The Holy Roman Empire of pre-modern age had two institutions which may be justified as ‘central bank’. These were the Bank of Hamburg and Nuremberg Banco Publico. They were both founded in the aftermath of the Kipper-and-Wipper crisis of the 1610s, following the example of the public banks of Amsterdam and Venice. Their function was to stabilize the cashless payment systems as well as the cities\u27 local currencies. After their highly successful initial phase, the development of both public banks with the long history ran in opposite directions. In Hamburg, this institution contributed to the commercial success of Hamburg as Germany’s most important port, moreover it was held internationally in high esteem. In Nuremberg, it no longer could provide positive impulses for the development of urban economy although Banco Publico and its responsible parties usually guaranteed the stability of currency and an ‘organized’ cashless payment system. Nuremberg clearly suffered from the prerequisite and external conditions worse than in Hamburg. This paper analyzes, by means of a direct comparative analysis of both ‘central banks’ and the economic development of both cities, how such institutions could exert a positive or negative impact during financial or economic crises
