Construction hut

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(woodcut by Jost Amman from 1536)

The Bauhütten , also cathedral huts or huts , were the workshop associations of Gothic cathedral construction in Europe.

The building huts developed from the Romanesque church building by monks to the organized construction process of Gothic cathedrals, which included a wide variety of crafts. The form of organization of the stonemasons in the stonemasonry brotherhood was a specialty , because the masters of the other trades only organized themselves separately in the guilds and the journeymen. Therefore, a fundamental distinction must be made between the building works , the stonemasons and the guild .

Of particular importance is the quality education of the Gothic building works, that in had apprentices , journeymen and journeymen , Art servant, leaves Hauer, Parliere , sculptor and master different.

The main Gothic huts included those in Bern (later Zurich ), Vienna , Cologne and, above all, the most important in Strasbourg , to which other auxiliary huts in their catchment area were subordinate. With the end of the Gothic period, the importance of construction huts waned and with their final ban by Emperor Charles VI in 1731, the era of construction works ended for the time being. Today in Switzerland, Germany, Austria and France there are still or again cathedral or minster building huts, which are mostly supported by church foundations and mainly deal with the maintenance of existing sacred stone structures.

The German Foundation for Monument Protection has taken up the term “building hut” with its youth building huts . They organize the Voluntary Year in Monument Preservation for teenagers and young adults.

2020 Bauhütte beings was in the register of good practices of UNESCO entered.

Word origin

The word "Bauhütte" was coined in 1816 by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in his essay Art and Antiquity on the Rhine and Mayn , before the general term of the hut was written down. The term “ Dombauhütte” comes from Carl von Heideloff (1844).

The term building works movement is derived from the term building works described here, but describes a boom in the establishment of housing associations in the early 1920s.

Construction huts of antiquity

There are few or no documents or evidence of the nature of the ancient construction huts. It can be assumed that in the times of the Egyptian pyramids and Greek temples the knowledge of the art of building was in the hands of priestly caste. Nothing has been handed down about the way in which the craftsmen who carried out the work organized themselves, about their internal and external relationships.

There are only reports from the Roman Baucollegia. Its members called each other collegae and were exempt from certain civil burdens, especially in the Roman Empire. Their internal circumstances were governed by their own laws and jurisdiction. In contrast to the ordinary craftsmen, who were not particularly respected by the Romans, these “collegia” acquired considerable power and influence over time, similar to the medieval guilds. This was probably the reason why they were repeatedly attacked and banned. With the expansion of the Roman Empire and its colonies, branches of the Collegia also formed in Gaul and Britain.

A connection between the Collegia and the construction huts of the Middle Ages cannot be proven.

Romanesque construction huts

St. Gallen monastery plan. Reichenau, early 9th century

The history of stonemasonry in Germania begins with the occupation by Roman soldiers, who also carried out a transfer of stone building techniques. In connection with the advancing Christianization, monasteries were built, with Irish and Anglo-Saxon monks such as B. Bonifatius , who knew the stone building technique from their home countries, contributed significantly to the development of stone building art.

During the time of Charlemagne (768–814), the decisive turning point for the development of stone architecture in Germany, so that the construction of the King's Hall by Lorsch is described as one of the first German stone buildings to be built in a regulated construction company. Gottfried Kiesow considers Einhard to be the organizer of the Lorsch monastery building, who for the first time employed a permanent group of qualified stonemasons in the construction.

In particular, the orders of the Benedictines and the Cistercians promoted Romanesque church building. The abbot Wilhelm von Hirsau not only employed monks, but also from 1070 AD the so-called Conversi . The Conversi were lay brothers who had not taken a monk's vows, lived in the monasteries and were trained and worked as stonemasons. When a new church or monastery was started, groups of monks and conversi moved in, well equipped and armed to the next monastery construction site. The monasteries and monasteries on the way were obliged to house and feed them. When the Benedictines and the Cistercians withdrew from the monastery building in the pre-Romanesque period, the so-called Comacini are said to have filled this gap and enriched the Romanesque building ornamentation with twisted columns and elaborate capitals. It is believed that the Comacini were stonemasons from the Como area who followed Charlemagne after he had conquered the Longobard Empire.

