9783945880265

20142015

HERITAGE AT RISKWORLD REPORT 2014-2015 ON MONUMENTS AND SITES IN DANGER

H@

R2014-2

015

HERITAGE AT RISK

WORLD REPORT 2014-2015 ON MONUMENTS AND SITES IN DANGER

ICOMOS is dedicated to the development of common doc-trines, the evolution and circulation of knowledge, the crea-tion of improved conservation techniques, and the promotion of cultural heritage significance. As an official advisory body to the World Heritage Committee for the implementation of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, ICOMOS evaluates nomi-nations and advises on the state of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List. ICOMOS has built a solid philosophical, doctrinal and managerial framework for the sus-tainable conservation of heritage around the world. The ICOMOS Heritage at Risk Reports, first published in 2000, are part of this framework. From a strictly preservation-based approach this publication series offers world-wide information about the dangers that are threatening our cultural heritage, in order to provide help in the case of risks and to promote practi-cal measures to avert or at least allay these risks. The Heritage at Risk Reports are also addressed to the world public as an urgent appeal to commit itself to saving our heritage. Available also on the Internet, the reports furthermore serve as data base for the ICOMOS Global Monitoring Network.

www.icomos.org ISBN 978-3-945880-26-5

HERITAGE AT RISK

HERITAGE AT RISK

PATRIMOINE EN PÉRILPATRIMONIO EN PELIGRO

EDITED BY CHRISTOPH MACHAT AND JOHN ZIESEMER

Published by hendrik Bäßler verlag · berlin

WORLD REPORT 2014-2015 ON MONUMENTS AND SITES IN DANGER

Heritage at Risk edited by ICOMOSPresident: Gustavo AraozSecretary General: Kirsti KovanenTreasurer General: Laura RobinsonVice Presidents: Alfredo Conti, Toshiyuki Kono, Gideon Koren, Peter Phillips, Grellan D. Rourke

Office: InternationalSecretariatofICOMOS 11rueduSéminairedeConflans, 94220 Charenton-le-Pont – France

Funded by the Federal Government Commissioner for Cultural Affairs and the Media upon a Decision of the German Bundestag

Editorial Work: ChristophMachat,JohnZiesemer

FrontCover:OldAleppo,theOmayyadMosquein2016(©DGAM)InsideFrontCover:ProtesterssmashingtheheadoftheLeninmonumentinKiev,December2013 (photoMstyslavChernov,Wikimedia)InsideBackCover:Mali,MosquéeSankoré,crépissageduminaret,juin2013(photoALDI)

ThechoiceandthepresentationofthefactscontainedinthisbookandtheopinionsexpressedthereindonotcommitICOMOSinanywayandarethesoleresponsibilityoftheirauthors,whoseindependentviewpointsarenotautomaticallyendorsedbyICOMOS.Photo credits can usually be found in the captions; otherwise the pictures were provided by the various committees, authors or individualmembersofICOMOS.

First Edition 2017 ©2016ICOMOS–publishedbyhendrikBäßlerverlag·berlinISBN978-3-945880-26-5

CONTENTS

Foreword, Avant-Propos, PreámbuloGustavoAraoz,PresidentofICOMOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Introduction byChristophMachat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

NATIONAL REPORTSAlbania: MuralArtofVoskopoja . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Australia:IssuesandThreats / CaseStudy:LakeBurleyGriffinandLakeshoreLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Austria: VisualIntegrityofFamousKarlskircheinViennaatRisk / HeritageAlertfortheOtto-Wagner-HospitalinVienna . . . . 20Belgium:LacollégialeSainte-CroixàLiège . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Bosnia and Herzegovina:TheHistoricalMuseum,Sarajevo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Bulgaria:Buzludzha:ForbiddenHistoryofaNeglectedMasterpiece / ReconstructionsofCulturalHeritageSites BasedonConjecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Croatia:Diagnosis:TheCultureofDenial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Germany:Post-warInteriorofSt  Hedwig’sCathedralinBerlinatRiskofBeingIrretrievablyLost  / TheSurroundingsarean IntegralPartoftheMonument–TheGardenoftheMagnus-HausinBerlinistobeDestroyed / TheLedigenheim, Rehhoffstraße,Hamburg / TheMultihalleinMannheim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Ireland:Wall-paintingsinIreland:ProvisionalStocktakingoftheirEndangeredCondition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49Mali:ReconstructiondemausoléesàTombouctouaprèslacrisede2012:lerôledescommunautés . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52Mexico: AfectacionesalLagodeCuitzeo,Michoacán /AfectacionesalespacioescultóricodelaUNAMporlaconstrucción deledificioHdelaFacultaddeCienciasPolíticas / ElHospicioCabañasenGuadalajaraysuentornoinmediatoamenazado porlaconstruccióndeunatorredeoficinas(CDD) / VariasafectacionesalpatrimoniodelaCiudaddeGuanajuato,Gto. /  VariasafectacionesalpatrimoniodelaZonaMonumentaldePuebla. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Near East:ICOMOSetledéfideladestructionàgrandeéchelledupatrimoineculturelauProche-Orient /  Iraq: TheFutureofMosulHeritageaftertheDestruction / UNESCODirector-GeneralCondemnsDestructionatNimrud / Syria: AnnualReport2015compiledbytheDirectorateGeneralofAntiquitiesandMuseums(DGAM) / WarandDestruction intheOldCityofAleppo / FortheSafeguardingandPreservationoftheCulturalSitesinSyria–Memorandum oftheGermanNationalCommitteeofICOMOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Nepal:CulturalContinuityinPostGorkhaEarthquakeRehabilitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102Pakistan:LahoreOrangeMetroTrain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110Peru:RapportsurlecentrehistoriquedeCusco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114Russia:InsideandOutsidetheMoscowKremlin / WilltheMedievalTownofVyborgLoseItsAuthenticity? . . . . . . . . . . . 117Serbia:CurrentRisksinHeritageProtection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125Spain:PatrimonioenPeligro:ElCaminodeSantiago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129Ukraine:TheDestructionoftheSovietHeritage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133United States of America:EndangeredHistoricPlaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136Yemen: Yemen’sCulturalHeritageatRiskduetoArmedConflicts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

THEMATIC REPORTSInternational Scientific Committee on Shared Built Heritage:The“CliffBlock”inTanga,Tanzania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144International Scientific Committee on 20th Century Heritage:SocialistModernistHeritageintheRepublicofMoldova . . . . . . 147International Committee on Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues:TheMostRecentAdvancesintheImplementation oftheHagueConventionof1954fortheProtectionofCulturalPropertyintheEventofArmedConflict, anditsProtocols / RecommendationtoExpandtheDefinitionofCulturalHeritageinHeritageatRisk . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

The Heritage at Risk Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

6

FOREWORD ThiswonderfulinitiativeofourGermanNationalCommitteeforanICOMOSperiodicpublicationonHeritage at Risk(H @ R)sprangfromanoptimisticdesiretoreduceoreveneliminatethethreatstoheritageplacesbybuildingpublicawarenessabouttheirfragilityandtheirreversibilityoftheirloss.Overthelifeofitsexistence, Heritage at Riskhashelpedmitigatethethreatstohun-dredsofsitesbybringingthemtotheglobalattention.Sinceitsfirstpublicationin2000,naturaldisastershavecon-

tinuedtooccur,perhapswithgreaterfrequencyduetoclimatechange.Whilethereislittlethathumanscandotopreventsuchnatural phenomena, Heritage at Risk has fostered the preparation of better disaster preparedness plans in many parts of the world that in turn have increased the resistance of monuments and sites toseismicactivity,winds,andfloods.Insadcontrast to this,human induceddisasters,especially

thosefueledbyinternationalterrorismandarmedconflict,remainontherise,especiallyintheMiddleEastwheretheemblematicattacksonthefabricandthecourageousstewardsofAleppo,Pal-

myra,Cairo,andSana’achallengetheinternationallegalrecogni-tionoftheneutralityofculturalheritageasinitiallyembodiedinthe1954HagueConvention,andsincethenre-affirmedthroughmany other declarations. UndertheleadershipofICOMOS,theinternationalheritage

communityhasalwaysmaintainedthattheheritageofoneistheheritageofall,andthatrespectforallculturalheritageisamajorinstrumentforpeace-buildingthroughmutualinter-culturalun-derstanding.AswesliderecklesslytowardsanewworldorderthatseemsintentonfeedingagrowingcrisisthatunderminesthebasicbeliefsthathaveheldICOMOStogetherandthatareattheveryfoundationofUNESCO,Heritage at Riskhasacquiredamoreurgentandessentialroleinhelpingtheplanetreturntogreaterharmonyandsanity.Forthisreasonandmoreardentlythaneverbefore,IonceagainthankourGermancolleagueswhoworkceaselesslytoassembleeveryissueofH @ RaswellastheenlightenedGermanauthoritiesthatcontinuetoprovidethegen-erousfundingforitspublication.

Gustavo AraozPresident

AVANT-PROPOS La merveilleuse initiative de notre Comité national allemand pour unepublicationpériodiquedel’ICOMOSsurlePatrimoineenpéril(HeritageatRisk;H@R)découled’undésiroptimistederé-duireoumêmed’éliminerlesmenacesquipèsentsurleslieuxpa-trimoniauxensensibilisantlepublicàleurfragilitéetàl’irréver-sibilitédeleurperte.Toutaulongdesonexistence,lapublicationHeritageatRiskacontribuéàl’atténuationdesmenacespesantsurdescentainesdesitesenlesportantàl’attentionmondiale.Depuissapremièreparutionen2000,descatastrophesnatu-

rellescontinuentdeseproduire,peut-êtreavecplusdefréquenceenraisondeschangementsclimatiques.Bienqu’ilyaitpeudechosesqueleshumainspuissentfairepourprévenirdetelsphé-nomènesnaturels,HeritageatRiskaencouragél’élaborationdeplansdepréparationplusefficacesenvuedescatastrophesdansdenombreusesrégionsdumonde.Cesplansdepréparationontensuiteaugmentélarésistancedesmonumentsetdessitesauxactivitéssismiques,inondations,etc.Enrevanche,malheureusement,lescatastrophesprovoquées

parl’homme,enparticuliercellesduesauterrorismeinterna-tionaletauxconflitsarmés,continuentd’augmenter,surtoutauMoyen-OrientoùlesattaquesemblématiquessurAlep,Palmyre,

LeCaireetSana’a,etleursgardienscourageux,défientlarecon-naissancejuridiqueinternationaledelaneutralitédupatrimoineculturelinitialemententérinéeparlaConventiondeLaHayede1954etréaffirméedepuislorspardenombreusesautresdécla-rations.Sousl’impulsiondel’ICOMOS,lacommunautéinternationale

dupatrimoineatoujourssoutenuquelepatrimoinedel’unestlepatrimoinedetousetquelerespectdetouteslesformesdupa-trimoineculturelestuninstrumentmajeurdanslaconsolidationdelapaixàtraverslacompréhensioninterculturelleréciproque.Aufuretàmesurequenousnousdirigeonsversunnouvelordremondialquisemblevouloiralimenterunecrisecroissantequiminelesvaleursfondamentalesquianimentl’ICOMOSetquisontàlabasedel’UNESCO,lapublicationHeritageatRisken-dosseunrôledevenuplusurgentetessentielpouraiderlemondeàretournerversuneplusgrandeharmonieetéquilibre.Pourcetteraison,etplusardemmentquejamais,jeremerciedenouveaunoscollèguesallemandsquitravaillentinlassablementàcompilerchaquenumérodanslasériedepublicationsH @ Rainsiquelesautoritésallemandeséclairéesquicontinuentàfournirlegéné-reuxfinancementquipermetsapublication.

Gustavo AraozPrésident

7

PREÁMBULOEstamaravillosainiciativadenuestroComitéNacionalAlemánparaunapublicaciónperiódicadelICOMOSsobreHeritage at Risk(H@R,encastellano,PatrimonioenRiesgo)surgiódeundeseo optimista de reducir o incluso de eliminar las amenazas aloslugarespatrimonialesalcrearconcienciapúblicasobresufragilidadylairreversibilidaddesupérdida.Durantelolargodesu existencia, Heritage at Riskhaayudadoamitigarlasamenazasacientosdesitiosalelevarlosalaatenciónglobal.Desdesuprimerapublicaciónen2000,losdesastresnatura-

leshancontinuadoproduciéndose,quizásconmayorfrecuenciadebidoalcambioclimático.Aunquehaypocoqueloshumanospodamoshacerparaprevenirtalesfenómenosnaturales,Heritage at Riskhafomentadoeldesarrollodemejoresplanesdeprepara-ciónparadesastresenmuchaspartesdelmundoqueasuvezhanaumentado la resistencia de monumentos y sitios a la actividad sísmica,vientosyinundaciones.

En triste contraste con esto, los desastres inducidos por el hom-bre, especialmente los alimentados por el terrorismo internacio-nalylosconflictosarmados,siguenenaumento,especialmenteenelMedioOriente,dondelosemblemáticosataquescontrael

tejidoylosvalientescuidadoresdeAlepo,Palmira,ElCairoySana’adesafíanelreconocimientojurídicointernacionalsobrelaneutralidad del patrimonio cultural, inicialmente plasmado en la ConvencióndeLaHayade1954y,desdeentonces,reafirmadoatravés de muchas otras declaraciones.BajoelliderazgodelICOMOS,lacomunidadinternacionaldel

patrimoniosiemprehasostenidoqueelpatrimoniodeunoeselpatrimoniodetodosyqueelrespetoportodoelpatrimoniocul-turalesuninstrumentoesencialparalaconsolidacióndelapazatravésdelentendimientomutuoentreculturas.AmedidaquenosdeslizamosdescuidadamentehaciaunnuevoordenmundialqueparecedecididoaalimentarunacrisiscrecientequesocavalascreenciasbásicasquehanmantenidoalICOMOSunidoyquesonelfundamentodelaUNESCO,Heritage at Riskhaadquiridounpapelmásurgenteyesencialenayudaraquenuestroplanetaregreseaunamayorarmoníaycordura.Porestarazónyconmásardorquenunca,vuelvoadarlasgraciasanuestroscolegasale-manesquetrabajanincesantementeparareunircadanúmerodeH@R,asícomolasilustradasautoridadesalemanasquecontinúanproporcionandolagenerosafinanciaciónparasupublicación.

Gustavo Fernández-AraozPresidente

8

INTRODUCTION

The ICOMOS World Report 2014/2015 on Monuments and Sites in Danger (Heritage at Risk) is the latest volume of what is al-ready a whole series of World Reports started in 2000 on the ini-tiativeofPresidentMichaelPetzetandfollowedbythevolumesH @ R 2001/2001, H @ R 2002/2003, H @ R 2004/2005, H @ R 2006/2007, H @ R 2008–2010, and H @ R 2011–2013. The se-rieshasalsobeencomplementedbythreespecialeditions:H@RSpecial2006Underwater Cultural Heritage at Risk / Managing Natural and Human Impacts,H @ RSpecial2006The Soviet Heritage and European Modernism,andH@RSpecial2007Cul-tural Heritage and Natural Disasters / Risk Preparedness and the Limits of Prevention. The continuation of the successful series, alsodisseminatedviatheinternet,isrelatedtoResolution26ofthe16thGeneralAssemblyofICOMOSinOctober2008inQue-bec,whichresolvedto“requesttheHeritageatRiskSeriestobecontinued and that actions be taken to enhance its communication and impact so as to support protection and conservation of the culturalheritageworld-wideandtobetterserveICOMOSanditsCommitteestodefineprioritiesandstrategicgoals”.Andthe‘ICOMOSCulturalHeritageGlobalMonitoringNetwork’initi-atedbyPresidentGustavoAraozinJune2010isconsideredasbeing“thelogicaloutgrowthofourHeritage @ Riskprogramme”.Inlightoftheongoingarmedconflictsanddestructionsofcul-

turalheritageinSyria,IraqandinYementheUNESCOWorldHeritageCommitteeatits2015sessioninBonn/Germanyrec-ommended‘totheWorldHeritageCentreandtheAdvisoryBod-iestodevelopapost-conflictstrategy,includingmeanstoextendsupportforreconstructionofdamagedWorldHeritagepropertiesthrough technicalassistance,capacity-buildingandexchangeofbestpractices...’.AsaconsequenceICOMOSatitsAnnualGeneralAssemblyandAdvisoryCommitteemeetinginOctober2015inFukuoka/Japandecidedtodedicateits2016scientificactivitiestothetopicof‘post-traumareconstruction’,bymeansof workshops and international conferences, to raise fundamen-talquestions,exploretheoreticalandpracticalissuesandlaythefoundations for practical recommendations that will hopefully be neededinanot-too-distantfuture.Inthisspirit,thenewICOMOS World Report 2014/15notonlytriestofillagapinICOMOS’annualreporting,butoffersamongotherstwoveryrelevantcon-tributions to the topic of post-trauma reconstruction after threats anddamagescausedbyhuman-madeornaturaldisasters.OneisrelatedtoMali,whereinMay2012Islamicrebelscausedseriousdamagestomausoleums,mosquesandmanuscriptcollectionsinTimbuktu(H @ R 2011–2013,pp.94f.).Unfortunately,areporton the destructions was not available. The new detailed report fromICOMOSMalionthe“identical”reconstructionofthe11destroyed mausoleums in Timbuktu in 2014 –2015(pp.52–57)–basedonarchaeologicalinvestigations,researchandcompletedocumentation and the use of traditional construction materials andtechniques–isaconvincingdocumentaboutthenecessityofincludingthelocalcommunitiesinthereconstructionprocess.Thesamelessonwehavetolearnwhenreadingthereportonthe

disastrousearthquakesofAprilandMay2015inNepal( pp.102–109):Duringthepreparationofthepost-disasterrehabilitationprocess it became clear that a successful reconstruction of the set-tlementsandtheculturalsiteswillonlybepossiblebyensuringcultural continuity – and cultural continuity can only be ensured throughtheknowledgeandskillsofthecommunitybeingpassedonfromgenerationtogeneration.Inthisvolumespecialattentionisgiventoreportsfocussing

onthecurrentsituationintheNearEast(pp.63–101),someofthemincludingsimilarreflectionsconcerningtheinvolvementofstakeholdersandcitizensintheplanningprocessofrehabilita-tion.TheimpactofthecivilwarontheculturalheritageinSyriawasfirstdocumentedinthepreviousedition(H @ R 2011–2013, pp.143 –147).InJanuary2013,ICOMOSincooperationwithICCROM,theDGAM(DirectorateGeneralofAntiquities&Mu-seumsinSyria)andUNESCOmanagedtoholdane-learningcourseforSyrianculturalheritageprofessionals,conductedbyICORP,theICOMOSInternationalScientificCommitteeonRiskPreparedness(seeH @ R 2011–2013,p.9andp.146).Itwasco-ordinatedbytheICOMOSpermanentandoperationalworkinggrouponSyria,establishedinformallyasearlyasin2012.Since2014alsoinchargeofIraq, theworkinggroupwasvalidatedbyresolutionoftheGeneralAssemblyinFlorenceinNovem-ber 2014 as ICOMOS Working Group for Safeguarding Cultural Heritage in Syria and Iraq. Amongtheactivitiesoftheworkinggroup(seereportonpp.63– 67)monitoringisthehighestpriority(seealsothereportonAleppo,pp.97–100),followedbyinten-sifyingcontactstootherorganisations,suchasDGAM(withadetailedreportonSyria2015,pp.69–96),anduniversities,andinvolvingtheminresearch,formationandtrainingcoursesforculturalheritageprofessionalsinbothcountries(offeredinBeirutin2014and2015,withthesupportofUNESCO).However,ac-tivitiesalsoincludeestablishingadatabasewiththearchitecturalandurbandocumentationofalltheculturalheritagesitesinbothcountries,startingwitha3DdocumentationoftheoldcityofDamascus with the assistance of the American CyArk Foundation (reportoftheworkinggroup,p.64f.).OnbehalfoftheAnnualGeneralMeetingofitsmembersinNovember2015,theboardofICOMOSGermanyadoptedamemorandum‘FortheSafe-guardingandPreservationoftheCulturalSitesinSyria’(p.101).AsregardsIraq,theattacksagainstNimrudinMarch2015andtheongoingdamagestothearchaeologicalsitebyterroristsweredenouncedinaUNESCOPressReleaseofApril2015byDirec-tor-GeneralIrinaBokova,declaringthatthe”deliberatedestruc-tionofheritageisawarcrime”(p.67).Unfortunately,noreporton the situation is available. The report on the future of the herit-ageofMosulafterthedestructionbyISISinApril2014(p.65f.)clearly points out the importance of research and documentation forapossiblepost-disasterreconstruction.InthecaseofYemen,againthereisnoreporttodescribetheextentofculturalherit-ageatriskduetotheongoingarmedconflict,butICOMOSinastatementofApril23,2015expresseditsdeepconcernabout

Introduction 9

threatstoculturalpropertiesinYemen,mentioningthethreeCul-turalWorldHeritageSites,butalsomanyotherplacesofgreatculturalimportance( p.141f.).OnJune3,2015theInternationalCommitteeoftheBlueShieldpublishedastatementontheex-tremelyworryingreportsaboutthedestructionofculturalprop-erties,includingthebombingoftheWorldHeritageSiteOldCityofSana’a,andurgedallpartiestoabidebythetermsofthe1954HagueConvention(ibid.).Finally,onJune12,2015theDirec-tor-GeneralofUNESCOcondemnedthedestructionofhistoricbuildingsintheoldcityofSana’a(ibid.).It isworthmentioning that for the first time ICLAFI, the

ICOMOSLegalInternationalScientificCommittee,iscontrib-utingtoaneditionofH @ R with a very detailed report related to thelegalproblemsinconnectionwiththeprotectionofculturalpropertiesintheeventofarmedconflicts,followedbyarecom-mendationtoexpandthedefinitionofculturalheritageinHerit-ageatRisk( pp.152–164).

