landscape

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Landscape with the Three Trees , 1643,
Museum Het Rembrandthuis in Amsterdam
Landscape consisting of various landscape elements (near Königstein in Saxon Switzerland)

The word landscape has two main meanings. On the one hand, it describes the culturally shaped, subjective perception of an area as an aesthetic wholeness (philosophical-cultural-scientific concept of landscape), on the other hand, it is used, especially in geography , to designate an area that is different from other areas through scientifically detectable characteristics delimits (geographical concept of landscape).

In general, there is no uniform definition of what landscape is, which is why the term landscape can also be referred to as a "compositional" one due to its lifeworld, aesthetic, territorial, social, political, economic, geographical, planning, ethnological and philosophical references, whose " semantische [r] Hof “was shaped by a history of Central European ideas, literature and art that goes back over a thousand years.

Concept history

Etymological origin

The term landscape is a composition of the noun land and the suffix -schaft . The noun “Land” (mhd. Lant ) comes from Germanic and its initial meaning could have been “free land”, “fallow land” or “cleared land”, since this is in the abbreviation of New Swedish (dial.) Linda , which means so much as "wasteland" means. Already in Germanic times the meaning changed from 'free, open land' to 'national territory', later in contrast to city, water etc.

The suffix -schaft can be etymologically traced back to the Indo-European root * skapi / * skapja / * skafti of the verb "scapjan", which means "to create". The noun derivatives form feminine nouns in the word meaning of "quality" and can essentially be divided into three groups: in abstracts (e.g. domination, mastery); in collective or more precisely person group designations (e.g. team, neighborhood); and space names (e.g. county or landscape). So they all have in common the designation of something that belongs together, which has arisen through human activity (Eng. "Create", eng. Shape ).

The development towards a territorial and legal political concept

The Ahd. Word lantscaf or lantschaft could be found for the first time around the year 830 and denoted something "which in the vast majority of cases has the quality of a larger settlement area ". Originally, in this context it had the basic meaning of the common behavior and social norms of the residents living there in a certain area and developed in terms of its meaning from the “social norms in a country” to a “country in which such norms Are valid ". In the course of the 12th century, the term was understood as a political and legal space, which in turn represented part of a larger political unit. Those who were able to act politically (i.e. the non-farmers) in the region were also considered to be “representatives of the 'entire landscape'”, so that the term landscape developed into an expression of human laws and legal institutions in the late Middle Ages. Recent research shows that the term not only included a territorial and legal component, but an identity-creating one. The landscape assemblies were the place where public affairs were dealt with in a "country". Corresponding to the understanding of time, late medieval "landscapes" understood themselves as guarantors of the public cause or as communalist communities of peace, honor and benefit, which were able to demonstrate considerable autonomy vis-à-vis the princes or sovereigns.

In the High Middle Ages, landscape was also used to describe the zone managed and controlled by a city, which was, however, separated from the forest that had not (yet) been cleared. The term 'landscape' has been comprehensible in a geographical sense since the Renaissance, while the word root suggests the earlier meaning of a constituted, organizational unit [5] - in distinction to the expression region.

The term landscape thus acquired a political meaning “in addition to a social, initially descriptive, later also normative, indistinct regionally defined component, in that lordly functions were regionally located and delimited from one another”.

The constitution of the aesthetic landscape

The beginning of the aesthetic engagement with place and space can, after the first preliminary stages, be located in Egyptian, Mesopotamian and Israelite cultures in ancient Greece and is continued in Roman culture. The exploration of space concentrated strongly on a locus amoenus , i.e. on a place where certain objects, such as a tree or several trees, a meadow, a spring or a stream, are relationally arranged to one another in such a way that they Giving the viewer a feeling of well-being and the joy of being.

In the Middle Ages, on the other hand, the aesthetic concern with place and space is lost, because "[t] he gaze is directed to heaven, but not to its earthly appearance". The medieval spatial representations primarily served to visualize the place of the event or in the form of symbols and allegories as a reference to Jesus Christ as Redeemer. It was not until the Renaissance that landscape painting was able to establish itself as an independent discipline. Here, “an essential expression of social conceptions of the type of an idealized landscape […]” formed, which resulted in “a visionary expectation based on visual stereotypes”, which was carried over to the observation of physical spaces.

In terms of linguistic history, the concept of landscape in the German-speaking area was not expanded to include an aesthetic meaning in the sense of a 'viewed section of nature' until the 15th century, a component of meaning that has remained valid up to the present day.

Since the beginning of the 19th century, the experience of the landscape has been subjectivized; The landscape ideal also lost its binding force in landscape painting and gave way to strongly subjectively colored representations. Rosario Assunto should be mentioned as the theoretician of neoclassical and romantic landscape aesthetics .

The defensive landscape

In the First World War , in the Weimar Republic and under National Socialism, a defensive landscape was understood to be a landscape that should offer the residents an advantageous starting position in the event of a defense and offer the attacker as many obstacles as possible. At the same time, geodeterministic thinking was based on the assumption that a landscape designed in this way had positive effects on the population living there - both physically and mentally.

middle Ages

The idea of ​​a “bulwark”, a “defensive landscape” of the German Empire in the east, had centuries-old predecessors. The so-called "Medieval Land Expansion", which also extended towards Poland , received a clearly visible military component with the activities of the Teutonic Order . Although this development was largely ended by the defeat of the Crusaders in 1410 in the Battle of Tannenberg against the Poles and Lithuanians, a powerful myth emerged: the idea of ​​a warlike order that colonized Eastern Europe and could serve as a wall against threats to the German Empire.

