500 Years Ellernhof Farm in Ellerbeck
By Jana Cordes (nee Schürmann)
[On the weekend 31.8./1.9.2012, about 100 people from all around the world gathered in Schledehausen to celebrate the 500-year anniversary of the first known mentioning of the Schürmann family and their farm in Ellerbeck. Family members and friends came from Germany, Australia, the United States, and from India and other places. Jana Cordes, a local historian and daughter of Gudrun and Jan Schürmann, the only direct Schürmann descendants living close to their old farmstead, presented a keynote paper which is translated below. A revised version will be published by the "Verein für Geschichte und Landeskunde von Osnabrück" (Association for the History and Culture of Osnabrueck) in their annual journal "Osnabrücker Mitteilungen" vol. 20/2015.]
The Tax Register
The oldest archival evidence referring to the Schurmann family is a tax register from 1512. As today, the sovereign collected taxes from his subjects to finance the maintenance of his ducal court, the administration, and his battles. Court secretaries registered these names painstakingly in tax listings. As the clergy, the royals and the city of Osnabrück were exempt from paying tax, and commercial business gained some significance since the 19th century only, the peasantry had to burden the taxes exclusively. The taxation rules changed in the course of the centuries. They referred to the head of the persons on a farmstead, the livestock, the hearth, and the property as such.
The document from 1512 seems to be the oldest such taxation register surviving for the territory of the [Catholic] prince-bishopric of Osnabrück)[ 1 ] The so called head tax was calculated to include all members of the farmer’s family above the age of 12, the previous owner of the farm if living in a retirement cottage on the farmstead, and his farmhands and maidservants.[ 2 ]
Details relating to the collection of this tax, then collected only infrequently and with the consent of the learned professions, have not been transmitted but seem to be closely linked with the political history of the empire. It can be ascertained that the acting Bishop Erich II from Braunschweig-Grubenhagen was at this time facing severe political and financial problems. A faithful follower of Pope Julius II, the regional bishop of Osnabrück refused his obligation of financial support to Maximilian von Habsburg, the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. Subsequently, the emperor placed the bishop under the imperial ban, which could only be compounded by a large payment of money.[ 3 ]
Taxation Register 1512
Roman Emperor Maximilian I. von Habsburg
Prince-Bishop Erich II. von Braunschweig-Grubenhagen
The annual 1512 taxation register mentions a certain Jo Schürmann belonging to the Niederberger Mark homesteads.[ 4 ] He was made to pay tax for a total of six taxable people (see reproduction of page above). The abbreviation “dt” following the Roman number “VI” stands for the Latin word “dedit”, deriving from the verb “dare”, to give indicating, therefore, that he has “given”, i.e. paid. While the total amount is not being shown explicitly, it can be derived from the context of the entire document. For each taxable person, Schurmann as the owner of the homestead had to raise the sum of four shillings for himself and his household, in total 24 shillings or 2 Marks.
Infrequent tax collections were conducted much earlier and the first evidence dates back to 1360[ 5 ], but no name list has survived from this period of time. Only when the number of tax collections increased and became a regular feature during the 16th century, the density and detail of recording increases as well.
However, while the name of the Schurmann family can not be verified before 1512, another medieval taxation and income register indicates that the Schurmann homestead may have existed long before. The Registrum bonorum mensae Episcopalis osnabrugensis Episcopal [ 6 ] from 1240 registers the farmstead (villication[ 7 ]) belonging to the property of the Bishop and includes the taxes the individual peasant had to contribute to the maintenance of the Episcopal court.
A tendency of assigning specific names to the farmsteads in the Osnabrück county can be shown since the 12th century.[ 8 ] Unfortunately, the registers often do not list the name of the actual farmstead or its owner, rather than the villages or towns of settlement. If there were two or more farms within one locality, the respective name was indicated by an additional “item”, Latin for “also”.
