On the way into the Malbork Castle

Malbork Castle, also known as Marienburg Castle, is a historic fortress located in Malbork in northern Poland. It is one of the most impressive and well-preserved medieval castles in Europe and is renowned for its stunning architecture and historical significance.

Malbork Castle was built by the Teutonic Knights, a medieval Christian military order in the 13th century. Initially, it was a conventual seat of the commander. From 1309 after the capital of the order was moved to Malbork, it was the seat of the Grand Masters of the Teutonic Order and the authorities of Teutonic Prussia until 1457.

Similar to numerous buildings in regions that experienced various political conflicts and wars, it had its periods of prosperity and decline. It suffered significant damage during World War II as a result of artillery fire from the Soviet army. Today, it has been meticulously restored and is open for tourists.

To thoroughly explore the castle and its impressive collections, one would probably require several days. This time I had one afternoon on the way further north. It was Monday, a day when museums in Poland are closed. I could only wander through the exterior sections of the Castle and a limited number of interiors open to visitors. In this post, I will share just a selection of the photos I made on that day only while on approach to the Castle. The place is incredibly photogenic, so in later posts I will show more of the High Castle, the Middle Castle and some other spots within the castle boudaries.

The view onto the Malbork Castle from Google Maps. The orange spots and arrows show from where I made pictures

To reach the castle from the city side, you need to approach a courtyard. In front of you, you’ll see an entrance through the walls. If you look to the left, you will spot the Upper Castle with a large image of St. Mary. The Teutonic Knights are also known as the Order of Brothers of the German House of Saint Mary in Jerusalem. They have several patron saints, but the most prominent and significant one is St. Mary, the Blessed Virgin Mary.

The view onto the Upper Castle. In front you can see the Church of the Virgin Mary (with the picture of Virgin Mary on it).

The Church of the Blessed Virgin Mary at the Malbork Castle, along with its associated Chapel of St. Anne, is an integral part of the castle complex. They were built together with the Upper Castle. You cannot however reach the Chapel from the Church. The Chapel has two entrances, facing each other in the northern and southern walls. Beneath the chapel’s floor, there is a crypt that served as the final resting place for the highest-ranking members of the Teutonic Order, starting in 1341. The first to be interred here was the Grand Master Dietrich von Altenburg, and a total of eleven Grand Masters found their eternal repose in this crypt. Today, their legacy is commemorated by three original stone tomb slabs. A passageway through the chapel’s doors allows access to circumvent the High Castle. I will share this passage in another post along with the interior of the chapel.

To get to the Lower Castle, you’ll have to pass through two gates. The first is outer moat gate. The second one, reached by following the defensive walls and the moat, leads you to the Lower Castle.

Outer moat gateway

The moat was designed as a key component of the Castle’s defense. It surrounded the entire castle complex, creating a formidable barrier that impeded the advance of potential attackers. In the past the moat was filled with water. To access the castle, visitors and residents would cross the moat using a drawbridge, which could be raised or lowered as needed for defense. The gateways on the other side of the moat served as the primary entrances to the castle

The second gate to the Castle premises, seen from the outside

The gate seen from the Lower Castle premises

The Lower Castle, also known as the Lower Ward, is one of the three main sections of Malbork Castle. It was used for practical purposes, housing workshops, kitchens, storage areas, and other facilities necessary for the daily functioning of the castle. Here, the staff and servants of the Teutonic Knights performed tasks such as food preparation, maintenance, and storage. Within the Lower Castle, you can find St. Lawrence Church (Kościół św. Wawrzyńca), an integral part of the complex. This Gothic-style church was built during the castle’s construction and served as a place of worship for the knights and the castle’s inhabitants. It is named after St. Lawrence, the patron saint of cooks and the poor.

St. Lawrence Church as you approach it from the gate you see on the upper photo and from the back

I refrained from photographing the entrance to the Middle Castle to respect the privacy of people standing there. This entrance is situated behind a wooden building that spans across the moat, which you can see on the right side in the top and bottom pictures below showing the exterior of the Middle Castle seen from the Lower Castle. The entrance is a part of the Gate Tower.

