The Unified Catalogue of Earthquakes in Central, Northern, And

The unified catalogue of earthquakes in central, northern, and northwestern Europe (CENEC)-updated and expanded to the last millennium Gottfried Grünthal, Rutger Wahlström, Dietrich Stromeyer

To cite this version:

Gottfried Grünthal, Rutger Wahlström, Dietrich Stromeyer. The unified catalogue of earthquakes in central, northern, and northwestern Europe (CENEC)-updated and expanded to the last millennium. Journal of Seismology, Springer Verlag, 2009, 13 (4), pp.517-541. 10.1007/s10950-008-9144-9. hal- 00535486

HAL Id: hal-00535486 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00535486 Submitted on 11 Nov 2010

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 DOI 10.1007/s10950-008-9144-9

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

The uniﬁed catalogue of earthquakes in central, northern, and northwestern Europe (CENEC)—updated and expanded to the last millennium

Gottfried Grünthal · Rutger Wahlström · Dietrich Stromeyer

Received: 11 March 2008 / Accepted: 14 October 2008 / Published online: 13 January 2009 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2009

Abstract New databases motivate improvements study. The investigated area is subdivided into 22 and extensions of the catalogue by Grünthal polygons, in each of which one or more local cata- and Wahlström (J Seismol 7:507–531, 2003a)– logues, supplemented by data from special studies, G&W03 – of earthquakes in central, northern, are used. If more than one catalogue lists an event, and northwestern Europe with Mw ≥ 3.50. Data one entry was selected according to a priority from over 30 regional catalogues, the Interna- algorithm specific for each polygon. If the selected tional Seismological Centre and U.S. National catalogue entry contains more than one strength Earthquake Information Center bulletins for the type, one was selected for the Mw calculation NE Atlantic Ocean, and many special studies according to another priority scheme. The final were analysed, largely along the lines of the pre- catalogue, CENEC, is confined to the time period vious study. Non-tectonic, non-seismic, and non- 1000–2004 and magnitudes Mw ≥ 3.50.Thisisan existing as well as duplicate events were identified extension of the time period covered by G&W03 and removed according to our current stage of (1300–1993). The number of events has increased knowledge. If not given by the original source, the from about 5,000 to about 8,000. For each entry, moment magnitude, Mw, was calculated for each available information on the date, time, location event with a specified epicentral location and a (including focal depth), intensity I0, magnitude given strength measure (i.e., an original magni- Mw, and source (i.e., the local catalogue or special tude of any type or, for onshore events only, an study) are given. The strength type and value from intensity). The calculations follow transformation which Mw was calculated are also indicated. The relations derived in the present or in our previous catalogue is available on the website of the GFZ German Research Centre of Geosciences.

Keywords Earthquake catalogue · Europe · Unified moment magnitude G. Grünthal (B) · R. Wahlström · D. Stromeyer GFZ German Research Centre of Geosciences, Telegrafenberg, 14473 Potsdam, Germany e-mail: [email protected] 1 Introduction R. Wahlström e-mail: [email protected] Homogeneous earthquake catalogues with high- D. Stromeyer quality data covering large territories and long his- e-mail: [email protected] torical time spans are lacking for many parts of 518 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 the Earth. Such data are highly requested for var- available since the G&W03 publication. The cat- ious kinds of seismological studies. Grünthal and alogue also contains data from several additional Wahlström (2003a, here referred to as G&W03) special studies, mostly of single events. The time produced an earthquake catalogue for central, period has been extended back in time to the year northern, and northwestern Europe (EEC_ 1000 and forward to 2004. The addition of the first ◦ CNNW) north of 44 N for events with Mw ≥ 3.50 three centuries certainly does not imply complete- in the time frame 1300–1993 with unified Mw. ness for events with Mw ≥ 3.5, but it introduces The issue of G&W03 was strongly motivated by all the available local data uniformly converted the responsibilities at the corresponding Global to Mw above this threshold for this time period. Seismic Hazard Programme (GSHAP) regional The area covered has been slightly extended to the centre. It is based on many local earthquake lists north and east. and special studies and is available on the home- The new data enabled the improvement of page of the GFZ German Research Centre of most of the empirical relations between different Geosciences (doi:10.2312/GFZ.b103-030104 for strength measures. A joint study (Grünthal et al. the corresponding Scientific Technical Report 2009) is made of the degree of harmonization of STR 03/02 (Grünthal and Wahlström 2003b); doi: Mw which can be achieved by the approach used. 10.2312/GFZ.b103-030104_Annex for the seismi- The conclusions can provide the basis for future city database). The G&W03 catalogue has been work toward a further harmonized catalogue. very frequently visited and utilized. The update In the frame of this study, non-tectonic, non- of the present version is strongly demanded by seismic, and non-existing as well as duplicate the growing user community of G&W03. The new events were identified according to our current CEntral, Northern and northwestern European stage of knowledge. earthquake Catalogue (CENEC) intends to support newly established activities in the frame of the European Seismological Commission to 2 New local catalogues study the roots of the significant European earthquakes before 1900 and produce a catalogue with The new local catalogues for Italy (CPTI Working ≥ . Mw 5 8 events. Group 2004) and Switzerland (Fäh et al. 2003) Differenttomostdomesticcatalogues,thebulle- are now prime sources in these countries since tins from the international seismological data they contain Mw magnitudes throughout and in- centres, such as the International Seismological clude updated archival findings on historical key Centre (ISC), U.S. National Earthquake Informa- earthquakes. These and the other catalogues or tion Center (NEIC), and European Mediterranean data sets which are new with respect to G&W03 Seismological Centre (EMSC) and their prede- are described below in a country- or region-wise cessors, cover short time periods. The “standard” alphabetic order. This is the order of Annex 1 in catalogue for European and Mediterranean earth- which all the catalogues are listed in detail. Each quakes by Kárník (1996) has high strength thresh- catalogue is valid in one or more of 22 polygons olds, intensity 7 for the period 1800–1900 (and is (Section 3.1). still rather incomplete except for the last decades of the nineteenth century), MS = 4.5 for 1901– – Austria: Data files on the web from ZAMG 1950 and MS = 3.8 for 1951–1990. These sources (2007) from 2000 onward. The time gap be- do not meet the full needs of applications like tween Lenhardt (1996)andZAMG(2007), seismic hazard assessment or long-term seismic- i.e., for the period 1996–1999, is covered by ity studies, especially in areas of relatively low SZGRF (2007) data (see below). seismic activity, such as Europe north of the – Belgium: Upgrade of the Verbeiren et al. Mediterranean region. (1995) catalogue by data from the Obser- The main motivation of our present paper is vatoire Royal de Belgique webpage (ORB to keep the many users of our catalogue updated 2007). Historical data have been modified. with respect to data sets which have become In the period 1985–1993, the old data have J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 519

been completely substituted, and from 1994 – Iceland: The catalogue for Iceland until 1990 onward, new data have been introduced. used by G&W03, now available on the web- – Croatia: A new extensive database for page as a separate file and renamed IMO Croatia and surrounding countries, including (2007a). The catalogue for Iceland from 1991 data from many local sources (Herak et al. onward from the webpage of the Icelandic 1996). This is the only source for Croatia Meteorological Office (IMO 2007b). and Bosnia-Herzegovina and it is used also – Italy: CPTI-Working-Group (2004) substitut- for Slovenia and Serbia-Montenegro. The ing the only previous source used for Italy previous source for Croatia, used by G&W03 (Camassi and Stucchi 1996). Like its pre- (Živciˇ c´ 1994), has been abandoned. decessor, the CPTI-Working-Group (2004) – Czech Republic: Schenková (1993) up to 1984 catalogue claims to contain no dependent and Zedník (2005) from 1992 onward for use earthquakes (foreshocks and aftershocks) and in the Czech Republic. Schenková (1993)is considers no deeper earthquakes. It gives Mw also valid in Poland, but there is no event with magnitudes and has a threshold at Mw = 4. Mw ≥ 3.50. The INGV (2007) data file is available for the – Fennoscandia: Upgrade of the Ahjos and Uski time period 1983–2004 for Italy. For reasons (1992) catalogue by data from the Institute of specified in Section 4, only entries from Au- Seismology, University of Helsinki webpage gust 1, 2001 onward are used. (FENCAT 2007), including revision of the old – The Netherlands: The database from Het data and extension in time after 1991, as the Koninklijk Nederlands Meteorologisch In- only catalogue for Fennoscandia and the adja- stituut (KNMI 2006) succeeding Houtgast cent area (including the Baltic countries) and (1995) after 1993 as the only source for The used also for the North Atlantic Ocean (see Netherlands. below). – Poland: The published catalogue of historical – France: Two French catalogues, SisFrance earthquakes by Guterch and Lewandowska- (BRGM-EDF-IRSN 2008), giving intensities Marciniak (2002), used also for the Czech and LDG (2005) ML magnitudes. Beside Republic. Pagaczewski (1972)iskeptasthe France, they are used for the English Chan- source for pre-1483 earthquakes. nel. The previously used French catalogue by – Romania: The continued catalogue for Lambert and Levret-Albaret (1996) has been Romania from the National Institute for abandoned. Earthquake Physics (INFP 2007). Like – Germany: The Gräfenberg Observatory bul- its predecessor, the Oncescu et al. (1999) letins (SZGRF 2007) providing first hand data catalogue ending in September 1998, it for Germany and, for the period 1996–1999 contains Mw magnitudes and has validity when no data from the Austrian institute also in Serbia-Montenegro and the Ukraine, are available, for Austria. These SZGRF although lacking events with Mw ≥ 3.50 in the data were also used for Poland and the Ukraine. Both catalogues have validity for, Czech Republic since 1994, but in the Czech but lack entries in, Moldavia. Republic, Zedník (2005) has higher priority – Switzerland: The Swiss ECOS catalogue (Fäh and no SZGRF entries with Mw ≥ 3.50 are et al. 2003) is the only source used for needed. Switzerland and provides supplementary data – Hungary: Two Hungarian earthquake lists, for adjacent parts of Germany and selected Zsíros (1999) for the time period 1995– events in adjacent parts of France. It has sub- 1999 and Tóth et al. (2006) from the year stituted Mayer-Rosa and Baer (1992)used 2000 onward. These are the only sources for by G&W03. The Fäh et al. (2003) report Hungary and Slovakia in these intervals but covers the time period up to 2000 inclusive, Zsíros (1999) has no events with Mw ≥ 3.50. but the ECOS catalogue is continuously up- The catalogues are also valid for the Ukraine, dated at the ETH homepage and has been but have no entries. used for Switzerland after 2000 (ECOS 2006). 520 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541

