the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
The weather diaries of the Kirch family: Leipzig, Guben, and Berlin, 1677–1774
Stefan Brönnimann
Yuri Brugnara
Abstract. Astronomer and calendar maker Gottfried Kirch was a keen weather observer and made weather notes in his diary starting in 1677 in Leipzig. In parallel, his second wife Maria Margaretha Winkelmann started a weather diary in 1700 in Berlin. The diaries also contain instrumental measurements of temperature and later pressure. After the death of Gottfried in 1710 and Maria Margaretha in 1720, observations were continued by their son Christfried and then for another 44 years by their daughter Christine. The last measurements date to 1774. Together, the diaries span almost a century of weather observations. The instrumental measurements constitute the oldest part of Germany’s longest temperature series, which was however only available as monthly means up to now. Here we publish the imaged diaries, together amounting to 10445 images. Further, we present the digitised instrumental series, which will serve as the starting point for a new, daily Berlin series. By comparing the series to neighbouring records, we show that the pressure data are reliable in a quantitative sense, whereas this is true for the temperature data only in a qualitative sense as the temperature scale was not converted.
- Preprint
(3036 KB) -
Supplement
(1601 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Stefan Brönnimann and Yuri Brugnara
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on cp-2023-18', Anonymous Referee #1, 19 Apr 2023
The author collected the weather diaries of the Gottfried Kirch family, photographed them all, digitized the data since 1720, briefly processed and analyzed the barometric data, and made a case for the extreme cold winter of 1739-1740. The work is of great significance to historical climatology research in Germany.
I believe that the authors likely have valuable high-resolution (daily-scale) weather observations data that are worthy of a publication. After reading the manuscript, I found that the author's description was relatively simple and there were many ambiguities. Therefore, I suggest that a major revision is needed before the official publication.
- In the Chapter 2 & 3, the authors describe in detail the life of the family members, as well as the time periods they each recorded and the tools they used. But unfortunately, I did not get more information about the content of the observations: for example, what were the conditions of the observations, what was the routine of the observations, how many times a day were the observations made, and were they timed? How to ensure the consistency of observation data after the shift of observation position. In-depth descriptions of these elements can increase the scientific validity of the data and allow later users to use the record more confidently.
- In the method section of Chapter 4, the authors' description is rather brief, could they add a more detail description about the process of digitizing the data. How exactly was it extracted and what information was extracted? How does data quality control work: were there any outliers or missing measurements or ambiguous values recorded, and how were they handled if there were? In addition, I suggest that the authors give an example of the digitized results, such as a tabular presentation, which would provide more insight into what the authors did with the data.
- For the results section in Chapter 5, I suggest that the authors have a more detailed description of the data, such as adding a simple statistical description of the observed data (mean, maximum, etc.) in Chapter 5.1; the temporal variation characteristics of the reconstructed series can be analyzed, etc. In addition, the authors can perform some analysis of the trend of temperature and pressure changes within that century based on the available data, etc. In-depth description and use of the data allows the reader to have a more direct feeling of the data and to better promote the dataset.
- At the end of the manuscript, I hope the author can add some discussion to further analyze the value of this data set and look at other possible use of this data set in the future.
I hope our comments will help the authors, whose work I believe to be of great scholarly value, and look forward to seeing a new manuscript from the authors.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-2023-18-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Stefan Bronnimann, 05 May 2023
Thanks for the comments. We agree that the description of the actual meteorological data is (deliberately) very brief. The plan was to focus in this paper more on the diary itself, its provenance, the metadata related to the diary and the observations in general, and to give an overview (or more a preview) of what is in it. The plan was then to describe the meteorological data in more detail in a second paper, in which also other newly digitised (but not yet published) Berlin series from the 18th century (Lambert, Jablonski, Gronau, Brand, and others) will be described, compared, and concatenated. However, we agree that this separation may not be so satisfactory for the readers of the present paper. Furthermore, it may take a while until that second paper is written and available, so readers would have to wait. Therefore we appreciate the comment and will give more information on the data in a revised manuscript.
A more detailed reply to the individual points raised will be submitted at the end of the discussion period.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-2023-18-AC1
-
RC2: 'Comment on cp-2023-18', Anonymous Referee #2, 18 May 2023
The weather diaries during historical times are important to reconstruct the climate parameters when the instrumental measurement was not started. The paper introduced the history of the weather diaries of the Kirch family and addressed the detailed recording process, unquestionably, this kind of diaries are valuable. If the temperature scale can be converted and keep the homogeneous of the series, that would be great. I just have several minor comments:
- In section 2: Is it possible to plot a simple family tree, with year of measurement, and the readers could easily to get the information the year, and who measured? I think it is clearer than reading several paragraphs.
- In Fig.1 What did the circles mean? if they indicate the area, please mark with unit.
- P9-10, the number of figures could be wrong in the text.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-2023-18-RC2
Stefan Brönnimann and Yuri Brugnara
Stefan Brönnimann and Yuri Brugnara
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
288 | 60 | 11 | 359 | 23 | 1 | 2 |
- HTML: 288
- PDF: 60
- XML: 11
- Total: 359
- Supplement: 23
- BibTeX: 1
- EndNote: 2
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1