director Sauter and city gardener Droste discovered during an on-site visit on March 10, 1922 that the crown of the tree, which is still around 8 m high, had been destroyed by lightning and the hollow trunk had been badly damaged. So the old tree was left to decay. The museum association then planted a new linden tree at the detention office. It is not known whether the Krause Linde or its location has a historically tangible meaning beyond the legends, as there are no other traditions. Generally speaking, the linden tree played a very important role in public life in popular beliefs and customs of earlier centuries. They were used particularly as courtrooms, so-called court linden trees ( Femlinde ), but also as meeting places and protective trees ( Dorflinde ).

There are a number of archaeological finds from the area around the Krausen Linde, which were discovered by chance during construction work and other soil interventions. Apparently, attention was paid to found objects in the area of ​​the legendary tree as early as the late 19th century. From Hobreckers Feld and other, unspecified properties on the Krausen Linde there are three iron spikes with curved stirrups. Two of them are characterized by unusually widened heel pieces. There are also five horseshoes, which, apart from one, apparently only protected the front part of the hoof, and three arrowheads with pyramid-shaped tips in different shapes. In addition, three knives were found, one of which has a round rivet hole. An iron key with a diamond-shaped bow is characterized by its extraordinary length of 15 cm. Ceramic finds were rather rare or not kept. One of the three spindle whorls is fired hard like stoneware. The cullet material is made up of individual pieces of Pingsdorf style , Fasteinzeug and Siegburg stoneware as well as pieces of inconsistently fired spherical pots .

Overall, almost all finds could be dated to the time horizon of Nienbrügges towards the end of the 12th / beginning of the 13th century. Only the individual wall shards made of Siegburg stoneware must later have got into the ground. This type of coat of arms does not appear until around 1300. However, the randomness of the composition of the finds must be taken into account in the historical assessment of the spectrum of finds.

The Gasthof Drees is located around 500 m southwest of the Krausen Linde. Various archaeological sites came to light here between 1929 and 1941 during desanding work on the site immediately to the south. Ludwig Bänfer documented these finds. In the summer of 1929 two wooden wells were recorded about 15 m south of the Drees courtyard, one of which could be reconstructed. According to the find report, the well reached a depth of 2.5 m. It had a square cross-section with a clear width of 1.4 m and had an elaborately timbered, box-like construction made of oak. The basis was formed by five parallel planks, which carried two planks lying at right angles to them. Holes for the four vertical corner posts, each 15 cm in length, were worked into the corner. The wall of the well consisted of massive boards, which were neatly joined together through corresponding recesses at the ends. The lower part of the well was about 1 m high and was still so well preserved that the wood could be put together again after the recovery. The bottom was about 5 cm high covered with clay marl. This probably served to ensure clear water and to keep the sand away when scooping. Around the well shaft there were traces of a round construction pit about 4 m in diameter, which was backfilled after the well was built. Bänfer could not find out anything more about the construction of the second well.

In 1939, a little further south while mining sand, a pit filled with dark soil was found, which reached 1.50 m below the surface of the earth. Two posts were also found . Numerous fragments of medieval pottery were found in the area of ​​this complex, which cannot be further interpreted, and in its surroundings. Most of them are spherical pots. Two years later, a well was discovered, the shaft of which was made from a hollowed oak trunk. It reached about 2.25 m below the surface of the earth and was still preserved up to a height of 0.82 m above the base. Its diameter, which widened towards the top, was 0.90 m outside and 0.60 m inside. The remains of the well have been completely excavated.

The cullet material found in the area of ​​the traces of settlement described or during sand mining without any specific connection in the lower zone of the topsoil comes mainly from spherical pots of the 10th or 11th century. Older and younger ceramics, fast stone from the 13th century and Siegburg stoneware from the 14th century can also be found in the form of individual fragments. Bänfer mentions only three cattle bones from the well from 1929 and a single piece of iron slag found in non-ceramic finds.

Overall, the archaeologically tangible traces of the castle and city of Nienbrügge are just as poor as the historical sources. Only a few individual finds are known from the area on the south bank of the Lippe, where the city of Nienbrügge is said to have been. However, these are primarily equestrian spurs, horseshoes and weapon parts, which are usually missing in simple rural settlements, but are more common in castles and towns. This means that these finds can be connected to Nienbrügge.

This also applies to the features of the terrain that were observed here in the 19th century. Perhaps they are traces of former buildings or the remains of fortifications, as they were common in a city settlement. What is striking is the fact that the area in question is located south of the Lippe in the Lippe floodplain, i.e. in an area at risk of flooding. The division of the area into raised fields as described by Esselen can hardly put this into perspective.

The wells and shards found further to the west in the Drees sand pit obviously date from a time before Nienbrügge was founded and therefore cannot be part of the city. They lie on the flood-free terrace and prove that this section of the banks of the Lippe was already developed and settled in the early and high Middle Ages.

The hill, which was removed in 1877 and located on the northern bank of the Lippe, with the remains of a tower apparently destroyed by fire and the fountain was certainly part of Nienbrügge Castle. The found material, unfortunately almost completely lost, but well described in Esselen’s reports, confirms this assumption. The grave-like ditch in the area of ​​the Steinwinkel , in which stone debris was observed, could also belong to Nienbrügge.