The new ICOMOS World Report 2014/2015 consists of contri-butionsfrom24countries,amongthemreportsfromnationalandinternationalscientificcommitteesofICOMOS,butalso,asusu-al,reportsbyindividualexpertsandalsoquotationsfromdiffer-ent expertises, statements, articles and press releases. An analysis ofthereportsshowsthat,apartfromthegeneralriskstoheritagefrom natural disasters and physical decay of structures, there are certainpatternsinhumanactivityendangeringourheritage,suchasrisksfromwarandinter-ethnicconflicts,asdocumentedinthementionedreportsontheNearEast.Human-maderisksfromdevelopmentpressurescausedbypopulationgrowthandprogres-sive industrialisation are reported from all parts of the world, re-sultinginever-greaterconsumptionofland,destroyingnotonlyarchaeologicalevidence,butentire(evenprotected)culturalland-scapes,eitherbyplanningtouristdevelopmentfacilitiesliketheaerialtramwayintheNavayoReservationoftheworld-famousGrandCanyon( p.140),orbuildingcommercialandresidentialtourismunits,likeontheshoreofLakeBurleyGriffin( p.18)orat the South Rim entrance of the Grand Canyon. Renewed ura-niumminingaroundtheCanyonisthreateningdrinkingwater,anduncontrolledalarmingcontaminationfromminingactivitiesandsewagepollutionisreportedforthebasinofLagodiCuitzeo,aprotectedecologicalreservationnorthofthecityofMorelia,Mexico( p.58).Large-scaleminingprojectscontinuetothreatenculturallandscapes(seetheICOMOSAustraliareport,p.16ff.),forinstancetheplannedcopperminingintheareaofOakFlatinSuperior,Arizona( p.139)–orthosereportedalreadyinthepreviousvolume(H @ R 2011–2013,Introductionp.10)atMesAynak,Afghanistan(ibid.,p.18),Sakdrisi,Georgia(ibid.,pp.64– 66)orRoşiaMontana,Romania(ibid.,p.122).–Goodnewsatleastregardingthelatter:afteritsnominationbytheRomani-anGovernmentthe‘RosiaMontanaminingculturallandscape’hasbeenincludedintheUNESCOWorldHeritageTentativeListsinceFebruary1,2016.Insomecountriessuchuncontrolleddevelopmentsareoften

justifiedbythelackoffinancialresourcestoguidetheminthedi-rectionofprotectionandculturalcontinuity.Inthissensethedec-larationofICOMOSBulgariaofJune2014statesinplaintermshowbadtheconditionofthe‘authentic’culturalheritageis,whilesignificantEUfundsarebeingallocatedforfalsereconstructionsofruins,basedonconjectureandhavingdestructiveconsequenc-esespeciallyforarchaeologicalsites(pp.35–37).Oftenitisalsothepoliticalwillthatismissing,forinstanceiftheextantlegalregulationsandstructuresarenotputinuse,areweakenedorevenneglected,asreportedbyICOMOSPakistanaboutthepro-

jectoftheLahoreOrangeMetroTrainanditsimplementation(pp.110–113).Insomecountries,theeconomiccrisis(reportedinthepreviousvolume,pp.10,74,82–84)seemstobeusedasapretextfortherepercussionsontheculturalheritagesector–asreportsfromSerbia(pp.125–128)andCroatia(pp.38–41)trytoinvestigateandexplain.Tosomeextent,e.g.concerningtheSocialist(Soviet)modernheritage(seealsotheH @ R Special 2006onSoviet Heritage and European Modernism),thereisap-parentlyaproblemofattitude:WhileintheRepublicofMoldovaanICOMOSmemberoftheInternationalScientificCommitteeon20thCenturyHeritageisfightingfortherecognition–andprotection–offourimportantpublicbuildingsasoutstandingexamplesofSocialistmodernheritageinChişinău(seereportpp.147–151),inBulgariatheBuzludzhabuildingfrom1981(amonumenttopraisethegloryoftheBulgarianCommunistPar-ty)wasabandonedafter1989andhassufferedsincethenfromvandalismanddecay(reportpp.32–34).InBosnia-HerzegovinatheHistoricalMuseuminSarajevo,atypicalbuildingofSocial-istmodernheritagefrom1963,wasdamagedduringthearmedconflictsin1990andsincethenhasbeeninbadcondition.TheprojectforrehabilitationworkedoutbyICOMOShasnotbeensupportedbythepublicadministration(reportpp.29–31).TheongoingdestructionofSovietHeritageintheUkrainealsoneedstobementioned(reportpp.133–135).Neglectand/orlackofuseandmaintenanceareveryoftenthe

sourceofpossibledeteriorationordestruction.Itappliestoindus-trialbuildings,likeTheFactoryinWestHollywoodfrom1929( p.137f.),tosingleorgroupsofbuildings,liketheOldU.S.Mint(1874)inSanFrancisco( p.139),theA.G.GastonMotel(1954)inBirmingham,AL(agatheringplaceforprominentleadersintheCivilRightsmovementintheUS,p.138),the“CliffBlock”hospitalbuildingof1903inTanga,Tanzania(reportprovidedbytheISConSharedBuiltHeritage,pp.144 –146),theLedigenheim (homeforsingles)inHamburg( pp.45–47),theMultihalle(mul-ti-purposehall)inMannheim( p.47f.),butalsotochurches,liketheCollegiateChurchoftheHolyCrossinLiège(pp.23–28),ortomuralpaintings,suchasthefrescocyclesinfiveofthesixchurchesinVoskopoja,Albania,understateprotectionas“Mon-umentsofCultureoftheFirstCategory”(reportonpp.12–15),andthewall-paintingsinIrelandandtheirendangeredcondition(pp.49–51).Evenhistoricurbandistrictsallovertheworldsufferfromneglect,lackofmaintenanceorcareless,oftentotallyun-plannedrenewalprocesses,liketheHistoricCivicBlockinEastPoint,Georgia(p.136),theSouthStreetSeaportinNewYork(p.137),theeconomicareaoftheOtto-Wagner-HospitalinVi-enna( p.21f.)orthemedievaltownofVyborginRussia(reportpp.120–123).SimilarthreatstothehistoricurbanstructurebydevelopmentpressuresarereportedfromWorldHeritageSites–thecorezoneofVienna(Karlskirchep.120f.),thecoreandthebufferzonesoftheMoscowKremlin( pp.117–119),oneofthebufferzonesinBerlin(St.Hedwig’sCathedralandMagnus-Haus,pp.43– 45),thecitiesofGuadalajara,GuanajuatoandPueblaandtheuniversityareainMexicoCity(seethereportsonpp.58–62),fromthebufferzoneofCuzco,Peru(pp.114 –116),andthecon-tinuingthreatstothebufferzoneofthe‘ElCaminodeSantiago’culturalrouteinSpain(pp.129 –132).AllthesereportsonthreatstoWorldHeritageSites–itisa

relativelylargenumber–includingarmedconflicts(Mali,Syria,Iraq,Yemen)ordevelopmentpressures(Austria,Russia,Ger-many,Mexico,Peru,Spain)canbeconsideredastheresultofacontinuousproactiveobservation,apreventivemonitoringofthe state of conservation, which – in accordance with article 4 of

Introduction10

theICOMOSStatutes–liesintheresponsibilityoftheNationalCommitteesofICOMOS(inspecialcasessupportedbytheIn-ternationalScientificCommittees).AsexplainedalreadyintheIntroductiontothepreviousedition,suchpreventivemonitoringispartoftheresponsibilitiesoftheadvisorybodiesICOMOS,IUCNandICCROM,andtheirmandatesandfunctionsresultfromarticles8(3),13(7)und14(2)oftheUNESCOWorldHer-itageConventioninconnectionwithparagraphs30and31oftheOperational Guidelines. For instance, the positive results of the continuousactivitiesoftheGermanmonitoringgroupforWorldHeritageSites,foundedin2001(compareH @ R2006/2007,pp.62f.,H @ R2008–2010,p.13andH @ R2011–2013,pp.67–71),butalsoofICOMOSmonitoringgroupsinothercountries,orthemonitoringreportspresentedinthiseditionwillhopefullyconvinceallNationalCommitteesofICOMOStoattendtothetaskofpreventivemonitoringinthefuture.BasedontheannualreportsofallICOMOScommitteesonthedangersandtrendsinconservationintheirregion,theHeritage at Risk initiative be-comesthedatabaseforthealreadymentionedGlobalMonitoringNetwork:ICOMOSasasortofgeneral“monumentwatch”ob-servingthestateofconservationworldwide.

With this volume of Heritage at Risk we hope to have succeed-edingivingacertainoverviewofthethreats,problemsandtrends

regardingtheprotectionofmonumentsindifferentregionsoftheworld.Wearequiteawareofthegapsinourworkandofthelim-itstowhatwecando.However,inthenearfuturetheHeritage at Riskinitiativewillnotonlyneedanimprovedfinancialbase,butalsocontributionsfromallICOMOScommitteesintheformofannualreportscollectedbyapressandinformationofficetobeinstalledatourInternationalSecretariatinCharenton-le-Pont.OurspecialthanksareaddressedtoGaiaJungeblodt,ourdirectorattheInternationalSecretariat,whooverthelastyearshascol-lected all the relevant information for our editorial work, such as reports, press releases and comments on worldwide threats to heritage.Thankingallcolleagueswhohavecontributedtothispublication and made their pictures available to us, we would also liketonotethat,inlinewithICOMOSpolicy,thetextsandinfor-mationprovidedforthispublicationreflecttheindependentviewofeachcommitteeandofthedifferentauthors.Atthesecretari-atofICOMOSGermanyinBerlinwewouldliketothankJohnZiesemerwhowasinchargeoftheeditorialworkandtheEnglishtranslations,andAureliaZiegenbeinforheradministrativework.Finally, we wish to extend our thanks to the German Federal Gov-ernmentCommissionerforCulturalAffairsandtheMediawhoonceagainprovidedthenecessaryfinancialandorganisationalframework for this publication.

Christoph Machat

Introduction 11

NATIONAL REPORTS

12

ALBANIA

Mural Art of Voskopoja

VoskopojaisoneofthefewBalkancitiesthatwerenotbuiltoverthe foundations of an ancient city. The city is mentioned in writ-tensourcesofthe17thand18thcenturies.InthatperiodVosko-pojahadabout6,000housesand30,000residents.Thecityhada developed urban area, with cobbled streets, hospital, homes for theelderly,schools,ahighschoolknownastheNewAcademyandoneofthefirsttypographiesintheBalkansdatingbackto1726.

Churches

Themostimportantbuildingsinthecitywerereligious.Writtensourcesmentionthattherewere24churchesinVoskopojainthe18thcentury,whenthecitywasflourishing.Onlysixofthemhavesurvived.Themagnificentappearanceofthethree-naveba-silicaswithlargeexternaldimensionsrepresentsarefinedexam-pleofmuralart,typicalofthepost-Byzantineperiodandrealisedin“mezzofresco”technique.

Wall paintings

Painters like David from Selenica, Constantine and Athanasius fromKorça,MichaelfromLinotopi,paintersfromAgrafa,etc,are some of the masters who decorated the interior walls of the Voskopojabasilicasaswellastheirporches.Alsotheirmaster-fulpaintediconsandthe“ beautifuldoors”oftheiconostasiscanoftenbefoundinchurchesofVoskopojaandthesurround-ingarea.Painters fromKorçaandDavidfromSelenicaalsodecorated the massive walls of churches and monasteries in the regionaswellasinMountAthos.ThemuralartofVoskopoja

followstheByzantinetraditioninfluencedbytheartofCreteandVeniceaswellasbytheMacedoniantraditionofthe14thand15thcenturies,whichshowsarichandvariegatediconog-raphy. The decorated mural surface of the interior walls and porchesisabout600m2.

St. Athanasius Church, Christ Pantocrator, painted by Constantine and Athanasius from Korça

St. Athanasius Church, lower register of the apse, degradation of the paint layer

St. Athanasius Church, south wall, gold leaf applied on the halos of the saints

Albania14

The chronology of the construction of churches and mural paintings

AmongthesixsurvivingreligiousmonumentstodayinVosko-poja,theSt.JohntheBaptistMonasterydatesbacktothe16thcentury,whilethemostrecentisthechurchofProphetElijahwhichisdevoidofmurals.Theconstructionchronologyisasfollows:1.ThemonasteryofSt.JohntheBaptist:accordingtothemon-asterycodex,itwasbuiltin1634andpaintedbyMichaelfromLinotopiin1659.

2.ThebasilicaoftheArchangelsMichaelandGabrielwasbuiltin1696anddecoratedwithwallpaintingsin1722byananon-ymous painter.

3.Thecathedral“Dormitionof theVirginMary”wasbuilt in1699anddecoratedwithpaintingsbyTheodor,AnagnostandSterianfromAgrafain1712.

4.ThebasilicaofSt.Nicholaswasbuiltin1721anddecoratedwithwallpaintingsbyDavidfromSelenicain1726and1750by Constantine and Athanasius from Korça.

5.ThebasilicaofSt.Athanasiuswasbuiltin1724anddecoratedwithwallpaintingsin1744-45bythebrothersConstantineandAthanasius of Korça.

6.ThebasilicaofSt.Elijahwasbuiltin1759.Therearenowallpaintingsinit.

Techniques of execution

Thewallasthemainsupportofthebuildingismadeofcarvedandsquarestones.Theplaster,whichisthefirstpreparationlay-

er,ismadeoflime,riversand,goat’shairandaconsiderablequantityofstraw.“ Intonachino”isthelastlayer.Coveringtheentire surface, it is made of lime in order to prepare the surface forpainting.AnXRFanalysishasshownthedifferentcomposi-tionsofthepigments.Someofthemareearthcolours,someareminerals,andothersenamels.Insomecases,wefindthatgoldleaf was applied over the halos of the saints.

Causes of degradation of the wall paintings

– Themaincauseofdegradationtothesurfaceisattributedtothewinterweather,i.e.thefreezingwintertemperaturesofthemountainousareawherethesechurchesarefound.Theweightof snow on the roof structure, which is covered with stone slabs,andtheslightestmovementcancausemoistureinfiltra-tion.Defectsintheroofduringthisperiodarealmostinevita-ble.Consequently,thesensitivetechniqueofmezzofrescohassuffered.

– Othercausesofdegradationarenumerousactsofvandalism,suchasscratchesandwritingsonthewallpaintingseriouslydamagingtheintegrityoftheimagesandthematerial.Thisphenomenon is mainly present in the lower parts of the paint-ingsinsidethechurchesandespeciallyintheporchareas.These“inscriptions”aremainlyrelatedtodatesandnamesofpeoplewhowanttoleaveasignoftheirpresenceinthatplace.Incertainareas,duetothedensityofscratchesanddamage,itisverydifficulttoperceivetheimagesandscenesdepicted.

– Anotherphenomenon,whichratherthanbeinganactofvan-dalismcouldbelinkedtosuperstitionisthescratchingofthe

St. Athanasius Church, loss of the preparation and paint layers in the central cupola

Albania 15

ReferencesAdhami,Stilian.Voskopojadhemonumentetesaj.Tiranë1998.Çaushi,Edlira.KishaeShënThanasitVoskopojë,(Teknikat,alte-rimetdhendërhyrjet)Kantier2005.Monumentet,2005.

Durand,Maximilliene.SixtinedesBalkans:peinturesdel’égliseSaint-AthanaseàVoskopojë(Albanie).2008.

Giakoumis, Kostantinos. The activity of the Painters from Lino-topiintheregionsoftheOrthodoxChurchofAlbania.2000years church art and culture in Albania. Tirana: Orthodox Church of Albania, 2000.

Meksi,AleksandërandThomo,Pirro.ArkitekturapasbizantinenëShqipwri-Përfundime.Monumentet2/22,Tiranë1981.

Popa,Theofan.MishkrimetëkishavenëShqipëri.Tiranë1998.—.DisakonsideratatëpërgjithshmerrethpikturëspasbizantinenëShqipëri.StudimeHistorike1,1967.

Puzanova,Viktori.Prapëmbiartinshqiptartëshekullit18.Bule-tiniiUniversitetitShtetërortëTiranës(BUSHT)2,1958.

Thomo,Pirro.KishatpasbizantinenëShqipwrinëeJugut.Tiranë:BotimiKishësOrthodhokseAutoqefaletëShqipërisë,1998.

irisesofthesaints’eyes.Thescrapingswereswallowedwiththe food in the belief that they would heal eye ailments. This phenomenon is clearly visible in the portraits of the saints lo-catedinthelowerpartofthepaintings.

– ItisworthmentioningthatthechurchesofVoskopojaareunderstateprotectionandwereawardedthestatus“MonumentofCultureoftheFirstCategory”onMarch17,1948.Sincethen,differentinterventionshavebeenmadeonthebuildingsaswellasonthewallpaintings.ConservationandrestorationworkscarriedoutbyspecialisedAlbanianinstitutions,aswellasjoint

projectswithEuropeanpartners,havenotbeensufficienttoad-equatelymaintaintheintegrityoftheseartisticvalues.

– Itshouldbeconsidered that foraperiodofabout25yearsduringwhichthereligionsinAlbaniawereprohibited,thecom-munity did not have access to these churches, could not take careofthemorusethespacesforreligiousservices.

Thisarticleisbasedondifferentstudiesperformedovertheyearsbyspecialistsinconservation,architects,engineers,historians,and art historians.

St. Nicolas Church, scratches and writings on the wall paintings in the portico area

St. Nicolas Church, abrasion and loss of preparation and paint layers

16

AUSTRALIA

Introduction

InAustralia’s2011–2013reportforHeritageatRiskwenotedthe prevalence and impact of natural disasters across Australia. Sadly,bushfiresremainthecountry’smostthreateningnaturaldisasterwithanumberofbushfiresoccurringconstantlysinceJanuary2013acrossthestates.Weremaingratefulthattheim-pact on life has been much less than that from previous disasters, andwhilealossofsignificantheritagevalueshasnotoccurredinthese events, the destruction of more local and community based values has been sorely felt.AmajorachievementbytheAustralianGovernmenthasoc-

curredbythereleaseoftheAustralianHeritageStrategyon9De-cember2015.TheStrategysetsouttheAustralianGovernment’spriorities over the next decade and the actions it will take to sup-portandpromoteAustralia’sremarkablenatural,historicandIn-digenousheritage.

Issues and Threats

Whilewecontinuetorecognisethethreat toheritagearisingfromnatural disasters, the twomajor studies havenot beenupdated since our last report in order to provide overview of ongoingthreatstoAustralia’sculturalheritagesince2013.Thefive-yearlyAustralianGovernmentpublicationState of the En-vironment 2016 (SoE2016)iscurrentlybeingcompiledanddueforcompletionandreleasebyDecember2016.Notwithstanding,theAustraliaICOMOSExecutiveCommitteehadaworkshopwiththeauthoroftheSoE2016providingmorerecentdataonthethreatstoAustralia’sculturalheritagetothestudy.Theotherstudy,UNESCOWorldHeritageAsiaPacificSecondCycleofPeriodicReporting2010 –12,isalsodueforanotherperiodre-porting,butitisyettobereleased.AustraliaICOMOSmemberscontinuedtocontributetotheSoEstudyanditsfindings.Thekeythreatstoheritage(bothnaturalandcultural)which

wereidentifiedintheState of the Environment 2011(SoE2011)report remain similar: the impact of natural and human processes andalackofpublicsectorresourcing.WhileAustraliaatlasthasanationalHeritageStrategy,itis,however,veryhighlevel.TheStrategysetsoutaframeworkforthenexttenyearstoaddressheritageprioritiesagainstthreehighleveloutcomes:– national leadership– strongpartnerships– engagedcommunities.

TheStrategyhastakensometimetodevelop,anditismuchan-ticipatedintheheritagesectorasawayofre-energisingcommu-nityinterestandprovidingamuchneededfocusforthefuture.WhileAustraliaICOMOSisstillintheprocessofreviewingitindetail,thereismuchtosparkinterest,includingtheoutcomesfocusedonleadership,partnershipsandengagedcommunities,

considerationofaHeritageQualityFramework,engagementwiththeAustraliaICOMOSHeritageToolkit,arecognitionoftheeco-nomicbenefitsassociatedwithheritage,theconceptofasharedresponsibilityforheritagemanagement,andtheveryexcitingna-tional lottery proposal.Notwithstandingthatthestrategyisgood,unlessitisembraced

byindividualstategovernments,NGOsandcommunitygroups,itskeyobjectiveswillbeimpossibletoachieve.Inrecentyears,publicsectorfundingacrossthestateshasdeclinedforheritageeducation,conservation,goodconservationstudies,andgrantprograms.ThestrategyneedsresourcingbybothStateandCom-monwealthgovernments.Majorpublicinfrastructure,landreleas-esandminingareincreasinglythreateningtheculturalsitesatalandscape scale. Asnotedabove,inthepreparationoftheSoE2016report,Aus-

traliaICOMOShadtheopportunitytocontributethroughawork-shop session, which involved review of a survey that was responded tobymorethan150AustraliaICOMOSmembers.Thetablein-cludessummaryresultsofthatsurveyfortheSoE2016.Whileinsomecasestherehasbeenmarginalimprovementin

theprotectionofheritageplacesinAustralia,inparticularforsomeofAustralia’sWorldHeritagesites,keythreateningfactorsremain.Manyhavealreadybeenidentifiedaboveandthoselistedbelow stand out, and remain, as additional issues. While the Pe-riodicReportingprocessarisesinthecontextofWorldHeritageproperties,itwasclearfromthequestionnairesandworkshopsthattheimplicationsforheritagemanagementexistinmanyna-tionalentitiesacrossallheritageplacesandvalues:– incompleteinventories(inbothextentanddiversity)– inadequatetentativelists– inadequatelegalframeworks– lackofmanagementplansorineffective/incompleteplans– failuretoengageineffectivemonitoringprograms– lackofheritagetraining(includingtraditionaltradesandskillstraining)andaccesstoexperiencedpeople

– needforconsolidatedresearchprograms– inadequateinvolvementwithlocalandtraditionalcommunities– impacts from tourism activities and visitation– impacts fromdevelopment (for example the attached casestudy)

ArguablyoneofthestrongestchallengesthathasbeenidentifiedintheAustraliancontextandreflectedacrosstheregionrelatestocommunicationandawarenessraisingatthegrassrootslevel.Theimpetusforconservationandprotectionofheritagevaluescanbebestinstilledthrougheducationprograms,whetherschoolbasedormature-ageprograms,andthroughmechanismsforin-formationexchange,discussion,debateandlearning.However,this is but one of a tool set of activities and mechanisms that need tobeputintoplaytohelpreducethethreatswearefacingtoheritagewithinAustralia.Oneofthekeymessagescomingoutofprocesses such as the State of Environment and Periodic Report-

Australia 17

ingisthattherecommendationsinthesepublicationsareoflittlevalueunlesstheyareactedonandreviewedinatimely,regularandproactiveway.Waitingforanotherfiveorsixyearsforthenextreportintheseprogramsdevaluestheeffortsthathavegoneintotheircreation.Althoughitisnotanextensivesurvey,thishasbeenconfirmedbytheresultsofthesurveyoftheAustraliaICOMOSmembersfortheSoE2016.ThenewAustralianHeritageStrategyhasbroughtanoppor-

tunityforincreasedcommunicationbetweenAustraliaICOMOS

andtheFederalGovernment.AustraliaICOMOSisintheprocessoffurtherdiscussionandcollaborationwithrelevantgovernmentandotherbodies,bothnationallyandregionally,toensurethatthekeyheritageobjectivesoftheHeritageStrategy,includingestablishmentofQualityHeritageFramework,tentativelistandprovisionofadequatepublicsectorfundingforconservation,comprehensiveheritage studies andgrantprograms, are em-bracedandachievedbyalllevelsofgovernmentbodies,NGOsandcommunitygroups.