Thus the above mentioned Episcopal property register lists in the category “Curia Sledesen” the localities of “Hemminchusen” and “Elrebeke”, the latter of which with an additional note in the Latin language of a tax payment of “XXXI denar”[ 9 ] and “IV molt. avenae [ 10 ] et IV mod. Silig[ 11 ]”. For a long time afterwards, the farmsteads of Hemmninghaus and Schurmann were the only ones belonging to the rural community of Schledehausen. Therefore, it can be safely assumed that the farmstead registered under the name “Elrebeke” around the year 1240 refers to the Schurmann farm in Ellerbeck.[ 12 ]
(The following section was added to the presentation of the paper at the 500-year anniversary celebrations of the Schürmann farm in Schledehausen on 31 August 2012)
How did the people live way back then?
The rural subsistence farming society / legal issues / social status and obligations.
It is hard to imagine for us today, but since medieval times until the 19th century by far the largest number of people was bonded or, as we call it in this part of Germany, here in Westphalia, they were serfs. This implied that a third person was the owner not only of the person as a human being but also of his personality.
Ownership of property
The societal order of the time was based on the principle of property ownership. This concept implied that a noble man, or a church, or the bishop himself were the owners of the land on which the farmers were living and working. The property owner made available this land for cultivation – basically just the right to use the land.
Levies and services
In return, the property owner received compensation in the form of natural products, i.e. as payment from portions of the harvest or as a certain amount of money, and he could also demand obligatory labour services.
While a farmer had the legal right to bequeath his farm to is descendants under the same conditions as the initial purchase, this did not change the fundamental right of the land owner as the supreme land holder. However, the landlord not only held the property right of the farmer’s goods, but also over the farmer and his family. For instance, without permission by the land owner, the bonded farmer was not allowed to move away, to marry or to conduct legal business.
This personal dependency also implied some particular responsibilities for the land lord: For instance, if a farmer had died, his landlord would have the right to inherit half of the movable goods of the deceased, e.g. , household effects, farming tools, or cattle. However, custom offered the alternative to pay a certain amount of money to the land owner as compensation for the loss of the farmer or a farm worker through death (i.e. the “case of death”). If a serf wanted to leave the country, he first had to pay some money for his release, in other words compensation for the loss in the case of death.
Even if somebody were to marry into the farm, he or she would have to buy the right to do so from the supreme land lord. It was the so called ascension. In the same time this made him automatically an independent by buying himselfout of dependency.
Besides services owed to the property owners, the farmers also had obligations to the church (e.g. fees for church services, weddings funerals, baptisms) and for the keep of the pastor and the sacristan. They also had to pay duties to the reeve (the local council administrator), and of course their taxes to the sovereign from which clergy and the nobility were exempted. (At times of crises, e.g. the Thirty Years’ War, additional taxes were added.)
It has been estimated that up to 80 % of the produce generated by a bonded farmer went into other hands.
The community of Schledehausen
Until the year 1836, the inhabitants of the Schürmann farm were bonded farmers, but unlike many other people they enjoyed some privileges.
They were lucky enough to belong to a religious land owner, i.e. the bishop of Osnabrück, alternately a Roman Catholic or a Lutheran, who was at the same time the supreme land owner. These overlords amongst the clergy were at the same time large scale land owners, and their properties were often widely scattered around the country. To manage their farms more efficiently, they established the cooperation of a number certain farms, so called “villications”. Each of them were managed on behalf of the property owner by a head farmer on a large property (the so called “Meyer Farm”), to which 10 to 15 smaller farms had to deliver their produce. The Schürmann farm, for instance, was one such smaller farm, linked to the Meyer farm of Schledehausen.
When the payment of duties in form of natural products slowly changed to money, the farm collectives lost their economic relevance. In terms of management, the cooperatives were not necessary any longer, but the social network remained to represent the farmers’ interest to the authorities.
