Halfhip and hip roof with an attic in Lower Silesian towns at the beginning of the Prussian rule. Systematization of fire regulations and the form of roof

Bogna Ludwig

doi:10.37190/arc230401

Abstract

In Silesian towns, especially those in the Sudeten foothills and the Sudeten valleys, the use of hip and half hip roofs became common in the 2nd half of the 18th century. Along with them, late Baroque crownings of townhouses appeared. They combined the decoration of a low half hip gable, sometimes called a half gable, or dormers with a wall, obscuring the roof of the entire building. As a whole, this structure formed an elaborate attic. The author’s aim was to show that both the spread of roofs of such shapes and the forms of attics resulted from the adaptation of the tastes and needs of city dwellers to the ordinances in force. Municipal and then state regulations for the construction of houses, especially their canopies, resulted primarily from fire regulations. The research presents the process of formulating ordinances relating to the shape of roofs, roofing materials and surrounding fire walls. The analysis of preserved monuments and iconographic records depicting the roofs and crowning of tenement houses erected after the introduction of successive regulations made it possible to trace the ways in which they were implemented. The prescription to lower gables, in addition to erecting low roofs, resulted in a compromise in the form of constructing mansard roofs and shortening the height of gables by introducing pediments. The regulations on the method of erection and the height of fire walls influenced the way in which the gables of townhouses were designed and thus the form of attics became widespread.

Keywords:
lower silesia
baroque
attic
half hipped roof
firewalls

Full article view is only available on bigger screens.

2023

4(76)

Bogna Ludwig*

Half hip and hip roof with an attic in Lower Silesian towns

at the beginning of the Prussian rule.

Systematization of fire regulations and the form of roofs

Introduction

The half hip roof, typical for towns in the sub-Sudeten

region, appeared after the Silesian Wars in places where

the rst brick houses, usually covered with tiles, were

built, or tenement houses were rebuilt after war devasta-

tion or re damage. At the same time, a dierent construc-

tion was used – a hip roof, in many cases supplemented by

a transverse roof with a large dormer on the front side. In

the crowning of the façades of such tenements, a complex

structure was used – a half gable [1], with attached walls

on the sides creating the form of an attic (Figs. 1, 2). It was

not only a regional solution – outside the cities of this re-

gion it occurred sporadically in several Czech towns (e.g.

Prague or Pardubice) and in the Inn and Salzach valleys

(e.g. Innsbruck, Scharding or Burghaussen). It was fun-

damentally dierent from the French and Viennese attics,

which became the model at the turn of the 17

and 18

centuries in the Central European region, as well as from

the comb or gable attics still used in the 18

century in

the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The form of the

half hip roof attic was so unique that Polish researchers

beginning their work in Lower Silesia after World War II

were unable to recognise it in the engravings by Friedrich

B. Wernher and suggested that the notation was an inept

interpretation of Renaissance attics. Over time, the surviv-

ing specimens made the mistake clear. A detailed study of

the history of the Świdnica tenement houses by Małgor-

zata Chorowska and Czesław Lasota focuses on earlier

periods; nevertheless, it presents the characteristics of Ba-

roque alterations, indicating examples of Baroque attics

[1, p. 178]. A very important publication for the study of

Baroque tenement houses in Silesia, which collected and

analysed earlier works on the subject, was devoted to the

townhouses of Wrocław [2]. It contains a review of the

most important resolution of the Wrocław City Council of

DOI: 10.37190/arc230401

Published in open access. CC BY NC ND license

* ORCID:

0000-0002-7755-5835. Faculty of Architecture, Wro cław

University of Science and Technology, Poland, e-mail: bogna.ludwig@

pwr.edu.pl

Fig. 1. Roof shapes mentioned in the text:

a) concave simple butterfly roof, b) compluvial roof,

c) multi-element butterfly roof (compound, Grabendach),

d) gabled roof, e) hip roof, f) half hip roof, g) mansard,

h) hip mansard, i) half hip mansard (elaborated by B. Ludwig)

Il. 1. Kształty dachów wspominane w tekście:

a) dach pogrążony pojedynczy dwuspadowy,

b) dach pogrążony pojedynczy (zamknięty)

c) dach pogrążony wielokrotny (złożony, Grabendach),

d) dach dwuspadowy, e) czterospadowy, f) naczółkowy,

g) mansardowy, h) czterospadowy mansardowy,

i) mansardowy naczółkowy (oprac. B. Ludwig)

4 Bogna Ludwig

1668 for the legal basis for building in Silesia. This study

is the only one to address the question of the inuence of

regulations on architectural form, including the question

of the shape of the roof discussed here.

Economic stagnation and religious restrictions meant

that the process of revival of Silesian towns in the 2

half

of the 17

century and in the 18

century was slow. Only

the cities of the Sudeten foothills and the Sudeten valleys

were in a dierent situation, being subject to the greatest

changes [3], [4]. Further devastation was caused by the

Silesian Wars. During the sieges there was damage to ur-

ban buildings from bombardment, with the fortress towns

in the created defence system of the lands taken over by

the Prussian state being particularly vulnerable. It was the

eects of res caused either by deliberate arson during the

war or by unfortunate accidents that were far more severe.

The prevention of res was the reason why the rst ordi-

nances relating to building rules in towns were enacted. In

particular, this concerned the question of how to erect and

secure roofs. After the First Silesian War in 1742, when

Lower Silesia together with the County of Kłodzko came

under Prussian rule, these became state-wide regulations.