When they had implemented Christianization , the monks withdrew from the building industry. By then they had built around 2000 monasteries. The St. Gallen monastery plan shows that the monks built monasteries systematically, purposefully and at a high level .

Gothic construction huts and brotherhood of stonemasons

Stonemason's mark of a Gothic stonemason
Portrait of Peter Parler, one of the most important Gothic builders
Self-portrait by Adam Kraft , late Gothic sculptor, at the Sacrament House in St. Lorenz in Nuremberg

Differentiation between Bauhütte and stonemason brotherhood

According to the current state of knowledge, a distinction must be made between Bauhütte and stone masonry:

  • The Gothic Bauhütte was an organization whose field of work was on-site large-scale clerical construction. “The foreman and the various craftsmen belonged to the hut. a. Stonemason, carpenter, bricklayer, blacksmith and glazier, insofar as they were required on the construction site for a longer period of time, [...] in addition to a chaplain [...] there were not only sexton, sacristan, organist and church servant [...], but also baker, cook, and Servants for the household of the kitchen. ”“ The building hut was under the top management and supervision of one or more “master builders” (and) high administrative and financial officials. ”The building hut was a company.
  • The Gothic construction hut had an ideal superstructure called the “ brotherhood ”, the stonemasons' brotherhood , which structured all major construction sites as an overall organization and grouped them together in main and side huts. Only master stonemasons and journeyman stonemasons were organized in the brotherhood and no other trades. The stonemasonry brotherhood had its own order, its own jurisdiction and a fundamentally democratic structure.

One peculiarity is to be noted: The organizational forms of the stonemasons developed differently to the other trades, because the masters and the journeymen of the other trades organized themselves separately in the guilds. “In the other trades, journeyman's associations have been formed since the 14th century, in which two concerns are at the center of the associations: care and welfare in the event of illness and death as well as the order of behavior in the drinking room or in the guild house, i. H. the social gathering of the handicraftsmen, which also includes the opportunity to play, as far as this was allowed. ”The organizational structure of the stonemasons evidently did not initially develop in this direction due to the presence of the stonemasons' brotherhood.

At almost all Gothic cathedrals there are documents that prove the existence of a construction hut from the start of construction. These documents are in the form of administrative and economic records. References to a supraregional structure and ideal order from bygone times, which are not further documented, can be found in written form in the Central English Regius manuscript from the 14th century, as well as in the formulations of the Strasbourg stonemason ordinance of 1495.

The written statutes of the stonemasons' brotherhoods of the Gothic cathedral building were created at a time when the Gothic architectural style had already passed its zenith. There are suspicions that the organization of the Gothic construction hut emerged together with the Gothic architectural style.

Relationship between the stonemasons and the guild

It is often assumed that there was a fundamental disagreement between the stonemasons and the guild . According to Binding, there was more of a cooperative and adequate relationship between the guild and the stonemasons: “In the 15th century, the foremen and masters [of the building works] also had to be members of the municipal guild, provided they were not exempt from doing so. The relationship between the hut and the guild was generally harmonious and cooperative, especially since the hut was dependent on the city's craft, which was used for individual work. In some cities the guilds had a say in the church hut. The foreman of the hut was called in on various occasions as an expert on urban construction tasks. "

Gothic construction huts

High-precision tracery in Prague by Peter Parler
Leaf tusk work in the highest sense of form in Ulm Minster

The building of the Bauhütte

The building of the Gothic construction works was mostly made of wood. As far as we know, the stone work was finished when winter fell and resumed in spring. However, there are also isolated indications of a stone prefabrication phase in the winter half-year (construction invoices in the Xanten monastery archive). It was not until the middle of the 13th century that the first sources testify to the presence of the construction hut. The hut in Ripalle on Lake Geneva (1386) “was an elongated, two-story wooden structure, covered with 20,000 shingles, 90 feet long, 24 feet wide and 30 feet high (about 30 × 8 × 10 m). There were many window seats in the basement, and there was probably a tearing floor on the upper floor. “Art. 68 of the Rochlitzer Steinmetzordnung of 1462, that a furnace was available for heating in the winter time, is documented in Xanten 1398. The huts were lockable, but rarely made of stone, the roof was made of straw or wooden shingles, depending on the situation.

Training in the Gothic construction works

The Gothic architectural style is based in the technical sense on mathematical and geometrical-technical principles - this had to be reflected in the training of the Gothic stonemasons. In his work “Measure and Number in Gothic Architecture”, Konrad Hecht refuted through extensive scientific studies that there were generally valid proportions for construction, such as the triangulature , which were kept as hut secrets and only passed on to certain people. In his work he transferred eleven proportions to the tower of the Freiburg Minsterand proved that such an application would have resulted in significant dimensional deviations. “It is possible to state the known dimensions of a Gothic building in meters as a multiple of the unit of measurement customary for the place and time [...] The only triangle of proportions that one wants to see on a Gothic crack has proven to be an error. The Gothic builder knew neither 'magic agents' nor 'beauty makers'. [...] On the construction site as well as on the drawing board, he used the only reliable tools of measure and number; For everything that he created, for everything that still concerns us today as an achievement of Gothic, these aids were indispensable to him. But tools are one thing - desire, experience and ability are another - even in Gothic architecture. ' “As a result, the builders only used regionally valid dimensions and numbers. The fact that basic geometrical and technical constructions were undoubtedly instructed and applied in the training of stonemasons is not a contradiction in terms. The Gothic builders were all trained stonemasons and this only changed at the end of theRenaissance . They were therefore able to develop geometrical-technical basic constructions on the articulated Gothic stone structure; the cottage stonemasons could geometric-technical construction techniques with technical aids such as compass (for example, calipers , dividers and beam compass ) angle and straight edgeapply. They had learned how to use these technical aids during their training in the construction huts. Construction lines scratched in stone prove the precise mastery of the geometrical-technical rules of stone construction and manufacture. In this sense, the stone building art of the Gothic made high demands on the training of stonemasons, which were regulated in the statutes of the Bauhütte. There was no general law that was kept or applied in well-known smelter secrets, neither in training nor in Gothic stone architecture.

Hut servants (apprentices)

He must be at least 14 years old and baptized, and his parents must have been married to each other. When the apprentice was accepted, a guarantee of 20 guilders had to be deposited. Upon completion of the six-year training course, the money was repaid along with a further 10 guilders. If the apprenticeship was broken off, the money went to the hut. “It was only at the Speyer Conference in 1464 that the apprenticeship period was shortened to five years and that of masons to three years.” If a “servant” had already completed an apprenticeship with the masons' guild, his apprenticeship period was shortened to three years.


With the so-called single act the young stonemason became a journeyman, received his stonemason's mark and was accepted into the brotherhood. He was taught the secret Zureiseritual with which he could identify himself as belonging to the Bauhütte at all construction huts. From this point on, he had a say in organizational decisions and in the case law of the Bauhütte. It was up to him whether he wanted to look for funding (work) in a hut, divorce and hike or continue learning as an art servant.


The traveling journeymen formed the link between the individual construction huts. Every journeyman was free to say goodbye on wages evening or on Saturday. Only if a journeyman worked for a master during the winter should he stay “until Midsummer”. When a journeyman traveled to a "hut", he was received with the so-called greeting and handshake, the ritual greeting of the building hut. If a journeyman did not find funding in a construction hut, the master and all the working journeymen should support him.

A journeyman who had not "changed", i.e. who had worked on various construction huts, was not allowed to become a parlier .

Art servant

If a stonemason from the construction works wanted to become a parlier, he had to have been on the road and signed up as an art servant for another two years. To become an art servant, he had to have completed his apprenticeship. In addition, he had to be in the stonemasonry brotherhood . As an art servant, the stonemason was introduced to the higher arts, e.g. B. Construction, sculpture , proportion theory, etc. He could be used by the master as a parlier. For his finished work, the master had to “do the utmost” for the art servant; that is, he had to pay it in full.


Twisted pinnacle with crabs by Anton Pilgram

There is another professional differentiation in the huts that has so far received little attention, namely that of the leaf cutters: “In late medieval account books, a special group of leaf cutters ('lawberhawer' or 'dem Gesellen dej dy lawber hawt, all day II dn. more '), who cut the foliage on capitals and crabs , a specialization that began before the middle of the 15th century. cannot be proven. In 1462/67 the leaf cutter at St. Lorenz in Nuremberg was paid like a Palier with 22 pfennig a day's wage, in contrast to the stonemason who received 20 pfennigs ”. Further evidence is found in the Netherlands, where Laubhauer were paid in 1456 as “steenhouders ende looffwerkers” .


The foreman on the site is still called “foreman” today. It is likely that this name comes from the French word “parler”, which means “to speak” in German. The parlier stood between the master and the journeymen. He had to pass on instructions and supervise the work, had to be the first to come in the morning and the last to leave in the evening, he represented the master when pouring (greeting) traveling journeyman and vis-à-vis the client.

Stone sculptor

Up until now it was unclear whether stone sculptors played a special role as a profession in the huts, because sculptors were not everyone, as they are today. In Binding's work there are references: “In 1418 [...] the name bildhower appears for the first time in the Ulm accounting book , to which 5 guld will be given to a future image ; 1419 will give this same master Hartmann around between Bild 20 gildin and dez Bildhowers knecht give 6 sch. ze drinking money "and 1420" give the bildhower 7 lib. around the twelve botten and our frowen. ”Furthermore, it is stated:“ In the 15th century, after completing his apprenticeship as a stonemason and traveling for a year, he learned another year from a master and was thus more highly qualified than the stonemason. ”


There was no regular master craftsman training. At the end of the apprenticeship - usually without an examination - a hike of at least one year had to be completed. Then the master could make the journeyman a parlier or he became an art servant or a master servant for two years. In doing so, he learned the design and construction techniques. Furthermore, this time was connected with the acquisition of sculptural skills. “There were no vacancies for a master craftsman in the huts, but he had to apply for an open master craftsman position on a building. The training period could easily reach 10 years. ”It should be noted that commissions did not hold the master craftsman's examination as it is today. The employment as a master in the building huts was dependent on the good reputation and ability and high-ranking clients, such as princes,Patricians , bishops , abbots and priors decided on a position. The master had the highest authority after employment in his work. Journeyman and parlors had to be obedient to him at work, and he also had the last word when it came to making a judgment at the respective “hut”.

Internal and external conditions of the Gothic construction works

The Bauhütte was integrated into the ecclesiastical and legal circumstances of the time. It had a certain special position; Nevertheless, an involvement can be determined. The extent to which the foremen of the construction works were subordinate to the church administration can be shown using the example of the Strasbourg cathedral construction works (below).

Church factory "fabrica eccelesiae"

Builder and construction financing

It is undisputed that the church has had enormous assets since the 3rd century, which in addition to the church's property and usage rights also consisted of claims in the form of taxes as well as hand and tension rights, the so-called labor rights. Especially large ecclesiastical owners and property rights accumulated in the area of ​​developing cities in the Middle Ages. The construction load consisted not only of expenses for the new building, but also in the maintenance and operation of the cathedrals (equipment and maintenance) itself. In addition to the technical and organizational, the construction of the cathedrals also had a financial and legal as well as, as one would say today, an administrative side. The administration of the Christian cathedral building was carried out by the so-called factory administrators or conductors.