Being organised as a cooperative, these farmers who were supporting each other, had a much stronger legal position than individually bonded farmers. For instance, they had to pay less duties and render fewer services to their land holder, and they were also able to exercise a legal level of self management. Unlike bonded farmers, the collective community members did not have to dispense to the land owner half of all the movable goods of the deceased, but only a quarter. All through history there were attempts to restrict these rights of the collectives, but they were always able to defend their rights successfully or even reclaim them at the court.
In the case of Schledehausen, for instance, their rights were codified in 1551 and the documents are being kept by the State Archives of Lower Saxony, at Osnabrück. This codification was caused by a legal argument. The local land owner, Christoph of Schele (the owner of the Schele Castle) who had been give the right to collect the duties from the local farmers, wrote to the local bishop as the supreme head of state to have this right tested and, if possible, restricted or cancelled. However, he was not successful: At the court session on 9 May 1551, the Prince Bishop Franz of Waldeck confirmed the traditional rights of the farmers’ cooperatives. These rights remained valid until the beginning of the 19th century.
Classes of farm ownership
To be dependent, i.e. bonded, was not necessarily seen by the contemporaries as a disadvantage. More important for the status of a person was if he owned land at all and how much. The farmers and their farms were considerably different in terms of the size of the farmstead, the farming land, and the right to utilise the lands around the village. The forests, the pastures and the rivers in the vicinity were of crucial relevance for the local farming economy, yet not everybody within a rural community had the same right to utilise them.
The Schürmann farm was one of the seven original farms of the Ellerbeck community. Having been established first, they were best equipped and formed the establishment of the social fabric in the farming community. Traditionally they owned the largest and most valuable fields and enjoyed legal privileges, including voting rights, which were related to the size of the land owned. Traditionally the farms were called “Vollerbe”, or in a literal translation “Full Heirs”. During the course of the centuries the population had increased, and given the scarcity of the natural resources the size of the farms decreased for later generations and the newly arrived settlers. However, the number of Full Heir farms like that of the Schürmann family in Ellerbeck, remained stable over the course of the centuries. As it is well known that such Full Heir farms have not been established after the 12th century, this is an important indicator for the establishment and age of the Schürmann farm at this point of time.
What did a farm look like, and how did people live there?
(The farmstead and the its daily life)
Two inventory lists from the Schürmann farm from 1826 and 1839 have survived, which is the time when the two brothers left to become missionaries in Australia and India. These lists offer an interesting insight into the contemporary living conditions and the equipment used for farming.
There was a whole range of buildings belonging to the farm: the main building (the heir’s home); the cottage for the farmer’s retired parents; homesteads rented out to the farmer’s assistants or tenants, a bake house, stables and sheds, and a shed for threshing the wheat.
The centre of such a farm, however, was the main building, in Northern Germany typically a timber frame hall. It was rather specific for this region as its roof covered all aspects of farming life: the people, all life stock, storage and processing of the harvest. During the course of centuries improvements had happened, but since medieval ages until the 19th century these large buildings remained essentially the same.
The large main gate allowed horse drawn harvest wagons too drive directly into the building. Threshing of wheat happened here as well initially. On either side of the building where stables for the horses and cattle, the upper floors served for storage or as accommodation for servants.
The back part of the building, roughly a third, contained the living quarters of the farmer’s family, in earlier years possibly without any clearly dividing walls. (A local historian who has described such farm buildings for the Osnabrück region around 1900, indicates that even rather wealthy farmers rarely build such dividing walls between the living quarters and the main ground floor.) You may imagine that in winter time the building was rather cool, and temperatures even in the open fireplace kitchen rarely went above 12 degree Celsius.
The main kitchen and dining room had the open fireplace for cooking, light and warmth. On one side you would find a sink for washing the laundry and the dishes, and on the other side a large dining table for the family and the servants.
Other parts of the living quarters contained tiny sleeping rooms, the main living room, and the pantry of the farmer’s family. Here, an oven made out of steel plates or slates provided some warmth, and around 1926 this was being labelled “new”.
