The Functions of Minor Monuments in Mining and Post-Mining Landscapes

Adoption of the European Landscape Convention at the beginning of the new millennium was one of the impulses for rediscovering the shared interests of environmentalism and cultural heritage protection in Czechia. The attempt to address conservation of the cultural landscape values through restoration of minor monuments played a major role in this effort [1-3]. The author of this paper began to publish work concerning minor monuments at the turn of the millennium and continued to focus on this topic during the first decades of the 21st century. The author’s bibliography of publications discussing minor monuments and cultural landscape in general spanning more than two decades of work. These may be perceived as papers in specialised scientific fields, such as monument care, architecture, urbanism and ecology applied to the landscape. However, the engagement of philosophy in this context is important. The studies, as well as the relevant maps and references are accessible to the public. The references under this study point to major sources that influenced the work on this topic from the long-term perspective and were used as the basis for implementing various projects in practice. It should be noted that several of the publications referred to above were published retrospectively in international scientific literature based on specific implemented projects addressing practical issues in the relevant regions at the time.

Minor Monument Definition

Minor monuments have been gaining increasing importance over the recent decades due to the societal interest in maintaining values of the traditional cultural landscape [4, 5]. Minor monuments are only mentioned marginally when the development of architectural styles and the history of art is described, typically as part of the rural and folk architecture. They can either be itemised or characterised by their major features. We can therefore conclude that minor monuments include wayside shrines, crosses in fields, calvaries, open chapels, enclosed chapels, for example those in village centres, campaniles, statues in countryside and within municipalities, Marian columns, pillory, boundary stones, milestones, signposts and other minor structures in the landscape.

Highlighting the memory value of a place where a minor monument is located is the key characteristic of this type of structure. While minor monuments may have (and often have) its own historical and artistic value, the value of the “location” stemming from the memory of the specific point in the landscape is of the ultimate importance. These locations often are significant, for example dominating features in the landscape. This is why minor monuments are referred to as topical monuments. They are smaller in size compared to conventional monuments and form its own specific category.

Unlike other categories of monuments, minor monuments allow for transfer with relative ease. Monitoring of the fate of individual minor monuments gives the impression of minor monuments moving through the landscape. However, this gives rise to two theoretical questions. Firstly, if a minor monument is transferred (spontaneously in the past or currently according to the modern rules), does it carry the most important aspect - the topos - along? This study is of the opinion that this only happens partially. A wayside shrine continues to mark miraculous rescue from a dangerous situation, yet without the direct contact with the location, where the miracle occurred. The minor monument, a specific topical monument prior to its transfer, becomes a more abstract reminder of the location.

Is this more or less? Secondly, the topical character of a minor monument and the possibility of transfer seem to contradict each other, reduce the overall value of the minor moment and limit its merit to the artistic and historical value. However, this study is of the opinion that these two factors may function in synergy; transfers of minor monuments result in specific landscape points of the past events being forgotten, but at the same time turn the entire landscape into topos. The landscape as such seems to be blessed with memory. It is therefore possible to argue as to what means more: several specific preserved landscape topoi, or the entire landscape as an abstract feature of the memory.

Context of Geological Development and History of Settlement of the Northwest Bohemia

A major part of the North Bohemian Plateau was a Mesozoic Cretaceous Sea, producing marlite and sandstone (stones easily processed in masonry) in the area. These are lined on the northern side with orthogneiss in Krušné hory and with Tertiary basalt in České středohoří on the southern side. North Bohemia has been settled continuously from the neolithic era and was home to various nations and cultures, including the urnfield culture, the Celts and Germanic tribes. Slavic tribes settled here permanently in the second half of the first millennium. Lemuzi settled along the Bílina river, Lučané lived along the Ohře river, and the surroundings of the Elbe River was occupied by Děčané, Litoměřici and Pšované. Important development occurred in the 12th and the 13th century, when the regions close to the border were populated with German settlers under the patronage of the Markvartic family. German explorers gradually penetrated and settled in the massive forests around the border. North Bohemia is characterised by intensive economic development from as early as the medieval times, and this gives the landscape a certain non-idyllic aspect. As regards the Most region, which is the main focus of this study, it was a landscape with lakes, forest-steppe and fertile soil. As the farming in the area intensified, Komořanské jezero, a lake originally full of fish eventually dried out. The Most region on the eve of the fossil fuel mining was an area with highly intensive farming.

Context of the Development of Minor Monuments in Terms of History of Architectural Styles and in View of the History of Northwest Bohemia

Despite focusing mainly on monumental architecture from castles and chateaus, monasteries, churches and fortification architecture all the way to townhouses, history of architectural styles also mentions minor monuments as highly specific phenomenon of the past cultural landscape in the Czech lands [6-14]. While the romanesque, gothic and renaissance eras in the Czech lands were not notable for numerous minor architectures in the landscape, the gothic style brought a prominent feature in the form of wayside shrines with columns and chapel style, and especially those constructed at the beginning of the 16th century use a variety of shapes and decor. The design of a wooden campanile attached to a church without a tower and topped with a pointed roof is also a product of the gothic era. The so-called conciliation crosses and commemoration crosses also began to appear during the gothic era.

Conciliation and commemoration crosses are a type of stone monuments found throughout Europe. It should be noted that many conciliation and commemoration crosses in the Czech lands are found in the districts of Northwest Bohemia, such as the Chomutov, most. Teplice, Ústí nad Labem districts. Marking various tragedies or expressing thanks for avoidance of danger or misfortune, the so-called ex voto, were the main reasons for establishing wayside shrines. Paintings by Jan Willemberg show clearly that wayside shrines always stood by roads or at crossroads. An exceptional group of thirty-six wayside shrines from the late gothic era was preserved in the heart of Northwest Bohemia, between the towns of Kadaň, Chomutov and Jirkov. In addition, unique stone wayside shrine from Všestudy from the 13th century was preserved near the town of Chomutov and currently is safely stored in a stone structure collection.

Simple wooden crosses in village centres and fields were also constructed during the medieval era and wood was the material recommended by the church at the time. Some minor monuments have also been preserved in the Czech landscape from the renaissance era. Timbered and boarded campaniles were also built during this time. Stone wayside shrines consisting of columns and a relievo of Christ on the cross on one of the walls of the chapel part can also be found in the landscape. Stone wayside shrines constructed until the end of the renaissance era are characterised by their non-monumental style, most of them being between two and three meters high. Markers and boundary stones with coats of arms and indication of year can also be found in the landscape along with conciliation crosses similar to the gothic era.