Since the 13th century, the construction work has generally been transferred from the bishop to the cathedral chapter , which does not rule out the fact that in some cases the building initiative came from the bishop. The construction commitment and the construction financing are multifaceted and the proportions of the influence on the construction are very different, they are difficult to determine in detail - especially in the case of collective property developers from the bishop, cathedral and collegiate chapters as well as parish.

Factory administrators, factory attendants and conductors

The appointment of the church factory administrator was different and depending on the cathedral chapter or collegiate chapter , monastery or parish. The factory manager was usually appointed for a limited period of time, such as a year. The factory administrator was responsible for the administration of church property, such as B. the receipt of money and material gifts, also responsible for the equipment and the cleanliness of the church. At times he was also responsible for the construction management: “He had to pay the construction workers and complete the work and wage orders, take care of the procurement of materials and their transport, and negotiate the exemptions from customs, unless this - like the procurement of necessary building land - was done by the chapter itself took place "

Factory attendants were assigned to the factory manager to check the invoices and for control purposes. The number of factory attendants fluctuated. Schreiber, the factory manager, was on hand to support larger construction projects.

Strasbourg had a peculiarity because the cathedral was also the parish church of the citizens of Strasbourg. There was the so-called conductor there , who was appointed by the city and who roughly had the duties of the factory administrator. The foreman of the Münsterbauhütte in Strasbourg was subordinate to the conductor. It has not been proven whether this subordination of the foremen can be transferred to all Gothic construction huts, but due to the importance and position of the Strasbourg hut as the central main hut, it must be assumed that this was the case.

Brotherhood of Stonemasons

One of the largest Gothic rose windows on Strasbourg Cathedral , 13.6 m in diameter
Main article: → Brotherhood of stonemasons

The ideal basis of the building industry was a special form of brotherhood , the stonemason brotherhood . It is a supra-regional organization that is to be distinguished from the regional builders' huts, guilds and guilds .

In the journeyman's associations still existing today, the so-called shafts , we find indications that the brotherhood of construction huts did not completely disappear after their dissolution.

The two oldest associations, the existence of which can be traced back to the 17th century, call themselves the Society of Righteous Foreign Bricklayer and Stone Carver and Society of Righteous Foreign and Local Carpenters and Journeyman Slateers. The association of masons and stonemasons maintains a ritual they call “brotherhood”, which as such does not exist in the association of carpenters.

Main huts and side huts

The main huts were in Bern, later in Zurich, Vienna, Cologne and above all in Strasbourg. They are expressly mentioned as main huts in the hut regulations. Whenever there were disputes that could not be resolved at the local huts, or when decisions had to be made that affected the entire metallurgy, or there was a conflict between different huts, the main huts were invoked as the highest authority. The addition huts were under the relevant main cabins, depending on the catchment area and dissipate had money to them. It is not known whether the determination of the four main huts had existed for a long time or was only introduced with the Reformation of the hut regulations in 1459 and there were perhaps other, possibly changing, main huts beforehand.

Hut secrets

Several articles of the hut regulations expressly prohibit the passing on of hut usage to outsiders. This was also the case with the guilds. But the essential secret of the hut was the knowledge of the architecture. It was only allowed to be passed on to members of the stonemasonry brotherhood. Passing on handicraft techniques and arts was also forbidden in the guilds. This is partly still the case today.

Decision-making and jurisdiction of the building huts

The structure of decision-making and jurisprudence is reminiscent of the thing of Germanic jurisprudence. The master presided over the meetings at the “hut”. And it was up to him alone to pronounce the judgment. But all of the Brotherhood workers present discussed guilt or innocence together. The order to which the workers had to submit was drawn up jointly by everyone. If a stonemason did not agree with his judgment, he could turn to one of the main huts. To exclude a stonemason from the brotherhood, it took three masters as judges. The workmen of the hut were required to negotiate all disputes among themselves before the hut courts and not before the city court or the like.