Daily living comfort was rather moderate. One such farmstead is being described as owning only five chairs and an armchair for the entire house hold. I was also surprised about the number of beds: Besides one integrated into a cupboard, only three more sleeping places where listed, and I was wondering where all the many people on such a farmstead would have slept.
Additional household goods indicated some wealth at the Schürmann farm: A corner cupboard, a glass cabinet in the dining room, a barometer, a clock with a porcelain clock face, a mirror, and most modern for the time, a writing desk with a shelf addition on top.
However, nothing remained as there was a devastating fire, most likely caused by an electrical shortage in November 1926. Some news paper clippings report that the fire workers of the neighbourhood towns were unable to prevent the burning down of the buildings with most of the furniture and harvest being lost.
The succession of siblings and heirs
With the death of the farmer, only one child could inherit the farm. It was the tradition and legal regulation of the Osnabrück county to hand down the entire farm to one child and to pay a compensation to the other children. The economic rational was that the sovereign was not interested in the splitting up of the farming communities in tiny, uneconomic units which could not generate taxes properly. The other children received a compensation according to the size of the farm and the number of children.
It was also typical for the Osnabrück region that the youngest son inherited the farm. If there was no son, the youngest daughter became the heir. However, this has never happened in our family. Also, the children of the first marriage had priority over those from successive marriages.
In many cases the heir was too young to inherit the farm at the time of the farmer’s death. In this case the farmer’s widow married for a second time, and often after a short period of time of mourning. It was obvious to all that a new man or wife was essential to run the farm smoothly and to take care of the children.
Of course, often this did not happen without conflict, and in the case of our family there are documents of many court cases of battles between the adult heir and the step father who could not agree when to hand over the farm. While it was not early enough for the son, the parents of course wanted to delay the move into the less comfortable retirement home on the farm.
In many cases, and almost like today, so called patch work families resided under one roof, consisting of siblings, half and step siblings.
In the 19th century, it has rarely been documented what happened to all these siblings. Quite often existing records end with their liberation from bonded labour which included the release from the care and responsibility of their land lord. It is rarely known what happened to them afterwards and where they went.
As was custom, marriages often were arranged on the way to the church, as few people got beyond the vicinity of their village or to the neighbourhood town. Most of the women who married into a farmer’s family came from the surrounding farms. For young people, it was immensely important to find a well-to-do spouse. Marrying into another farm often was the only option for those children who had to leave the family farm, if they wanted to secure their future life style and not end up on another farm as a farm hand or a maid servant. This is being illustrated by an example from around 1700: Apparently there was an agreement between the two Full Heir farms of the Schürmann and the Konert family, according to which the second oldest Schürmann son, Johann, was to marry the heir of the Konert farm, Clara. However, after the death of her father, Clara chose to marry another man. Therefore, Johann went to court to claim the costs already incurred to him. He also offered to pay a higher ransom to the land lord to be allowed to marry Clara. Obviously, nothing came out of it, as the church records indicate marriage between Johann Schümann and the sister of the very same man who had won the heart over Clara. So much for a romantic marriage of love. (Apparently, arranged marriages were not only a tradition amongst the nobility.)
Emigration in the 19th century
Between the 1830s and 1890s a very large number of people left the Princely Diocese of Osnabrück to migrate to North America in search of a better future.
Yet, in our family only one person is known to have migrated to America at some time in the 1830s, a certain Johann Heinrich Christoph Schürmann, who became a crafts man in Kentucky where his trail was lost.
Two of his brothers left the country for completely different reasons: Johann Adam went to India, Clamor Wilhelm to Australia. However, they did not leave because they lacked prospects, but to become missionaries and spread the gospel. For this reason, Clamor as the youngest son forwent his legal right to inherit the farm, which was a most unusual event. While their success as missionaries amongst the heathen was quite limited, they left an important record in a quite different field, i.e. language research. Johann Adam translated the bible into Urdu and Hindi, while Clamor Wilhelm and his colleague Gottlob Teichelmann published dictionaries and grammar books on several Aboriginal languages, today the foundations for linguistic language studies. Yet, these records are not only of academic interest. Professor Rob Amery, who is amongst us today, and other enthusiastic language revivalists are thus enabled to reclaim Aboriginal languages that have been considered extinct by other language researchers, but were only sleeping in the understanding of Aboriginal people and are now being spoken again.