Fire regulations and roof construction rules

Fire ordinances appeared as early as at the end of the 13

century in the laws of German cities promulgated by the

city councils and then also in neighbouring areas, the rst

in Augsburg and Lübeck in 1276 and in Vienna in 1278

[5, p. 25], [6]. In the following centuries, separate ordi-

nances of a re-ghting nature were issued. Some of these

were extensive and multi-faceted (Zwickau 1349, Cologne

1403, Nuremberg 1439) [7]. The principles, though made

more specic, were enshrined in the Saxon Mirror. They

focused on giving warning of the appearance of re and

The earlier legislation appeared in 1086 in Meran and in 1189 in

London.

extinguishing it [8, pp. 247–252]. They also prescribed

how to secure sources of re, how to make passable street

and square spaces (e.g. Prague 1331) [9, pp. 67–73], [10,

p. 361]; they also mandated removing or re-bricking of

wooden arcades (Cologne and Nüremberg 1355, Kroneu-

burg 1384). They encouraged the construction of brick

houses (Hildesheim 1381), reproof partitions and ceram-

ic tile roong (Kroneuburg 1384), reducing taxes (Göttin-

gen 1342) or promising subsidies to their owners (Brno

1375–1384) [9, pp. 47, 58–61, 63], [10, p. 362].

Such ordinances appeared also in Silesia. The rst re-

commendations to build brick houses were issued in Wro-

cław as early as in 1272 by Duke Henry IV [11, pp. 40,

41]. Regulations promulgated after successive res from

the 1

half of the 14

century onwards by the municipal

administration or the supreme dukes were not limited to

indications on the conduct and nancing of reghting

(as in the case of the oldest from Legnica in 1340 [12] or

the Świdnica one from 1406 [13, Bd. 1, p. 179]); they or-

dered the removal of wooden arcades and construction of

brick basements (Świdnica 1362 [13, Bd. 1, pp. 79, 80], [1,

pp. 35, 87–95], Wrocław 1363 [11, p. 207], Legnica 1384

[14]), the replacement of wooden chimneys with brick ones,

the separation of bakeries and malt houses, kitchens and

workshops with re walls (Wrocław 1377) [15]. It was also

recommended to cover roofs with tiles (Świdnica 1386)

[13, Bd. 1, p. 211].

In the 15

century, the rst sets of rules, the so-called

re orders (Feuerlösch-Ordnungen) were drawn up in

Frankfurt (1439), Nüremberg (1449), Vienna (1454, 1458)

or Lübeck (1461) [10, p. 26]. In the following centuries

they were published in most of the major cities [16] (also in

Poland, e.g. in Poznań 1544 and Kraków 1627 [8, p. 248],

[17, pp. 76–80], [18]). Many of these were printed. The in-

evitability of res was assumed, and the ordinan ces served

to try to prevent the spread of re, from house to house,

usually via roofs. At the same time, the rulers looking after

the cities provided building material – stone, bricks or tiles

to rebuild houses destroyed by re, exempted them from

Fig. 2. Required by fire regulations: a) crowning of the half hip roof meeting the requirement not to exceed the height of the gable

with the outlines of an equilateral triangle, b) a fire wall 4 ells high as the base of the gable and c) a fire wall of this height realised as an attic

(elaborated by B. Ludwig)

Il. 2. Wymagane przepisami przeciwpożarowymi: a) szczyt dachu naczółkowego wypełniający wymóg nieprzewyższania wysokości szczytu

o zarysach trójkąta równobocznego, b) mur ogniowy o wysokości 4 łokci jako podstawa szczytu

i c) mur ogniowy takiej wysokości zrealizowany jako attyka (oprac. B. Ludwig)

Half hip and hip roof with an attic in Lower Silesian towns at the beginning of the Prussian rule 5

taxes and allocated funds for construction with re-resis-

tant materials. Fire walls around buildings were beginning

to gain importance. It was noted that lower roofs hidden

behind them were better protected against re spread. At

the beginning of the 16

century in Innsbruck, the future

Emperor Maximilian I Habsburg introduced regulations

recommending low roofs with a durable covering, hidden

behind re walls with crenelated parapets (Zinne). There is

information of further similar ordinances that he issued after

the res for Freistadt, Linz and Klagenfurt. These provided

exemption from taxes for reconstruction in the “Innsbruck

way”. Subsequent years saw subsidies for this purpose [10,

pp. 361–368], [19]. The re ordinances of 1542 issued in

Linz and enacted in Innsbruck in 1561, and earlier such

municipal ordinances in Krems and Stein mandated simi-

lar solutions. Thanks to them, re walls and roofs hidden

(verborgen) behind them – due to the width of the property,

usually multi-element buttery roofs (Grabendach, Fig. 1)

– became a characteristic feature in the towns of the Sal-

zach and Inn valleys [20]. They also became widespread

in Upper and Lower Austria and Vien na itself. Similar

regulations to those of the Habsburgs were introduced by

the city council of Kraków in 1544. They prescribed the

construction of roofs on new or renovated buildings, in-

cluding wooden ones, as concave and closed (immersum et

inclusum) [21] (Fig. 1). Such roofs surrounded by a re fall

taking the form of an attic became a distinctive element in

many towns of the Polish-Lithua nian Commonwealth in

the late 16

and 17

centuries. In Silesia, no tenements

with such a covering were built. Perhaps an exception was

the large tenement house in Dzier żoniów, later the house

of the Sadebeck family [22]. On the other hand, Silesian

towns promulgated re ordinances at a similar time. In

Wrocław, a revised ordinance was enacted in 1551

, to be

followed by the next ones of 1574, 1586

, 1602 and 1639,

in printed form [8, pp. 250, 262–271], [23]–[25]. Similar

regulations were formulated in most of the signicant Sile-

sian cities from the 1560s onwards: in Ziębice in 1560, in

Świdnica in 1560 (also called a police ordinance) and then

in 1589, in Złotoryja after the re of 1576, in Oleśnica in

1612, in Legnica in 1613 after the great re of 1584, and in

Głogów in 1617 [13, Bd. 1, pp. 365–372; Bd. 2, pp. 171–

177], [26, p. 124], [27]. In addition to the organisation of

a warning system and reghting, the securing of water

and re-ghting tools, some of these ordinances contained

applicable or recommended building rules. It was mandat-

ed that re sources ought to be prevented from spreading

outside malting houses, breweries and workshops with re

walls. The construction of brick or at least clay-lined ues

and chimneys was also mandated. Among the regulations

for Wrocław and Legnica was the order to erect re walls

Khunglichen Stad Breslaw New aufgerichte Feuerordnung, Bre-

slau 1551. We only know the date of publication [8, p. 251].