Furthermore, the Swiss Moment Tensor Solu- where there are two or more catalogues covering tions (2006) database beginning in 1999 has a region (e.g., a country), the investigated area is been used. It encompasses practically all of subdivided into 22 polygons (Fig. 1, Annex 3). The Europe and its entries supersede the calcu- overall boundaries are 25◦ W to the west, 73◦ N ◦ lated Mw entries of any other catalogue (see to the north, and 44 N to the south, whereas Section 4). the eastern border is irregular – see Fig. 1.The – United Kingdom: The database from the differences to the G&W03 study are: British Geological Survey (Musson 2006)succeeding Musson (1994) after 1993 is the only catalogue for the United Kingdom. The – The polygon Fennoscandia (FEN) has been Musson (2006) catalogue includes events with slightly expanded to the north and east to better cover the seismicity distribution. ML ≥ 3. – Ukraine: The catalogue by Kondorskaya and – Ukraine (UA) and Belorussia (BY) have been Ulomov (1999) for the former Soviet Union expanded to the east to include the whole is used as the prime source for Moldavia and countries. the Ukraine up to 1995. It also applies to – Due to the introduced improved French data Belorussia, but has no entries. from LDG (2005) and SisFrance (BRGM- EDF-IRSN 2008), both the British and The local catalogues which contribute data to the French catalogues are applied for the CENEC are listed to the catalogue are listed in English Channel. The French polygon has Annex 1 with the new catalogues highlighted. been extended in the offshore area south Many special studies also provide data for the of the UK polygon, substituting a previous catalogue (Annex 2). Uncertain events were iden- part of the North Atlantic Ocean and Iceland tified as, e.g., fakes, when a corresponding spe- (AOI) polygon. cial study or a compatible reference can be cited. – AOI has been extended from 72◦ to 73◦ N However, it is beyond the scope of this study to latitude to cover more of the seismicity. make a systematic analysis of all the individual – The previous Bosnia and Serbia polygon has entries, e.g., medieval earthquakes, in the local been split into its two national parts, BIH and catalogues. YU (see Annex 3), respectively. The reporting of local earthquake data to international data centres such as the ISC or NEIC is very different on behalf of different domestic 3.2 Catalogue–polygon combination priorities seismological agencies. The compilation and unifi- cation of local data from most European countries For each polygon, one or more local catalogues made in this study, therefore, implies a significant are accepted as data sources. Data are also pro- improvement, which is necessary for reliable seis- vided by more than 50 special studies, each refer- mic hazard assessment and other seismicity-based ring to one or a limited set of events only. Annex 1 analyses. For the North Atlantic Ocean, where summarizes to which polygon(s) the catalogues for obvious reasons local data are lacking, the re- are associated and Annex 2 summarizes the spe- ported events by the ISC have been incorporated cial studies. For the sake of completeness, this to supplement the previous data from the NEIC study includes all references used in the catalogue. (see also Section 3.1). Annex 3 gives the polygons and their associated catalogues. These are the polygon–catalogue com- 3 Study area extent and priorities of the different binations which qualify for the new catalogue. If national catalogues two or more catalogues are allowed for a polygon, 3.1 Revised polygons and study area one is selected according to the priority scheme in Annex 3. Exceptions from the validity criteria To account for the geographical limitation of the are made for “mutual border cases”, i.e. when validity of each catalogue and to set priorities catalogue C1 with validity in polygon P1 has an J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 521

Fig. 1 The polygons accounting for the geographical limitation of the validity of used regional catalogues. To the south, the polygons are cut at latitude 44◦ N with the exceptions that the southern border of Romania is followed and the border north of the Iberian Peninsula is slightly north of 44◦ N

entry in neighbouring polygon P2, and catalogue is to obtain its Mw.IfMw or the seismic moment, C2 with validity in polygon P2 has an entry in M0, is provided by the original source, this is P1; in such cases one of the entries is accepted used. M0 is converted to Mw using the Hanks and by CENEC. As before, special studies have gen- Kanamori (1979) relation. erally higher priority than the catalogues in most Beside the Romanian catalogue by Oncescu cases. et al. (1999), used already by G&W03, and With the many new data sources added to its continuation (INFP), the new local cata- or substituting the previous ones in G&W03, logues for Italy (CPTI Working Group 2004)and the catalogue–polygon priority scheme has Switzerland (Fäh et al. 2003; ECOS 2006), give changed in many cases. The full scheme is given Mw for all entries. So does the Kondorskaya in Annex 3. and Ulomov (1999) catalogue used for Eastern Europe. The new Fennoscandian catalogue, FENCAT (2007), gives Mw (originally from Bergen University) for some events. Several

4 Calculation of the moment magnitude Mw special studies also give Mw magnitudes. As men- from other event strength types tioned in Section 2, Mw magnitudes from Swiss Moment Tensor Solutions (2006) have been in-

4.1 Hierarchy of conversions toward Mw serted to entries of all catalogues and special studies. So have supplementary Mw values from

Mw was chosen by G&W03 as the standard mag- the European–Mediterranean Regional Centroid nitude because it is a physically founded measure Moment Tensors project (Pondrelli et al. 2002, and most of the ground motion models are given 2004, 2007). for this parameter. Mw is used also for the present The new Icelandic data ﬁle (IMO 2007b) gives catalogue. Once an entry from a local catalogue, a moment magnitude which is not compatible with or a special study, has been selected for an event the Hanks and Kanamori Mw (S. Jakobsdottir, according to the scheme in Annex 3, the next task personal communication). To convert to Mw,we 522 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 have made a regression with Mw from ISC for 4.2 Mw from other magnitude types overlapping events, resulting in the relation: 4.2.1 Mw derived from ML

M , = 0.612M , + 2.63 w ISC w IMO07 ML is by far the most frequent magnitude type σ = 0.43 ...0.61. (1) in our database. In many cases, it is the only magnitude given. A well-constrained relation derived by Stromeyer et al. (2004) based on The large standard deviation σ indicates that data from 164 earthquakes in central Europe with the relation between Mw and ML is not stringent. original seismic moments was used by G&W03 This and all the following relations in this paper who demonstrated its applicability to the local are based on the chi-square maximum likelihood catalogues in central Europe. The positive feed- regression technique, presented by Stromeyer back the authors received on this relation con- et al. (2004). This approach pays special attention firms its general usefulness in the seismological to the errors affecting the input data. For Eq. 1, practice. the same error is assumed for all values. The For the present study, the set could be ex- uncertainties of this and all the following relations panded to 221 Mw − ML data pairs, many of them are given in terms of the 68% confidence bounds filling the previous gap between ML = 3.5 and 5. for a predicted value. This measure depends on The new regression relation, assuming the same the residuals between the model and the input but unknown error in both magnitude types, reads data and the covariance of the regression para- (Fig. 2a): meters. The difference between the regression relation and its 68% confidence bounds is approx- = . 2 + . + . Mw 0 0376ML 0 646ML 0 53 imately one standard deviation σ of a predicted σ = ...... magnitude. For Eq. 1, σ = 0.43 and 0.61 denote 0 29 0 34 (2) the lower and upper bounds, respectively. The detailed dependence of σ on Mw,IMO07 is given in The dependence of σ on ML is given in Annex 4. Annex 4. The remaining vast majority of the local cata- The new ML data for Eq. 2 come primarily from logues do not provide Mw (or M0), which thus has earthquakes after 1993 and are combined mostly to be derived. A scheme is established showing with Mw from Swiss Moment Tensor Solutions the transformation relations and the hierarchy of (2006). Some special studies also provide data for strength types from which Mw is calculated for the regression. The shape of relation 2 is very the different catalogues (Annex 5). Where avail- similar to the previous equation, although due to able, local transformation relations were tested the large covariance, the parameters of the two and used. However, the majority of the necessary equations are rather different. Since the relation relations had to be derived by G&W03 and in the between Mw and ML is of key importance for our present study. Magnitude data are given priority study, it is compared in Fig. 2b with our previous to intensity data. Special attention is paid to the version. The difference is less than or about 0.1 for historical earthquakes, which are often the largest the range ML ≥ 1. ones in an area. Their strengths can originally be In the Herak et al. (1996) catalogue, which given in terms of macroseismic parameters only is used for several of the Balkan countries (see (see Section 4.3). The relations to obtain Mw de- Annex 1), all magnitudes (not only ML)are rived in the present study are given in detail in unreliable for events before 1908 according to Sections 4.2 and 4.3; the other relations used are M. Herak (2005, personal communication). There- given directly in Annex 5. fore, entries before 1908 are all based on intensi- If Mw (or M0) does not exist for an entry of ties (Section 4.2) in our updated version. a special study, it is calculated from an algorithm The new Mw and ML data in FENCAT (2007) valid in the polygon where the event is located. fit excellently to Eq. 2. The standard deviation for J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 523 the new data with respect to this equation is 0.31, which is in agreement with that for the regression data of Fig. 2a. Equation 2 is, therefore, applied also to FENCAT (2007)entries. Since the ML values of the French catalogue LDG (2005) are generally larger than those in other catalogues for the corresponding events, a regression of ML from SZGRF (2007)onML from LDG (2005) was performed for French earthquakes yielding the relation below for ML < 4.65 (Fig. 3). For larger magnitudes, the few available data do not seem to indicate a significant deviation between the two ML sets: = . − . Fig. 3 Regression of ML data from SZGRF (2007) vs. ML ML calc 1 310ML,LDG 1 44 data from LDG (2005) for earthquakes in France in 1994– 2004 (93 data points), Eq. 3 for ML < 4.65.ForML ≥ 4.65, σ = 0.40 ...0.51 for ML < 4.65, = ML(SZGRF) ML(LDG) is set (the dashed lines denote the 68% confidence bounds) ML calc = ML,LDG for ML ≥ 4.65. (3) Again, the same but unknown error is assumed in all input values. The dependence of σ on ML is

given in Annex 4. Each equation is combined with Eq. 2 to give compatible Mw values for ML,LDG magnitudes. The INGV (2007) catalogue gives ML and/or Md magnitudes for each event. We give ML the higher priority. By comparing the ML magnitudes with Mw from Swiss Moment Tensor Solutions (2006), there is an obvious systematic change in the ML values from August 2001 onward. The regression equation including only events since August 2001 reads (Fig. 4a):

Mw = 0.906ML + 0.65 σ = 0.21 ...0.22, (4)

assuming the same error in all input values. The detailed σ − ML dependence is given in Annex 4. Equation 4 is applied to INGV (2007) entries from August 2001 onward.

4.2.2 Mw from MS Fig. 2 a The updated Mw–ML relations for central Eu- rope based on data in G&W03 extended by new data For North Atlantic Ocean earthquakes, ISC data as explained in Section 4.1 (in total 221 data points; the have been added to the previous data sets. Where dashed lines denote the 68% conﬁdence bounds), Eq. 2; b comparison of the new and old (G&W03) Mw–ML Mw is given by ISC, this is used; otherwise MS. relations For MS magnitudes from ISC and NEIC, a global 524 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541

North Atlantic Ocean events, mb from NEIC is used when MS is not given (from G&W03). To calculate Mw from mb in these catalogues, again, a global transformation relationship based on graphs by Utsu (2002) was derived:

Mw = 8.17 − SQRT (42.04 − 6.42mb) . (6)

This relation is valid for the range of all our data, which does not exceed mb = 6.

4.2.4 Mw from Md

Like for Ahjos and Uski (1992), the new Fennoscandian catalogue, FENCAT (2007), assumes the duration magnitude to be equal to ML except for offshore events, when it is not applied. The INGV (2007) catalogue contains many entries where Md is given as the only strength parameter. We have performed a regression of Mw from Swiss Moment Tensor Solutions (2006) on Md from INGV (2007) with the result (Fig. 4b):

Mw = 1.472Md − 1.49 σ = 0.20 ...0.22. (7)

Fig. 4 Regressions of Mw data from Swiss Moment Tensor Solutions (2006) on INGV (2007) local magnitude data This relation is valid for the range of all our data, = (ML and Md): a Mw–ML with data since August 2001 (110 which does not exceed Md 4. The same error data points), Eq. 4; b Mw–Md (119 points), Eq. 7 (the has been assumed in all Mw and Md values and dashed lines denote the 68% conﬁdence bounds) the detailed dependence of σ on Md is given in Annex 4. This equation is applied to INGV (2007) entries from August 2001 onward.

transformation relationship derived from graphs 4.2.5 Mw from Mm by Utsu (2002) is applied: Besides ML, Herak et al. (1996) also gives macroseismic magnitudes, Mm. We assume that these Mw = 10.85 − SQRT (73.74 − 8.38MS) . (5) are calibrated to ML, i.e.: This equation is valid in the range of all our data, ML = Mm (8) which does not exceed MS = 7. and then apply Eq. 2. As mentioned above, mag- 4.2.3 Mw from mb nitudes before 1908 are not trusted according to the local authors and, therefore, not used. The Fennoscandian catalogue by Ahjos and Uski In other catalogues giving Mm, the intensity (1992) and its update called FENCAT (2007) is also given and is the entity used for the Mw both have mb magnitudes for many events. For calculation. J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 525

4.3 Empirical relations between Stromeyer et al. 2004). The regression equations Mw and macroseismic parameters read:

Most of the catalogues use the epicentral or max- Austria : ML = 0.787 I0 + 1.19 log h − 1.44 imum intensity as the strength measure for their σ = 0.36 ...0.38, (9) historical or pre-instrumental parts. In exceptional cases, only isoseismals are given, which usually provide a good basis for the conversion to magnitudes. Another very useful macroseismic database Belgium and The Netherlands: for conversions into magnitude types are the sets ML = 0.696 I0 + 1.06 log h − 0.60 of intensity data points (IDP). However, also this σ = . ... . , type of information is lacking almost entirely for 0 48 0 57 (10) the Mw ≥ 3.5 databases which are at our disposal for this project. As already described in G&W03, : = . + . − . approaches based on individual intensity observa- Fennoscandia ML 0 848 I0 0 76 log h 1 41 tion data to calculate Mw, in general, failed due σ = 0.44 ...0.48, (11) to limitations in the direct transferability of such approaches. We do not differentiate between intensities Germany : M = 0.810 I + 0.49 log h − 0.85 assigned according to different 12-degree scales. L 0 Different routines and subjective components in σ = 0.39 ...0.44. (12) the evaluation of macroseismic data play a larger role than the differences between the scales. For each equation, the detailed dependence of The ML vs. I0 and h equation by Herak (1995, the prediction error σ of ML on I0 and h is see Annex 5) is applied to all entries in the Herak given in Annex 4. The regressions are shown in et al. (1996) catalogue before 1908, the period Fig. 5. The data sets are from 1963 and later, when magnitudes are unreliable (see above), and except for Austria where no magnitudes are re- to events as from 1908 where no ML or Mm is liable before 1991 (W. Lenhardt, 2006, personal given. The Herak et al. (1996) catalogue contains communication). I0 or (exclusive) Imax for each felt event. Since Equations 11 and 12 were also applied to sev- many Imax values occur from epicentres on land, eral catalogues of adjacent areas, as speciﬁed this relation is used for I0 and Imax. The Herak in Annex 5.EachofEqs.9, 10, 11,and12 is (1995) equation is also now applied to the Živciˇ c´ combined with an Mw–ML relation to calculate (1993) catalogue entries. Equation 2 is autho- Mw (Annex 5). rized for the subsequent transformation from ML For the other catalogues, existing local formu- to Mw. lae are used to convert I0 to ML, if needed (some An attempt to lump together all the instrumen- catalogues give magnitudes for all events). This tal time data from the local catalogues to derive applies to the catalogues below and the corre- an ML–I0 relation resulted in a large scatter and sponding equations are given in Annex 5. was abandoned (G&W03). However, such a rela- Herak’s (1995) formula is applied to the Herak tion was successfully derived for each of the local et al. (1996)andŽivciˇ c(´ 1993) entries. The French catalogues for Austria, Belgium, Fennoscandia, relation by Levret et al. (1994) is applied to the Germany (Grünthal 1988, 1991; Leydecker 1986, SisFrance entries (BRGM-EDF-IRSN 2008)and 1996), and The Netherlands under the assumption to the few entries in France from Fäh et al. (2003) that the ML data have an error of 0.3 and inten- used for the catalogue, under consideration of sities of 0.5 (only the ratio 3/5 controls the regres- Eq. 3 for transformation to Mw. sion). Using only events with a focal depth of 5 km The formula given by Zsíros (1983)isusedfor or larger, the error in the depth is negligible in the conversion of entries in the Zsíros et al. (1990) the applied chi-square regression technique (see and Zsíros (1994) catalogues. Again, Eq. 2 is used 526 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541

Fig. 5 Regression of ML vs. I0 and h for earthquakes d Germany (82 points), Eqs. 9, 10, 11,and12, respectively. in a Austria (311 data points), b Belgium and The The range of grey colours for the data points and regression Netherlands (27 points), c Fennoscandia (116 points), and lines refers to the range of source depths

for the ML to Mw conversion. Labak (1998) gives tonic earthquakes. They are the events inside the a relation to convert I0 to MS (Annex 5). 22 polygons in the time period 1000–2004 with When calculating a magnitude from an inten- Mw ≥ 3.50. The epicentres of the catalogue en- sity, a default value of 10 km is set for the focal tries with classes of Mw are plotted in Fig. 6. depth if this is not given. This is valid for all A histogram showing the event frequency in relations, whether derived in this study – Eqs. 9, different magnitude classes is given in Fig. 7. 10, 11,and12 – or already existing. This should not be interpreted as a magnitude– frequency distribution, since it does not consider the data completeness with time. The analysis 5 Entries of the catalogue of the completeness of the data with time is a separate complex problem and part of, e.g., After the data selection and editing described probabilistic seismic hazard assessments (PSHA). above, the catalogue consists of about 8,000 tec- The magnitude-dependent data completeness is a J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 527