Decline of the Gothic and Gothic construction huts

Ulm Minster with the highest tower of all Christian churches, 161.5 m high

In fact, the time of the Gothic construction works ended in 1731 with their final ban by Emperor Charles VI. In 1707 the construction huts were banned from having their own jurisdiction. From the 16th century there are documents that prove that the guilds took over the building huts. It is believed that this appropriation was also promoted by the masters of the building works, as it enabled them to expand their power and prosperity considerably. Probably the decay had begun long before the Strasbourg order - it is also expressly referred to grievances.

If you look at important cathedrals from the beginning and the end of the Gothic period, e.g. B. Chartres and Cologne, can guess that the spirit of the Gothic had gradually faded. This applies to the construction huts as well as to the architectural style. The construction huts had to conjure up their cohesion with a set of rules like the Strasbourg order. The set of rules had to be confirmed by the highest authority (confirmation document from 1498 Maximilian I) - it shows that the importance that the construction works had carried for centuries was reduced. A new time, the time of the Renaissance, the time of the rebirth of antiquity, set new standards.

The Renaissance came from Italy and with it the Enlightenment . The time came to an end for deep mystical piety, one might also call it superstition , as well as for a solidarity fraternity in which each individual contributed his skills and knowledge to a great common goal and the name and identity of many great builders and sculptors behind the stonemasons of the construction huts remained hidden from the outside.

Today's situation of the construction huts

Lettering of the Dombauhütte Cologne in basalt lava

There are huts in Switzerland, Germany, Austria and France. Today's construction huts deal exclusively with maintenance work. Old, morbid stone workpieces are secured, repaired or newly created. Depending on the stone material or degree of destruction, new technologies for stone conservation , such as B. water repellants used. Comprehensive examinations are carried out by special experts before the use of construction chemicals.

Some of today's “cathedral builders” are master stonemasons, others are engineers or architects. You are mainly concerned with engineering and organizational problems. In 1996, Ingrid Helm-Rommel in Ulm was the first woman to be appointed master builder for the cathedral. In order to exchange experiences, European cathedral builders coordinate meetings of all "builders" on changing cathedral construction sites and have organized themselves in an association.

The organizational forms of the huts are different. There are state (e.g. the Zwingerbauhütte in Saxony), ecclesiastical (e.g. the Münsterbauhütte Schwäbisch Gmünd ), organized by ecclesiastical foundations (e.g. the Cologne Cathedral Administration ) or by associations (e.g. the Freiburg Cathedral Building Association ) Huts. All huts are largely financed by public or church funds and work together with the state monument protection authorities.

A more recent establishment are the youth building huts of the German Foundation for Monument Protection , which is the patent holder of the brand name "Jugendbauhütte", which was protected on January 5, 2000 under the registration number: 399 44 950. Here young people who complete the Voluntary Year in Monument Preservation (FJD) get an insight into historical craft techniques. They also gain knowledge of the history of architecture and get to know the work areas of monument preservation. The supervisors of these facilities are employees of the ijgd (International Youth Community Services e.V. ), who are under the supervision of the German Foundation for Monument Protection. The youth building huts are located in Brandenburg/ Berlin , Görlitz , Duisburg / Raesfeld , Mühlhausen (Thuringia), Quedlinburg , Romrod , Soest and Wismar as well as Stralsund / Szczecin as the location of a German-Polish joint project, Regensburg, Stade and the Hanseatic City of Lübeck .

