Julia Richter
DAStU, Politecnico di Milano, Mantova, Italy
Introduction
Has Hanseatic identity been lost? This question was the starting point of my master’s thesis research in history and urban planning, for which I analyzed 42 medieval port cities in the Baltic and North Sea regions. The term Hanseatic refers to the medieval Hanseatic League, a network of northern European cities connected through trade that dominated maritime commerce in the region from the 13th to the 17th century. Through their interactions within this network, member cities shaped each other's cultural, architectural, and economic traditions (Marczinek et al., 2022). Do the former members still continue to influence one another today — despite the discontinuation of the league at the last Hanseatic Day in Lübeck in 1669? Problems such as over-tourism, seasonality, and shrinking maritime industries — which cause gentrification and empty waterfronts — suggest a potential loss of these cities’ distinct identities. This raises questions about how Hanseatic identity has evolved, to what extent it retains meaning in contemporary urban contexts and inter-city networks today, and what potential it holds for future developments of these cities?
Identity as a Memory, Feeling, Landscape, and Lifestyle
Hanseatic identity does not manifest itself in the same way across all former member cities of the League. In some cities, like Lübeck (DE) or Visby (SE), it is remembered publicly — an officially narrated story of trade, exchange, and life shaped by the sea. Citizens speak about it, celebrate it, and teach it to visitors and children (Berger et al., 2023). In these places the past feels close.
In other cities, such as London (GB), and Cologne (DE), the Hanseatic legacy is pushed to the background. Here, identity is shaped less by a memory of history and more by daily experiences and local atmosphere. Rather than something explicitly named, the identity is lived, inhabited, and adapted to — often unconsciously (Pikner et al., 2022).
In Bergen (NO), for example, most residents do not consider themselves Hanseatic, yet a “maritime mood” persists through the built environment and daily rhythms, as explained in Museum Vest E. Aae. In the majority of former Hanse cities, identity is etched into the landscape — in warehouses, quays, and cranes — and expressed as a lifestyle, maintained through knowledge of fishing, craftsmanship, seasonal work, and other everyday practices. It is not static but adaptive, sustained by local communities and influenced by the character of the place. What identity are people connecting to today — specifically Hanseatic, or simply maritime?
Three Phases of Historical Transformation
To understand how this layered identity emerged and why it varies between cities, it is necessary to examine the historical transformations they underwent. While each city developed at its own pace and under unique local circumstances, most Hanseatic cities went through three similar phases of development:
- Trade (12th – early 17th century): Early growth was initially driven by basic needs and the search for goods, transforming minor settlements into thriving centers of exchange, with new established connections to the larger regional network (Jahnke, 2013; Kouzelis, 2021).
- Industrialization (mid 17th – early 20th century): This period brought dramatic change to the urban landscape of the cities, especially along the waterfronts, where docks, warehouses, and factories replaced medieval structures such as merchant houses and defense structures. Stakeholders who had once acted collectively now turned their attention to new technologies and market competition (Notteboom & Winkelmans, 2003; Hein et al., 2021).
- Globalization (20th century – today): Containerization concentrated trade in major hubs, marginalizing smaller Hanseatic ports. Numerous customary port operations diminished or relocated further away from city centers, often leaving buffer zones between the city and the new port. These are spaces that today are often underutilized, abandoned, or in need of reactivation.
Together, these phases explain how economic change gradually altered the spatial organization and everyday use of Hanseatic waterfronts. As a result, many cities, such as Bruges (BE) and Stockholm (SE), and particularly smaller and medium-sized cities, are now entering a new phase focused on post-industrial tourism and heritage branding (Hein, van Mil, & Ažman-Momirski, 2021).
Pressures and Opportunities: Insights from the Analysis
In my thesis, I identified two interconnected primary challenges: over-tourism and a transformation of maritime functions that reshape urban space. These new dynamics affect how maritime identity is perceived and how people feel about the waterfront areas. They are most pronounced in smaller cities such as Stralsund (DE), where tourism dominates or ports have lost regional significance. In smaller cities, planning practices and studies frequently overlook local challenges, as governments, planners, and other stakeholders often focus their interventions on larger urban areas, which naturally attract more attention and funding due to the size and scale of their projects.
