






































Microsoft Word - 06rohr.doc


 History of Meteorology 2 (2005) 71 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The Danube Floods and Their Human Response and Perception 

(14th to 17th C) 
 

Christian Rohr 
 

Department of History and Political Science, University of Salzburg, Austria 
e-mail: christian.rohr@sbg.ac.at 

 
 
Introduction 
 

There are hardly any studies on floods in Late Medieval, Early Modern and Modern 
Austria, except some case studies1 and concise surveys on natural disasters in general2. All 
studies on climate history only deal with the times from the beginning of systematic 
measurement of temperature and water level during the second half of the 18th century.3 
Therefore, contrary to some neighbour countries, such as Germany,4 Switzerland,5 and the Czech 
lands,6 any major and more general publication on the history of floods before the 18th century is 
still missing. This paper will, therefore, also show some major lacunae to be filled by future 
studies. My habilitation study People and Natural Disasters at the End of the Middle Ages and in 
Early Modern Times (13th to 16th c.), to be concluded in early 2006, will try to cover the history 
of the floods prior than 1600 from the perspective of cultural history. The analysis is based on a 
comparative study of different natural hazards: floods, earthquakes, other natural hazards and 
risks, including animal plagues, but excluding diseases and epidemics. In this way it may be 
carved out, which hazards had been experienced as disasters and which had not. 

In this paper, emphasis will be given to a “mentality bound approach”, which asks for the 
perception, interpretation, management and cultural responses to floods. It will be shown that 
these aspects are influenced rather more by the expectation of floods than by religious beliefs. 
Contrary to many other natural hazards, such as earthquakes, floods were almost common to 
people living near the riverside. Towns, located on the banks of a river, were confronted 
repeatedly with two different “faces” of the water way: the axis of trade and wealth could turn 
into a threatening enemy, causing enormous or, at least, some damage to their property and their 
lives. 

This study will examine in particular the reactions of the people living close to the 
Danube River and its catchment area in “Austria” between the 14th and 17th centuries. As climate 
and weather history of pre-modern times is based on non-objective measurement, it is not easy to 
get proxy data from records such as “This year happened an extraordinary flood”. So, the 
following questions have to be answered to contextualize non-objective records: 



 Danube Floods 72 
 

 
How did the people experience these floods? How did the specific interpretations of these 

days look like? Can they be called “irrational” or had the people built up a “culture of flood 
management”?7 How did they manage the floods with the available means? Did the strategies of 
perception, interpretation and management change within the period from the Late Middle Ages 
to the 17th century? Were “public reactions”, such as the legislations of city councils, the 
landlords and the modern state, always equivalent to “individual reactions”? Did people in the 
cities and in the countryside learn from experience and change their living and working attitudes 
in the course of consecutive flood events? 

Due to the lack of good sources for the 14th to 17th centuries it is necessary to use a 
combination of methods: I take over results from natural sciences, such as historical meteorology 
and hydrography, and results from archaeological and geological studies. Then I combine them 
with an historical analysis of written and pictorial sources, such as narrative sources, charters, 
economic records, early drawings, and flood marks. 

It is also important to define, what has been perceived as a disaster, a question to be 
solved in historical anthropology. Nature knows only natural events, only human perception 
makes them disasters. Important determinants for the perception as disaster are: 

• the helplessness of people trying to cope with the damage with the available means 
• people’s helplessness not only in coping with the events but also in explaining them 
• the direct or indirect affliction  
• the unexpectedness of the event 
 
One of the central aspects for interpretation is the “mentalities”of the people. I would like 

to define them as follows: “Mentalities are horizons of experience and the sum of all the factors 
determining the possibilities (and also the impossibilities) of thinking and acting in a given 
society or in parts of that society. In our case this mainly concerns the perception of natural 
disasters, the explanations and the strategies used to handle them, and any ideas about disasters 
more generally.”8 

Firstly I will examine the sources concerning the “millennium flood” of 1501. Secondly I 
try to show that, at least from the end of the Middle Ages, a “culture of flood management” 
already existed among the people living along the Danube River and its catchment area in 
Austria. Thirdly, I will focus on the daily life along the riverside by analysing the accounts of the 
bridge master of Wels (1441-1520). Finally, I try to answer the question, whether the perceptions 
and interpretations have changed during the Struggle of Confessions in the 16th and 17th 
centuries. 
 
The “millennium flood” of 1501 

 
In a first step of my examination I will try to find out how people perceived, interpreted 

and managed the extraordinary flood of 1501. It has been far the largest flood of the Danube 
River and its catchment area East of Regensburg (Bavaria) during the second millennium. It 
happened in the middle of August and lasted for about ten days; the flood was mainly caused by 
heavy rainfall in the whole catchment area of the Danube River. 