As regards stone conciliation and commemoration crosses in the second half of the 17th century, i.e., at the time of the developing baroque style, specialised literature expressly refers to Northwest Bohemia: “The abbot Scipio from Osek (1650-1691) wrote in his diary: Similarly, to the previous years, in 1672 I had resting stones made of hard rock placed in various locations, for example in Teplice and Most and next to the monastery, so that passersby carrying heavy loads can rest on them. It was my intention to note this here carefully to make sure that none of these stones are considered to be markers by any of the neighbours and no disputes arise from this; there are many of these stones and the places where they are located are visible and can be easily recognised. None of these stones is to be ever considered a marker. Instead, they should only be called resting stones [15].”

However, wayside shrines in the form of monumental columns began to appear with the onset of the victorious counter-reformation in the Czech lands. Baroque no longer applies a share shape of a columns, preferring a round column with an entasis. In addition to stone wayside shrines, squared wayside shrines constructed of bricks began to appear. As the counter-reformation succeeded in the Czech lands, a new type of crosses, often including a painted body of the Christ made of sheet metal, was erected in municipalities and in the landscape to commemorate Jezuit missions or restoration of Catholic church in towns and villages. A new type of a cross - a metal or stone cross resting on a massive stone base began to appear in villages at the end of the 17th and beginning of the 18th century under the influence of the developing monumental sculpture.

Baroque came with the vision of composed landscape. Ways of the cross, wayside shrines and statues are typical features of the cultural landscapes in the Czech lands during the Baroque era and can be found near architectural structures, such as small bridges, or in groups of trees. Statues can be divided into two groups: the first consists of works by major sculptors, in which case they are dedicated to the nobility and bear dedication inscriptions in Latin, including the coat of arms of the donator and the arms of alliance of a noble couple. The second group includes works by local stonemasons influenced by folk elements and inscriptions not this time in Latin. Names of authors can only be found in exceptional cases. Commemoration stones, markers and milestones are also found in the Baroque landscape.

The era of the classicist and empire style in the Czech lands is also characterised by occurrence of chapels, wayside shrines, statues and crosses. Signposts and guideposts at crossroads of the continuously expanding network of roads appear as a new element in the landscape during this time. Milestones in the shape of obelisks and columns without fluting, and even the first road signs for travelling coachmen began to appear by roads. Wayside shrines established by common people at the turn of the 18th and 19th century and in the first half of the 19th century in the folk baroque style consist of a massive pedestal, round column and heads with a chapel open to one side.

Context of Reclamation and Resocialisation of Areas with Ongoing or Terminated Brown Coal Mining

The Reclamation Office of the Agricultural Council of the Czech Kingdom was established in 1908. The establishment in Vienna decided to establish a reclamation office in Duchcov in the north part of the Czech kingdom and the first reclamation projects commenced. Reclamation was not defined in the law despite the developing brown coal mining in the first decades of the 20th century. The Ministry of Agriculture supported by Živnobanka attempted this in 1938, but without success. The establishment of the Reclamation Cooperative Society was also promoted with the intention that mine owners would let the land left after terminated mining free of charge to the newly established society, which was obliged to reclaim the leased land, but the plan was not implemented. Brown coal mining intensified after World War II and a new Act on Mining was issued in 1957, requiring that all mining companies, now owned by the state, reclaim land after mining. Individual reclamation projects started after World War II in Northwest Bohemia at the beginning of the 1950s. During the following decades of the existence of the socialist Czechoslovakia, the developing system of reclamation was gradually improved with conceptual and practical steps aimed at resocialising the reclaimed areas. Long-term conceptual prerequisites for restoration of larger parts of the landscape were created from 1998 as part of the Reclamation General Scheme. The long-term reclamation strategy involves safe storage of the topsoil and potentially fertile upper layers of soil already during preparation of new mining areas. Appropriate shapes of tips are also highly important for subsequent reclamation.

Minor Monument as Symbolic Representation of a Settlement Destructed due to Brown Coal Mining

This topic was defined while working on the study entitled “Polyfunctional Museum in Open Landscape - Bílina Nord Mine” in 2009. Firstly, one should ask why the project commented on here should be seen as exclusive? The decision according to which a polyfunctional space serving the commemorative function along with the hygienic, protective and recreational sports functions can be created directly next to the large active brown coal mine Bílina with major remaining deposits of high-quality brown coal is undoubtedly unique. Fragments of the original historical cultural landscape with a high memory value preserved in the deeply anthropomorphised landscape are the key prerequisite of the project.

The exclusivity of the environment also stems from the visual characteristics of the landscape west of the active surface brown coal mine Bílina. The visual contrast between the industrial and the historical landscape is exceptionally strong. The industrial landscape is visually characterised by the structures of massive machinery for surface coal mining or the more distant cooling towers of power plants. On the other hand, the historical landscape is visually dominated by the dome of the pilgrimage church in Mariánské Radčice, the castle above the town of Most, or the structure of the historical mining tower. The area is exceptional due to the expressive visual representation of the significant clash of the eras. The open landscape below Krušné hory with its great dimensions suggestively expresses the dialectics of being of the nature, culture and technology: The world of technology stresses out the positive purpose of preserving and reviving cultural heritage. On the other hand, the preserved cultural heritage points to the monumentality of the human technical brilliance.

However, the experience from the exclusive space on the western border of the Bílina mine can be applied to other locations. For example, there are areas continuously altered by the ongoing mining of minerals, areas of large water reservoirs and their surroundings or newly revitalised military areas. Restoring the memory is the initial objective of the project. However, how should one restore memory in a landscape, where even historically significant town of Most and numerous smaller municipalities ceased to exist due to surface coal mining, where the dynamics of coal mining remains, yet where massive reclamation process with subsequent revitalisation has been taking place over decades? How should one restore memory in landscapes with such massive dynamics of extinction of cultural and monument values on the one hand and creation of new values on the other hand? This is the central methodological problem addressed in the study entitled “Polyfunctinal Museum in Open Landscape - Bílina Nord Mine”.

Specialised literature describes the so-called revolution of nostalgy, which strives to preserve and recall the details of the past appearance of the landscape. This absolutized interest in preserving the past is in conflict with the need to create new values, including architectural and urbanistic values. The necessity of economic development significantly questions the approach of monument care based on the revolution of nostalgy. This will essentially result in nothing being preserved. Selective approach needs to be applied when restoring the memory of the past landscape to ensure that future has its say alongside the past. However, once the need for a selective approach is confirmed, this gives rise to the difficult problem of monument care - finding out which category of monuments is capable of representing the extinct cultural landscape as a whole, including its settlement structure.