Fig. 6 Epicentres of the catalogue entries, about 8,000 events with Mw ≥ 3.50 in the time period 1000–2004. The red line denotes the outer border of the polygons

function of cultural historical conditions, which, impression of the completeness of certain magni- obviously, vary considerably over the study area tudes, not yet published PSHA shows that, for SW of this catalogue. To provide the reader with an Germany, Mw = 3.5 is complete since about 1825 and Mw = 6 since about 1250. The largest events (Mw) in different geological areas are shown in Table 1. Compared with G&W03, there are changes due to new references or new magnitude transformation formulae and different cut-off magnitudes for the selection of events. The catalogue is available under the doi:10. 2312/GFZ.CENEC-2008 (electronic version of the seismicity database CENEC 2008 for Europe north of 44◦ N). The following information is given in the catalogue:

– Origin time: Year, month, day, hour, and minute, speciﬁed to the smallest unit given by the original source. Time period 1000–2004. Generally, the original data have been kept, Fig. 7 Frequency of the earthquakes of the catalogue in half magnitude classes. The events in the polygon AOI are i.e., no attempt to standardize GMT and lo- excluded cal times, Julian and Gregorian dates, etc. is 528 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 he polygon pe encompasses the ) Gemona I AooI )Asolo 1997 2004 ) Verviers B )RO )RO )RO )RO )RO )DürenD ) Tollhausen D ) North Sea UK ) North Sea UK )Prov.UdineI 2008 ))))) Kattegat Lurøy Norwegian Sea Lofoten Oslo Fiord DK/S N N N N/S 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 2001 2001 1996 2006 ) S Iceland IS ) S Iceland IS ) N Iceland IS ) N Iceland IS , , , ) Katschbergregion A b b b b 2005 )AlbstadtD ) Basel CH , , , , 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 1995 1995 1994 2007 1986 2006 2007a 2007a 2007a 2007a Reference Locality and country code 0 I w M 7.1 IMO ( 7.1 IMO ( 7.0 IMO ( 7.0 IMO ( 7.0 NEIC Jan Mayen N 5 0 0 6 7 . . . . . 9 20 17 20 19 − − − − − ) in different geological areas w M 1951 6 6 16 71.3 1912 5 6 18 63.9 18191866 81894 31904 7 31 10 13 9 23 23 66.4 1 5 10 65.2 67.9 59.2 14.4 6.0 13.3 10.5 5.8 VII 5.7 5.4 5.4 FENCAT ( VII VII FENCAT ( FENCAT ( FENCAT ( 17561878 21911 8 11 18 26 16 8 9 21 50.8 50.9 48.2 6.5 6.6 9.0 5.9 5.7 5.7 VIII VIII VIII Meidow ( Meidow ( Kunze ( 1931 6 7 0 54.1 1.5 5.9 Musson ( 1692 9 18 14 50.6 5.9 6.1 VIII Alexandre et al. ( 15111695 3 2 26 25 14 5 46.2 45.8 13.4 12.0 6.9 6.6 IX IX–X Fitzko et al. CPTI ( Working Group ( 1356 10 18 21 47.5 7.6 6.9 IX ECOS ( 1348 1 25 17 46.5 13.5 6.8 X Hammerl and Lenhardt ( 1977 3 4 19 45.8 26.8 7.4 IX Oncescu et al. ( 1940 11 10 1 45.8 26.7 7.7 IX–X Oncescu et al. ( 1838 1 23 18 45.7 26.6 7.5 IX Oncescu et al. ( 1802 10 26 10 45.7 26.6 7.9 Oncescu et al. ( 1963 3 28 0 66.3 The largest earthquakes ( and Iceland 1910 1 22 7 66.5 North Atlantic Ocean 1784 8 14 16 64.0 Fennoscandia 1759 12 22 0 57.7 11.1 5.6 FENCAT ( Variscian Europe 1382 5 21 14 51.3 2.0 5.9 VIII Melville et al. ( Alpine region 1201 5 4 10 46.9 13.5 6.6 IX ZAMG ( polygons United Kingdom, The Netherlands, BelgiumFennoscandia and Luxemburg, France, and Germany; Fennoscandia encompasses the land and coastal areas inside t AreaVrançea (since 1700) 1738 6 11 Year Month 10 Day Hour 45.7 Latitude N Longitude E/W 26.6 7.7 IX–X Oncescu et al. ( The Alpine region encompasses the polygons Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Serbia, Hungary, and Slovakia; Variscian Euro Table 1 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 529

made for the historical events. However, the ing and identifying duplicates among entries of different timings were checked with respect to different catalogues with 10–11 days time shift. duplets. However, different historical CENEC entries – Location: Epicentral coordinates and, if given, may refer to different calendars. Such minor focal depth. time shifts in the historical time are irrele – Intensity, I0: If given by the original source. vant for seismic hazard assessments and seis- – Magnitude, Mw, with original magnitude entry micity studies. A file under the URL http:// from which it has been calculated according seismohazard.gfz-potsdam.de1 shows (a) fake to the scheme of Annex 5. No entry means events of various kinds before 1800 and (b) ques- calculated from intensity. tionable duplets before 1900. Especially for the – Reference: The local catalogue (Annex 1)or latter list, detailed analysis in future projects may special study (Annex 2). Only one reference is give clarifying information. listed for each entry, although the parameters It is often hard to discriminate between proba- are sometimes taken from different sources, ble and possible duplicates, even if a careful con- e.g., when not all parameters have been re- sideration of similarities and differences in time, assessed in a special study. location, and intensity is made. In the most obvious cases, the duplicates in the database have been flagged and do not show up in the version made public. The rule has been to keep the multiple entries in suspicious but not convincing cases, which 6 Discussion and conclusions does not guarantee, however, that single “unique” entries for an event could occasionally have been It has been a long and non-trivial work to compile, deleted. It was beyond the scope of this study to edit, scrutinize, and homogenize all the data in the provide an inventory of the original sources of large database and then to make the final selection such events in a Europe-wide frame. of the entries for the catalogue. The elimination of A critical part of any catalogue compiled of entries concerns duplications and various types of data from different local sources is the harmo- fakes. nization of magnitudes. The G&W03 catalogue The new catalogue has some 8,000 entries, i.e., like the present one contains unified Mw magni- about 60% more than the old one. The main con- tudes for all events, but an absolute harmonization tributing factors to the increase are the inclusion can hardly be achieved. Further credibility in this of the time periods 1994–2004 (some 1,700 events) respect is provided in the joint Grünthal et al. and 1000–1299 (some 60 events), the extension of (2009) study. By extending the Mw–ML relation the area to the north and east (some 90 events), for Central Europe also to Fennoscandia and and above all, the introduction of the many new eastern Central Europe, a further step towards data sources. On the other hand, a number of a harmonization has been taken. For Fennoscan- events in the previous catalogue have also been dia, this has implied generally slightly higher discarded as fakes or duplicates; especially the Mw values. Mw values for Italy and Switzerland new Italian and Swiss catalogues are rigorous in are among those which now are generally higher this respect. There are also a few events which than in G&W03 due to the new respective have had their location or magnitude changed in catalogues. a way that they no more qualify for the catalogue; In many statistical seismicity studies over others have been shifted in time of the order of smaller or larger areas, data from global cata- minutes, hours, days, or months. A special case logues like the ISC or NEIC bulletins are adapted. is made up by events where the date has been changed by 10–11 days (Julian to Gregorian cal- endar); especially Fäh et al. (2003) has converted many events from the old Swiss catalogue to 1Following the link “Projects” and then “Earthquake cata- the Gregorian time frame. We have been search- logues.” 530 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541

If these data were generally good, homogeneous, the same time, we miss a lot of earthquakes, let and had non-tectonic events separated, studies be of smaller size. like the present one would be superfluous. It should not come as a surprise to the reader The quality of the ISC bulletin has proved to that this is not the case. A comparison was be very different in different parts of Europe. A made between the entries in our database and further drawback of the ISC catalogue is that the those of ISC and NEIC for a selection of areas and different local magnitude scales (ML or duration) time intervals. Generally, ISC has a better cover- are not harmonized. It is obvious that continued age than NEIC and it would suffice to concentrate scrutinized and edited data from local catalogues, the comparison of our data to ISC. The findings especially in some areas, significantly improve the are: database and in practice are inevitable in order to – For Belgium and The Netherlands, the local create a reliable foundation for seismic hazard and catalogues have slightly less events than ISC, seismicity studies. but the local agency selection is likely more In conclusion, the use and editing of the individ- critical. ual local catalogues are advantageous compared – There is a good correlation between our data- to a “blind” acceptance of the global databases. base and ISC for the United Kingdom. There is also no benefit in supplementing ISC – For Hungary and Slovakia, we made a more and/or NEIC data where local catalogues exist. thorough comparison of the ISC data with our For our catalogue, data from ISC and NEIC have database for the period January to June 2004. only been used where no domestic catalogue ex- There are hundreds of events within the area ists, i.e., for Atlantic Ocean events. 46–50◦ N, 16–23◦ E, encompassing also parts The catalogue will be useful for applications of several neighbouring countries (see Fig. 1). in many fields of seismicity and in seismic haz- Most events are from the Zedník (2005) cata- ard assessment, especially in the case of large- logue where, in turn, the vast majority likely scale projects of probabilistic seismic hazard is non-tectonic although this is not marked. assessment. The update of the database, including We have considered this source unreliable for a further temporal extension as well as a spatial events outside the Czech Republic. For the extension to southern Europe and the Mediter- specified time and space frames, we have 26 ranean area for larger-magnitude events, is a con- earthquakes in our databank. Only one of tinued effort, which will be undertaken also in the these has a magnitude, Mw ≥ 3.50 and quali- frame of ongoing European projects. fies for the catalogue. Fifteen of these events are also given by ISC but only one of these Acknowledgements We are very grateful to all the col- (the event in our catalogue) has been reviewed leagues who have provided their data on Internet plat- (by ISC). Of the 18 events reviewed by ISC, on forms or in form of publications. Special thanks to the other hand, 14 are mining-induced. Three B. Feignier (LDG), M. Herak (Department of Geo- more are probable rockbursts according to physics, University of Zagreb), K. Klinge (BGR/SZGRF), J. Lambert (BGRM), R. Musson (BGS), M. Nicolas thelocalsourcesusedbyus.Onlythesingle (LDG), Z. Schenková (IRSM), M. Uski (Institute of Seis- event in our catalogue remains as an earth- mology, University of Helsinki) and T. Zsíros (Seismolog- quake of all the ISC entries. It is obvious from ical Observatory, Hungarian Academy of Science) with all this comparison that using the ISC catalogue of whom we were in personal contact about the local data. We are thankful for the support from Aon Re Global. The we come across non-analysed and erroneously technical staff of our section contributed in various steps of discriminated (as to event type) entries and, at the data processing. J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 531