The views onto the Castle from the Lower Castle. Making the photos I had St. Lawrence Church behind my back

On tle lower photo above you can see the West wing of the Middle Castle that accomodates the Great Refectory. It was a significant dining hall where the Teutonic Knights and residents of the castle gathered for communal meals and various gatherings. You cannot enter it on Monday. Still below it, in the underground you can see a small room that served a furnace that was used to heat the underfloor heating system. A furnace heated the air, which then circulated through channels beneath the floors, warming the rooms above, including the Great Refectary and the Grand Master’s Palace located behind it.

Here the view from Nugat river onto the Lower Castle premises. On the right you can see the St. Lawrence Church, the Castle is further to the right.

On the way into the Malbork Castle

The Hanseatic League

Visiting old port cities along the coasts of the Baltic Sea and the North Sea, and exploring their historical centres, one often realises that these were once highly prosperous cities. It is widely understood that trade brings prosperity. In medieval northern Europe, maritime trade was dominated by the Hanseatic League, commonly known as the Hansa, alongside various merchant guilds.

The Hanseatic League (Hansa) was a medieval confederation of merchant guilds and port cities which, from the late 12th century to the 17th century, played a dominant role in trade along the maritime routes of the North Sea and the Baltic. It originated as a loose association of merchants and gradually evolved into a network of over 200 cities, stretching from Estonia to the Low Countries.

The origins of the Hanseatic League date back to the 12th and 13th centuries, when merchants from German cities – most notably Lübeck (which quickly became the centre of the entire network), as well as Hamburg, Cologne, and several other hubs – began forming loose trade associations. These were aimed at protecting their interests during journeys, organising transport collectively, and defending against pirates and local threats. Their cooperation was based on mutual trust and the benefits of coordinated action – both in trade and legal matters.

As the League’s influence expanded, more cities across the Baltic and North Sea regions began to align themselves with the Hanseatic network. This process was often driven by mutual economic interests, political pragmatism, and the promise of protection and commercial privilege. Membership was not granted automatically; cities typically had to demonstrate a commitment to Hanseatic rules and practices, sometimes by negotiating terms or proving their strategic value.

The network consisted of member cities, known as Hanseatic cities. These were located along the Baltic and North Sea coasts (port cities), as well as inland (merchant cities). The Hansa also conducted trade beyond its immediate sphere of influence through so-called kontors – permanent trading posts established in cities that were not members of the League, but held significant strategic and economic importance.

The Hanseatic League did not possess a centralised structure of authority in the traditional sense – it had no permanent administrative apparatus, no common treasury, and no military force. Its functioning was based on the principle of a confederation of cities, cooperating voluntarily, guided by shared commercial interests and a commitment to consensus. The entire organisation operated as a network, within which individual centres retained autonomy, and decisions were made collectively, through agreement rather than coercion.

The main mechanism for decision-making was the so-called Hansetageassemblies of representatives from member cities, convened as needed, most often in Lübeck, regarded as the League’s central point. The Hansetage followed no fixed schedule and attendance was not mandatory; however, their resolutions – while not formally binding – were in practice observed by most members. Each city had the right to send its own delegation, but decisions were reached not by majority vote, but by unanimity or broad consensus.

At the local level, a key role was played by the merchant guilds, which operated in every Hanseatic city. These guilds formed the core organisational unit of economic life – they brought together merchants, regulated trade, represented the interests of their members, and ensured adherence to local customs and trade law. The guilds were also responsible for training apprentices (through the guild system), resolving disputes, and, in many cases, delegating representatives to the Hansetage. Although they did not formally constitute a governing body for the League as a whole, it was the network of connections between these guilds that provided the practical foundation for Hanseatic activity.

The Hanseatic League’s ports each developed distinct specialisations based on regional resources and strategic location. Lübeck was a major centre for the salt trade, essential for food preservation. Hamburg, on the Elbe River, was renowned for beer, grain, and cloth. Bremen, on the North Sea, focused on wine and wool, linking Flanders with northern Germany.

