Even if a landscape is characterized by the occurrence of no particular natural or cultural attractions,
it is of undeniable cultural and historical value since it documents a long-term relationship between
humans and the place where they have spent their lives. One way to identify and quantify the values
of normal, unexceptional types of landscapes is by using the concept of the physical storage structure
of landscapes. The elements of physical storage structures, natural landscapes and cultural elements
of landscape, and the location and method of cover remain relatively constant over time. The proposed
principle for determining the landscape memory structure can be a suitable procedure for identifying and
quantifying the values of so-called “ordinary” cultural landscapes according to the European Landscape
Convention. However, it should be stressed that the use and meaning of the term “landscape memory”
is strictly purposeful and rather metaphorical what does this mean – purposeful and metaphorical is a
combination that needs to be explained in this paper. The study was conducted in the Stíˇcany cadastral
territory (159 ha), located in an intensively cultivated cultural landscape in the Pardubice Region. The
definition was made on the basis of an interpretation of the Stable Cadastre maps and aerial photographs as
surface, line and point elements of the landscape structure, with minimal variability of the characteristics
over the period from 1839 until 2002. The largest proportion of the landscape memory consists of arable
land (76.1% of the arable land in 1839 was still arable land in 2002), which confirms the priority of arable
landscapes as long-term agricultural activities. A large proportion of the landscape memory is formed by
built-up areas and communications (43.3%). The least stable areas are permanent grasslands (only 9.7%
of the grassland survived the period from 1839 to 2002), which means that there have been big changes
within this category. Only 16.1% of the areas of permanent landscape structures retained the same covers
throughout the period. The cover in more than one half of the area (59.8%) remained the same in the
period from 1839 until 2002. The character of the cover of 39.4% of all surface features of the landscape
changed in this period. Almost two-fifths of the land area “lost its memory” over a period of more than
160 years. Our study also demonstrates and quantifies the impact of mining on loss of landscape memory