For example, we can consider the conventional real estate monuments, such as townhalls or churches. It is at least theoretically viable for copies of these monuments with alternative materials and proportions to commemorate the extinct municipalities. However, the approach preferred by this study says that this is not sufficiently intimate. This would involve institutions too significantly and exclude emotionality as the core of memory. This is why the extinct landscape as a whole should be represented by a simple structure of a minor monument as a topical monument reflecting the course of history involving major political events along with unpolitical history of everyday life. The link between a minor monument and the landscape is not associative, but deeply symbolic [16,17].

Restoration of the memory of a landscape and its settlement structure, which became extinct due to surface coal mining, may therefore be a process involving the following steps: firstly, identification of irreversibly extinct small monuments in the area documented in archive materials. The second step involves creating inventory of the preserved minor monuments and the third step consists of mapping rescue transfers of minor monuments from the area. The subsequent procedure is a complex process in terms of monument care, architecture and urbanism:

• How to commemorate extinct minor monuments - by an exact copy, loose copy or a new structure evoking the minor monument?

• Reverse transfer of the original minor monument or its exact or loose copy – where the structure should be transferred? This will be addressed in a separate chapter in this study.

• How to create the museum consisting of the elements mentioned above in the addressed landscape and how to align it with the preserved minor monuments in place?

• And how to make this architectural and urbanistic landscape composition fully functional within the purpose of the Polyfunctinal Museum in Open Landscape - Bílina Nord Mine.

Minor Monument as an Antecedent in the Restoration of a Pilgrimage in Mining and Post-Mining Landscape

This topic was defined and addressed in the project for restoration of the pilgrimage between the Osek monastery and the pilgrimage site in Mariánské Radčice, which built on the outcomes of the project entitled Polyfunctinal Museum in Open Landscape - Bílina Nord Mine. Pilgrimages leading to pilgrimage sites always significantly contributed to the composition and the spiritual structure of the landscape in the Czech lands. Historical pilgrimages began to be restored gradually after 1989 and pilgrimage sites were revived. The revived pilgrimage between the Velehrad monastery and the Hostýn pilgrimage site is one example for all [18, 19]. The renovation of the historical pilgrimage from the Osek monastery to the Mariánské Radčice pilgrimage site needs to be considered in this broad context. Is it possible to find a compromise between the order of the landscape created formerly and presently by the Cistercians (Osek being a Cistercian monastery) [20] and the order pressed on the landscape by industrialism? Only then the renewed pilgrimage on the boundary of the active surface coal mine Bílina can become part of the landscape and the habits of the local residents.

We know of the existence of medieval pilgrimages owing to the existence of the so-called pilgrimage badges. Literature states that instead of being completely new structures, pilgrimages in the Czech lands in the medieval times were established by using old trails. The pilgrimage between the Osek monastery and the Mariánské Radčice pilgrimage site was probably created around the time of establishment of the monastery and the pilgrimage site. During 1197-1199, the nobleman Bohuslav moved the Cistercians from Mašťov near Kadaň to the old church near Osek and Přemysl Otakar II confirmed and expanded the monastery’s assets before 1207. The origin of the pilgrimage church in Mariánské Radčice is associated with the cult of a wooden statue of the holy mother of sorrows in the 13th century with funds being provided probably by Přemysl Otakar II. The abbot Dětřich from Osek had the wooden statue of the Virgin Mary carved around 1280.

Research in archives yielded individual indirect references of the existence of the pilgrimage between the Osek monastery and the Mariánské Radčice pilgrimage site from the time when the medieval monastery and the pilgrimage church were established. The evidence of the pilgrimage in mainly baroque vedutas and paintings is more convincing. However, no veduta or depiction showing the authentic route or infrastructure of the pilgrimage have been found [21,22]. Information on the route of the medieval pilgrimage from any relevant maps is lacking. More recent maps refer to the pilgrimage in two aspects – as a certain type of a road connecting the starting point with the destination and in the relevant infrastructure surrounding the pilgrimage. The infrastructure belonging to the pilgrimage and including minor monuments is the key to the reconstruction of the original route of the baroque version of the pilgrimage.

As all available historical documents were analysed, two branches of the pilgrimage were identified: the east and the west branches. The east branch largely became extinct due to the mining activities in the Bílina surface coal mine. Its original route leads from Osek through Hrdlovka and Libkovice, a currently extinct municipality, to Mariánské Radčice. The west branch has been preserved along the route of the roads I/27 Lom - Osek and III/2567 Mariánské Radčice - Lom [23].

It should be stressed out that the basic verification of the baroque route of the pilgrimage relied on the analysis of extinct, transferred and existing minor monuments or their remnants along the assumed route of the pilgrimage. The existence of minor monuments in certain locations is indicative of the location of other existing historical structures in the landscape. In other words, one minor monument is an antecedent of a second minor monument, and a group of minor monuments is an antecedent of the pilgrimage as such [24]. The team working on the project for restoring the pilgrimage between the Osek monastery and the Maríánské Radčice pilgrimage site used primarily this method in the first stages of the analysis of the area.

The study provides a list of extinct, transferred or existing minor monuments (or their relicts) as an infrastructure of the pilgrimage and as antecedents indirectly pointing to the existence of the pilgrimage in the dynamically changing mining and post-mining landscape.

Extinct monuments along the route of the historical pilgrimage

• Three baroque niche chapels from the set of originally seven pilgrimage chapels along the route from Mariánské Radčice to Libkovice

• Three crosses or chapels along the route from Libkovice to Osek

• Two crosses or chapels along the route from Mariánské Radčice to Lom

• Statue of St. John of Nepomuk from 1730 from the small bridge “U Salačů” in Libkovice

• Minor monuments transferred from the route of the historical pilgrimage

• Baroque pilgrims’ chapel (Veronica wipes the face of Jesus, transfer from Libkovice to Vtelno near Most

• Baroque pilgrims’ chapel (The Christ’s circumcision, transfer from Libkovice to Vtelno near Most

• Baroque pilgrims’ chapel (The flight into Egypt), transfer from Libkovice to Vtelno near Most

• Baroque pilgrims’ chapel (12-year-old Jesus at the temple; transfer from Libkovice to Vtelno near Most

• Existing minor monuments (or their relicts) along the route of the historical pilgrimage

• Gate of the Osek monastery as the starting point of the west branch

• Chapel near road I/27 from Osek to Lom

• Gate of the Osek monastery as the starting point of the east branch

• Niche of the extinct chapel in the monastery wall in the Dolnonádražní street in Osek

• Empty pedestal for a minor monument in the Dolnonádražní street in Osek

• Resting stone on the corner of the cemetery near Osek

To What Extent Do Rescue Transfers of Minor Monuments Determine the Character of Mining and Post-Mining Landscapes?