Gdańsk (Danzig) specialised in timber, grain, and amber, while nearby Elbląg (Elbing) also thrived on grain and timber exports. Königsberg, at the mouth of the Pregolya River, was well known for its amber trade.

Further east, Riga acted as a gateway for trade with Russia, handling timber, wax, and furs. Tallinn (Reval) played a key role in the trade of hemp and flax, materials vital for rope and linen production.

Inland, Cologne, on the Rhine, was a hub for wine and metal goods, linking northern and southern Europe. Novgorod in Russia, although not a League member, was a key trade partner, especially for furs and access to Eastern markets.

In the Low Countries, Bruges – though not a port in the strict sense – was a vital commercial hub for Flemish cloth, connected to the sea via the Zwin channel, and served as the League’s western outpost.

To the north, Stockholm played a key role in the trade of iron and copper, essential for tools and weaponry. Bergen, in Norway, though geographically distant, was a prominent Hanseatic outpost known for exporting dried fish, especially stockfish. Toruń (Thorn), inland on the Vistula River, was noted for honey, timber, and pottery, acting as a link between Prussian and Polish hinterlands.

Statues of Roland, a medieval symbol of civic liberty and market rights, were commonly erected in Hanseatic cities. These figures, usually depicted as knights with drawn swords, stood prominently in town squares as guardians of municipal law and independence. Riga’s Roland statue, placed in front of the Town Hall, is one of the best-known examples and remains a symbol of the city’s Hanseatic heritage.

The Hanseatic League lost its significance as nation-states began to emerge and consolidate power. European countries became more centralised, developing their own trade networks and overseas colonies. Growing competition and conflict between states undermined the cooperative relationships that had sustained the League. Internal divisions and rivalries among member cities also weakened it; as the organisation expanded, disputes over trade policy and other matters led to fragmentation. The formal dissolution of the Hanseatic League is generally dated to the mid-17th century, when its last trading post in England was closed.

One significant port that never joined the League was Antwerp. Located on the Scheldt River, Antwerp emerged as a major European trading centre in the 16th century, just as Hanseatic influence declined. It became renowned for its trade in textiles, spices, and diamonds. In many ways, Antwerp’s rise signalled the shift of economic power from the Hanseatic cities to new Western European centres.

Though the Hanseatic League no longer exists, its legacy remains visible in the architecture, urban layout, and cultural identity of many northern European cities. Traces of its influence can still be felt in market squares, merchant houses, and maritime traditions. Exploring these former Hanseatic cities offers not only a glimpse into a once-powerful trading network, but also a deeper understanding of how commerce shaped the development of the region for centuries.

The Hanseatic League

A Short Note on Slavery in Middle Age Europe

Yesterday, as I was driving home at a late evening hour, with the radio on for a moment, I was listening to the beautiful Gladiator theme by Hans Zimmer. Somehow, by association, my first thought was of the Don Quixote and Sancho Panza monument, or actually two twin monuments I photographed at Spain squares, one in Madrid and the other in Brussels. Yes, an association that seems to be a bit far-fetched at first sight. On second thought, however, the link between the two pictures is not that impossible at all. I will not cite Sigmund Freud here, but indeed these two have something very special in common.

The Gladiator in the film, a fictional figure, was a Roman general, a Spaniard who beaten by Roman soldiers and left to die somewhere in Spain fell into the hands of slave traders of North Africa. The attempts to free him even in Rome failed. The story was fictitious but the enslavement – not that impossible in the real world. 