It would be easy to offer an evening-long lecture on this topic alone, but this is beyond the time available tonight.
I would like to offer a final thought: At this point of time, we experience the wonderful juncture of past, present and future, and it is remarkable that the work of the two brothers has brought forth such fruit today.
The generation of the two missionaries has been the first to experience an important turning point, i.e. the liberation of the peasants of their time. The Napoleonic Battle of the People near Leipzig in 1813 led to the final defeat of the French Army, but the philosophies of the French Revolution remained ingrained in German culture. Thus the desire for reforms stayed alive, and despite the massive opposition of the nobility a law was promulgated in 1833 that allowed each farmer to pay a ransom to the local duke to become a free person for good, able to work and own his own land.
Yet, key elements for the change were not only humanistic ideals of the enlightenment but, more importantly, had economic value. Amongst the economists of the time the perception took hold that agriculture would produce higher proceeds if the farmers were able to carry more responsibility and could profit more for themselves. This brings us back to taxation.
Actually, the term “peasant liberation” is somewhat misleading, as their liberty had to be bought with large amounts of money and could often only be managed by high debts.
In 1838, eventually, it happened:
All members of the Schürman farm were declared completely free, and the farm became the property of the Schürmann family without any restrictions. In the following years the farm prospered and grew to a size of approximately 45 hectares which may sound quite puny and small for Australian standards. But for this region around Osnabrück it was a considerable size, and thus the farm was referred to as one of the larger farms in the area.
I’ll stop here and will jump to the rather recent history and a final conclusion.
During the 1960s, the last owner of the Schürmann farm attempted to put it on a sound economic footing as a holiday resort and a horse ranch. However, this project failed eventually and the farm had to face a forced sale. Since 1978, the farm is owned by a local not-for-profit Health Service agency (Heilpädagogische Hilfe Osnabrück) and serves until today as a home for people with disabilities[ 13 ].
Well, this concludes the history of this farm which has been owned by one and the same family for well over 500 years. However, we do not need to be too sad as we can see today that the history of this family has not ended. And it is a pleasure to see so many of you assembled over here and celebrating this weekend together and having the chance of getting to know each other. I hope I was able to give you some insight into the 500 year history of our family and our farm. Given our limited time, however, this was just a glimpse into a much larger story.
In a letter written in January 1952, Heinfried Schurmann, then the occupier of the Ellernhof, stated:
“The Schurmanns are a very old family who can be traced back to exactly the year 1512. Historians presume that our farm was founded as a Königshof (king’s farm) as early as between the years 782 and 786 by the Emperor Charlemagne.”[ 14 ]
On 11 July 1832, the guardians of the Schürmann children sent a letter of appeal to the local bailiff asking him to assist the family and the oldest son Johann Friedrich in giving a loan to his youngest brother, Clamor Wilhelm to enable him to enrol at the Jänicke Mission Institute in Berlin, as had his brother Johann Adam. It offers an interesting insight into the financial state of a typical farming family in the County of Schledehausen.
In the transcript by Antje Fasshauer and translation by me, this letter follows here[ 15 ]:
|Hochzuehrender Herr Amtmann /||Highly esteemed Mr Bailiff|
|Wie Euer Hochwohlgeboren bekannt, ist der / |
Schürmanns dritte Sohn zu Ellerbeck, in der /
Missionsanstalt zu Berlin, und jetzt hier / zu
Besuch wegen Militärdienst Untersuchung / vom
Dienst aber befreit worden ist, sein
Bestimmungsort von der Mission ist nach China.