The sources I use reflect the perception of people who had really been eyewitnesses, for 
instance the monks in the monasteries of Melk, Göttweig and Klosterneuburg along the Danube 
River in Lower Austria, but also the municipal accounts from Wels. The sources mostly tell 
about the damage, but hardly anything about the reactions of the people. One of the few 



 History of Meteorology 2 (2005) 73 
 

 
exceptions is the report of the Annals of Melk on the devastating flood of 1501. The annalist, 
obviously an eyewitness, wrote:9 
 

Hoc anno maxima fuit aquarum 
inundacio, in vigilia assumptionis Marie 
inchoans, et durans fere per dies decem. 
Huiuscemodi gurgitis habundatia in 
centum annis vix visa fuit similis, quod 
testatur femina forensis centum et septem 
etatis habens annos. Frumentum ac fenum 
a quibusdam reconditum Hystro periit, in 
agris iam secatum pluvia computruit. Per 
cunctas urbium opidorumque iuxta 
Danubium sic largiter gurges aquarum 
transiit, ut navigabiles existerent. Domos 
funditus evertit, duas cum familia 
Mellicum pretereundo versus orientem 
asportavit. Prata atque pomeria vestivit 
arena, arboresque deiecit et vineas 
eradicavit, integra cum horreis stabula, 
omnisque generis supellectilis substancia 
defluxit noctuque dieque. Magna denique 
opida cum villis in tantum debachatus est 
Danubius, ut unam domum vix vidisses 
integram. Pars una populi ridebat, pars 
altera flebat. Hic et in partibus Bohemie 
innumeris ruptis lacunis, noctu magna 
pars periit hominum et facti sunt iuxta 
Abacuk vaticinium homines velud pisces 
maris. In ecclesiam quoque beate Virginis 
forensem gurges aquarum introiens, 
cubitum unum ultra altaria per idem 
tempus stabat, et sedes cum tumulis 
subvertendo. 

In this year, a very heavy flood happened, 
which started on the day before the 
Ascension of Mary and lasted for nearly 
ten days. Within 100 years, hardly anyone 
could remember such a high flood, as a 
107-year-old woman has testified. The 
grain and hay, which was just going to be 
harvested, was destroyed by the Danube, 
and the just cut grain mouldered after 
heavy rain. The water streamed through all 
parts of the cities and fortified places 
along the Danube River so copiously that 
they seemed to be navigable. The flood 
destroyed houses thoroughly, and when it 
passed at Melk, it carried away eastwards 
two houses together with their inhabitants. 
The flood covered the meadows and 
pastures with sand, threw down trees and 
uprooted the vines; strong farmsteads with 
their barns and all kinds of household 
effects were swept away during the nights 
and days. Finally the Danube River 
destroyed so much inside the major towns 
and villages that hardly any house 
remained undamaged. One part of the 
people laughed, one part cried. In Austria 
and also in some parts of Bohemia a large 
number of people died in the slough 
during the night, and they became fish 
according to the prophecy of Habakkuk. 
The flood also entered the parish church of 
the Virgin Mary at Melk and rose to a 
level one inch higher than the altar; it also 
destroyed the banks inside and the 
graveyard. 

 
Besides the reports on the damage of buildings and fields, and besides the reports on 

people who were killed, two remarks seem particularly interesting: On the one hand, we 
frequently read that no one, even the oldest people, could remember a disaster like that. On the 
other hand, what does this unique remark “a part of the people laughed” mean? May we consider 
a conflict between landlords or a social conflict between peasants and landlords? Was it a kind of 
gloating? Was it gallows humour that people had to go to church by boat? In antique tragedy, for 



 Danube Floods 74 
 

 
instance, crying and laughing, ridiculous and tragic emotions, were sometimes close together. 
So, this may be an expression for extreme emotional reactions of the people. 

The sources do not contain any rational or irrational interpretations and explanations as to 
why the flood had happened. On the one hand, we have quite a lot of evidence that people knew 
well about the different ways a flood could grow. On the other hand, the flood of 1501 was 
definitely not set into connection with comets or other astronomic signs, such as eclipses. 

It is remarkable that these combinations were restricted to only few authors, mostly 
dating from the 14th century, such as the author of the Bohemian “Chronica Aulae Regiae”, who 
presumably had not been an eye-witness of the floods of the Danube River in the second decade 
of the 14th century.10 In the Continuation of the Annals of Zwettl, this explanation is emphasized 
with reference to Bede the Venerable and other medieval scholars: “The star called comet had 
been seen for 80 days without interruption. … It announces either famine or a big disease or high 
mortality or a change of reign or a corruption of the air or heavy storms”.11 In 1316 and 1317 a 
large flood, diseases and great famine followed. It is remarkable that in only some of these 
sources from the beginning of the 14th century floods were compared with the biblical deluge.12 
Reading the Book of Genesis and its report on the great deluge properly, it is remarkable that at 
the end God promises not to send such a deluge again. Maybe the people living in the 15th 
century remembered this promise well. Nevertheless, these connections between floods and 
astronomical signs were quite rare and did not occur frequently in the 15th century. Floods did 
not need a supernatural explanation, because they were obviously part of nature. 