Quite a similar fate was shared by Miguel de Cervantes, the Spanish writer, who invented Don Quixote. In his early years, Miguel de Cervantes served in the Spanish navy infantry, participating in several key military campaigns in the Mediterranean, including the famous Battle of Lepanto in 1571, where he was severely wounded, losing the use of his left hand. Despite his injury, Cervantes continued his service. When he embarked on a journey back to Spain, his vessel was attacked by Barbary pirates from Algiers. Cervantes, along with his brother Rodrigo and other passengers, was captured. He spent five long and arduous years in captivity, enduring the harsh conditions of slavery making at least four ultimately unsuccessful escape attempts. His family’s resources were limited, and the sum demanded by his captors for ransom was exorbitant. It took his family five years to scrap the ransom and free him out of the slaver’s fate. They were significantly aided by the Trinitarian friars, members of a Catholic religious order dedicated to the redemption of Christian captives. All of these happened in the XVI century Europe, almost fourteen hundred years after the plot of the Gladiator took place.

Slavery was common in ancient Greece and later in the Roman Empire. It was deeply embedded in the economic, social, and philosophical systems of that time. Both cultures viewed slavery as a natural and necessary institution, justified by the belief that certain people were inherently suited to servitude. Prominent philosophers like Aristotle argued that some individuals were natural slaves, destined by nature to be ruled and serve the needs of the free citizens. Stoic philosophers like Epictetus and Seneca, however, questioned the moral legitimacy of slavery, particularly emphasizing internal freedom.

Economically, slaves were crucial to the functioning of both Greek and Roman societies, providing essential labour in agriculture, domestic service, crafts, and large-scale construction projects. In large Roman cities like Rome or Carthage, slaves made up a substantial portion of the population – up to 30-40% in some estimates.

People became slaves in various ways. Many were prisoners of war, captured during military conflicts and sold into slavery. Others were born into slavery, the children of enslaved parents. Some were kidnapped by pirates or sold by their families during times of poverty or crisis. People could fall into slavery as a punishment for crimes or debt, unable to pay what they owed and thus forced into servitude. Roman law recognized multiple legal categories of slaves, including “servi poenae” (criminal slaves), “vernae” (house-born), and “captivi” (war captives). Slaves in Greece and Rome performed a wide range of tasks. In Greece, many slaves worked in households as servants, cooks, or tutors, while others toiled in mines or on large estates. In Rome, slaves filled similar roles but also had specialised jobs like gladiators, scribes, or skilled artisans. Some urban slaves, especially those in banking or administration, could accumulate wealth and influence despite their legal status. Some slaves in both societies even served in administrative positions, managing finances or estates for their masters. Despite this diversity, most slaves lived under harsh conditions, particularly those in mines or on farms. The worst conditions were reported in Roman silver mines (e.g., in Spain), where life expectancy was notoriously short.

Freedom from slavery was possible but relatively rare. Slaves could be freed by their masters as a reward for loyal service or through their master’s will upon death. Others could purchase their freedom if they were able to save enough money, often through tips or allowances. Freedmen (liberti) in Rome had legal obligations to their former masters, including continued service and political loyalty. Sometimes, slaves were freed by mass manumissions as a calculated response to maintain social stability or political support. During the transition from the Roman Republic to the Empire, Julius Caesar and his heir Octavian freed large numbers of slaves to gain popular support amidst civil war. Later, Nero also manumitted slaves during periods of unrest, aiming to reduce the risk of rebellion. Emperor Constantine freed slaves owned by the imperial household as part of reforms aligned with Christian values.

This gradual association of Christianity with moral opposition to slavery would intensify in the Late Empire, although slavery remained legally tolerated.

Slavery was also a significant institution among the tribes living in Central and Northern Europe, such as the Celts, Germanic tribes, and Slavs, long before and after Roman times. It often resulted from warfare, raids, punishment for crimes, or as payment for debts. Slavery, however, was a local issue. These early systems were usually decentralized, with slaves integrated into households or local economies rather than traded widely.