Issue 1: Over-tourism and its Consequences
Tourism brings economic benefits, visibility, and it also transforms the social and spatial fabric of port cities. While this may sound positive, mass tourism and seasonal overcrowding in combination with unbalanced economic dependence on visitors produce negative effects. In Figure 3, I illustrate how tourism influences the “Maritime Cultural Landscape” in both positive and negative ways; from this, two main concerns can be deduced:
Loss of sense of community: In cities like Tallinn (EE) and Lübeck (DE), gentrification, short-term rentals, tourism, and the commercialization of housing displace long-term residents from historic areas. This weakens the social networks that once supported maritime jobs and civic participation. Furthermore, daily life becomes pricier and increasingly oriented around visitor services, leaving residents feeling excluded from their own communities.
Loss of everyday identity: Even where local residents remain, waterfronts increasingly cater to tourists rather than to local daily routines. Everyday maritime activities — fishing, boat maintenance, and informal gatherings — are displaced to make way for curated experiences, reducing the cultural and functional character of the waterfront. Over time, infrastructure is reconfigured around the needs of tourists, rather than local residents (Berger et al., 2023).
Together, these processes reshape both the social fabric and cultural character of Hanseatic waterfronts. Cities that prioritized visitors as their primary source of income risk becoming mono-functional and less resilient, particularly to seasonal, economic, and social pressures, while also becoming less resident-friendly.
Issue 2: Globalization and the Decline of Maritime Activity
The growing importance of container shipping and the shift towards large ports in the periphery since the 1970s have reduced the role of smaller ports in global trade. In cities like Stralsund and Wismar (DE), major port functions have moved to the urban periphery, leaving historic Hanseatic and industrial waterfronts only partially used — or entirely vacant. These areas, once central to urban life, now often act as quiet zones between the modern port and the city itself. As logistics move to the outskirts, old docks and warehouses lose their former purpose. Safety measures, such as fences, increase this separation, making waterfronts feel closed off instead of publicly accessible. Coupled with the pressures of over-tourism, this harms community spaces and daily life, putting further strain on maritime identity. These changes are reshaping how we experience maritime heritage today and endanger the social and cultural fabric of smaller Hanseatic port cities even more (Couling & Hein, 2020; Deppisch, 2023) .
Potential of Collaboration: Then and Now
The Hanseatic League’s strength did not just stem from its geographical position (Kouzelis et al., 2022). Cities around the Baltic and the North Sea prospered because they worked together. They coordinated trade, made routes safe, and supported each other despite political and economic differences. Even though the League's economic systems are no longer actively upheld today, its collaborative spirit offers a helpful way to deal with contemporary challenges.
As shown in Figure 5, many of the challenges faced by Hanseatic cities today, including environmental change and spatial transformation of port areas, extend beyond city limits. These issues put pressure on the “Maritime Cultural Landscape”, but they also create common ground for cooperation. Here, collaboration among key stakeholders — including municipal authorities, business owners, port organizations, tourism agencies, heritage institutions, and local residents — can serve as a tool for building awareness for the cultural and historical significance of the Hanseatic heritage. This awareness can foster appreciation and ultimately inspire action toward the preservation and reactivation of waterfront areas, and thus lay the foundation for a more coordinated approach for future development.
A Collaborative Framework for Resilience
To implement a cooperation strategy, I developed a plan to connect tourism management, maritime history, and local teamwork. Rather than allowing tourism to dominate waterfronts, my six-step framework (Figure 6) aims to support maritime renewal through urban planning, event organization, information centers and policies. Other steps involve municipal assistance for small maritime businesses to encourage the adaptive reuse of former port buildings and to involve a diverse group of users. My proposed plan also promotes collaboration between cities and regions to reawaken the Hanseatic network.
Hanseatic identity plays a strategic role in this approach. Used as a shared label or brand, it offers cities a point of connection. Regional initiatives built around this shared identity can distribute tourism more evenly and promote appreciation for natural and cultural heritage — through coordinated harbour festivals, shared maritime apprenticeship programs, or joint cruise tourism scheduling. The aim is to increase long-term awareness instead of intensifying seasonal pressure on historic centres.
Figure 6 visualizes this framework as an adaptable “toolbox” for policy makers and various stakeholders: cities can apply it according to their local needs while coordinating at the regional level. It is not a rigid model but a shared base for decision-making, including governance structures and legal frameworks to make coordinated action easier and more feasible.
Conclusion
Returning to the starting question: Has Hanseatic identity been lost? My research suggests a nuanced answer: it has not disappeared — it simply exists in different forms depending on the city. Hanseatic identity is dynamic, one that has adapted over time and space. At its core, Hanseatic identity features a tradition of commerce, exchange, and teamwork, which remain relevant today. This tradition enables cities to learn from one another, participate in joint planning, and foster resilience when faced with difficulties. The current challenge, therefore, is not to preserve identity as a fixed condition, but to consciously guide its ongoing transformation.