Due to the temporal and historical context, Nienbrügge is closely connected to the castle on the Isenberg near Hattingen. Both were owned by Count Friedrich von Altena, who called himself Count von Isenberg since 1217 . Like Nienbrügge, the Isenburg was also destroyed after the assassination of Archbishop Engelbert in 1225. The Isenburg was a complex with impressive stone buildings with a total length of 240 m. A mighty defensive tower, farm buildings and a chapel were uncovered in the upper castle. The lord of the castle resided with his family in the palace area. The outer bailey was secured by a gate and housed various craft businesses, including facilities for iron smelting and lime burning. The stone curtain wall that fortified the castle was 557 m long. The remaining wall remains show traces of the enormous effort that the conquerors made to level the castle to the ground.

In the Hammer Gustav-Lübcke-Museum, some objects that have been discovered during the excavations in the Isenburg since 1970 are shown to supplement the finds from Nienbrügge. Particularly noteworthy is the gold-plated decorative nail made of bronze with a depiction of an eagle, which finds an exact parallel in Esselen's descriptions of 1877, as well as architectural parts made of volcanic tuff, which Esselen also mentions. A large millstone 94 cm in diameter is made of basalt lava; Fragments from this material are also among the surviving Nienbrügger finds.

As already mentioned, Hofrat Esselen was an enthusiastic Roman explorer. One of his main interests was the search for Aliso, the famous Roman camp which, according to the ancient authors, was the only one able to withstand the Germanic onslaught after the Varus Battle in 9 AD. Esselen was convinced that Aliso could be located on the Nienbrügge site, a view shared by other researchers, e.g. B. Wilhelm von der Marck, sympathized. As proof of a chain of topographical indications, interpretations have been prepared by place names and archaeological factors, at least to scrutiny latter not withstand. Esselen and von der Marck classified some of the finds discovered on both sides of the Lippe, horseshoes, spurs, iron arrowheads, pottery shards, which no doubt date from the Middle Ages, and even one of those found near the Krausen, partly based on the state of research at the time Linde found a Bronze Age lance tip as Roman. Especially the Nienbrügger pieces made of volcanic rock, which does not occur naturally in the Lippe region and must have been transported from the Rhineland, traced them back to the Romans. Today, however, it is clear that there were no stone buildings in the Roman camps in Westphalia. The corresponding finds from Isenburg near Hattingen, however, document the use of non-local, Rhenish volcanic rock in medieval architecture and for equipment such as millstones.

Nienbrügge in literature

In 2005 the historical novel Hagen by Northof by Frank Mattern was published. It begins at the beginning of the thirteenth century. Hagen, the eldest son of a free farmer, grows up with the twin children of Count von Isenberg, Friedrich and Kriemhild. He has a close friendship with Friedrich and falls in love with Kriemhild at a young age. After initially reciprocating this love, she pushes Hagen back and throws herself into the arms of the future Archbishop of Cologne. Love becomes hatred, the archbishop is murdered, the city of Nienbrügge is wiped out. The author moves the events close to the Nibelungenlied.

Footnotes

1. ^ Georg Eggenstein: II. Until 1225 - Nienbrügge Castle and City. In: Traces of Time. The beginnings of the city of Hamm. Edited by Georg Eggenstein and Ellen Schwinzer, Bönen 2001, pp. 49–59.
2. ↑ See Richtering, 1976, p. 125: probably on Mark .
3. ↑ Moritz Friedrich Essellen: Description and brief history of the Hamm district and the individual localities in the same , Hamm 1851.
4. ^ Karl Wulf: Hamm - city between Lippe and Ahse. Historical review from the beginnings to around 1930 . Published by the Hamm Urban Planning Office, September 1999. P. 9 f.
5. ^ Heinrich Eversberg: Count Friedrich von Isenberg and the Isenburg 1193-1226 . Hattingen 1990, p. 56.
6. ↑ Willi E. Schroeder: A home book. Two districts introduce themselves. Bockum and Hövel , 1980, pp. 14/15, 152.
7. ↑ Ingrid Bauert-Keertman, Norbert Kattenborn, Liesedore Langhammer, Willy Timm, Herbert Zink, Hamm. Chronicle of a City , Cologne 1965, p. 172.
8. ^ Frank Mattern: Hagen vom Northof, Historischer Roman, BoD, ISBN 3-8334-0638-0 .

literature

• Ernst Dossmann: In the footsteps of the Counts of the Mark .
• Georg Eggenstein: II. Until 1225 - Castle and town of Nienbrügge . In: Traces of Time. The beginnings of the city of Hamm, ed. by Georg Eggenstein / Ellen Schwinzer, Bönen 2001, pp. 49–59.
• Josef Lappe : Hamm in the Middle Ages and in modern times. In: 700 years of the city of Hamm (Westphalia). Festschrift to commemorate the 700th anniversary of the city. Published by the Magistrate of the City of Hamm (Westf.), Werl 1973.
• Gustav-Lübcke-Museum Hamm: Notes on the city's history 8/10 . In: Traces of Time. The beginnings of the city of Hamm .
• Wilhelm Ribhegge: The history of the Counts of the Mark and the history of the city of Hamm in the Middle Ages .
• Helmut Richtering: Noble seats and manors in the area of ​​the city of Hamm. In: Herbert Zink: 750 years of the city of Hamm. Hamm 1976.
• Willi E. Schroeder: A home book. Two districts introduce themselves. Bockum and Hövel. 1980.
• Spectrum of Science 2/2002, Hagen vom Nordhof . ISBN 3-8334-0638-0 .
• Reinhold Stirnberg: Before the Märker came , essay series in Active Seniors , issues 55–63.

Web links

• History of the city of Hamm ( Memento from September 27, 2007 in the Internet Archive )
• Entry on Nienbrügge in the private database "Alle Burgen".

Coordinates: 51 ° 40 ′ 40.4 "  N , 7 ° 47 ′ 29"  E