The regulations and their dates, the content of which is not dis-

cussed in more detail in the text, are given on the basis of preserved

documents in archives and museums, as well as legal collections, lists of

archival inventories and bibliographies, as well as chronicles of towns

and villages not cited due to publishing restrictions. They are also print-

ed in library collections (available in digital version).

4 ells (approx. 2.3 m) high to separate neighbouring prop-

erties, and the necessity to build two-storey facades facing

the street, made by an expert mason, was ordered, and the

recommendation to cover houses with tiles was reiterated

[23, p. xxxi], [24, pp. iii, viii], [25, p. ii], [26, p. 8]. It was

also ordered that breweries and malt houses should be cov-

ered with shingles or tiles [24, p. vii].

Further re orders were established after the Thirty

Years’

War from 1673 onwards, e.g. in Głogów (1673), Legnica

(1674), Nysa (1678), Świdnica (1682 and 1702), Brzeg

(1685), Złotoryja (1691), Grodków (1698), or already in

1713 in Jelenia Góra and in 1719 in Oleśnica and Żagań

[28], [29], [13, Bd. 2, pp. 172, 173], [30]. The rapid re-

building after the destruction of the war probably raised

questions about re safety. It was not only the cities that

were threatened, but also the seats of power within them.

There were stricter orders to construct brick buildings and

workshops that were particularly at risk from re, such

as locksmith shops, forges or breweries, malt houses and

bakeries [28], [29], [13, Bd. 2, pp. 288–294], to build brick

or at least wattle-and-daub re walls and chimneys. In

Legnica, it was ordered that corner houses and those lo-

cated near churches and the castle must be made of brick

and tiled. Particular emphasis was placed on the use of

walls, gables and re walls with a height of 4 ells above

the roof for each building, leading from a point in front

of the gutters (e.g. records for Świdnica or Jelenia Góra

[29, pt. 4], [13, Bd. 2, p. 171], [30, p. 222] (Fig. 2). These

regulations were based on the principles of the Wrocław

construction arrangement of that time.

In 1668, a new building arrangement for Wrocław [31]

was promulgated

, which, unlike the rst one of 1574, dealt

mainly with the question of boundary walls, water drain-

age and sewage [32], comprehensively covered all the rec-

ommendations for the construction and roong of build-

ings, thus stemming from the re regulations. It specied

the rules for the erection of smoke ducts of the required

cross-section, chimneys and re walls, built of brick, el-

evated 4 ells, starting from the lowest point, at the point

where the gutters ran, which were to hide behind them

[31, pp. xi, xii], [33]

(which would require the construc-

tion of such a height of the gable pedestal or the addition

of walls on its sides). In the case of buildings of dierent

heights, the course of the walls had to be level and the re-

quired height of chimneys and walls had to be built above

the higher of the adjacent roofs. Roofs were ordered to be

covered with tiles, and roofs with lower pitches were to

be constructed. In contrast to the regulations in the towns

of the Tyrole and Upper Austria, the permitted height of

Full text translation: [2, Appendix, p. 322 .].

The term Feuermauer, which refers to both the walls of the chim-

ney ues [2, pp. 322–332] and the rewalls above the roof [33], requires

comment. The fact that the second part of the chapter refers to re walls,

and not chimney walls, is evidenced by the provisions of the re reg-

ulations of Świdnica (and later other towns, e.g. Jelenia Góra), which

literally quotes a provision from the Wrocław order, supplementing it

with an order that if the walls are under a roof, they must be extended

[29, point 4], and each house with an attic must be separated from the

neighbouring ones by a gable, walls and rewalls of the right height and

gutters [29, point 6], [30, pp. 222, 233].

6 Bogna Ludwig

newly built roofs with gables not exceeding an equilateral

triangle (i.e. roof slopes of 60° [31, p. viii]) was precisely

dened (Fig. 2). The erection of tarred wooden terraces

and their attics (balustrades) was also banned

[34] – only

stone-clad and copper sheeting was allowed [31, p. xv].

Under Prussian rule, municipal re regulations were sys-

tematised, which drew on earlier regulations [35, p. 670]. As

early as in 1742, the War and Demesne Chamber (Kriegs-

und Domänenkammern) issued sets of rules for Głogów

[36, Bd. 1, part 2, p. 100 et seq.], Jelenia Góra [36, Bd. 1,

part 2, p. (117)], Złotoryja [36, Bd. 5, pp. 25–32], then Bo-

le sła wiec [36, Bd. 5, pp. 97–117] and Szprotawa (1744),

and after the Second Silesian War in 1751, among others

Pro chowice, Wrocław (supplemented in 1760) [36, Bd. 6,

p. 65; Bd. 4, p. 1; Bd. 6, p. 793] and Wałbrzych, and a reg-

ulation for all villages and suburbs [36, Bd. 4, p. 139].

In 1765, general re regulations were issued and an or-

der to draw up regulations in all towns on the model of

Wrocław [36, Bd. 8, pp. 614 ., 646]. This was imme-

diately followed by the re regulations of Dzierżoniów,

Lwówek, Oława, Opole or Złotoryja [26, p. 275]. Unied

regulations for all cities were issued in 1776 [36, Bd. 15,

pp. 104–149]. They referred in most cases to the Wrocław

construction arrangement of 1668 [31]. The ordinances

placed particular emphasis on the construction of masonry

and rewalls, masonry of chimney ues and securing of

chimneys, roong with tiles and the use of metal gutters

only [36, Bd. 4, pp. 1–5, 7, 8, 113; Bd. 8, p. 614; Bd. 15,

pp. 104–109], [37]. Taried penalties were introduced for

non-compliance. The legal provisions were to supplement

It is worth noting that attics and balustrades on roofs were re-

ferred to as Altane (Altan).