Historical Context of Rescue Transfers of Minor Monuments in Northwest Bohemia

Firstly, attention should be paid to the term transfer. Transfer is stipulated in the monument care legislation in the case of national cultural monument or a declared immovable cultural monument. Although the term transfer is also used in movable cultural monuments, it is not up to this study to discuss this topic. In this study, the term transfer is used in the broad sense of a change in the location of immovable declared cultural monuments, as well as any other immovable assets with cultural and monument care protection, as asset being the product of human work [25].

The controlled extinction of a major part of the historical town of Most necessitated by the expanding surface coal mining in the region is a key event that formed the context of the exceptionally widespread practice of rescue transfer of minor monuments in the mining landscapes of Northwest Bohemia. The controlled extinction of the town of Most began in 1965. This study states the following on this topic: deep and subsequently surface coal mining in Northwest Bohemia commenced in the early 19th century, when all reserves of wood for fuel in the Czech lands were used up and the era of initially rather chaotic, later increasingly systematic deep and surface coal mining began. At the end of the 19th century, the environmental conditions in the Most region were extremely poor due to the mining and burning of brown coal. To quote the relevant literature: F. Bernau comments on the situation in the Most region at this time as follows: “The impression of the formerly flourishing plateau is incredibly sad. Smoking chimneys of coal factories everywhere, burning heaps of soot emanating unbearable stench everywhere. Endless coal trains on the railway crisscrossing the landscape point to the quantity of coal mined here [26].”

During socialism, at the time of existence of the Warsaw Pact and the Council of Mutual Economic Assistance, coal mining in the nationalised industry of Northwest Bohemia was systemised, but also intensified and the region became the fuel and energy hub of the state during the Cold War. The large brown coal mines established at this time with their tips combined with the expanding power engineering and chemical industry and their emissions make the impression of Northwest Bohemia as a derelict landscape. This was indeed the case. However, concepts for reclamation and practical implementation of these projects began to appear and brought major transformation of the landscape decades later. The fate of the town of Most needs to be perceived in the context of industrialisation in Czechoslovakia emphasising heavy industry during the era of exceptionally strong international tensions throughout the Cold War, which was preceded by World War II with (sometimes even targeted) destruction of a large part of the unique cultural heritage throughout Europe.

The majority of the historical town of Most disappeared, giving way to surface brown coal mining. As regards authentic immovable monuments, the Church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary was transferred to Starý Most, entire groups of smaller immovable assets were transferred, and the new town of Most was established according to the textbook models of avantgarde after World War I and was to become a model socialist town with the progressing reclamation in the region. As the Cold War progressed, brown coal mining was very intensive and after dozens of municipalities became extinct, extinction threatened others, such as Mariánské Radčice. The adoption of the ecological limits for mining at the beginning of the 1990s was therefore a relief and a signal that escalation of the Cold War into a conventional war is not imminent. While the systematic surface coal mining has continued over the last couple of decades, reclamation and unique resocialisation have achieved major outcomes, leading to transformation of Northwest Bohemia. Almost no reminders of the former derelict landscape can be found there now. In addition, the area still has relatively large brown coal deposits allowing for effective brown coal mining for many decades to come.

Minor Monuments and Landscape Matrix in Mining and Post-Mining Landscapes

Environmental literature refers to minor landscapes as structures contributing to the unique character of landscape. Their longterm existence in a specific location signals the current presence of landscape structures such as a plane, corridor or landscape matrix. Naturally, a minor monument with its natural surroundings [28] may constitute the smallest landscape unit in an otherwise heterogeneous landscape, i.e., an ecotope [29]. However, this term is only mentioned for completeness, as an ecotope is not the same as the topos of a minor monument, as shown further.

On the other hand, a minor monument may point to landscape structures formerly existing but not extinct in the relevant location. Naturally, this has an impact on our perception of the dynamics of biodiversity of ecosystems in a specific landscape. Clearly this will be a valuable source of information for the overall revitalisation of the landscape. Besides being a specific category of monuments, minor monuments are also a specific separate functional and structural category in ecology of the landscape. In terms of ecology of the landscape, the landscape matrix has the following characteristics: it has a larger relative area than any other type of a landscape element, it is the most intertwined part of the landscape, or plays a dominant role in the dynamics of the landscape as a whole. Let’s try to analyse minor monuments as a potential landscape matrix.

As regards the total relative area: At the first sight, minor monuments do not cover a major relative area. However, when the intertwined nature of natural and cultural heritage is considered and individual landscape planes including a minor monument is added up along with landscape corridors that ultimately became a minor monument themselves, the criterion of the largest relative area may be fulfilled. However, this is purely a thought experiment mentioned for illustration only. The intertwined nature is more important: Naturally, networks of minor monuments are not linked in the terrain according to the rules applied by ecology of the landscape. Let’s compare a plane as a key structure of ecology of the landscape with the topos of a minor monument. Unlike plane, topos is an abstract entity of some kind. While the minor monument is visible, its topos may potentially spread far beyond the minor monument.

It may go as far as to a point where it links to the topos of another minor monument, thereby creating important landscape relations. Topos of a minor monument therefore dissolves in the endless continuity of all minor monuments in the relevant landscape. We can therefore describe a network of minor monuments as landscape continuity. In this context, it is necessary to reiterate what was said in the previous chapters, specifically the overall ability of minor monuments to be transferred. As mentioned previously, these transfers turn the entire landscape into a topos, although only an abstract one.

Minor monuments may therefore be considered the most intertwined part of the landscape. Naturally, the landscape matrix created by a network of minor monuments in a landscape is highly abstract, even spiritual [30]. Mining and post-mining landscapes, for example in Northwest Bohemia, highlight minor monuments as a certain abstract landscape matrix owing to the very frequent (as mentioned several times in this study) rescue transfers of minor monuments due to the ongoing surface coal mining. As shown previously, relocation of a minor monument results in increasingly abstract nature of topicality of minor monuments.