Kerime DanisPresident, Australia ICOMOS

Issue Summary of Responses

State/Trend: Historic Heritage · nosignificantprogresshasbeenmadeinthecollectiondatarelatingtostatutorylistingprocessforhistoricheritage

· althoughthenumberoflistedculturalheritageplaceshasincreasedandtherehavebeenmoresystematic,thematichistoricheritageassessmentprojectsthesearenotatthedesiredlevel

· themajorityofAustralia’sculturalheritageplacesarenotingoodconditionanddonotretainintegrityoftheiridentifiedvalues

Pressures: Climate Change · thereisanincreasedpressureandhighimpactofrisingtemperatures,changingrainfall,risingsealevel,alteredfireregimesandextremeweatherevents

Pressures: Population Growth · community perception of value of both natural and cultural heritage remains disconnectedfromtheallocationofpublic resources,and for someplacesheritagevaluesareperceivedasexpendable

· populationshiftalsohashighimpactontheintensivelandusesandpressuresfromincreasinglandvaluesandinfrastructuredemandresultingindestructionofheritageplacestomakewayfornewdevelopment,inappropriatechangestoheritageplaces,andimpactsontheirsetting

Pressures: Economic Growth · resourceextraction(mining),developmentandtourismremainkeythreateningfactorsforheritageplaces,withmininganddevelopmenthavingveryhighimpactontheprotectionandsurvivaloftheheritageplaces

Management Effectiveness – Historic

· Australia’sculturalheritageisnotwellunderstoodandappropriatelyrecognised· inadequateresourcesareavailableforthesurvey,identificationandassessmentofAustralia’sculturalheritageplaces

· understandingofmanagementneedsandprocessesaremarginallyimprovedbythoseresponsibleformanagingAustralia’sculturalheritageplaces

· thereisalackofappropriatemanagementplansorothermechanisms

Protection · thereisalackofadequateprotectionthroughexistingstatutorycontrols· decisionregardingculturalheritageplacesisnotwell-informedbyanunderstandingofheritagevaluesandtheprinciplesoftheBurraCharter

Leadership · thereisalackofappropriategovernancestructurestocoordinateandmanageculturalheritagein Australia

Celebration · thereissomedegreeofappreciationandpresentationofculturalheritageplacesinAustraliacontributingtothecommunity’ssenseofplace

ReferencesState of the Environment Committee 2011, State of the Envi-

ronment 2011,IndependentreportpreparedtotheAustralianGovernmentMinisterforSustainability,Environment,Water,Population and Communities, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/soe/2011/report/index.html.

AustralianHeritageStrategy2015availableat:http://www.en-vironment.gov.au/heritage/publications/australian-heritage- strategy

State of the Environment 2016Australia ICOMOS Execu-tiveCommitteeworkshoppresentation,21February2016,non-public,byProfRichardMackay,AM

AustraliaICOMOSmemberssurveyfortheStateofEnvironment2016,non-public

Australia18

Case Study: Lake Burley Griffin and Lakeshore Landscape

Background

Located in the approximategeographic centre ofAustralia’scapital,Canberra,LakeBurleyGriffinisthecentrepieceoftheCity. The lake system is a fundamental feature of the visionary prizewinningplanbyWalterBurleyGriffinandMarianMahonyGriffinof1911thatinitiatedtheideaofalakewithaparklandperimeterasacentralfeatureoftheCanberradesign.Itwasnotuntil1958,undertheencouragementofPrimeMinisterRobertMenzies,thatthelakeworkscommencedwithareducedsizeandslightlymodifiedalignment.Thelake,itslandscaping,twobridg-esandadamwerecompletedin1963,retainingitsconceptualvisionandhassinceacquiredgreatbeauty.Thereisnootherde-signedlandscapeofthisscaleandsuccessinAustralia.LakeBurleyGriffinandlakeshorelandscape is of outstand-

ingsignificanceforitsaestheticandetherealbeautyexperiences and as a planar base for the valued vistas across water to the woodedhillsandmountainranges.Thelakeunifiesthecityandcontains thecrossingof the landsandwateraxialvistasand

landscapedperimeter.Itprovideslandscapesofpublicparklandsforpeople,arboreta,nativewoodlands,nativegrasslands,andwetlandsforwildlifeincludinginternationalmigratoryspecies.Thewaterandparklandsdeliverclimateamelioration.Itislovedand used by Canberra citizens and is the venue for numerous local,nationalandinternationalevents.Itistherestfulheartforthe City.HeritagenominationsfortheLakeandlakeshorelandscape

havebeenproposed:initiallyin1999totheRegisteroftheNa-tionalEstate,in2011totheCommonwealthHeritageList,andin2011,2014and2016totheNationalHeritageList(NHL),which

attesttoaconcernfortheprotectionofthevaluesbyheritagelegislation.Commercialisationoftheforeshorebeganinthe1990switha

landexchangeoftheCanberraHospitalsiteforanewNationalMuseumofAustralia.KingstonForeshorewasdevolvedtotheACT Government where an extensive urban apartment estate has since been developed.

Concerns

Thereisnoencompassingheritageprotectionforthelakeanditslakeshorelandscape.Heritageprotectionisjustforafeware-as:theCentralBasinincludingCommonwealthandKingsParkshaveCommonwealthHeritageprotectionandYarralumla, theGovernorGeneral’sEstate,hasCommonwealthHeritageListprotection.JerrabomberraWetlandsandWestonParkhaveACTHeritageRegisterprotection.ThelakesystemispartoftheNa-tionalHeritageListassessmentforCanberrathathasbeenwait-ingonfinalisationbyagreementfromtheACTGovernmentsince2013,withtheassessmentnowdelayeduntil30June2017.AlthoughLakeBurleyGriffinisacoreCanberraheritageicon

andessentialtothenationalsignificanceofCanberra,itsintegrityisbeingincrementallydiminishedbydividedgovernment(Com-

monwealthandACT)responsibilities,successivedevelopmentsandchanging landusepractices.Theproposeddevelopmentwouldhaveasignificantimpactontheheritagesignificanceofthe cultural landscape.Recently,sitesintheKingstonForeshoreoftheboatmainte-

nancecomplexandarowingclubhavebeenrelocatedtothees-tablishedlakesideparksandtheirKingstonsitessoldformoredevelopment.

Currently, an urban estate development is proposed for Ac-tonPark,WestBasinundertheACTGovernment’sCity to the Lakeproject.Thiswasinitiallyproposedin2003andhasgrown

The 1911 prize winning plan for Canberra by Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin (Source: Canberra following Griffin by Paul Read, 2002 National Archives of Australia)

The West Basin section of the 1913 plan by Walter Burley Griffin (Source: segment from Griffin, Walter Burley & Australia. Department of Home Affairs. (1914). Canberra Federal Capital of Australia preliminary plan, retrieved April 9, 2016, from http://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-230041959)

Australia 19

fromapproximately50%parkcoveragetoapproximately80%. It involvesinfillofasegmentof thelakein theGriffinPlanalignment–aclaimthatrebutsthesignificanceoftheextantlakeshapedevelopedin1963.Thedevelopmentwillappropri-atetheWestBasin’spublicparkland,damagevistasacrossthelakeandblightthesignificantsymbolicrouteoftheCommon-wealthAvenuetoParliamentHouse.ItwillunbalancetheurbanformoftheCityandtheperimeterlakeshoreparklands.Itwilladdenvironmentaldamageofaheatbank,waterandnightlightpollution.

Prepared by Juliet Ramsay, NSC on Cultural Landscapes and Cultural Routes

West Basin in 1964 showing the alignment of the extant lake and the horseshoe shape of the Basin (Source: Clough, R. 1964 Fully Filled West Basin from Air from above Australian National University (ANU) 1964, Canberra. The National Library of Australia)

The proposed urban development of the West Basin; note the changed shape of the Basin from Fig. 3 (Source: ACT Government, Land Devel-opment Agency: http://www.lda.act.gov.au/en/city-to-the-lake)

20

AUSTRIA

Visual Integrity of Famous Karlskirche in Vienna at RiskTheKarlskircheinViennaisoneofthemostimportantbaroquebuildingsinEuropeandthemajorsacralbuildingdesignedbyar-chitectJohannBernhardFischervonErlach.Intheplagueyearof1713,EmperorCharlesVIhadpledgedtoSaintCharlesBorromeothat he would erect a church. Work started as early as in 1714, and thechurchwasconsecratedin1737(afterFischervonErlach’sdeathin1723completedbyhissonJosephEmanuel).General-lyconsideredasaprogrammaticworkofHabsburgianimperialstyle, the church dominates the southern side of the Karlsplatz, oneofthemajorhistoricsquaresinthecity,situatedinthecorezoneoftheUNESCOWorldHeritagesiteHistoricCentreofVien-na.Between1954and1958anewbuildingfortheWienMuseum(foundedin1888astheHistorischesMuseum)waserectedonthe

eastsideoftheKarlsplatz(architectOswaldHaerdtl).Intheearly1970s,inthelineofthemuseum’sfaçadetheWinterthurbuildingoftheZurichVersicherung(architectGeorgLippert)wasadded.ThelatterbuildingbendsandcomesascloseasthreemetrestotheeastsideoftheKarlskirche(thusvisuallyclosingthesquare).AfteralengthyplanningphasefortheWienMuseum(todaya

listedbuilding)theresultofthearchitecturalcompetitionof2015forthe“WienMuseumNeu”wasalargelyacceptedconversionproject,includinganadditionalstorey,however,withplannedopenpassagewayanddemolitionoftheadjacentbuildingsec-tionoftheWintherthurbuilding.Ascompensationforthispartial

demolitionitwassuggestedtotheZurichVersicherungtobuildstoreysontopoftheremainingbuilding.Plansintendingtoaddtwofullstoreysandthusaheightoftenmetreshavecausedquiteastir.Thevisualconsequenceofoneofthesubmitteddesignswould be that the Karlskirche would look as if it received another sidetower.DuetothepresentmoderateheightoftheWinterthurbuildingandtheconsiderabledistancebetweenthechurchandthenextbuildingonthewestsidethechurchsofarappearsasifstandingalone.Iftheextrastoreyswerebuilt,theoriginalappear-ance of this Viennese landmark would be lost and the ensemble of the Karlsplatz willfully destroyed.

ICOMOS Austria

Aerial view of the Karlsplatz with simulation of the Wien Museum Neu (photo Architektur aktuell)

View of the Karlskirche with simulation of planned height of the Wien Museum Neu (photo Wikimedia)

Austria 21

Heritage Alert for the Otto-Wagner-Hospital in Vienna

The following letter was sent by the Secretary General ofICOMOSandthePresidentofICOMOSAustriatotheMayorofViennainDecember2015(withcopiestoMag.MariaVassilak-ou,Vice-MayoroftheCityofVienna;DIDr.BrunoMaldoner,FederalMinistryofArtsandCulture,ConstitutionandMedia;theAustrianCommissionforUNESCO;andtoIng.GerhardHad-inger,InitiativeSteinhof)toexpresstheirconcernaboutthepres-entconditionoftheOtto-Wagner-Hospital,amajorworkbythefamousarchitectOttoWagner.TheletterispartoftheHeritageAlertstrategyinitiatedbyICOMOS.TheHeritageAlertprocessusesICOMOS’professionalandpublicnetworkstopromotetheconservationofculturalheritageanddrawattentiontothethreatswhichitconfrontsandtopromotegoodconservationsolutions.

Dr. Michael HäuplMayor of the City of ViennaTown Hall ViennaLichtenfelsgasse 2, Stiege 5, 1. Stock 1010 ViennaAustria

Paris, 18 December 2015

Subject: ICOMOS Heritage Alert for the Otto-Wagner-Hospital, Steinhof, Vienna

Dear Sir, ICOMOS international and ICOMOS Austria wish to express their deep concern at the situation of the Otto-Wagner-Hospital, Steinhof, Baumgartner Höhe 1, 1140 Vienna, owned by the City of Vienna.

The significance of the site as an extensive ensemble, built from 1903–1907 by Otto Wagner with the participation of Hein-rich Goldemund, among others,is beyond doubt and has been confirmed by several scientific studies (notably most recently by Jäger-Klein, Caroline & Plakolm-Forsthuber, Sabine (ed.). (2015). DieStadtaußerhalb:ZurArchitekturderehemaligenNie-derösterreichischenLandes-,Heil-undPflegeanstaltfürGeistes-undNervenkrankeAmSteinhofinWien, Birkhäuser-Verlag).

The importance refers to both the architectural characteristics and the spatial planning of the site, including the horticultural design of the gardens. In addition, its relevance to developments in medical and therapeutic history are eminent and therefore of major cultural value.

Whilst the core area (Kernbereich, pavilions and church) of the site benefits of Statutory Monument Protection, no protection is afforded to the so called economic area (Wirtschaftsbereich) in the eastern part and today the site is gravely endangered by: − Already newly erected constructions (VAMED) and buildings

under construction; − Change in land use/dedication of the so called economic area

(Wirtschaftsbereich) in the eastern part of the ensemble;− The planned closing of hospital services within the next dec-

ade.

Due to the extraordinary characteristics of the site, in recent years numerous suggestions and appeals have been made from

various quarters to the authorities of Vienna and Austria to con-sider nominating the Otto-Wagner-Hospital for inclusion on the UNESCO World Heritage list. In this light, ICOMOS Austria asked internationally renowned expert Dr Leslie Topp (Univer-sity of London) to make an assessment, on the basis of a com-

Aerial photo of the Otto-Wagner-Hospital, 1932 (photo Wikimedia Commons)

Steinhof Church by Otto Wagner (photo Haeferl, Wikimedia)

Austria22

parative analysis, on whether the site may possess potential for the values which would argue in favour of such a nomination. Dr Topp’s study came to a positive conclusion. In addition, a citizens’ initiative (Initiative Steinhof) independently consulted Dipl.-Ing. Christian Schuhböck, Alliance of Nature, whose expertise came to the same conclusion.

Based on these findings, and considering the dangers the site is facing, ICOMOS Austria made several petitions to the authorities of the City of Vienna, also highlighting the values of the site. Due to increasing public attention, a mediation process among the various stakeholders was initiated by the City of Vienna. In ad-dition, an Expert Committee was established to review the devel-opment potential of the area taking into account the preservation of the existing core site. The result was that it was suggested to reduce the originally planned 600 new building units in the east-ern part of the area to 440 units. However, another 100 addition-al apartments are planned by conversion of usage of protected estate buildings.

Although the findings of the Expert Committee, established by the City of Vienna (in which ICOMOS did not participate), have led to significant changes in the foreseen usage of the area, the new planning basis still remains in contradiction with the multi-faceted significance of the site. Taking into account its values, it is beyond doubt that the site must be maintained intact in its en-tirety. The new structures that have regrettably already been built

serve as a reminder of a misguided concept and unsuccessful pol-icy. Also a number of the historic structures are in an increasingly poor state of conservation, especially the building originally used for “Pathology” – associated with the terrible memories of Nazi crimes, and in need of urgent attention.

ICOMOS therefore again calls upon the authorities of Vienna and Austria not to allow economic aspects to override the cultur-al importance of the ensemble and to urgently:− Extend the status of protection to also include the so called

economic area (Wirtschaftsbereich) in the eastern part of the site;

− Reconsider the development and conservation concept for the entire area;

− Develop a usage programme for the future when the hospital services close, which takes into consideration the exceptional importance and history of the whole ensemble.

ICOMOS, through its Austrian National Committee, remains at the disposal of the City of Vienna and the Austrian governmental authorities, for all advice they may wish to undertake the above actions.

Yours sincerely Kirst Kovanen Wilfried Lipp ICOMOS Secretary General President of ICOMOS Austria

23

BELGIUM

La collégiale Sainte-Croix à Liège

Summary

Founded by Bishop Notger at the end of the 10th century, the Col-legiate Church of the Holy Cross in Liège was rebuilt during the 13th, 14th and 15th centuries. Its late Romanesque Westbau, its choir, inspired by the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris, its hall-type nave and finally, its side chapels very well illustrate the evolution of styles and influences during the reconstruction in the 19th centu-ry. In the 19th century, the church was restored; the Westbau and the southern side of the building being the most heavily affected by these works, while the northern side and the chevet remain untouched due to lack of money. Inside, the church was adorned with a rich neo-Gothic decoration.

Listed as a monument in 1936, the church was inscribed on the Outstanding Heritage of Wallonia List in 1999 (the Westbau

being excluded for authenticity reasons) and finally in 2013 in its entirety. Its heritage value lies in its particular meaning for the city of Liège and its exceptional architectural features. As part of an ambitious construction programme aiming at turning Liège into one of the most prestigious cities of the Holy Empire, the church still assumes the role of an urban landmark, indispensable for the perception of the religious topography of the city that in-cluded the nearby cathedral, demolished at the end of the Ancien Régime. From the architectural point of view, the originality of the plan as well as the quality of the neo-Gothic decoration give Sainte-Croix an exceptional value.

The decline of the church dates back to the second half of the 20th century, starting with emergency interventions mostly on the parts that had not been restored in the 19th century. Meant to be temporary, these interventions were never followed by a proper restoration and had disastrous consequences in the long term. However, the most crucial event was the construction in the 1980s of a highway connecting the heart of the city with the motorway, which resulted in the disappearance of 80% of the church par-

Vue générale de la collégiale Sainte-Croix

Belgium24

ish. Without parishioners, the church has suffered from a lack of maintenance. The last priest has not been replaced, and finally, the church was closed to avoid vandalism and theft. As a con-sequence, the regional authorities have stopped investing in the building, which is difficult to reuse in an unstructured urban area with a lack of social cohesion and local life. The Institut du Pat-rimoine Wallon, in charge of developing scenarios for the future of the church, has not succeeded so far in finding a practicable solution. In addition to the problems of the surroundings, the ar-chitectural qualities of the building impede a reuse, with an in-ternal space difficult to divide and the presence of the neo-Gothic decoration, explicitly catholic. A good solution would be a mixed allocation, combining a cultural function with the resumption of the cult, but that would mean the transfer of parishioners from other nearby churches, a solution that is not conceivable for the religious authorities.

Owing to its desperate condition, in 2014 the church was in-scribed on the World Monuments Fund Watch List, on the initi-ative of the SOS Sainte-Croix association founded in 1998. This dubious distinction has made the problem more visible in the media and has resulted in the consideration of more ambitious actions than the emergency measures that are often taken in des-peration by the church at its own expenses. A first assessment of the structural problems has been made, leading to the definition of priorities: first, securing and provisionally waterproofing the building should allow it to be reopened to the public. But after

that, the roofs must imperatively be repaired and the church re-stored as a whole.

The case of the Holy Cross Church illustrates the fragility of listed religious heritage in today’s Belgium, victim of a vicious circle of lack of use and maintenance and of neglect. The reuse of this type of heritage is problematic, especially when the heritage values are high. The solution seems to lie in a dialogue between religious and heritage authorities, resulting in a strategic plan that will take into account the challenges of de-Christianisation as well as of heritage preservation, two aspects apparently diffi-cult to reconcile.

LacollégialeSainte-Croixestfondéeparl’évêqueNotger(972–1008)àlafinduXesièclesurlePublémont,unecollinesituéeàlapériphérieducœurhistoriquedeLiège.Al’estdelanouvellecollégialeestconstruitedès leXIesiècle lapetiteparoissialeSaint-Nicolas-aux-Mouches,dépendantdeschanoinesdeSainte-Croix.Ausuddel’égliseprimitives’étenduncloîtrebordédesbâtiments canoniaux.AudébutduXIIIesiècle,leschanoinesentamentlareconstruc-

tiondelapremièreéglise.Ilscommencentparlapartieocciden-tale,oùilsédifientleWestbau,aucaractèreencoretrèsroman,somméd’unetouroctogonaleflanquéesursespetitscôtésdetou-rellessemi-circulaires.Lareconstructionsepoursuitàl’extrémitéorientalequelquesdécenniesplustard,aveclaconstructiond’un

Le chœur oriental Le chœur occidental

Belgium 25

nouveauchœur,puisd’unpetittranseptetd’unenef-halle,bâtieendeuxtemps,etachevéeseulementdanslesannées1330.DanslecourantduXVesiècle,laconstructiondechapelleslatéralesetd’unenouvelletrésoreriedonneenfinàlacollégialemédiévalesaphysionomiedéfinitive.TransforméeenparoissialeàlasuiteduConcordat,l’église

Sainte-CroixestensuiterestauréeauXIXesiècle.Al’extérieur,c’estassurémentleWestbauquiestleplusprofondémenttou-chéparcestravaux,aveclerenouvellementdel’ensembledeses parements et la reconstruction de la moitié supérieure de satour.Lafaçadesud,avecsespinacles,pignonsetornementsnéogothiques,porteégalementlamarqueprégnantedetravauxqui,fautedemoyens,épargnerontlechevetetlafaçadenord.Al’intérieur,ledécapagesystématiquedessupportsetlamiseenœuvred’unrichedécornéogothiqueconfèrentàl’édificesonaspect actuel.

Un édifice d’exception

L’égliseSainte-Croixestclasséeen1936.Elleestensuiteins-crite sur la liste du patrimoine exceptionnel de Wallonie en 1999. Dans un premier temps, le Westbau est exclu de ce classement, enraisondufaibleniveaud’authenticitématérielle(l’authen-ticité formelleestenrevanchebienavérée)desonélévationextérieure.Cepremierjugementestrevuparlasuiteetc’est

latotalitédel’égliseliégeoisequiestinscritesurcettelisteen2013.Lavaleurpatrimonialedel’édificetientàlafoisàsasigni-

ficationparticulière,àl’échelledel’histoireliégeoise,etàunearchitectured’exception.L’égliseSainte-Croixest l’unedesseptcollégialesfondées

entreleXeetledébutduXIesièclepourfairedelacitéliégeoisel’unedesvillesd’Empirelesplusprestigieusesdel’époque.Sonimposante touroctogonale joueaujourd’huiencore lerôledesignaldanslepaysageurbain,etconstitueunjalonsymboliqueindispensablepourlamiseenrelationdesdifférentescollégiales,dansunelecturedelatopographiereligieusedelacité,dansla-quellelacathédraleNotre-DameetSaint-Lambert,détruiteàlafindel’AncienRégime,jouaitunrôlecentral.L’importancedel’édificetientégalementàsavaleurarchitec-

turale exceptionnelle. Avec ses deux absides opposées, un chœur orientalévoquant,danslesannées1250,laSainte-ChapelledeParis,avecsanef-halleégalement,bâtiedanslesannées1270-1280d’aprèsunmodèleencore trèspeu répanduenEurope,avec,aussi,seschapelleslatéralesàl’élévationsingulièreetor-néesd’écoinçonssculptédetraditionbrabançonne,elles’écartedesdispositifsarchitecturauxtraditionnelsdelarégionmosaneetparticipeàl’importationetl’élaborationdenouvellesformulesgothiquesdanslapartieoccidentaledel’Empiregermanique.Enfin,lavaleurpatrimonialedeSainte-Croixestégalementin-

dissociabledestravauxderestaurationdesXIXeetXXesiècles,

Vue générale de la nef-halle

Belgium26

quivontréinterpréterl’édificemédiévaletnousletransmettredansunétatprimitifagrémentéd’ornementsnéogothiquessou-ventdegrandequalité.

