Gau Nisan

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Gau Nisan (also Gau Nisani, from Nisani 'people in the lowlands' - see also Daleminzier ) was the name of a district that temporarily belonged to the Mark Meissen and temporarily to Bohemia . Some scientists, especially Reinhard Spehr , are of the opinion that Nisani was also the name of a harbor settlement that was near the later Dresden gondola port (southeast of the Brühl terrace ). A tower, the Neidhart , is assigned to this port settlement .


The Gau Nisan probably extended in the Elbe valley from the mouth of the Wild Sau near Gauernitz - Constappel in the north to the jungle in the south to Pirna . It included several German castle wardes . Are occupied Bresnice ( Briesnitz ) Woz / Wosice (probably the Castle Hill Niederwartha ) and Bvistrizi whose center either the Heidenschanze at Coschuetz or Burgwart Berg Pesterwitz or High stone above Plauen was. Only hypothetically, Dohna with Dohna Castle is also viewed as the center of a Burgward. More likely, however, is a German burgraviate Dohna from 1156 at the latest. The Sorbian Gau Nisan comprised the four named castle districts, the castle district Kesselberg around Pirna and other castle districts in the Burgwardslücke in the center of the Gaues. A lost castle similar to the Kesselberg Pirna near the Elbfurt from Nisana to Altendresden in the area of ​​the Hahnenberg is very likely. With the eastward expansion of German rule , the former Gau area expanded into a high medieval archdeaconate of Nisan.

Upper Lusatian border document

On 7 May 1241 the Bohemian signed King Wenceslas I. Přemysl on the then Bohemian castle Koenigstein a certificate to distinguish between the time the kingdom of Bohemia belonging Oberlausitz and the Diocese of Meissen . The document was based on measurements made in 1213 and 1223.

This demarcation is the first in this region for long stretches and is therefore also reflected in the Meissen diocese registers, which describe the (Roman Catholic) border to the then diocese of Prague . The border ran:

Limits according to the deed book of the Meissen Monastery

The Dresden region in 1834 with the former Gau area

The limits were determined according to information from the Meissen diocese register, as far as the difficult source situation permitted. It is therefore a borderline which, at best, goes back to the late Gau constitutional period, but often had to be extrapolated from more recent sources. It is also problematic that the ecclesiastical borders did not always coincide with the landscape and political borders and, like the latter, often had expansive features as part of the expansion of power. In the case of Gau Nisan, the blurring of the boundaries between the episcopal office of Stolpen and other possessions of the Meissen Monastery in Upper Lusatia make things even more difficult.

Western border

Here the east of the Gau Daleminci met the Gau Nisan. The border ran:

Northern border

Eastern border

Here the borders have shifted to the southwest due to the very early and compulsory unification of the settlements of the Gau Nisan under the episcopal office of Stolpen with other properties of the Meissen Monastery in Upper Lusatia. The border ran southwest of the Oberlausitz villages:

  • Hauswalde (Kirchort) on the Hauswalder Bach (flows into the Große Röder in Bretnig )
  • Rammenau (Kirchort) am Grunabach (in the wooded northern part of the municipality Röderbrunn, the Große Röder rises southwest of the Hochstein ; in the past, the Gruna between Frankenthal and today's Niederteich in Rammenau marked the border between Upper Lusatia and the diocese of Meißen coming from the source of the Schwarzen Röder)
  • Großröhrsdorf (Kirchort) on the Große Röder on the Alte Poststraße
  • Frankenthal (Kirchort) directly on the former Upper Lusatian-Meissnian border is the Frankenthaler Beigut residential area on Grunabach; The Schwarze Röder rises on the Frankenthaler Flur and represents the border in this area
  • Harthau (Kirchort) confluence of the Gruna coming from Frankenthal in the castle park into the Wesenitz ; at the Köhlerberg the Zinsbach flows into the Schwarze Röder, at this confluence, on the border between Massenei and Großharthauer Flur, there is a border stone with swords and still marks the historical border described in the Upper Lusatian border document
  • Bischofswerda (archpriest chair) on the Wesenitzschleife, in Sorbian Přibok ("on the old street"); According to the more recent understanding, Bischofswerda did not belong to the historical Margraviate of Upper Lusatia, but rather formed the “gateway to Upper Lusatia”, as the woodland that was only cleared in the Middle Ages met here with the open Sorbengau Milska
  • Drebnitz (Kirchort) southwest of Bischofswerda, Upper Sorbian Drjewnica (settlement on or in the forest on a forest or wood stream, today's Hundeflüsschen ), Groß- and Kleindrebnitz belonged to the Stolpener official villages
  • Rückersdorf between the Hohwald and the northern foreland of the Elbe Sandstone Mountains , was under the episcopal-Meissnischen Burgward Göda
  • Ottendorf in the transition area between the Lausitzer Bergland and Saxon Switzerland

Southern border

The document book of the Meissen Monastery only describes the border situation in the extreme southeast of Nisan to Bohemia. The border ran

  • at the Lusatian Mountains with the Falkenberg ( Sokol ) as the dividing point
  • along today's border with Bohemia

The Meissen registers also show the Bohemian Netherlands with the districts of Hainspach ( Lipová u Šluknova ), Schluckenau ( Šluknov ), Rumburg ( Rumburk ), Reichenberg ( Liberec ), Friedland ( Frýdlant v Čechách ) and the northern part of the Warnsdorf district ( Varnsdorf ) to the Gau Nisan ( Netherlands ).

As an extension of the Lusatian Mountains, which extends from Jeschkenberg ( Ještěd ) near Reichenberg to the Elbe near Bad Schandau , the Ore Mountains ridge is assumed to be the further southern border , up to the source of the Wild Weißeritz on the Czech Ore Mountains ridge near Nové Město (Neustadt) Moldava as Divoká Bystřice at an altitude of about 850 meters, from where the western border of the Gau branched off to the north.

Limits of the Archdeaconate of Nisan

According to map 6 in the history of Dresden ( rule and Christianization in the Dresden Elbe valley area ), the boundary of the archdeaconate Nisan ran as follows:

The western border

  • from the Erzgebirge ridge along the Wilde Weißeritz
  • including Schönfeld (first mentioned in 1336)
  • exclusively Frauenstein
  • including Hennersdorf (first mentioned in 1332)
  • including Reichstädt (first mentioned in 1319)
  • including Ruppendorf (first mentioned in 1350)
  • including Höckendorf (first mentioned in 1235)
  • to Tharandt, where the Nisan border separates from the Weißeritz and continues strictly to the north
  • including Kesselsdorf (first mentioned on February 9, 1223)
  • to Wilsdruff, where the Wilde Sau runs west
  • including Weistropp
  • including Gauernitz
  • the Elbe between Gauernitz and Kötitz (first mentioned in 1203) a little westwards
  • exclusively Brockwitz
  • including Coswig

In contrast to the Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae regiae , the important Frauenstein with Frauenstein Castle is excluded here. The exclusion of Brockwitz, however, can be found here as well as with the CDSR, the affiliation of this place to Nisan was only temporary. According to the Old Sorbian sources, Brockwitz was part of Glomaci (Daleminzien), but fell to Nisan after 965 due to the character of Meissen as a border castle. The place was apparently never part of the Archdeaconate of Nisan, belonged to the Districtus Großenhain in 1351 and was again administered directly by the Meißen district office from 1547 .

The northern border

  • north of Coswig to the west including Bärnsdorf (first mentioned in 1309)
  • including Medingen (first mentioned in 1289)
  • including Ottendorf (first mentioned in 1346)
  • including Seifersdorf (first mentioned in 1335)
  • exclusively Lomnitz (first mentioned in 1313), from there the border runs south again

The eastern border

The southern border

  • ran along the Ore Mountains ridge east of Geising to the source of the Wild Weißeritz
  • including Geising (first mentioned in 1375)
  • including Altenberg (first mentioned in 1446)

Neighboring districts

The Gau originally belonged to the Bohemian Netherlands , which protruded from the south and east to this point. The Gau Lusici joined in the north and the Gau Daleminci in the east .


Atlas of the Saale and central Elbe region

According to the atlas of the Saale and central Elbe region, the Gau Nisan included the following settlements (starting from the west, following the German settlement direction):

  • Brockwitz
  • Naundorf
  • Roitzsch
  • Oberhermsdorf
  • Cossebaude
  • Leuteritz
  • Gohlis
  • Mob sweetheart
  • Pesterwitz (Burgward)
  • Döltzschen
  • Löbtau

According to the Gaue and Burgwarthauptorte map in the 10th and 11th centuries , the German Gau structure at that time ends on the Weißeritz.

Document book of the Meissen Monastery

Map of the Dresden Elbe valley widening with the districts in the west of Dresden

The deed book of the Hochstift Meißen lists the following locations:

Early manorial conditions in Gau Nisan

Motivated by the 800th anniversary of Dresden in 2006, a three-volume history of Dresden was published , which was again devoted to Gau Nisan. In order to be able to continue the Gau east of the Weißeritz due to the lack of sources, one resorted to the much later guard grain levies for the Dohna Castle and postulated their origin in the Gau constitution time. Such an approach was and is controversial among historians. Many of the towns listed cannot have been founded before the settlement spurt from around 1150 (until 1250) simply because of their location. Gruna ( place in the green floodplain ), a German foundation between two oxbow lakes of the Elbe in a wetland and first mentioned in 1370, is likely to be much younger, Heidenau was probably founded by burgrave Otto Heyde I (1321 to 1336) as the outworks of the castle Dohna founded and first mentioned in 1347/49. Conclusions about the Burgward system in the 11th century are therefore purely speculative. A map of early manorial conditions in Gau Nisan lists the following places subject to tax according to the directory of 1445 and other sources (starting in the west):

In the west of Nisan the same map mixes the following documented rights of bishops and canons in easily identifiable places up to the year 1150 with the mostly much younger places of the burgraviate Dohna (from 1150 to after 1400):

The year numbers on the map refer mainly to the forged documents in the middle of the 12th century and thus suggest that episcopal territorial ownership also in the 11th century, which never really existed.