Fig. 3. The market square in

Jelenia Góra showing buildings

with high mansard roofs and

hip roofs with attics

on the F.A. Tittel’s graphic

(source: F.A. Tittel, Der Marktplatz

und das Rath-Haus zu Hirschberg,

Schmiedeberg 1828,

oai:www.sbc.org.pl:410543)

Il. 3. Rynek w Jeleniej Górze

z uwidocznioną zabudową

z wysokimi dachami

mansardowymi i dachami

czterospadowymi z attykami

na grafice F.A. Tittela

(źródło: F.A. Tittel, Der Marktplatz

und das Rath-Haus zu Hirschberg,

Schmiedeberg 1828,

oai:www.sbc.org.pl:410543)

the regulations of the introduced compulsory re insur-

ance, imposing premiums correspondingly high to the re

risk [36, Bd. 1, part 2, pp. 5, 119, 217].

The biggest re protection problem perceived by the

Prussian administration, while regulating and standardis-

ing various ordinances [38], was ammable roong, shin-

gles and thatch, still commonly present in all Silesian

towns. They were used to cover houses and outbuildings

both in the countryside, in towns and in large cities. Rec-

ommendations for tile roong appeared in all re regula-

tions. Subsequently, ordinances were also issued for the

whole of Silesia. In 1743, the King of Prussia introduced

an order to cover dilapidated roofs with tiles, and this was

renewed with the granting of concessions and subsidies

over the following years [36, Bd. 6, p. 65; Bd. 20, pp. 51,

431]. In 1752, tax oces and town councils were encour-

aged to reduce the duties of those carrying out construc-

tion [36, Bd. 4, p. 700]. Particular care was given to the

building of fortress towns: high subsidies from the state

coers for the making of the ceramic covering and other

benets were allocated for the property owners there [36,

Bd. 6, p. 65; Bd. 20, pp. 51, 52], in 1768 the municipal

authorities were reminded of the due reduction in taxes

and encouraged to press homeowners on this issue [36,

Bd. 10, pp. 124, 125]. The obligation to erect new build-

ings as brick and to cover new and repaired roofs with

tiles and to replace at least one roof within the city walls

was introduced in 1764 [36, Bd. 8, pp. 159–162] and was

renewed four years later [36, Bd. 10, pp. 300–302], [35,

p. 732]. A realistic assessment of the implementation of

the regulations prompted an ordinance of 1764 that at

least the trusses should always be prepared for tile roong

[36, Bd. 8, p. 181]. All subsequent re and then building

ordinances emphasised the importance of durability of

Half hip and hip roof with an attic in Lower Silesian towns at the beginning of the Prussian rule 7

buildings, re resistance, but also of order and beauty, un-

derstood as uniformity and simplication of forms. Such

a solution was recommended in the building regulation

for Wrocław in 1784, where it was proposed that two or

three narrow houses should be houses covered with one

single roof with a ridge parallel to the street and only dis-

tinguished by façades [36, Bd. 18, pp. 136–142]. At the

turn of the 18

and 19

centuries, re protection regu-

lations (rules for erecting re walls) enforced the use of

roofs constructed in this way [39, p. 31].

Implementation of building regulations

of fire significance. Roofs and firewalls

The introduction of the regulations progressed with dif-

culty. This is evidenced by the successive renewals of the

ordinances. At rst, these only applied to newly construct-

ed buildings or roofs. Changes to roof coverings, which

were most important for the re resistance of buildings,

were unsatisfactory in the cities of Prussian Silesia

. Even

in Wrocław itself, as late as at the end of the 18

century,

many of the townhouses were covered with shingles [39,

pp. 25, 29]. In Legnica at the end of the 18

century the

number of shingled roofs within the walls was estimated to

be one-third [40, Bd. 8, p. 149], and in Jelenia Góra it was

almost half [41, p. 243]. In small towns thatched roong

may have even prevailed. However, changes were taking

place and e.g. within the walls of Świdnica in 1741, 12

houses were thatched, while in 1788 only 8 remained un-

der shingle [41, p. 64], while in Kamienna Góra, according

to the chronicler, at the beginning of the 19

century all

houses were thatched [42]. The lowering of the roofs de-

termined the exclusion of thatch roong, and made it dif-

cult to use shingles. Maintaining the steeper slopes made

it possible to use mansard or hip roofs (Fig. 1). The new

shape of the roof also prompted the choice of other solu-

tions for the truss structure. Nevertheless, in some of the

towns, especially fortresses such as Brzeg and Nysa, heav-

ily damaged during the First Silesian War, high roofs were

often retained in the reconstruction [43, T. 128–133]. The

process of introducing lower roofs with gables progressed

from the 17

century until the 1830s. They were initial-

ly designed in a two-storey version, e.g. in Jelenia Góra

(market houses No. 32a, 27–29, 52, 55 and 56) (Fig. 3).

However, more and more single-storey gables were erect-

ed, e.g. in Legnica (in Środkowa and NMP streets), market

squares in Namysłów, Lwówek, Jawor, Jelenia Góra, or in

dynamically expanding Kamienna Góra [43, T. 105, 124,

125, 76, 48, 49, 28–36], [44, Der Marktplatz zu Landeshut]

(Fig. 4). There were similar ones in the frontages of the

market in Głogów until the re of 1831 (Fig. 5). This can

also be seen in Wernher’s drawings. Drawings with market

frontages and streets in Głogów, Legnica, Brzeg, Wołów

or Ząbkowice clearly show tenements with gables in the

outline of equilateral triangles [45, p. 48], [46, pp. 566,

And so, in comparison with Wielkopolska (Poznań Chamber),

where at the end of the 18

century only 26% of roofs in cities were

covered with tiles [17, p. 161], Lower Silesia looked better.

