Treaties of Cölln and Mewe

The Treaties of Cölln and Mewe, concluded in 1454 and 1455, transferred the

Electorate of Brandenburg. The Teutonic Knights had received the area as a pawn from Brandenburg in 1402, and as a possession in 1429. Financial shortages due to the onset of the Thirteen Years' War (1454–1466) forced Ludwig von Erlichshausen, Grand Master of the Teutonic Order, to pawn the Neumark to Frederick II, Elector of Brandenburg, by the Treaty of Cölln on 22 February 1454, and to subsequently sell it by the Treaty of Mewe on 16 September 1455.^[1]^[2]^[3]

Background

Teutonic Order State

In the second half of the 13th century, the

Teutonic Order state,^[4]

their eastern neighbor.

On September 29, 1402,

First Peace of Thorn (1411), Grand Master (Hochmeister) Heinrich von Plauen intended to pawn the Neumark to the Polish king, and prepared a respective treaty.^[6] The noble estates of the Neumark however, on the basis of their privileges, prevented the ratification of the treaty.^[6]

On September 8, 1429, the Teutonic Order acquired the pawn as a full possession from

Kingdom of Poland.^[8] The Order's military and financial weakness^[9] resulted in an urgent need for money to attract and pay mercenaries.^[10] To that end, the Grand Master Ludwig von Erlichshausen pawned the Neumark to Brandenburg^[9] and many of his Prussian holdings to mercenary groups in 1454.^[10]

Treaties

On 22 February 1454,

Landsberg an der Warthe to receive the homage of the estates.^[12] The nobles accepted the treaty on 31 March.^[16] The Polish king Casimir IV Jagiellon had also announced an interest in receiving the Neumark and upon hearing of the Teutonic offer to Brandenburg, entered negotiations with the Neumark nobles.^[17] Yet the estates^[16] and the Grand Master had favoured the Elector of Brandenburg.^[9]

In June, the noble estates of the Schivelbein area approached the Brandenburgian elector for protection against frequent Polish and

Bromberg (Bydgoszcz) about a peace between Poland and the Order.^[18] The latter had not handed over the Schivelbein and Driesen areas with the rest of the Neumark after the Cölln treaty to pressure Frederick II to assist it in the war, also had the Holy Roman Emperor asked Frederick to mediate in the dispute.^[18] On 7 April 1455, Frederick II received the hommage of the estates and asserted their privileges.^[19]

On 16 September 1455, another treaty was concluded at the Order's castle in Mewe between Frederick II and Ludwig von Erlichshausen,^[20] wherein the Neumark was sold to Frederick for 100,000 Rhenish guilder.^[21] The Schivelbein and Driesen areas were explicitly included.^[21] The payment of 40,000 guilder resulting from the treaty of Cölln was included in the sum agreed on in Mewe.^[13] The Order was granted the right to buy the Neumark back after Frederick II's death.^[22] Brandenburg further granted the Order's forces safe conduct.^[23]

Aftermath

When by the

Teutonic Order State lost several territories to Poland, Frederick II was concerned that a Polish king might in place of the Order claim the right to buy the Neumark according to the Mewe treaty.^[12] He wrote down a respective memorandum, directed at his successors, wherein the latter were urged to not accept such claims, keep the Neumark within the "German lands and the Holy Roman Empire and the worthy Electorate Mark of Brandenburg" and not have it "brought to non-German tongue".^[12]

In 1517,

expected war with Poland-Lithuania.^[25]

Sources

References

^ Leon Rogalski, Dzieje Krzyżaków oraz ich stosunki z Polska, Litwę i Prussami, poprzedzone rysem dziejów wojen krzyżowych, czerpane z najlepszych źródeł, Nakładem i drukiem S. Orgelbranda, 1846
^ Philippe MEYER, Une histoire de Berlin, edi8, 11/09/2014
^ Henry BOGDAN, Les Hohenzollern, edi8, 13/02/2014
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d Gahlbeck (2007), p. 402
^ Ortvay, Band 3 (1894), p.18
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d Heinrich (1992), p. 148
^ Ortvay, Band 3 (1894), p.35
^ Neugebauer (1996), p. 55
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d Böckler (1995), p. 203
^ ^a ^b Boockmann (1998), p. 216
^ Joachim & Hubatsch (1973), p. 840; Schultze (1989), p. 77
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d Schultze (1989), p. 77
^ ^a ^b ^c Gallus (1798), p. 77
^ ^a ^b Joachim & Hubatsch (1973), p. 840
^ Böckler (1995), p. 203; Schultze (1989), p. 77
^ ^a ^b Hirsch (ADB VII, 1878), p. 479
^ Hirsch (ADB VII, 1878), p. 479; Sonthofen (1990), p. 173
^ ^a ^b Voigt (1860), p. 147
^ Amts-Blatt (1865), p. 82 (397)
^ Böckler (1995), p. 203; Gallus (1798), p. 77; Schultze (1989), p. 77
^ ^a ^b Böckler (1995), p. 204; Gallus (1798), p. 77; Neugebauer (1996), p. 55
^ Böckler (1995), p. 204; Schultze (1989), p. 77
^ Böckler (1995), p. 204
^ Sach (2002), p. 307; Schultze (1989), p. 77
^ Sach (2002), p. 308