Once again the special role of Brockwitz becomes clear, both temporally (1013) and spatially, because the place had to be shown on a detail map far outside of the rest of the Gau area.

In 1144, the Meissen margraves, who were enfeoffed with Nisan in 1143, fought for their first territories with Naundorf and Gohlis in the far west of the Gau.

The Sorbian castle districts

The German castle award system in Nisan was based on originally Sorbian castles, just like in its beginnings in the west of the Sorbian brand area . Thus, the castle guardes Bresnice , Woz / Wosice and Bvistrizi would already have been Sorbian castle districts. Due to the age, size and importance of Dohna Castle, it was also a Sorbian (double) castle with a castle district. This was delimited by the (wall) castle Kesselberg in Pirna, the castle Burgstädtel in Borthen and the castle Pillnitz . Kesselberg Castle covered the important Elbe ford, Pirna, like Bresnice Castle, the Iron Ford .

Furthermore, a lost Nisana castle similar to the Kesselberg Pirna near the Elbe ford from Nisana to Altendresden in the area of ​​the Hahnenberg is very likely. Further Sorbian castle districts in the so-called Burgwardslücke would be possible around Burgstädtel Castle near Omsewitz , Lockwitz Castle and Loschwitz Castle .

The German Burgward Organization

According to the map of Burgward center points and Young Slavic castle ramparts in the Upper Saxon-Meissnian area by Gerhard Billig, the following Burgward districts and corresponding castle ramparts were in Nisan:

  • B 26 Niederwartha / Woz ( documented center of Burgward ; first mentioned in 1045 )
  • B 27 Dresden-Briesnitz ( documented center of Burgward ; first mentioned in 1071 )
  • B 28 Pesterwitz ( mentioned center of Burgward without secured fortifications ; first mentioned 1068 )
  • C 10 Dohna ( Probable center of Burgward ; first mentioned 1040 )
  • 43 Niederwartha (Böhmerwall) ( Young Slavonic castle wall )
  • 44 Dresden-Omsewitz ( Young Slavonic castle wall )
  • 45 Dresden-Coschütz ( castle wall with continuous older and younger Slavonic evidence )
  • 46 Dresden-Loschwitz ( questionable Young Slavonic castle wall )
  • 47 Dresden-Lockwitz ( castle wall with older and younger Slavonic evidence, continuity questionable )
  • 48 Borthen-Burgstädtel ( Young Slavonic castle wall )
  • 49 Dohna (Robscher) ( Young Slavonic castle wall )
  • 50 Dresden-Pillnitz ( Old and Young Slavonic occupied castle wall, continuity questionable )

With this card, there is a tendency to relocate the first documentary mentions as deeply as possible in history, without considering the problem of clearly forged (F 1071, F 1091) or controversial diplomas (to 1045 and 1068).

The Burgward Bresnice (Briesnitz)

The Elbfurt Briesnitz , even iron ford called, was after the Slavic by the Nisaner with a land grab Wallenburg protected from clay and wood. The Sorbian Burgward Bresnice ("Birkenort") was built around this castle . The ford near Dresden was in swampy terrain at the time, "Dresdene" was probably derived from the Old Sorbian term "Drežďany" ("swamp" - or "Auwaldbewohner", plural form). "Drežďany" goes back to the Slavic word drežga ("swamp forest").

The Burgward Woz

In the middle of the 12th century, a Burgward Woz (F 1071, 1144) or Wosice (F 1091) was mentioned three times .

Niederwartha Castle Hill

In recent research, Woz / Wosice is identified with Niederwartha Castle Hill, a prominent hill near Niederwartha, where the Elbe runs particularly close to the southern highlands.

The bohemian castle Gvozdec

According to some historians, Woz is identical to the Bohemian castle Guozdec / Gvozdec / Gvozdek (1123/1125) mentioned in Cosmas of Prague . This name goes back to Old Sorbian * Gvosd (e) c ('[mountain] forest'). Originally related to original Slavonic * gvozd ('forest') is Czech hvozd ('forest mountains '). As a result, Gvozdec meant castle in the (mountain) forest for the Nisans . After Cosmas, however , Gvosdec was a Bohemian counter-castle near the German castle Meißen . So Niederwartha is hardly an option as a location.

The Burgward Guodezi

On September 22, 1045 King Henry III transferred. in Quedlinburg the lord of the castle ( miles ) Jaromir ( IARMIR ) three royal estates in the Burgward Guodezi ( GVODEZI ). The historians are divided in the assessment of the document. The Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae regiae is written by the keeper Chutizi, in the county of Ekkehards . Jaromir was a servant of the Margrave Ekkehards von Meissen , who was originally a count in Gau Chutizi . The Gau Chutizi also appeared in name forms such as Gudici . Other historians locate the goods in Burgward Guodezi in Gau Nisan, which is then often equated with Gvosdec . However, both linguistic and historical arguments speak against this equation.

The Burgward Bvistrizi

A Burgward Bvistrizi (see Bystritza ) was mentioned in a royal charter from Henry IV in 1068. To this day it has not been clearly identified. In particular, either the Heidenschanze near Coschütz or the Pesterwitz castle hill or the castle above Plauen are under discussion. It should be noted that this diploma may also belong to the forgery complex of documents in favor of the Meissen Monastery from the 10th and 11th centuries and could more likely describe the situation in the middle of the 12th century than that of 1068.

Hypothetical Burgward Pesterwitz

Hypothetical Burgward Coschütz

Hypothetical Burgward Plauen

A manor had been in Plauen since the end of the 12th century at the latest.

Dohna Castle

Dohna Castle was initially a Slavic (Elbe-Sorbian) rampart on the important connecting road to Bohemia. Any assumption of an East Franconian-Early German castle building and an East Franconian-Early German burgrave as early as the 10th century is pure speculation and mostly nourished by the wishful thinking of patriotic historiography.

The first mention of Dohna Castle took place on the occasion of a campaign by King Heinrich III. to Bohemia in 1040. Dohna Castle was on the way to the ascent to the Eastern Ore Mountains, which is why the army gathered there. Some historians suspect that on this occasion the castle was given as a fief to the Margrave of Meissen. This assumption is certainly ahistorical, because at this point in time the early German power had not even spread to the westernmost part of Nisan, and even there the Margraves of Meissen did not acquire their first small property until 1144 through a royal decision.

Before 1085, Nisan and Dohna were in direct Bohemian administration, in that year it was dowry from Judith, the daughter of Duke Vratislav, for her marriage to Wiprecht von Groitzsch, but remained under Bohemian sovereignty. This only changes with the cession of Nisan by the Bohemian duke to the German king because of military aid in 1142.

Some historians suspect another (fourth) Burgward Dohna for the Gau Nisan. However, there is no documentary evidence that Dohna ever belonged to the East Franconian-Early German Burgward system. For many other historians, this Burgward system ceased altogether at the Weißeritz, because the Gau was only transferred to German rule after the end of the Burgward constitution.

The hypothetical Burgwardlücke

To the west of the Weißeritz, no Burgward structure has survived. In the case of the hypothetical assumption of a Burgward Dohna, research speaks of a Burgward gap. Gerhard Cheap has summarized and systematized this hypothetical gap with similar situations in Chutizi, Daleminzien and Milska as gaps in the traditional Burgward network . However, it remains doubtful whether an early German Burgward system ever existed in Nisan west of the Weißeritz. In this respect, the situation in the Grenzgau Nisan is not directly comparable with that in the other districts.

According to Gerhard Billig, the real gap in the Burgward network [...] would be around three-seventh of the Gau , although he regards the three Burgwarde Niederwartha / Woz, Briesnitz and Pesterwitz as standard-setting examples because of secondary expansions in Dohna . This theory is inconsistent in that the Burgward Dohna would then have to be reduced to the normative examples , whereupon the gap would be rather four-eighths or even five-ninths of the Gau.

Assuming an early German Burgward Dohna , the area of ​​the high medieval city foundation of Dresdene was also located in this gap in the early German Burgward network. The decay and complete leveling of two castle walls for the central area of ​​Nisan in the catchment area of ​​the Kaitzbach between the castle complexes in Coschütz and Lockwitz is suspected.

The protection of Dresdene and central Nisan is more likely, however, by one or more defunct Slavic castle walls.


Slavicization and the Bohemian Netherlands

Europe in 476.

When Central European early history began with the first Roman written documents about Teutons and Celts outside the Roman Empire , the Elbe Valley was populated by Germanic people, probably by the Suebian tribe of the Semnones and in the 5th century by the Suebian Hermundurs . At that time he was under the influence of the Roman economy as well as Roman culture . At the end of the 5th century, the region may have formed the eastern border of the Kingdom of Thuringia , which was militarily subject to the Franconian Empire in 531 .

In 1897 two Germanic graves were discovered in Dresden- Nickern . The men's grave, dated around 550 , and the women's grave, dated to the last third of the 6th century, were assigned to the Lombards and even called a street near the site of the Langobardenstrasse . The unambiguous assignment of the finds to the Lombards is, however, doubted in recent research.

562, 566 and 571 the Asian penetrated horsemen of the Avars in fighting against the Frankish kingdom under King Sigebert I. as far as the Middle Elbe and last until after Thuringia before. In Nisan, the Avar grave in Dresden- Stetzsch testifies to these events. After a severe military defeat in 566, the Franconian Empire became subject to tribute to the Avars. The Byzantine Empire paid tribute to the Avars since 558, but still regarded them as their federates . The Avars settled in the Pannonian Plain in present-day Hungary , the westernmost foothills of the Eurasian steppe, after the destruction of the Gepids and the withdrawal of the Lombards to Italy , just like the cavalry peoples of the Jazygens and Huns before them . With this conquest of the land, the time of the classic migration ended .

Groups of the Prague Korchak culture and neighboring cultures in the 7th century.

Around 600 or at the beginning of the 7th century, according to archaeological finds, the Slavic cultural model in the form of the Prague cultural group with partially sunk pit houses made of smooth coniferous logs , unadorned, hand-made clay vessels and cremation burials in urns also spread along the Elbe and the Saale. The Elbe Valley (later Nisan) was first settled from Bohemia. The culture there therefore came from Bohemia.

The expansive Slavicization began with the Prague-Korchak culture around 500 in the area between the Bug and the central Dnieper , where the Slavic language had already been formed . This topogenesis also explains the Slavic traditions that arose in the Eastern European steppe and forest steppe .

The former Slavic tribes on the territory of today's Czech Republic : Czechs (light green), north of them the Lutschanen (pink), the Litoměřici (orange), the Lemuzi (dark red) and the Děčané (dark green), to the northwest the Sedlitschanen (purple), to the east the Pschowanen (light blue) and the Chorvaten (dark blue) - the red area in the southeast was settled by the Moravians , the dark green area in the southwest by the Dulebs

The cultural break with a change in social structure and ethnic identity as well as the replacement of the ideal-typical character of the Germanic by that of the Slav can be proven by archaeological finds in Bohemia and Moravia as early as the 2nd half of the 6th century. Since such fundamental changes can only be explained by immigration and assimilation, historical scholarship assumes a significant immigration of Slavic cultural bearers into the area of ​​Elbe and Saale at the beginning of the 7th century from Bohemia via the Erzgebirge passes.

Names of immigrant ethnic groups have not survived at the time. According to the De Administrando Imperio , a work of the Byzantine emperor Konstantin Porphyrogennetos (905-959), Nisan belonged in the transition area between Bohemia and Saxony to the territory of Boiki , the land of the White Serbs . Boiki is linguistically based on Bohemia and, according to the predominant research opinion , included roughly the northern area of ​​the Prague group on the upper and middle reaches of the Elbe.

The ethnogenesis of the Nisans took place in the newly developed settlement area of ​​the Elbe valley after the immigrants took their land, including the groups that remained settled after the migration. The immigrants did not form an ethnic unit either, but consisted of groups and people of very different polyethnic origins. Only in Nisan did a common identity, a common language and a belief in a common culture develop. Even the ethnic designation of the Nisans was now based on the newly developed area. The Slavic name nisan refers to the low- lying country in relation to Bohemia in the sense of Bohemian Netherlands . The assimilation of the autochthonous population, which was most likely thinned out by the migration, took place within a relatively short time, as evidenced by the archaeological findings in the area of ​​the Prague-Korchak culture. The Slavs saw themselves as Sloveni , as the people of the word or as the speakers and thus distinguished themselves from the mute ( némec ). With the adoption of language and customs by the autochthonous population, their assimilation was complete.

A permanent settlement of Nisan by the Slavs has therefore been possible since the 7th century, but only proven by finds from the 8th century (e.g. the floor plan of a sunken house in block construction on the edge of Altmockritz with Slavic ceramics from the 8th / 9th century ). Nevertheless, historians assume that the Dresden Elbe valley expansion began in the 7th century after the first Slavic-Germanic contacts at the end of the 6th and beginning of the 7th century (e.g. on the site of the later Neustädter Kohlmarkt).

At the beginning of the settlement according to the Slavic cultural model, it is assumed that they were placed under the Pannonian Avars, which the Slavs won or subjugated as auxiliary peoples. In the 620s, the Elbe Slavic tribes of the surbi were ruled by Prince Derwan , who had submitted to the newly strengthened Frankish Empire. In 631 the Franks under Dagobert I suffered a severe defeat while attempting to defeat the empire of Samo that was established in 623 or 624 . Samo ruled the surrounding areas from Moravia, including Bohemia. After this renewed weakness of the Frankish empire Derwan joined the empire of Samo. This first Slav state structure disintegrated after the death of Samo in 658.

In the second half of the 9th century, Bohemia expanded its foreign policy ever further north and also dominated the Nisan area. This development is superimposed and accelerated by the connection of Bohemia to the then powerful Old Moravian Empire (also: Great Moravian Empire) in the years 888 to 890. Some historians already consider the first historically tangible Bohemian Duke Bořivoj I to be a vassal appointed by the Old Moravian Duke Svatopluk I since (around) 867.

Bavarian geographer

In this enumeration of the peoples in the east and north of the Frankish Empire , the Sorbs and Daleminzians are followed by the people of Bohemia and then the Moravians. Because of this, some historians proposed Nisan to Daleminzia, others to Bohemia. Gerhard Cheap sees the possibility that one… has simply suppressed a smaller landscape and not captured it. As a result of the settlement from the south-east, the cultural orientation in the south-east, the naming of Nisan as "Netherlands (seen from Bohemia)", the historical situation and the Old Sorbian sources, there was more of a connection between Nisan and Bohemia than with Daleminzia. The omission at the end of the 9th century is probably due to this connection.

Nisan is said to be under the control of Otto the Great in 971

In 965, after the death of Margrave Gero , the establishment of a new brand structure with margraves in Merseburg , Zeitz and Meißen (968 occupied) began. In 968 the Archdiocese of Magdeburg was founded with dioceses also in these margrave towns ( Diocese of Merseburg , Diocese of Zeitz and Diocese of Meißen ).

In 971, according to a diploma, Emperor Otto the Great in Ravenna gave the tithe from the Gau Nisan to the Meissen Monastery:

Otto gives the church of Meissen under Bishop Folchold with the knowledge and consent of his son of the (co) emperor on his and on his Gemalin Adelheid intercession the tithe of all tributes of honey, fur, silver, slaves, pigs, grain and of the "uberchorufa" from the provinces of Dalaminza, Nisane, Diedesa, Milzsane and Lusiza, with the stipulation that this quota must be paid to the bishop before the division between the treasury and the count.

As with many documents in favor of church institutions, this diploma is also unreliable and therefore no evidence of German rule over Nisan. The Monumenta Germaniae Historica state:

In addition, the numerous shortcomings and errors in this elaborate do not appear in a favorable light, even assuming that they were created later. [...] In this limited sense we are also allowed to speak of an original copy, without concealing from ourselves that in such a process the diploma alone does not offer a full guarantee that what Folchold had written down here also exactly the will of the emperor corresponded.

In this context, a forged papal document (allegedly made by Pope John XIII ) dates from 968. In fact, this confirmation of the founding of the diocese of Meißen and its borders comes from a transsumpt of the bishops Dietrich II. Von Naumburg (also: von Meißen) and Heinrich II. Von Merseburg (also: von Waren) in 1250. Two more documents were issued at the same time as this document Diplomas made to the years 968 and 996 transsumed, which also carry out this boundary description.

Apart from these questionable territorial and tithe claims of the Meissen bishops, there is no early German news about Nisan from the 10th century; the only contemporary mention comes from the chronicle of Thietmar von Merseburg , which was written from 1012 until Thietmar's death in 1018. Here is the first entry for 984.

No further activity of the Ottonians in the Gau Nisan can be determined at this time. The border castle Meißen , founded in 929, was permanently lost again in 936 as a result of the death of King Heinrich I. Decisive were not only the succession disputes among the Ottonians, but also that many Slavs had only sworn their loyalty to Heinrich I. Even Margrave Gero was unable with all his might to enforce this loyalty to Meissen, let alone Budissin (the region around Bautzen) or Nisan. From 984 at the latest, if not long before that, Nisan clearly belonged to Bohemia.

After the loss of Meissen to Bohemia in June 984

Emperor Otto II hands over the crosier to Adalbert of Prague

In 983 not only did the Great Slav uprising break out, but also a renewed power struggle between the Ottonians following the death of Emperor Otto II on December 7, 983 in Rome. The Bavarian Duke Heinrich der Zänker , nephew of Emperor Otto I, tried to take over the succession, but his son Heinrich II would not succeed until a generation later. The brawler bought the support of the Bohemian Duke Boleslav II by helping him, among other things (after Thietmar in June 984) to own the castle of Meissen. Even if there had been German rule there around 968/971, Nisan came under the control of Bohemia again after only around 13, at most 16 years, in which it remained with brief exceptions (1113 and possibly 1040) until 1142.

Poland's expansion from 960 to 990

In 990 the Bohemian Academy was relocated from Krakow to Nisan in what was then also the peripheral location of the diocese of Prague . A transfer to the Bohemian center or even to Prague was ruled out, since Pope Benedict VI. in 973 a diocese had approved Prague only as a Latin foundation. The first bishop of Prague was Thietmar , a Saxon from 976 , who was very popular as mild and just. His successor from 983 (until 996) was the Slavnikide Adalbert of Prague , who brought with him a great zeal for reform for the Roman Catholic Church and who himself lived temporarily in Rome in the monastery of St. Bonifacius and Alexius on the Aventine . The legend goes back to this time that Adalbert lived as a hermit in the Dippoldiswalder Heide for a while . The Bohemian Academy had been in Cracow since 886, from where it had been expelled by the Polish Duke Mieszko I in 990 through the annexation of Silesia and Wislania . It emerged as one of the successor institutions of the Great Moravian Academy founded in 863 at about the same time as the Pliska School (from 893: Preslaw School ) and the Ohrid School . The Devín Castle near Bratislava is assumed to be the location of the Great Moravian Academy .

Greater Poland 1003/04
Bolesław I. Chrobry ( the Brave )

In March 1003 the (later) Polish king Bolesław I. Chrobry ( the brave ) took over the rule of Bohemia and thus also of Nisan. In 1004, the German king and later emperor Heinrich II. Gathered ships near Nisan on the Elbe, although there are disputes among historians about the location of this Nisan. The same year the emperor succeeded in persuading Bolesław to give up Bohemia. The ships only served as a diversionary maneuver for the pass crossing from Heinrich's army pillars over the Ore Mountains.

On July 19, 1013, a village in Gau Nisan was first mentioned. After very damaging enemy devastation, Heinrich II gave six villages to the diocese of Meissen, which had lost almost everything , including Brochotina cethla ( Brockwitz ) in Niseni . The place names were apparently added later in the gaps left in the diploma. This is the only mention of Brockwitz as belonging to Gau Nisan. In terms of settlement geography and according to the Slavic sources, Brockwitz originally and later belonged to Glomaci (Daleminzia). The village lies west of the bottleneck, which separated the Gaue Nisan and Glomaci from each other by prehistoric forests and prehistoric cleared areas, but slightly east of Meissen. Apparently the establishment of the early German border castle Meißen created a new border situation here. In 1013 Heinrich II seems to have only had the small area west of the bottleneck in the immediate vicinity of Meißen Castle. Gerhard Cheap assumes a (re) shift of the Gaug border from Sörnewitz / Batzdorf in a southeast direction to Kötitz / Gauernitz as early as the 11th century.

On July 8, 1015, Henry II gathered his army in Sclanisvordi for the Polish campaign, invaded the Lausitz region and crossed the Oder near Krossen on August 3, 1015. This war was part of the conflict with Bolesław Chrobry that had been open since Heinrich took office in 1002 . On September 1, 1015, the hitherto unsuccessful army marched back through swampy terrain, with the rearguard under the leadership of Archbishop Gero of Magdeburg, Margrave Gero II and Palatine Burchard, caught in a Polish ambush and wiped out. Margrave Gero II, Count Folkmar and two hundred knights fell, the others were almost all captured. Only Archbishop Gero and the wounded Count Palatine managed to escape with difficulty and report the defeat to the Emperor. It was only in Strehla on the Elbe that the receding emperor released the margrave Hermann von Meißen with the task of defending Meißen Castle against the advancing Poles and fled further to the safe Merseburg. On September 13, 1015, seven Polish armies crossed the Elbe and enclosed Meißen Castle, devastating the entire Meissen area up to Jahna. The lower town and castle of Meissen were plundered by the Poles and set on fire after the Sorbian Wetenici withdrew to the upper castle. The upper castle had already caught fire in two places and could only be held with great effort. On September 14, 1015, the Polish army withdrew across the rapidly swelling Elbe in front of the approaching imperial army. It can be assumed that Brockwitz and its surroundings were also devastated during this campaign. Nisan, which is under Bohemian influence east of the bottleneck, i.e. the Gau Nisan in the original and later sense, did not suffer from the Polish campaign. The situation for Meißen was so precarious at the time that Meißner Bishop Eido I, who died in Leipzig on December 20, 1015, did not want to be buried there, but under the protection of St. Magnus in his native Colditz. Eido had feared the devastation and later desolation of Meissen and the Meissen Cathedral, including a desecration of his body.

In September 1017, Bresnice was razed to the ground by the troops of Henry II (the Saint) and all prisoners were killed. The pagan Liutizen , allied at that time with the Christian Emperor against the Christian Polish Duke Bolesław I. Chrobry, did not take part in the devastation of Nisan because they had an old friendship treaty with the Nisans (according to another opinion, the Liutizen had already left Heinrich's army because a picture of her goddess carried as a standard had been damaged by a German throwing a stone. The emperor compensated her with 12 pounds ). There is also the view that Henry Nisan did not already devastated by his passage from Bohemia to Meissen, but only after the September 19, 1017 as in the area between Elbe and dump the Poles on the orders of her Duke Boleslaw invaded, devastated the country and withdrew with more than 1000 serfs captured . It is more likely, however, that the Poles' devastation campaign in Daleminzia was a reaction to the devastation in Nisan. In contrast, it is also unlikely that in the strategically very difficult situation at the time, the emperor had turned back militarily. The Bohemian Academy of Nisan was moved upstream to the port of Nisan after the destruction of Bresnice .

At the persistent request of Bolesław I Chrobry, the Peace of Bautzen was concluded on January 30, 1018 by order of Emperor Heinrich II . The empire's negotiators are Archbishop Gero von Magdeburg , Bishop Arnulf von Halberstadt , Margrave Hermann I von Meißen , Count Dietrich and the Imperial Chamberlain Friedrich. Both the Reich and the Poles provide hostages chosen for this purpose. As in 1013, the Gau Nisan remains under Bohemian rule due to the weakness of the empire.

In 1020, as a result of the lasting peace, the first Frauenkirche (still made of wood ) was built. When the church ceiling was redesigned around 1580, an old year (probably 1020) was found for the “foundation” and the age was given as “in the 560th year”. A foundation of the church (around) 1020 therefore saw chroniclers of the 17th and 18th centuries as possible. The church was consecrated on the feast day of the Nativity of Mary by Přibislav (either the court chaplain of the Bohemian Duke Oldřich or a close relative of him). At the same time an icon school was founded.

In the years from 1039 to 1041, the German King Heinrich III. renewed feudal rule over Bohemia by military means . The important Dohna Castle was first mentioned in a German diploma in 1040 . In this context, this castle seems to have come under the military control of the German king for a short time, who presumably granted it as an imperial fief to the Margraves of Meissen. A short time later the castle came under the rule of burgraves from Bohemia.

At the latest as a reaction to this military action , but perhaps even earlier, the Duchy of Bohemia built Gvozdec Castle in the far west of Nisan near Meissen in the middle of the 11th century . The possession of Nisan was a prerequisite for the granting of fiefs from the Lausitz to the Bohemian duke in 1075. Vratislav II stood in the struggle of many dukes with Henry IV on the side of the king. In 1076, the Bohemian border fortress Gvozdec was destroyed by the deposed Meissen Margrave Ekbert II , when the Bohemian Duke was also enfeoffed with Meissen.

A royal charter from Heinrich IV, who was then underage at the time, dated October 28, 1068 zu Rochlitz , owned Löbtau and the Burgward Bvistrizi. Either this document is also fake (such as the important diplomat Julius von Ficker , long-time director of the Regesta Imperii ), or the ownership structure in the west of Nisan changed rapidly in terms of time and space. A Bohemian castle Gvozdec in the extreme northwest of Nisan near Meissen, which was destroyed in 1076 and immediately rebuilt, makes a simultaneous Meissen possession much further west of it near the Weißeritz questionable. In terms of historicity, Cosmas von Prag is to be assessed as more credible than a document from the former monastery archive in Meißen in favor of the cathedral chapter in Meißen, which forged a large number of diplomas from the 10th and 11th centuries.

In addition to the landscape around Bautzen, Nisan was part of the dowry of the daughter Judith of the Bohemian King Vratislav II when she married Count Wiprecht von Groitzsch in 1085.

Vladislav I († 1125)
Bohemian castle Přimda from the 1120s (engraving from 1848)

After Wiprecht's death in 1124, his son Heinrich von Groitzsch officially took power in the Gau until his childless death in 1135. After that, formal rights reverted to Bohemia. The important Dohna Castle remained in Bohemian hands even under Count Heinrich. In 1121 Vladislav I rebuilt Dohna, which was probably destroyed around 1113. The Bohemian Duke Soběslav I also used the peripheral location of the place to imprison competitors for power in Bohemia, including even the Přemyslids , in the Dohna Castle, for example Břetislav, son of Duke Břetislav II. And 1128 Konrad Lutold, Duke of Znojmo. In 1123 the Bohemian army gathered at the Bohemian castle Gvozdec , located near Meissen, in the far west of Nisan, probably the later German castle Woz , probably today's Niederwartha castle hill . From there, the Bohemians devastated the area around Meissen, but withdrew after an armistice with the later Emperor Lothar von Süpplingenburg . Originally the Bohemians wanted to help their by-related ally Wiprecht von Groitzsch to his margravial office in Meißen, which was given by Emperor Heinrich V, which was denied to him by the Saxon nobility opposition under the Saxon Duke Lothar in association with the Wettin Konrad the Great and the Ascan Albrecht the Bear. Wiprecht died the following year, Lothar won the German royal crown as early as 1125 .