First World War

General Erich Ludendorff followed up on exactly this idea when, during World War I, another major battle took place in the same area, but now against Russia. Initially named as the Battle of the East Prussian city of Allenstein, it was relabelled as the “ Battle of Tannenberg ” after the German victory in revanchist intent with reference to the Teutonic Knight Order . E. Ludendorff went one step further. After further military successes, he succeeded in establishing a kind of military state in Courland , Lithuania and Belarus . This area, administered solely by the General Staff of the Commander-in-Chief East, was called "Ober-Ost". Head of the central administration was Captain Wilhelm von Gayl , a Pangermane, anti-Semite , enemy of Poland and a staunch advocate of colonization in the east. He presented a comprehensive memorandum for the further development of "Ober Ost", which was approved in 1917 by the General Staff, the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of War. "Your key message was that depopulated areas with a << human wall >> should be repopulated by new German settlers, which would secure these areas forever." The resettlement of the previously resident population was planned. The implementation of these visions was prevented by the defeat of the German Reich in the First World War.

Weimar Republic

In the Weimar Republic, the defense landscape remained on the political agenda. In particular because, as a consequence of the Versailles Treaty in 1919, Poland, which was divided up between Prussia, Russia and the Habsburg Empire in 1795, rose again, i.e. German areas in the east of the German Empire were lost. The so-called " Artamans " , among others, were the carriers of the idea of ​​the defensive landscape in the east . This movement was formed in 1924 and was formally founded in 1926. They developed the plan to recruit young people from the cities, train them in agriculture in East Prussia , “toughen them up”, give them farm positions and thus gradually along the German-Polish one To develop border villages that held the land firmly in German hands. They saw themselves as "fortified farmers" and as an "elite". In 1929 about 2000 Artamans were active on about 300 estates. The Artamans carried the idea of ​​the “defensive landscape”, as it was developed in “Upper East”, over the time of the Weimar Republic to National Socialism. It is proven that they influenced Rudolf Höß and Heinrich Himmler .

National Socialism

Siegfried Line

When the West Wall was built between 1936 and 1940, the “landscape lawyers” in particular took up the idea of ​​a defensive landscape. This is a group of around 40 conservationists around the so-called Reichslandschaftsanwalt Alwin Seifert , who from 1938 had taken on the task of the military green camouflage of the bunkers, positions, etc. when the west wall was built. They immediately recognized the possibility of realizing far-reaching planning through the immense changes in the landscape that were necessary. It was not just about the military positions themselves that were created, but building materials such as wood, sand etc., which were mostly obtained on site, had to be taken, the infrastructure for their transport, but also of people and goods, was built, the air force created an "air defense zone" and the damage from the fighting on the Siegfried Line in 1940 caused entire villages to disappear.

From 1938 onwards, with the support of the Wehrmacht, the landscape could be redesigned or “improved” in the National Socialist sense. That should not only have an influence on nature, but also strengthen the "German people" in the sense of the " blood and soil ideology ". The responsible landscape lawyer Wilhelm Hirsch (1887–1957) mentioned a counterexample in November 1940 when he said about the now accessible French landscapes that had been affected by the First World War: “... large areas are unused as wasteland. The landscapes resemble a great neglect and often have steppe character. The people living in it cannot grow up to be strong-willed people. "The aim was" ... to camouflage the military structures with the help of the elements, which at the same time represent measures for the recovery of the highly intensively used landscape. In the landscape, these are primarily windbreak plantings that are intertwined with the individual plantings necessary for camouflage, forming new landscape areas. ”The landscape lawyers also planned for the populated landscape. After the campaign against France in 1940, Reich Minister of the Interior Wilhelm Frick had ordered that communities severely impaired by war damage or the construction of the Siegfried Line would be considered as possible “reorganization communities”. With the help of the German Reich, they were able to be rebuilt and converted into “model villages”, ie in the future they will have a construction method that corresponds to the National Socialist “blood and soil ideology”. The ideas behind these plans projected a National Socialist defensive landscape in which the military positions were perfectly integrated into the landscape on the one hand, so that "the enemy" could only make out them with difficulty and in which the landscape itself contributed to the people living there especially in their “Germanness strengthened”. Corresponding work was carried out on the Siegfried Line in November 1940.

Second World War

H. Himmler also saw the territorial conquests of the Wehrmacht and the SS in Eastern Europe as an opportunity to incorporate parts of these areas into the German Reich in order to systematically populate them as a kind of "Wall in the East", especially with German farmers. The first version of this “ General Plan East - Legal, Economic and Spatial Basics of the Eastern Construction” was presented in 1940 by the agricultural scientist Konrad Meyer . With the redesign of the occupied territories of Eastern Europe in the sense of a National Socialist defense landscape, large-scale plans were made here, which u. a. the landscape lawyers at the Siegfried Line had planned and implemented. The deportation of all Jews and the expulsion of 3.4 million Poles from the area between the Oder and Urals was a prerequisite for the redesign of the landscapes and was cynically “factored in” into the planning. The driving force behind the landscaping was Heinrich Wiepking-Jürgensmann , special representative of Reichsführer SS H. Himmler. In 1942 he presented a fundamental work with the title "The Landscape Primer". In the last chapter he also deals with the "... forest and defense landscape from a historical and military perspective". He invoked the German forest as a heroic retreat and starting point for the dispute with the Romans ( Battle in the Teutoburg Forest ) and claimed that the Germans and Germans always lost their greatest battles in the open field. Protection through trees and plantations has been even more indispensable since a modern air force has been available for warfare.

The green camouflage on the ground should not be limited to individual objects that would therefore be particularly noticeable, but rather it should cover the entire landscape with a veil. In particular, he pleaded - since he suspected the main enemy of the German Reich to be in Eastern Europe - in these areas for planting the river banks and the bridge areas in the form of a "friend and an enemy side". The plantings should also have an economic benefit, a natural character and be adapted to the local conditions.

“It is not possible to explain in detail how a large landscape area is to be built with plantings for defense purposes, especially since the respective location is of particular importance. The few attached drawings are sufficient to show the unity of the military, food and landscape requirements. "" ... The task will only be solved by a landscaper who is able to think holistically and as a soldier. "

A. Seifert saw himself as such a “landscaper”. He was particularly interested in the hedge landscapes. On the one hand, they offered protection to an extensive fauna , prevented the drifting of fields, as they formed a natural obstacle against the wind, and represented an obstacle for advancing troops.

In 1940 A. Seifert wrote to one of his W. Hirsch about a conversation with Fritz Todt : “You will be pleased to hear that he fully supports my demand for a rebuilding of the German East in hedge landscapes and wants to start on his streets. So I have to go to Posen in the very near future . ”There is no reliable information about the actual implementation of the plans. It can be assumed, however, that it was rudimentary, but could not be pursued further due to the course of the Second World War. Because even in 1944 A. Seifert noted, with regard to a trip to East Prussia, that “... my views on landscape and agriculture were completely in agreement with those of Gauleiter Erich Koch. I also got to know large landowners who are already in the process of planting their wind-blown cultivated areas with hedges. "

The geographical concept of landscape

The geographical concept of landscape is relatively new, a modern phenomenon and not clearly defined. The definition of landscape as the “total character of a region” is repeatedly attributed to Alexander von Humboldt in the specialist literature , but cannot be proven in Humboldt's writings (but it is from the subjective “total impression of a region” that is created in the viewer). The term 'landscape' has been tangible in a geographical sense since the Renaissance, while the word root -. the earlier meaning of a written, organizational unit suggests - in distinction to express land .

Both in literature and in specialist books, landscape is used in four meanings, which have in common that a landscape has a uniform character:

  1. Really fulfilled space that is geographically relevant.
  2. Picturesque view of a three-dimensional object enclosed by a horizon line.
  3. Visible section of the earth's surface that can be viewed from one point.
  4. Symbol of meaning for the modern subject that aesthetically visualizes meaning in the outside space.

The latter terms, the visual appearance of an area and its reception by a viewer , you specified a landscape view landscape , they go in this form to the landscape painting back, which develops in the course of the 17th century as an independent subject of art in the Netherlands. Dutch landschap , English landscape , which influence the German word - also in a scientific context - stand for this .

Meyer's Lexicon from 1908 defines landscape as “every section of the surface of the earth that we are able to survey from a certain location, until the horizon or horizon seems to collide with the sky”, and adds: “Each L. can under a scientific , be viewed from an artistic or from a cultural-historical point of view. "

Landscape as a geoscientific technical term

The concept of landscape, which is controversial within geography , gained its meaning primarily in everyday language and is connoted with semantic contents that ultimately amount to physiognomic concepts such as harmony, beauty, uniformity, wholeness, peculiarity, diversity and delimitation . The ontological (holistic) status of the landscape as a geographical area, which is differentiated from other areas by different characteristics, is controversial , whether the landscape unity lies in the cultural objects and geological formations themselves or arises in the consciousness of the viewer.

In Switzerland and Germany - in the sense of the word root -schaft with - Landscape Landsmannschaft also, ancient, ' geographical and political space named for. B. the canton of Basel-Landschaft , which connects to the south of the canton of Basel-Stadt; here landscape also means “the people living in the Basler Land”. In Germany, the landscape associations refer to the political and spatial significance of the landscape . Meyer's Großes Konversations-Lexikon describes this meaning as “landscape, as much as province ; in the constitutional sense as much as estates . "

In geomorphology

In geomorphology, two descriptive approaches can be distinguished with regard to the term landscape, the taxonomic and the typological approach.

In the taxonomic approach, in geomorphology, as in other descriptive branches of geosciences, the aim is to grasp the geographical space in large and small landscapes by classifying it taxonomically .

In the typological approach, one would like to define a landscape as either a natural landscape or a cultural landscape . Here it is assumed that a landscape represents an area in which typical features, called landscape elements, combine to form certain patterns. These landscape elements are of a physical, biogenic and anthropogenic nature. The physical landscape elements include geomorphological landforms such as rocks, sand, hills and plains that affect the topography , as well as the forms of land cover and climatic characteristics. Biogenic landscape elements are ecological elements such as water, forest and meadows. The anthropogenic landscape elements include all human geographic influences on the landscape. This includes, for example, settlement structures in the form of houses, streets, stone walls and bank developments. The result of this analysis is the distinction between natural and cultural landscapes. It is characteristic of cultural landscapes that they are permanently shaped by humans, while a natural landscape has not experienced any lasting formative influence from humans. These natural landscapes can in turn be divided into inorganic landscapes such as deserts, salt lakes and ice deserts, and organic landscapes such as rainforest and savannah.

In landscape geography

In landscape geography, landscape is viewed as the basis of human existence and an expression of human actions and ideas of order. On the one hand, landscape is viewed as a static ideal state, whereby landscapes that correspond to this are usually referred to as 'healthy landscapes'. On the other hand, landscape is perceived in constant dynamism because the landscape objects are subject to use. This contradiction is rooted in the concept of landscape, which links aesthetic aspects with the material properties of a space section. This made it possible for the concept of landscape to receive normative aspects at the same time, such as B. in the maintenance of the land and landscape architecture , in homeland and nature protection became virulent. This concept of landscape forms the semantic background from which further determinations are derived.

In ecology

In ecology and its derived and applied sciences e.g. B. Landscape ecology is usually preferred to the concept of natural space . In practice, this results in rival and often almost congruent delimitations of "landscape areas" or "natural spatial (main) units". These overlaps include a. due to the fact that the ecological units are assigned physiognomically definable spaces.

In social constructivist landscape research

Social constructivist landscape research does not understand landscape as a physical occurrence, but rather as a socially and culturally generated and mediated construct. For the representatives of the social constructivist perspective, the capture and construction of the world, and thus also of the landscape, is directly related to perception, which in turn is not an isolated event, but rather the result of “a very complicated process of interpretation in which the present Perceptions with earlier perceptions ”can be put in relation, so that a certain prior knowledge about the world (here about landscape) flows into every perception in the form of abstractions.

The construction of landscapes always takes place in spatial contexts, so that the spatial arrangement can be viewed as the basis of the synthesis of 'landscape'. Because the level of the landscape and the level of space are constitutively related to one another in the construction of landscape. However, this dependency is not absolutely necessary in the construction of space, as the example of the industrial space or industrial landscape shows: Thus “[b] certain arrangements of objects […] can be constructed as space (e.g. industrial space) without landscape qualities are ascribed to them (ie the space created in this way is denied the designation 'industrial landscape'), but objects whose spatial arrangement is not considered are not constructed as landscapes ”.

On the one hand, landscapes represent human abstraction, but on the other hand they are also projections of emotional occupation, whereby what has already been learned, as the result of a long social development process of cultural norms, is always the basis for the interpretation of sensory perceptions as landscape.

In addition to the physical and social level, the individual person is another central component in the construction of landscape. Because it is she who interprets the landscape on the basis of socially mediated patterns of interpretation and evaluation and in doing so draws on objects in physical space and relates them to one another. This creates a landscape “at the intersection of physical objects, people and society”.

Kühne's conception of the four-dimensional landscape can be viewed as an analytical framework for examining the different levels of the social construction of landscape. Kühne distinguishes between four dimensions:

  1. The social landscape : the socio-constructive dimension of landscape, in which what is to be understood by landscape and what can be connoted with it is socially created, passed on and negotiated.
  2. The individually updated social landscape : Individual construction of landscape by a person
  3. The external space : physical space as the physical starting substrate of an external world of objects
  4. The appropriated physical landscape : those objects of physical space which, when viewed together, can be understood as a landscape on the basis of social landscape interpretations.

In spatial planning

This makes it clear that in the German-speaking science of geography from the 1950s onwards, the term “landscape” was subjected to a far-reaching discussion, a discussion that has had an impact up to the present day. However, in order to specify the spatial reference of the concept of landscape in more detail, the concept of “landscape” could not be assigned a satisfactory, unambiguous definition.

In spatial planning , therefore, the concept of geographical space is used in the general sense , and we speak of free space , which denotes a social area of ​​action , or of spatial planning as a control measure for development, both in regional political contexts and, for example, at the level of the common efforts of the Europeans Union .

The terms region , area, area, district are largely synonymous, but, depending on the author, are also opposed to the landscape as non-obvious structures, such as political regions. (especially as a translation of foreign language expressions), or as central working terms of regional geography superordinate to the term landscape . Landscape is then a special form of the region, while the latter can be applied to global and geopolitical constructs in all specialist areas of geography just as casually as it can down to the small-scale scales of the corridor .

Both concepts, space and region , today complement the concept of landscape in the interdisciplinary nature of geosciences as well as the interaction with geopolitics and other natural and human sciences.

In the European Landscape Convention (ELC)

The following definition can be found in the European Landscape Convention :

"'Landscape' means an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and / or human factors."

Toponomastics and naming

Landscapes can have proper names, so-called toponyms , such as the Harz Mountains . At the same time, however, the Harz is a low mountain range or - scientifically typical - a low mountain range or mountain landscape. You can just as easily classify the Harz as a forest landscape .

In the examples of Glogau-Baruther glacial valley , northern land ridge or Saarmunder terminal moraine arc , we find scientific terms, especially geological terms, which are rarely used in common language.

Nevertheless, this applies to general geographic maps with regard to the labeling. Nevertheless, because they name typical natural areas with common features, these play a role. For both the Glogau-Baruther Urstromtal and the Northern Ridge there are quasi “subsets” that can demonstrate general validity and awareness ( Baruther Urstromtal , Spreewald for the first, Feldberger Seenlandschaft for the second example). To make matters worse, natural landscape borders often do not exist. Exceptions are e.g. B. Climatic divisions in mountains.

