Seite - 183 - in The Power of Urban Water - Studies in premodern urbanism

11 MeetingWaterNeedsasaMajor Challenge in anUrbanContext 183 Frommysource-basedapproachasahistorian, focusingonwrittenmaterial, resourceman- agementof latemedieval towns isoften seen through the lensof institutions. This isdue to the fact thatmost of thematerial relating to towns has its roots in the respective administrations. Virtually all documents that I haveused formy studieswere created aspart of the administra- tive work of secular or religious authorities, such as the town council, the parish church or monasteries, as well as institutions in an economic context, such as trade fraternities and guilds. With the randomness of remaining sources to be considered an important element of what conclusionswe can draw for organisational aspects of watermanagement, thismaterial neverthelessdrawsacomprehensivepictureof theactivities inwhichmunicipaladministrations and their actorswere involved. Against this background, it has – until today – always been a paramount taskofauthorities toensure thewater supplyofa townand its inhabitants, in terms of finances and infrastructure, know-howandaccessibility. Runningwater requires a complex framework of political, technical and social infrastructure to transportwater from its source to the houses and discharge it after use – safely, reliably and at reasonable cost.14 Some, but by far not all practical and organisational aspects of water management in late medieval towns were recorded in account books andnormative sources. Theyprovide an insight into construc- tionwork and termsof use, howconflicts about access towater or other regulations regarding watermanagementwere handled, but also into preventive or protectivemeasures against fire. These issues of distributionusually led to negotiationprocesses betweenurbanactors and the groups involved.15 Someof these relations,withmutual impactbetweenhumanprotagonistsand their actions resulting fromthespecificpropertiesofwater, canbedescribed in their intertwinedcomplexity. This knowledge can be used to understand urban structures both in a social and amaterial context.16 The reasonwhy I chosemost of the examples from the area of the towns of Krems and Stein on the Danube is not the particularly profound documentation of sources, but the specific constellation of different players on both sides of the Danube that had been forced, over theentiremedievalperiod, todevelopconcretemethodsofhowtodealwithwater, due to their topographical location on the Danube. The towns of Krems and Stein in the immediate vicinityofeachotheronthe leftbankandMauternontherightbankof theDanuberepresented important traffichubsoneither sideof theDanube,withvarying intensity in thecourseof time. Theyweresubject to thepolitical influencesofdifferent rulers.While theburghersof the towns ofKremsandSteinhadgained their townrightsunder the influenceof the territorial lords from the 12th century at the latest, those ofMautern on the opposite sidewere under the rule of the BishopofPassau.Due to its extensive rightsasaparish, thenearbyBenedictineAbbeyofGött- weigwasalsoperceivedasan influential actor. This settingof territorial influenceandpolitical power being separated by a river in combinationwith the joint utilisation of the region in the Danubesectionunder review,andthenecessity toexchangegoods,with interactionandmedia- tionacross the river being verifiably practised for at least half amillennium, led to a consider- ablenumber ofwrittendocuments. Access towater ‘Water is life’.17 This is the concise definition which the publishers of the current volume of articles dealingwith theuse, the perception and symbolismofwater inmedieval culture have 14 Cless 2014, 32. 15 For anoverviewconcerningAustrian towns, see Scheutz 2016; seeMagnusson 2001, for a general overviewof the issueofwater technology inanurbancontext. 16 Knoll 2014, 203. 17 Huber-Rebenich et al. 2017, 1.