The widow of Heinrich von Groitzsch, Bertha von Gelnhausen, was mentioned for the last time in 1137 and died shortly afterwards, also childless, so that her personal belongings in Nisan and the Bautzen region fell back to Bohemia. Duke Soběslav I therefore acquired some castles from the personal property of Wiprecht's last wife, Kunigundes von Weimar-Orlamünde , for 700 silver marks and the third pfennig from the income from Castle Dohna , which had gone to her daughter Kunigunde von Beichlingen. With this, the Bohemian Duke had secured rule over Nisan.

Also in 1139 the bishopric of Meissen made a push to expand its power to Nisan by applying to the Pope for confirmation of further ownership claims. It was not until October 29, 1131 that Innocent II had confirmed to the collegiate church all rights and goods which it owns or will own in the future . Due to the developments at that time, the Hochstift now saw the opportunity to expand further east into the neighboring Nisan and thus to break up the character of Meissen as a former border castle towards the east.

Innocent II then issued another confirmation document on February 27, 1140, which explicitly listed Cozebude , Jazelice , Hermanni villa , Bulsize and Nicradewice (all in burgwardo Woz ). In addition, five villages were mentioned, which the Slavic noble Bor would have received in exchange, but which would have reverted to the bishopric after his death. Two of them were in Gau Nisan: Luciwice ( Leutewitz ) and Wirnotine ( Wüstung Wernten ) in Burcwardo Bresnice ( Briesnitz ). With this the Pope had sanctioned the acquisition of five villages in the province of Nisanen by donating a Slavic noble named Bor and the possession of two further villages. For this purpose a document for 1071 was forged in duplicate by the bishopric, which supposedly came from Bishop Benno. In addition to Gozebudi, these fakes list four other places in Nisan: Oicice , Grodice , Cinici and Luderuwice . Together with a forged document from 1091, which is said to have been issued by Henry IV and concerns, among other things, Mocozice ( in burgwardo Wosice ), the Meißen diocese raised at least twelve forged claims in 1139 in the Nisan district alone. Against this background, the document of Henry IV of October 28, 1068 with the mention of Livbitvwa ... in pago Nisani in burchuuardo Bvistrizi ( Löbtau in Gau Nisan in Burgward Bvistrizi ) is in doubt.

There are also historians who are of the opinion that the papal charter from 1140 is just as forged as the royal charter from the 11th century in order to give the diocese of Meißen advantages in legal disputes between the king and the margrave of Meißen. The dating would then change by only four, but crucial, years, and almost all documented German documents relating to Nisan would come from the time after the transition from Nisan to the German king and the transfer to the margraviate of Meissen in 1142/1143. This thesis is also supported by the lack of any early German counts for Nisan, as they have been handed down for Chutizi since the 10th century.

Nisan's transition from Bohemia to Conrad III. 1142

Slavic and German village complexes in Nisan and Saxony (research status before 1930)

In 1142, Konrad II of Znojmo ( Znojmo ) raised an army with rebellious Moravians and other Přemyslids and marched into Bohemia. On April 25, 1142 there was a battle on Vysoká hill near today's Kutná Hora , in which the Bohemian Duke Vladislav II was victorious, but was forced to retreat to safe Prague through betrayal in his own ranks . Completely insecure, he left the defense of Prague to his younger brother and deputy Děpold (Dippold) and fled to his liege, King Konrad III , in a violent attack . to Würzburg , according to other opinions on the Court Day in May 1142 to Frankfurt . Bishop Heinrich Zdik von Olmütz and comes Velislav also fled with him . For the requested and then successfully provided military assistance, the duke ceded Gau Nisani to the king, among others. In 1143 this reintegrated the Gau into the Margraviate of Meißen.

King's charter from 1144

Disputes about the manorial lords, building obligations and security services in the westernmost part of Nisan immediately broke out between Meinward, the revered Meißner bishop, and Konrad, our loyal and highly respected margrave , which had to be settled with a royal charter from 1144. In the eastern part, the king installed a burgraviate.

Episcopal land expansion

The Meissen Monastery had already endeavored to acquire and own towns in the vicinity of Meissen in the far west of Nisan by 1139 (but not yet in 1131) at the latest. According to another opinion, which also regards the papal deed of 1140 as doubtful, the efforts were not made until 1142/1143, when the Gau Nisan had passed to the German king.

Through a papal deed from 1140, a royal deed from 1144 and numerous forgeries made in the 11th century, the Meißner bishops took possession of the villages of Leuteritz, Leutewitz, Wernten (desert), Roitzsch, Zschon (desert), Mobschatz, Polst (desert), Cossebaude, Naundorf, Nausslitz and Döltzschen.

The village of Hermanni villa (Hermsdorf) occupies a special position . While some historians see this place as evidence of a German state expansion already before 1139/1140, other historians assess the mention of this place in the diploma of 1140 as ahistorical and therefore more as proof that this papal document was forged by the Meissen bishops .

The Burgward Briesnitz was still in worldly possession until 1223 and was destroyed and not rebuilt during a Wettin military campaign by the Thuringian Landgrave Ludwig IV (married to St. Elisabeth). The time of the Burgwarde was long over by this time. At the end of the 12th century Briesnitz had already become the seat of an archdeacon for Nisan.

Burggravial development

By far the greatest increase in area was accounted for by the royal territories, which were combined in the Burgraviate of Dohna .

A burgrave Heinrich I von Dohna is documented for the first time in 1156.

According to some historians, the viscount were to 1173 by Emperor I. Friedrich "Barbarossa" commissioned Dresden and the first Dresden Elbe bridge plan. This remains questionable, as the duties in the possession of the Dohnas ( Dresdener Zoll and Königsbrücker Zoll ) did not come into their possession until the 1430s and it was more of an escort duty than a bridge duty.

According to another opinion, the construction of the bridge is related to the silver finds in Freiberg in 1168, according to which the Margrave of Meißen ordered the construction of the first stone Frauenkirche before 1170 and the construction of the bridge a short time later. Heinrich the Illustrious was (shortly before 1288) the first known owner of the patronage right over the Frauenkirche. However, this right does not necessarily have to have resided with the margraves in 1170; according to another opinion, it was with the bishops of Meissen. The connection between the silver discovery in Freiberg and the bridge construction is also not mandatory.

A third view suggests that the bridge was built by the merchants, who had a market with a settlement on the site of the later bread banks before Dresden was founded , and possibly also founded the Nikolaikirche, the later cruciform church, at least as a wooden church before the city was built . In this case, too, an impulse from the Freiberg Berggeschrey from 1168 is conceivable. In line with this, the Nisan Academy was dissolved in 1169 and only continued as a school in Kayticz . This view is supported by the later connection of the Kreuzkirche with the Dresden Bridge Office , which lasted until the 19th century. It was not until 1837 that the foundations of the Materni , Bridge Office and Bartholomäi Hospitals merged .

Overall, the complex of building bridges in Dresden, building the stone Dresden Frauenkirche and founding Dresden's city remains historically very controversial.

Margravial development

In 1144, the Meissen margraves, who were enfeoffed with Nisan in 1143, fought for their first territories with Naundorf and Gohlis in the far west of the Gau.

The Bohemian Königstein Castle from the 12th century

The Königstein over the Elbe

The wooden predecessor castle was probably built or expanded from 1142/1143 directly after the loss of the strategically important Dohna Castle as a counterweight to it. In the first phase of the transition of Dohna Castle from Bohemia to the German Burgrave (1143 to 1156), a transition from Bohemian foundations in the region from the old Dohna Castle to the Königstein Castle District and not to the later Dohna Castle is also conceivable.

After rich silver finds from 1168, which led to the emergence of Freiberg and the First Berggeschreys , the previously almost uninhabited wooded Ore Mountains between the Margraviate of Meißen and the Kingdom of Bohemia moved even more into the focus of Markmeißn and Bohemian interests than before. Both sides began with the construction of a number of border protection castles (including Sayda , Frauenstein , Purschenstein , Rechenberg , Bärenstein , Lauenstein ) to delimit their own sphere of interest.

At the latest in this context, the expansion of the then Bohemian Königsstein to a stone castle belongs. The oldest stone building still in existence today is the sacred castle chapel built at the turn of the 12th to the 13th century, the even older secular stone buildings from the 12th century were surely built over (sometimes several times).

From this northern outpost of the Bohemian Kingdom, a systematic development of the country from the north in the direction of the Erzgebirge ridge took place from the beginning, which only ended militarily with the Dohna feud (until 1402) and the treaty of Eger of April 25, 1459 by means of an exchange of territory also diplomatically could.

Passage from Pirna to Bohemia in 1293

Territories under Bohemian control at the time of Ottokar II (1253 to 1278 King of Bohemia) with a simplified representation of the Bohemian north-western border

Bohemia's expansive territorial policy towards the south as far as the Adriatic was abruptly ended on August 26, 1278 by the battle of Dürnkrut and Jedenspeigen . Here the anti-Bohemian coalition under the Habsburg and German King Rudolf I prevailed.

Wenzel II of Bohemia , released from hostage in Dresden in 1283, was unable to regain his father's property in the Alpine countries, which is why he mainly directed his foreign policy towards the north: the Margraviate of Meissen, the Pleißenland and Poland.