The fact that reverse transfer of minor monuments, for example from outdoor stone structure collections, outlines new perspectives of the former mining landscape and plays a key role in the dynamics of the landscape (although this dynamic is natural and societal, instead of being purely natural) is another factor supporting the hypothesis that minor monuments create a highly abstract and very intensive landscape matrix especially in mining and post-mining landscapes [31-33].

Outdoor Stone Structure Collections of Transferred Minor Monuments and Their Significance

Monument care in Czechoslovakia in the second half of the 20th century considered outdoor stone structure collections a legitimate type of cultural heritage care. These are not specific to the Czechoslovak or Czech monument care. They are a method used in wider international practice [34]. Literature mentions, for example, an outdoor stone structure collection in Jablonec n/Nisou, in an area surrounding the former parish church of St. Anne, where a collection of folk sculpture was established. The Gethsemane from Rádlo was transferred and restored here along with the unsigned work by Ignác Martinic, the Virgin Mary of Karlov, the work of Jan Chládek senior from Turnov, and a conciliation cross from 1666.

The landscape of Northwest Bohemia is a home to many larger or smaller outdoor stone structure collections for minor monuments relocated in rescue transfer from municipalities that had to give way to surface coal mining. The representative outdoor stone structure collection in Mariánské Radčice in front of the parish house in an enclosed and uniquely intimate space from the architectural and urban point of view. While the space is undoubtedly carefully maintained, this study points out that the location lacked an official name over long term. The failure to name such a location stigmatises the industrial development in the region with a certain degree of defeatism.

The author of this study joined with colleagues and used a system of signposts in Mariánské Radčice (and also in Březno, on the outskirts of the active Nástup-Tušimice surface coal mine) [35] in an attempt to show that creating outdoor stone structure collections with relocated minor monuments is a decent step on the part of the state-organised monument care within the limits of the relevant situation. The establishment of these outdoor stone structure collections seems to point to the order hidden in the core of industrial development, or at least of the industrial development we can observe in Northwest Bohemia.

Active industry similar to that in Northwest Bohemia must be an alternative to the passive societal consumerism of the current globalisation and builds on the best European and Czechoslovak traditions. Naturally, the permanently sustainable rules of its development could be subject to vast and sharp discussions. Outdoor stone structure collections with minor monuments as an artistic and historical statement of the era show that the industrial humankind moves along the trajectories of necessity. While brown coal mining had to start in Northwest Bohemia two hundred years ago because there was no other alternative, the landscape did not become tragic because of this. Instead, it is intensely anthropocentric in a certain sense thanks to the content of the important fossil fuel.

The claim that outdoor stone structure collections with minor monuments are not mere passive places for commemorating extinct settlements is a precursor to the following chapter of this study. We also decide on the future when considering reverse transfers of minor monuments currently stored in outdoor stone structure collections.

Reverse Transfer of a Minor Monument: Strengthening the Sense of Home or on the Contrary, Deepening the Sense of Strangeness?

Seven chapels originally stood near the east branch of the pilgrimage from the Osek monastery to the Mariánské Radčice pilgrimage site. As the mining in the Bílina surface coal mine progressed, four of the historically preserved chapels were relocated to the church in Vtelno near Most. As the mining in the northern part of the Bílina surface coal mine is terminated, the pilgrimage from the Osek monastery to the Mariánské Radčice pilgrimage site can be restored. The question is: should the four chapels historically located near the pilgrimage from the Osek monastery to the Mariánské Radčice pilgrimage site be relocated to the restored pilgrimage?

The initial opinion is as follows: the appropriateness of reverse transfer of a minor monument from the original location to a new location can be considered in view of specialised fields of science, such as monument care, architecture, urbanism and ecology of the landscape. The unique character of a minor monument in a landscape arises from the tension between the freedom to be relocated freely in the landscape and the special character of the minor monument pointing to the memory and other values of the specific location in the landscape. Let’s imagine that reverse transfer of a minor monument in the complex dynamics of the mining and post-mining landscape is philosophically situation in places of conflict between the naive and scientific world as described by the Czech philosopher Jan Patočka. One of the major reasons is that while the coordinates for the reverse transfer of a monument can be described through natural sciences, the nature of the reverse transfer location is determined mainly by spiritual dynamics. To find a key to the reverse transfer of a minor monument in a constantly changing landscape (and mining and post-mining landscapes are prime examples of changeability), one needs to step aside from the personal, to leave the empiric subject in favour of a transcendental approach, and examine the reverse transfer of the minor monument from this point of view, i.e., as an expression of a man in his relationship to the world. Therefore, we need to delve into ontology and view the reverse transfer of the minor monument from the perspective of subjectivity of the historical man.

A suitable location for reverse transfer of a minor monument cannot be found by relocating the monument automatically to the original geographical point, if it still exists, or some extrapolated substitute location existing in the landscape, if the original landscape ceased to exist, for example due to surface coal mining. Reverse transfer of a minor monument is not a direct line pointing in a certain direction and under a certain angle, but a function of a certain kind directed into space. If a minor monument moves within the context of changes in the landscape, we can describe the original and the new location as “previously” and “then” in the sense of movement of the relevant monument. Being a transcendental subject, we can then say that the minor monument moves through us, as an expression of us and the static periods, when the minor monument remains in a single location, are also an expression of this movement with the rapid motion that follows. Therefore, we can formulate the basic principle: the ontological difference between the original and the new location of a minor monument, or in other words the difference between previously and then in the continuous motion of the minor monument along with the changeable landscape context is an event. A primordial event.

How to characterise ontologically the difference between the original and the new location of a minor monument, between its previously and then, according to the concept of a primordial event of the Czech philosopher Ladislav Hejdánek? This type of event is taking place all at once, no action is purely present and the past is not anything that has passes and cannot be changed. Actions are internal and are gradually externalised, as they move into the present and then into past. Therefore, the ontological difference can be described as the difference between the inner and outer in actions involved in a primordial event. It would therefore seem important how the event is defined, how it is internally constructed, what is being announced, what is externalised and what happens within the event. The issue of a reverse transfer of a minor monument, which encloses something important in a highly dynamic, as if endlessly dynamic mining and post-mining landscape, is a suitable application space for thinking considering the motion as such instead of the static present status. It is a suitable application space for philosophical effort described by Ladislav Hejdánek as follows: “While the beginning of philosophy in the Ancient Greece is marked by the effort to define what remains stable in the middle of changes, we need to open up to a different approach leading us to the question how permanence is possible against the backdrop of constant changes [36].”

This is where the impulse provided by philosophy to specialised scientific fields should be mentioned: truly adequate reverse transfer of a minor monument in terms of specialised scientific fields, such as monument care, architecture, urbanism and ecology of the landscape, is relocation to a place of possible permanence of the externalised action in the middle of constant changes. Let’s further assume that perception has a teleological structure and life relationships through which we perceive things are differentiated indefinitely. Definition of a primordial event including the reverse transfer of a minor monument is a presentation activity in perception. There are great many options for defining the time and space for reverse transfer of a minor monument: the minor monument could even be reverse transferred to the location where the deep and surface coal mining in the Bílina region started.

The primordial event of reverse transfer of a minor monument comprises two components: an event of faith and an event of modern science and technology. A primordial event in the form of reverse transfer of a minor monument can be described as a wide and deep event formed by the tension between the two components, i.e., between faith and the world of science and technology. This tension is specifically shown in the themes of home and strangeness. Home is the initially domesticated, familiar environment consisting of typical structures we do not carry along. Instead, we return to them. Jan Patočka says: “Inconspicuousness is an interesting characteristic of home, which develops towards this as its (rarely realised) telos [37].” Distance and the subsequent strangeness are a certain opposite to undomesticated surrounding reality. A minor monument has the meaning of a certain milestone marking the domesticated, yet it contains the distant horizon of death, very unusual, undomesticated, real strangeness, as it also serves the function of memento mori. This is especially the case if we understand transcendental consciousness analysing being in the world as the time.

To sum up: The phenomenon externalised in reverse transfer of a minor monument is estrangement of the domesticated. This means that returning a relocated minor monument to its original geographical location would be gross misunderstanding of a minor monument in its bilingual expression of the source of the feeling of home and strangeness. It would therefore seem that the objective of reverse transfer of a minor monument, i.e., reinforcing the feeling of home in a newly constructed landscape, the return of the domesticated, deepening of the domesticated, cannot be achieved in this manner. On the contrary, this may lead to deepening strangeness. However, it is not any distant strangeness as the opposite of the warm closeness of home. It is a radical strangeness close to the strangeness of death.

Reverse Transfer of a Minor Monument into a Reclaimed Landscape or into the Remnants of the Pre-Mining Landscape?

Once mining activities are terminated, the reclaimed areas are radically anthropomorphised landscapes. From the point of view of specialists dealing with reclamation, the reclaimed landscape is definite. Raw material has been mined out and the landscape has been reconstructed into an optimised appearance according to the available scientific knowledge. However, if landscape is a change, reclaimed landscape is a radical change. It is due to its character that the reclaimed landscape will continue to change, perhaps even radically, into a new type of industrial landscape. The insight into reclaimed landscape brings the experience of a radical change accompanying us every step of the way and assuming subsequent radical changes.

Perhaps we should refer to this insight as insight into the transience of things, but perhaps it would be more appropriate to refer to the characteristics of motion inherent to the human civilisation. While it may appear as transience on the outside, it is at the same time its dialectic denial. In other words, it would seem that the basis for civilisation movement forward is very narrow. As if the human civilisation had to gather its already limited strength before each step forward. Progress is nevertheless achieved. Although the implementation of reclamation strategies required mobilisation of vast scientific and technological resources, the reclamation is a convincing externalisation built on an ephemeral basis. It does not pretend; it simply expresses the permanent conflict in the situation of the civilisation as such. A landscape that has not undergone mining or reclamation says less about the human fate than a reclaimed landscape. It leaves certain secrets unspoken and unassessed. Be it as it is, it still says a lot, but not radically much.

Therefore, reverse transfer of a minor monument to a pre-mining landscape (if such segment could even be found in the mining and post-mining landscapes of Northwest Bohemia) is on one hand just another relocation in the chain of relocations the minor monument is subjected to due to its ability to be transferred. On the other hand, this somewhat belittles and devalues the fact that while the basis for the human progress is even laughably weak, progress occurs. Industry may be tripping but keeps striving forward, sometimes with almost miraculous ferocity. When we move a minor monument from an outdoor stone structure collection, where minor monuments were relocated from municipalities extinct due to surface coal mining, to a pre-mining landscape, it is as if we shrugged our shoulders and whispered a small prayer. It is as if we were saying: this is it and we will see what will come next. The circumstances will always be stronger.

However, if we reverse transfer a minor monument into a reclaimed landscape, where it may now stand near a hippodrome or a car racing circuit, we are saying that despite being weak, we want to influence future the best we can [38]. However, we are aware that we are stepping out into the unknown. However, this study strives to avoid the application of the notion of the Earth as a miraculous teleological organism. This planet with its limited resources is not the topic of future. It is the space and we know very little about it.

Three Options for Reverse Transfer of a Minor Monument into a Reclaimed Landscape

Reverse transfer of a minor monument into a reclaimed landscape is an experiment that examines the wide context of the relationship between the nature and civilisation against the backdrop of a cultural phenomenon. It explains how perseverance of the core sense of a minor monument is possible in the dynamics of mining and post-mining landscape. The study now presents a list of options that may be considered:

• Reverse Transfer of a Minor Monument into a Mining Landscape That Has Been Reclaimed but Has Not Been Resocialised.

An entire range of options is available in this case, but the study proposes the Kopisty tip as an example of well implemented reclamation. It was formed as the external tip of the large surface coal mine Obránců míru, and became a multiregional biocentre within the Territorial Systems of Ecological Stability and a protected European area within the European network NATURA 2000.

• Reverse Transfer of a Minor Monument into a Mining Landscape that has been Reclaimed and Resocialised.

The Most region has several reclaimed areas that seem to have been well resocialised. There is, for example the Velebudice tip, which was created by tipping soil on the surface coal mine Jan Šverma, and formerly represented a major ecological problem of the Most region owing to its size of 800 hectares. Reclamation work commenced in 1982. The tip gradually settled and despite all efforts collapsed by dozens of centimetres per year. This complicated the main resocialisation vision of the future of the reclaimed tip, as a hippodrome was to be constructed there. The plan to build a hippodrome was drafted in 1973 and the land planning study was prepared two years later. Hippodrome was to be built on 82 hectares and 145 hectares were to be dedicated to facilities for horses. The first horserace took place in 1997 on a provisional racecourse [39]. Placing a minor monument on the upper part of the Střimice tip, which consists of upper soil layers from the surface coal mine Svoboda, is another option. Following intensive soil melioration, the area was reclaimed for farming and an airport was built on a part of the area. A part of the Střimice tip is the external tip of the surface coal mine Ležáky-Most. Reclamation into forest involved melioration of the tipped soil with compost from the waste bark from Krušné hory forests. Third option: Extremely adverse conditions prevailed in the surface coal mine Vrbenský in the Matylda section, with steaming, mine fires and steam emissions occurring. Once mining was terminated, the mine was filled with inner tip, further reclaimed and subsequently resocialised with a car racing track [40].

• Reverse Transfer of a Minor Monument into a Mining Landscape that has been Reclaimed and is Resocialised by Installation of Renewable Sources, Specific Solar Power Plants.

This option of reverse transfer has a high symbolic value, as it confirms the convergence of environmentalism and protection of cultural heritage. This convergence is highly important, for example, because monument care cannot have principial negative attitude to the use of the cultural landscape with its visual values for wind power plants [41]. In 2013, the author of this study drafted material on the use of mining and post-mining landscapes in Northwest Bohemia for the development of solar power plants. A solar power plant was already installed in one of the cases, in the former Lotta-Marie quarry, as part of resocialisation measures in the reclaimed. Potential locations for installation of a solar power plants were identified based on map and terrain research. To name but a few: a potential location for installation of solar power plant in the premises of the reclaimed surface coal mine Obránců míru (total area of 6,926,296 m²) and potential location for installation of a solar power plant in the area of the reclaimed Horní Jiřetín tip (total area of 3,525,013 m²). The condition that the land must be owned by the state was considered during preparation of the material. However, it does not apply generally [42].

The introduction to this study mentions that minor monuments are perceives as a rather marginal phenomenon in terms of the development of architectural styles and the history of art, mainly as part of rural and folk architecture. This may be caused by the fact that mining landscapes with surface coal mining have swallowed exceptional areas of former rural cultural landscapes, yet minor monuments in their functional use under reclamation and resocialisation measures seem to become part of the standard architecture, the standard urbanism of the interiors of municipalities and landscapes on the outskirts of towns, as well as territorial planning [43]. However, architecture, urbanism and territorial planning now need to realise the dynamics of the hierarchy of values within themselves. Minor monuments seem to be not very visible, not that strong but a permanently acting phenomenon, such as solar wind that moves the bases of specialised scientific fields focusing on the art of buildings, the art of structuring private and public space and their relationships to the questions of the modern environmentalism.

The author would like to express his thanks for the support in working on this topic to:

Ivan Dejmal (Minister of the Environment of the Czech Republic)

Jiří T. Kotalík (Vice-Chancellor of the Academy of Fine Arts in Prague)

Ivan Makásek (Chief Editor of the Nika environmental magazine)

Miroslav Eis (Technical Director of Severočeské doly a.s.)

Milena Šandová and Monika Praženková (editors of the Minerální suroviny [Mineral Materials] specialised magazine)

No conflict of interest.

