History of Cultural Heritage Protection In Austria

Architectural atlas of Zagreb contains overview of the history of Zagreb architecture and 900 entries on buildings from all parts of the city.
The buildings are grouped according to Zagreb’s neighborhoods: Upper Town, Kaptol, Lower Town - Centre, Lower Town - West, Lower Town - East, Savska street, Vukovarska street and Slavonska avenue, New Zagreb, etc. Each of these neighborhoods has been split into streets, and the buildings are organized according to their official street number. Along with each city area, a map showing the locations of all the marked buildings mentioned in the atlas is also attached.
The buildings in this atlas have been selected primarily according to their importance to the history of Zagreb’s architecture, while also bearing in mind their interest to the average visitor to Zagreb. The city center (Lower Town, Upper Town, and Kaptol) has been covered in most detail.

The origins of heritage conservation in Czech lands are usually dated back to the year
1850 when the Central Commission for Research and Conservation of Architectural
Heritage (Central-Commission für Erforschung und Erhaltung der Baudenkmalen) was
founded in Vienna. In the years 1854–1855, fourteen conservators were assigned to the Bohemian area whose job was to search for and describe heritage sites and they also were to initiate their repairs. One of those fourteen conservators was one – still rather unbeknown – František X. Josef Beneš (1816–1888), conservator of Čáslav county, with whose life and work this paper is concerned. He was born into a family of an establishment bureaucrat Josef Alois Beneš in Český Dub, however, soon the family moved to Osek u Rokycan. Having graduated from grammar-school he continued studying at Prague Polytechnic school where he focused on chemistry and sugar industry. He started as a sugar industry adjunct in Dobrovice and later he was moved to Suchdol u Kutné Hory to act as a manager of a local sugar factory. Having helped František Alexander Heber with his work Böhmens Burgen, Vesten und Bergschlösser to whom he gave valuable data about many a building in Kutná
Hora area, Beneš himself began to be interested in conservation. In the 1840's we can already find Beneš as a member of the Archaeology Board of the Museum of the Bohemian Kingdom – a post which doubtless played its part in his appointment as a conservator. In the late 1850's he decribed the Nanebevzetí Panny Marie cathedral in Sedlec, decanal cathedral of St. Petr a Pavel in Čáslav, St. Petr a Pavel church in Čestín, church of St. Václav in Krchleby and with connection to its reconstruction also the memorial of the royal oath in Jihlava. The 1860's are the heritage boom years for Beneš – his main focus is on Kutná Hora; he describes the archdeacon church of St. Jakub, Hrádek nad Páchem, St. Markéta church in Křesetice and other churches. The attempt to photograph ceiling paintings in the hall of Sedlec monastery is among his most distinctive efforts. In the 1860's and 1880's he repeatedly published the decription of ruined tableaux by the painter Juda Tadeáš Supper. Around this
time he also became interested in mapping of strongholds. Upon moving to Prague he
attended Vocel's university lectures and after his death became a conservator for the city of Prague and later also for the Prague counties in his stead. Beneš concerned himself with Prague heritage in the 1870's and 1880's (chapel of St. Prokop in Strahov, Prašná brána, the bridge towers etc.) as is demonstrated by his knowledge of these sites in his later texts. However, gradually his conservation activity ceased; among his last texts is the report on Nanebevzetí Panny Marie church in Tismice. František X. Beneš belongs to the first generation of conservators of the Central-Commission. In his texts, he follows in footsteps of older topographic scholars such as Schaller, Sommer, Dlabacz on one hand and also Jan Erazim Vocel on the other. His main approach was detailed decription of given sites and detection of source findings which he compared quite critically. Epigraphic sites are most important to him. Beneš was a conservator-practician, although his knowledge of medieval buildings was outstanding he never overcame period-critics approach. Despite being wellknown among his peers during his life, he was almost forgotten after his death.