Annex 1 Local catalogues and associated polygons (cf. Annex 3 and Fig. 1) Country/area of Catalogue Notation Associated polygons main application Austria Lenhardt (1996), ZAMG (2007)ZAMG,ZAMG07 Austria (A) Belgium and Luxemburg Verbeiren et al. (1995), ORB, ORB07 Belgium and Luxemburg (BL), ORB (2007) Germany (D)-western part Belorussia Boborikin et al. (1993) Bob Belorussia (BY), Fennoscandia (FEN) Croatia Herak et al. (1996) HHM Croatia (CRO), Bosnia/ Herzegovina (BIH), Slovenia (SLO), Serbia/Montenegro (YU) Czech Republic Schenková (1993) CAS Czech Republic (CZ), Poland (PL) Zedník (2005) GFU Czech Republic Estonia Nikonov (1992) Nik Fennoscandia Fennoscandia Ahjos and Uski (1992), FEN, FEN07 Fennoscandia, North Atlantic Ocean FENCAT (2007) and Iceland (AOI) Fennoscandia, Wahlström and Grünthal (1994) WG Fennoscandia southern part France BRGM-EDF-IRSN (2008), SisFrance, LDG France (F), United Kingdom (UK) LDG (2005) Germany Grünthal (1988, 1991) Gru, Gru91 Germany and adjacent area, inside 49.6–54.8◦ N, 9.5–15.5◦ E Leydecker (1986, 1996) Ley, Ley96a Germany outside 49.6–54.8◦ N, 9.5–15.5◦ E, Austria, France SZGRF (2007) GRF Germany, Austria, Czech Republic, Poland Hungary Zsíros et al. (1990), Zsíros (1994) Zsi, Zsi94 Hungary (H), Ukraine (UA) Zsíros (1999), Tóth et al. (2006) Zsi99, Tot Hungary, Slovakia (SK), Ukraine Iceland IMO (2007a, b)IMO,IMO07 North Atlantic Ocean and Iceland Italy CPTI Working Group (2004), CPTI04, INGV Italy (I) INGV (2007) The Netherlands Houtgast (1995), KNMI (2006) Hou, KNMI The Netherlands (NL) Poland Pagaczewski (1972)PagPoland Guterch and GLM Poland, Czech Republic Lewandowska-Marciniak (2002) Romania Oncescu et al. (1999), INFP (2007)Onc,INFP Romania (RO), Moldavia (MD), Serbia/Montenegro, Ukraine Slovakia Labak (1998) Lab Slovakia Slovenia Živciˇ c(´ 1993) ZivS Slovenia Switzerland Fäh et al. (2003) ECOS Switzerland (CH), France (selected events), Germany–western part ECOS (2006) ECOS06 Switzerland United Kingdom Musson (1994, 2006)Mus,Mus06 United Kingdom The former USSR Kondorskaya and Shebalin (1982)KSh Ukraine (selected areas) Kondorskaya and Ulomov (1999) KU Ukraine, Moldavia, Belorussia Worldwide ISC bulletins, NEIC bulletins ISC, NEIC North Atlantic Ocean and Iceland New catalogues cf. to G&W03 are marked in italics In addition, Pondrelli et al. (2002, 2007) and Swiss Moment Tensor Solutions (2006) contribute Mw data for events in all Europe since 2000 aBefore 1982, Ley96 is given when the corresponding Ley entry is revised 532 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541

Annex 2 Special studies contributing to the catalogue Notation Special study Notation Special study Aho83 Ahorner (1983) GruP Grünthal, personal comment AhoP Ahorner, personal communication GruRA Grünthal, renewed analysis Alx08 Alexandre et al. (2008) GS01 Grünthal and Schwarz (2001) Alx90a Alexandre (1990) Hin05 Hinzen (2005) Alx94 Alexandre (1994) HL97 Hammerl and Lenhardt (1997) AP83 Ahorner and Pelzing (1983) KMM57 Kárník et al. (1957) AP85 Ahorner and Pelzing (1985) Kun86 Kunze (1986) Arv91 Arvidsson et al. (1991) LenP Lenhardt, personal communication AS04 Amstein and Schwarz (2004) Mei01 Meidow (2001) AWK92 Arvidsson et al. (1992) Mei95 Meidow (1995) Ben06 Benn et al. (2006) Mel96 Melville et al. (1996) Bon84 Bonamassa et al. (1984) MG92 Meier and Grünthal (1992) Cam94 Camelbeeck et al. (1994) NG95 Neunhöfer and Grünthal (1995) Car05 Cara et al. (2005) OGS OGS (2006) EiG94 Eisinger and Gutdeutsch (1994) PEM01 Pondrelli et al. (2001) FG96 Fischer and Grünthal (1996) Pet05 Pettenati et al. (2005) FGS01 Fischer et al. (2001) PHW94 Prinz et al. (1994) Fit05 Fitzko et al. (2005) Sch98 Schneider (1998) GF00 Grünthal and Fischer (2000) SchP Schneider, personal communication GF02b Grünthal and Fischer (2002) SV87 Schneider and Vogt (1987) GF98 Grünthal and Fischer (1998) VG94 Vogt and Grünthal (1994) GF99 Grünthal and Fischer (1999) Vog91 Vogt (1991) GFV99 Grünthal et al. (1999) Vog93a Vogt (1993a) GHK99 Gutdeutsch et al. (1999) Vog93b Vogt (1993b) GM95 Grünthal and Meier (1995) VogP Vogt, personal communication Gru05 Grünthal (2005) ZsiP Zsíros, personal communication Gru08 Grünthal et al. (2008) a From this reference, only selected mapped events are included and assigned I0 = V–VI, corresponding to Mw = 3.8,ifno intensity is given J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 533

Annex 3 Polygons and the hierarchy (left to right) of local catalogues to which they are associated for different time periods Polygon Country/area Time period Local catalogue A Austria –1981 ZAMG, Ley 1982–1993 ZAMG 1994–1995 ZAMG, GRF 1996–1999 GRF 2000–2004 ZAMG07 AOI North Atlantic Ocean and Iceland –1990 IMO, ISC, NEIC, FEN07, FEN 1991–July 2003 IMO07, ISC, FEN07 Aug. 2003–2004 IMO07, FEN07 BIH Bosnia/Herzegovina –2004 HHM BL Belgium and Luxemburg –1984 ORB07, ORB 1985–2004 ORB07 BY Belorussia –1988 Bob CH Switzerland –2000 ECOS 2001–2004 ECOS06 CRO Croatia –2004 HHM CZ Czech Republic –1984 CAS GLM Grua 1985–1991 Gru91a 1992–2004 GFU D Germany inside the area 49.6–54.8◦ N, –1984 Gru 9.5–15.5◦ E D Germany outside the area 49.6–54.8◦ N, –1981 Ley/Ley96, ORB07, ORB, ECOS 9.5–15.5◦ E 1982–1993 Ley96 1994–2004 GRF F France –1961 SisFrance, Ley/Ley96, ECOSb 1962–2003 LDG, SisFrance 2004 LDG FEN Fennoscandia, Balticum, Kola Peninsula –1984 WG, Nik, Bob, FEN07, FEN and adjacent waters 1985–1991 FEN07, FEN 1992–2004 FEN07 H Hungary –1986 Zsi 1987–1994 Zsi94 1995–1999 Zsi99 2000–2004 Tot I Italy –2001 July CPTI04 2001 Aug.–2004 INGV MD Moldavia –1995 KU NL The Netherlands –1993 Hou 1994–2004 KNMI PL Poland –1482 Pag 1483–1995 GLM 1996–2004 GRF RO Romania –1998 Sep. Onc 1998 Oct.–2004 INFP SK Slovakia –1994 Lab 2000–2004 Tot 534 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541

Annex 3 (continued) Polygon Country/area Time period Local catalogue SLO Slovenia –1981 ZivS, HHM 1982–2004 HHM UA Ukraine –1974 KU, KSh, Zsi, Onc 1975–1986 KU, Zsi 1987–1995 KU 1998 Oct.–2004 INFP UK United Kingdom and adjacent waters –1961 Mus, SisFrance 1962–1993 Mus, LDG 1994–2004 Mus06, LDG YU Serbia/Montenegro –1998 Sep. Onc, HHM 1998 Oct.–2004 INFP, HHM Missing time periods have been inspected but lack entries. Special studies usually have preference over the local catalogues aPart of polygon inside the area 49.6–54.8◦ N, 9.5–15.5◦ E (with ﬁrst priority) bSelected events