Fig. 4. Equilateral triangle-shaped roof gables with high plinths

as fire walls on townhouses at the market square in Kamienna Góra

(photo by B. Ludwig)

Il. 4. Szczyty dachów o kształcie trójkątów równobocznych i wysokich

cokołach o charakterze ścian ogniowych na kamienicach przy rynku

w Kamiennej Górze (fot. B. Ludwig)

Fig. 5. The half hip roofs at the market square in Głogów in the early

century (source: C. Bouet, Die südliche Seite

des alten Rathauses zu Glogau, lit., W. Hinzer, Glogau ca. 1825, detail,

urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb10013651-1)

Il. 5. Naczółkowe dachy przy rynku w Głogowie na początku XIX w.

(źródło: C. Bouet, Die südliche Seite des alten Rathauses zu Glogau,

lit., W. Hinzer, Glogau ok. 1825, fragm.,

urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb10013651-1)

8 Bogna Ludwig

317, 320, 326, 333, 341]. The dierences in the height of

the roofs are also clearly visible in the rebuilt parts of the

burnt cities, e.g. in the views of the frontages in Złotoryja

or Oława [46, pp. 168, 396, 397].

Applicants for state or municipal subsidies or tax relief

after war damage and res had to comply with the regula-

tions. This was particularly true for the reconstruction of

fortress towns. There, the use of hip roofs became more

common. It is likely that the lowering of gables required by

the regulations could have been achieved by the construc-

tion of mansard roofs and using half hip roofs (Fig. 2).

Judging from Wernher’s notation, before the middle of the

century in Silesian towns there were half hip roofs,

e.g. in the market frontages of Świdnica (especially in

the southern and western frontages, rebuilt after the re)

(Fig. 6), Jelenia Góra (Fig. 3), Mieroszów and Otmuchów

[47, Bd. 3, pp. 118, 119, 143, 144], [48, Bd. 1, pp. 223,

224], [43, T. 29–32]. In Nysa, single houses were built with

Fig. 6. Partially reconstructed half hip roofs over townhouses in the western frontage of the Świdnica market square (photo by B. Ludwig)

Il. 6. Częściowo zrekonstruowane dachy naczółkowe nad kamienicami w pierzei zachodniej rynku w Świdnicy (fot. B. Ludwig)

Fig. 7. Attic shielding the half hip roof of the building at No. 7

at the market square in Świdnica (photo by B. Ludwig)

Il. 7. Attyka osłaniająca dach naczółkowy kamienicy przy rynku

w Świdnicy pod nr 7 (fot. B. Ludwig)

Fig. 9. Tenement houses with half hip roofs

in the western frontage of the market square in Kłodzko

in a graphic by E.W. Knippel

(source: E.W. Knippel, Parade=Platz zu Glatz, [Schmiedeberg]

[ca. 1840], https://www.sbc.org.pl/dlibra/doccontent?id=34531, detail)

Il. 9. Kamienice z dachami naczółkowymi w zachodniej pierzei rynku

w Kłodzku na grafice E.W. Knippla

(źródło: E.W. Knippel, Parade=Platz zu Glatz, [Schmiedeberg]

[ok. 1840], https://www.sbc.org.pl/dlibra/doccontent?id=34531, fragm.)

Fig. 8. Crowning of the townhouses at Nos. 6 and 8 Długa Street

in Świdnica (photo by B. Ludwig)

Il. 8. Zwieńczenia kamienic przy ul. Długiej nr 6 i 8 w Świdnicy

(fot. B. Ludwig)

Half hip and hip roof with an attic in Lower Silesian towns at the beginning of the Prussian rule 9

half hip roofs (e.g. the house of von Bata [43, p. 74, T. 129,

133]). The half hip roof also became a distinctive feature

of wooden buildings in Upper Silesian cities and towns,

initially using shingle roong, and of half-timbered build-

ings in Lower Silesia and Lusatia [43, pp. 14–16, T. 7–9].

The introduction of numerous half hip roofs in the other

two frontages of the market square in Świdnica, in Długa

and Grodzka Streets, was already taking place after the de-

struction in the 1850s and 1860s (Figs. 7, 8) [1, p. 178].

In the 2

half of the 18

century, this solution became

widespread in Jelenia Góra and Kamienna Góra, as well as

in Kłodzko, which was incorporated into Silesia [43, T. 28,

32–36, 38] (Figs. 3, 9). Single roofs of this type appeared

at market squares in Złotoryja (several at the Upper Square

in the eastern frontage), Bolesławiec (Nos. 6 and 7), Gry-

fów (No. 13) and Wałbrzych [43, p. 61, T. 87, 54], [47,

Bd. 3, p. 300, 301]. In the early 19

century the use of half

hip roofs was already becoming common (e.g. in the mar-

ket frontages of Lwówek, Gryfów, Kłodzko, Lubań, Żagań

or Głogów [43, T. 83, 84, 118]).

The introduction of rewalls on the roofs compliant

with the regulations required the addition of walls to the

sides of the gables. For new buildings, it was sometimes

decided to construct a hip roof, usually a mansard roof,

valued for prestige reasons (Fig. 1). Such roofs were indi-

cated by theoreticians as covering palace buildings. In cit-

ies, e.g. in Wrocław, it was the seats of the aristocracy that

were roofed this way [2, pp. 291–296]. Outside Wrocław,

few of them were erected on tenement houses in compact

buildings. From the rst decades of the 18

century they

were erected in Jelenia Góra (market square, Nos. 1–3)

and Kamienna Góra (Nos. 6, 16 and Nos. 1, 2, and 11,

already with Classicist detail) (Fig. 3, 10) [43, p. 18].

The largest number of such buildings was erected at the

market square and in Wrocławska Street in Oleśnica, e.g.