Chronique d’un lent déclin

DanslasecondemoitiéduXXesiècle,l’égliseSainte-Croixsubitun lent déclin. Dans les années 1970, les parements médiévaux, nonrestaurésauXIXesiècle,commecertainsornementsnéo-gothiques,montrentdedangereuxsignesdefaiblesse.L’édificeestalorsconsolidéenurgenceaumoyendebriquesdeciment,quiprennentlaplacedespierresfragilisées.Cetteinterventionprovisoireexpliquel’aspect«patchwork»quelafaçadenorddel’égliseafficheaujourd’hui.C’estégalementlorsdecestravauxd’urgencequ’unrevêtementbitumeuxestfixésurlacouvertured’ardoisesdéfectueuse,aumoyendelattesdeboisclouéessurlesvoliges.Cechoix,probablementappropriépourstabiliserlesiteenprévisiond’unerestaurationprochaine,agénérédeseffetsdésastreuxpourl’édificesurlelongterme…Mais l’événementcrucial, à l’originedudéclinde l’église

Sainte-Croix,c’estl’aménagement,dèslafindesannées1970,delavoierapidereliantlaPlaceSaint-Lambertàl’autoroute.Cenouvelaxedecirculationnécessiteeneffetladestructiondesim-meublesrueSainte-CroixetruedeBruxelles.Danslesfaits,c’estprèsde80%delaparoissequiestrasée.Depuis,lenombredeparoissiensaévidemmentchuté,àtelpointque,lorsquelachau-

dièrerendl’âme,iln’estpasjugéopportundelaremplacer,lesmessesnesedonnantplusquepourunepoignéedefidèles,danslatrésorerieduXVesiècle.Privéedeparoissiens,l’égliseSainte-Croixseverraensuitepri-

véedecuré,danslesannées2000,aprèsledépartàlaretraitedudernierd’entreeux,l’AbbéCrochet.Plusieurscasdevandalisme–l’égliseestalorssurtoutfréquentéepardestoxicomanes–etlevoldedeuxmiséricordesduXIVesiècleontensuiteraisondel’accessibilitédubien.L’églisefermesesportesauxpassants,etnepeutplussedécouvrir,désormais,quedanslecadredevisitesguidées…Désertéeparlesparoissiens,ferméeaupublic,l’égliseestaussi

progressivementdésinvestieparlespouvoirspublics.Ilyabeau-coupd’églisesmédiévales,àLiègecommeenWallonie,souventdegrandevaleur,etlaconcurrenceestrude,d’autantquesepose,àSainte-Croix,leproblèmedelaréaffectation.Pourbénéficierdelarestaurationglobalequ’ilattenddepuisprèsde40ans,l’édificedoiteneffetsevoirattribueruneouplusieursnouvellesfonctions.Laréflexionestconfiéeàl’Institutdupatrimoinewallon,dontl’unedesmissionsestprécisémentd’œuvrerauxscénariosderé-affectationdupatrimoinerégional.Ellen’acependantpumeneràcejouràdespropositionsconvaincantes.Deuxobstaclesmajeurssemblentsedressersurlechemind’uneréaffectationglobaledubien.Lequartier,toutd’abord,n’apporteguèredesoutienaudé-bat:amputéparlesgrandstravauxdelafinduXXesiècleetdéstructuréparplusieursdentscreusesetfaçadesaveugles,ilaperdusonidentitéoriginelle.Lacohésionsocialeestfaibleetlaviedequartierquasiinexistante.Certes,l’égliseest-ellesituéedansleprolongementdelarueMontSaint-Martin,unquartieràfortpotentielpatrimonial,avecsesnombreuxhôtelsparticuliersetlacollégialeSaint-Martinquiledomine.Certes,laréaffecta-tiondeplusieurshôtelsparticuliersdansunvastecomplexehô-telierdeluxe,àunecentainedemètresdel’égliseSainte-Croix,aprobablementcontribuéàrevaloriserlequartier.Maiscetteac-tivitétrèsélitisten’impliqueenrienlescommunautéslocalesetn’apportequ’unfaibleconcoursàlaredynamisationd’unquartiervidé de vie sociale.L’architectureetsondécorconstituentl’autreobstaclemajeur

àunprojetderéaffectationrespectueuxdel’égliseetdesonhis-toire.L’édificeestvasteetn’offreguèredepossibilitésdecloi-sonnements;ledécornéogothique,trèsprésentdansleschapelleset la partie orientale, impose une réserve dans les choix opérés et supposequel’essentieldecesornementscatholiquesduXIXesièclerestentprésentsdansl’atmosphèrefuturedulieu.Unesalledeconcertouunmusées’accorderaientprobablementbienaveccescontraintes,maisla«rentabilité»decesfonctionsposeim-médiatementquestiondansunepetiteville,quidisposedéjàdenombreuxbâtimentsaffectésàcesdeuxmissions.Seprofileégalementlescénariod’uneaffectationmixte,proba-

blementplusconformeauxpossibilitésoffertesparlelieu,etquipermettraitdepréserverunculte–fut-ilépisodique.L’opinionestdéfendueparl’association«SOScollégialeSainte-Croix»,fon-déeen1998pourconcourirausauvetagedecerichepatrimoine.Elleproposeainsid’associeràunespaceculturelpréservédansla partie orientale, des concerts, expositions et autres activités occasionnelles,mais,surtout,d’aménagerdanslelieulecentred’accueild’unnouveaucircuittouristiqueassociantlesanciennescollégialesdeLiège,etbaptisé«Circuitdescollégiales».L’idéed’uneréorganisationdescultesparoissiauxenfonction

delavaleurpatrimonialedeséglisesbénéficieraitassurémentàl’égliseSainte-Croix.Aunecentainedemètresdelà,uneégliseplus modeste, et profondément altérée par un incendie dans les

Dégâts visibles des voutes

Belgium 27

années1980,abriteencorepériodiquementunepopulationpa-roissialedignedecenom.Ledéplacementprogressifdecesfi-dèlesversl’égliseSainte-Croixpermettraitderedonnerdusensàl’anciennecollégialeliégeoise.Maisl’idéepassemalchezlesecclésiastiques,quisoulignent,avecraisond’ailleurs,quelava-lorisationdupatrimoinereligieuxetladynamiquedescommu-nautésparoissialesrépondentàdeslogiquesbiendifférenteset,souvent,peuconciliables.Desautoritésecclésiastiquesquinelâchentpasl’édifice:toutrécemment,l’évêquelui-mêmeapro-posédefairedel’édificeunlieuprivilégiépourdescélébrationsœcuméniquesetd’installerdanslesdépendancesdel’égliseunecommunautéreligieusequipourraitcontribueràredynamiserl’église,commedansd’autrescascomparables,enBelgiqueouailleurs.

Sainte-Croix sur la World Monuments Watch List 2014

Aucoursdecesdixdernièresannées,l’étatdubienn’acesséd’empirer, et cemalgré les interventions d’urgence requisespar l’étatdes toitures.L’étatdésastreuxde la couverture,dûnotammentàladétériorationdelacouverturedefortunedelafinduXXesiècle,provoquedefréquentesinfiltrationsd’eau.Al’aplombduruissellement,lesvoûtes,mursetsupportssegorgentd’eau,avectouslesdégâtsquecelasuppose.Lamisehorseaudel’édificeestclairementlaprioriténuméroun,examinéeparl’Institutdupatrimoinewallon,maisl’argentmanque.Souvent,

lafabriqued’églisedoitpareraupluspressé,quitteàassumer,seule,lefinancementdecesopérationsd’urgence.Ceconcoursdecirconstance,peufavorableaumonument,incitel’association«SOScollégialeSainte-Croix»àenvoyerauWorldMonumentsFundundossierpourl’inscriptiondecetteéglise,désormaisex-plicitementmenacée,surlalisteWorldMonumentsWatch2014.L’édificeestsélectionnéparlafondationnew-yorkaisepour

figurersurlalisteconvoitée.AprèslesiteindustrieldeTour&Taxisetlamaisondelaradio,tousdeuxàBruxelles,etlesana-toriumJosephLemaireàOverijze,l’égliseSainte-Croixestlequatrièmemonumentbelge–lepremiermonumentwallon–àfigurersurlalisteaméricainedupatrimoineenpéril.Cetévéne-mentaoffertunsurcroîtdevisibilitéaudramepatrimonialquisejouesurlesiteet,au-delà,apermisdemédiatiserleproblèmedeplusenpluscomplexedel’avenirdupatrimoinereligieuxdanslaBelgiqueduXXIesiècle.

L’aube d’un renouveau?

Silesinterventionsdespouvoirspublicssesonttoujoursbornées,depuisledernierquartduXXesiècle,aufinancementdemesuresconservatoiresd’urgence,elless’intègrentdepuispeudansuncalendrierplusambitieux,laissantentrevoirlapossibilitéd’unerestaurationglobaledel’édifice.Unpremierbilandel’étatsani-taireestainsicommandéparlaVilleen2014aubureaud’étudesbruxelloisOrigin.Ils’agitd’identifierlespathologieslesplusévi-

La lente disparition de sculptures murales du XVe siècle

Belgium28

dentes et de lister les études préalables nécessaires pour aboutir àundiagnosticprécisdubien.Cetteétudepermetégalementdedresser un ordre de priorités des opérations nécessaires pour sau-vegarderl’édificeetdechiffrer,nefut-cequedefaçonapproxi-mative,lesinterventionsnécessaires.Lapremièreétapedoitêtrecelle de la réouverture du site au public, moyennant les travaux desécurisationnécessairesetl’étanchéisationprovisoiredelatoi-ture. La réfection de la couverture doit intervenir dans un second temps,avantlatroisièmeétape,celledelarestaurationglobaledubien.Lapremièreétape,bienmoinscoûteusequelesdeuxsui-vantes,estenbonnevoiedeconcrétisation.Maispourqu’elleneserésumepasàunenouvellecampagnedetravauxprovisoires,elle doit impérativement être suivie des deux phases suivantes. L’avenirdirasicepremierétatsanitaireconstituel’aubed’unrenouveauouuneéclairciedansunegrisaillepersistante…Lecasdel’égliseSainte-Croixillustrebienlafragilitédupa-

trimoinereligieuxclasséenBelgique.Commedansbiend’autrescas,leproblèmecommenceparladisparitiondesparoissiens,

puiss’aggravefautedeperspectivesderéaffectation.Lebâtimentsouffrealorsd’uncerclevicieuxquialtèredemanièresouventirréversiblesesqualitéspatrimoniales:fauted’uneprésenceré-gulière,lebâtimentestfermédeplusenplusfréquemment.Cettemesure,destinéeàprévenirlevoloulevandalisme,condamnelebienàunabandoncroissant,quiaccélèresadétérioration.Si,commedanslecasdel’égliseSainte-Croix,lesperspectivesderéaffectationrestentpeuconvaincantes,ledébatgagneraitalorsàêtreélargiauxquartiersavoisinants,etauxéglisesquienja-lonnentlepaysage.L’enjeuneseréduiraitdèslorsplusàlasau-vegardeoulacondamnationd’unbâtimentisolé,maisbienàl’or-ganisationducultecatholiqueselonunplanstratégique,résultantd’unepolitiqueconcertéeassociantlesdifférentsniveauxdepou-voirsetlesautoritésecclésiastiques,etquis’appuieraitàlafoissur le dynamisme de certaines paroisses, sur les attentes des com-munautéslocales,souventattachéesàleurs«vieilleséglises»,surlavaleurpatrimonialedeséglisesetsurlespossibilitésréalistesderéaffectation.

ICOMOS BelgiqueICOMOS Wallonie-Bruxelles remercie Mathieu Piavaux et Claudine Houbart

29

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

monument in 2012, as one of the most important examples of modernheritageinBosniaandHerzegovina.Itislocatedinthecentralpartofthecity’sMarijindvorquarter,betweenagreenbelt(VilsonovoPromenadealongtheriverMiljacka)andabusytrafficroadcalledMešeSelimovićaBoulevard.TogetherwiththeneighbouringhistoricistcomplexoftheZemaljskiMuseumthatconsistsofafewpavilions(builtbyKarelParikin1909)itformsthemuseumquarter,soontobeenlargedbytheCon-temporaryArtMuseumbuildingnamedArsAevi(designedby

Historical Museum in Sarajevo, built in 1963, architects: Boris Magaš, Edo Šmidihen and Ranko Horvat (photo 2016)

The composition is dominated by the cube – the main exhibition space positioned on a strong pedestal

View of the Historical Museum’s rear façade with garden (photo 2016)

The smaller cube, much more modest and intended to house the museum’s management (photo 2016)

The Historical Museum, Sarajevo

Description of the structure

TheHistoricalMuseumisoneoftheeminentrepresentativesofsocialistYugoslavia’sarchitectureandpartoftherichher-itageofthe20thcenturyinEurope.Itwasdeclaredanational

Bosnia and Herzegovina30

RenzoPiano).TheHistoricalMuseumwasbuilt in1963,onthebasisofthefirst-prizedesignattheYugoslavArchitecturalandTown-PlanningCompetition;itwastheworkofCroatianarchitectsBorisMagaš,EdoŠmidihenandRankoHorvat.ThemuseumwasnamedtheMuseumoftheRevolutionuntiltheendof the 1990s and its collection of that time referred to the history ofWorldWarIIintheregion.Today,theMuseum’scollectionfocusesonthehistoryfromtheMiddleAgestocontemporaryBosniaandHerzegovina.TheMuseumbuildinghastobeseenaspartofthespecific

socio-politicalandculturologicalcontextofpost-warEuropeandtheeffortstoinstitutionaliseandreifythecollectiveoroffi-cialmemoryofWorldWarIIbymeansofthearchitecturalandspatiallanguage.ItcanalsobeseenasacomponentforanewcitycentreofSarajevowithculturalandeducationalattractions.However,itsarchitecturalexpressioniscompletelydevoidofanykindofideological,archaicandfolklorenarration.Therefore,theexpressionistcharacterofthebuilding’sarchitectureopensupadialoguewiththetendenciesofinternationalcontemporaryarchi-tecture, which, in turn, is not formally unilateral.

The composition of the structure consists of three volumes: a dominant“hovering”exhibitioncube,asmallercubewithoffices,andalinearglazedcorridor(withmultifunctionalhalls),whichconnects them. The entire composition is laid on a white stone pedestal,thusbeinganearlyexampleofanurbangallery/terraceopentowardsthemuseumquarter.Atthesametime,thepedestalenablesthecreationofadelimitedgardenatthebackfaçade–areminiscence of the unbreakable bond between the traditional ur-bandwellingandthegreenery.Itisobviousthattheauthorsofthedesignwiththeirvocabu-

lary of shapes and selected concept mediated between the uni-versalandtheparticular,givingprecedencetotheformationofmodernlocalidentities.Apartfromtherecognisablereferencesapplied(thecross-sectioncolumns,theblackmodularstructur-alpatternoftheglasssurfaces,thefree-standingwall,markedconsoles,etc),modernisationprocessesstillrepresentedachal-lengetotheauthors.Anactivedialoguewasestablishedwiththetraditionanditresultedinthelanguageofabstraction.Byapply-ingreducedformsandasimplegeometricalcompositiontothe

building’sappearance,thisarchitectureseemstobeshapedintheminimalistmanner.However,onthecontrary,arichandcomplexspatialdispositionwasrealisedalongwithvariousscenariosandatmospheres. The structure neither has an extrovert nor an intro-vertcharacter.Instead,withitscompositionandmaterialisation(whitestonefromtheislandofBračandtheglassfacade),itskil-fully balances between the full and the empty.

The structure’s condition in 2016

Duringthewaractivitiesintheearly1990s,theMuseum’sstruc-turewasatthefrontline,whichcausedsignificantdevastation,both physically and functionally. After the end of the war, due to politicalreasonsthestatusandfundingoftheMuseumwerenotadequatelysolved.Becauseofthelackofthoroughrenovationandregularmaintenance,thebuildingrapidlyfellintodisrepair.Althoughexpertshaveevaluatedthisbuildingasanexceptionalachievement of 20th century architecture, relevant institutions have not yet undertaken appropriate measures in order to prevent its present condition.Confrontedwiththeintolerablehandlingofthisculturalas-

set of the 20th century, which is restricted to an occasional and partial“patchingup”onthesurface,andbeingfullyawareofthe fact that without funds work on this important cultural mon-umentcannotbecarriedout,theICOMOSNationalCommitteeinBosniaandHerzegovinadecideditwasnecessarytoentertheKeeping it Modern 2015 competition of the Getty Foundation in thehopeofobtainingfinancialsupporttoprofessionallyandeth-ically conduct the restoration of the museum. Bearinginmindthatinterventionssofarhavebeenmadepro-

visionallyandatrandom,thedesignintendedtobepreparedbyICOMOSBosniaandHerzegovinawouldbebasedonthecom-pilationofanexpertdesigning-conservationdocumentationthatwould include:– detailedinformationaboutthebuilding;– descriptionofthecurrentconditionofthebuilding,includingananalysisofanystructuraland/ormaterialdeficienciesandconservation needs;

Steel construction with obvious and very advanced corrosion; stone surfaces also showing severe damage (photos 2016)

Bosnia and Herzegovina 31

– detaileddescriptionoftheproposedconservationplanning,in-cludingtypesofresearchandanalysis(historic,technical,orscientific);

– objectivesandexpectedoutcomesanda rationale foreachcomponent;

– detailedinformationaboutspecialistsinvolvedintheproject(includingtheprincipalconsultants,architects,engineers,sci-entists,researchers,conservators,surveyors,projectsupervisorwhowillbeoverseeingthearchitect(s),designandconstruc-tiondates,etc),theirrolesandresponsibilities,andtheirquali-ficationstoundertaketheproject;

– inaddition,imagesillustratingtheexteriorandinteriorofthebuilding,includingdepictionsofitslocation,architecturalde-tails, and past and present condition would be included. That photo documentation would demonstrate the continuous dete-riorationofthebuilding.

AllourpreparationsandnegotiationswitharepresentativeoftheGettyFoundation,aswellassincereeffortstohelptocon-tributetothepreservationoftheHistoricalMuseumandtoitsexpert restoration and presentation were in vain, because the Museum’smanagementdidnotgiveustheirconsent totakepart in the Keeping it Modern 2015competition.TheICOMOSNationalCommitteeinBosniaandHerzegovinadoesnotwantto speculate about the reasons for such behaviour, but must concludethatinthiscasetheonlyrealloseristheHistoricalMuseumitself.Theimportanceoftheprestigiouslocationofthemuseum

andthemanyyearsofconsciousneglectofthebuildingit- selfsuggestthataninevitabledemolitionandtheconstructionofsomenewofficebuildingmayoccurinthefuture,follow-ingthemodelofthecurrentbuildingtrendsintheneighbour-hood.

National Committee in Bosnia and Herzegovina

AllphotosbyVjekoslavaSankovićSimčić.

32

BULGARIA

Buzludzha: Forbidden History of a Neglected MasterpieceBuzludzhamonumentisanarchitecturalmasterpiece,anout-standingengineeringachievementandanadmirableexampleofmonumentalart.Despitethis,itisanabandoned,neglectedandcrumblingsiteforhistoricalandpoliticalreasons.Buzludzhawasbuiltin1981onamountainpeakinBulgariatopraisethegloryoftheBulgariancommunistparty.Theextraordinarystruc-turehadaveryshortlifeofjusteightyearsuntiltheendofthesocialist regimeinBulgaria in1989.Soonafter thepoliticalchangesBuzludzhawasabandonedtoitsfateandtothehandsof looters, to vandalism and severe weather conditions. Today

theglamourhasturnedintodecay,butthebuildingstillattractsattention with its dramatic history; it thrills with its architecture beyondgravityandastonishesvisitorswiththeremainsofcol-ourfulmosaicsinside.Althoughthemonumentwasbuiltwithapastideologyinmind,itispartoftheBulgarianhistory–anartifactwithimmensepotentialtobecomeasightofworldsig-nificance.

Context

Similar is the destiny of several hundred other monuments built duringthesocialisterainBulgaria.Everycityandeverysmallvillagehastracesfromtheperiod,e. g.sculptures,memorialsand

signsaboutlocalornationalhistoricalfiguresandeventscon-nected to the socialist ideas. Some of them have been destroyed, othersdisplacedorabandoned,butthemajoritystillstandasstonewitnessestoaperioddifficulttoevaluate.Thus,itslegacyhasnotyetbeenassessed.NoneofthemonumentsbuiltduringthesocialistperiodinBulgaria(1944 –1989)arelisted;there-fore,officiallytheyarenotprotectedasheritage.Thissilentin-action allows the weather and looters to destroy the monuments “naturally”.Ifpromptactionisnottaken,theremaysoonbenothinglefttopreserve.Itwouldbeasignificantarchitectural,historical and cultural loss to allow the destruction of sites such asBuzludzha,the“1300YearsBulgaria”MonumentinSofia,theMonumentto“Bulgarian-SovietFriendship”inVarna,andmanymore.However,theproblemconcerningsuchcontempo-

raryheritageisnotonlyBulgarianbutEuropean.Thepost-so-cialistcountrieshavethepotentialtorevealuniquearchitecturalachievements.Buzludzha,asoneofthesemasterpieces,couldeasily turn into a powerful example for the reassessment and hopefully for the preservation of other sites often described as darkheritage.

Historical background

Buzludzhaislocatedonamountainpeakatanaltitudeof1432m.ItsitsintheveryheartofBulgaria,theBalkanRange.Thissitereceivedhistoricalsignificancein1868,whenthelastfightoftherevolutionaryformation,theorganisedresistanceagainsttheOttomanyokeledbyHadzhiDimitar,tookplace.Theeventand

The Buzludzha monument during construction (photo Bedros Azinian)

The monument shortly after its opening in 1981 (photo Bedros Azinian)

Bulgaria 33

battlesiteweresymbolicfortheliberationofBulgaria.Knowing-ly, at the exact place the socialist-democratic party was founded in1891assuccessortotherevolutionaries.Furthermore,guerril-lamovementmemberswerekilledtherein1944.Accordingly,tocelebratethe90thanniversaryoftheparty’sfoundation,theHouse-MonumentofBuzludzhawasbuilt.1

Construction and utilisation

ArchitectGeorgiStoilov’sprojectwontheannouncedarchitec-tural competition and construction work started in 1974. The mountainpeakwasreducedbyninemetresand15000cubicme-tresofrockweredugoffforthelayingofthefoundationofthemonument.70000tonsofconcrete,3000tonsofreinforcedsteeland40tonsofgildedglasswereusedintheprocess.Qualifiedmilitaryforces,craftsmen,engineers,techniciansandvolunteersworkedinthreeshifts;labouringwascontinuousdayandnight.Atotalof6000peopleworkedforeightyears,dedicatedtothecommonobjective.Buzludzhawasthelife’sworkofthebestartists,engineersandarchitectsinthecountry.Theprojectwasfinancedbypublicdonations,becauseitwasanationalcause.On23August1981themonumentwasinauguratedduringanofficialcelebration.2

Duringtheeightyearsofuse,thebuildingwasvisitedbybe-tweentwoandthreemillionpeople,whichequatestomorethan1000 people per day. The monument was built to be a pantheon of socialism and was used for the political education of all so-cialgroupsandforritualpoliticaleventssuchasobtainingpartymembership. Thebuildingliessecludedonthemountainpeakandits60-me-

tre-wide spherical body symbolises a wreath, as if laid out on the mountaintopinrecognitionofthedescribedhistoricalevents,whereasthe70-metre-highpylonrepresentsawavingflagwiththeworld’sbiggestilluminatedpentagrams,whichhadtobeseenfrom as far away as north of the Danube and south from the Ae-geanSea.Withitsclearlydefinedarchitecturalshapes,advanced

lightsystem,uniqueacousticsandmorethan1000m2 of story-tellingmosaicpanelsthebuildingwasasynthesisofarchitectur-alandmonumentalartonthehighestlevel.3Thebuildingwasahugeengineeringachievementwithits60mfree-spanningsteelroofanditsmainbodyoverhanging20mandsupportedbyonlythreemainanchoragepoints.Thematerialsusedintheconstruc-tionwerefair-facedconcrete,whitemarbleforfloorandwalls,graniteplatesonthestaircases,andredvelvetadorningthewalls– all combined with the impressive architectural shapes contrib-utedtothestrongvisualandemotionalimpactofthemonument.