On February 15, 1288, the Margrave of Meissen Heinrich the Illustrious died in Dresden , at whose court Wenzel II had spent his last time as a prisoner. With a contract dated March 12, 1289, the youngest son of Heinrich, Frederick the Little , wanted to sell his property to the Bohemian crown, against which his nephew, Margrave Friedrich Tuta , objected and on September 11, 1289 bought these properties up to Dresden. Friedrich had already sold Dresden to Waldemar von Brandenburg , but secured a lifelong right of residence. Frederick the Little died on April 25, 1316 without an heir in Dresden.

Territories under the control of the Bohemian crown around 1301 (blue: vassals, including the margraviate of Meissen)

In 1293, through diplomatic skill, Bohemia came into the possession of the town and castle of Pirna, which previously belonged to the Meißner bishop. A Bohemian Dominican monastery was founded here around 1300 (first mentioned in 1307), which was followed by a school (first mentioned in 1317). This development continued on a much smaller scale with the former Nisan Bohemian Academy with an attached monastery. Around this time, the Bohemian Přemyslids gained new power. As the reigning king, Wenceslas II acquired the Polish one for the Bohemian 1300 and from 1301 to 1303 for his son Wenceslaus III. , the last Přemyslid, the Hungarian crown.

Countries of the Bohemian Crown under Charles IV (1347 to 1378) with a simplified representation of the Bohemian north-western border
Pirna 1753/55
Pirna Monastery Church

The decisive factor was the stacking right in Pirna, which was confirmed by King John of Böhmen ( Luxembourg ) in 1325 , on the road and waterway to Bohemia. In economic terms, Pirna outstripped the neighboring Dresden, which was even more important under Heinrich the Illustrious. In 1351 the king and later emperor Charles IV of Bohemia even held a prince's day in Pirna . This bohemian heyday came to an abrupt end due to the expansive territorial policy of the Meissen Margrave Wilhelm I , who endeavored to bring the entire area of ​​what is now Saxon Switzerland into his possession. In 1404/05, the Winterstein Castle fell to the Marches of Meissen as a late consequence of the Dohna feud, together with the Pirna Care, which had been part of the Bohemian Crown up to that point . In 1408, one year after the death of Wilhelm I, the Bohemian Königstein Castle was also conquered by the Meissners. At the same time, Bohemia also lost the territory of New Bohemia . Auerbach was conquered by the Wittelsbachers as early as 1400, the year the German King Wenzel of Bohemia was deposed , Bärnau in 1405.

For his war against the Burgraviate of Dohna and other Bohemian fiefs and estates, Wilhelm I even accepted a considerable reduction in the silver content of the coins issued by the main Wettin mint. It was not until 1412 that Frederick the Arguable was able to stabilize the currency again. In 1459, with the Treaty of Eger , Pirna remained in the possession of Elector Friedrich II of Saxony , but continued to be a Bohemian fief.


Before 1206 there were churches in Briesnitz , perhaps also in Kaditz ( Emmauskirche ) and in today's Dresden ( Frauenkirche ).


  • Gerhard Cheap : The Burgward organization in the Upper Saxon-Meissnian area. Archaeological-archival comparative studies (= publications of the State Museum for Prehistory Dresden. Vol. 20). Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften, Berlin (East) 1989, ISBN 3-326-00489-3 .
  • Leo Bönhoff : The Gau Nisan in political and church relations. In: New Archive for Saxon History. Vol. 36, 1915, ISSN  0944-8195 , pp. 177-211. Digital copy of the SLUB .
  • Werner Coblenz : To the Slavic ramparts of the Gau Nisan. In: Gotthard Neumann (Hrsg.): Early castles and cities. Contributions to research on castles and town centers. Festschrift Wilhelm Unverzagt . (= German Academy of Sciences in Berlin. Writings of the Section for Prehistory and Early History , Volume 2.) Akademie-Verlag, Berlin 1954, pp. 85–94.
  • Werner Coblenz: Comments on the Slawengau Nisan. In: Joachim Herrmann (Ed.), In connection with Bernhard Gramsch: Archeology as historical science. Studies and Investigations. Karl-Heinz Otto on his 60th birthday. (= Writings on Prehistory and Early History , Volume 30.) Akademie-Verlag, Berlin 1977, pp. 343–351.
  • Ernst Eichler , Hans Walther : Place names and settlement route in the old landscape of Nisan in the early Middle Ages. In: Ernst Eichler, Rudolf Fischer (ed.): Contributions to the Slavonic Onomastic Atlas. Theodor Frings in memory. (= Treatises of the Saxon Academy of Sciences in Leipzig . Philological-Historical Class. Vol. 61, Issue 2), Berlin 1970. Entry RI OPAC .
  • Manfred Kobuch , André Thieme: The Nisan landscape from the 10th to the 12th century - settlement, rule, church. In: History of the City of Dresden. Vol. 1: From the beginning to the end of the Thirty Years War. Edited by Karlheinz Blaschke. Theiss, Stuttgart 2005, ISBN 3-8062-1906-0 , pp. 63-87.
  • Reinhard Spehr , Herbert Boswank: Dresden. City foundation in the dark of history. Verlag D. J. M., o. O. [Dresden] 2000, ISBN 3-9803091-1-8 .
  • André Thieme : Nisan or Neußen: Comments on Thietmar VI, 10 on King Heinrich II's campaign to Bohemia in 1004. In: New archive for Saxon history. - Neustadt ad Aisch: Schmidt. - Vol. 76 (2005), pp. 211-219.
  • Friedrich Strunz: Disquisitiones de duobus antiquis Saxoniæ Pagis Nisani ac Daleminci. Accessit Ioannis Rivi Descriptio Mariæbergi paucis annotationibus illustrata. Verlag Gottfried Zimmermann, Wittenberg 1714.
  • Karl Moritz Welte: Gau and archdeaconate Nisan in the margraviate of Meissen. In: Program with which the teaching college invites you to the public examination and the speech of the Annen Realschule (Realschule first order) in Dresden on Wednesday 5th and Thursday 6th April 1876 through Rector Professor Job. Hellmuth Henkler's printing press in Dresden, pp. 1–52. Digital copy of the SLUB .