Annex 4 Full error equations for the regressions of this study (σ ≈ 68 % prediction error) Eq. no. Error range (σ) Error equation 2 2 −2 1 0.43 – 0.60 σ = (3.16Mw,IMO07 − 23.3Mw,IMO07 + 80.9) × 10 2 4 3 2 −4 2 0.29 – 0.34 σ = (0.97ML − 12.4ML + 58.4ML − 120ML + 921) × 10 2 2 −2 3 0.40 – 0.51 σ = (0.44ML,LDG − 2.71ML,LDG + 8.98) × 10 2 2 −2 4 0.21 – 0.22 σ = (0.17ML − 1.39ML + 10.53) × 10 2 2 −2 7 0.20 – 0.22 σ = (0.88Md − 6.72Md + 25.04) × 10 2 2 2 −4 9 0.36 – 0.38 σ = (11.2I0 + 0.761I0logh + 127log h − 87.7I0 − 242logh + 1611) × 10 2 2 2 −3 10 0.48 – 0.57 σ = (8.57I0 − 3.01I0logh + 141.4log h − 71I0 − 273logh + 525) × 10 2 2 2 −3 11 0.44 – 0.48 σ = (4.74I0 − 1.26I0logh + 44.4log h − 39.2I0 − 82.9logh + 317) × 10 2 2 2 −3 12 0.39 – 0.44 σ = (2.82I0 + 3.99I0logh + 57.2log h − 31.1I0 − 132logh + 293) × 10 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 535 ) 4.2 ) 4.1 used only m M and L M ) /G&W03/ or other studies. The not used before 1991 (Section not used for offshore events L d values from entries in special studies, from 1908 on (Section and reference PAN events M M 2003a Original w M ) 1994 ) 4.2 1995 Herak ( Levret et al. ( Section G&W03 G&W03 ) values, and derived 0 ) M h (or 0.38 w = M 13 48 . . 1 0 − + h h 0 I and 0.30 for log 0 I 28 log 48 log . . 1 1 2 + + 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 treat like I I +Eq. + S d , 0.53 for 72 44 . . 3 2 2 L +Eq. +Eq. +Eq. +Eq. +Eq. +Eq. +Eq. M M 0 0 max +Eq. +Eq. I M = = = = 2 9 2 10 11 2 8 2 12 2 12 11 2 6 11 2 11 = L w L L (standard errors of estimates for +Eq. +Eq. +Eq. , and full equations are quoted from Grünthal and Wahlström ( 0 I M M M M 4 Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. L L L m L L L S d L b 0 0 0 0 max 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I I I I M M M M M M M M M M entity m for the different local catalogues. Originally given w M 2 2 4 5 2 4 2 3 2 3 )1 )1 1994 2007 )1 )1 ), 1 ), 1 2008 )1 )2 1993 1995 1992 )1 ), ZAMG ( )1 )1 1996 2007 )2 1993 1996 1992 Algorithms for calculation of 2005 2007 ORB ( FENCAT ( CatalogueLenhardt ( Priority Original size Algorithm Reference Comment Boborikin et al. ( Herak et al. ( Zedník ( Nikonov ( Ahjos and Uski ( BRGM-EDF-IRSN ( Verbeiren et al. ( Schenková ( Wahlström and Grünthal ( Annex 5 usually have the highest priority.focal The depth, equations refer h, to is Section in km and the default value is 10 km 536 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 ) applies different 1998 given given w w M M Labak ( ) 1979 ), ) geographical subregions– ) after 1942 1998 1983 Richter ( Zsíros, personal communication communication Gutenberg and G&W03; formulae for different Labak ( G&W03 see G&W03 for details Hanks and Kanamori ( Zsíros ( Agustsson, personal 0 . 1 − L h 7 M . 3 . 95 10 . 1 8log . 0 − 1 + 0 + 2 2 2 2 2 S 5 + 2 . 0 M I M 0 I 17 S 6 55 = 2 . . = +Eq. +Eq. +Eq. +Eq. +Eq. M 0 0 w 3log +Eq. 0 / = = 3 2 12 2 2 12 2 2 2 1 4 7 2 10 2 12 2 12 2 = Eq. M 2 M L w S + + + M M M Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. log Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. IMO07 , L L L L L L L L w L d L L L S L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I I M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M entity 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 ) )2 )1 )1 2007 2002 ) 1994 2006 2004 )1 ), INFP ( )1 1996 ), Zsíros ( , 1999 )1 )1 )1 )1 1972 1990 )1 )1 )1 ), Tóth et al. ( )1 )1 1986 )1 1988 1991 1995 (continued) 2007 2006 2007 1998 1999 2005 2007b 2007a Lewandowska-Marciniak ( IMO ( Leydecker ( Zsíros et al. ( IMO ( CPTI Working Group ( Houtgast ( Pagaczewski ( CatalogueLDG ( Priority Original size Algorithm Reference Comment Zsíros ( Grünthal ( Grünthal ( SZGRF ( KNMI ( Guterch andOncescu et al. ( 1 INGV ( Labak ( Annex 5 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 537 given given w w M M ) 1994 ) 1995 Herak ( Levret et al. ( 13 48 . . 1 0 − + h h 28 log 48 log . . 1 1 2 + + 2 2 0 0 I I +Eq. 72 44 . . 3 2 +Eq. +Eq. 0 0 = = 12 2 2 11 5 5 6 L L +Eq. M M Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq. L L S S b 0 0 0 0 I I I I M M M M m 2 2 )1 ) 1982 1999 )1 )forGermany 1 ) for Switzerland; ) for France 1 2006 ) for Switzerland , )1 2003 2003 2003 2006 1994 1993 ´ c( ˇ ci (selected events) + Eq. ECOS ( Fäh et al. ( Živ Fäh et al. ( Fäh et al. ( Kondorskaya and Ulomov ( Musson ( Kondorskaya and Shebalin ( NEIC bulletins 1 ISC bulletins 1 538 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541

References ing length of small earthquakes for a Friuli sequence (May 1976). Ann Geophys 2:17–22 BRGM-EDF-IRSN (2008) Base de données SisFrance des Ahjos T, Uski M (1992) Earthquakes in Northern Europe séismes historique en France. Available at http://www. in 1375–1989. Tectonophysics 207:1–23. Available sisfrance.net at http://www.seismo.helsinki.fi/bulletin/list/catalog/ Camassi R, Stucchi M (1996) NT4.1 un catalogo paramet- Scandia_clean.html as in 2003; cf. FENCAT (2007) rico di terremoti di area italiana, al di sopra della Ahorner L (1983) Historical seismicity and present- soglia del danno. Gruppo Nazionale per la Difesa dai day microearthquake activity of the Rhenish Massif, Terremoti, 17pp + Appendix, 66 pp Central Europe. In: Fuchs K et al (eds) Plateau uplift. Camelbeeck T, van Eck T, Pelzing R, Ahorner L, Loohuis Springer, Berlin, pp 198–221 J, Haak HW, Hoang-Trong P, Hollnack D (1994) The Ahorner L, Pelzing R (1983) Seismotektonische Herdpa- 1992 Roermond earthquake, the Netherlands, and its rameter von digital registrierten Erdbeben der Jahre aftershocks. Geol Mijnb 73:181–197 1981 und 1982 in der westlichen Niederrheinischen Cara M, Brüstle W, Gisler M, Kästli P, Sira C, Bucht. Geol Jb E 26:35–63 Weihermüller C, Lambert J (2005) Transfrontier = . Ahorner L, Pelzing R (1985) The source characteristics macroseismic observations of the ML 5 4 earth- of the Liège earthquake on November 8, 1983, from quake of February 22, 2003 at Rambervillers, France. digital recordings in Germany. In: Melchior P (ed) J Seismol 9:317–328. doi:10.1007/s10950-005-6853-1 Seismic activity in Western Europe with particular CPTI Working Group (2004) Catalogo Parametrico dei consideration to the Liège earthquakes of November Terrimoti Italiani, versione 2004 (CPTI04). Istituto 8, 1983, NATO ASI Series C: 144. Reidel, Dordrecht, Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologica, Milan, Italy. pp 263–289 Available at http://emidius.mi.ingv.it/CPTI04/ Alexandre P (1990) Les séismes en Europe occidentale ECOS (2006) Data file of the Swiss Federal Institute de 394 a 1259. Nouveau catalogue critique. Publ de of Technology Zurich, Swiss Seismological Service, l’Observatoire Royal de Belgique, Série Géophysique Zurich, Switzerland. Available at http://histserver. N◦ Hors-Série, 267 pp ethz.ch/simplequery_e.html (since 2001) Eisinger U, Gutdeutsch R (1994) The Villach earthquake Alexandre P (1994) Historical seismicity of the lower of December 4th, 1690 in the German sources. Materi- Rhine and Meuse Valleys from 600 to 1525 a new als of the CEC project “Review of historical seismicity critical review. Geol Mijnb 73:431–438 in Europe”, pp 133–137 Alexandre P, Kusman D, Petermans T, Camelbeeck T Fäh D, Giardini D, Bay F, Bernardi F, Braunmiller J, (2008) The 18 September 1692 earthquake in the Deichmann N, Furrer M, Gantner L, Gisler M, Belgian Ardenne and its aftershocks. In: Fréchet J, Isenegger D, Jiminez MJ, Kästli P, Koglin R, Meghraoui M, Stucchi M (eds) Historical seis- Masciadri V, Rutz M, Scheidegger C, Schibler R, micity, interdisciplinary studies of past and recent Schorlemmer D, Schwarz-Zanetti G, Steimen S, earthquakes. Springer, pp 209–230 Sellami S, Wiemer S, Wössner J (2003) Earth- Amstein S, Schwarz J (2004) Das Erdbeben vom quakes catalogue of Switzerland (ECOS) and the 04. August 1940 in der Gegend von Göppingen. related macroseismic database. Eclogae Geol Helv In: Seismische Gefährdungsberechnung und 96:219–236. Available at http://histserver.ethz.ch/ Einwirkungsbeschreibung, Schriften der Bauhaus- simplequery_e.html (up to 2000) Universität Weimar 116, Univ.-Verlag, Weimar, FENCAT (2007) Data file of the Institute of Seis- pp 19–34 mology. University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. Arvidsson R, Gregersen S, Kulhánek O, Wahlström R Available at http://www.seismo.helsinki.fi/bulletin/list/ (1991) Recent Kattegat earthquakes – evidence of catalog/Scandia_clean.html active intraplate tectonics in southern Scandinavia. Fischer J, Grünthal G (1996) A basic earthquake cat- Phys Earth Planet Inter 67:275–287. doi:10.1016/0031- alogue and a database for the evaluation of long- 9201(91)90024-C term seismology and seismic hazard (BEECD). Arvidsson R, Wahlström R, Kulhánek O (1992) Deep- App. D2 – investigation report of GeoForschungs- crustal earthquakes in the southern Baltic shield. Zentrum Potsdam, BEECD - final report - appendices Geophys J Int 108:767–777. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X. D, pp 3–10 1992.tb03468.x Fischer J, Grünthal G, Schwarz J (2001) Das Erd- Benn N, Stange S, Brüstle W, Henk A, Stribny B beben vom 7. Februar 1839 in der Gegend von (2006) Das Beben von Waldkirch am 5.12.2004. DGG Unterriexingen. Thesis, Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift Jahrestagung, Berlin, Germany (Poster) der Bauhaus-Universität Weimar 1/2:8–30 Boborikin AM, Gareckij RG, Emeljanow AP Cildvee Fitzko F, Sudadolc P, Aoudia A, Panza GF (2005) Con- ChCh, Cuvejedis PI (1993) Sowremennoye sostoy- straints on the location and mechanism of the 1511 aniye seismitsheskich nablyudenhiy i ich obobsht- Western-Slovenia earthquake from active tectonics sheniy. In: Semletryasseniya Belarussi i Pribaltiki, and modeling of macroseismic data. Tectonophysics Minsk, Belorussia, pp 29–40 404:77–90. doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2005.05.003 Bonamassa O, Console R, de Santis A, Rovelli A Grünthal G (1988) Erdbebenkatalog des Territoriums (1984) Seismic moment, local magnitude and record- der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik und der J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 539