See also

Literature (chronological)

  • Georg Simmel : Philosophy of the Landscape. In: The Guild Chamber. 3 (11), 1913, pp. 635-644. (on-line)
  • Joachim Ritter : Landscape. On the function of the aesthetic in modern society. (= Publications of the Society for the Promotion of the Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität zu Münster. Issue 54). Münster 1963. (Reprinted in: Ders .: Subjectivity. Six essays. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1974, pp. 141–163, 172–190 (notes)).
  • Gerhard Hard : The landscape of the language and the landscape of the geographers. Semantic and research logic studies. (= Colloquium Geographicum. Volume 11). Bonn 1970.
  • Rosario Assunto: Il paesaggio e l'estetica , Vol. I: Natura e storia , Vol. II: Arte, critica e filosofia , Napoli, Giannini, 1973.
  • Rainer Piepmeier: The end of the aesthetic category 'landscape'. In: Westphalian research. 30, 1980, pp. 8-46.
  • Ulrich Eisel: The beautiful landscape as a critical utopia or as a conservative relic. In: social world. 33, 1982, pp. 157-168. (on-line)
  • Willy Puchner : Pictures of the Austrian landscape . With a text by Harald Sterk. Vienna 1983, ISBN 3-217-01189-9 .
  • Rosario Assunto: Il parterre ei ghiacciai. Tre saggi di estetica sul paesaggio del Settecento , Palermo, Novecento, 1984.
  • Denis E. Cosgrove: Social formation and symbolic landscape. Croom Helm, London 1984.
  • Manfred Smuda (Ed.): Landscape . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1986, ISBN 3-518-38569-0 .
  • Alfred Barthelmeß : Landscape - Human Habitat. Problems of landscape protection and maintenance are historically presented and documented . Alber, Freiburg / Munich 1988, ISBN 3-495-47621-0 .
  • Hanns-Peter Mederer: Signs in the Landscape. Fir resin and storm clouds gave rise to legends. In: The beautiful Allgäu. 1, 1994, pp. 51-55.
  • Kenneth R. Olwig: Recovering the substantive nature of landscape. In: Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 86 (4), 1996, pp. 630-653.
  • Hansjörg Küster : History of the landscape in Central Europe: from the Ice Age to the present. Munich 1999, ISBN 3-406-45357-0 .
  • Hansjörg Küster: Nice prospects: A short history of the landscape. Munich 2009, ISBN 978-3-406-58570-8 .
  • Gerhard Hard: The concept of landscape - myth, history, meaning. 6th Erg. Lfg. 10/01, 2001. In: W. Konold, R. Böcker, U.-H. Hampicke (Hrsg.): Handbook of nature conservation and landscape maintenance. Compendium on the protection and development of habitats and landscapes. Landsberg am Lech 1999.
  • Gerhard Hard : Landscape and Space. Essays on the theory of geography. Volume 1, Osnabrück 2002.
  • Jacob Radloff (Ed.): Landscape cult. Nature as a cultural challenge. (= Political Ecology. 96). 2005, ISBN 3-86581-003-9 .
  • Richard Schindler : Understanding the landscape. Industrial architecture and landscape aesthetics. Freiburg 2005, ISBN 3-937014-30-6 .
  • Norman Backhaus, Claude Reichler, Matthias Stremlow: Alpine landscapes - from imagination to action. Thematic synthesis of research focus I “Processes of Perception” of the National Research Program “Landscapes and Habitats of the Alps” (NRP 48). Zurich 2007, ISBN 978-3-7281-3119-5 .
  • Frank Lorberg: Metaphors and Metamorphoses of the Landscape. The role of models in land maintenance. (= Notebook of the Kassel School. Volume 71). Ed .: AG Freiraum und Vegetation. Kassel 2007.
  • David Blackburn: The Conquest of Nature: A History of the German Landscape . Pantheon, Munich 2008, ISBN 978-3-570-55063-2 .
  • Thomas Kirchhoff, Ludwig Trepl : Landscape, wilderness, ecosystem: on the culturally determined ambiguity of aesthetic, moral and theoretical conceptions of nature. Introductory overview. In this. (Ed.): Ambiguous nature. Landscape, wilderness and ecosystem as cultural-historical phenomena . transcript, Bielefeld 2009, ISBN 978-3-89942-944-2 , pp. 13-66.
  • Dorá Drexler: Landscape and Landscape Perception - A Comparison of English, French, German and Hungarian Understandings of Landscape. In: Laufen special contributions. (1), 2011, pp. 18-25.
  • Deborah Hoheisel: Landscape - theoretical, moral, aesthetic. On the ambiguity of the German concept of landscape. In: Laufen special contributions. Basics, methods, applications. (1), (2011), pp. 9-14.
  • Andrea Siegmund: The landscape garden as a counterworld. A contribution to the theory of the landscape in the field of tension between Enlightenment, sensitivity, romanticism and counter-Enlightenment. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2011, ISBN 978-3-8260-4612-4 .
  • Thomas Kirchhoff: Landscape. [Version 1.2]. In: Basic Concepts of Natural Philosophy. 2012. (online)
  • Ludwig Trepl: The idea of ​​the landscape. A cultural history from the Enlightenment to the ecological movement. transcript, Bielefeld 2012, ISBN 978-3-8376-1943-0 .
  • Olaf Kühne : Distinction - Power - Landscape. For the social definition of landscape. Wiesbaden 2008, ISBN 978-3-531-16213-3 .
  • O. Kühne: Landscape Theory and Landscape Practice. An introduction from a social constructivist perspective. Wiesbaden 2012, ISBN 978-3-531-19262-8 .
  • Markus Ender, Ingrid Fürhapter, Iris Kathan, Ulrich Leitner, Barbara Siller: Landschaftslektüren. Readings of the area from Tyrol to the Po valley. transcript-verlag, Bielefeld 2017, ISBN 978-3-8376-3553-9 .