Let me also turn to the management of the floods. We have to distinguish between the 
economic impact, the impact on settlement, and the mental impact. If we look at the example of 
Wels, situated along the Traun River in Upper Austria, the flood of 1501 was the only one which 
changed the economic and social life of the town. Numerous landowners and peasants left their 
meadows, woods and orchards located near the river after they had been totally destroyed. Some 
of them were given up, most of them were sold to other people, but the flood also built new 
islands in the river, which became cultivated quickly. Although the repairs must have been 
enormous – we have records about expenses for the craftsmen between August 1501 and March 
1502 – the reserve of timber must have been at least sufficient. Only after some consecutive 
disastrous floods in 1503 and 1508, did good timber become extremely rare and far more 
expensive.13 

During the devastating flood of 1501 the water level rose far higher than at any time in 
the second millennium, i.e. about 2 meters higher than in 1954 and in 2002. So, the authorities 
started to build their tax houses and other buildings for administration on higher ground. The first 
floor did not contain any windows, as the example of Engelhartszell in Upper Austria shows. 
The old toll house bears a historical flood mark from 1501 close under the roof. The new toll 
house, however, built in the 16th century, would have survived even the flood of 1501 without 
major problems. 
 



 History of Meteorology 2 (2005) 75 
 

 

 
 
Fig, 1. Engelhartszell, Upper Austria, photography, 1954 (taken from Siegfried Schwarzl, Die 

Hochwasserbedrohung Wiens. Elementarereignisse an der Donau im Rahmen der Klimaentwicklung 
(Wetter und Leben, Sonderheft 4), Österreichische Gesellschaft für Meteorologie, Vienna, 1956, 2). The 
red line shows the water level of 1501 according to the flood mark under the roof of the old toll house (in 
the middle). The new toll house, built after 1501, is on the right. 

 
Finally, is there any possibility to get a view of the mental management of the floods? It 

is remarkable that after the big flood of 1501 people started to mark the level of the water. These 
flood marks can be found mostly on toll houses and other buildings of public administration, on 
town gates near the riverside, and also on private houses. In some cases, such as in Passau and in 
Linz, these water level marks are quite elaborate. The still-existing marble slab of Linz tells in 
Early Modern German and in humanistic Latin about the flood. Only the birds have been 
eyewitnesses, sitting on top of the roofs.14 



 Danube Floods 76 
 

 
 

Hiermit disen stain beczaichene stat 
wie hach die Donaw geraichet hat 
Das ist beschiehen im Monet Augusti 
bey Regirung Römischen kunig Maximiliani 
Da von Cristi gepurde erganngen war 
Tawsennt funfhundert und ain Jar 

The place, which is marked with this 
stone, shows how high the level of the 
Danube River had been. This has 
happened in the month of August 
under the reign of the Holy Roman 
king Maximilian, in the year 1501 
after Jesus Christ was born. 
 

  
SVM NOTA QVANTA FVIT VNDARVM CONSPICE MOLES 

PALVSTRIS VATES CVIVS AVIS FVERAT 
QVE TANTO SEDIT MESTISSIMA TEMPORE TECTIS 

DILVIVM QVANTO TEMPORE TRISTE FVIT 
  

Look, I am the sign, how much the flood has been, 
whose witness has been a bird from the swamp, 

which sat just in this very sad time on the roofs, 
when the sorrowful flood happened. 

 
We have to consider that a kind of memory culture helped the people to cope with the 

disaster. On the one hand, any new flood mark lower than the maximum of 1501 could give the 
feeling that it had been even worse some time ago. On the other hand, the knowledge that 
nobody could remember a similar flood could serve as consolation. 

In addition to that, it is maybe no surprise that one of the oldest views of Linz, a pen-and-
ink-drawing (Figure 2), shows the city during a big flood. The drawing must have been made 
between 1497 (the privilege for a bridge) and 1509 (a great fire).15 So, it is very likely that it 
depicts one of the major floods around 1500, maybe the one from 1501, 1503 or 1508. 
 

 
 
Fig. 2. Linz, Upper Austria, during a flood of the Danube River, pen-and-ink-drawing by Wolf Huber (?), around 

1500/1510. Mayrhofer and Katzinger date the drawing to about 1550.16 
 



 History of Meteorology 2 (2005) 77 
 

 
At the End of the Middle Ages: a Culture of Flood Management 

 
The question still remains: is it possible to reconstruct and contextualize “natural 

disasters” without reconstructing the “normal”. Which natural hazards have been experienced as 
disasters, and which not? Has there been a “culture of flood management” or did people only 
experience a flood as a disaster if the warning and prevention system did not work? 

Nearly all floods happened either in February and March during the snow-melt or in 
summer between June and August after heavy or continuous rain. It was, therefore, worth 
reporting, if a flood hit the people unexpectedly. It seems to me that remarks like “inopinata 
inundatio” (an unexpected flood) meant that a doubtlessly existing system of warning and 
prevention did not work. I suppose that there had existed such a system especially among the 
monasteries along the Danube River, but also via merchants. People knew that a flood on the 
Danube in Lower Austria could also be caused by heavy rain in Tyrol or Salzburg. It is 
remarkable that records about men and animals killed mostly occur in connection with the 
remark that the flood came unexpectedly. We may presume that in case of a warning in time, 
only buildings and fields were destroyed, but not people. It also seems that a specific 
constellation of the stars had been rather felt as a disaster (= Greek: corruption of the stars) than a 
major flood. 