|As Your Highness may be aware, the third son of the Schuermann family at Ellerbeck — John Adam, currently studying at the Mission Institute in Berlin — is visiting home for medical checks regarding his military service, from which he is exempted, as his mission destination will be China.|
|Der jüngste Schürmanns Sohn mit Namen / |
Clamor 17 Jahre alt, ist Erbe der Stätte, hat /
schon seit längerer Zeit den Wunsch gehegt /
sich zu keinem Oeconomen sondern der Lehr- /
sache zu widmen, jetzt da der Bruder hier, ist
kein Aufhalten sondern will mit nach Berlin zur
Missionsgesellschaft. Der jetzt hier anwe- /
sende Bruder hat nach Berlin geschrieben und
nun vorgestern Nachricht erhalten, daß der
jüngere / in die Missionsanstalt aufgenommen /
|The youngest son of the Schuermann family, Clamor, aged 17 and inheritor of their farmstead has been harbouring the plan for quite some time, not to become a farm worker but dedicate his life to teaching [?]. Since his brother currently is staying with him, there is no restriction anymore for Clamor but to join his brother at the Mission Institute in Berlin. Subsequently, his visiting brother had written to Berlin, and yesterday he received news that his younger brother would be admitted at the Mission Institute.|
|Der älteste Bruder hat sich bereits verheirathet / |
mit [Siemanns] Tochter zu [Wulthen] und erhält
/ von Siemanns Stätte 800 rt Aussteuer. //
|The oldest brother is already married to the daughter [of Sieman in Wulthen], and he will receive a dowry of 800 rt [Reichstaler] from the Siemann farm.|
|Da nun der jüngere Bruder unter benann- / |
ten Umständen etwa 3 bis 400 rt brauchen / würde, dafür derselbe bei der Mission /
gelernt würde, so ist der ältere Bruder /
erbötig wenn es sich machen ließe, daß der /
vorläufige Abstand der Stätte von dem jüngeren /
mit Zustimmung Euer Hochwohlgebren festge- /
stellt werden könnte; so wolle er die Gelder /
auf seine Rechnung ausleihen und nachher /
in den jüngeren seine Stelle nach Ablauf /
der bestimmten [Mahl]jahre des Stiefvaters /
welche noch 9 sein werden, die Stätte beziehen. /
Der Bruder vor dem jüngeren welcher 19 Jahr /
will auch die Stätte nach Verlauf der [Mahl]jahre /
voll übernehmen da aber die Anschaffung /
der jetzt nöthigen Gelder schwer fällt, weil /
dieselben auf der Stätte, jetzt wol nicht aus- /
geliehen werden können; noch viel weniger der /
Stiefvater dieselbe verzinsen wird; auch wenn /
alle der vorhandenen Kinder welche 9 betragen /
die jetzigen Schulden und den nöthigwerdenden /
Anleihe Capital, dem Colon und der Stätte zu /
schwer erscheinen dürften, auch keine Scherheit //
|According to these circumstances, the younger brother [Clamor] would be in need of some 300 to 400 Reichsthaler for his education at the Mission [Institute]. For this reason, the older brother offered to provide [Clamor with] a loan [out of his dowry], if a preliminary renouncement [of Clamor inheriting the farmstead] could be signed with the agreement of Your Highness. After the passing of the at present nine years of interim administration of the [Ellerbeck] farm, the older [oldest ?] brother |
will take the place of the youngest und settle on the farmstead. The second youngest son […], aged 19, would like to take the farm as well. However, this does not seem to be feasible as he finds it hard to gather the required funds. No loan will be given to this farm, because the stepfather will [can] not bear the interest. Even if all nine living children would shoulder the required capital for the current debts plus the necessary loan, being to much to be covered by the farmer or the farmstead, this would still prove to be an insufficient security.
