the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 02 Apr 2025
Strong wind occurrence in Poland from the 13th to 16th centuries based on documentary evidence
Abstract. A comprehensive database of strong winds based on documentary evidence was created for Poland until AD 1600. Three types of documentary sources were used: handwritten and unpublished, published, and “secondary” literature. The database contains detailed information about the occurrence of strong winds (the location/region, time, duration and indexation for intensity, extent and character of damage), as well as the exact textual content of the original weather note, the name of the source, and an evaluation of the source’s quality. Five categories of strong winds were delimited: 1 − fresh and strong breeze (Beaufort scale 5–7), 2 − gale (8–9), 3 − storm (10–12), 4 − squall (i.e., gusty wind during a thunderstorm), and 5 – tornadoes. The intensity, extent, and character of damage were estimated based on the proposition given by Brázdil et al. (2004), which we slightly modified to include the Baltic Sea and its influence on coastal parts. In the database, 137 thus-defined strong winds were identified. A reliable estimate of some characteristics of the occurrence of strong winds in Poland seems possible from the mid-15th century onwards. The highest number of strong winds occurred in the second half of the 16th century, with a maximum in the 1570s. For each season, the greatest number of strong winds was found for the Baltic Coast and Pomerania region, and then for Silesia and Lesser Poland. Storms and gales were most common during the cold half-year (mainly in March, November, and December).
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(2104 KB)
-
Supplement
(872 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(2104 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(872 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-1042', Anonymous Referee #1, 30 Apr 2025
I think this paper is needed and it is very important and a useful starting point for the scientific community. Wind is still relatively under-researched, and every field has to start somewhere. I believe this was a strong beginning for the topic.
It's a good idea overall.
There's no need to include the word enlightenment (line 99).
I like the division into the three categories of wind and how they are described — I hope this classification can become generally accepted.
The database is very useful — great initiative!Table 1 is a good example.
Figure 2 could benefit from a clearer caption. This applies to several figures — more self-explanatory captions would improve them (e.g., Figures 3, 12, and 13).The comparison with the contemporary period is a bit poorly explained and could be clarified.
Figure 4 is very good.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1042-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Przemyslaw Wyszynski, 02 Jun 2025
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-1042/egusphere-2025-1042-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Przemyslaw Wyszynski, 02 Jun 2025
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-1042', Anonymous Referee #2, 26 May 2025
This is a strong paper that makes an important contribution through its presentation and analysis of new research into historical documentary evidence for the occurrence of strong winds in Poland between the 13th and 16th centuries. The paper first presents the knowledge gap related to this kind of evidence and discusses the various issues related to the collation of textual records for the period as well as the methodology adopted by the authors to create a database of documentary records relating to strong wind occurrence. Next the paper presents the results of this work, dividing the results in terms of the spatial occurrence of strong winds and the magnitude and impact as reported in the textual sources (where possible). Results of modern instrumental data recording strong wind occurrence are also presented and discussed for comparison. The discussion and conclusion usefully bring this data together and importantly highlight that the data gathered from historical sources both matches the general pattern seen in modern instrumental data as well as agreeing with data gathered from textual sources from neighbouring European countries which experience weather patterns driven by similar systems. The data reported in this paper, therefore, seems to reflect genuine patterns which can usefully be used to understand strong wind occurrence over the timeframe of the study. The methods and analysis are convincingly presented throughout and take into account past work on the topic in neighbouring countries while pointing to possible future avenues for research.
I do not have any significant suggestions in relation to the content, the paper is well structured and easy to follow.
A minor technical question I have relates to lines 73-75. Discussing the results of Outten and Sokolowski, the authors state that: "they found increases in the return period, i.e. more frequent extreme episodes projected for Northern, Central and Southern Europe throughout the 21st century." However, if the return period is increasing (the length of time between extreme episodes is getting longer?), does this not mean that extreme episodes would become less, not more, frequent?
The English is almost all completely understandable but there are several errors that should be corrected prior to publication. I list a few below but this is not an exhaustive list.
Line 38: 'second' is in the wrong position, better phrasing would be "they are the second most dangerous natural phenomenon after floods"
Line 84: insert a 'the' before 1950s e.g. "...they all cover some periods since the 1950s and are written mainly in Polish and therefore..."
Line 131-132: The 'and' between 'north and the Sudetes' should be replaced with a 'to' e.g. "Poland is a Central European country stretching from the Baltic Sea in the north to the Sudetes and Carpathian Mountains in the south (Fig. 1)"
Line 132-133: winds should be singular and the 'the' before analysis is unnecessary e.g. "To more precisely estimate the spatial changes in strong wind occurrence, analysis was also made for six historical-geographical regions: Baltic Coast and Pomerania, Masuria and Podlasie, Greater Poland, Masovia, Silesia, and Lesser Poland (Fig. 1)."
Line 135-136: A 'the' should be inserted before 'contemporary' e.g. "Data from the contemporary period representing all the mentioned regions were collected for 12 meteorological stations – two for each region."
Line 183-184: 'only one' not 'one only' e.g. "A similar situation is noted for both sub-periods with only one exception being the category E1 in the period 1281–1500 (Fig. S4)."
Line 200-202: damages is singular e.g. "About 60% of all damage mentioned in the weather notes were found for the cold half-year, but particularly for autumn (39.2%)."