angrenzenden Gebiete von 823 bis 1984. Akademie Gutenberg B, Richter CF (1942) Earthquake magnitude, der Wissenschaften der DDR, Zentralinstitut für intensity, energy and acceleration. Bull Seismol Soc Physik der Erde 99, 38 pp + Appendix, 139 pp Am 32:163–191 Grünthal G (1991) Data file continuing the earthquake Guterch B, Lewandowska-Marciniak H (2002) Seis- catalogue by Grünthal (1988) for the years 1985– micity and seismic hazard in Poland. Folia Quat 73: 1991. GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam, Potsdam, 85–99 Germany Hammerl C, Lenhardt W (1997) Erdbeben in Österreich. Grünthal G (2005) Ein Schadenerdbeben am 19. Jan- Leykam Buchverlagsgesellschaft mbH, Graz, 191 pp uar 1619 im Taunus? Mainzer Naturwiss Arch 43: Hanks TC, Kanamori H (1979) A moment magnitude 29–38 scale. J Geophys Res 84:2348–2350. doi:10.1029/ Grünthal G, Fischer J (1998) Die Rekonstruktion JB084iB05p02348 des “Torgau”-Erdbebens vom 17. August 1553. Herak D (1995) Razdioba brzina prostornih valova potresa Brandenbg Geowiss Beitr 5(2):43–60 i seizmicnost sireg podrucja Dinare (Distribution of Grünthal G, Fischer J (1999) Zwei vermeintliche Schaden- body-wave velocities and seismicity of the greater beben in den Jahren 1565 und 1595 bei Zell an der Dinara Mt. region). Ph.D. dissertation, University of Mosel. Mainzer Naturwiss Arch 37:12–19 Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia (in Croatian with English Grünthal G, Fischer J (2000) False earthquakes in cen- abstract) tral European catalogues as a result of repeatedly Herak M, Herak D, Markušic´ S (1996) Revision of the referencing of distant large events. In: Proceedings earthquake catalogue and seismicity of Croatia, 1908– of the 25th general assembly of the European 1992. Terra Nova 8:86–94 (+ data file until 2004) Geophysical Society, Nice, France, 25–29 April, 74 Hinzen KG (2005) Ground motion parameters of the July (Abstract) 22, 2002 ML Alsdorf (Germany) earthquake. Boll Grünthal G, Fischer J (2002) Irrtümliche Schadenbeben Geofis Teor Appl 46:303–318 vom 20. Dezember 1777 und am 28. Januar 1778 Houtgast G (1995) Aardbevingen in Nederland. in der Gegend von Feldkirche im Breisgau. Mainzer Koninklijk Nederlands Meteorologisch Instituut, Naturwiss Arch 40:89–94 De Bilt, The Netherlands 179, 166 pp Grünthal G, Meier R (1995) Das “Prignitz”-Erdbeben von IMO (2007a) Data file of the Icelandic Meteorological 1409. Brandenbg Geowiss Beitr 2(2):5–27 Office, Reykjavik, Iceland for large earthquakes up Grünthal G, Schwarz J (2001) Reinterpretation der Pa- to 1990. Available at http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/ymislegt/ rameter des Mitteldeutschen Bebens von 1872 und storskjalf.html Ableitung von Erdbebenszenarien für die Region IMO (2007b) Data file of the Icelandic Meteorological Of- Ostthüringen. Thesis, Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift fice, Reykjavik, Iceland for earthquakes with ML ≥ 3 der Bauhaus-Universität Weimar 1/2:32–48 from 1991. Grünthal G, Wahlström R (2003a) An Mw based INFP (2007) Data file of the National Institute for Earth earthquake catalogue for central, northern and north- Physics. Bucharest, Romania. Available at http:// western Europe using a hierarchy of magnitude con- www-old.infp.ro/catal.php versions. J Seismol 7:507–531. doi:10.1023/B:JOSE. INGV (2007) Data file of Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e 0000005715.87363.13 Vulcanologia, Milan, Italy Grünthal G, Wahlström R (2003b) An earthquake ISC bulletins International Seismological Centre (previ- catalogue for central, northern and northwestern ously International Seismological Summary) bulletins Europe based on Mw magnitudes, Scientific Technical (1904–2000) Newbury, United Kingdom. Available at Report STR 03/02, GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam, http://www.isc.ac.uk/search/index.html 143 pp. doi:10.2312/GFZ.b103-030104, doi:10.2312/ Kárník V (1996) Seismicity of Europe and the Mediter- GFZ.b103-030104_Annex ranean. Geophysical Institute, Czech Academy of Sci- Grünthal G, Fischer J, Vogt J (1999) Neue Erkenntnisse ences, Prague, The Czech Republic, 28 pp (+ maps and zu angeblichen Schadenbeben im Raum Mainz im 15. catalogue) Jahrhundert. Mainzer Naturwiss Arch 37:1–11 Kárník V, Michal E, Molnár A (1957) Erdbebenkatalog Grünthal G, Stromeyer D, Wylegalla K, Kind R, der Tschechoslowakei bis zum Jahre 1956. Travaux Wahlström R, Yuan X, Bock G (2008) The Mw 3.1–4.7 de l’Institut Géophysique de l’Académie Tchécoslo- earthquakes in the southern Baltic Sea and adjacent vaque des Sciences, Prague. Czechoslovakia 69: areas in 2000, 2001 and 2004. J Seismol 12:413–429. 411–598 doi:10.1007/s10950-008-9096-0 KNMI (2006) Data file of Het Koninklijk Nederlands Grünthal G, Stromeyer D, Wahlström R (2009) Har- Meteorologisch Instituut, De Bilt, The Netherlands. monization check of Mw within the central, north- Available at http://www.knmi.nl/seismologie/ ern and northwestern European earthquake catalogue tectonische-bevingen-nl and http://www.knmi.nl/ (CENEC). J Seismol, in press seismologie/tectonische-bevingen-regio Gutdeutsch R, Hammerl Ch, Kaiser D (1999) Neubewer- Kondorskaya NW, Shebalin NW (1982) New catalogue of tung der größten Erdbeben im nördlichen Oberrhein- strong earthquakes in the USSR from ancient times graben seit dem Jahr 858. Deutsche Geophysikalische through 1977. In: World Data Center A for Seismol- Gesellschaft Jahrestagung, 165 (Abstract) ogy SE-31, Boulder, CO, 608 pp 540 J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541