The city of Wels, a town with Roman origins, is situated on the Traun River, one of the 
major affluents of the Danube River in Austria. The river is widely branched out, an ideal place 
for a bridge, as the copperplate print by Matthäus Merian from 1649 shows. In the 5th century 
AD floods have been presumably jointly responsible for the decline of the town. A bridge across 
the Traun River had existed in Roman times, whereas the medieval bridge is testified from the 
12th century onwards. 
 



 Danube Floods 78 
 

 

 
 
Fig. 3. Wels, Upper Austria, copperplate print by Matthäus Merian (Topographia Austriae, Frankfurt 1649) 
 

Looking for a history of the floods of the Traun River, there is much evidence from the 
charters: Six charters dating from 1352 to 1469 are extant. They were granted by the 
Habsburgian dukes of Austria, who were also the sovereigns of the city of Wels. To prevent 
damage from floods and to accelerate the repairs, several privileges were given to the citizens of 
Wels:17 
• The taxes at the toll house in Wels on salt, wine and textiles were dedicated to the 

construction of water defenses. 
• The tax interests of the citizens of Wels were reduced by the Habsburgian dukes. More 

money should be spent for dikes and other water defenses. 
• The landowners had to admit the construction of water defenses on their properties. 
• The landowners, their bondsmen and two large monasteries in the neighbourhood had to 

assist if damage after a flood had to be removed. 
So, normative sources tell us quite a lot about the collective management of floods, but 

nothing about individual reactions or about the mentalities of the people. The charters can be 
seen as reactions to presumably disastrous floods, which could not be coped with by available 
means; regional solidarity was necessary. But one question still remains: is it possible to 
reconstruct all major floods of the Traun River by analysing the charters of the later Middle 
Ages? Let me, therefore, turn to another type of source. 

 



 History of Meteorology 2 (2005) 79 
 

 
The accounts of the bridge master of Wels

18 
 

From the 13th century onwards the office of a bridge master had been established, who 
was responsible for any repair. According to a series of charters, he received his annual budget 
from a nearby church. The oldest accounts of the bridge master date from 1350, but a close series 
of accounts has survived only from 1441 onwards. The accounts contain detailed information 
about the timber purchase for the bridge and about the expenses for craftsmen to repair the 
bridge after floods and other damage. 

In my recent study from 2004 my main purpose was to carve out the economic impact of 
the floods between 1441 and 1520 and to ask, how a “culture of flood management” could have 
worked. The results have been multifarious: Firstly, it shows that the consumption of timber and 
the expenses for the bridge was enormous. Secondly, I was able to reconstruct how often floods 
hit the bridge and the city of Wels. I could find records even on major floods, which have not yet 
been documented through annals, chronicles or other administrative sources. For these results it 
was rather more necessary to look at the expenses for craftsmen than on the ones for timber. 
 

 
Fig. 4. Expenses of the bridge master of Wels for timber (1471-1520), based on Rohr, 2004, op. cit. 
 

Thirdly, it came clear that the bridge master bought high amounts of timber every year. 
Due to the frequent repetition of the floods (at least two major ones within a decade), he must 
have had large dumps, because in the times of a major flood timber was hard to acquire. After a 
series of tremendous floods in 1501, 1503 and 1508, no oak stems for the piles were available 
any longer; therefore, larch stems were substituted. 

 



 Danube Floods 80 
 

 
Table 1. Floods of the Traun River, 1441-1520, according to the accounts of the bridge master 

(Bruckamtsrechnungen) of Wels. Source: Rohr, 2004, op. cit., 310-312. 
 

Year 

Month Floods Intensity 

1441  no flood  
1442 no accounts survived 
1443 June/July flood with ravages, hail? strong 
1444 June/July flood? little 
1445 April/May flood with ravages strong 
1446-1458 no accounts survived 
1459  no flood  
1460 April/May flood little 
1461 end of August flood with ravages moderate 
1462 August flood little 
1463 March / August ice blocks? flood? little 
1464-1470 no accounts survived 
146919 February, March flood with severe ravages strong 
1471 summer flood? little 
1472 summer flood? little 
1473 summer flood? little 
1474 June/July flood moderate 
1475  no flood  
1476-1477 no accounts survived 
1478 summer? flood with severe ravages very strong 
1479 April/May flood moderate 
1480 May/June flood little 
1481 February ice blocks? moderate 
1482 January ice blocks? moderate 
1483  no flood  
1484 June? August? flood little 
1485 June to September four floods with ravages strong 
1486 February, May two floods moderate 
1487 July flood? little 
1488  no flood  
1489 November flood with ravages strong 
1490 July flood moderate 
1491 May/June flood little 
1492 May flood with severe ravages very strong 
1493 July flood little 
1494 no accounts survived 
1495 March flood? little 
1496 August flood moderate 
1497 May, June two floods with ravages strong 
1498 March, August? flood moderate 
1499 June flood with severe ravages very strong 
1500 April, May two? flood with ravages moderate/strong 
1501 July?, August disastrous flood extremely strong 
1502  no flood  
1503 September flood with severe ravages very strong 
1504 May flood moderate 
1505 May/June, August two floods moderate 
1506 July flood? little 



