Monument protection

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Monument sign in Schwerin
The listed anatomical theater of the veterinary school in Berlin before and after the restoration
The ground monument Motte Altenburg - remains of a medieval castle with a castle hill and moat
Technical monument : roving production in the cloth factory Müller , Euskirchen
Modern monument:
Willy Sachs Stadium in Schweinfurt by Paul Bonatz (1936)

Monument protection serves to protect cultural monuments and overall facilities relevant to cultural history ( ensemble protection ). The aim is to ensure that monuments are permanently preserved and not falsified, damaged, impaired or destroyed, and so that these mostly architecturally designed cultural assets are permanently secured. The legal definition and framework conditions for monument protection are determined by monument law.

Monument protection is part of the protection of cultural assets . Measures that are necessary for the creation and maintenance of cultural monuments are called monument preservation .


Monument protection aims to preserve monuments permanently. The function of a society's cultural heritage is to provide information about the history of society on the basis of tangible and sensually perceptible historical evidence and thus to preserve a lively picture of the architecture and way of life of bygone times in the area of ​​monument protection. Monument protection can also be seen as part of maintaining quality of life .

There are international, national and country-specific legal bases for monument protection. The international basis is the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, which was passed on November 16, 1972 by the General Conference of UNESCO . The operational guidelines of the convention provide precise information on the practical implementation of the World Heritage Convention and instruct the contracting states on how the convention is to be applied. This international undertaking created an awareness of the fact that there are monuments, but also buildings or places around the world, the preservation of which is in the interest of all humanity, since they represent unique testimonies to human, natural and cultural history. As a result, many states also took action to establish or improve their national regulations on monument protection.

Internationally, monument protection as part of the protection of cultural assets is particularly about preserving the particularly sensitive cultural memory, the grown cultural diversity, the historical background and the economic basis of a state, a region or a society. There is also a connection between the destruction of these foundations and the causes of flight, as Karl von Habsburg , President of Blue Shield International , explained during a cultural property protection mission in Lebanon in April 2019 with the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon : “Cultural goods are part of the Identity of the people who live in a certain place. If you destroy their culture, you also destroy their identity. Many people are uprooted, often no longer have any prospects and as a result flee from their homeland. "

The basis of monument protection is the respective monument law of the states and, if applicable, of the federal states, which defines what a monument is. The task of the monument protection authorities is also the inventory of the monument inventory in monument lists .


Niche of one of the destroyed Buddha statues from Bamiyan in Afghanistan (2005)

Buildings have existed since time immemorial that, due to their aesthetic appeal or their imposing dimensions, survive and continue to be preserved, often protected by "rededications" (examples: Pantheon in Rome , Hagia Sophia , Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, Mezquita of Cordoba ). At most, however, we can speak of preliminary forms of monument protection. The - in vain - agitation for the preservation of the Constantinian basilica at the point where the Roman St. Peter's Basilica is today, already referred to immemoriality and tradition and can be regarded as a preliminary stage of modern monument protection thinking that grew out of the rationalism of the Enlightenment . Above all, the French Revolution, with its state-sponsored secularization , contributed to the desacralization of the "aura" of old buildings and to make them into museums.

On the other hand, the destructive excesses in revolutionary epochs (example: destruction of the monastery complex of Cluny ) such as the restoration after 1815 resulted in a special dedication to tradition, which was also promoted by the re-established pre-revolutionary dynasties. It was in this area of ​​tension that the first monument protection laws emerged in the early 19th century. The earliest ordinance in Germany, which was supposed to ensure not only the delivery of historical finds but also the preservation of existing architectural monuments, was issued by the state of Baden in April 1812 based on a design by Friedrich Weinbrenner. He was followed in 1818 by his student Georg Moller for the Grand Duchy of Hesse .

Some of the current discussions are in part already taking place on a globalized level, such as the world cultural heritage and activities of UNESCO and ICOMOS . Blue Shield International is the link between national processes and international regulations or between military structures and civil institutions . Blue Shield and its national organizations have carried out projects for the wars in Iraq, Syria, Mali, Egypt and Libya, but also for natural disasters such as Haiti. In doing so, so-called “no-strike lists” were and are being drawn up together with local experts to protect buildings from air strikes or other military effects, transmitted to the military parties to the conflict and compliance checked.

In wars, the freedom of movement of the United Nations personnel is significantly restricted due to security concerns and therefore, due to its structure, Blue Shield is seen as particularly suitable for acting quickly, flexibly and autonomously in armed conflicts. It is also considered important to send cultural heritage inspectors in the event of armed conflict. This is a signal to all warring parties that the international community and the UN take the illegal destruction of cultural heritage seriously and will bring those to justice who are responsible for the destruction and looting. Another important task for the monument protection of Blue Shield is seen in its monitoring / "early warning" function, which can also lead to the preparation of support actions under the aegis of UNESCO. The establishment of an early warning system for the field offices of the partner organizations UNESCO and Blue Shield is to be sought and the UN Secretary General is to be informed accordingly if the cultural heritage and cultural diversity are at risk.

Monument protection is the establishment of rules and lists as well as the training of administrative staff, volunteers, the police, the military and the courts.

In many countries such as France, Germany or Austria, Memorial Day is celebrated. The German Open Monument Day has been coordinated nationwide by the German Foundation for Monument Protection since 1993, with the day of action taking place annually on the second Sunday in September. The Austrian events developed from the European cultural event “ European Heritage Days ” (EHD). In Austria, Monument Day always takes place on the last Sunday of September as a fixed date.


In Germany, monument law is a sub-area of ​​special administrative law and deals with the legal definition, protection, handling of cultural monuments and the financial support of listed repairs.

In Germany, monument protection has been in Article 150 of the Constitution of the German Reich since 1919 ( Weimar Constitution of August 11, 1919). The text reads: "The monuments of art, history and nature as well as the landscape enjoy the protection and care of the state".

In the German Reich , the first modern, codified monument protection law in Germany was passed with the law on monument protection of July 16, 1902 in the Grand Duchy of Hesse . In 1909, Saxony passed the law against defacing town and country (defacing law) , which was followed in 1934 by the law for the protection of art, cultural and natural monuments (Heimatschutzgesetz) developed in the Weimar Republic .

In the DDR various regulations and laws on the conservation, maintenance and protection of monuments have been adopted since 1952, see listed in the GDR .

In the Federal Republic of Germany, according to the Basic Law, the federal states have had cultural sovereignty since 1949 (see Art. 70 in conjunction with Art. 72 to 74 GG). In 1975 the majority of the federal states did not yet have any legal regulations for the protection of monuments. The German National Committee for the Protection of Monuments (at that time still the German National Committee for the preparation of the year 1975 ) campaigned for the corresponding legislative procedure in the course of the campaign for the European Monument Protection Year 1975 (officially: European Architectural Heritage Year (EAHY)) .

International transfer of cultural assets

The monument law also includes regulations that regulate the trade and traffic with movable cultural monuments . Today, these regulations largely only affect cross-border trade in cultural goods. Due to corresponding EU regulations, the freedom of the common market only applies to a limited extent and the protection largely relates to the whereabouts of the cultural asset in the respective nation state .

Since 2016 there have been federal regulations in the Cultural Property Protection Act (Kulturgutschutzgesetz - KGSG). Previously, the regulations were divided into several laws:

Types of cultural monuments

The Spellenstein , a listed menhir in Rentrisch / St. Ingbert

A distinction is made between different types of monuments :

Monument protection laws

Since monument protection in Germany sets limits to the property right guaranteed in Article 14 of the Basic Law , a statutory regulation is necessary according to Paragraph 1, Sentence 2 of this Article . Due to the cultural sovereignty of the federal states (Art. 30 GG ), monument protection legislation is a matter for the 16 federal states . In addition, certain cultural monuments are protected by Section 304 (1) StGB ( damage to property ).

There are 16 monument protection laws in the individual countries in Germany :

The monument protection laws of the German states use the plural of the word "monument":
  • Monuments
  • Monuments
  • The national laws define the terms cultural monument , monument , monument preservation and monument protection differently. All laws define monument protection as a public interest and deal with the protection of inland cultural monuments. For the origin and development of these laws since the 19th century, see for example: Development of monument protection in Saxony .

    There are two different systems of legal validity of monument protection depending on the federal state:

    1. In the information system (also: ipso-jure system, declarative system ), the law basically places all objects that meet the criteria defined in the law under protection as monuments. This also applies if the objects are still undiscovered in the floor or cannot be found in the hallway. Monument lists then only have an informal, informational character.
    2. In the constitutive system , the Monument Protection Act defines which conditions must be met so that an object can be declared a cultural monument by an administrative act by the competent authority. All objects that are listed in separate lists of monuments are protected as monuments. This creates legal certainty for the owner, who has to adhere to the requirements , but the creation and regular updates require more effort than the information system . For regions or monument categories in which there are still considerable inventory deficits, such as B. in the garden monuments , this system is disadvantageous from the point of view of protection. One way out is the quick entry lists that were created in East Germany in the 1990s.

    There are monument lists in both systems .

    The monument law knows different regulations for ground and architectural monuments, since architectural monuments are usually visible and can therefore be considered in their concerns more easily than ground monuments, which are often unknown and only come to light in the course of a building project.

    Monument protection laws apply primarily to immovable monuments. The enforcement density of monument law for movable monuments is relatively low. Special laws for the protection of monuments are the archive laws and the law for the protection of cultural property. The current versions of the currently valid Monument Protection Act for each federal state are most easily accessible via the websites of the state offices for monument preservation and the supreme monument protection authorities .

    In addition, monument law includes laws that protect special objects. These include the archive laws , a legal matter that has a considerable overlap with data protection law . There is an overlap with nature conservation law as far as garden monument maintenance and the protection of cultural landscapes are concerned.

    Likewise, the monument serves Fideikommissabwicklungsrecht .

    Comparison of state legislation

    The laws already differ in the definition of their subject matter. The monument protection laws of Baden-Württemberg , Berlin , Bremen , Lower Saxony , Rhineland-Palatinate , Saarland , Saxony , Saxony-Anhalt , Schleswig-Holstein and Thuringia define the cultural monument as something that is permanently preserved in the public interest . The monument protection laws of Bavaria , Berlin, Brandenburg , Hamburg , Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and North Rhine-Westphalia define the term monument in the same way .

    The laws of Baden-Württemberg, Bremen, Hesse, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland and Thuringia give certain reasons as criteria for classification as a cultural monument or monument. In contrast, the laws of Bavaria, Berlin, Brandenburg, Hamburg, Lower Saxony, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt and Schleswig-Holstein require that the cultural monuments are of importance for certain areas. In Saxony-Anhalt and Schleswig-Holstein, special importance is also required. Both are required in North Rhine-Westphalia.

    The areas in which the justification must be given or for which the monument must be significant and thus justify the monument property and monument value are:

    • Labor and production conditions , development of: North Rhine-Westphalia
    • Village image maintenance , historical: Thuringia
    • History : Bavaria, Berlin, Brandenburg, Hamburg, Hesse, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Lower Saxony, North Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Schleswig-Holstein, Thuringia
    • Local history : Baden-Württemberg, Bremen
    • Culture : Saxony-Anhalt
    • Cultural landscape : Schleswig-Holstein
    • Cult : Saxony-Anhalt
    • Art : all countries
    • Landscaping : Saxony
    • Urban development : Bavaria, Berlin, Brandenburg, Hamburg (preservation of characteristic features of the cityscape), Hesse, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Lower Saxony, North Rhine-Westphalia (also: cities and settlements), Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Schleswig- Holstein, Thuringia
    • Technology : Brandenburg, Bremen (history of technology), Hesse, Saxony-Anhalt (technical-economic), Schleswig-Holstein, Thuringia
    • Folklore : Bavaria, Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, North Rhine-Westphalia, Thuringia
    • Economy : Saxony-Anhalt (technical-economic)
    • Science : all countries

    Conflicts of Interest

    Homeowners often see monument protection as a burden - as here in Bamberg
    Example of high-tech architecture in Germany: The Aachen University Hospital has been a listed building since the end of November 2008.

    According to the Association of State Monument Preservators, there are around one million properties in Germany that are listed. The property of a monument usually puts a strain on the monument owners because they are obliged to preserve their monument due to the relevant monument protection law. This can be a significant financial burden and restrict property owners. However, this is only legally permissible to the extent that is reasonable. The special burden on the monument owner is based on Article 14, Paragraph 2, Clause 2 of the Basic Law, the social commitment of property. Often, however, monument protection also collides with the interests of economic use, especially from the point of view of heating costs. For example, listed houses are much more expensive to maintain, which often means that no maintenance measures are carried out at all in order to wait until, for example, woodworms solve the "problem of old windows". But the renovation is often much cheaper, as many regulations z. B. energy standards to be achieved do not have to be adhered to: A monument does not have to be a low-energy house .

    Road breakthrough at the Oberburg in Gondorf

    Monument protection can also come into conflict with all other social and private interests. So was z. B. the Lehrter Stadtbahnhof demolished in favor of the new building of the Berlin Central Station . Elsewhere, listed cobblestone streets are considered a nuisance or hurdle for cyclists and wheelchair users . It is also a source of additional road traffic noise . As a “public interest”, it must be weighed against the other interests in a corresponding decision (monument preservation permit, building permit, planning approval). In this case, too, it is important to ensure that the decision is reasonable for the owner. A satisfactory conflict resolution does not always succeed. This sometimes leads to grotesque compromises, such as the road breakthrough at the Oberburg in Gondorf in favor of a federal road (see illustration on the right).

    When dealing with monuments, problems also arise when monument authorities are unable to enforce monument protection issues against economic interests. “... and so many memorials disappeared behind the scenes and illegally. Sometimes, however, a district administrator simply disregards the monument protectors and decides to demolish it ... ”( Hanno Rauterberg : A land on demolition .) Architectural monuments are often not repaired in accordance with the preservation order , but“ energetically refurbished ”or they are misused in such a way that the building fabric cannot correspond to the changed intended purpose. From the point of view of the preservationists, many of these "improvements" serve the entrepreneurs rather than the cause. Historic windows are among the components of architectural monuments that are most at risk. The so-called "energetic upgrading" of historical window stocks is often approved by monument authorities in ignorance of the structural-physical relationships in the historical building, although the irreversible intervention in the construction of the windows does not correspond to the monument protection laws of the federal states and the measure according to § 24 Energy Saving Ordinance is not applied to monuments anyway finds. If the total investment costs of the measures for an "energetic renovation" are taken as a basis, including the useful life, the measure must also be rejected as uneconomical in accordance with Section 5 of the Energy Saving Act (EnEG).

    Window renovation ” on a monument: The Brentano house in Winkel in the Rheingau; Restorable windows on the upper floor on the right that are worth restoring

    The lack of knowledge about the physical properties of historical single windows in combination with traditional radiant heating in old buildings (decentralized individual stoves, central tiled stoves) or modern radiant heating have been the victim of many window stocks for decades. ( More on the physical properties of historical windows in the main article window repair ) The questionable use and the resulting shift in meaning of the word window refurbishment can serve as an expression of a conflict of interest in the field of monument protection . Today, a distinction must be made between clearly defined window repairs or window restoration that are in line with listed buildings and the imprecise and ambiguous window restoration . Irreversible changes that interfere with the substance of historical windows or even remove them are now referred to as window renovation and are therefore not compatible with the legal principles of monument protection in the German federal states. According to the monument protection laws of the federal states, however, legitimate interests in changing monuments on the part of the owners must be taken into account. Here the "... ideological-puristic core [of the German monument protection] ..." ( Jens Jessen : Dangerous Zeal - About the Monument Ideology.) Is perceived by some owners as a nuisance.

    Monument protection measures must therefore take various aspects into account - sometimes with negative consequences if the demands of monument protection projects have to be reduced in order not to conflict with the reasonableness, or with positive consequences if monument protection is seen as an economic, soft location factor , tourism promotes or has a positive effect on the marketing of objects.

    The treatment of monuments from the Nazi era is still particularly difficult. In spite of the status of a monument, the entry in the list of monuments is sometimes dispensed with in order not to create “consecrated places”. On the other hand, this leads to the loss of monuments, in the absence of documentation of the monument properties, such as B. in the case of the Platterhof on Obersalzberg .

    State measures

    The state guarantees monument protection through legal provisions, permits, requirements, funding programs and tax laws . In numerous laws (e.g. individual state constitutions, the monument protection laws of the states, the spatial planning law), the legislature has given monument protection a special priority.

    In some countries, expropriation in favor of the country is possible in the case of high-quality or endangered monuments . In practice, however, no use is made of this because of the cost of expropriation compensation.

    In subsidized redevelopment areas , the municipalities support the redevelopment of endangered buildings through the federal / state programs for urban development funding and urban monument protection .

    Monument funding

    According to the distribution of competences between the federal government and the states, monument protection and monument preservation belong to the original tasks of the states, which have to determine this area in terms of content and administration in accordance with the state monument protection laws. The federal government essentially only has co-financing competence based on the nature of the matter in the preservation and restoration of nationally valuable cultural monuments or on the basis of special legal provisions, such as the Unification Treaty or administrative agreements with the federal states on the granting of financial aid. Since 1950, the federal government ( Federal Government Commissioner for Culture and Media ) has been promoting the preservation of monuments, archaeological sites and historical parks and gardens from its funding program "Nationally valuable cultural monuments" if they have outstanding cultural, political, historical, architectural, urban development or scientific achievements of the state as a whole or are decisive for the cultural or historical development of the German cultural landscape. From 1950 to 2007, more than 500 cultural monuments of the type mentioned were funded from this program with a total of around 280 million euros.

    Marking of monuments

    Affixing of the first monument protection plaque (2012) in Lower Saxony by State Minister Johanna Wanka at the Eickesches Haus in Einbeck

    A memorial plaque, the symbol of which is derived from the designation of the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (1954), is used in various federal states to mark cultural monuments . Plaques with the inscription "Monument" (North Rhine-Westphalia) and "Kulturdenkmal" (Hessen) and the respective state coat of arms serve the same purpose in North Rhine-Westphalia and Hesse. The monument plaques are issued by the monument authorities. The marking of cultural property with the symbol of the convention itself has so far only been widespread in the states of Bavaria , Hesse and Rhineland-Palatinate and, due to the Third Implementation Regulation of the GDR's Monument Preservation Act of 1975, in the eastern German states. In Lower Saxony there was such a shield from 2012 to 2017, which was replaced in 2018 by a white shield with the state coat of arms ( Niedersachsenross ).


    Depending on the federal state , partly depending on its size, monument protection is organized as a single-tier administration (e.g. Saarland ), two-tier administration (e.g. Hesse) or three-tier (e.g. Baden-Württemberg ). The lower monument protection authority generally issues permits under monument law . This is usually located in the independent cities and districts (exception: North Rhine-Westphalia , there it is the municipality and the city ​​states ). The highest monument protection authority is the responsible ministry (in city-states the responsible senator).

    Outside of this hierarchy, in most of the federal states there is a state office for the preservation of historical monuments as a monument authority (with a slightly different name in detail). There, monument preservation expertise is summarized, which for reasons of cost cannot be held by each individual monument protection authority. The lower monument protection authority may only issue monument law permits - differently depending on the federal state - in agreement or in consultation with the monument authority or after hearing the same.

    Badge on funding projects

    Private initiative

    Monument protection usually only works - in spite of all the compulsory options prescribed by the monument protection laws - if state agencies and monument owners work together. It is therefore important for monument protection to sensitize the public - and in particular the owners of the monuments - to the importance of the preservation of the cultural heritage and to arouse interest in the issues of monument preservation. The German Foundation for Monument Protection , the Farmhouse Interest Group and the Bavarian Monument Network are particularly active here .

    Special features for archaeological finds

    The ground monuments are also defined differently depending on the federal state. All monument protection laws cover archaeological cultural property , some also - via a legal fiction - paleontological monuments .

    In most federal states there is a “ treasure shelf ” for archaeological finds , the content of which is very different. It grants the state ownership of (selected) archaeological finds.

    Tax benefits and grants

    • For rented architectural monuments: The investment in a listed property is supported by special tax incentives. Up to 9% of the production costs for construction measures, which are necessary in terms of type and scope to preserve the building as a monument or for its sensible use, can be increased annually in the year of construction and in the following 7 years - then up to 7% annually for 4 years % are written off ( § 7i EStG ). The proportion of old buildings is depreciated at 2.5% for buildings that were completed before January 1, 1925.
    • For self-used monuments: The special expenses deduction for construction work on self-used monuments and buildings in redevelopment areas is up to 9% annually over 10 years. § 10f EStG.

    In both cases, the prerequisite is the certificate from the responsible monument authority that the work is necessary for the use or that is necessary for monument preservation and that this has been carried out in accordance with the specifications of the monument authority.

    Property tax can be waived for monuments under certain conditions ( Section 32 GrStG ). In addition, a reduction in the unit value, which determines the amount of property tax, is possible. The tax authorities recognize a flat rate of 5%.


    In Austria monument protection is a federal matter , the monument law - in contrast to the legal situation in Germany - federal law .

    The federal law on the protection of monuments due to their historical, artistic or other cultural significance applies here ( Monument Protection Act - DMSG) . The Monument Protection Act also regulates the affairs of the Federal Monuments Office and the Monument Advisory Council .

    The road to becoming law was a long one.

    historical development

    In 1850, Emperor Franz Joseph I signed the decree for the establishment of the Kk Central Commission for the research and preservation of architectural monuments (the forerunner of today's Federal Monuments Office). The commission began its work in 1853, its competencies were significantly expanded in 1873, and from that year the institution also had its own budget. In 1911, under the protectorate of the heir to the throne Franz Ferdinand, a state monument office was established. By the end of the Danube Monarchy there were 72 draft laws (one came from the well-known art historian Alois Riegl ). Due to the resistance of the church and the nobility, however, it was not possible to pass a monument protection law. On December 1, 1918, shortly after the end of the First World War , an export ban on works of art came into force in Austria, which was intended to avoid an extreme sell-off of cultural goods in the starving country. It was the forerunner of the Monument Protection Act of 1923, which still exists today. With these two legal norms, the advisory commission became an authority.

    Legal bases and jurisdiction

    Signet according to the Monument Protection Act

    The main legal source is the Monument Protection Act of 1923 in the version of the amendment that came into force on January 1, 2000 (Federal Law Gazette No. 170/1999). Among other things, this integrated the Export Prohibition Act . Incidentally, after the amendment, the provisional protection of public buildings ends on December 31, 2009 (amendment of § 2). The new Section 31 (1) also makes it explicitly clear that there is no obligation to maintain or repair monuments (Austria has not ratified the international convention of Granada adopted by the Council of Europe in 1985 and therefore does not have any “active monument protection”, ie an unconditional maintenance obligation).

    The Federal Monuments Office , an independent authority that is bound by instructions to the Federal Ministry for Education, Art and Culture , is no longer an advocate for the preservation of monuments after this amendment. The monument advisory board only has an advisory and expert function.

    Location of the monument system

    The number of listed objects in Austria is significant. Nevertheless, the protection of monuments in Austria is traditionally not considered too strong by law and often requires support from the media and citizens' initiatives . Both the positive incentives (subsidies) available to the Federal Monuments Office and its ability to impose sanctions (penalties) have been reduced rather than expanded in recent years. Overall, this is based on a deregulating tendency. The Federal Monuments Office estimates the total number of objects worthy of protection at around 60,000, of which in 2008 over 16,000 were listed as architectural monuments.

    The concept of monument is interpreted in Austria by the Constitutional Court due to the petrification theory in the (narrow) sense that was legally given at the time when the competence articles of the Austrian Federal Constitution came into force (October 1, 1925). This results in certain problems with newer, expanded concepts of monument protection such as ensemble protection or the protection of garden monuments . ( In Austria, nature conservation is a matter for the country).

    With the 2000 amendment, 56 selected gardens and parks in Austria were listed ( Appendix 2 to the Monument Protection Act DMSG), for which the approval of the Federal Monuments Office must now be obtained before changes to structural and plant elements. Austria was the last country in Europe to include gardens worthy of protection in its monument protection law. The protection status is, however, tied to the consent of the respective garden owner, which has so far only been available in about half of the cases (status: 2006).

    The possibility of ministerial decisions against the explicit will of the Federal Monuments Office, as in the Viennese example cases of the demolition of the baroque riding school at the Palais Archduke Rainer (1958), the Florianikirche (1965), at the metro station Meidling designed by Otto Wagner (1968) or the renovation completed in 2002 of the Albertina have, however, been showing the relative weakness of the instruments used to protect Austrian monuments for decades.

    The President of the Federal Monuments Office, Barbara Neubauer , declared herself dissatisfied with the situation in Austria in a newspaper interview in September 2014. In particular, the financial incentives and funding opportunities for the owners of monuments are inadequate, as is the lack of public awareness of them:

    “The financing of monument protection needs to be discussed anew, and the owners need to be empowered to perceive a public interest. That has to be paid for - and not just with a few thousand euros if a stucco ceiling is repaired [...] It is a mistake that only objects that belong to rich people are listed as historical monuments. "

    Inventory of immovable objects under monument protection in 2017 by federal state
    Type of property 1) AT BGL KTN NOE OOE SBG STM TIR VBG HOW
    All objects 1) 38,146
    Archeology 2) 918 58 79 298 137 30th 255 40 15th 6th
    Gardens and parks 5) 29 1 2 6th 2 2 2 3 2 9
    Profane buildings 7) 23,306 1,323 1,346 6,438 3,948 1,501 2,675 2,455 1.002 2,618
    Sacred buildings 8) 11,889 661 1,287 3.214 1,475 576 1,692 2,074 514 396
    Technical monuments 10) 2,004 32 134 601 280 84 303 253 72 245
    Source: Bundesdenkmalamt (monument database) / Statistics Austria, status: 11/2012
    1)Total first digit: updated list of monuments 2017 without movable monuments and collections as well as sound monuments (immovable and archaeological monuments under monument protection, § 2a or notification ); second digit: all objects that were listed as monuments with a legally binding decision
    2)Archaeological small memorials , fortified settlement / weir , single bauwerk , single fund , single grave , reference u. Ä.
    7) Mounting - / military buildings , reminder - / small memorials , cultural / health / education, agricultural buildings , castles / castles / palace , tourism / sport / leisure, office buildings , residential buildings u. Ä.
    10)Category technical monuments: production, traffic, energy / supply, trade, machines, traffic, etc. Ä .; only immovable monuments; others are assigned to the movable monuments category. Transport structures (bridges, railway lines, etc.) and aqueducts are z. Partly divided into cadastral communities and route sections. )


    In Switzerland, monument protection is essentially the responsibility of the 26 cantons (Art. 78 BV); the federal government is only active on a subsidiary basis. The Federal Nature and Homeland Protection Act (NHG) is a framework piece of legislation that - in the area of ​​monument protection - lays the foundation for federal financial contributions to the benefit of the cantons. Monument protection as such is regulated by cantonal legislation. At the federal level, the Federal Commission for Monument Preservation (EKD) is the highest body and the Federal Office of Culture is affiliated with the Federal Department of Home Affairs.

    “Federal protection” in the sense of mandatory subsidization does not exist in Switzerland. According to the ordinance of January 16, 1991 on nature conservation and heritage protection, cultural assets of national importance can be financially supported by the federal government ( Federal Office of Culture ) in individual cases. These subsidies are classified according to the categories A (national importance), B (regional importance) and C (local importance) according to the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and the Federal Act of June 20, 2014 on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and the Ordinance of October 29, 2014 on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict . The Swiss inventory of national cultural assets (category A) was last published in 2009.

    The actual protection of monuments is the responsibility of the cantons, which enact their own laws and are not bound by the laws on the protection of cultural property. New, not yet included art monuments are often given the status worthy of protection (or worthy of protection), this is the preliminary stage for inclusion in a cantonal monument protection inventory. If the state of preservation is poor, the status can also be downgraded. This is also the case if, on the basis of a renovation that is accompanied by the preservation of monuments, it is found that there is not as much of the old building fabric as was originally assumed.

    The Swiss Homeland Security, which is divided into cantonal sections, is an association that is committed to the cultural heritage in the area of ​​buildings.


    France protects its monuments by declaring it as a monument historique .


    Basics of monument protection in Spain

    In Spain, monument protection is part of the comprehensive protection of cultural assets . The protection of cultural property is enshrined in Article 46 of the Spanish Constitution. These cultural assets are known as the Bien de Interés Cultural . The basis of monument protection in Spain is currently (2012) the second part of a law entitled “Del patrimonio histórico Español” (From the historical heritage of Spain) from 1985. The legal regulations apply to the entire Kingdom of Spain. Additional regulations and differences in the designations in individual Comunidades Autónomas and Ciudades autónomas are possible. The implementation of the law has been regulated by an ordinance since 1986. The governments of the individual Comunidades Autónomas are fundamentally responsible for the implementation of the law, but especially for the selection of the objects to be protected. They are supported by the city administrations (Ayuntamientos). The objects are entered in a central register in Madrid after the government of the respective Comunidad Autónoma has declared them to be a Bien de Interés Cultural by means of a decree.

    Local cultural assets (Bienes Inmuebles)

    The local cultural assets are divided into different categories in Spain:

    • Architectural monuments (Monumentos) - Monumentos are buildings based on architectural or technical designs or large-scale sculptures and sculptures with historical, artistic, scientific or social significance. The sculptures and sculptures are often fountains such as B. La Fuentecilla de la Calle de Toledo in Madrid
    • Gardens of historical importance (Jardín Histórico) - Jardín Histórico is a delimited area on which nature has been ordered by man. The design is occasionally completed with artificial structures. The history of the place, the aesthetic, emotional or botanical value can be of particular importance. The term is not only used to describe gardens that have existed for a long time, such as B. the Jardines de Aranjuez , but also newer parks or swimming pools that are characterized by their own landscape architecture, such. B. various works by the Canarian artist César Manrique .
    • Historical complexes ( Conjunto histórico-artístico ) - The term is primarily used to describe historical city centers or connected castle complexes.
    • Historical places (Sitio histórico) - On the one hand, the term refers to facilities that are referred to as industrial monuments in German monument protection (e.g. mills with the associated water pipes), but on the other hand also z. B. pilgrimage or processional routes.
    • Archaeological Areas (Zona Arqueológica) - Areas in which archaeological finds are only suspected can be protected. All types of excavations or searches under water, whether geological, palaeontological or other historical type, require the express consent of the responsible authorities. An object can be listed in several categories.

    Movable cultural goods can be connected to all localized cultural goods (e.g. figures of saints or paintings with a particular church or sculptures with a particular garden).

    Procedure for declaring a building to be a Bien de Interés Cultural

    By various laws passed before 1985 in Spain all fortifications (castillos), walls (murallas) and towers (torreones) and their ruins were declared to be Bienes de Interés Cultural, as well as all coats of arms or symbols attached to buildings, a special type of crossroads ( Cruz de término) on the boundaries of the urban areas and special granaries ( Hórreo ) occurring in northwestern Spain, in each case when they are older than one hundred years. In the case of these objects, the renewed inclusion in the list of monuments of a Comunidad Autónomo has the purpose of describing the object precisely and, among other things, U. to extend the monument protection to the environment (entorno). Generally under monument protection since 1985 all places where rock carvings are located. A formalized procedure is prescribed for the procedure for declaring an object to be a Bien de Interés Cultural. An official investigation is carried out. As a preventive measure, the property is entered in the list of Bienes de Interés Cultural at the start of the investigation. The condition of the only preventive entry can drag on for years. During the investigation, the importance of the object is assessed. A detailed description and analysis of the property, its surroundings and the u. Transportable works of art connected with the object are published with references to the sources and literature used in the Law and Ordinance Gazette of the Comunidad Autónoma. All affected owners and property neighbors will be informed. Objections can be lodged against all parts of the investigation (even against the description of the property). If there are no contradictions or if the contradictions have been accepted or they have been dismissed by the court, the final entry is made.

    The consequences of declaring a building to be a Bien de Interés Cultural, Categoría Monumento in Spain largely correspond to the consequences of declaring a building to be a monument in Germany.

    Further international legal regulations for the protection of monuments and cultural assets

    Identification number for an object protected under the Hague Convention

    Registered cultural assets are for the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict at war to protect disputes.

    In addition, UNESCO has classified it as a world heritage , which declares evidence of human creativity of “exceptional universal value” as indispensable for “entire” humanity.

    Cultural heritage of European importance is marked with the European Heritage Label.

    See also


    General :

    • Dieter J. Martin, Michael Krautzberger (Hrsg.): Handbook of monument protection and preservation - including archeology, law, professional principles, procedures . Published in cooperation with the German Foundation for Monument Protection . 3rd, revised and significantly expanded edition. Verlag CH Beck, Munich 2010, ISBN 978-3-406-60924-4 ; detailed review of the first edition (2004) by Jürgen Klebs in: Die Denkmalpflege . Volume 63, Issue 1, 2005, pp. 91–95 “Reviews”.
    • Achim Hubel: Monument Preservation. History. Subjects. Tasks. An introduction . Stuttgart 2006.
    • Hans-Rudolf Meier, Ingrid Scheurmann , Wolfgang Sonne, Ulrike Wendland (eds.): Values. Reasons for the preservation of monuments in the past and present . JOVIS, Berlin 2013, ISBN 978-3-86859-162-0 .
    • Frank Eckardt, Hans-Rudolf Meier, Ingrid Scheurmann, Wolfgang Sonne (eds.): Which monuments which modernity? For dealing with buildings from the 1960s and 70s. JOVIS-Verlag, Berlin 2017, ISBN 978-3-86859-443-0 .