Fig. 10. Crowning of the hip roof of the tenement at market square No. 6 in Kamienna Góra

(probably designed by M. Frantz the Younger)

(photo by B. Ludwig)

Il. 10. Zwieńczenie czterospadowego dachu kamienicy przy rynku nr 6 w Kamiennej Górze

(prawdopodobnie projektu M. Frantza Młodszego)

(fot. B. Ludwig)

in the neighbourhood of the land house. In other towns

there were single buildings; in Oława (market tenement

house/town house no. 25, and the non-existent one at 14

Wro cławska Street), in Niemcza (Marketplace no. 10, later

town hall and no. 16, 34), in Bierutów (Krausenz house), in

Gryfów (Marketplace no. 33, 32, now after late 18

-cen-

tury rebuilding and non-existent no. 14 [43, T. 54]), in

Kluczbork two of the mid-market buildings erected after

a re (the so-called 12 Apostles). Examples of townhous-

es from the 1860s can be found in the iconography of the

market square of Brzeg [43, T. 123] at no. 19 and Legnica

at no. 13 at that time.

The simplest solution and ultimately the most com-

mon, was to use a roof with a ridge parallel to the street.

These were already quite common in Wrocław or Goerlitz

in the late 17

century [2, pp. 51–61, 205–214], [43, pp.

29, 34, T. 56, 57, 64, 71]. In the reconstruction of towns

after res at the end of the 18

century, towns were often

made up still of timber or half-timbered buildings, front-

ages of lengthwise terraced houses with low ridge roofs

were also increasingly erected, e.g. in Złotoryja, at Lower

Square [49] and in the southern part of the town, in Prud-

nik [43, T. 126], or Kowary, where slate roong was most

commonly used [44, Ansicht des Rath=Hauses und des

Marktplatzes zu Schmiedeberg].

Conclusions

The shape of the roof and the forms of the crowning,

which were important for the body of the building, and

thus also for the character of the street frontages in cit-

ies, as well as the material and construction possibilities,

tradition and fashion, were also determined by issues re-

lating to protection against the greatest danger, which was

re. Municipal and later state regulations sought to elim-

10 Bogna Ludwig

[1] Chorowska M., Lasota C., Kamienica mieszczańska w Świdnicy:

karczma i mieszkanie w XIII–XVIII w., Ocyna Wydawnicza PWr,

Wrocław 2013.

[2] Brzezowski W., Dom mieszkalny we Wrocławiu w okresie baroku,

Ocyna Wydawnicza PWr, Wrocław 2005.

[3]

Gierowski J., Zmiany w wielkości i rozmieszczeniu miast, [in:] K. Ma -

le czyński (red.), Historia Śląska, t. 1, cz. 3, Zakład Narodowy im.

Ossolińskich, Wrocław 1961, 188–190.

[4] Wąs G., Dzieje Śląska od 1526 do 1806 roku, [in:] M. Czapliń-

ski (red.), Historia Śląska, Wydawnictwo UWr, Wrocław 2002,

118–248.

[5] Magrius C.D., Das Feuerlöschwesen in allen seinen Theilen, C.D.

Magrius, Ulm 1877.

[6] Holaubeck J., Die Österreichischen Feuerwehr, Ueberreuter, Wien

1979.

[7] Wucke B., Gebrochen ist des Feuers Macht. Ein Abriß zur Ge-

schichte der Feuerwehr, EFB, Erlensee 1995.

[8]

Ulicki B., Gaszenie pożarów we Wrocławiu według Porządków Og 

niowych z XVI wieku, “Studia z Dziejów Państwa i Prawa Polskiego”

2022, Vol. 25, 247–274, doi: 10.48269/2450-6095-sdpipp-25-013.

[9] Pfeier A., Baupolizei in der mittelalterlichen Stadt, “Mittei lungen

des Oberhessischen Geschichtsvereins Gießen” 1956, Bd. 41, 46–

78, doi: 10.22029/jlupub-3477.

[10] Grüll G., Zur Geschichte der Brandverhütung und Schadensver-

sicherung in Oberösterreich, “Jahrbuch des Oberösterreichischen

Musealvereines” 1966, Bd. 111, 355–398.

[11] Breslauer Urkundenbuch, G. Korn (Hrsg.), Bd. 1, W.G. Korn, Bre-

slau 1870, oai:www.sbc.org.pl:3930.

[12] FeuerOrdnung vom Jahre 1340 zu Liegnitz, A. Sammter (Hrsg.),

“Zeitschrift des Vereins für Geschichte Schlesiens” 1860, Bd. 3,

H. 1, 223–225.

[13] Schmidt F.J., Geschichte der Stadt Schweidnitz, Bd. 1–2, L. Heege,

Schweidnitz 1846–1848.

[14] Zum Winkel A., Die Stadt Liegnitz im Mitelalter, “Mitteilungen

des Geschichts- und Altertumsvereins zu Liegnitz” 1906/1908,

H. 2, 18–20.

[15] Maleczyńska E., Kultura materialna, [in:] K. Maleczyński (red.),

Historia Śląska, t. 1, cz. 2, Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich,

Wrocław 1961, 341–354.

[16] Feuerloeschordnungen, B.-D. Rassek (Auf.), http://www.feuer-

loeschordnungen.de/feuerloeschordnungen [accessed: 9.10.2022].

[17] Rady Poznanskiey postanowienye czassv przigody ognya, [in:] Do-

kumenty do historji ubezpieczeń ogniowych i obrony przeciwpo-

żarowej ziem zachodnich Polski, F. Baranowski (oprac.), Zakład

Ubezpieczeń Wzajemnych w Poznaniu, Poznań 1935, https://www.

wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/publication/178616/edition/181785 [acces-

sed: 20.10.2022].

[18] Senatus consultum de defensione urbis, [in:] Prawa, przywileje

i statuta miasta Krakowa (1507–1795), t. 2, z. 1, F. Piekosiński

(oprac.), Akademia Umiejętności, Kraków 1885, 176–179.

[19] Dreger M., Innsbrucker Dächer, [in:] J. Bick (Hrsg.), Festschrift

der Nationalbibliothek, Wien 1926, 211–221, oai:dbc.wroc.pl:4431.