 History of Meteorology 2 (2005) 81 
 

 
1507 August? flood? moderate 
1508 July, August two floods with ravages very strong 
1509 fall? flood? little 
1510 no accounts survived 
1511 July flood with ravages strong 
1512  no flood?  
1513  no flood  
1514 June, August zwei floods little/moderate 
1515 summer flood with ravages strong 
1516 June flood little/moderate 
1517 July flood little/moderate 
1518  no flood  
1519 April, June, September three floods with ravages strong 
1520 August flood with severe ravages very strong 

 
The economic impact of the “millennium flood” of 1501 can be reconstructed in great 

detail: Carpenters and other craftsmen worked from August to December 1501, and again several 
months in 1502 to repair the bridge. Numerous meadows and orchards along the riverside were 
distroyed and their owners changed. Perhaps the former owners were killed or moved away. 
From 1502 onwards, taxes for land on the new banks of the Traun River were paid. Timber, 
especially oak stems, became rare and expensive 

Besides some interesting information on daily life, such as on the butchers huts located 
on the bridge or on the expenses when the king entered the town, the accounts also provide an 
insight into a “culture of living with the flood”. When the flood arrived, everybody tried to 
participate in the restoration of the bridge. If the bridge was interrupted, several carpenters, 
dozens of servants, and numerous fishermen, who saved the driftwood, tried to construct a 
provisional bridge within only a few days. In many years, these repairs constituted about 10 to 20 
percent of the carpenters’ annual work. 

It is worth noting that there are absolutely no records about religious donations or the 
like, a remarkable detail, because the accounts also contain the income of the nearby church. I 
could also not find records showing desperation, anger, fear or similar emotions. 
 
A Change of Interpretations during the Struggle of Confessions? 

 
It is hard to get an homogenous idea of the perception, interpretation and management of 

floods in Early Modern times. On the one hand, numerous private or “official” chronicles and 
diaries have survived, containing partly detailed records about the weather and natural hazards. 
On the other hand, we know more about the impact of natural hazards on the religious behaviour 
of the people. Nevertheless, we have to be cautious to assume that people now perceived 
disasters more through a religious way than at the end of the Middle Ages. As I have shown 
before, the prejudice that people in the Middle Ages interpreted floods mostly as a divine 
punishment cannot be confirmed by most of the sources. We are still influenced too much by the 
perception of Black Death, which is documented best in the sources. In many cases, if people 
were living along the riverside, cosmic signs, such as comets, would frighten them, but not 
floods.20 So we have to look to see if this assumption can also be falsified for Early Modern 
Times. 

In addition to that, as I have pointed out in my introduction, there are hardly any 
satisfying studies on natural disasters in Early Modern Austria, even though among the authors 



 Danube Floods 82 
 

 
of sources with an interest in weather and climate there are also very prominent ones, such as 
Johannes Kepler, who had lived in Linz for many years at the begin of the 17th century. In his 
marginal notes he provides detailed comments on the weather in Linz between 1617 and 1626.21 
Besides Kepler, there are numerous other late Renaissance and Early Modern scientists from the 
16th and 17th centuries, who documented both the daily weather and the floods. They were mostly 
living in the major towns, such as Linz and Vienna, or in the big monasteries along the Danube 
River and its catchment area.22 

Let me therefore show two different examples for the perception, interpretation and 
management of floods in Early Modern Times. On the one hand, the case of the city of Laufen 
and its bridge across the Salzach River, may confirm that most of the structures of a “culture of 
flood management” did not change within the 16th century. 

The wooden bridge of Laufen existed since the 13th century and had been destroyed for 
many times since 1316; the disastrous floods of 1567, 1572 and 1598 are well documented in the 
municipal sources. Like in Wels, timber was extremely rare in the time of major floods. 
Therefore, the citizens of Laufen invested much money and effort to restore the piles and other 
timber after the bridge had been destroyed. In 1572 the peasants were severely forbidden to take 
the drifting timber for their own purposes. The city also received 2.500 guilders from the 
archbishop of Salzburg as an immediate support to rebuild the bridge. Nevertheless, even with 
this loan, it became extremely difficult to find specialized craftsmen for the reconstruction, 
because these master builders were needed in the neighbour towns also.23 

The consequences of major floods did not only concern the reconstruction of the bridge, 
but also the toll to be paid by the passing ships. In “normal” years, about 2500 to 3000 ships 
passed the dangerous loop near Laufen, mostly carrying salt from the mountains to the Danube 
area. In 1572, however, when one of the highest floods took place, only 1553 ships came along. 
28 ships sank at the local landing stage, whereas in quiet years an average of only two ships were 
lost.24 

The major floods also caused hygienic problems, not only because the streets and the 
lower floors of the houses were flooded, but also because the supply of drinking water had been 
interrupted. In 1540, the city authorities of Laufen had built a water-pipe from the village of 
Oberndorf at the opposite riverside, which led across the Salzach River along the bridge. For 
emergencies, they had also built up a storage dump for 150 water pipes made of pinewood; the 
flood of 1572, however, hit this location as well.25 So, we may define the flood of 1572 as a 
disaster, because all kinds of prevention did not work. 

On the other hand, the catholic Counter Reformation was responsible for a thoroughly 
religious interpretation and management of floods in Austria and Bavaria. The Bohemian saint 
John of Nepomuk (Jan Nepomucky), who died at the end of the 14th century, became more and 
more popular not only as the patron of the bridges, but also as a protector against floods. Statues 
of Saint John of Nepomuk were erected on nearly every bridge, along the riversides and even on 
rocks inside the river. The boatmen wore amulets of John of Nepomuk, which they bought in 
Bohemia. Although the statues had been frequently destroyed, they were erected again and again. 
Only after the disastrous flood of 1899, was the statue of the saint on the rock near the so-called 
“Vornbacher Innenge” not restored for a long time. In a time of lay culture and industrialisation, 
the protector against the flood was not popular enough any longer.26 Nevertheless, it is 
remarkable that the people of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries looked for the help of a saint against 
the flood rather than to explain the flood as a divine punishment or the like. Contrary to other 
natural hazards, the explanations for a flood were clear. 



 History of Meteorology 2 (2005) 83 
 

 
 
Conclusion 
 

The accounts of the bridge master of Wels give us a detailed insight into the history of 
floods and their management during the 15th and 16th centuries. Through the expenses for the 
craftsmen many more floods can be reconstructed than through annalistic or normative sources. 
Religious explanations and responses for floods are hardly documented. The “normality” of 
frequent floods is an important explanation, as to why there are hardly any religious 
interpretations necessary within a “culture of flood management” and why most of the floods are 
not documented in annalistic sources. 
 



 Danube Floods 84 
 

 
Endnotes 
 

1 Cf. for example Wacha, Georg, 1959, Zur Wetterchronik des Linzer Raumes, in 
Witterung und Klima von Linz, eds. Friedrich Lauscher, Georg Wacha (Wetter und Leben, 
Sonderheft 6), Österreichische Gesellschaft für Meteorologie, Vienna, 3-86; Friedrich Lauscher, 
1996, Unwetterchronik des Pinzgau, Land Salzburg, seit 1501, Wetter und Leben, Zeitschrift für 
angewandte Meteorologie, Österreichische Gesellschaft für Meteorologie, Vienna, 38, 26-36; 
Helmut Kretschmer, Herbert Tschulk, 1993, Brände und Naturkatastrophen in Wien (Wiener 
Geschichtsblätter, Beiheft 1), Verein für Geschichte der Stadt Wien, Vienna; Elisabeth 
Strömmer, 1993, Studien zur Klimageschichte Österreichs in der frühen Neuzei, Die Quellen des 
Stadtarchives Klosterneuburg (unprinted M.A. thesis), University of Vienna, Vienna; Hans Roth, 
1997, Die alte Laufener Salzachbrücke. Das Hochwasser als ständige Gefahr für Brücke und 
Stadt, Das Salzfas, Heimatkundliche Zeitschrift des Historischen Vereins Rupertiwinkel, 
Historischer Verein Rupertiwinkel e.V, Tittmoning, 31,1, 5-32; Anna Gugerbauer, Ernst Dürr, 
1999, Vom Zorn des Inn, Hochwasserkatastrophen in Schärding und den bayerischen 
Nachbargemeinden, Verlag Wiesner, Wernstein; Horst Hieble, Herbert Lämmermeyer, Heinz 
Schmidbauer, 2003, Die Salzachbrücke zwischen Laufen und Oberndorf, Von der ersten 
Erwähnung eines Salzachüberganges im Jahre 1278 bis zur Gegenwart, Zeitdokumente Horst 
Hieble, Laufen. 

2 Lehner, Martina, 1995, Und das Unglück ist von Gott gemacht ..., Geschichte der 
Naturkatastrophen in Österreich, Edition Präsens, Vienna. The chapter on floods between the 
High Middle Ages and the 20th century covers only 22 pages (57-78); similarly Josef 
Nussbaumer, 1996, Die Gewalt der Natur. Eine Chronik der Naturkatastrophen von 1500 bis 
heute, Edition Sandkorn, Grünbach; Franz Fliri, 1998, Naturchronik von Tirol. Tirol – 
Oberpinzgau – Vorarlberg – Trentino. Beiträge zur Klimatographie von Tirol, Verlag Wagner, 
Innsbruck; Frederick Watzik, 1994, Hochwasser, in Die Donau. Facetten eines europäischen 
Stromes, Katalog zur oberösterreichischen Landesausstellung 1994 in Engelhartszell, Amt der 
Oberösterreichischen Landesregierung, Linz, 63-68. 