Present condition

Afterthecollapseofthecommunistsocialmodelin1989,thenewgovernmentneglected to lookafter thismostsignificantsymbolofapreviousideology.In1992,theMonumentalHouseBuzludzhawasnationalisedundertheTotalitarianOrganisations’PropertyConfiscationLawandthenclosed.Thelastemployeesweremaderedundantandthedoorswerelocked.Nowunprotect-ed, a number of thefts were recorded and vandalism soon started. Some incidents were politically motivated and born out of hatred towards communism, others were opportunistic and commercial-lymotivatedasmetalswerecollectedandsoldoffasscrap,andthirdly,somepeoplemerelyenjoyedtheactofdestructionforthesakeofit.Thissustainedneglecthasbroughtthebuildingtoitspresent condition – an abandoned and half-destroyed monument of a past time. A lot, but thankfully not all is lost. The monu-ment’ssupportingstructureappearstobestableandthemajorityof the mosaic panels are still in place. The white marble of the ritualhall’sfloorremainsaswellasthemarbleonthewallsofthe staircases. Luxury was replaced by ruin, but the frame of the monumentisstillthere.Ithaspreserveditsimpact,itsoverallimpressiveandinspiringappearance.Thisisduetoitsshapes,proportions,scale,lightconcept,itslocationandposition.Buzludzhawas included inan international rankingof the

33mostbeautifulabandonedplacesintheworldbyBuzzFeed,

View of the Buzludzha monument from afar (photo Nicola Miller)

Bulgaria34

whichgives ithighpopularityabroad.Thisrankinghasbeenviewedbyalmostfivemillionpeoplesofar.ManyofthemtraveltoBulgariafromtheothersideoftheworldtoseethisbeautifulruin.ForeignersoftendescribethemonumentasthebestthingtoseeinBulgaria.ThisisthereasonwhyBuzludzhareceivedaCertificateofExcellencefor2015bytripadvisor–thebiggestinternetsitefortourismintheworld.Hundredsofpeoplevisititeveryday,however,itsmassivetourismpotentialisignored.The doors have now been welded shut to prevent access into the building,becauseitisconsidereddangeroustovisitors,buttheyalwaysfindawaytoenterit.Meanwhilethecracksinthecon-cretearedeepening,theroofiscrumblingandthemosaicstonesarefallingoff.Everydayandparticularlyeverywinter,thereisanewchallengeforthemonument,becausethroughtheleakyroofandmissingwindowswind,rainandfrostcontinuetodestroythebuilding’suniquearchitecture.

Future function

WhatshouldbethefutureofthebiggestandmostimpressivemodernmonumentinBulgaria?Justaruin?Abandonedsymbolofthesocialistregimeandofthetransitiontodemocracy?Mul-tifunctionalconcerthall?Restaurantandnightclub?Luxuriousfive-star-hotel?Museumofcommunism?Inanycase,Buzludzhaneedsanewfunctioninordertobe

preserved;anewusethatunitesthedifferentviewswithinsoci-ety about the idea that historical and cultural monuments must bepreserved.Idevelopedtheconceptualdesign“Buzludzha–memoryoftime”asmymasterthesisinarchitectureattheTech-nicalUniversityBerlin.Itsuggeststheusageasamonumentofnationalhistoricalmemory,whereBulgarianhistorywillbepre-sentedclearlyandemotionally,methodicallycorrespondingtoandcomplimentingtheatmosphereoftheexistingarchitecture.Thebuildingwillnotjustserveasaframe,butinfactwillbethemostimportantandinfluentialexhibit.Partoftheconceptis a multifunctional hall that will be used as a forum for history andart.Thecirclesarounditwillrepresentdifferenthistoricalperiodsofthecountry.Apanoramicglasselevatorwillgivethevisitor the opportunity to explore the open deck at the top of the 70-metre-highpylon,revealingbreathtakingviewsoftheBalkanRange.

The concept proposes a conservation of the monument in its present condition and only minimal architectural intervention. A completerestorationofBuzludzhawouldnotonlybemuchmoreexpensive,butwouldbecommunicatingthewrongmessage.Theglamourwascreatedtoglorifyaregime,butboththeglamourandtheregimearenolongerwithustoday.Conservationinsteadofrestorationofthebuildingwillallowtosimultaneouslysavethe monument, but leave the traces of time and its connotations opentoeveryvisitorwhocaninterpretit,accordingtohis/herownunderstandingoftheperiod.

Preservation initiative “Buzludzha project”

AlthoughthisideahasattractedunderstandingandsupportbyinstitutionsandBulgarians,itsimplementationappearstobeverydifficult.Buzludzhadoesnothavethestatusofculturalvalueasitis not listed in the national monument lists. Only monuments with suchstatuscanbemanagedbytheMinistryofCultureandre-ceivefundsfortheirpreservation.Ownershipisanotherdifficult

topic,asBuzludzhaismanagedbyaregionalgovernorwhodoesnothaveanybudgetforsuchpurposes.Theotherinstitutionsdonot take responsibility for the problem as they do not own the building.TherearethreeoptionsforBuzludzha:governmentalinvolvement, business involvement or donations.TheinitiativetopreserveBuzludzhastartedasmymasterthe-

sisanddevelopedintoacauseofthe“BuzludzhaProject”Foun-dation, established with the purpose to preserve the monument and transform it into an active cultural site. Our newly founded NGOofferssolutions,organisesexhibitionsandroundtables,looksforsupportandtriestodepoliticisethisdifficulttopic.Lastyearnumerousexhibitions,presentingthepast,presentandpos-siblefutureofBuzludzhawereshowninthecapitalcityofSofia,butalsointhetownsnearBuzludzhainordertoinformabouttheplightofthemonumentandtosearchforsupportonalo-callevel.Themajorityoftheelderlyandmiddle-agedcitizenshavepersonalmemoriesoftheperiodwhenBuzludzhawasusedandactivelywantitspreservation,whereastheyoungergener-ationviewitasabizarreandinspiringstructure.Theytooareenthusiastic about this initiative. This leaves us all with the hope thatnoteverythingislostandpreservationofthemonumentisjustamatteroftime,buttimeistheworstenemyofthebuildingand national and international awareness and prompt actions are neededtosaveBuzludzha.

Contact: buzludzha.project@gmail.com For further information: www.buzludzha-project.com

Footnotes1 TodorovS.,MarinovM.,“ NationalParkBuzludzha”,[inoriginal“ НационаленпаркБузлуджа”],Kazanlak2009.

2 “ Horizont”journal,InterviewwithDelchoDelchev(thecon-structionsupervisorofBuzludzha),[inoriginal“ Хоризонт”],1981.

3 “ MonumentalHouseonthepeakBuzludzha”[inoriginal:Дом-паметникнавръхБузлуджа],Sofia1984.

Bulgaria 35

Reconstructions of Cultural Heritage Sites Based on ConjectureDeclaration of the Bulgarian National Committee (BNC) of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS)

Regarding: The present practice in Bulgaria of reconstructions of cultural heritage sites based on conjecture.

The Bulgarian National Committee of ICOMOS (consisting of 152 members – Bulgarian experts and institutions in the field of immovable cultural heritage preservation, members of ICOMOS International) categorically opposes the growing practice of cre-ating conjectural reconstructions of Bulgarian cultural heritage sites that have survived to the present in the form of ruins. As there is no credible information about what these sites originally looked like, their reconstruction based solely on conjecture con-stitutes an inadmissible falsification of the original.

In this connection, the BNC of ICOMOS declares the following: – The practice of reconstruction based on conjecture is in deep

contradiction with the principles and ethics of scientific resto-ration laid down in a series of international documents: The International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (The Venice Charter of 1964), accord-

ing to which restoration is based on ‘respect for the original’ and must ‘stop at the point where conjecture begins’; The Nara Document on Authenticity (1994); the Convention on Protec-tion of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972), rati-fied by Bulgaria, and the Operational Guidelines for its imple-mentation, Paragraph 86 of which stipulates: ‘Reconstruction is acceptable only on the basis of complete and detailed docu-mentation and to no extent on conjecture.’

– This practice of reconstructions based on conjecture leads to irreversible damage to the authenticity of cultural heritage sites, which constitutes their irrevocable quality and their value as unique historical testimony. Any damage to the authenticity of cultural heritage sites is damage to their very original and to the traces of their historical development. Hence, this is also a violation of the Bulgarian Cultural Heritage Act which re-quires ‘maximum preservation of the authenticity’ of cultural heritage sites.

– The decisions on reconstruction projects are made in a non-transparent manner, without being subjected to profession-al and public debate.

– The funding of these reconstructions is done through European funds even though it is at variance with the fundamental Euro-pean and world principles of cultural heritage preservation.

– The drafting of the funding programmes, the selection of pro-jects to be funded, their commissioning and implementation are usually carried out without the participation of experts in the field of scientific restoration.

Ongoing reconstruction at Krakra fortress, Pernik

Bulgaria36

– The allocation of significant EU funds for false reconstructions (approximately BGN 80 million according to data from the Ministry of Culture) is in stark contrast with the insignificant funds provided by the State for the preservation of authentic cultural heritage sites which are in a critical condition (BGN 500 000 according to data from the Ministry of Culture). This drastically distorts the national policy on cultural heritage preservation.

All this has destructive consequences for Bulgaria’s cultural her-itage and especially for archaeological sites, as it impairs their cultural value and unique specificity.

Considering this, the BNC of ICOMOS: 1. Appeals to the central and local government authorities to ter-

minate the practice of reconstructions of Bulgarian cultural heritage sites based on conjecture, which is incompatible with the contemporary restoration science.

2. Proposes that decisions at all phases of programming and pro-jects on immovable cultural heritage reconstruction be made in a transparent manner and after professional and public de-bates, with the participation of competent experts in cultural heritage preservation. In this respect the BNC of ICOMOS is available to provide all possible support.

3. Insists on explicit relevant amendments to the Public Procure-ment Act, the Cultural Heritage Act and other laws, in order to guarantee the preservation of cultural heritage according to the established international principles and standards, and to ensure conditions for the competition-based selection of the most suitable projects.

This Declaration was adopted by the General Assembly of the Bulgarian National Committee of ICOMOS on 6 June 2014.

Mr Rosen PlevnelievPresident of the Republic of Bulgaria

The Council of Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria

The National Assembly of the Republic of Bulgaria

Our Ref: GA/GJ/66 Paris, 8 April 2015

Subject: Endangered cultural heritage in Bulgaria

Your Excellencies,

During its most recent meeting held in Paris on 9–10 March 2015, the international ICOMOS Board was officially informed by the Bulgarian National Committee of ICOMOS about wor-rying trends in current policy approaches to conservation and restoration of cultural heritage in Bulgaria that have already substantially and visibly endangered a number of cultural mon-uments in the country. ICOMOS is also deeply concerned that these policy approaches may result in adverse effects on the Bulgarian cultural properties inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List.

ICOMOS understands that these changes in policy approaches have been motivated by an effort to support regional development in the country by increasing cultural tourism. While policies ben-efiting local communities are welcome, the cases presented in the report submitted to the ICOMOS Board make it immediately clear that this process has stimulated a widespread trend of large-scale conjecture-based reconstructions on top of the ruins of archaeo-

Ongoing reconstruction at Krakra fortress, Pernik Reconstructions at Trapesiza

Bulgaria 37

logical sites in Bulgaria. Rather than enhancing the significance of the monuments involved, the large-scale replacement of miss-ing original materials and forms is destroying the authentic spirit of these monuments and sites. By substituting original structures, these new constructions actually falsify history and cause an ir-reversible loss of authenticity. In addition, they may render any further scientific research impossible.

Such reconstructions go against internationally accepted sci-entific approaches to conservation and violate the principles of the Venice Charter, Nara Document of Authenticity as well as the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (paragraph 86), to which Bulgaria is a sig-natory.

Being deeply convinced that a sustainable policy in the field of heritage protection should be based on internationally ac-knowledged and broadly established principles of conserva-tion, ICOMOS appeals to the Bulgarian State to urgently under-take effective actions in order to:

1. Put an immediate halt to the on-going conjecture-based re-constructions in the country and ensure appropriate scientific assessment of their effects in order to guarantee that all fu-ture conservation and restoration works in Bulgaria follow accepted principles and ethics of scientific conservation, as defined in the Venice Charter and other ICOMOS and inter-

national doctrinal documents (World Heritage Operational Guidelines, § 86 in particular);

2. Guarantee expert involvement in national procedures for calls for tender under the EU Operational Programmes to en-sure that internationally acknowledged scientific principles of conservation are applied in all projects in order to min-imize risks that heritage authenticity and cultural values are destroyed;

3. Establish, with the comprehensive expert assistance of ICOMOS Bulgaria and all of ICOMOS more generally, a continuous training programme in the field of heritage conservation aimed at building relevant capacity within local authorities for addressing issues related to heritage protection and cultural tourism.

ICOMOS assures all cultural authorities in Bulgaria of our will-ingness to help and advise. As a first step in this direction, ICO-MOS is ready to contribute to this process by organizing an on-site mission to Bulgaria in support of a scientific assessment of the im-plementation of internationally accepted conservation principles to the cultural heritage of Bulgaria.

Yours sincerelyGustavo Araoz President

Reconstructions at Trapesiza

38

CROATIA

Diagnosis: The Culture of DenialThe Croatian conservation system is based on two elements: as an institutional activity, it has a venerable and dynamic history of morethan150years;duringthatperiod,itwasinfluencedbyahistoricistsenseofthepastandbyinvestmentprojectionsofstateleadersandadministrators.Itisthereforemarkedbyanunstablecoexistence of professional standards and politically proclaimed “highergoals”.ThelongevityofthesystemfoundedbyEmperorFranzJosephIalsoimpliessignificantruptures.Theserupturesare an important part of the Croatian history of conservation, im-perillingprofessionaldignity.Alongwithitsbesttraditions,con-servation in this country has been marked by denial, indolence, oblivion, threats to the authenticity of monuments and sites, and forbearance of professional standards. This has become obvious especiallyinthepast25years.

Croatia became an independent republic after the fall of the BerlinWallandtheethnicconflictthattoreapartwhatusedtobetheYugoslavFederation.Betweenthe1850sandthecollapseofCommunism, this South-eastern European borderland pursued a mythoftheWesternEuropeanvaluesystembycreatinganim-aginedcommunity.TheHabsburgMonarchyfosteredthisbypro-vidingearlyheritageexpertswithfunds,educationandprojectsinmonumentalcomplexessuchasDiocletian’sPalaceinSplitorthecathedralsinŠibenik,ZadarandPoreč.PartofCroatia’saffiliationtotheEuropeanconservationtra-

dition can also be seen in the active reception of innovative prin-ciplescreatedinAustriaandGermanyaround1900.ThefirstCroatianconservatorswere influencedbyRudolfEitelberger,AloisHauser,ThomasGrahamJackson,AloisRiegl,CorneliusGurlitt,GeorgeNiemann,JosephW.Kubitschek,MaxDvořákandGustavoGiovannoni.Thus,thespreadingofthealtruisticandemancipatoryconservationmovementfromtheGerman-speakingcountries across Europe was also felt in these colonised provinces. DuringacenturyandahalfofconservationtraditioninCroatia,the country experienced identity shifts from decolonisation to fullemancipation.Inthatprocess,thefin-de-siècle conservation theories were understood as an aid to build a collective identity. Thismeantthatconservationwasfrequentlyusedasatoolforpoliticalself-definitionorasdefencemechanism.Thispoliticalteleologyhasharmedtheprofessionalethosofconservatorstimeandagain.

Concepts promoted by the champions of the Central Europe-an conservation movement, such as democratised perception, cosmopolitismandage-value,hauntedCroatianexpertsuntil1945.UntilthebombardmentsoftheSecondWorldWar,asinPoland,ItalyandGermany,Croatianconservatorsdogmaticallyadhered to the motto Konservieren, nicht restaurieren, fostered byDvořák’sViennesestudents.

To understand the recent state of Croatian conservation it is necessarytostudythegenesisofitsnumerousruptures.Oneofthefirstmajorbreaksfollowedthecreationoftherevolutionary

communiststate in1945.Intheconservationcommunity, thepoliticalnewspeakwasaccompaniedbythemethodologicalre-visionsconceivedinItalyandPoland.Until1955thebasiccon-ceptsoftheItalianrestauro critico had implicitly been accepted inCroatia.Amoresignificantshiftwaspromotedaftercontactswith Polish experts were established. The reconstructions of Pol-ishhistorictownsencouragedanewinterventionisminCroatianconservation.Abandoningtheabstinentprincipleandacceptingthereconstructivedemandforphysicalandaestheticintegrityastoolsforsocialexperiments,thenewparadigmledtothefoun-dationoftheRestorationInstituteofCroatiain1966,whichhaskept its relevance until today.This ishowduring the1950sand1960samethodological

synchronismwasestablished.Intheprofessionalcommunityitgatheredtheadvocatesofboththeconservationandtheinter-ventionistprinciples.Generally, lifebetween the twogroupswas idyllic, especially in the 1970s when the so-called active approach to conservation was promoted, akin to the political programmeofsocialistself-governance.Bythatperiod,thesys-tem of conservation had attained an unprecedented success: from 1945elaboratedlegaldocumentswereadopted,inventoryingwasaccompanied by reconstruction interventions, and the possibili-tiesoffusingmonumentalformsandnewsocialistcontentswerestudied.Croatiastructureditsconservationsystembysettingupregionalandlocaloffices,anddevisingambitiousprojectspri-marilyforthesitesintheAdriaticregion.Thesocialistsystemwasalsomarkedbycorporativetrends.Sincetheendofthe1950sCroatian conservators established their association and published resultsinaspecialisedjournal.Thesystemledtotheinventory-ingofthousandsofmonuments.Althoughtherewerestillprob-lems of public appreciation of their work, conservators succeed-edininscribingthehistoriccentresofDubrovnikandSplit,aswellasthePlitviceLakesontheUNESCOWorldHeritageListin 1979. Immediatelyafterthefirstdemocraticelectionsin1990,Cro-

atia could not tackle the two important concepts of emancipa-tion in post-communist Europe, namely freedom and memory. Asmentioned,25yearsagobloodywarsmarkedtheendofthesocialistfederation.Thesetragiceventsrepresentedyetanoth-er discontinuity in the system. Croatian conservation was then confronted with war destructions, but also with a new political reality. This reality implied the paternalism of political elites at the birth of the Croatian Republic and its submissive acceptance amongprofessionals.Thisprocesswasmarkedbythesymbolicabandonment of the conservation tradition created around 1900, namelyintheprojectofthehistoricistrebuildingofthemediae-valMedvedgradCastle(fig.1)onthehillsabovethenewnation’scapital,thecityofZagreb.TheprojectcomparablewithBodoEbhardt’srebuildingofWilhelmII’sHohkönigsburginAlsaceandtheItaliancreationofAltare della Patria on the Roman Cap-itolineHillwascontrivedbythefirstCroatianPresidentFranjoTudjmanintheearly1990s.Atthesametime,itrepresentedare-

Croatia 39

nunciation,awilltomethodologicalregressionandasubmissionto political fantasies.

At that time, the Society of Croatian Conservators was abol-ished, which facilitated a political take-over. This coup-d’état wascodifiedin1999,whenthefirst lawontheprotectionofcultural properties in independent Croatia was enacted. The con-troversialandstillvaliddocumentinauguratedanewsystemof values for a new epoch: instead of the traditional concept of monument(evokingaspiritualdimensionoftheartefact),anewconcept of cultural property aimed at the material or, rather, the marketvalueofheritage.Inacountrywhosenationaleconomyrestsmainlyontourism,itisnowonderthattheimageofherit-agewasprimarilyseenasatoolforashort-termmendingofthestatebudget.Thisnewerabroughtabouttworadicalchanges:conceptu-

al (or terminological) andadministrative (the transformationof the professional community into a mass of bureaucrats with diminishedsocialreputationandnopowertopreventnegativetrends).Theconservationsystemwasfragmentedintomorethan20conservationoffices(insteadoffourregionalofficesexistinginthesocialistperiod).Thenewsystemwasanoffspringofthenon-transparent, unreformed and expensive state that stopped caringforprofessionalexpertiseanddialoguebetweenadmin-istrators, professionals and the public. Rare and praiseworthy successeswerenewinscriptionsonUNESCO’sWorldHeritageListbetween1997and2016,butlocalconservationachievementswere seldom incorporated in everyday public life.

Consequently,professionalshaveinmostcasesbeenpushedaside.Sincetheconflictinthe1990s,theirprofessionalismhasbeen substituted by political arbitrariness, hypocrisy and subor-dination.Naturally,therehavebeenexceptionstotherulebutnotconvincingenoughtopromptthechange.IfthereisasegmentofCroatiansocietythatexemplifiesthecrisisoftheyoungrepublic,itistheconservationsystem.Itismarkedbyparadoxes,simplybecause the political representatives, as key players in the pro-cess, still have no clear concept of how to preserve and interpret itsheterogeneousheritageforfuturegenerations.

Consequences in practice

Whatarethepracticalconsequencesofthissituation?Firstofall,the tradition of political denial has led to discontinuities in the perceptionandtreatmentofculturalheritageinCroatia.There-fore,theeffortsofthebestEuropeanexpertswhocaredforandprotectedthemonumentsoftoday’sCroatiaweremostlyforgot-ten or suppressed, as if they were considered uncomfortable or obsolete.ItisonethingtoignoreRiegl’sandGiovannoni’sre-portsonDiocletian’sPalaceinSplit,publishedin1903and1942respectively.Equallyproblematicistheindolencetowardsmonu-ments and sites that attracted those famous experts to this country inthefirstplace.AdministratorsoftheCroatianconservationsys-temthereforedevisedatwofolddenial:oneisbeingobliviousofthepreviousconservationideas(developedby“foreigners”),and

Medvedgrad castle after rebuildings in 1993 –94 (photo M. Špikić, 2010)

Croatia40

theotherisneglectingormisusingmonumentsandsitesthem-selves.Thesecondcaseisdependentonthefirstandcanbeseenindiverseforms:inadangerouscarelessnessoftouristinvest-ments,intheautocracyofsecularandecclesiasticalbeneficiaries,eveninnonsensicalexpertdecisions.Inanattempttoillustratethe seriousness of the situation only the most notable problems willbementionedthathaveappearedatCroatia’sUNESCOsitesin the past few years. Thethreatsrangefromindividualartworks towholeareas,

thatis,fromaestheticandsemantictoecologicalcontexts.TheCathedralofSaintJamesinŠibenikwasinscribedontheWorldHeritageListin2000(criteriaii,iiiandiv).In2012,thelocalbishop decided to replace the statues of the saints on the main portaloftheRenaissancecathedralwithoutconsultingthelocalconservation authorities. Despite heavy criticism and statements fromconservatorsin2013,thecopiesarestillinplace,harmingthe authenticity of the protected site. InthehistoriccityofTrogir,inscribedontheListin1997on

thebasisofcriteriaiiandiv,agroupofarthistorians,prelatesandconservatorsmadeasimilardecisionin2011.Encouragedbyanarchivaldocumentsuggestingthatuntiltheearly17thcentury

a statue of Christ stood in front of the Cathedral of Saint Law-rence,theydecidedtoputacopyofthe15thcenturystatueinthemiddleofthesquarethatusedtoserveasacemetery.Nowtheprofessional community was divided: not only were the authentic location,iconographyandfunctionofthesculpturecontroversial,but also the act of reproduction and its hypothetical location. Af-terfiercediscussionsamongthepublicandtheexperts’demandfortheremovalfromthesite,nochangewasmade,sothecopy,placed on top of a contemporary neo-Renaissance column, still standsinfrontoftheRomanesqueCathedral.