Line 224-225: This sentence is difficult to follow and should be rephrased e.g. "Also, helpful knowledge can be observed about the values of the greatest speed of strong winds in Poland in modern times."
Overall, this is a useful paper which presents new data that is important for understanding the past occurrence of strong winds in Poland. It should be published once these very minor issues are addressed.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1042-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Przemyslaw Wyszynski, 02 Jun 2025
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-1042/egusphere-2025-1042-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Przemyslaw Wyszynski, 02 Jun 2025
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-1042', Anonymous Referee #1, 30 Apr 2025
I think this paper is needed and it is very important and a useful starting point for the scientific community. Wind is still relatively under-researched, and every field has to start somewhere. I believe this was a strong beginning for the topic.
It's a good idea overall.
There's no need to include the word enlightenment (line 99).
I like the division into the three categories of wind and how they are described — I hope this classification can become generally accepted.
The database is very useful — great initiative!Table 1 is a good example.
Figure 2 could benefit from a clearer caption. This applies to several figures — more self-explanatory captions would improve them (e.g., Figures 3, 12, and 13).The comparison with the contemporary period is a bit poorly explained and could be clarified.
Figure 4 is very good.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1042-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Przemyslaw Wyszynski, 02 Jun 2025
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-1042/egusphere-2025-1042-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Przemyslaw Wyszynski, 02 Jun 2025
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-1042', Anonymous Referee #2, 26 May 2025
This is a strong paper that makes an important contribution through its presentation and analysis of new research into historical documentary evidence for the occurrence of strong winds in Poland between the 13th and 16th centuries. The paper first presents the knowledge gap related to this kind of evidence and discusses the various issues related to the collation of textual records for the period as well as the methodology adopted by the authors to create a database of documentary records relating to strong wind occurrence. Next the paper presents the results of this work, dividing the results in terms of the spatial occurrence of strong winds and the magnitude and impact as reported in the textual sources (where possible). Results of modern instrumental data recording strong wind occurrence are also presented and discussed for comparison. The discussion and conclusion usefully bring this data together and importantly highlight that the data gathered from historical sources both matches the general pattern seen in modern instrumental data as well as agreeing with data gathered from textual sources from neighbouring European countries which experience weather patterns driven by similar systems. The data reported in this paper, therefore, seems to reflect genuine patterns which can usefully be used to understand strong wind occurrence over the timeframe of the study. The methods and analysis are convincingly presented throughout and take into account past work on the topic in neighbouring countries while pointing to possible future avenues for research.
I do not have any significant suggestions in relation to the content, the paper is well structured and easy to follow.
A minor technical question I have relates to lines 73-75. Discussing the results of Outten and Sokolowski, the authors state that: "they found increases in the return period, i.e. more frequent extreme episodes projected for Northern, Central and Southern Europe throughout the 21st century." However, if the return period is increasing (the length of time between extreme episodes is getting longer?), does this not mean that extreme episodes would become less, not more, frequent?
The English is almost all completely understandable but there are several errors that should be corrected prior to publication. I list a few below but this is not an exhaustive list.
Line 38: 'second' is in the wrong position, better phrasing would be "they are the second most dangerous natural phenomenon after floods"
Line 84: insert a 'the' before 1950s e.g. "...they all cover some periods since the 1950s and are written mainly in Polish and therefore..."
Line 131-132: The 'and' between 'north and the Sudetes' should be replaced with a 'to' e.g. "Poland is a Central European country stretching from the Baltic Sea in the north to the Sudetes and Carpathian Mountains in the south (Fig. 1)"
Line 132-133: winds should be singular and the 'the' before analysis is unnecessary e.g. "To more precisely estimate the spatial changes in strong wind occurrence, analysis was also made for six historical-geographical regions: Baltic Coast and Pomerania, Masuria and Podlasie, Greater Poland, Masovia, Silesia, and Lesser Poland (Fig. 1)."
Line 135-136: A 'the' should be inserted before 'contemporary' e.g. "Data from the contemporary period representing all the mentioned regions were collected for 12 meteorological stations – two for each region."
Line 183-184: 'only one' not 'one only' e.g. "A similar situation is noted for both sub-periods with only one exception being the category E1 in the period 1281–1500 (Fig. S4)."
Line 200-202: damages is singular e.g. "About 60% of all damage mentioned in the weather notes were found for the cold half-year, but particularly for autumn (39.2%)."
Line 224-225: This sentence is difficult to follow and should be rephrased e.g. "Also, helpful knowledge can be observed about the values of the greatest speed of strong winds in Poland in modern times."
Overall, this is a useful paper which presents new data that is important for understanding the past occurrence of strong winds in Poland. It should be published once these very minor issues are addressed.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1042-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Przemyslaw Wyszynski, 02 Jun 2025
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-1042/egusphere-2025-1042-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Przemyslaw Wyszynski, 02 Jun 2025
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 334 | 96 | 16 | 446 | 30 | 16 | 33 |
- HTML: 334
- PDF: 96
- XML: 16
- Total: 446
- Supplement: 30
- BibTeX: 16
- EndNote: 33
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Cited
1 citations as recorded by crossref.
Rajmund Przybylak
Andrzej Araźny
Janusz Filipiak
Piotr Oliński
Przemysław Wyszyński
Artur Szwaba
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(2104 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(872 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper