Seite - 188 - in The Power of Urban Water - Studies in premodern urbanism

188 ElisabethGruber ine Abbeys of Melk,45 Göttweig46 and Admont47 whose location was not detailed, andmore, otherwise unspecifiedmills on the Krems brook. Typically, themills owned by cloisters were leased,which, in turn, entailed agreed revenues and levies. In themiddle of the 14th century, the obligations linked to renting the mill of the Benedictine Melk Abbey were extended. In addition to the customary annual service and constructionworkneeded tomaintain thebuild- ing, the tenantswereobliged toprovideaccommodation forconventmembers, includingnight- gowns,wardrobes, stables, lights, presses, tubs andvats. These obligationswerepasseddown to the next tenant and continued. Their concrete implementationmight have occasionally led to conflicts, since in 1454 the new tenant, for instance, limited his accommodation obligation byexcludingboard, fodder,hay,beddingand light.48Foramill on theKremsbrook inavillage situatedupstreamnot far fromKrems, thedifferentusageswhich the runningwaterofferedare documented. A fish pond in themoat obviouslywas dammedupwith a sloped reinforcement driven into thebrook tokeepaway floatingsheetsof ice.Themill tenantheld the fishing rights for the pond, but had to share the revenues of the annual pond emptying with the owner. Furthermore, abathhousewas linked to themill.49Theexampleof themill illustrates the inter- playofmaterial andsocialprocesses.On theonehand,waterpower isusedby themill todrive agrindingplant; thenecessary installationscreateacalmwaterbasinthatenables fish farming; the accumulationof runningwater allows the runningof abathhouse. Harvesting from the river Using theDanube as fishing grounds (Fischweide) and the related fishing rights as one of the sovereign rights had to be permitted by the territorial lord. In 1362, the Benedictine Abbey of Melkwas granted the right to fishinggrounds in theDanube that extended from themiddle of theDanube to the riverbank.Thepenalty imposed foraviolationof this rightofutilisationwas high, amounting to 100 pounds of gold.50 The fishers in Kremswere granted a similar right, whichwasdocumentedby instructionsof the territorial lord in1455and1459.51Suchprovisions regularly led todisputes like thedocumentedconflict between theburghersofKremsandStein on one side of the Danube and the town ofMautern, subject to the Bishop of Passau, on the other. TheburghersofKremsandSteinwereaccusedofhavingdenied theMauterncitizens the utilisation of the fishing grounds in episcopal possession. The burghers of Krems and Stein argued that theyhadusedboth the floodplainand the fishinggrounds togetherwithGöttweig Abbey for years. They, in turn, accused the townspeople ofMautern of havingprevented them withheavyweapons fromusing their rights,namely fishingandharvesting ice inwinter. There is no evidence on the final outcome of the conflict. The parties’ argumentsmake it clear that opinions regarding fishingpractice and theuseofDanubewater/iceapparentlydiffered.While KremsandSteinadhered to the territorial lord’s instructionsofprudentutilisationof thewater, the use of special fishing devices caused significant damage by damming water.52 About 20 45Winner –Herold 2001, no. 147 (1303 January 1);Winner –Herold 2001, no.317 (1318May 1);Winner –Herold 2001,no.675 (1357September 1);Winner–Herold2001,no.720 (1363 July4);Winner–Herold 2001,no.798 (1383 July 4);Winner–Herold 2001, no.830 (1388April 24). 46 Fuchs 1901a, 541no.609 (1364March31). 47Winner–Herold 2001, no. 248 (1314November 11). According to anote on thebackof thedeed, thismillwas locatedon theLedergasse inKrems. Jaritz 1976, 19, n.3. 48Winner–Herold 2001, no. 1486 (1454August 23). 49 Fuchs 1902, 226no.2012 (1487December 15). 50Winner–Herold 2001, no.713 (1362 January 22). 51 Brunner 1953, 114no. 186 (1455 June 19), 118no. 194 (1459September 4). 52 A similar conflict was also documented in the area of influence of KlosterneuburgAbbey:Hoffmann– Sonn- lechner 2011, 124.