Kondorskaya NV, Ulomov VI (1999) Special earthquake Neunhöfer H, Grünthal G (1995) Das Erdbeben vom catalogue of Northern Eurasia from ancient times 7. April 1847 im Thüringer Wald. Z Geol Wiss 23: through 1995 (SECNE). Joint Institute of Physics 277–286 of the Earth (JIPE), Russian Academy of Sciences, Nikonov AA (1992) Distribution of maximum observed Moscow, Russia tremors and zones of possible occurrence of earth- Kunze T (1986) Ausgangsparameter für die Abschätzung quakes in Estonia, Izvestiya. Earth Phys 28:430–434 der seismischen Gefährdung in Mitteleuropa. Jber OGS (2006) The Bovec (SLO) earthquake (12.04.1998). Mitt Oberrhein Geol Ver Stgt 68:225–240 Centro di Ricerche Sismologiche (CRS), L’Istituto Labak P (1998) Data file of the Geophysical Institute. Nazionale di Oceanografia e di Geofisica Sperimen- Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia tale (OGS), Udine, Italy. Available at http://www.crs. Lambert J, Levret-Albaret A (1996) Mille ans de Seismes inogs.it en France. Catalogue d’epicentres, parameters et ref- Oncescu MC, Marza VI, Rizescu M, Popa M (1999) The erences (+ data file). French Association for Earth- Romanian earthquake catalogue between 984–1997 quake Engineering, Aix-en-Provence, 700 pp (+ data file until September 1998). In: Wenzel F, LDG (2005) Data file of the Laboratoire de Détection et Lungu D (eds) Contributions from the First Interna- de Géophysique, Bruyères-le-Châtel, France tional Workshop on Vrançea Earthquakes, Bucharest, Lenhardt W (1996) Data file of the Zentralanstalt für Romania, November 1–4, 1997. Kluwer, The Meteorologie und Geodynamik, Hauptabteilung für Netherlands, pp 43–48 Geophysik, Vienna, Austria ORB (2007) Data files of the Observatoire Royale du Levret A, Backe JC, Cushing M (1994) Atlas of macro- Belgique. Brussels, Belgium. Available at http://www. seismic maps for French earthquakes with their princi- astro.oma.be/SEISMO/index.php/ pal characteristics. Nat Hazards 10:19–46. doi:10.1007/ Pagaczewski J (1972) Catalogue of earthquakes in Poland BF00643439 in 1000–1970 years. In: Publications of the Institute Leydecker G (1986) Erdbebenkatalog für die Bundesre- of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, publik Deutschland mit Randgebieten für die Jahre Poland 51, 61 pp 1000–1981. Geol Jb E36, 83 pp Pettenati F, Sirovich L, Bungum H, Schweitzer J (2005) Leydecker G (1996) Data file updating and continuing Source inversion of regional intensity patterns of five (until 1994) the earthquake catalogue by Leydecker earthquakes from south-western Norway. Boll Geofis (1986). Teor Appl 46:111–134 Mayer-Rosa D, Baer M (1992) Earthquake catalogue of Pondrelli S, Ekström G, Morelli A (2001) Seismotec- Switzerland. Data file, Swiss Federal Institute of Tech- tonic re-evaluation of the 1976 Friuli, Italy, seis- nology Zurich, Swiss Seismological Service Zurich, mic sequence. J Seismol 5:73–83. doi:10.1023/A: Switzerland 1009822018837 Meidow H (1995) Rekonstruktion und Reinterpretation Pondrelli S, Morelli A, Ekström G, Mazza S, Boschi von historischen Erdbeben in den nördlichen Rhein- E, Dziewonski AM (2002) European-Mediterranean landen unter Berücksichtigung der Erfahrungen bei regional centroid-moment tensors: 1997–2000. Phys dem Erdbeben von Roermond am 13. April 1992. Earth Planet Inter 130:71–101. doi:10.1016/S0031- Ph.D. Thesis, University of Köln, 305 pp 9201(01)00312-0 Meidow H (2001) Das Erdbeben vom 13. April 1767 bei Pondrelli S, Morelli A, Ekström G (2004) European- Rotenburg a. d. Fulda. Deutsche Geophysikalische Mediterranean Regional Centroid Moment Tensor Gesellschaft. Mitteilungen 4:4–15 catalog: solutions for years 2001 and 2002. Phys Earth Meier R, Grünthal G (1992) Eine Neubewertung des Planet Inter 145:127–147. doi:10.1016/j.pepi.2004.03. Erdbebens vom 3. September 1770 bei Alfhausen 008 (Niedersachsen). Osnabr NatWiss Mitt 18:67–80 Pondrelli S, Salimbeni S, Morelli A, Ekström G, Boschi Melville CP, Levret A, Alexandre P, Lambert J, Vogt J E (2007) European-Mediterranean regional centroid (1996) Historical seismicity of the Strait of Dover– moment tensor catalogue: solutions for years 2003 Pas de Calais. Terra Nova 8:626–647. doi:10.1111/j. and 2004. Phys Earth Planet Inter 164:90–112. doi:10. 1365-3121.1996.tb00792.x 1016/j.pepi.2007.05.004 Musson R (1994) Earthquake catalogue of Great Britain Prinz D, Hollnack D, Wohlenberg J (1994) The seismic and surroundings. British Geolocical Survey, activity near Aachen following the 1992 Roermond Edinburgh, United Kingdom, Technical Report earthquake, The Netherlands. Geol Mijnb 73:235– 240 WL/94/04, Seismology Series, 99 pp Schenková Z (1993) Earthquake catalogue for Musson R (2006) Data file of the British Geological Sur- Czechoslovakia. Pure Appl Geophys 119:1077–1092 vey, Edinburgh, United Kingdom for events with (+ data file until 1984) ML ≥ 3 Schneider G (1998) Neue Bemessungsspektren für NEIC bulletins U.S. (1917–1999) In: National Earth- Deutschland. In: DIN Symposium 21.01.1998, quake Information Center bulletin U.S. Geologi- Leinfelden, Germany cal survey, World Data Center A for Seismology, Schneider G, Vogt J (1987) Seismotectonics and seis- Boulder, Colorado, USA. Available at http://neic. micity of the Bodensee-Fildergraben fracture zone— usgs.gov/neis/epic historical and instrumental aspects. In: First interna- J Seismol (2009) 13:517–541 541

tional workshop meeting, historical earthquakes in berücksichtigtes Schadenbeben. Geowissenschaften central Europe, Vienna, Austria, 24–27 June 12:236–240 Stromeyer D, Grünthal G, Wahlström R (2004) Chi- Wahlström R, Grünthal G (1994) Seismicity and seis- square regression for seismic strength parameter re- motectonic implications in the southern Baltic Sea lations, and their uncertainties, with applications to area. Terra Nova 6:149–157. doi:10.1111/j.1365-3121. an Mw based earthquake catalogue for central, north- 1994.tb00648.x ern and northwestern Europe. J Seismol 8:143–153. ZAMG (2007) Data file on the webpage of the doi:10.1023/B:JOSE.0000009503.80673.51 Zentralanstalt für Meteorologie und Geodynamik, Swiss Moment Tensor Solutions (2006) Moment tensor Hauptabteilung für Geophysik, Vienna, Austria. solutions from the Schweizerischer Erdbebendienst Available at http://www.zamg.ac.at/erdbeben/beben_ (SED), Zurich, Switzerland. Available at http://www. archiv/jahresberichte/index.php seismo.ethz.ch/mt Zedník J (2005) Catalogs of regional seismic events— SZGRF (2007) Gräfenberg Seismological Central Obser- Czech Regional Seismological Network. Geophysical vatory bulletins, Erlangen, Germany. Available at Institute, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, The http://www.szgrf.bgr.de/bulletins.html Czech Republic Tóth L, Mónus P, Zsíros T, Kiszely M, Czifra T (2006) Data Živciˇ c´ M (1993) Data file “Earthquakes of Slovenia” of file of the GeoRisk Ltd. Budapest, Hungary. Available the Seismology and Geology Office. Environmen- at http://www.georisk.hu tal Agency of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubljana, Utsu K (2002) Relationships between magnitude scales. Slovenia In: Lee WHK, Kanamori H, Jennings PC, Kisslinger Živciˇ c´ M (1994) Data file “Earthquake catalogue of PC (eds) International handbook of earthquake and Croatia” of the Seismology and Geology Office. engineering seismology, part A. Academic, New York, Environmental Agency of the Republic of Slovenia, pp 733–746 Verbeiren R, Camelbeeck T, Alexandre P (1995) Data Ljubljana, Slovenia file of the Observatoire Royale du Belgique, Brussels, Zsíros T (1983) The Érmellék earthquake of 1834. Acta Belgium Geod Geophys Montan Hung 18:129–134 Vogt J (1991) Die Bebenfolge vom Mai 1733 im “Rheinge- Zsíros T (1994) Data file of the Seismological Observa- biet”. Mainzer Naturwiss Arch 29:65–69 tory. Geodetic and Geophysical Research Institute, Vogt J (1993a) Révision de la crise sismique rhénane de Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary mai 1737. In: Stucchi M (ed) Materials of the CEC Zsíros T (1999) Data file of the Seismological Obser- project “Review of historical seismicity in Europe”. vatory. Geodetic and Geophysical Research Insti- CNR, Milan, pp 89–100 tute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Vogt J (1993b) Révision de la crise sismique nord-rhénane Hungary de novembre 1787. In: Stucchi M (ed) Materials of Zsíros T, Mónus P, Tóth L (1990) Hungarian earth- the CEC project “Review of historical seismicity in quake catalogue (456–1986). Seismological Observa- Europe”. CNR, Milan, pp 237–241 tory, Geodetic and Geophysical Research Institute, Vogt J, Grünthal G (1994) Die Erdbebenfolge vom Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary, Herbst 1612 im Raum Bielefeld—Ein bisher un- 182 pp