See also


  • The general brotherhood order of the stonemasons "in German lands" from 1459 (Regensburg)
  • The Torgau or Rochlitz stonemason ordinance of 1462
  • The renewal of the brother's book from 1563


  • Günther Binding : Construction in the Middle Ages . Primus-Verlag, Darmstadt 1997, ISBN 3-89678-066-2 .
  • Günther Binding: Construction company . In: Lexicon of the Middle Ages (LexMA) . tape 1 . Artemis & Winkler, Munich / Zurich 1980, ISBN 3-7608-8901-8 , Sp. 1553-1561 .
  • Günther Binding: Bauhütte . In: Lexicon of the Middle Ages (LexMA) . tape 1 . Artemis & Winkler, Munich / Zurich 1980, ISBN 3-7608-8901-8 , Sp. 1630 f .
  • Alexander Garbai: The construction huts. Your past and future. The way to the common building of workers' organizations in the construction industry. Verlag des Deutschen Baugewerksbund, Hamburg 1928.
  • Karl Friederich : Stone processing in its development from the 11th to the 18th century. Edition AEGIS, Ulm 1988, ISBN 3-924756-02-3 (reprint of the Augsburg edition 1932).
  • Carl Alexander Heideloff (Hrsg.): The construction works of the Middle Ages in Germany. A brief presentation with certificates and a. Side dishes . Stein Publishing House, Nuremberg 1844.
  • Ferdinand Janner: The construction huts of the German Middle Ages. Seemann, Leipzig 1876.
  • Werner Jüttner: A contribution to the history of the Bauhütte and the building industry in the Middle Ages. Welzel Verlag, Cologne 1935 (also dissertation, University of Bonn 1935).
  • Gottfried Kiesow : Architectural History. In: Vocational training center for the stonemasonry and sculptor's trade (ed.): Natural stone and environmental protection in monument preservation . Ulm 1997.
  • Albrecht Kottmann: Symbol numbers, units of measurement and measurement methods from prehistoric times to the introduction of the metric system . Fink Verlag, 2003. ISBN 978-3-89870-020-7 .
  • Max Raphael : Work and Life in the Bauhütten. On the architectural history of the Middle Ages . In. Ders .: temples, churches and figures . TB edition. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1989, pp. 31-86.
  • Alfred Schottner: The "regulations" of the medieval cathedral huts. LIT-Verlag, Münster 1995, ISBN 3-8258-2353-9 .
  • Rudolf Wissell : The old craft law and custom (history of the German craft). Colloquium-Verlag, Berlin 1971 ff (6 vols .; reprint of the Berlin 1929 edition).

Web links to cathedral and cathedral building huts and building associations






Other Information

Individual evidence

  1. UNESCO honors building metallurgy , UNESCO, December 17, 2020.
  2. ^ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe: Art and antiquity on the Rhine and Mayn. 1st issue; 1816; about on the fifth to last page
  3. Prehistory and early history of the Bauhütten (up to approx. 1550). on:
  4. ^ Karl Friederich: The stone processing ... 1988, p. 38.
  5. Gottfried Kiesow: Architectural History. 1997, p. 45.
  6. ^ Günther Binding: Construction in the Middle Ages. 1997, p. 102.
  7. ^ Günther Binding: Construction in the Middle Ages. 1997, p. 103.
  8. ^ A b Günther Binding: Construction in the Middle Ages. 1997, p. 104.
  9. ^ Günther Binding: Construction in the Middle Ages. 1997, p. 123.
  10. ^ Günther Binding: Construction in the Middle Ages. 1997, p. 126.
  11. ^ Konrad Hecht: Measure and number in the Gothic architecture. 3 parts in one volume, 2nd reprint of the Göttingen edition 1969−72. Olms, Hildesheim 1997, p. 469f.
  12. ^ A b Günther Binding: Construction in the Middle Ages. 1997, p. 292.
  13. a b c Günther Binding: Construction in the Middle Ages. 1997, p. 291.
  14. ^ Günther Binding: Construction in the Middle Ages. 1997, p. 294.
  15. ^ Günther Binding: Construction in the Middle Ages. 1997, p. 67.
  16. ^ Günther Binding: Construction in the Middle Ages. 1997, p. 73.