Web links


  1. ^ Author: Manfred Kobuch
  2. CDS IA 1 - Documents of the Margraves of Meissen 948-1099, p. 192 f.
  3. Otto Schlüter, Oskar August (ed.) With the participation of numerous experts: Atlas of the Saale and central Elbe region. Verlag Enzyklopädie, Leipzig 1958–1960, map 15.
  4. Ernst Gotthelf Gersdorf: Document book of the Meissen Monastery, part 1: 962-1356 (= Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae regiae. 2nd main part / 1), Giesecke & Devrient, Leipzig 1864, p. 192 f.
  5. the inheritance books of the offices of Dresden and Pirna and other documentary evidence
  6. Bulsitz (Bultzsch, Poltz) † (Wüstung) in the Digital Historical Directory of Saxony : Mentioned in 1140 as Bulsize (CDS I / 2/134), also Poltz, Bultzsch, Polschberg
  7. ^ Cheap: The Burgward organization in the Upper Saxon-Meissnian area. Appendix 2.
  8. Bresnice (Briesnitz) is a derivation from the Sorbian Breźnica and means "birch forest" or "birch village "; see. Ernst Eichler : Slavic place names between Saale and Neisse. Volume I, VEB Domowina-Verlag, Bautzen 1985, p. 63.
  9. CDS II 1, No. 32, p. 36 : V villas praedii sui in provincia Nisanen, in burgwardo Woz sitas.
  10. CDS II 1, No. 47, p. 50 : in provincia Nisanen in burgwardo Woz
  11. CDS IA 1, No. 166 : sex villas, unam in provincia Nisani in burgwardo Wosice
  12. 1123 (ad a. 1123): Guozdec (Cosmas III 53); 1088 [at 1125]: Gvozdec (Cosmas II 40); 1087 [around 1125]: Gvozdek (Cosmas II 39)
  13. CDS IA 1, No. 99 : Omnium dei: nostrique fidelium tam futurorum quam presentium sollers industria noverit, qualiter nos ob amorem et peticionem ECHEHARDI marchionis nostri fidelis cuidam militi suo scilicet IARMIR in dicto in villa SCVTROPEI, possi femi in proximis locis tres regales mansos in burchwardo GVODEZI nec non in comitatu prenominati marchionis sitos in proprium tradidimus.
  14. CDS IA 1, p. 331, no. 136 . (Accessed July 23, 2020).
  15. ^ Annalista Saxo
  16. Bardo (1031-1051) - RIplus Regg. EB Mainz 1 [after 1027 1040 Aug. 15 to 31, Dohna. ]. In: RIplus Regg. EB Mainz 1 [after 1027], in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on November 23, 2018)
  17. ^ Cheap: The Burgward organization in the Upper Saxon-Meissnian area. Pp. 82-108.
  18. ^ Cheap: The Burgward organization in the Upper Saxon-Meissnian area. P. 98.
  19. ^ Cheap: The Burgward organization in the Upper Saxon-Meissnian area. P. 95.
  20. The place Loupfourdon , mentioned by Claudius Ptolemäus around 150 , in Latin also Lupfurdum (Λούπφουρδον), was located according to the latest research with a tolerance of 20 km at an (Elbe) ford in the Germania magna in the Dresden area.
  21. The (late) Lombards moved from their homes on the Lower Elbe - cf. Bardowieck - to Pannonia via the Tullnerfeld either only through the Elbe valley or some of them even settled here for a while. Since, according to more recent research, the passage took place earlier than at the end of the 6th century, this chronological discrepancy led to the fact that the assignment of the graves to the Lombards was questioned.
  22. See Langobardenstrasse in the Dresden City Wiki.
  23. ^ Cornelia Rupp: Longobards in Dresden? In: Judith Oexle (Ed.), State Office for Archeology Dresden : Dresden 8000. Dresden, 2006, pp. 51–54.
  24. Since around 600 the Sorbs have immigrated from the Bohemian region to what is now the Saxon Elbe valley near Dresden and from there they gradually spread over the entire area east of the Saale. […] The evidence unearthed by archeology allows the conclusion that the Sorbs immediately moved further down the Elbe after their arrival in what is now the Saxon area and only came to a standstill at the Saale, because this river formed the line of retreat for the Germans who had migrated to the west. Only when the Sorbian immigrants backed up at the Saale did they begin to take permanent possession of the land they had already traversed and to advance south along the rivers Saale, Weisse Elster and Mulde . Karlheinz Blaschke : History of Saxony in the Middle Ages. Verlag C. H. Beck, Munich 1990, ISBN 3-406-31722-7 ; Union Verlag, Berlin 1990, ISBN 3-372-00076-5 , pp. 43, 45 (see map: The immigration of the Slavs into the Upper Saxon area after 600. Draft: Karlheinz Blaschke , In: ibid. P. 44).
  25. According to an outdated opinion, especially from the 19th century, the language of the country Boiki was based on the Russian boyk .
  26. According to a lesser opinion, especially from archeology, Konstantin Porphyrogennetus would have formed the White Serbs only as an analogy to the White Croats , and a group of historians also apparently locates Boiki on the upper reaches of the Vistula and Oder rivers for patriotic reasons.
  27. The immigrating Slavs most likely did not find an area devoid of settlement, so a “settlement gap” of a century or more is unlikely. Even after the great migration of the peoples, parts of the population remained resident, but the archaeological findings show a sharp decline in the population density. German-Slavic contacts in the sense of groups of different cultural traditions are therefore to be assumed in the East Central European region. [...] rapid assimilation ("Slavicization") of the existing population. In: Sebastian Brather : Archeology of the Western Slavs. Settlements, economy and society in early and high medieval East Central Europe , de Gruyter, Berlin-New York 2008 ( Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde , Volume 61) ISBN 978-3-11-020609-8 , pp. 61f.
  28. Prope illis resident quos vocant Bethenici, et Smeldingon, et Morizani, qui habent ciuitates XI, Iuxta illos sunt qui uocantur Hehfeldi, qui habent ciuitates VIII. Iuxta illos est regio, quae uocatur Surbi. In qua regione plures sunt, quae habent ciuitates L. Iuxta illos sunt quos uocantur Talaminzi, qui habent ciuitates XIIII. Beheimare, in qua sunt ciuitates XV. Marharii have ciuitates XI.
  29. Gerhard Billig: To the reconstruction of the oldest Slavic castle districts in the Upper Saxon-Meißnischen area on the basis of the Bavarian geographer In: New archive for Saxon history. Ph. CW Schmidt publishing house, Neustadt ad Aisch 1996, ISSN 0944-8195. - Vol. 66. 1995 (1996), pp. 27-67, here: p. 57.
  30. ^ Solutione argenti , actually the tenth from the profits of the money exchange.
  31. See Waitz VG. 8, 368
  32. RI II, 1 n.531, in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on October 31, 2018).
  33. ^ DO I 406 Ravenna 971.
  34. Otto III. - RI II, 3 n. 956l2 - 984 (June) - Meissen: The troops of the Bohemian duke separate from Heinrich in Alt-Mügeln and return to Bohemia. Their leader Wagio cunningly occupies Meissen, wins over the residents by persuasion, lures Count Friedrich von Eilenburg, the friend and vassal of Margrave Rigdag, to a talk from the city into the Nikolaikirche and then lets the burgrave Rigdag assassinate at the Tribische, a tributary of the Elbe, slain. (after Thietmar IV c. 5, p. 136) RI II, 3 n. 956l2, in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on January 6, 2019).
  35. See, among others, Thieme, Nisan or Neußen.
  36. Heinrich donated the episcopal church of Meissen to the bishop Eiko's complaint that his church had suffered severe damage from hostile incursions and lost almost everything, the places Glossen (Kr.Oschatz, Bz. Leipzig), Daubnitz, Schänitz, Mertitz (all Kr. Meissen, Bz. Dresden) in the Gau Dalaminci, further Golencizacethla (?) In the Gau Gudici and Brockwitz (Kr. Meissen, Bz. Dresden) in the Gau Niseni with all accessories and free right of disposal for the benefit of the church. RI II, 4 n. 1786, in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on November 1, 2018).
  37. CDS II 1, No. 11, note a) : Setle, cethla probably related to the Slavic sedlak, villagers, peasants, should designate a settlement of arable people.
  38. CDS II 1, No. 19 of July 19, 1013 : K. Heinrich owns the monastery, which has been badly damaged by hostile devastation in its income, from six localities in the districts of Dalaminci, Gudici and Niseni […] Ideo eidem praefatae ecclesiae sex villas nostrae proprietatis concedimus , quatuor in pago Dalaminci Glupp, Difnouuocetla, Zenizi, Miratina cethla, V tam in pago Gudici nomine Golenciza cethla, VI tam in Niseni Brochotina cethla cum mancipiis utriusque sexus, silvisatis, venationibus, aquisibus, aquarumve decursation aedificiis, viis et inviis, exitibus et reditibus ac cum omnibus appertinentiis inquisitis seu inquirendis.
  39. MG. DD. 3, 319 no.269.
  40. ^ Cheap: The Burgward organization in the Upper Saxon-Meissnian area. P. 71.
  41. Thietmar VII, 60 (44) f., 63 (46) f .; Ann. Quedlinburg. (Pp. 3, 84).
  42. RI II, 4 n.1908c, in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on February 23, 2019).
  43. Thietmar VII, 63 (46) f.
  44. RI II, 4 n.1908d, in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on February 23, 2019).
  45. Thietmar VIII, 1 (1); Ann. Quedlinburg. (Pp. 3, 84).
  46. Anton Weck : The Chur-Princely Saxon widely-called Residentz and Haupt-Vestung Dresden description and presentation . Joh. Hoffmann, Nürnberg 1680, p. 245 .: “ The ancestors did not record the time of the foundation; and the like report brought to posterity / so that one could decrease the actual age / but one has for almost several 90th years / when the church was ground on the ceiling / from a year = number of old people report after / removed that already at the same time in the 560th year. "
  47. Anton Weck: The Chur-Princely Saxon widely-called Residentz and Haupt-Vestung Dresden description and presentation . Joh. Hoffmann, Nürnberg 1680, p. 13 .: “So it is certain / that Dresden was already well known for quite some time before the 1000th year after the birth of Christ / in mass Dresserus in its cities = Chronicki and other authors, but especially from the Pirnischen Münche / Johann Lindnern / an = and stated that Dresden at the time of Kayser Heinrich des Voglers / and Kayser Ottens / was a patch / alda it had a Taberne or Schenckstädt / and a fortified Uberfarth on the Elbe / but is / what Ietzo mentioned / not to be understood in any other form than from the old Dresden / because New Dresden suffered damage after around 1020. Than AltDresden before that / and also from the water / from the Elbe streaks / damage. "
  48. ^ Johann Gottfried Michaelis : Dreßdnische Inscriptiones und Epitaphia . Schwencke, Alt-Dresden 1714, [p. 19/678] .: “ Only here it is difficult to determine / if this church at Sanct Marien or our dear women made the first start / or who was the foundation of it /. It would be desirable that complete news of this would not have been withdrawn from us at the same time as the farewell of their papists by the blessed Lutheran Reformation: So one could inform a well-meaning reader with better reasons about the foundation and funders. But it is probable that it may have already stood around the one thousand and twentieth year. Because at that time the people because of great water damage, which they often suffered in Alt-Dreßden from the Elbe / started to build this side of the Elbe, because the land was higher here / than in Alt-Dreßden. If one can trust the saying of old people / who once lived / when the ceiling of the church was newly ground and at that time a year was found; so the year given above must be correct. "