1. Tomáš Hájek (2001) The cross and the tree in the effort to gain identity. in: Ivan Dejmal and collective (Eds.), The face of our country - the landscape of the home; Collection of contributions to the conference held on February 21-23, 2001 at Prague Castle and Průhonice, Volume Landscape in Threats. Lomnice n/Popelkou: Jaroslav Bárta, Studio JB for the Czech Chamber of Architects, pp. 224, p. 160-167.
2. Tomáš Hájek (1999) The newly discovered common interests of ecology and cultural heritage protection. in: Prague: Nika 42-43, pp. 188-189.
3. Tomáš Hájek (2000) An attempt at a cultural landscape through the restoration of small terrain monuments. in: Prague: Nika 30-31, pp. 124-125.
4. Tomáš Hájek (ed.) (2001) Anthology Land in danger. in: Ivan Dejmal and collective (Eds.) The face of our country - the landscape of the home; Proceedings of the conference held on February 21-23, 2001 at Prague Castle and Průhonice. Lomnice n/Popelkou: Jaroslav Bárta, Studio JB for the Czech Chamber of Architects, pp. 224.
5. Tomáš Hájek, Karel Jech (2000) Topic for the 21st century - Cultural landscape (or why protect it?). Prague: Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic, pp. 243.
6. Martin Čičo, Michaela Kalinová, Silvia Paulusová a kolektiv (2002) Calvary and Ways of the Cross in Slovakia. Bratislava: Memorial Institute Bratislava, pp. 408.
7. Barbora Dohnalová (2015) Methodology for identifying cultural artifacts in the landscape. Brno: Mendel University in Brno, pp. 296.
8. Tomáš Hájek, Irena Bukačová (2004) History of small monuments (from lack of interest to fascination). Translator Jitka Feitová. Pressath: Bodner Verlag, pp. 153.
9. Tomáš Hájek, Irena Bukačová (2006) The story of small monuments (from indifference to fascination), Second edition. Lomnice n/Popelkou: Studio JB, Jaroslav Bárta, pp. 140.
10. Kolektiv autorů (2001) Stone crosses of Bohemia and Moravia. Second supplemented edition. Prague: Argo, pp. 475.
11. Jindřich Nusek, Jan Svoboda a kolektiv (2001) The story of the chapels – Small sacral objects in Podblanick. Vlašim, Benešov: Podblanické ecocentre of the Czech Association of Nature Protectors Vlašim, Benešov District Museum, is published as the 6th separate supplement to the Pod Blaníkem quarterly, pp. 130.
12. Bohumil Outrata (2008) Small sacral buildings in Moravia - chapels and chapels in Prostějovsk. Olomouc: Moravian-Silesian Christian Academy, pp. 127.
13. Martin Pour, Kristýna Švůgerová a Kolektiv (2010) Small monuments of Podchlumí. Balobousy: Microregion Podchlumí, pp. 382.
14. Radko Šarič, Petr Štěpánek (2000) Czech megaliths - guide. Materna Publishing House, pp. 64.
15. Josef V Scheybal, Jana Scheybalová (1985) Art of folk carpenters, stonemasons and sculptors in northern Bohemia. Ústí nad/Labem: Severočeské nakladatelství Ústí nad Labem in cooperation with the Institute for Ethnography and Folkloristics ČSAV, pp. 352.
16. Tomáš Hájek, Kristina Langarová, Barbora Matáková (Dohnalová) (2009) The starting points and principles of the territorial study "Multifunctional museum in the open landscape - Bílina Nord mine". in: Urbanism and territorial development 6/2009. Brno: Institute of Territorial Development, pp. 78, p. 12-21.
17. Tomáš Hájek, Barbora Matáková (Dohnalová), Kristina Langarová, Ondřej Přerovský (2012) Principles of preservation and recalling of memory traces in an industrial landscape: A case study of decayed monument recreation in the brown-coal mining area of Bílina, Czech Republic. In: Sjoerd Kluiving, Erika Guttmann-Bond Landscape archeology between Art and Science From a multi- to an Interdisciplinary Approach. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 525, p. 59-69.
18. Kolektiv autorů (1999) Old paths, pilgrimage routes (set of reports from the 4th working meeting on 21 April 1999. Brno: Memorial Institute in Brno, pp. 82.
19. Miroslav Kuranda a kolektiv (2009) From Prague to Stará Boleslav along the holy route along forty-four chapels and the St. Wenceslas route from Stará Boleslav to Prague. Stará Boleslav: publisher not specified, pp. 121.
20. Dana Stehlíková a kolektiv (1996) 800 years of the monastery in Osek (1196-1996) Catalog for the exhibition, held in the refectory of the monastery from 25.5 to 20.10. 1996. Osek: The Cistercian Abbey in Osek in Unicornis publishing house, pp. 110.
21. Bohuslava Chleborádová (1986) North Bohemian views of the 19th century. Teplice: Regional Museum in Teplice, pp. 30.
22. Karel Král a kolektiv (1987) North Bohemian views. Ústí nad/Labem: Severočeské nakladatelství, pp. 112.
23. Kamila Svobodová, Tomáš Hájek (2017) Pilgrimage route recovery in an industrial landscape. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 60(6): 959-976.
24. Ivana Trpáková, Pavel Trpák, Petr Sklenička, Jan Skaloš, Barbora Engstová (2009) Reconstruction of the historical use of the landscape of Sokolovsk - the landscape in the mirror of the stable cadastre maps. Prague: for the Department of Landscape Ecology of the Faculty of the Environment of the Czech University of Life Sciences in Prague, publishing house Lesnická práce, pp. 107.
25. Jan Kaigl, Zuzana Šťastná, Martin Zídek (2003) Monument Law. First edition, reprint. Prague: Ministry of Culture of the Czech Republic, pp. 159.
26. Stanislav Štýs, Jana Jeníčková, Transformations of Mostek. Most: Statutory city of Most, pp. 63.
27. Barbora Dohnalová, Aleš Rudl, Tomáš Hájek (2022) Vegetation Accompaniment of Small Monuments and its Interpretation in Landscape Archaeology. In: 7th Landscape Archaeology Conference. Vatra Dornei: Book of Abstracts.
28. Aleš Rudl a kolektiv (2018) Lime trees of the Republic in Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia. Prague: Agency Koniklec o.p.s., pp. 143.
29. Richard TT Forman, Michel Godron (1993) Landscape ecology. Translated by Jan Těšitel, Petr Hanousek, Irena Hanousková, Vladimír Kremsa, Hana Rambousková, Zdeněk Štěrbáček. Prague: Publishing House of the Czech Academy of Sciences in cooperation with the Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic, pp. 583.
30. Tomáš Hájek, Barbora Matáková (Dohnalová), Kristina Langarová, Ondřej Přerovský (2011) Transfer of Minor Landmarks as the Spiritual Movement within a Historical Cultural Landscape – the Industrial Landscape of Northern Bohemia. In: Éva Konkóly-Gyuró (eds.), Workshop on Landscape History (Proceedings). Sopron: University of West Hungary Press, 2011, pp. 176, p. 90-98.
31. Tomáš Hájek (2019) How to approach reverse transfers of minor landmarks in mining and postmining landscapes. In: 10th IALE World Congress, Milano.
32. Tomáš Hájek (2019) One of the examples of how to interest the international scientific public in the topic of Mosteck. in: TEMA - Quarterly of the Most District Economic Chamber 4/2019. Most: District Chamber of Commerce, pp. 51, p. 38-39.
33. Tomáš Hájek, Kamila Svobodová, Petr Sklenička (2012) On Minor Landmarks Back-transfer Methodology: Case Study on Transferred Minor Landmarks in a Post-mining Landscape. In: 2th International Landscape Archaeology Conference. Berlin: Abstract Book, pp. 142, p. 70.
34. VA Krokhin, VI Pulkin, VI Smirnov, SV Yamshchikov (1971) Man. Petrozavodsk: Karelia Publishing House, pp. 63.
35. Tomáš Hájek (2018) Relics of the traditional cultural landscape in mining and industrial areas as tourist attractions. In: 5th Landscape Archaeology Conference. Newcastle and Durham, pp. 247, pp. 211-212.
36. Ladislav Hejdánek (1997) Non-objectivity in thought and in reality. Prague: OIKOMENH, pp. 197.
37. Jan Patočka (1992) The natural world as a philosophical problem. (3^rd edn). Prague: Czechoslovak writer, pp. 288.
38. Tomáš Hájek (2024) Minor monuments as an auxiliary methodological instrument in reclamation and resocialisation of landscapes with surface coal mining. In: 3rd World Conference on Climate Change & Sustainability, Barcelona, collection of abstracts.
39. Markéta Jahnová, Martin Cáp, Jaroslav Fabris Hipodrom most 1997-2017. Most: Hipodrom Most a.s. (reklamní publikace), pp. 26.
40. Stanislav Štýs, Jan Sixta (2013) Recultivation transformations of Mosteck with your own eyes. Mosteck Economic and Social Council: Guide to the field meeting of the Mosteck Economic and Social Council in cooperation with the Most District Chamber of Commerce and the Most ROTARY club (May 14, 2013), p. 36.
41. Tomáš Hájek (2016) Wind energy as a subject of conservation. In: Energy 21 1/2016. Prague: Profi Press s.r.o. pp. 58, p. 32-33.
42. Tomáš Hájek (2015) The landscape of the Northwest and the development of solar energy? In: Mineral raw materials 2/2015. Brno: Mining Union, pp. 25, p. 24-25.
43. Tomáš Hájek (2012) Small monuments as an important methodological tool for the recultivation and resocialization of landscapes with brown coal surface mining. in: Mineral raw materials 1/2012. Brno: Mining Union, pp. 37, p. 19-21.