Web links

Wiktionary: Landscape  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

Individual evidence

  1. Gerhard Hard : The landscape of language and the 'landscape' of the geographers. Semantic and research logic studies . Dümmler, Bonn 1970.
  2. ^ Rainer Piepmeier: Landscape, III. The aesthetic-philosophical term. In: J. Ritter ua (Hrsg.): Historical dictionary of philosophy. Volume 5, Darmstadt 1980, Col. 15-28.
    E. Winkler landscape, II The geographical L.-term. . Ibid .: Col. 13-15.
  3. Beate Jessel : Landscape. In: E.-H. Ritter (Head of Red. Committee): Concise dictionary of spatial planning. ARL, Hannover 2005, pp. 579-586.
  4. Thomas Kirchhoff: 'Nature' as a cultural concept . In: Journal for Cultural Philosophy. (1), 5, 2011, pp. 69-96.
  5. D. Ipsen, U. Reichhardt, St. Schuster, A. Wehrle, H. Weichler: Future landscape. Citizen scenarios for landscape development. Kassel 2003, p. 130.
  6. ^ G. Hard: The word landscape and its semantic court. About the method and result of a linguistic test. In: active word. 19, 1969, p. 10.
  7. a b landscape. In: Friedrich Kluge: Etymological dictionary of the German language. Edited by Elmar Seebold. 24th, revised and expanded edition. Berlin / New York 2002, p. 555.
  8. a b c Cf. G. Müller: On the history of the word landscape. In: A. v. Wallthor, H. Quirin (Ed.): "Landscape" as an interdisciplinary research problem. Münster 1977, pp. 4-13.
  9. cf. W. Haber: ideas about landscape. In: B. Busch (Ed.): Now the landscape is a catalog full of words. Contributions to the language of ecology. (= Valerio. 5). 2007, pp. 78-85.
  10. ^ R. Gruenter: Landscape. Comments on the word and its history of meaning. In: A. Ritter (Hrsg.): Landscape and space in the art of narration. Darmstadt 1975, pp. 192-207.
  11. G. Müller: On the history of the word landscape. In: A. v. Wallthor, H. Quirin (Ed.): "Landscape" as an interdisciplinary research problem. Münster 1977, pp. 4-13, p. 6; Similar KR Olwig: Recovering the Substance Nature of Landscape. In: Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 86, H. 4, 1996, pp. 630-653; St. Heiland: Between change and preservation, between being and ought: cultural landscape as a subject and subject to protection in nature conservation and landscape planning. In: U. Matthiesen, R. Danielzyk, St. Heiland, S. Tzschaschel (eds.): Cultural landscapes as a challenge for spatial planning. Understandings - experiences - perspectives. Hanover 2006, pp. 43-70.
  12. G. Müller: On the history of the word landscape. In: A. v. Wallthor, H. Quirin (Ed.): "Landscape" as an interdisciplinary research problem. Münster 1977, p. 7. See also P. Groth, Ch. Wilson: Die Polyphonie der Cultural Landscape Studies. In: B. Franzen, St. Krebs (ed.): Landscape theory. Texts from Cultural Landscape Studies. Cologne 2005, pp. 58–90.
  13. G. Hard: On the landscape concepts of geography. In: A. v. Wallthor, H. Quirin (Ed.): "Landscape" as an interdisciplinary research problem. Münster 1977, p. 14. See also D. Bartels: Zum Landschaftsbegriff. In: K. Paffen (Ed.): The essence of the landscape. Darmstadt 1973, pp. 175-201; GA Sullivan: The Drama of Landscape: Land, Property, and Social Relations on the Early Modern Stage. Sanford 1998; B. Jessel: "Landscape" - to be used with a term that is taken for granted. In: St. Appel, E. Duman, F. Grose-Kohorst, F. Schafranski (eds.): Paths to a new planning and landscape culture. Festschrift for Hanns Stephan Wust. Kaiserslautern 2000, pp. 143-160; P. Groth, Ch. Wilson: The Polyphony of Cultural Landscape Studies. In: B. Franzen, St. Krebs (ed.): Landscape theory. Texts from Cultural Landscape Studies. Cologne 2005, pp. 58–90.
  14. KR Olwig: Recovering the Substance Nature of Landscape. In: Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 86, H. 4, 1996, pp. 630-653.
  15. Konstantin Langmaier: The land Ere and Nucz, Frid and Gemach: The land as honor, utility and peace community: A contribution to the discussion about common utility. In: Quarterly for social and economic history . tape 103 , 2016, p. 178-200 .
  16. cf. G. Müller: On the history of the word landscape. In: A. v. Wallthor, H. Quirin (Ed.): "Landscape" as an interdisciplinary research problem. Münster 1977, pp. 4-13; W. Haber: The culture of the landscape. From aesthetics to sustainability. In: St. Appel, E. Duman, F. Kohorst, F. Schafranski (eds.): Paths to a new planning and landscape culture. Festschrift for Hanns Stephan Wüst. Kaiserslautern 2000, pp. 1-19; W. Haber: ideas about landscape. In: B. Busch (Ed.): Now the landscape is a catalog full of words. Contributions to the language of ecology. (= Valerio. 5). 2007, pp. 78-85; B. Jessel: "Landscape" - to be used with a term that is taken for granted. In: St. Appel, E. Duman, F. Grose-Kohorst, F. Schafranski (eds.): Paths to a new planning and landscape culture. Festschrift for Hanns Stephan Wust. Kaiserslautern 2000, pp. 143-160.
  17. ^ O. Kühne: Landscape theory and landscape practice. An introduction from a social constructivist perspective. Wiesbaden 2012, p. 40.