But in early mediaeval Europe it was the Vikings, who mastered and economised slavery on a larger scale. Vikings integrated slavery deeply into their economic and social systems, making it a central part of their way of life. Slaves, known as thralls, were a crucial source of labour. Others were a source of revenue. Vikings were exceptional seafarers and raiders. They targeted monasteries, coastal villages, and towns across Europe from the British Isles, Francia, Iberian Peninsula, the Slavic regions, and even beyond, creating a diverse pool of slaves who could be sold in different markets. Slavic captives were especially valued, and the very word “slave” in many European languages (e.g. English “slave”, French “esclave”, German “Sklave”) derives from “Slav”. This diversity increased the attractiveness of Viking slaves to buyers, who could find a variety of skills, appearances, and characteristics among those captured. Vikings established trade routes that connected Europe with the Byzantine Empire and the Islamic Caliphates, where there was a consistent demand for slaves. Particularly important was the eastern route along the rivers of Rus (e.g., Dnieper and Volga), connecting Scandinavia with Constantinople and Baghdad. This trading activity allowed them to build a lucrative and sustainable economic practice centred on the acquisition and sale of human beings. Vikings established important trade centres such as Hedeby, Dublin, York, Chester, Bristol, and Birka, which became hubs for the exchange of goods, including slaves. In Dublin, archaeological finds suggest that the slave trade was a cornerstone of the city’s early economy, with purpose-built enclosures possibly used for holding captives. They were not just places for selling slaves but also for redistributing them across Europe and beyond. 

As Scandinavian societies gradually converted to Christianity from the 10th to the 12th centuries, Christian teachings increasingly condemned the practice of enslaving fellow Christians, prompting a cultural shift away from slavery. Laws began to differentiate between Christian and non-Christian captives, often prohibiting the enslavement of co-religionists while permitting slavery of pagans or Muslims. At the same time, Viking society itself underwent significant changes; as raids subsided, the focus shifted from raiding and capturing slaves to more settled agricultural and trade-based economies, reducing the demand for slaves. Concurrently, the rise of strong centralized monarchies in Europe established new legal and political structures that curtailed slave trade practices. For example, the Norwegian Gulathing Law (11th century) imposed fines for enslaving Christians, reflecting changing legal attitudes. But it does not mean that slavery in Middle Age Europe was cut for good. While Viking-driven slavery declined, new forms of human exploitation – such as serfdom and long-distance slave trade via Mediterranean routes – took prominence in later centuries

Still, in another form, piracy and the slave trade remained widespread throughout the Mediterranean until the late 18th century. The very center of this Mediterranean slave trade was North Africa. North African pirates – later described as Barbary pirates or corsairs – operated out of Sale, Rabat, Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli. They traded in European slaves, mostly with the Ottoman Empire. The Barbary States were nominally under Ottoman rule but operated with significant autonomy, often under local dynasties such as the Deys of Algiers.

The slaves were not only soldiers like Miguel de Cervantes – who had been captured from a boarded ship and spent five years in captivity – but also ordinary civilians kidnapped from the coastal cities and villages of what are now Spain, France, and Italy. Some entire settlements, such as the Irish village of Baltimore in 1631, were raided and depopulated. Basically, anyone sailing through the Mediterranean or living near the shore was at risk of being enslaved, regardless of social status or origin. The wealthy could often count on being ransomed by their families or governments. The poor, however, frequently met a grimmer fate, with thousands condemned to galley slaverychained to a single bench for years, rowing under brutal conditions with little chance of survival.

The North African slave trade had its early roots on the Iberian Peninsula, dating back to the Muslim invasions of the 8th century, when both Muslim and Christian forces engaged in raiding and enslaving their enemies. With the rise of the Ottoman Empire, the trade expanded eastward, and North African corsair cities flourished as centers of both piracy and slavery.

During the 16th and 17th centuries, with the spread of the Protestant Reformation and the decline of English and Dutch privateering, many English and Dutch seamen joined the Barbary pirates. Some, like Jack Ward (Yusuf Reis) and Simon Danseker, converted to Islam and rose to prominence as corsair captains. Though officially their targets were Catholic vessels, in practice, profit was the overriding motive, and ships of all nations were attacked. To balance the story, it must be noted that the Catholic Church, while condemning the enslavement of Christians, explicitly permitted the enslavement of non-Christian prisoners of war. This mirrored Islamic legal traditions, which also allowed slavery under similar conditions. Both systems used religion as a boundary between lawful and unlawful enslavement.