A reframed question may help guide future development: How can Hanseatic identity be activated? If cities choose to engage with it not as nostalgia, but as a shared resource, Hanseatic identity can evolve with the present and help shape the future in a flexible, connected, and community-driven manner.
Acknowledgments
This blog post is based on my master’s thesis, Anchoring Harmony – Revitalizing Hanseatic Cities’ Maritime Cultural Landscape for a Resilient Future. I would also like to acknowledge the professional certificate program Water and Ports, Historic Cities and Landscapes at TU Delft, which inspired my interest in port city transitions and resilience. I would like to thank the PortCityFutures editorial team, Eliane Schmid, Floris Catijn, Koen Feenstra, and Yi Kwan Chan, for their support, as well as Professor Carlo Peraboni and Professor Nora Lombardini at Politecnico di Milano for their guidance throughout the research.
References
Berger, H. M., Erbach, T., Kuehn, A., Possmann, J.-P., & Langendijk, G. S. (2023). Rising waters, rooted memories: Cultural heritage as a resource for climate adaptation in sinking cities. Journal of Delta Urbanism, 4, 88–101. https://doi.org/10.59490/jdu.4.2023.7334
Couling, N. R., & Hein, C. M. (2020). The North Sea: New perspectives on the sea‑land continuum. In N. Couling & C. Hein (Eds.), The urbanisation of the sea: From concepts and analysis to design (pp. 6–15). NAi Publishers. https://doi.org/10.7480/isbn.9789462085930
Deppisch, S. (2023). Climate change impacts on cities in the Baltic Sea Region. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.922
Dollinger, P. (1970). The German Hansa. Stanford: Stanford University Press. First published 1964. https://prussia.online/Data/Book/th/the-german-hansa/Dollinger%20P.%20The%20German%20Hansa%20(1970).pdf
Hein, C., Daamen, T., & Luning, R. (2021). Value literacy and port‑city regions. Port City Futures Working Paper Series, No. 1. https://pure.tudelft.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/103679345/1032_261_PB.pdf
Hein, C., van Mil, Y., & Ažman-Momirski, L. (2021). Straddling the fence: Land‑use patterns in and around ports as hidden designers. Urban Planning, 6(3), 136–151. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v6i3.4101
Jahnke, C. (2013). The city of Lübeck and the internationality of early Hanseatic trade. In The Hanse in Medieval and Early Modern Europe (pp. 37–58). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004241930_003
Jahnke, C. (2024). The Hanseatic League (H. Klemettilä & V. McAlister, Eds.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780415791182-RMEO449-1
Kouzelis, A. (2021). Hanseatic League – History & Civilisation. Kulturlandskapet. https://research.chalmers.se/publication/528778/file/528778_Fulltext.pdf
Marczinek, M., Maurer, S., & Rauch, F. (2022). Trade persistence and trader identity: Evidence from the demise of the Hanseatic League (Working Paper Series No. 2022‑01). University of Konstanz. https://ideas.repec.org/s/knz/dpteco/2201.html
Netchev, S. (2022). Map of the Hanseatic League Trade Network, c. 1400. World History Encyclopedia. https://www.worldhistory.org/image/16368/map-of-the-hanseatic-league-trade-network-c-1400/
Notteboom, T., & Winkelmans, W. (2003). Dealing with stakeholders in the port planning process. Maritime Policy & Management, 30(3), 245–261.
Pikner, T., et al. (2022). Sociocultural dimension of land–sea interactions in maritime spatial planning: Three case studies in the Baltic Sea Region. Sustainability, 14, 2194. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042194
Marczinek, M., Maurer, S., & Rauch, F. (2022). Identity in trade: Evidence from the legacy of the Hanseatic League [Working paper]. University of Oxford; University of Konstanz; University of Heidelberg
Richter, J. (2025). Anchoring Harmony - Revitalizing Hanseatic Cities' Maritime Cultural Landscape for a Resilient Future [Master’s thesis, Politecnico di Milano]. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/386144439_Anchoring_Harmony_-_Revitalizing_Hanseatic_Cities'_Maritime_Cultural_Landscape_for_a_Resilient_Future
Serry, A. (2025). From crisis to resilience: The port of Klaipeda and the reshaping of Baltic trade flows (2014–2023). TransNav, 19(1), 135–142. https://doi.org/10.12716/1001.19.01.16