  18. M. Baridon: Naissance et du paysage renaissance. Paris 2006.
  19. ^ H. Lehmann: Forms of landscape spatial experience in the mirror of the fine arts. Erlangen 1968, p. 9.
  20. see G. Erb: The landscape representation in German prints before Albrecht Dürer. Frankfurt am Main 1997.
  21. Cf. N. Büttner: History of landscape painting. Munich 2006.
  22. cf. M. Andrews: The Search for the Picturesque. Landscape Aesthetics and Tourism in Britain 1760–1800. Stanford 1989.
  23. ^ O. Kühne: Landscape theory and landscape practice. An introduction from a social constructivist perspective. Wiesbaden 2012, p. 41.
  24. ^ O. Kühne: Landscape theory and landscape practice. An introduction from a social constructivist perspective. Wiesbaden 2012, p. 42.
  25. See F. Seibt: Splendor and misery of the Middle Ages. A finite story. Berlin 1991. ISBN 978-3-442-12825-9 . Pp. 205-220, 454-457.
  26. ^ VG Liulevicius: land of war in the east. Conquest, colonization and military rule in the First World War. Hamburg 2002. ISBN 978-3-930908-81-3 . P. 26
  27. ^ VG Liulevicius: land of war in the east. Conquest, colonization and military rule in the First World War. Hamburg 2002. ISBN 978-3-930908-81-3 . P. 74
  28. ^ VG Liulevicius: land of war in the east. Conquest, colonization and military rule in the First World War. Hamburg 2002. ISBN 978-3-930908-81-3 . P. 82
  29. ^ VG Liulevicius: land of war in the east. Conquest, colonization and military rule in the First World War. Hamburg 2002. ISBN 978-3-930908-81-3 . P. 125
  30. ^ VG Liulevicius: land of war in the east. Conquest, colonization and military rule in the First World War. Hamburg 2002. ISBN 978-3-930908-81-3 . P. 125
  31. P. Schmitz: The Artamanen. Agricultural work and settlement of youth in Germany. 1924-1935. Bad Neustadt ad Saale 1985. ISBN 978-3-922923-36-7 . P. 31
  32. MH Kater: The Artamanen - Völkische Jugend in the Weimar Republic. (Historical magazine vol. 213 issue 3/1971). P. 629
  33. MH Kater: The Artamanen - Völkische Jugend in the Weimar Republic. (Historical magazine vol. 213 issue 3/1971). P. 578
  34. ^ V. Kopp: Rudolf Höss. The commandant of Auschwitz. Cologne, Weimar, Vienna 2014. P. 48-53 / MH Kater: The Artamanen - Völkische Jugend in the Weimar Republic. (Historical magazine vol. 213 issue 3/1971). Pp. 622-638
  35. Cf. N. Franke: The West Wall in the landscape. Activities of nature conservation in the time of National Socialism and its actors. Mainz 2015. https://mulewf.rlp.de/uploads/media/Der_Westwall_in_der_Landschaft.pdf
  36. ^ N. Franke: The Siegfried Line in the landscape. Activities of nature conservation in the time of National Socialism and its actors. Mainz 2015. p. 54. https://mulewf.rlp.de/uploads/media/Der_Westwall_in_der_Landschaft.pdf
  37. ^ W. Hirsch to A. Seifert. November 17, 1940. Enclosure: The Westwall in its landscape structure. November 15, 1940. File F1b / 131 Hirsch. Alwin Seifert held at the Technical University of Munich. P. 6
  38. ^ Project wasteland. A section from the Siegfried Line. Edited as an example for the correct integration of technical structures into the organism of the landscape and their camouflage by the landscape attorneys Dipl. Rer. hoard. Otto Kurz - Ulm and Dipl. Rer. hoard. Max Müller - Bamberg as the owners of the company Kurz und Müller, a company for landscape design, civil engineering, which was used in the area of ​​the Landau site management. Sports field construction Nuremberg-Landau / Pfalz. Federal Archives Freiburg / file RH 11 III / 380. P. 4
  39. ^ N. Franke: The Siegfried Line in the landscape. Activities of nature conservation in the time of National Socialism and its actors. Mainz 2015. pp. 52-54. https://mulewf.rlp.de/uploads/media/Der_Westwall_in_der_Landschaft.pdf
  40. See e.g. BJ Lambert & Sons Trier. Garden design. Large nursery and seed shop. Design and implementation of gardens, parks, cemetery and sports facilities at home and abroad. Advice for private individuals and authorities. Garden maintenance. By courier to the camp commander Sturmbannführer Pister, Hinzert b. Hermeskeil, SS special camp. November 15, 1940. Bundesarchiv Berlin Lichterfelde / Files NS / 4 / HI / 7
  41. AA No. 7 / II: General order No. 7 / II of the Reichsführer SS, Reich Commissioner for the Consolidation of German Ethnicity of November 26, 1940, regarding principles and guidelines for rural development in the new eastern regions. In: MA Hartenstein: New village landscapes. National Socialist Settlement Planning in the "Integrated Eastern Regions" 1939 to 1944. Berlin 1998, pp. 93–96.
  42. E. Klee: The personal dictionary for the Third Reich. Who was what before and after 1945. (Fischer Taschenbuch Nr. 1684). Frankfurt a. Main 2003, ISBN 978-3-10-039309-8 , p. 408.
  43. ^ H. Wiepking-Jürgensmann: The landscape primer. Berlin 1942.
  44. ^ H. Wiepking-Jürgensmann: The landscape primer. Berlin 1942, pp. 320-327.