Kidnappings and raids persisted well into the 18th century. The Catholic Trinitarian and Mercedarian Orders raised funds across Europe to ransom Christian captives, liberating thousands, though this represented only a small fraction of those taken. National governments occasionally launched military expeditions to suppress piracy and rescue captives. For many coastal communities in Southern Europe, frequent pirate raids were so devastating that entire populations relocated inland. In response, some regions fortified their coasts with watchtowers, garrisons, and early warning systems.

The decline of Barbary slavery came only with the rise of European naval power in the early 19th century. The 1816 bombardment of Algiers by British and Dutch fleets is often seen as a turning point, effectively signaling the beginning of the end of Barbary piracy and its associated slave trade.

For centuries after the fall of the Byzantine Empire in 1453, Tatars and Turks of the Ottoman Empire conducted numerous raids into Eastern Europe. These incursions were particularly concentrated on the territories of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which, from the fifteenth to the seventeenth century, stood as one of the largest and most influential political entities in Europe. The vast, sparsely populated borderlands of the Commonwealth – including areas of present-day Ukraine, Belarus, and parts of Poland and Lithuania – were prime targets for slave-hunting expeditions carried out by the Crimean Tatars, who functioned as vassals of the Ottoman Empire. Men, women, and children were captured during these raids, known in Polish sources as jasyr, and were either sold into slavery within Ottoman markets or transported farther into the Middle East. Captives were often subjected to grueling forced marches before reaching the bustling slave markets of Istanbul, Ankara, and Cairo. The fate of the enslaved varied by age, gender, and skill: men were typically sold as labourers, craftsmen, or galley slaves; women and girls were often sold as concubines or domestic servants; and children were sometimes retained as household slaves or raised within Ottoman families.

Among the most distinctive features of the Ottoman system was the institution of the Janissaries – elite infantry units composed primarily of Christian boys who had been either captured or taken from their families as a kind of blood tax, known as devşirme. These boys, officially owned by the Sultan, underwent extensive training in warfare, strategy, and administration, and were integrated into the state apparatus. They enjoyed a privileged legal and social status that set them apart from ordinary slaves or conscripts. The Janissaries were highly disciplined and well-compensated, and in many cases fiercely loyal to the Ottoman throne. Over time, they became not only a formidable military force, but also a bureaucratic elite, deeply embedded in the structures of imperial governance. Some rose to prominent positions as generals, provincial governors, or imperial advisors, wielding significant influence. In this way, the Ottoman state transformed a system of coercive integration into a mechanism of state-building, drawing on the diversity of its empire to create a loyal and effective ruling class directly tied to the interests of the central authority.

In the same time, outright slavery declined in most of Western, Central and Northern Europe, but still other forms of coerced labour persisted. People’s ownership was still spread through in the form of serfdom – a system where peasants were bound to the land and controlled by local nobles, the Church, or other authorities. The system emerged in Western Europe and then spread to Central and Eastern Europe. This gradual shift from slavery to serfdom reflected changes in the economic and political landscape. Serfdom was less about the ownership of individuals and more about controlling labor through legal and territorial obligations. Serfs could not be bought or sold like slaves, but they were not free to leave the land they worked on. In exchange for protection and the right to cultivate plots, they owed fixed services or rents to their lords, often in the form of agricultural labor or produce.

While in Western Europe serfdom weakened as cities grew, trade expanded, and labor became more mobile, in Eastern Europe – particularly in areas like Poland, Prussia, and Russia – it became more entrenched. There, the nobility secured stricter control over the peasantry to maintain large agricultural estates that supplied Western markets with grain and other goods. Serfdom slowly disappeared in the same order as it appeared, beginning from the West already in the Renaissance time, with Eastern Europe as the last. In the latter, the abolishment of serfdom began as the Napoleonic army marched in. It was the early 19th century. In some regions, like Russia, serfdom would survive even longer, persisting until the mid-1800s. The legacy of these regional differences left a lasting impact on social structures, economic development, and political change well into the modern era.

A Short Note on Slavery in Middle Age Europe