[20] Stolz O., Über die Bauart der Innsbrucker Bürgerhäuser im Mit-

telalter, “Veröentlichungen des Tiroler Landesmuseums Ferdi-

nandeum”, 1940/1945, Bd. 20–25, 17–26, https://www.zobodat. at/

pdf/VeroeFerd_020-025_0017-0026.pdf [accessed: 20.10.2022].

[21] De tectis aedium novarum, [in:] F. Piekosiński (oprac.), Prawa,

przywileje i statuta miasta Krakowa, t. 1, z. 1, Akademia Umiejęt-

ności, Kraków 1885, dok. 112, 183–184.

[22] Kaczmarek R., Dom Sadebecków w Dzierżoniowie, jego sala kon-

gresowa i portal, “Quart” 2011, nr 1(19), 44–60.

[23] Eines Erbaren Rathes der Kayserlichen Stadt Bresslaw, New au-

gerichte Fewerordnung, C. Scharenberg, Bresslaw 1578, https://

books.google.pl/books/about/Eines_Erbaren_Rathes_der_Kay-

serlichen_St.html?id=C8pDdhy3m0oC&redir_esc=y [accessed:

25.10.2023].

[24] Der Kayserlichen Stadt Bresslaw Fewer Ordnung au s new vmbge 

fertiget vnd gebessert, G. Baumann, Bresslaw 1602, oai:www.sbc.

org.pl:515992.

[25]

Der Kayserlichen Stadt Bresslaw FewerOrdnung wie dieselbe ander-

werts vbersehen, au s new vmbgefertiget vnd verbessert, G. Bau mann,

Bresslaw 1630, https://books.google.pl/books/about/Der_Ka%C3%BF-

serlichen_Stadt_Bresslaw_Fewer_O.html?id=-3tmAAAAcAA-

J&redir_esc=y [accessed: 25.10.2023].

[26] Sturm L., Geschichte der Stadt Goldberg in Schlesien, L. Sturm,

Goldberg 1888.

[27] Feuer Ordnung Der Fürstlichen Stadt Lignitz: Aus neue vber-

sehen, vermehret vnd verbessert, [George Rudol, Hertzog in

Schlesien], N. Schneider, Liegnitz 1613, oai:www.bibliotekacy-

frowa.pl:73832.

[28] FeuerOrdnung Der Fürstlichen Stadt Liegnitz 1674, [Louise],

[w.n., Legnica 1674], oai:www.sbc.org.pl:137055.

[29] Der Kaiser- und Königlichen Stadt Schweidnitz Aufs Reue Revidir-

te Bermehrte und Berbesserte Feuer Ordnung. Publiciret in Jahr

Christi 1682. Wiederum Ausgelegt mit einem kurtzen Beysatz Anno

1702, Schweidnitz 1702, oai:cyfrowe.mnk.pl:26920.

[30] Der Kaÿser und Königl. Stadt Hirschberg neuaugerichtete

FeuerLösch und DämpOrdnung, [in:] M.D. Zeller, Vermehr-

ter Hirschbergischer Merckwürdigkeiten […], Akten Magistrat

Hirschberg, sgn. 2887, Bd. 2, Ullrich Junker, Bodnegg, 2006, 219–

235, oai:jbc.jelenia-gora.pl:2096.

[31] Der Kayserlichen vnd Khöniglichen Stadt Breszlaw Aus neu um-

gefertigte, vermehtre und verbesserte BauOrdnung, J.Ch. Jacob,

Breslau 1668, oai:www.bibliotekacyfrowa.pl:34814.

[32] Berger O., Die Bauordnungen der Stadt Breslau von 1605 bis 1925,

Graß, Barth, Breslau 1926.

[33]

Die Feuermauer, [in:] J.Ch. Adelung, Grammatisch-kritisches

Wörterbuch der Hochdeutschen Mundart, Bd. 2, Bauer, Wien

1811, https://lexika.digitale-sammlungen.de/adelung/lemma/

bsb00009132_1_1_1179 [accessed: 10.11.2022].

[34] Der Altan, Das Altandach, [in:] J.Ch. Adelung, Grammatisch-

kritisches Wörterbuch der Hochdeutschen Mundart, Bd. 2, Bauer,

Wien 1811, https://lexika.digitale-sammlungen.de/adelung/lemma/

bsb00009131_3_1_1700 [accessed: 10.11.2022].

References

inate ammable coverings by prescribing lower roofs (or,

in fact, gables) that given such materials were not tight.

However, high roofs had major advantages for the bur-

ghers, particularly merchants. They could accommodate

considerable storage space, as well as small ats for rent.

This may explain the attempt to reconcile the lowering

of roofs with the retention of spacious attics, such as the

construction of mansard roofs and the shortening of ga-

ble heights through the introduction of half hip roofs. The

rules governing the erection of rewalls around roofs de-

termined the forms of the crowning of townhouses. They

required the construction of a low-rise wall shielding the

roof as an attic or gable pedestal. Under the Prussian ad-

ministration’s supervision, all the ordinances in question

were raised in rank, systematised and better enforced,

though they had already been formulated in earlier times,

based on local experience and information from other

centres during the reconstruction period after the Thirty

Years’ War.

Translated by

Jacek Szela

Half hip and hip roof with an attic in Lower Silesian towns at the beginning of the Prussian rule 11

Abstract

Halfhip and hip roof with an attic in Lower Silesian towns at the beginning of the Prussian rule.