3 Zisser, Helmut, 1989, Die Hochwässer der Donau (unprinted M.A. thesis Vienna), 
Technical University of Vienna, Vienna; Ingeborg Auer, 1993, Niederschlagsschwankungen in 
Österreich seit Beginn der instrumentellen Beobachtungen durch die Zentralanstalt für 
Meteorologie und Geodynamik (Österreichische Beiträge zu Meteorologie und Geophysik 7), 
Zentralanstalt für Meteorologie und Geodynamik, Vienna; Ingeborg Auer, 2001, Reinhard 
Böhm, Wolfgang Schöner, Austrian Long-Term Climate 1767-2000. Multiple Instrumental 
Climate Time Series from Central Europe, (Österreichische Beiträge zu Meteorologie und 
Geophysik 25), Zentralanstalt für Meteorologie und Geodynamik, Vienna; Elisabeth Strömmer, 
2003, Klima-Geschichte. Methoden der Rekonstruktion und historische Perspektive. 
Ostösterreich 1700 bis 1830 (Forschungen und Beiträge zur Wiener Stadtgeschichte 39), Verlag 
Deuticke, Vienna. 

4 Glaser, Rüdiger, 2001, Klimageschichte Mitteleuropas. 1000 Jahre Wetter, Klima, 
Katastrophen, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt; generally for central Europe cf. 
for example Christian Pfister, Rudolf Brázdil, Rüdiger Glaser (eds.), 1999, Climatic Variability 
in Sixteenth-Century Europe and its Social Dimension (Special Issue of Climatic Change 43,1), 
Kluver, Dordrecht, Boston, London. 
 



 History of Meteorology 2 (2005) 85 
 

 
 

5 Pfister, Christian, 2002, Wetternachhersage. 500 Jahre Klimavariationen und 
Naturkatastrophen (1496-1995), Verlag Paul Haupt, Berne, Stuttgart, Vienna, 1999; Christian 
Pfister (ed.), Am Tag danach. Zur Bewältigung von Naturkatastrophen in der Schweiz 1500-
2000, Verlag Paul Haupt, Berne, Stuttgart, Vienna, and many of his other studies. 

6 Brázdil, Rudolf, 1995, Old ich Kotyza, History of Weather and Climate in the Czech 
Lands, Vol. 1: Period 1000-1500 (Zürcher Geographische Schriften 62), Geographisches Institut 
ETH , Zurich; 1996, Vol. 2: The Earliest Daily Weather Records in the Czech Lands, Masaryk 
University, Brno; 1999, Vol. 3: Daily Weather Records in the Czech Lands in the Sixteenth 
Century II, Masaryk University, Brno; 2000, Vol. 4: Utilisation of Economic Sources for the 
Study of Climate Fluctuation in the Louny Region in the Fifteenth-Seventeenth Centuries, 
Masaryk University, Brno; 2004, Vol. 5: Instrumental Meteorological Measurement in Moravia 
up to the End of the Eighteenth Century, Masaryk University, Brno, 2002; Vol. 6: Strong Winds, 
Masaryk University, Brno, and many of their other studies. 

7 The term “culture of flood management” follows the term “cultures of disasters” 
introduced by Greg Bankoff, 2003, Cultures of Disaster. Society and Natural Hazard in the 
Philippines, Routledge Curzon, London, New York. 

8 Rohr, Christian, 2003, “Man and Natural Disaster in the Late Middle Ages. The 
Earthquake in Carinthia and Northern Italy on January 25th 1348 and its Perception, in Coping 
with the Unexpected. Natural Disasters and their Perception, Michael Kempe, Christian Rohr, 
eds.,  (Environment & History, Special Issue 9,2), The White Horse Press, Strond, Isle of Harris, 
127-149 [= Rohr, 2003a]. 

9 Annales Mellicenses, 1851, Continuatio Mellicensis ad a. 1501 (ed. Wilhelm 
Wattenbach, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores 9, Hanover, reprint Stuttgart 1983, 
501-535), 528. On this record see Rohr, Christian, 2004, Überschwemmungen an der Traun 
zwischen Alltag und Katastrophe. Die Welser Traunbrücke im Spiegel der 
Bruckamtsrechnungen des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts, Jahrbuch des Musealvereins Wels, 
Musealverein Wels, Wels, 33, 281-328. 

10 Chronica Aulae Regiae, Pars prima 128, 1875, ed. Johann Loserth, Fontes Rerum 
Austriacarum 1,8, Vienna, p. 379: Iste annus Domini 1316 tot in se pestilentias et miserias 
continet, quod eas audire auris refugit, mens stupescit; in hoc anno, ut supra diximus, cometa 
quaedam in parte aquiloni apparuit, quae disponente deo plurima pericula nuntiavit, aestatis 
facta est ex continuatis imbribus tam copiosa aquarum habundantia, quod more diluvii in locis 
pluribus subverteret aedificia, muros et castra. See also Pautsch, Eveline, 1953, 
Elementarereignisse in den erzählenden österreichischen Geschichtsquellen des 14. und 15. Jh. 
(unprinted phD thesis), University of Vienna, Vienna, 31. 

11 Annales Mellicenses, Continuatio Zwetlensis ad a. 1316, 1851, ed. Wilhelm 
Wattenbach, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores 9, Hanover reprint Stuttgart 1983, 
654-669), 659: Stella que cometa dicitur visa est per continuos LXXX dies; que secundum Bedam 
et alios doctores ostentat verl famem aut pestilenciam vel mortalitatem vel mutacionem regni vel 
aeris intemperiem aut ventorum immanitatem. See also Pautsch, 1953, op. cit., 31. 

12 Chronica Aulae Regiae (see note 10); Annales Sancti Rudberti Salisburgensis, 
Continuatio Canonicorum Sancti Rudberti Salisburgensis ad a. 1316, 1851, ed. Wilhelm 
Wattenbach, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores 9, Hanover reprint Stuttgart 1983, 
819-823, 822: Item eodem anno ante festum Iohannis baptiste [24th June] et in vigilia eiusdem et 
 



 Danube Floods 86 
 

 
 
in vigilia apostolorum Petri et Pauli [28th June] triplex inundatio tanta aquarum facta fuit, quod 
quasi particulare diluvium videretur. 

13 See in detail Rohr, 2004, op. cit., 308-310 and below., 
14 On this marble slab see also Werner Kresser, 1957, Die Hochwässer der Donau 

Schriftenreihe des österreichischen Wasserwirtschaftsverbandes 32-33, Springer-Verlag, Vienna, 
11. 

15 Pfeffer, Franz, 1954, Eine Linzer Stadtansicht aus dem Beginn des 16. Jahrhunderts, 
Historisches Jahrbuch der Stadt Linz, Magistrat der Stadt Linz, Linz, 1953, LXXIV-LXXXIX. 

16 Drawing taken from Fritz Mayrhofer/Willibald Katzinger, Geschichte der Stadt Linz, 
Volume 1: Von den Anfängen zum Barock, Verlag J. Wimmer, Linz, 1990, 110). Mayrhofer and 
Katzinger, however, presume that the drawing was made only around 1550. 

17 On these charters dating from 1352 to 1469 see in detail Rohr, 2004, op. cit., 287-293. 
18 See in detail Rohr, 2004, op. cit. 
19 Flood reconstructed through a charter by the emperor Frederic III (29th March 1469) to 

the community of citizens in Wels. The flood must be either caused by very much melting water 
or dates, in fact, from 1468. In September or October 1468 floods are documented for central 
Germany and the area of Lake Constance, in March 1469 floods also happened in Lorraine and 
Thuringia. See Curt Weikinn, 1958, Quellentexte zur Witterungsgeschichte Europas von der 
Zeitwende bis zum Jahre 1850, Vol. 1: Hydrographie, Part 1,1: Zeitwende-1500 
(Quellensammlung zur Hydrographie und Meteorologie 1), Akademie-Verlag, Berlin, 406-407. 

20 Rohr, Christian, 2001, Mensch und Naturkatastrophe im Mittelalter. Tendenzen und 
Probleme einer mentalitätsbezogenen Umweltgeschichte des Mittelalters, in Umweltgeschichte. 
Arbeitsfelder – Forschungsansätze – Perspektiven, eds. Sylvia Hahn, Reinhold Reith 
(Querschnitte. Einführungstexte zur Sozial-, Wirtschafts- und Kulturgeschichte 8), Verlag für 
Geschichte und Politik, Oldenbourg Verlag, Vienna, Munich, 13-31; Rohr, Christian, 2003, Der 
Fluss als Ernährer und Zerstörer. Zur Wahrnehmung, Deutung und Bewältigung von 
Überschwemmungen an den Flüssen Salzach und Inn (13.–16. Jahrhundert) in 
Naturkatastrophen / Catastrophes naturelles, eds. Monika Gisler, Katja Hürlimann, Agnes 
Nienhaus (Special Issue of Traverse. Zeitschrift für Geschichte / Revue d’Histoire 10, 3), 
Chronos Verlag, Zurich, 37-49 [= Rohr, 2003b], and Rohr, 2003a, op. cit., 128-129, (focussing 
on the perception of earthquakes and floods). 

21 See for example Wacha, 1959, op. cit., 47-62 (with an edition and translation for a part 
of Kepler’s marginal notes) and Strömmer, 2003, op. cit., 12-16, who pointed out, what should 
be done in research for the future. 

22 See Wacha 1959, op. cit., 12-27. 
23 See in detail Roth, 1997, op. cit.; Rohr, 2003b, op. cit., 43-44. 
24 Koller, Fritz, 1983, Die Salzachschiffahrt bis zum 16. Jahrhundert, Mitteilungen der 

Gesellschaft für Salzburger Landeskunde, Gesellschaft für Salzburger Landeskunde, Salzburg 
123, 1-126, in particular 21-23 with table 2. 

25 See in detail Roth, Hans, 1996, Die Anfänge der Laufener Wasserversorgung. Der Bau 
einer Wasserleitung von Oberndorf in die Stadt im Jahr 1540 und die Zeit bis 1600, Das Salzfass. 
Heimatkundliche Zeitschrift des Historischen Vereins Rupertiwinkel, Historischer Verein 
Rupertiwinkel e.V, Tittmoning, 30,2, 81-104, in particular 94-100. 

26 Dürr, Gugerbauer 1999, op. cit., 176-183. 