These examples may seem harmless in comparison with the plansforthedevelopmentofthetraditionallyuninhabitedSrdjHillabovetheOldCityofDubrovnik,inscribedin1979undercriteria ii, iii and iv. The problems of Dubrovnik are manifold: they range from tourismsustainability (excessivenumberofcruise-shipvisitors)andthepreservationofmonuments(men-aced by themass of visitors and “improved” byHollywoodblockbusters)toaggressiveinvestmentplans,suchastheprojectofagolf-resortandaccompanyingapartmentsonthehillaboveDubrovnik.ThankstolocalNGOstheproblemwasinternation-alised.Atthe2014WorldHeritageCommitteesessioninDoha,it

Šibenik cathedral, main portal, apostle without hand, state before substitution (photo P. Markovic, 2007)

Šibenik cathedral, main portal, apostle without hand, new work (photo P. Markovic, 2012)

Croatia 41

wasdecidedthatareactivemonitoringmissionwouldbesenttoDubrovnik.InOctober2015themissiontookplaceandinMarch2016areportwasissued.Thisambitiousproject,withinvestor,local and state political actors on one side, conservators on the otherandNGOsonthethird,isstillonholduntil“acomprehen-sivestudyandHeritageImpactAssessment(HIA)intermsofitscumulativeimpactontheOUVofthepropertyhasbeencomplet-edforthepropertyanditslargersetting.”

As we have seen, Croatia has a problem with non-transparent politics,silentoroverambitiousprofessionalsandmarginalisedcivicsociety.Ithasmuchtodowiththeevolutionofdemocrat-ic standards and self-respect, but also with respect towards the precedingculturalandpoliticalsystems.Thiscountrythereforeneeds help, even in the form of international pressure, to improve itsstandards,ortoretracethebesttraditionsinitslonghistoryofconservation.

Marko Špikić ICOMOS Croatia

42

GERMANY

Post-war Interior of St Hedwig’s Cathedral in Berlin at Risk of Being Irretrievably Lost

TwoyearsaftertheerectionoftheBerlinWalltherebuildingoftheStHedwig’sCathedralinEastBerlinwascompletedwithamoderninterior.HardlyanyotherbuildinginGermanyreactedtotheguiltandterroroftheNazierabycreatingsuchinspiringarchitecture.Now,theonlymoderninteriorofacathedralinGer-manydestroyedintheSecondWorldWarandmajorworkbythearchitectHansSchwippertisinneedofrepair.Thisexceptionalinterior space and thus also the readability of its multi-layered meaningsarethreatenedtobelostforeverifaremodellingisim-

plementedwhichthearchdioceseofBerlininitiatedin2013–14with an open realisation competition for the interior and the ca-thedral’ssurroundings.Builtbetween1747and1773,StHedwigisofsignificance

similartootherambitiouschurchprojectsofthetimeinEurope-ancapitals:StPaul’sinLondon,LesInvalidesandthePanthéonin Paris, or the Karlskirche in Vienna, all of them crowned by monumentaldomes.Prussia’sKingFredericIIhadchosenthisprominent construction site at the Forum Fridericianum and the typeofanantiquerotundabasedonthemodelofthePantheoninRome,thusmakingthefirstCatholicparishchurchinBerlinaftertheReformationasymbolofenlightenedreligiouspolicy.From1884-87theinteriorwasalteredbyMaxHasak.After

theestablishmentofthedioceseofBerlinin1930thechurchwaselevatedtotherankofacathedralandonceagainalteredin1930-32byClemensHolzmeister.In1943thecathedralwascomplete-ly destroyed, except the outer walls. The re-erection of the main domeasaconcreteconstructionwascarriedoutfrom1951byarchitectsandengineersFelixHinssen,HerbertDavid,HerbertEbsandTheodorBlümel,basedonthemodelofStStephaninKarlsruhe.HansSchwippert,oneoftheprotagonistsofrebuildinginGermany,wasinchargeoftheredesignoftheinteriorbetween1956and1963.WiththebuildingofthefirstGermanparliamentinBonnin1948-49(demolishedin1987)hehadalreadycreatedthefirstarchitecturalsymboloftheyoungFederalRepublic.

The interior of the cathedral is characterised by a breathtak-ingbuildingconcept:radicalutilisationofthecentrallyplannedbuildingandconcentrationontheverticalmainaxisbycreatingadoublechurchwithcrypt.Throughanopeninginthecentreofthebuildingthiscrypthasanimpactonthemainchurchinterior.Schwippertintegratedthelowerchurchintotheupperchurchandcreatedaringofchapel-likespacesusedforbaptism,thecom-memorationofthediocese’smartyrskilledduringtheNaziterror,theburialofthebishops,forconfessionandastreasury.Bytakinguptheshapeoftheroundrooflightthecircle-shapedopeningintheflooroftheupperchurchnotonlycorrespondstothesteeperdomerebuiltafterthewar,thuscreatingspaciousness.Italsoal-lows access to the space of the crypt and powerful references to the spiritual fundament of the church.

The crypt open for the commemoration of the martyrs shows thevisionarycharacterofthecreatedspace.Since1965ithasalso become a funerary monument due to the tomb of Provost BernhardLichtenberg.InthecathedralhehadprayedpubliclyforthosepersecutedbytheNazis.InOctober1941hewasarrestedanddiedonNovember5,1943duringhistransporttoDachauconcentrationcamp.In1996theclericwasbeatifiedbyPopeJohnPaulII,whohadprayedathistomb.Intherotunda,everythingisorientedtowardsthecentrepiece

oftheinterior:theliturgicalcentreneartheopeningtothelowerchurchwiththeconnectingaltarstele,carryingabovethemainaltar with cross and below a sacramental altar with tabernacle. AmongtheartistsinvolvedfromEastandWestGermanywere:

Interior of the St Hedwig’s Cathedral, 2015/16 (photo W. Bittner, Landesdenkmalamt Berlin)

Germany 43

apartfromHansSchwippert(Düsseldorf)theglassartistAntonWendling(Aachen), the textiledesignerandBauhausweaverMargarethaReichardt(Erfurt),themetalartistFritzKühn(EastBerlin), thegoldsmithsFritzSchwerdt andHubertusFörster(Aachen)aswellasthepainter,graphicartistanddraughtsmanJosefHegenbarth(Dresden).DeliberatelyquotingtheConfessioofStPeter’sinRomewas

donetoshowtheaffiliationtotheWorldChurch.Itistheonlymodern confessioinchurchhistoryandmoreoverquiteuniqueinthemodernhistoryofart.Thespatialarrangementandthefur-nishingsrepresentrevolutionarydynamicsandspiritualdepth.Inthecombinationofancientspatialdesigns(crypt,doublechurch,confessio,anddomeontopofthecircularbuilding)andexcep-tionalartisticimplementationinmaterialandformliesthegreatvividnessanddignityofthisinteriorspaceuntiltoday.Itwasaparticularventuretoimplementtheimpulsesofthe

SecondVaticanCouncil(1962–65)intheanti-clericalGermanDemocraticRepublic.Thecathedral’sconsistentlymoderninte-riorinthedividedcityofBerlinbearswitnesstothisventure.ArchbishopAlfredBengschconsecratedthemainaltaronNo-vember1,1963,i.e.onemonthbeforethedecisionsoftheCoun-cilvalidfortheentireCatholicChurchwerepublished.Ifthisinterior now needs to be defended, it is not merely a matter of heritageconservation.Instead,thisalsoconcernsecclesiologicaldimensions,becauseaself-conceptoftheChurchisnegotiated.ThiscathedralanditsinteriorinformerEastBerlinasseatofacross-border diocese at the time of the German partition symbol-ises the unity of Catholic Christians in East and West. Therefore, thismonumentisacombinationofhigharchitecturalqualityandtheologicalandpoliticalrelevance.Consequently,theinteriorinitsappearanceoftheearly1960s

should be preserved and carefully restored or modernised, where

necessary.Throughcarefulmaintenanceandrepairsthecathedralhasbeenpreservedalmostunaltered.Between2005and2008theouter shell of this monument of national relevance, an important post-warinterpretationofplastersurfacesimitatingnaturalstone,was cleaned and repaired. The interior deserves to be treated with thesamecare.Closingthecentralflooropening(asproposedintheprize-winningdesignofthearchitecturalcompetition)wouldequalnotonlyanextremereorganisationofthechurchinarath-erretrospectivesense,butalsothedemolitionofanoutstandingmonumentcarryingvanguardideasandhavingaforward-lookingimpact even today.

Sabine Schulte

The Surroundings are an Integral Part of the Monument – The Garden of the Magnus-Haus in Berlin is to be DestroyedInthe18thcentury,richfamiliesinBerlinusedtoliveintheverycentre,intownhousesboardingthestreetsandwithgardenstotherear. Few of them survived the enormous development of the city thatbeganinthemiddleofthe19thcenturyandthedestructionsofWorldWarII.OneofthoseveryrareexamplesistheMag-nus-HausattheKupfergraben.ThebuilderwasthePrussianKingFredericII,whoin1753hadtheprestigioushousebuiltaccording

The interior seen from above (photo W. Bittner, Landesdenkmalamt Berlin)

Germany44

tothedesignsofthefamousarchitectGeorgWenzeslausvonKno-belsdorff.Thetownhouseisatypicalbaroquebuilding,featuredwith a Corinthian colossal order; its west façade overlooks a typ-icalpleasuregarden.ThehousereceiveditsnamewhenthephysicistGustavHein-

richMagnusbecameitsowner.Afewyearslater,in1845,theGerman Physical Society was founded there. When they set up theirowncompanySiemensAGin1847,WernervonSiemensandGeorgHalskewerecloselyassociatedtothesociety.Finally,theMagnus-HauspassedintotheownershipofthefederalstateofBerlin.Thehouse,butnotthegarden,isinscribedinthelistofprotect-

edmonuments.However,theimportanceofthegardenhasnot

beenignored:theentirelotispartofaDenkmalbereich(listedconservationarea)andalsoofanErhaltungsgebiet(areaprotectedbybuildingregulations);italsobelongstothebufferzoneoftheWorldHeritageMuseumIslandBerlin.Infact,thegardenformsanintegralpartoftheensemble.Itislikeasmallpark,surroundedby a wall; several tall trees have a spatial impact on the house and theneighbourhood.Formerlywell-groomed,ithasbeenneglectedinthelastyears.Thegardenispartofatypologicalunity–thehouse is not understandable without the wide open space in its originalexpanse.Thecaseshowstheimportanceofpreservinganyfeatureworthprotectinginthesurroundingsofaheritageobject.Itwasnoticedandnegativelyreceivedwhenthefederalstate

ofBerlinsoldthehousewithitsgardentotheSiemensAGwith-

The rear front of the Magnus-Haus and the open space of the garden belonging to it

The Remise (depot-building) gives an idea of the scale of the garden

First detailed plans for the project to erect a large office building in the garden

Germany 45

out any assurance that the historical value of the whole property wouldberespected.Itisascandalthatthecompanycurrentlyplanstoerectabuildingoffiveorsixstoreysinthegardeninordertohaveaprestigiousofficeintheheartofthecapitalcity.First intentions were made public in 2012; now the plans have become realistic.It ismostdisturbing to seeaprivate companydisregarda

city’spublicinterestinitsintactculturalheritage.Theprevious-lyagreedpreservationplansarecallouslybeingneglected.Thecompany’splansactagainsttheperceptionoftheimportanceofhistoricalgardensandparks,ashasbeendevelopedinthelastdecadesandbecomegenerallyaccepted in themeantime.Byerectingatallbuiltvolumeintherearpartofthegardenthein-dispensable relationship with the house would be destroyed.Itisalsohardtobelievehowthecity’sgovernmentandadmin-

istrationdealtwiththecompany’sdemandforageneralconstruc-tion permission. The competent board and all professional ser-vicesclearlytookpositionagainsttheproject,whichviolatestheexistingrules.However,theMayorgaveinstructionsto“helptheinvestor”andacompliantadministrativedirectordeliveredthepermitimmediately.Thatbehaviourofsubmissionwasstronglycriticised in the media, by political initiatives and by the broader public. Unimpressed,Siemensorganisedanarchitecturalcompetition.

Courageously,inanopenletter,alltheimportantarchitecturalassociations recommended that their members should careful-ly consider whether they should participate in a procedure that woulddestroyahighlyimportantpieceoflandscape-architecture.Whiletheselinesarebeingwritten,theprocedureisstillopen.

ThegardenspacebelonginginseparablytotheMagnus-Hausisinextremedanger.Thecaseshowsthepowerofmajorcompanies,even in developed democracies, and the weakness of political representatives.Theculturalheritagethatbelongstothepublicissacrificed.Oncedestroyed,itcanneverberecoveredagain.

Bernhard Furrer

The Ledigenheim, Rehhoffstraße, HamburgThe LedigenheimintheRehhoffstraßeinHamburg’sNeustadtisthelastsurvivingexampleofitstype.Itwasbuiltin1912toprovide112rooms(eachofeightsquaremeters)combinedwithacommunalrestaurantandlibraryaswellasdifferentsocialser-vices for men who had no other form of accommodation in the city. The Verein Ros e.V. was founded in 2011 to take forward anumberofculturalandeducationalprojectsinHamburgandhasfocusedonsavingtheLedigenheim from redevelopment by a Danish company so that it can be refurbished and continue to providemuch-neededhousingforpeopleinneed.

The Ledigenheim

The concept of the Ledigenheim(orhomeforsinglemenandwomen)wasdevelopedfromthe1870sonwardsasaresponsetogrowingconcernsovertheinabilityofurbanhousingmarketsto

Historic view of the foyer, 1913 (photo Hamburgisches Architekturarchiv, Slg. Koppmann)

Historic view of the Ledigenheim, 1913 (photo Hamburgisches Architekturarchiv, Slg. Koppmann)

Germany46

copewithanunprecedentedincreaseinpopulationgrowthfuelledincreasinglybyin-migration.Hamburg,likemanyotherport-cit-iesandmanufacturingcentresintheGermanEmpire,attractedagrowingnumberofworkers,manyofwhomcamefromruralar-eas,itshinterlandorfromfurtherafield.Theywereoftenyoung,unskilled, and with little experience of daily life in a rapidly de-velopingurbanmetropolis.TheLedigenheim was therefore seen asanimportantsolutiontoanacutehousingproblemandwaspartofawiderstrategyofhousingreform,particularlyintheperi-odbetween1890andtheoutbreakoftheFirstWorldWar.Homesforsinglemenandwomenwerebuiltbyindividualemployers,asameansofstrengtheningtheircontroloflabour;bytheChurch,in order to improve the lives of skilled workers; and by munici-palauthorities,suchasHamburg,tocaterfortheaccommodationneedsofsinglemenwhowereseekingtoestablishthemselvesinthe local labour market. Inmanycasestherewasastrongemphasisonstrengthening

communitylife.NotonlydidtheLedigenheim have a library and eatingfacilities,ithadaseparatereadingroom,aroomforplay-ingbilliard,alittleshopwithafriendlyshopkeeper,aswellasaporterwhowasresponsibleforkeepinganeyeontheresidentsandtheirneeds.Tothisextentitwasalivinginstitutionlocatedclosetothecity’sharbourareawhichcontinuedtoprovidegoodqualityaccommodationforsinglemenwithinawidercommuni-ty-basedcontext.Itenabledsinglemen,whethertheyweresail-ors or dockworkers, to live a life without undue hardship and it provided a sheltered home in a family-like framework. Overtime, however, the clientele of the LedigenheiminHamburgchanged:duringtheWeimarRepublicanumberofpolicecadetsandfire-menwereaccommodated,whileduringtheNazidictatorshipitissaid to have been used by the Gestapo. AlthoughtheconceptoftheLedigenheim was a product of the

late 19th century, it still has a real relevance as a response to theacuteneedsofourtime.Majorcities,suchasHamburg,arestillconfrontedbyseverehousingproblems,particularlyintermsofprovidingsufficientaccommodationforyoungpeople,in-mi-grants,andthosewhohavedifficultiesinestablishingthemselvesinurbansociety.InHamburg,asinotherurbancentres,thereisachroniclackofaffordableaccommodationandthegrowingnum-ber of apartment seekers has contributed to a rapid rise in rental levels.Atthesametime,thegrowthofwealthinequalityinWest-ernsocietyhasbeenaccompaniedbyincreasinghomelessnessanddestitution.Insuchacontext,thepreservationandextensionofaffordableurbanhousingremainapriorityinthe21stcentu-ry.Indeed,thehomeforsinglemenintheRehhoffstraße,withitsconceptofcommunity-living,continuestofillanimportantgapinHamburg’shousingprovisionwithtangiblesocio-culturalbenefits.

A home under threat

Despite the fact that the concept of the Ledigenheim is still di-rectlyrelevanttothehousingneedsofourtime, there have been repeated attempts in the last few years to close it, primarily be-

Detail of the facade (photo Ros)

The foyer today (photo Ros)

Germany 47

causeofspeculativeprofitmotives.Thehomehasbeenneglect-ed for many years and is therefore now severely at risk, both in termsofitsbuildingfabricandthesurvivalofthesocialidealthatunderpinneditsoriginalestablishment.Necessaryrepairshave not been made and the community-based services have been abolished almost entirely. The Ledigenheim and its resi-dentshavebeenbadlyaffectedbythesedevelopments.In2009,the home was sold to a Danish investor, who had no real inter-estinretainingitshistoricfunctionasahomeforsinglemen.Naturally,thiscausedagreatdealoffearandanxietyamongstits mostly elderly residents who were very confused and wor-riedaboutwhatwasgoingtohappentothem.Asneighbours,wewereveryconcernedabouttheirplightandofferedtoprovidewhateversupportmighthelpthemtosafeguardtheirinterestsandpreserveacommunityhousingconceptthatwasstillhelpfulandbeneficialatthestartofthe21stcenturyasithadprovedtobe in the German Empire.

A new perspective

Eventually,wedecidedwiththesupportofthehome’sresidents,tocontactthenewowner.Thisprovedtobeaturningpoint,be-causeduringourdiscussionstheideaoftryingtoconverttheLedigenheimbacktoanon-profitformofownershipemergedasapossiblesolutiontothecurrentcrisis.Initialtalkswithvar-ious experts and political leaders in our district demonstrated thattherewasagreatdealofsupportandactiveencouragementforthisidea.Numerousmeetingsfollowed,particularlywiththedistrictofficialsinHamburgandtheDanishowner,whichfo-cusedontwokeyquestions:theviabilityofanon-profitformofownership;andwhowouldtakeoverlong-termresponsibilityforthehistoricresidence.Bynowwewerenotonlyconvincedthat the concept of the Ledigenheim made sense as a charitable enterprise,butthatitmightbepossibletorestoreandexpandthisuniquesocio-historicalmonumentinthelongterm!Asafirststep,inathree-way-meetingwiththeownerandthecityauthoritiesweagreedtoworktogethertotrytosavethehomeandtorevivetheoriginalconceptthroughachangeinowner-shipanditstransfertoanon-profitorganisation.Animmediateand timely improvement for the residents was the reintroduc-tionofsocialservicesinthehomeforthefirsttimeinoverten years.

The long-term management of the Ledigenheim

Althoughthedesirabilityofpreservingandrestoringthehomehadbeenagreed,therewasstillsomeuncertaintyoverhowitslong-termmanagementshouldbesecured.Becausewehadbeencampaigningforseveralyearsforitspreservationandretentionasahomeforsinglemen,itwassuggestedbymanypeoplethatweshouldassumeresponsibilityforensuringitscontinuedrole.Inevitably,thiswasaverypersonalissueforus,andwehadal-readybeenundertakingmostoftheworktosecurethefutureofthe home and the welfare of its inhabitants. We felt that it would notberighttoexpectotherpeopleororganisationstotakeonthisresponsibility,sowehavecommittedourselvestomanagingthefuture of the Ledigenheimasanon-profit,charitableinstitution.Wehavethereforedecidedtobuythehomeandhavgoneontoestablishanon-profitpublicfoundation,‘Ros’,asameansofse-curingtheLedigenheim’s longtermpreservation.

Long live the Ledigenheim

Aconsiderableamountofmoneywillberequiredtopurchasethe home from its Danish owner and to restore the fabric of the building.Thankstothesupportofmanyindividuals,localtrusts,and individual companies, we have already made considerable progressinraisingfundstosecurethefutureoftheLedigenheim asahomeforsinglemenindesperateneedofaccommodationwithin a community-based framework. Forthisreason,wearelookingforsupporterswhowouldbe

willingtofundthepurchaseandauthenticrestorationofthehome–peoplewhocanhelptogivetheLedigenheim, as a social institution, thenecessarymeansandopportunitiestofulfilitshistoricfunc-tionbyprovidingsinglemenwithalow-cost,family-like-home.

Renew and develop the Ledigenheim !

Wewouldlikeinfuturetobothmodernisethehomeasauniqueculturalmonumentandtotechnicallyre-equipthebuilding,sothat its historic community role can be re-established. This would bringbacktolifetheuniqueresidentialformrepresentedbytheLedigenheim which has catered for the accommodation needs of dock workers, seafarers and craftsmen within the harbour-ware-housedistrictofHamburgsince1912.ItwouldalsoreinforcetheroleoftheHamburgMuseumbyprovidingauniqueexampleofabuildingformthatreflectsthewiderprocessofhousingreforminHamburgpriortotheoutbreakoftheFirstWorldWar.TheLe-digenheimisalivingtestimonytoacriticalperiodinHamburg’shistory:itistodayalreadyofgreatinteresttoschoolgroupsandpeopleofHamburgingeneral,andisboundtobecomeanimpor-tantheritageattractiontothecity’smanyvisitorsinterestedinarchitectureandthesocialrelevanceofbuildingdesign.Moreim-portantly,ifwecanachieveourobjective,auniqueculturalmon-umentinHamburgwillhavebeensavedforfuturegenerations.

