## 4 Intensity Map Derived in This Study  
For a thorough evaluation of intensity at a specific location, it is imperative that earthquake reports accurately depict the impact on living beings, objects, structures, and the natural environment. However, it is rare to find such well-written reports that cover every category of data about the effects of an earthquake. This is particularly true for reports on historical earthquakes, as they often come from a time when neither the knowledge nor training of regular people was at the needed level. As a result, most of the reporters of historical earthquakes mention only some of the data that are necessary and important for a reliable assessment of the earthquake intensity. In Appendix C, we show a few examples of reports from the 8 April 1893, Svilajnac Earthquake for several locations in Serbia. By using these examples, we will demonstrate the significance of beginning each research study with original data rather than reusing the data interpreted by earlier researchers and thus introducing their possible mistakes into the current study. Already with the first example for Aleksandrovac (a village 15 km south of the Serbian city of Pozarevac), given in Appendix C under number 1, we can see from the first two reports what a bad and a good report mean for the same place. Based on the first report, the things we know are that \"the earthquake occurred at 2:42 p.m.; it was felt from the eastern side and lasted approximately 40-45 s\". There is no information about the effects on people, objects, and the very building where the telegraph station was located. Neither information is given as to how the earthquake itself was felt: weak, moderate, strong, very strong, fierce, etc., except that it lasted about 40-45 s. While the second report is commendable, there is a minor issue with the data. Based on the given description that \"many houses made of hard material cracked\", we cannot find out the type and extent of the cracks. The intensity could be I = VII (EMS-98: cracks in many walls) or I = VIII (EMS-98: large and extensive cracks in most walls). Therefore, we may estimate the intensity value as I = VII-VIII. At this juncture, we should mention that intermediate intensity values are pure artifacts that have been introduced to suggest a resolution that is not actually achievable, as pointed out recently by [PERSON] [15]. In this Section and Section 7, as well as in Table A1 in Appendix B, we use intermediate intensity values for all locations for which the available information was not conclusive enough for us to reliably assess only one discrete value. However, in Section 6, we will use only discrete intensity values for our calculations and estimation of the 1893 earthquake's seismological parameters. The third report for Aleksandrovac, found in the Serbian newspaper \"Odjek\" from 13 April 1893 [11], contains information that \"an unprecedented strong earthquake occurred at 2:40 PM in the west direction; lasted 40 s\". Similar effects of the main shock occurred in places around Aleksandrovac, for which we estimated intensities I = VII-VIII and I = VIII (for example, Zabari (VIII), Malo Crnice (VIII), Velika Plana (VII-VIII), Veliko Selo (VII-VIII)). In [PERSON]'s 1967 map, the estimated value of intensity was I = VI, but we found that it was attributed to the wrong location of another village with the same name (Aleksandrovac), which is located almost 100 km to the south, near the city of Krusevac. The next example refers to the village of Vlaska (number 2 in Appendix C). This village is located between Mladenovac and Sopot (about 64 km NNW from the epicenter). Yet again, [PERSON] [4] erred by incorrectly assuming the location of the village of Vlaska. Namely, [PERSON] [4] assumed that the village of Vlaska is the one with the same name, only located east of Jagodina (about 19 km SE from the epicenter). Two pieces of information from the report helped us to determine which of the two villages is the right one.