Systematization of re regulations and the form of roofs

In Silesian towns, especially those in the Sudeten foothills and the Sudeten valleys, the use of hip and half hip roofs became common in the

half of the 18

century. Along with them, late Baroque crownings of townhouses appeared. They combined the decoration of a low half hip

gable, sometimes called a half gable, or dormers with a wall, obscuring the roof of the entire building. As a whole, this structure formed an elaborate

attic. The author’s aim was to show that both the spread of roofs of such shapes and the forms of attics resulted from the adaptation of the tastes

and needs of city dwellers to the ordinances in force. Municipal and then state regulations for the construction of houses, especially their canopies,

resulted primarily from re regulations. The research presents the process of formulating ordinances relating to the shape of roofs, roong materials

and surrounding re walls. The analysis of preserved monuments and iconographic records depicting the roofs and crowning of tenement houses

erected after the introduction of successive regulations made it possible to trace the ways in which they were implemented. The prescription to lower

gables, in addition to erecting low roofs, resulted in a compromise in the form of constructing mansard roofs and shortening the height of gables by

introducing pediments. The regulations on the method of erection and the height of re walls inuenced the way in which the gables of townhouses

were designed and thus the form of attics became widespread.

Key words: Lower Silesia, baroque, attic, half hipped roof, rewalls

Streszczenie

Dach naczółkowy i czterospadowy z attyką w miastach dolnośląskich w początkach panowania pruskiego.

Usystematyzowanie przepisów przeciwpożarowych a forma dachów

W miastach śląskich, przede wszystkim z Przedgórza Sudeckiego i kotlin sudeckich, w 2. połowie XVIII w. zaczęto powszechnie stosować dachy

naczółkowe i czterospadowe. Wraz z nimi pojawiły się późnobarokowe zwieńczenia kamienic. Połączyły dekorację niskiego szczytu naczółkowego,

czasem nazywanego półszczytem, lub lukarn ze ścianką przesłaniającą dach całej budowli. W całości struktura ta tworzyła rozbudowaną attykę.

Celem autorki było wykazanie, że zarówno upowszechnianie się dachów takich kształtów, jak i form attyk wynikało z dostosowania upodobań

i potrzeb mieszkańców miast do obowiązujących przepisów. Przepisy miejskie, a następnie państwowe dotyczące budowy domów, zwłaszcza ich

zadaszeń wynikały przede wszystkim z regulacji przeciwpożarowych. W wyniku przeprowadzonych badań przedstawiono proces formułowania za-

rządzeń odnoszących się do kształtu dachów, materiałów pokryć i otaczających je murów ogniowych. Analiza zachowanych zabytków i przekazów

ikonogracznych obrazujących wznoszone po wprowadzaniu kolejnych przepisów dachy i zwieńczenia kamienic pozwoliła prześledzić sposoby ich

wdrażania. Nakaz obniżania szczytów, oprócz wznoszenia niskich dachów, zaowocował kompromisem w postaci konstruowania dachów mansardo-

wych i skracania wysokości szczytów poprzez wprowadzanie naczółków. Regulacje dotyczące sposobu wznoszenia i wysokości murów ogniowych

wpłynęły na sposób projektowania szczytów kamienic i rozpowszechnienie formy attyki.

Słowa kluczowe: Dolny Śląsk, barok, attyka, dach naczółkowy, mury ogniowe

[35] Die Bau-Polizei des Preußischen Staates…, L. Rönne (Hrsg.),

G.Ph. Aderholz, Breslau 1854.

[36] Sammlung aller in dem souverainen Herzogthum Schlesien […],

Bd. 1–20, J.J. Korn, W.G. Korn, Breslau [1744]–1790.

[37] Neurevidirte Feuer=Ordnung für die Stadt Neisse, Schloglisch,

[Neisse] 1766, http://www.muzeum.nysa.pl/web.n4?go=838 [ac-

cessed: 10.10.2022].

[38] Eysymontt R., Pruska reorganizacja miast (Stadtretablissement)

na Śląsku, [in:] Ch. Baier et al. (Hrsg.), Retablissement: preußische

Stadtbaukunst in Polen und Deutschland, Lukas, Berlin 2016,

167–184.

[39] Simon H., Das Provinzial-Gesetzbuch der Schlesischen Verfassung

und Verwaltung […], H. 7, Das Bau und WegeVerfassung von

Schlesien, G.P. Aderholz, Breslau 1847.

[40] Zimmermann F.A., Beyträge zur Beschreibung von Schlesien,

Bd. 1–13, J.E. Tramp, Brieg 1783–1796.

[41] Zöllner J.F., Briefe über Schlesien, Krakau, Wieliczka, und die

Grafschaft Glatz auf einer Reise im Jahr 1791, Bd. 2, Maurer, Ber-

lin 1793.

[42] Perschke W., Beschreibung und Geschichte der Stadt Landeshut

als Beitrag zur Verfassung-Geschichte deutscher Städte, J. Max,

Landeshut 1829.

[43] Stein R., Das Bürgerhaus in Schlesien, E. Wasmuth, Tübingen

1966.

[44] Tittel F.A., Erinnerungsblätter. Ein Taschenbuch für Wanderer in

das Schlesische Riesengebirge…, F.E. Glogner, Hirschberg [ca.

1822], oai:www.bibliotekacyfrowa.pl:44886.

[45] Wernher F.B., Topographia Seu Compendium Silesiae. Pars V, ca.

1750, [manuscript], oai:www.bibliotekacyfrowa.pl:16345.

[46] Wernher F.B., Topographia oder Prodromus Delineati Principatus

Lignicensis Bregensis, et Wolaviensis […], ca. 1750, [manuscript],

oai:www.bibliotekacyfrowa.pl:14652.

[47] Wernher F.B., Topographia oder Prodromus delineati Silesiae

Ducatus, Bd. 3, Fürstenthum Münsterberg-Frankenstein, Schweid-

nitz, ca. 1750, [manuscript], Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer

Kulturbesitz, XVII. HA, Rep. 135, Nr. 526-1, 526-5.

[48] Wernher F.B., Topographia oder Prodromus delineati Silesiae Du-

ca tus, Bd. 1, [manuscript], ca. 1750, Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preu -

ßischer Kulturbesitz, XVII. HA, Rep. 135, Nr. 526-1.

[49] Tittel F.A., Der Markt zu Goldberg, ca. 1830, https://polska-org.

pl/5322454,foto.html?idEntity=592590 [accessed: 10.09.2022].