    Germany :

    • Michael Anton: National Law on Cultural Property and Monument Protection, Volume 4 National Law on Cultural Property and Monument Protection . de Gruyter, Berlin 2011, ISBN 978-3-89949-735-9 .
    • August Gebeßler , Wolfgang Eberl: Protection and maintenance of architectural monuments in the Federal Republic of Germany . Cologne 1980.
    • German National Committee for Monument Protection (Ed.): Monuments in Germany - Preservation and restoration of immovable cultural monuments of national importance by the Federal Government Commissioner for Culture and the Media. 1st, limited edition. 2003, ISBN 3-922153-14-3 .
    • Norbert Bernsdorff , Andreas Kleine-Tebbe: Protection of cultural property in Germany. A comment. Cologne 1996.
    • Michael Kummer: Monument protection law as constructive building law . Munich 1981.
    • Kerstin Odendahl : cultural property law . Baden-Baden 2006.
    • Jan Nikolaus Viebrock u. a .: Monument protection laws (= series of publications of the German National Committee for Monument Protection . Volume 54). 4th edition, Bonn 2005, ISSN  0723-5747 .
    • Torsten Hartleb, Hansjörg Wurster: Monument protection and preservation. In: Michael Hoppenberg, Siegfried de Witt (Hrsg.): Handbook of public building law. 39th edition. Munich 2015.
    • on the situation of monument protection in Germany. In: The time . No. 3/2007.
    • Dieter J. Martin, Stefan Mieth, Jörg Spennemann: The reasonableness in monument law. Fundamental property rights and monument protection in practice. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 2014, ISBN 978-3-17-023332-4 .


    • Dieter Klein , Martin Kupf , Robert Schediwy : Wiener Stadtbildverluste . Vienna 2004.
    • Wolfgang Huber: Definitions and literature on the Austrian Monument Protection Act. In: Kunsthistoriker aktuell. No. 2/2003.


    • Simon Bundi: Graubünden and homeland security. From the invention of the homeland to the preservation of the village of Guarda (= sources and research on Bündner history. Volume 26). Chur 2012, ISBN 978-3-85637-418-1 .

    Web links

    Wiktionary: Monument protection  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations





    United States

    Individual evidence

    1. ^ Karl von Habsburg on a mission in Lebanon. Retrieved July 19, 2019 .
    2. Jyot Hosagrahar: Culture: at the heart of SDGs. UNESCO courier, April – June 2017.
    3. ^ Rick Szostak: The Causes of Economic Growth: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Springer Science & Business Media, 2009, ISBN 9783540922827 .
    4. ^ Corine Wegener, Marjan Otter "Cultural Property at War: Protecting Heritage during Armed Conflict." In: The Getty Conservation Institute, Newsletter 23.1, Spring 2008.
    5. Friedrich Weinbrenner: Words and Works, Bad Saulgau 2017, pp. 14–15.
    6. ^ Karl Habsburg: Abuse of cultural goods is punishable. Interview. In: Wiener Zeitung. June 29, 2012; Isabelle-Constance v. Opalinski: "Shots on civilization" in FAZ from August 20, 2014.
    7. ^ Corine Wegener, Marjan Otter: Cultural Property at War: Protecting Heritage during Armed Conflict. In: The Getty Conservation Institute, Newsletter 23.1. Spring 2008.
    8. u. a. Peter Stone: Inquiry: Monuments Men. In: Apollo - The International Art Magazine. February 2, 2015; Fabian von Posser: World Heritage sites bombed, cultural treasures hawked. In: The world. November 5, 2013; Rüdiger Heimlich: Desert City Palmyra: Protect cultural heritage before it is destroyed. In: Berliner Zeitung. March 28, 2016.
    9. See Sabine von Schorlemer: Destruction of cultural assets. The eradication of cultural heritage in crisis countries as a challenge for the United Nations. 2016, p. 785ff.
    10. z. B. Joris Kila: Monument Men of the Present. Protection against bombs and looting. Interview. In: Kölner Stadt Anzeiger. 20th February 2014.
    11. ^ Sabine von Schorlemer: Destruction of cultural assets. The eradication of cultural heritage in crisis countries as a challenge for the United Nations. 2016, p. 871ff.
    12. The constitution of the Weimar Republic
    13. Eckhart Franz: “Have awe of the old and have the courage to dare to try something new!” The preservation of monuments in the cultural-political concept of Grand Duke Ernst Ludwig. In: 100 Years of the Monument Protection Act in Hesse. History - meaning - effect. Stuttgart 2003, ISBN 3-8062-1855-2 , pp. 23-28; Winfried Speitkamp: Origin and significance of the monument protection law for the Grand Duchy of Hesse from 1902. In: 100 years of monument protection law in Hesse. History - meaning - effect. Stuttgart 2003, ISBN 3-8062-1855-2 ; Jan Nikolaus Viebrock: Hessian monument protection law. (= Municipal writings for Hesse ). 3. Edition. W. Kohlhammer Verlag, Stuttgart 2007, ISBN 978-3-555-40310-6 , p. 9, marginal no. 18th
    14. Denkmalschutzgesetze @, website of the German National Committee for Monument Protection, accessed on January 21, 2018.
    15. Kerstin Odendahl : Protection of cultural goods: Development, structure and dogmatics of a cross-level system of standards. Tübingen 2005, p. 395.
    16. Law on the Protection of Cultural Property (Kulturgutschutzgesetz - KGSG)
    17. Law for the Protection of German Cultural Property against Emigration
    18. Cultural Goods Return Act - KultGüRückG
    19. Act implementing the Convention of May 14, 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict
    20. a b
    21. ( Page no longer available , search in web archives: architectural monuments, protected - real estate as cultural heritage . ) (PDF). In: Haus & Grund magazine. Edition 8/2011, p. 14.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link /
    22. ( Page no longer available , search in web archives: Property as cultural heritage. ) In: Bietigheimer Zeitung. Online, August 27, 2011.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link /
    23. Thomas Wegmann: Historic parks and nature conservation compensation measures are not always “good friends”. About the systematic destruction of parts of a park of the Ruhr University Bochum that is worthy of protection as a garden monument . In: garden art . 29, 2017/1, pp. 205-223.
    24. ^ Hanno Rauterberg: A country on demolition. In: The time . No. 3/2007, p. 41.
    25. Klaus Könner: Stand firm in my house in the world. Monument preservation - conception and implementation . Introduction to the exhibition and catalog. Edited by Klaus Könner, Joachim Wagenblast. State Monuments Office Baden-Württemberg and City of Aalen, Aalen 2001, p. 20.
    26. Hanno Rauterberg: Put an end to the insulation craze! In: The time . No. 44/2010, p. 49.
    27. ^ Martim Saar: Ventilation in old buildings . Worksheets of the Bavarian State Office for Monument Preservation, Munich 2002, p. 3.
    28. ^ Wolf Schmidt: Repair of historical wooden windows. In: Monument preservation information . Bavarian State Office for Monument Preservation, Munich 2004, p. 5, ISSN  1617-3147
    29. ^ Claus Meier: building physics of the historical window. In: Praxis Ratgeber. German Castle Association V., Braubach 2001.
    30. Claus Meier: Heating like the sun. In: space and time. 2006.
    31. a b Worksheet 8, Instructions for the treatment of historical windows in architectural monuments. Association of State Monument Preservators in the Federal Republic of Germany, Wiesbaden 1991 (PDF; 34 kB)
    32. ^ A b Wolf Schmidt: Repair of historical wooden windows. In: Monument preservation information. Bavarian State Office for Monument Preservation, Munich 2004, p. 21, ISSN  1617-3147
    33. Tobias Huckfeldt, Hans-Joachim Wenk: wooden windows - construction, damage, renovation, maintenance . Cologne 2009, ISBN 978-3-481-02504-5 , p. 260.
    34. Jens Jessen: Dangerous zeal - About the monument ideology. In: The time . No. 3/2007, p. 41.
    35. Inquiry and answer on the demolition of the Platterhof, 2000 . Bavarian State Parliament (PDF; 24 kB)
    36. Urgent motion against the demolition of the Platterhof, 2000 . Bavarian State Parliament (PDF; 13 kB)
    37. Monument protection and building culture ( Memento of the original from October 16, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot /
    38. ^ Monument plaque of the Hessian Ministry for Science and Art . In: Monument Preservation and Cultural History. 2015/3, p. 49.
    39. Federal Office for Civil Protection and Disaster Aid (ed.): Protection of cultural property in armed conflicts. 6th edition. Bonn 2007.
    40. Monument protection plaque will in future bear the coat of arms of Lower Saxony. Press release from the Lower Saxony Ministry for Science and Culture from December 22, 2017.
    41. Austrian Monument Protection Act , ris.bka
    42. Inventory of listed objects in 2006 by federal state. In: Statistics → Education, Culture → Culture → Architectural Heritage. Statistics Austria , December 18, 2007, accessed on March 1, 2009 .
    43. ^ Head of the Monument Office: "I am not the Jeanne d'Arc of the cultural heritage" . In: The Standard . September 25, 2014.
    44. ↑ List of monuments , Federal Monuments Office
    45. ↑ The number of legally protected immovable objects in 2017 by federal state. Federal Monuments Office , December 31, 2017, accessed June 8, 2018 .
    46. Federal Chancellery : Ordinance on Nature Conservation and Heritage Protection (NHV). SR 451.1. In: Systematic Legal Collection SR . Swiss Federal Council , January 16, 1991, accessed on August 23, 2017 (as of January 1, 2017): “Art. 5 Assessment of Contribution and Art. 6 Eligible Expenses "
    47. Federal Chancellery : Federal Act on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, Disaster and Emergencies (KGSG). SR 520.3. In: Systematic Legal Collection SR . Federal Assembly of the Swiss Confederation , June 20, 2014, accessed on August 23, 2017 (as of January 1, 2016).
    48. ^ Federal Chancellery : Ordinance on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflicts, Disasters and Emergencies (KGSV). SR 520.31. In: Systematic Legal Collection SR . Swiss Federal Council , October 29, 2014, accessed on August 23, 2017 (as of January 1, 2016).
    49. ^ KGS inventory A objects (2009). ( Memento of the original from June 28, 2010 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot /
    50. ^ Constitution of the Kingdom of Spain. Article 46 December 29, 1978, retrieved September 8, 2012 .
    51. Ley 16/1985, de 25 de junio, del Patrimonio Histórico Español. June 25, 1985, Retrieved September 8, 2012 (Spanish).
    52. De desarrollo parcial de la Ley 16/1985, de 25 de junio, del Patrimonio Histórico Español. January 10, 1986, Retrieved September 8, 2012 (Spanish).
    53. Ley 16/1985, de 25 de junio, del Patrimonio Histórico Español. Article 6 + June 7, 1985, accessed September 8, 2012 (Spanish).
    54. Consulta a la base de datos de bienes inmuebles. Search template for local cultural assets. Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte, accessed September 8, 2012 (Spanish).
    55. Ley 16/1985, de 25 de junio, del Patrimonio Histórico Español. Article 40.1. June 25, 1985, Retrieved September 8, 2012 (Spanish).
    56. Decreto de 22 de april de 1949, expedido por el Ministerio de Educación Nacional (BOE 5-5-1949) sobre protección de los castillos españoles. (No longer available online.) April 22, 1949, archived from the original on October 19, 2013 ; Retrieved October 1, 2012 (Spanish). Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot /
    57. Decreto de protección de los escudos, emblemas, piedras heráldicas, rollos de justicia, cruces de término y piedras similares de interés histórico - artístico. (PDF) February 1, 1963, accessed October 1, 2012 (Spanish).
    58. Decreto 449/1973, de 22 de February, por el que se colocan bajo protección del Estado español, los “hórreos” or “cabazos” antiguos en Asturias. (PDF; 155 kB) February 22, 1973, accessed October 1, 2012 (Spanish).
    59. Ley 16/1985, de 25 de junio, del Patrimonio Histórico Español. Article 40.2. June 25, 1985, Retrieved September 8, 2012 (Spanish).
    60. De desarrollo parcial de la Ley 16/1985, de 25 de junio, del Patrimonio Histórico Español. Article 11 ff. January 10, 1986, accessed on September 8, 2012 (Spanish).