Prof. Robert W. LeeAntje Block Jade Peter Jacobs

The Multihalle in Mannheim

The so-called MultihalleinMannheimwaserectedasatempo-rarybuildingforthenationalgardenshowin1975.Itstillexists;however,itsconditionisdeterioratingfast.Onthewhole,incon-trasttostructuresfortradefairs,buildingsforone-timeexhibi-tionssuchasgardenshowsorWorldExhibitionsareconsideredtobetemporary.Inmostcases,thisclassificationhastodolesswiththeconstructionthanwithchangedtermsofuseatacertainsite.Therefore,“temporary”didnotpreventtheheritageauthorityinBaden-WürttembergfromputtingtheMultihalle on the monu-ment list at the end of the 1990s.

The Multihalle has stood for more than 40 years and was used mostofthetimeforvariouspurposes,untilthecityofMannheimasownersuddenlystoppedthemaintenancewithoutgivinganyexplanation.TheofficeCarlfriedMutschler+PartnerfromMann-heimincooperationwiththelandscapearchitectHeinzEcke-brechtfromFrankfurt/Mainhadbeenthewinnersofanational

Germany48

architecture competition. They were commissioned to do the landscapingaswellastodesignthemanysmallandlargebuild-ingsforexhibitions,cafés,andinfrastructurethatarenecessaryforoperatingalargegardenshow.Anumberofalternativeswereconceivedforacentrallargeroofing,allofthemaslightweightconstructions.Finally,thedesignofagridshellmadeofwoodwasselected,developedbythearchitectFreiOttofromStuttgart,whoonlyafewyearsbeforehaddesignedandrealisedaspec-tacularpavilionfortheExpo67inMontreal.Bothconstructions,thetensilestructureinMontrealandthegridshellinMannheim,were novelties on the world market. The constructions and the architectural forms were praised and admired by experts and the generalpublic.NotwithoutreasontheMultihalle was popularly knownasthe“miracleofMannheim”.

The Multihalle ismadeupofagrateofsquaremeshesturningintorhombusesinordertofollowthecurvature.9,500squareme-treswerecoveredwithafreespanof60metres.Untilthen,suchdimensions for a wooden shell had never been achieved. This designprincipledevelopedbythePritzkerPrizewinnerFreiOtto(d.2015)allowsatotallyfreegroundplanwithdifferentroomheightsandnot leastacompleteprefabricationusingstraightbars.Fortheroofingofthegridshellaplasticfoilwasused.Inaddition,methodsforcalculationandgeometricdeterminationwerenecessary;theseweredevelopedbytheengineersLinkwitzinStuttgartandOveArupinLondon.Astherewerenocompara-tivecalculationprogrammes,anarchaicmethodusingsuspendedweightshadtobeappliedforthestatictest.Consequently,thecalculationwasasofarunknownmethodologythathadalastinginternationalinfluenceonthetechnologyofwide-spanningstruc-tures.ThedesignmodelisnowkeptattheDeutschesArchitek-turmuseuminFrankfurt/ Main.

The MultihalleinMannheimisatrisk.Woodenstructuresaresensitive to humidity; however, if looked after well they can be preservedforaverylongtime–asisprovedbycenturies-oldhalf-timberbuildingsandrooftrusses.ItisnotunderstandablewhythecityofMannheimandtheregionwithmillionsofinhab-itantsshouldn’tbeabletofindanadequateuse.Thesameappliestothenecessaryrenovation,whichisbecomingmoreandmoreexpensiveandcomplicatedeveryday,althoughthediscussionabout the Multihalle’s preservationhasbeengoingonforyears.ItseemsjustifiedtodemandthatGermanyasoneoftheworld’s

wealthiest industrial countries takes care of the works of its inter-nationally renowned architects. There is no doubt that the Multi-hallecanbepreservedandisalsoparticularlyworthpreserving.

Berthold BurkhardtThe Multihalle at night (photo Frei Otto, Warnbronn)

Inside view of the Multihalle (photo Architektenkammer Stuttgart)

49

IRELAND

Wall-paintings in Ireland: Provisional Stocktaking of their Endangered Condition

Irelandiswell-knownforitsmanyarchaeologicalsites.Forin-stance,theStoneFortsandalignmentsandMegalithictombsatNewgrange,CroaghPatrick,inFenaghBeg,atKnowth,atDúnDúchathairontheislandofInishmore,ortheBurrendolmensareallofinternationalrenown.Incontrast,aseriesofartefactsthathavegenerallybeenforgottenaretobefoundamongthemedi-evalwall-paintingsstillextantinanumberofancientchurchesthroughoutIreland.ItisalsonotwellknownthatanumberofhomeoftheIrishascendencyclassstillretainwall-paintings.Generallyspeaking,itcanbearguedthatthislackofawarenesshasitsrootsintheReformationofHenryVIIIandElizabethI.Duringthatperiod,ecclesiasticalwall-paintingsweredestroyedorforbiddeninEnglishchurches.Theonlyreproductionsthatwere allowed were the Ten Commandments and the royal coat

ofarms,andnothingelse.InIreland,itisnotuncommontofindnewerAnglicanchurchesdirectlyadjacenttoanoldchurch,abuildingthatwouldoftenhavebeendestroyedbyCromwell’stroops. And, of course, this new church would have no wall-paint-ings.Thefewwall-paintingsIknowof,orthatIhaveworkedonin

Ireland,aretobefoundeitherinchurchesandmonasteriesfromthePre-Reformationperiodorintowercastles.Thepaintingsfoundattheselocationsareusuallysaidtodatebacktothe15thor16thcenturies,dateswhich,inmyexperience,haveoccasion-ally proven to be incorrect.Throughouttheperiodofthe1990s,theRepublicofIreland

receivedgenerousfundingfromtheEuropeanUnion.However,throughoutthisdecadeitwasnotonlytheroadnetworklargeinfrastructuralprojectsthatreceivedassistance.Extensivefund-ingwasalsomadeavailableforspecificnationalculturalheritageprogrammes.Forinstance,in1989,ontheoccasionofthe800thanniversaryofthefoundingofanabbeybyCathalCrobhdeargUaConchobair,theKingofConnacht,theCistercianOrderwassuccessfulinacquiringfundsfortheconservationofwall-paint-

Ardamullivan Castle with “climate-active” curtains

Wall-painting at Abbeyknockmoy

Ireland50

ingsinAbbeyknockmoy.ThisturnedouttobeastartingpointfortheconservationofthisparticularelementofIreland’scul-turalheritage.Twoyearslater, theAbbeyknockmoyinitiativewasfollowedbyaprojecttoconservethewallpaintingsatClareIslandAbbey–onceagain,thiswasontheinitiativeoftheCis-tercianOrder.Thisrestorationandconservationprojectcontinuedthroughoutthe1990s.Throughoutthisperiod,wallpaintingsatcastlesandbuildings

asfarapartasArdamullivan(Galway),Askeaton(Limerick),Bar-ryscourt(Cork),Ballyportry(Clare),Cashel(Tipperary),Cobh(Cork),Clonmacnoise(Offaly),JerpointAbbey(Kilkenny),Lis-donagh(Galway),andDunLaoghaire(Dublin)wereconserved.Inmostcases,Iwasinvolvedasconservationistand/orasadvisor.TheproblemnowisthatsincetheEuropeanfundinghasbeen

drastically reduced, the aftercare for these monuments has also, moreorless,cometoanend.InthecaseoftherestorationofwallpaintingsatClareIslandAbbey,aproposalforitsaftercarewasphrased(2000)asfollows:“Thestabilisationphasehasbeencompleted; maintenance and restoration can now be taken into consideration.”Thiswas16yearsago.In2000,anyfurtherconservationatClareIslandwasinterrupt-

ed so that the restoration remained incomplete. Since then, Clare IslandAbbeyhassufferedconsiderablyduetoalackoffollow-upcare.ThisismadeallthemoredisappointingsincetheAbbey,historically,isanextremelyimportantandinterestingvenue–notleastbecauseofitsconnectionstoGraceO’MalleyandtheO’MalleyClan.Thislackofandpressingneedforaftercarecan

beappliedtomostofthevarioussitesmentionedabove.Moreexamples could easily be added to the list.Withinthepowersthatbe,ofIrishNationalMonuments,and

withintheOPW(OfficeofPublicWorks)Ihavearguedfor,buthave not been able to pave a way for a comprehensive conser-vationapproachtothesemonuments.Myaspirationtoprovidesome form of advisory role, from which conservation of these objectsmightbenefit,hasfallenondeafears.Ingeneral,decisionsaboutwhatworksoughttobedoneare

left to thestaffofregional“depots”.Whilemembersof thisstaffarechargedwith takingcareofdailymaintenance,e.g.lawn-mowing,generalmaintenance,preservationofthefabricofbuildings,theyare,however,intheirrolesasgeneralcrafts-men,ill-equippedtodealwithspecificdemandsregardingtheconservationofhistoricbuildings.Aconsequenceofthisisthatmanydecisionstakenconcerningfollow-upcare,particularlyofwall-paintings,arebasedonalackofspecificinformation,orknowledge,andareoftenwrong.Inregardtothewall-paint-ings,aneedforactioniseithernotrecognisedoris,unwittingly,ignored.Thus,ittook14years,andthankstotheadvocacyofMichael

Petzet,torecognisethatconservation-basedaftercareneededtobecarriedoutatClareIsland.Theinadequatemeasuresthathavealready taken place include:– Inadequatewaterdrainageontheroof,thuscausinglargequan-

tities of rainwater to remain in the masonry;–Microbiologicalingress,aconsequenceofthedampness,hav-

Ardamullivan Castle, with curtains rolled up the situation becomes visible as immediately after the conservation. The ceiling is new and unneces-sary; the electric heating even dangerous. What is still missing, is at least a minimal presentation of the wall-paintings.

Ireland 51

ingbeentreatedwithpesticides,includinginteriorsurfacesandaroundthewallpaintings;

– Installationof thermostatically controlled electric heating,causingaseriousincreaseinsaltefflorescence,whichisseri-ouslydangerousforthepaintedplastersurfaces.Ifatall,anyelectricheatingshouldbecontrolledonlybyahygrometer;

– Erectionofalargelyuselessandextensivebarrierwastopre-ventvisitorsfromenteringtheruinsofthesacristy;

– Alackofeffectivemaintenanceofthewindows;and– Inadequatedisposalofrefuse.

Abouttheonlymeasurethatdoesmakesenseisavisitors’plat-form in the choir.Moneyinvestedinrestorationbecomessuperfluous,oratleast

misspent,whenanadequatecare-plan,withadequate,long-termfundingisnotincludedinacomprehensiveconservationplan.Aparallelcanbedrawnwithanewlybuiltsuspensionbridge.Ifthereisnolongtermcare,abridgewilleasilybecomeahazard.InArdamullivan,forinstance,aminimalconservationofthe

wallpaintingswasfollowedbythereconstructionoftheoriginalroofandtwowoodenceilings.Anelectricalsupplywasdrawnfrom over one kilometre away; a thermostat-controlled electric heatingwasinstalled;andthecarparkforvisitorswasenlarged.However,thesiteremainsclosed,becausethereisnoonethereto

openittovisitors.Mostimportantlyofall,thefactthatthecon-servationwaslimitedtoaminimum,withoutacontinuingcare-plan,meansthat,today,thepaintingsarebarelyvisibleanymore.InAbbeyknockmoy,wheresomeyearsaftertherestorationI

documentedtheconditionofthepaintings,inordertoprovethenecessityofanaftercareplan,nothinghashappenedsince1990.Forexample,duringmylastvisit,in2014,thedrainagearoundthechoir,onceagain,wascompletelyblocked.And,onceagain,thepaintingsarealmostentirelyinvisibleandarebeginningtoshownewsignsofdamage.Thisisnotwithstandingthefactthatonly20%ofthepotentiallypaintedplastersurfacesinthechoirweretreated.Also,thoughsmallinsurfacearea,someastonish-inglyclearfragmentsoforiginalcolouringcanstillbefound.The lesson is obvious.Those fragments ofmedievalwall

paintingsstillextantinIrelandhavebeensubjectedtoinadequaterestoration and conservation plans.Thesewall paintings arenotstaticobjects.Theyarelivingartefacts,existingincontin-uallythreateningmicro-environments.Anyplanforrestorationandconservationmustincludedetailedcostingsforcontinuingprogrammesofmaintenanceandcare.Aftercareplansmustbedrawnupbyexpertsintheareaofwall-paintingconservation.Continuingfollow-upcaremustonlybeundertakenbystaffthathavebeeneducatedandcoachedinsuitabletechniques,undertheguidanceofconservationexperts.

Christoph OldenbourgICOMOS Germany

Clare Island Abbey

52

MALI

Reconstruction de mausolées à Tombouctou après la crise de 2012 : le rôle des communautés

1. Introduction

LeMaliavécurécemmentunecrisemultidimensionnelle.Cettecriseaétéparticulièrementressentiedanslesrégionsdunorddupayslorsdesonoccupationpardesgroupesarméesd’avril2012àfévrier2013.Tombouctou,citémillénairedunordduMali,villehistoriqueetrichedesaculture,laperledudésert,avusonpatri-moineculturelmatérieletimmatérielsoumisàdegravesmenacesetdégradationpendantcettepériode.L’undesobjectifsrecherchéparlesoccupantsétaitlanégation

de leur identité culturelle. Ainsi plusieurs interdictions furent im-poséesauxpopulations:l’interdictiondecélébrationsreligieuses(tellequeleMaouloud,naissanceduProphèteMahomet:unedesplusgrandesfêtesreligieusesàTombouctou),l’interdictiondepratiquestraditionnellescommelecrépissageannueldesmos-quéesdelaville,l’interdictionauxjeunesdepratiquerlefootball,d’écouterlamusiqueetc.LeshabitantsdeTombouctouontrésistéenrefusantdecollaboreraveclesoccupants.N’ayantpuobtenirlasoumissiondespopulationslocales,lesoccupantspardépitet/ouparvengeance,s’enprirentdélibérémentauxsymboleslesplus visibles de leur culture. Parmi lesgravesatteintesaupatrimoinecultureldeTom-

bouctou,quatorzemausoléesontétédétruitsetlapratiquetra-ditionnelleducrépissageannueldesmosquées fut interdite,plusde4200manuscritsanciensfurentbrûlésetlemonument ALFAROUK,grandsymbolemythiquedelavillefutdémoli,etc. Lespremièresdestructionsdemausoléesonteulieule30juin

2012etlesdernièresle23décembre2012.Signalonsqu’unat-tentat–suicide,chosequelacélèbrecitén’avaitjamaisconnue,aébranlélavillele28septembre2013.LeprésentarticletraitedelareconstructiondesmausoléesdétruitsàTombouctouetdupremiercrépissagedelamosquéedeDjingareyberàlalibérationdelavilleenaoût2013.

2. Contexte / rappel

LestroisgrandesmosquéesetseizemausoléesdeTombouctousontinscritssurlaListedupatrimoinemondialdel’UNESCOdepuis1988.LeMalidisposedetexteslégislatifsetrèglemen-tairespourlagestion,laprotectiondesonpatrimoineculturel.ConformémentàlaLoiN°10-061portantmodificationdelaLoiN°85-40/AN-RMpromulguéle30décembre2010,lepatrimoineculturelduMaliestdéfinicommel’ensembledesbiensculturels

Mausolée Alpha Moya avant démolition (photo Sane Chirfi Cisse, juillet 2005)

Mausolée Alpha Moya détruit

Mausolée Alpha Moya, travaux de reconstruction (photo Madou Koné)

Mali 53

matérielsetimmatérielsqui,àtitrereligieuxouprofane,revêtentuneimportancepourl’histoire,l’art,lapensée,lascienceoulatechnique.LeMaliaégalementadhéréàplusieursconventionsculturelles,

notamment :– LaConventionde1954relativeàlaprotectiondesbienscultu-relsencasdeconflitsarmés,ratifiéepar leMali le18Mai1961etsonDeuxièmeProtocolede1999,auquelilaadhéréen2012 ;

– LaConventionde1970relativeàlaluttecontreletraficillicitedesbiensculturels,ratifiéeparleMalien1987;

– LaConventionde1972relativeàlaprotectiondupatrimoinemondial,cultureletnaturelratifiéeparleMalien1977;

– LaConventionde2003relativeàlasauvegardedupatrimoineculturelimmatérielratifiéeparleMalien2005.

– LaConventionde2005relativeàlaprotectiondeladiversitédes expressions culturelles

3. Reconstruction des mausolées

LeMalientantqu’EtatpartiedelaConventionde1972,recon-nait sonobligationàassurer l’identification, laprotection, laconservation,lamiseenvaleuretlatransmissionauxgénérationsfutures du patrimoine culturel et naturel situé sur son territoire, commelestipulel’article4delaconvention.AinsileGouverne-mentdelaRépubliqueduMalietlespartenairestechniquesetfi-nanciersainsiquedesinstitutionsspécialiséestellesquel’UNES-CO,ontaffichéleurvolontédegérerlepatrimoinecultureldesrégionsdunordtouchéparleconflitarméde2012etlacrisequis’enestsuivie.

Le processus de reconstruction des mausolées comprend deux grandesétapes:d’abordles«Etudes»etensuiteles«Travauxdereconstruction».

4. Phase « Etudes »

L’unedespremièresactionsmenéesparleMinistèrechargédelaCulture,àtraverslaDirectionNationaleduPatrimoineCultu-rel«DNPC»avecl’appuidel’UNESCO,aétédeprocéderàuneévaluationdel’étatdedégradationet/oudedémolitiondesouvragesdupatrimoineculturelbâtiàTombouctouetGao.Lesprestationsdelaphase«Etudes»ontétéconfiéesàdesbureauxd’étudesmaliens.Ainsideuxéquipesd’expertsnationauxfurentenvoyéesàTombouctou:unepremièreaumoisdemai2013etunesecondeenaoût2013.Cesmissionsavaientpourobjectifsd’évaluerl’étatdupatrimoineculturelbâtietdesmanuscritsan-ciensàTombouctouetdeprocéderauxRelevésarchitecturaux(Etatdeslieux)desmausoléesdétruitsetl’évaluationducoûtdeleurreconstruction/réhabilitation.Lesrapportsdecesmissionsontserviàpréciserlepland’ac-

tionsadoptélorsdelaréuniontenueenfévrier2013ausiègedel’UNESCOàParissurlareconstructiondupatrimoineduMali.Alasuitedecesmissionsd’évaluation,unatelierderestitutionquiaregroupélesresponsablesmunicipaux,lesautoritésadminis-trativesetcoutumières,lesexpertsnationauxetinternationaux,lesreprésentantsd’institutionsrégionalesetinternationalesfutorganiséàBamakole8juin2013.Al’issuedecetatelierilaétédécidé:

– deprocéderàlareconstructionàl’identiquedesmausoléesdé-truits ;

Mausolée Alpha Moya, reconstruit (photo DNPC, Madou Koné)

Mali54

– deconfierlestravauxdereconstructionàlacorporationdesmaçons traditionnels de Tombouctou ;

– d’assurerlasupervisiontechniquedestravauxpardesexpertsnationaux et internationaux ;

– de réaliser les travaux de reconstruction dans le respect des normesdelaconservationsuivantl’espritdelaConventionde1972del’UNESCO.

Pourlamiseenœuvredecesactionsuncomitédepilotageetuncomité de suivi furent mis en place. Lestravauxdereconstructiondesquatorzemausoléesontété

officiellementlancésle14mars2014parleMinistredelaCultureduMali.Ilssesontachevésenseptembre2015.Ilconvientderappelerquelapremièreétapedelaphasedes

étudesaétélarecherchedocumentaireetd’informationssurlesmausoléesdeTombouctou,auprèsdesacteurssuivants:laDi-rectionNationaleduPatrimoineCulturel«DNPC»,laMissionCulturelle de Tombouctou, les maçons responsables des mauso-lées,lesnotabilitésdeTombouctou,etc.Ils’agissaitdecollecterles informationsd’ordregénéralet technique:documentationphotographique,biographiedesSaints,lesystèmeconstructifdesmausolées,lesmatériauxlocauxutilisés,lescarrièresd’extrac-tion, etc. Cetteétapedecollected’informationsapermisdeconstater

uneinsuffisancedeladocumentationetdesarchivesrelatifsauxditsmonuments.Ceconstatestd’autantplusimportantquedanslestraditionslocales,nousn’avonspaseuconnaissanced’ar-chivagesparticulierssurdessupportsclassiquesconcernantlesmausoléesdétruits.Cettelacune(insuffisanceconstatéelorsdelarecherchedocumentaire)aétécompenséeparleprocessusdedocumentationetd’archivageaucoursdestravauxdereconstruc-tion. Les informations recueillies sont pour la plupart transmises parvoieoraleavecquelquesphotographiesdespériodesrécentesde notre histoire.Signalons ici, le rôle important joué par les communau-

téslocalesquiontassistélesdifférenteséquipesdesmissionsd’experts.Ils’agitenparticulierdesfamillesresponsablesdesmausolées(engénérallesdescendantsdesSaints),desmaçonstraditionnelsresponsablesdesmausoléesetdesmosquées,leschefscoutumierset religieux, lesautoritésadministrativesetcommunales et certaines personnes ressources.Concernantlesquestionsd’ordretechnique,lesmaçonstradi-

tionnelsetlesautresartisanstraditionnelstelsquelesmenuisiersontfaitmontredeconnaissancesempiriquesexceptionnellesre-lativesauxconstructionsenterred’unemanièregénérale,auxmatériauxlocauxdeconstructionetauxtechniquesconstructivestraditionnelles.Ilestaisédeconstaterqu’ilssontlesdépositairesdesavoirsetdesavoirs–fairetraditionnelsquidoiventêtrepré-servésàtoutprixpourlaconservationdupatrimoinearchitecturalen terre de la cité.Ladeuxièmeétapedelaphasedesétudesaconcernélesre-

levésarchitecturauxetl’évaluationdesbesoinspourlarecons-tructionet/oularéhabilitationdesmausolées.Cettepartiedelamissiondeterrainaétéexécutésuivantlemodeclassiquedelatriangulation.Lesdessinsontétécomplétéspardesphotogra-phies. Lors de la phase de terrain, les informations relatives aux techniquesconstructives,auxcarrièresdematériauxdeconstruc-tionontétéessentiellementobtenuesauprèsdesmaçonsetautresartisans locaux.Ladernière étape de la phase «Etudes» a concerné l’or-

ganisationdeconcertationsaveclesacteurslocaux(familles responsables des mausolées, notabilités, corporation des ma-

Mosquée Sankoré, directives des anciens maçons, juin 2013 (photo ALDI)

Mosquée Sankoré, mobilisation populaire pour le crépissage, juin 2013 (photo ALDI)

Mosquée Sankoré, préparation du mortier pour l’enduit (photo ALDI)

Mali 55

çonsetartisanstraditionnels), lesexpertsnationauxetinter-nationaux, lesservices techniquesmalienset les institutionsspécialisées,etc.afindedéterminerlesprincipespourlaréa-lisation des travaux de reconstruction. Les principes suivants furent adoptés :– le principe de base est la « reconstruction des mausolées à

l’identique»,danslamesuredupossible,etdansleslimitesdes informations rassemblées ;

– tenir compte des cultures constructives locales dans le souci de les préserver et les pérenniser ;

– envisagerlaréutilisation,dansleslimitesdelafaisabilitétech-nique,decertainsélémentsderécupération(portesenbois,poutresenrônier,pierrealhore,etc.).D’autrespourraientêtreexposés dans des musées de la ville de Tombouctou, en même tempsquedesphotos;

– lesfondationsetsoubassementsd’origine,nondétruitspourlaplupart,sontconservésetconsolidéslorsqueleurétatleper-met,ouremplacéslorsqueleurétatestjugéinsatisfaisant.