  49. See CDS IA 1, p. 331, no. 136. (Accessed November 2, 2018).
  50. RI III, 2,3 n. 503  ( page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on November 2, 2018).@1@ 2Template: Toter Link /  
  51. Cf. MGH DD 6, 270 n ° 212. (Accessed November 2, 2018).
  52. See CDS II 1, p. 33, no.29 (accessed on November 2, 2018).
  53. Since Dohna and Gvozdes / Woz in Nisan were already in direct possession of the Bohemian crown in the 1120s, these are castles from the Bautzen countryside rather than from Nisan, although the latter is not excluded. The castles Bvistrizi and Bresnice further west of the Gau Nisan, but also an abandoned castle on the Kaitzbach or the presumed Neidhardt at the port of Nisani, would also be considered.
  54. Kunigunde von Weimar-Orlamünde was last mentioned on March 20, 1117, Margrave Wiprecht von Groitzsch died widowed on May 22, 1124 in Pegau.
  55. Kunigunde von Beichlingen was the wife of Wiprecht III, Count von Groitzsch, and was married to Diepold III, Margrave of Vohburg, for the second time.
  56. Canonici Wissegradensis continuatio Cosmae MGH SS IX, to 1139
  57. Innocentius episcopus servus servorum dei venerabili fratri Godebaldo Misennensi episcopo eiusque successoribus canonice substitendis in perpetuum… CDS II 1, No. 45 With Godebaldo Misennensi episcopo is meant Bishop Godebold of Meissen , who held this office from August 31, 1140 († 1140) ).
  58. Ernst Gotthelf Gersdorf: Document book of the Meissen Monastery, part 1: 962-1356 (= Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae regiae. 2nd main part / 1), Giesecke & Devrient, Leipzig 1864, p. 49 : P. Innocenz II. Confirms all rights of the collegiate church and possessions, namely the acquisitions of five villages in the province of Nisanen by donating a Slavic noble name Bor.
  59. In quibus haec propriis duximus exprimenda vocabulis, videlicet quinque villas inferius annotatas, quarum una vocatur Cozebude, alia Jazelice, alia Hermanni villa, alia vero Bulsize, atque alia Nicradewice, quas utique quidam liberis, in natione Bor nuncupatus, in provincia Scupatus burgwardo Woz, praesentibus et collaudantibus duobus filiis suis Wichardo et Luthero in praesentia Heinrici secundi regis et aliorum quam plurium principum Misinensi ecclesiae traditit. CDS II 1, No. 47
  60. CDS IA 1 No. 142
  61. This document was made out by two scribes, No. 32 A and No. 32 B. Both documents have double additions, added by two other hands, the form of the document is that of a protocol, the type of writing is only in the 12th Century, while the forgery itself was terminated to 1071, when Henry IV was staying in Meissen.
  62. Haec Benno decimus Misinensis ecclesiae episcopus scripsit et sigilli sui impressione signatum corroboravit. Ista sunt nomina villarum, quas Bor et filii eius in concambium dederunt Wighardus et Liuthegerus Misinensis ecclesiae sine werra et omni contradictione: Gozebudi, Oicice, Grodice, Cinici, Luderuwice. CDS II 1, No. 32, p. 37 ; Luderuwice is absent from No. 32 B.
  63. sex villas, unam in provincia Nisani in burgwardo Wosice, que vocatur Mocozice, quinque in regione Milce, quatuor ex his in burgwardo Schizani, quintam Posarice vocitatam Misinensi aecclesiae in proprium tradidimus. In: CDS IA 1, No. 166 , allegedly issued on May 17, 1091 in Mantua ( Italy ).
  64. In the late 12th century, when the episcopal Meissnian possessions were apparently threatened by competing claims, the bishop and cathedral chapter tried to secure the acquired goods by means of forged documents. In this context, not only the alleged document of Bishop Bennos from 1071 should have been created, but also a forgery made on Emperor Heinrich IV in 1091, in which the bishopric, among other things, had the donation of the village of Mobschatz - again located in Burgward Niederwartha - recorded . In: History of the City of Dresden. Vol. 1: From the beginning to the end of the Thirty Years War. Edited by Karlheinz Blaschke . Theiss, Stuttgart 2005, ISBN 3-8062-1906-0 , p. 83.
  65. Further ownership claims through forgery of documents are raised in Daleminzien and in the Bautzen countryside.
  66. CDS II 1, No. 29 allegedly from October 29, 1068: K. Heinrich IV. Gives the collegiate church two royal gifts for the benefit of the chapter. Hufen zu Löbtau in Burgwart Pesterwitz of the Nisan district. ( … Duos regios mansos sitos in villa Livbitvwa, et si ibi aliquid defuerit, in proximo cum bene aratis agris implendis in pago Nisani in burchuuardo Bvistrizi cum omnibus suis appendiciis… ); the assignment of Pesterwitz to burchuuardo Bvistrizi is questioned by more modern historians.
  67. So among others Vratislav von Brünn, Otto von Olmütz and the son of Duke Sobĕlav I, Vladislav, who was passed over in 1140 in the succession.
  68. Děpold succeeded in holding Prague, which the duke had left, until the victorious royal troops arrived.
  69. MGH SSrerGerm 45, 351: Eo tempore Conradus Maraviensis comes conspiratione cum Boemis facta ducatum terrae illius affectans de Maravia in Boemiam exercitum ducit. Cui cum dux Labezlaus cum copiis occurrere ready, a suis proditus fugae presidio vix periculum mortis evasit. Sicque profugus ad regem veniens casum suum deplorat.
  70. 1142 May 3 – before May 28, Frankfurt, Konrad holds a court day attended by almost all princes of the empire : RI IV, 1,2 n. 240  ( page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically created as marked defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on October 9, 2018).@1@ 2Template: Toter Link /  
  71. So inter alia Wilhelm Bernhardi , Konrad III. , P. 289, and Peter Hilsch , The Bishops of Prague in the Early Staufer Era: Their Position Between Imperial u. Regional authority from Daniel I <1148-1167> to Heinrich <1182-1197> . Diss. Tübingen 1969, p. 40.
  72. RI IV, 1,2 n. 239  ( page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on October 8, 2018).@1@ 2Template: Toter Link /  
  73. The campaign took place before June 7, 1142, after which Konrad von Znojmo fled not only from Bohemia but also from Moravia (Znojmo was destroyed by Vladislav II in 1145); Conrad III. puts Duke Vladislav II back into his rule on June 7th, 1142: RI IV, 1,2 n. 247  ( page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on October 9, 2018) and RI IV, 1,2 n.248, in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on October 9, 2018) RI IV, 1,2 n.249, in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on October 9, 2018).@1@ 2Template: Toter Link /  
  74. In addition to the payment of a promised sum of money , Duke Vladislav ceded some goods from the legacy of Heinrich von Groitzsch, who died in 1135, to the Přemyslids, such as the Gau Nisan and the landscape around Bautzen, to Konrad. see. RI IV, 1,2 n.250, in: Regesta Imperii Online, URI: (accessed on October 9, 2018).
  75. CDS II 1, No. 48 .: Unde universis Christi regnique nostri fidelibus notum esse volumus, qualiter altercationem quandam, quae inter Meinwardum venerabilem Misinensem episcopum et illustrem marchionem Cvnradum fidelem nostrum erat, ipsis utrimqueidimus spontaneous collaudantibus dec.
  76. The first documentary mention of Naundorf 1144. In: Website of the village and school association Radebeul Naundorf eV : The members of the Meißner cathedral chapter are said to have two villages, namely Döltzschen and the nearby Naundorf, but the bishop is said to have the other Naundorf, which is on the other Elbe side is, in accordance with the agreement reached in the meantime, but in such a way that he grants it as a fiefdom to the son of the margrave, but the margrave owns the village of Gohlis at his own disposal. All villages of the Meißner church, which are located in the province of Nisan, are exempt from building obligations on the margravial castle and from the public guard duty.
  77. Forged document from 1071.
  78. Forged document from 1071.
  79. Desertification in western Friedrichstadt between the Flügelwegbrücke and Alberthafen (forged document from 1071).
  80. Forged document from 1071.
  81. Desertification at the entrance of the Zschoner Grund in Steinbach, Gompitz village (forged document from 1071).
  82. Forged document from 1091.
  83. Desertification on the Niederhermsdorf corridor (document from 1140).
  84. Document from 1144.
  85. Document from 1144.
  86. Document from 1144.
  87. Document from 1144.
  88. This transit and escort duty was already in the first archive for Saxon history (volume 1862/1863) by Dr. Hermann Knothe dealt with: p. 425 This is often confused with the third court penny from the Middle Ages, whereas the term “third bridge penny”, which only became common in Dresden from 1577: the third part of the bridge toll or the third pfennig . This was the transit and escort duty for the road from Dresden to Koenigsbrück , which was levied and taken both in Dresden ( Dresdner Zoll ) and at the castle Koenigsbrück ( Koenigsbrücker Zoll ). This important connection between Dresden and the Via Regia had been owned by the city of Königsbrück from the earliest times and therefore belonged to its owners. For the first time demonstrates the two duties on 4 October 1426 after which this the Waldaw (Waldau) family belonged: from about 1405 a Hans von Waldaw (of the duties as the family held are had inherited Pertinenzstück), from the early 1420s then his son Georg (Jurge [n]) von Waldaw, who had already lost Königsbrück and the escort duties in 1426. Königsbrück passed to Hans von Polenz around 1426 , who sold it to Wentzsch von Donyn, his wife's brother, before his death in 1437, according to a royal document from 1441, which was only confirmed in 1452. Between 1437 and 1441 he exchanged Königsbrück for Grafenstein , which was then owned by Hlabatsch von Dohna. Wentzsch founded the Grafensteiner, Hlabatsch the Königsbrücker line of those of Dohna . According to a document dated August 4, 1448, Königsbrück and the two customs duties at Königsbrück and Dresden are in the possession of Hlabatsch von Dohna. As a result, these duties came into the possession of the von Dohna in the 1430s and have nothing to do with the Burgraves of Dohna, who perished in 1402.
  89. Reinhard Spehr : Excavations in the Frauenkirche of Nisan / Dresden . In: Judith Oexle (ed.): Early churches in Saxony. Results of archaeological and architectural studies . Konrad Theiss, Stuttgart 1994, p. 212.
  90. Dr. phil. Karl Moritz Welte, senior teacher at the Annenrealschule Dresden