|Die Gelder jetzt zu erhalten, und die fernere / |
Verzinsung vorhanden, derselbe … darum /
abstrahiren muß. /
|To receive these funds and to secure future payment of interest […] has to be subtracted from …|
|Wir bitten Euer Hochwohlgeboren als Gutsherrn / |
und Obervormund der Stätte, Ihre ver…mirenden /
Rath und Unterstützung zu geben, von vorstehenden /
Verhältnissen und möglichst den Wunsch, des /
jüngeren Schürmann zu Hülfe zu kommen, /
[jedem] derselbe von seinem Grundsatz /
nicht zurück /
zubringen scheint. /
|Therefore, we plead to Your Highness, to extend your counsel as Lord of the Manor and the legal guardian of the Ellerbeck farm, and for your support to assist the youngest Schuermann [son] under these circumstances, as he can not be deterred from his decision.|
|Euer Hochwohlgeboren / |
unterthänigster Diener /
Die Vormünder [Unterschriften] /
d. 11. July 1832 //
|Your Highness’ most humble servant, |
The guardians [signatures]
Schledehausen, July 11, 1832
May 2012; translation: Gerhard Rüdiger, June 2012. The original German version of the first part of this paper was first published on the Schürmann website <www.schuermann-worldwide.com> (currently defunct).
- Lower Saxony State Archives Osnabruck, NsStaOs Rep 100/89/1 a (fol. 30 – to finish). [ ▲ ]
- Hirschfelder, Heinrich: Herrschaftsordnung und Bauerntum im Hochstift Osnabrück im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert, Osnabrück 1971, S. 29 and 159. [ ▲ ]
- Stüve, Johann Karl Bertram: Geschichte der Stadt Osnabrück: aus Urkunden und Akten, part 3, Osnabrück 1826, S. 13. — After reconciling himself with the Emperor, the Pope advocated for the Bishop of Osnabrück. [ ▲ ]
- Most likely, “Jo” is an abbreviation for the name “Johann” [ ▲ ]
- Hirschfelder: Herrschaftsordnung, S. 158. [ ▲ ]
- Reprinted in Möser, Justus: Osnabrückische Geschichte, Theil 4 (Urkunden), in: Abeken, B.R. (Ed.): Justus Möser’s sämmtliche Werke : neu geordnet und aus dem Nachlasse desselben gemehrt, Theil 8, Berlin 1858, S. 399. [ ▲ ]
- network of farming properties in medieval times, differentiating between the main farm (curtis) and smaller farming settlements (mansi), see Wikipedia. [ ▲ ]
- Westerfeld, Heinrich: Beiträge zur Geschichte und Volkskunde des Osnabrücker Landes, Haltern 1934.S. 12 [ ▲ ]
- 31 denarios; in mediaeval times, the Denar was synonymous with the „Pfennig”. [ ▲ ]
- 6 moltium („Malter“, corn measure) avenae (oat). [ ▲ ]
- 4 modios (Roman measure of 8,74 l) siliginis (wheat). [ ▲ ]
- The mentioning of the settlement name Hemmingchuse is rather unusual and may be owed to its isolated location, outside of the actual township of Ellerbeck. Unlike the sole heir farms in Ellerbeck proper, the Hemmingchuse farm owned no farmland near the Ash Tree Creek, but rather near its own farmstead. For this reason it may have been listed as a settlement independent of Ellerbeck, which may also explain the name suffix “-hausen”. [ ▲ ]
- <http://www.os-hho.de/wohnen/stationaere-angebote/wohnheime/ellernhof-bissendorf.html> [ ▲ ]
- Quoted in Schurmann, Ted, and C. W Schürmann. I’d rather dig potatoes : Clamor Schurmann and the aborigines of South Australia 1838-1853. Adelaide: Lutheran Pub. House, 1987. Page 15 [ ▲ ]
- Letter by the guardians of the Schürmann children to local Bailiff, 11 July 1832. MS held by the Osnabrück State Archive (?), transcript by Antje Fasshauer, translation GR [ ▲ ]
(Created: 12.11.2014. Last updated: 11.02.2016.)
Direct URL: <www.grweb.org/cpo-pirltawardli/en/detail.php?rubric=places_de_ellerbeck&nr=308>. Viewed 04.07.2020.