Nuremberg (Germany) -- Description and travel; Nuremberg (Germany) -- History
Henry IV. whose scene at Canossa with the Pope--Kaiser of the Holy Roman
Empire waiting three days in the snow to kiss the foot of
excommunicative Gregory--has impressed itself on all memories. His last
visit to Nuremberg was a sad one. His son rebelled against him, and the
old king stopped at Nuremberg to collect his forces. In the war between
father and son Nuremberg was loyal, and took the part of Henry IV. It
was no nominal part, for in 1105 she had to stand a siege from the young
Henry. For two months the town was held by the burghers and the castle
by the Præfect Conrad. At the end of that time orders came from the old
Kaiser that the town was to surrender. He had given up the struggle, and
his undutiful son succeeded as Henry V. to the Holy Roman Empire, and
Nuremberg with it. The mention of this siege gives us an indication of
the growth of the town. The fact of the siege and the words of the
chronicler, "The townsmen (oppidani) gave up the town under treaty,"
seem to point to the conclusion that Nuremberg was now no longer a mere
fort (_castrum_), but that walls had sprung up round the busy mart and
the shrine of St. Sebald, and that by this time Nuremberg had risen to
the dignity of a "Stadt" or city state. Presently, indeed, we find her
rejoicing in the title of "_Civitas_." The place, it is clear, was
already of considerable military importance or it would not have been
worth while to invest it. The growing volume of trade is further
illustrated by a charter of Henry V. (1112) giving to the citizens of
Worms _Zollfreiheit_ in various places subject to him, amongst which
Frankfort, Goslar and Nuremberg are named as royal towns (_oppida
regis_).
We may note at this point, however, that the Chroniclers declare that
the town fell into the hands of the enemy, through the treachery of the
Jewish inhabitants and was plundered and burnt. By this destruction they
account for the absence of all earlier records, and are left at liberty
to evolve their theories as to the history of previous days. They add
that when the town was rebuilt (1120) the Jews chose all the best sites
for their houses, and retained them till they were driven out. The first
statement was an easy invention. The second, very probably true in
effect, points to the reason--commercial jealousy--but does not afford
an excuse for the shortsighted and unchristian persecution of the Jews
which disfigures the record of the acts of Nuremberg.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account