  45. ^ H. Wiepking-Jürgensmann: The landscape primer. Berlin 1942, pp. 320-327.
  46. ^ H. Wiepking-Jürgensmann: The landscape primer. Berlin 1942, p. 327.
  47. ^ H. Wiepking-Jürgensmann: The landscape primer. Berlin 1942, p. 327.
  48. ^ OA to Wilhelm Hirsch. February 7, 1940. 2 p. File F1b / 131 Hirsch. In: Seifert archive at the Technical University of Munich, p. 1.
  49. A. Seifert to W. Hirsch on July 24, 1944. 2 p. Files F1b / 131 Hirsch inventory Alwin Seifert in the Technical University of Munich, p. 1.
  50. Winkler: Landscape. The geographical concept of landscape. In: Joachim Ritter ua (Hrsg.): Historical dictionary of philosophy. Volume 5, Darmstadt 1980; Rainer Piepmeier: Landscape. The aesthetic-philosophical concept of landscape . ibid.
  51. Heinz Ellenberg : Farmhouse and Landscape - from an ecological and historical perspective . Ulmer, Stuttgart 1990, ISBN 3-8001-3087-4 , p. 12.
  52. Gerhard Hard: The 'total character of the landscape'. Re-interpretation of some passages by Alexander von Humboldt. In: Geographic Knowledge. Booklet. Wiesbaden 1970, pp. 49-71.
  53. a b Landscape [2]. In: Meyers Großes Konversations-Lexikon . 6th edition. tape 12 . Leipzig 1908, p. 122 ( zeno.org ).
  54. a b Landscape [1]. In: Meyers . 1908, p. 121-122 ( zeno.org ).
  55. Gerhard Hard : The landscape of language and the 'landscape' of the geographers. Semantic and research logic studies . Bonn 1970.
  56. ^ Lucius Burckhardt : Landscape development and social structure. In: ders .: The children eat their revolution. Cologne 1985, pp. 206-213.
  57. ^ Rainer Piepmeier: Landscape. The aesthetic-philosophical concept of landscape. In: Joachim Ritter ua (Hrsg.): Historical dictionary of philosophy. Volume 5, Darmstadt 1980.
  58. landscape. In: dtv-Brockhaus. Volume: Kli-Lem. 1988, p. 252.
  59. Joachim Ritter: Landscape. On the function of the aesthetic in modern society. In: ders .: subjectivity. Six essays. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1974; Friedamar Apel: German spirit and German landscape. A topography . Munich 1998.
  60. ^ Ulrich Eisel: Landscape as Critical Utopia and Conservative Relic. In: social world. Volume 33, Göttingen 1982, pp. 157-168; Frank Lorberg: Metaphors and Metamorphoses of the Landscape. The role of models in land maintenance. Kassel 2007, DNB 988955687 .
  61. ZB Hartmut readers: Landscape ecology. UTB Ulmer, Stuttgart 1976.
  62. W. Wojtkiewicz, St. Heiland: Understanding of landscape in landscape planning. A semantic analysis of the use of the word "landscape" in municipal landscape plans. In: spatial research and spatial planning. 70, H. 2, pp. 133-145; T. Greider, L. Garkovich: Landscapes: The Social Construction of Nature and the Environment. In: Rural Sociology 59.1 , 1994, pp. 1-24; D. Ipsen: space as landscape. In: D. Ipsen, D. Lapple (Hrsg.): Sociology of space - sociological perspectives. Hagen 2002, pp. 86-111; WYD Mitchell: Introduction. In: WJT Mitchell (Ed.): Landscape and Power. Chicago / London 2002, pp. 1-4; D. Soyez: Cultivated Landscape Management : Whose Culture? Which landscape? What kind of care? In: Petermanns Geographische Mitteilungen. 147, 2003, pp. 30-39; St. Kaufmann: Sociology of the landscape. Wiesbaden 2005; D. Ahrens: Between constructedness and objectivity. Notes on the concept of landscape from a sociological point of view. Institute for Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning In: Technische Universität Berlin (Hrsg.): Perspective Landscape. Berlin 2006, pp. 229-240; O. Kühne: Landscape in Postmodernism. The example of the Saarland. Wiesbaden 2006; O. Kühne: Distinction - Power - Landscape. For the social definition of landscape. Wiesbaden 2008; O. Kühne: Basics of a constructivist landscape theory and its consequences for spatial planning. In: spatial research and spatial planning. 67, 5/6, 2009, pp. 395-404; T. Chilla: On the political relevance of space-related discourses. The example of the nature protection policy of the European Union. In: Geography. 61, H. 1, 2007, S, pp. 13-25; N. Backhaus, C. Reichler, M. Stremlow: Alpine landscapes - from the idea to the action. Zurich 2007; M. Micheel: Everyday constructions of cultural landscapes. In: spatial research and spatial planning. 70, H. 2, 2012, pp. 107-117.
  63. A. Schütz: Collected essays 1. The problem of reality. The Hague 1971, pp. 123-124.
  64. See A. Schütz: Collected Essays 3. Studies on Phenomenological Philosophy. The Hague 1971.
  65. a b c d O. Kühne: Landscape theory and landscape practice. An introduction from a social constructivist perspective. Wiesbaden 2012.
  66. ^ O. Kühne: Landscape theory and landscape practice. An introduction from a social constructivist perspective. Wiesbaden 2012, pp. 30–31.
  67. ^ N. Goodman: The Structure of Appearance. Cambridge 1951.
  68. ^ O. Kühne: Landscape theory and landscape practice. An introduction from a social constructivist perspective. Wiesbaden 2012, p. 61.
  69. ^ Region. In: dtv-Brockhaus. Band: Que-Sah. 1988, p. 96.
  70. conventions.coe.int