4.1 Phase « Travaux de reconstruction »

Al’issuedelaphasedesétudes,leMalietsespartenaires,no-tammentl’UNESCO,ontprocédéàlamobilisationderessourceshumaines,matériellesetfinancièresenvuedudémarragedestra-vaux de reconstruction des mausolées.Danslesoucides’assurerdurespectdesnormesliéesàl’ins-

cription des mausolées sur la Liste du patrimoine mondial de l’UNESCO,lasupervisiondestravauxaétéassuréepardesex-pertsnationauxetinternationauxetlaparticipationdelaMissionCulturelledeTombouctou(undémembrementdelaDirectionNationaleduPatrimoineCulturel)quiétaientparticulièrementchargésdeveilleraurespectdesprincipesetnormesdeconser-vationdansl’espritde lamiseenœuvredelaconventionde1972. Ilestimportantdesignalerici,l’engagementetlavolontédes

maçons,desfamillesresponsablesetdesautoritésreligieusesdeTombouctoudeparticiperactivementàlamiseenœuvreduprojet.Pourfavoriserl’implicationdesmaçonsetautresartisanslocauxetprofiterdeleurscompétencesetsavoirs-faire,ilaétédécidéd’organiserlareconstructiondesmausoléesenmodedelarégiedestravaux.L’organisationsuivanteaétémiseenplace:lechefdesmaçonsmobiliselamaind’œuvre,organiseetdirigelestravaux.Ildéterminelesbesoinsenmatérielsetmatériauxdeconstruction.LaMissionCulturelledeTombouctous’occupedupaiementdesfacturesaussibienpourlamaind’œuvrequepourle matériel et le matériau.Unautreavantagetirédestravauxdereconstructiondesmau-

soléesestl’implicationdelajeunegénérationdanslaréalisa-tiondestravauxàtraversl’organisationdechantiers-écoles.Eneffetpendanttouteladuréedestravauxdereconstruction,lesmaîtresmaçonsontformédejeunesmaçonsdébutantsenleurtransmettantl’essentieldessavoirsetsavoir-faireancestrauxliésauxculturesconstructives.Cetteformationsurtoutpratique,al’avantaged’assurerlapérennisationdespratiquesconstructivestraditionnelles,degarantirladisponibilitédecompétencespourlaconservation du patrimoine architectural en terre et de contribuer àlarelanceéconomiqueparlacréationd’activitésgénératricesderevenusetd’emploisrémunérés.D’unemanièregénérale,lestravauxdereconstructiondesmau-

soléesdeTombouctou,quiontétédesvéritableschantiers-écoles,ontétémisàprofitpour:

– Constituerunedocumentationimportanteetdiversifiéelaplusfidèlepossibleduprocessusdereconstruction(documentationécrite,graphiqueetphotographique);

– Collecterlesinformationsrelativesauxpratiquesconstructives,aux matériaux de construction y compris leur préparation et leurmoded’utilisation;

Crépissage de la Mosquée Sankoré, vieux maçons traditionnels, juin 2013 (photo ALDI)

Mosquée Sankoré, crépissage du minaret, juin 2013 (photo ALDI)

Mali56

– Documenter,archiver(photographies,graphiques,films,des-sins,etc.)etàpostérioridiffuserlestechniquesconstructivestraditionnelles.

Al’issuedestravauxdereconstruction,lespopulationsdeTom-bouctouengénéraletenparticulierlesfamillesresponsablesdesmausolées,ontexpriméleursatisfactionàretrouverleursbiensculturels reconstruits et ont salué la renaissance culturelle de leur cité.Cesrésultatsontétéatteintsgrâceenparticulieràl’enga-gementdesmaçonsetautresartisanslocauxdepuislacollected’informationjusqu’àl’exécutioneffectivedestravaux.Ilestimportantd’apprécieretdereconnaîtrelescompétences,

leurs savoirset savoirs-faire. Ilsontprouvéune foisdeplusqu’ilsdétiennentdesconnaissancesendogènesliéesauxculturesconstructives locales dont la transmission est nécessaire. La re-connaissancedeleurssavoirsdéjàreconnusauplannationall’aétéauplaninternational,àtraverslediplômedereconnaissancedécernéparl’UNESCOenmargedelaréunionduComitéduPatrimoinemondialtenuàBonn(Allemagne)enjuin2015.

Cette distinction remise au Chef de la corporation des maçons deTombouctou,AlhassaneHasseye,récompensel’ensembledesmaçons de la ville pour leur implication dans le processus de re-construction des mausolées.

4.2 Fouilles archéologiques

Alafaveurdelareconstructiondesmausolées,ilaétéégale-mentprocédéàdesfouillesarchéologiques.L’objectifrecherchéàtraverscesfouillesétaitd’apporter,danslamesuredupossible,desélémentsderéponseauxmultiplesinterrogationsdescommu-nautéslocalesetdesdifférentsintervenantsdansleprocessusdereconstruction.Eninterrogeantlesvestigesdesmausolées,cer-tainesréponsesrelativesauxfondations,auxtechniquesetma-tériauxutilisés,systèmeconstructif,lesenduits,l’évolutiondesouvrages(renforcementdesstructures,rehaussements,etc.ontpu être apportées. Sur la base de résultats des fouilles, des déci-sionsontpuêtreprisespourdéterminerparexemplelesystèmeconstructifquivaried’unmausoléeàunautreetlechoixdel’en-duitintérieur(«laTerredeBourem»)quiestquasimentlemêmepourl’ensembledesmausolées.Ladatationd’échantillonsprélevéslorsdesdifférentesfouilles

archéologiquesdemausolées,permettrad’insérerlesitedanslecadrechronologiqueglobaldelarégionetprécisercertainesin-formations relatives aux Saints de Tombouctou.

4.3 Aspects immatériels de la reconstruction des mausolées

Ledémarrageeffectifdestravauxaétéprécédépardespratiquesculturellesparticulièresquiontmisenlumièrelarelationdirecteentrelepatrimoinematérieletdespratiquesimmatérielles.EneffetàTombouctou,commeàDjenné,ilestimportantdenoterl’existencedepratiquesimmatériellesliéesàlaconstruction.Cer-tainesdecespratiquessonteffectuéesaudémarragedestravaux,notammentcelledite«desseptcéréales»(àdéposeraufonddesfouillespourlesfondations)etd’autresàlafindestravaux,no-tamment les rites et rituels et les cérémonies de lecture du Coran. Toutescespratiquesontétéprévueseteffectuéesdanslecadredela reconstruction des mausolées de Tombouctou. Selonlacroyancepopulaireplusieurspratiquesimmatérielles

sont liées aux Saints et aux mausolées. Ainsi les populations de

TombouctouassocientvolontiersleursSaintsauxdifférentsévè-nementsfastesetnéfastesdeleurvie.Atitred’exemple,l’unedespratiquescourantesàTombouctouveutquelesnouveauxmariés visitent les mausolées des saints selon un itinéraire précis. Aucoursdecesvisites,ilsseprocurentunepoignéedesabledechaquemausoléeetlesversentdansleurchambrenuptiale.Cegesterituelpourraitapporterlebonheuraucouple.D’autresserecueillentsurlestombesdeSaints,endifférentes

circonstancesetfontdesprièresetdesvœux.Encasdeséche-resse,desinvocationsfaitesparlesulémassontadresséesàDieuàtraverslesSaints.LespopulationsdeTombouctouétaientetrestentfortementattachéesàleursmausolées.Malgréladémoli-tiondecesmonuments,ilétaitfréquentdecroiserdespersonnesvenues se recueillir sur les tombes de Saints, avant même le début des travaux de reconstruction. Ceci dénote de la dévotion des po-pulationspourleursSaintsetjustifieamplementlareconstructiondesmausolées;cequipermetparlamêmeoccasion,deperpétuerlespratiquesspirituellesancestrales.

5. Premier crépissage de la mosquée de Djinguareyber de Tombouctou après l’occupation ( jeudi 15 août 2013)

Aprèsuneinterruptiond’environdeuxsaisonsdespluies,dueàl’occupationdelavilledeTombouctouparlesterroristesetautresgroupesarmés,ilaétéprocédélejeudi15août2013aucrépis-sageduMinaretetdumuracrotèredelaMosquéedeDjingua-reyber.Commeàl’accoutumé,lespréparatifsontétécoordonnésparl’ImamBenEssayouti,leComitédegestiondelamosquéeetlacorporationdesmaçonstraditionnelsavecleChefMaçonMahalmadaneMahalmoudouresponsabledelaMosquéedeDjin-gareyber.Lespopulationsparticipentmassivementetactivementauxtraditionnelstravauxdecrépissagedelamosquée.Danslamatinéedece15août2013,souslasupervisiondes

maçonstraditionnels,ilaétéd’abordprocédéàundernierma-laxagedel’enduitenbancoquiaavaitdéjàétépréparédepuisplusieursjours.Rappelonsquelatechniqueiciutiliséeestcelledite«dupourrissement».Acemélangedebancoaétéajoutédela balle de riz et de mil.Pourlecrépissagedesfaçadesestetsud,ilaétéajoutéede

lapoudredebaobab(oupindessinges).Cettepoudreconfèreàl’enduitunemeilleurerésistanceauxeauxdepluiesqui,pourlavilledeTombouctou,proviennentessentiellementdel’EstetquelquesfoisduSud.L’enduitaétépréparécetteannéedansdesbacssituésausuddelamosquée.Ilaététransportéparlesjeunes,desbacsjusqu’autoitdelamosquée.Lorsqu’unequantitéimpor-tanted’enduitaététransportéesurletoit,lecoupd’envoisymbo-liquedestravauxfutdonnéparlechefdesmaçonstraditionnelsresponsablesdel’entretiendelamosquée(habituellementuneseulefamilleenestresponsable).

Les travaux de la matinée ont concerné les faces nord et ouest duminaretcentralainsiquelesmursacrotères,précisémentceuxsituéssurlescôtésouestetsuddelamosquée.Lestravauxdecrépissagedesfaçadesestetsudduminaretsontréservéspourl’après-midiaprèslaprièredel’Asr(16heures).Ledébutdecestravauxdececrépissagedel’après-midiestmarquéparle«céré-monialdelabandedecotonnade».Cettebandedecotonnadeestpréparéeparles«vieuxmaçons»avecdesnœudsetdesincanta-tionsysontégalementdites.Elleestensuiteenfiléeaux«jeunesmaçons»chargésdegrimperjusqu’ausommetduminaretetd’y

Mali 57

commencerlestravauxd’enduitssursafaçadeest.Cettebandedecotonnadequiestdonnéeparlesanciensauxjeunesestunesortedelienombilicalentrelesgénérationsetestcenséeprotégerd’unemanièregénéralelesmaçonsetautresouvriersnotammentcontrelesaccidents(chutes)lorsdestravaux.Alafindestravauxducrépissage,desbénédictionssontfaites

parl’ImamdelamosquéedeDjingareyber,entourépourlacir-constancedeceuxdesmosquéesdeSankoréetdeSidiYahia,àl’endroitdetouslesparticipantsainsiquepourtoutelapopula-tion de la ville.

6. Conclusion

Dans le cadre des travaux de reconstruction des mausolées de Tombouctou, entrepris par leMinistère chargéde laCultureduMalietl’UNESCO,l’apportdescommunautéslocalesaétéessentielets’estmanifestédefaçonmultiformeetàtouteslesétapes du processus.Eneffet,aucoursduprocessusdereconstructiondesmauso-

léesdétruits,lescommunautésontjouéuntrèsgrandrôleautantsurleplanthéoriquequepratique.Ellesdétiennentlesconnais-sancesempiriquesrituellesnécessairesaudémarragedeschan-tiers et ont en leur sein une corporation de maçons traditionnels quisontdesexpertslocauxrompusàlatâchedansledomainedelaconstructionetdel’utilisationdesmatériauxlocaux.Grâceauxcommunautés,l’historiquedesSaintsetceluidela

constructiondesmausolées(informationsfourniesparlesnota-bilités,lesérudits,lesleadersreligieux,lesresponsablesmunici-paux,l’administrationpublique,laclassedesintellectuelles,lesfamillesresponsablesdesmausolées)ontétédavantageconnus.Lestechniquestraditionnellesdeconstructionycomprisles

matériauxdeconstructionutilisés(techniquesmaîtriséesetensei-gnéesparlesmaçonstraditionnelles:individus,familles,corpo-

rations)etlesculturesconstructiveslocalesquisontl’apanagedela corporation des maçons repartis entre les familles responsables des mausolées, ont été valorisées.Lacommunautéinternationale,àtraversl’UNESCOentant

qu’institution spécialisée du système des Nations-Unies, etd’autrespartenairestechniquesetfinanciersduMali,aparticipéactivementàtouteslesphasesduprocessusdereconstructiondesmausolées de Tombouctou. Ilestimportantdesoulignericiladynamiquepartenarialeetla

collaborationétroitequiontprévaluentrelesexpertsmaliensetlesexpertsinternationauxquisesontappuyéssurlescommunau-téslocalesparlebiaisd’échangeetdepartagedessavoirsmulti-séculaires,qu’ellesdétiennentetqu’ellessesontappropriéesaufildessiècles.Celaprouve,sibesoinest,delavéracitédel’espritdelaConventionde1972del’UNESCOconcernantlaprotectiondupatrimoinemondialcultureletnaturelquidonneuneplacedechoixauxcommunautéslocalesdanslagestionetlatransmissiondu patrimoine.Particulièrementdanslecontextemondialactuel,oùl’humani-

téentièreestsoumiseàdesdestructionsvolontairesetmassivesdebiensculturels,lerôleetlaplacedescommunautéssontbienperceptibles. La reconstruction des mausolées de Tombouctou est unhymneàlasolidaritéinternationaleetàlarésistancecontretouteformedenégationetdedestructiondesressourcesdelaculture.L’implicationdescommunautéslocalesestlegaged’uneges-

tionefficienteetdelapérennisationdestraditionsetpratiquesconstructives.C’estcequiexplique la forteparticipationdescommunautéslocalesdeTombouctouaulentetméthodiquepro-cessusdereconstructiondesmausoléesdétruitsen2012.Lerôleet la mission de ces communautés dans la conservation, la valo-risationetlatransmissiondupatrimoineculturels’expliquentparlefaitqu’ellessesonttoujoursappropriélesbiensculturelsquisontd’abordlocaux,nationauxetensuiteuniversels.

Alpha DiopPrésident ICOMOS Mali

Bibliographie Rapportd’études:«Relevésarchitecturaux / EtatdeslieuxdesmausoléesdétruitsàTombouctouetEvaluationducoûtdeleurreconstruction / Réhabilitation»parAtelierd’Architecture ALDI–BioclimaticDesigns(septembre2013)

TravauxdereconstructiondesMausoléesdétruitsàTombouctou:Rapportdefindechantiersparl’AgenceAUDEXSarl(sep-tembre2015)

Patrimoinemondial–Manuelderéférence:GérerlePatrimoinemondialculturel–UNESCO,ICCROM,ICOMOS,UICN(pu-blication2014)

Convention concernant la protection du patrimoine mondial, cultureletnaturel:Propositiond’inscriptionsurlaListedu PatrimoineMondial–DossiersoumisparleMali(1987)

NORDMALI:Tombouctou –Gao –Kidal: Passeport pourlepatrimoine:biensculturelsàpréserver–MinistèredelaCultureduMali–DirectionNationaleduPatrimoineCulturel«DNPC»(novembre2012)

Rapportdemission:«Fouillesarchéologiquesetétudesarchitec-turalessurlesmausoléesdétruitsdeTombouctou».DirectionNationaleduPatrimoineCulturel«DNPC»décembre2014

58

MEXICO

Afectaciones al Lago de Cuitzeo, Michoacán

Identidad y lugar

Nombreactual:CuencadelLagodeCuitzeoClasificación / tipodelugar:zonadecultivoruralEstadoactualdelaproteccióndelpatrimonionatural: zona de reservaecològica

Declaración de valoración e historia

IncrementodelaciudaddeMorelia,deun400%.La cuenca se encuentra terriblemente contaminada con metales pesadoscomocobreyplomo,ademásdecontaminaciónorgánicaconhecesfecalesquevanadaralazonadecultivosmásimpor-tantedelaregión.

Proyectos bajo evaluación

MejoramientodeEcosistemasyDesarrolloHumanoenlaCuencadelLagodeCuitzeo

Análisis

LaproblemáticasurgedelafaltadeplaneacióndelcrecimientodelaciudaddeMorelia,porloqueeldilemaestáentreresolverelproblemadelavialidaddeMoreliaolaproblemáticaambientaldelaszonasdereservaecológicadelaciudad.Hayque:pre-guntarsesiexisterealmenteunanecesidaddecrecimientodelaciudadosetratadeunproblemadeespeculacióninmobiliaria;identificarelgradoderesponsabilidaddelaciudaddeMoreliaenelproblemadelacontaminacióndelaCuencadelLagoCuit-zeo;identificarparaprevenirunproblemadesaludmayorconlacontaminacióngenerada.Existeyaunproblemaconlacontami-nacióndelaguaqueesurgenteresolver.

Acciones recomendadas

–Hayqueresponsabilizartambiénalaindustriadelageneraciónde metales pesados vertidos a la cuenca.

– Revisar y utilizar las recomendaciones pertinentes del Reporte TécnicorealizadoporelproyectodelaUNAM.

– ResolverelproblemadelaLomaSantaMaría.– TomarenserioeldilemadelcrecimientodelaciudaddeMore-liayladesaparicióndelaszonasdereservaecológicaysucon-

secuentecontaminación.Estosdostemassetienenqueresolver,nosepuededejarderesolverunoendetrimentodelotro.

Afectaciones al espacio escultórico de la UNAM por la construcción del edificio H de la Facultad de Ciencias Políticas

Identidad y lugar

Nombreactual:EspacioEscultórico,CiudadUniversitariaClasificación/tipodelugar:espaciourbanosituadoalsurdelaciudaddeMéxico,enlazonaconocidacomo“PedregaldeSanAngel”Estadoactualdelaproteccióndelpatrimonio: PatrimonioMun-dial,comopartedelaUNAM(julio2007)

Declaración de valoración e historia

En1551elReyFelipeIIdeEspañacreólaRealyPontificiaUni-versidaddeMéxico,quejuntoconlaUniversidaddeSanMar-cosenLima,Perú,fueronlasprimerasuniversidadesdelNuevoMundo.LaC.U.esunejemploúnicodeurbanismomodernoyarqui-

tectura, pero también con referencias a la cultura tradicional, particularmentealosconjuntosdelaarquitecturaprehispánicayalasartesydiseñodelpaisaje.Eldiseñosehizoen1947yseempezóaconstruiren1948,hasta1952.LosarquitectosqueganaronelconcursodeldiseñofueronMarioPaniyEnriquedelMoral.Enelmarcodeldiseñorectorparticiparonmásde60ar-quitectosyartistas.

Vista del edificio H desde el espacio escultórico de la UNAM

Mexico 59

MonumentoArtísticoconDeclaratoriapublicadaenelDiarioOficialdelaFederaciónel18dejuliode2005,deacuerdoaloestablecidoenlaLeyFederaldeMonumentosyZonasArqueoló-gicos,ArtísticoseHistóricos.Elconjuntodelespacioescultóricosepercibecomountributo

alMéxicoprehispánico,peroalmismotiempo,comounaprome-sahaciaelfuturo,enmediodelosparadigmasdelaarquitecturamodernadelsigloXX,endondelosvaloresnacionalesylaiden-tidadtípicamexicanaestánpresentes.InscritoenlaListadePatrimonioMundialdelaUNESCOen

juliode2007.

Proyecto bajo evaluación

LaConstruccióndeledificoHdelaFacultaddeCienciasPolíti-cas y Sociales.

Análisis

Ensentidoestricto,eledificioHdelaFacultaddeCienciasPo-líticasnoconstituyeagresiónalaleynialperímetroreconocidocomo patrimonio mundial. Pero es parte de la zona de amorti-guamientodeladeclaratoriadelcampuscentral.Tampocoestáconstruidoeneláreadereservaecológica.Perolacuestiónesquesiinterfiereconeláreadelpaisaje.SegúneldocumentodeinscripciónenelPatrimonioMundial,

«lazonadeamortiguamientoestádefinidaen3partes:lazonadeamortiguamiento1(553,5ha),incluyendoelterrenodelauni-versidadnoincluidoenelPlanMaestrode1947ylareservaeco-lógica;lazonadeamortiguamiento2(649has),incluyendolaszonas urbanas controladas por el Gobierno del Distrito Federal, conunaalturadeconstrucciónlimitadaa2niveles,queincluyeelbarrioresidencialdelPedregal,concebidoporLuisBarragán;ylazonadeamortiguamiento3(52Has),unazonaurbanatambiénbajocontroldelgobiernodelDistritoFederal,conunaalturadeconstrucciónlimitadaa3niveles.”Elperímetrodondeestáconstruidoelinmueblenodañaales-

paciocentralperímetro«A»ynoespartedelazonadelimitadadelaReservaEcológica.PerolacuestiónesquesiinterfiereconeláreadelpaisajeenparticulardesdeelespacioEscultóricodelaUNAM.Laconstruccióndelinmueblenofueevaluadayaprobadapor

elsubcomitédePreservación,DesarrolloyMantenimientodelPatrimonioInmobiliariodelCampusCentralyestosiconstitu-yeunaomisióndelostrabajosdelSub-comite(integradaporelRector,elDirectordeObras,dePatrimonioUniversitario,delaFacultaddeArquitectura.DelInstitutodeInvestigacionesEsté-ticas,etc.).Laproblemáticasurgedelafaltadeplaneacióndelcrecimiento

de la ciudad universitaria.

Acciones recomendadas

–Verporquéno se consultó alSubcomitédePreservación,DesarrolloyMantenimientodelPatrimonioInmobiliariodelCampusCentraldeCiudadUniversitariaparaanalizarsieledificioqueseconstruyóteníalosnivelespermitidosysinoperturbabalavistadesdeelEspacioEscultórico.

– ICOMOSrecomendóponerenprácticalomásprontoposibleelPlandeGestión(oAdministración)delaCiudadUniversita-ria(PROMACU).

– ICOMOSrecomendócuandorevisóelexpedienteparaincluiralaUNAMenlalistadePatrimonioculturaldelahumanidad,quelasautoridadesdelaUNAMestrecharanmássusrelacio-nesconlasautoridadesdelaCiudaddeMéxico,paragarantizarunmejorcuidadodelaciudaduniversitariadelaszonasquelarodean,habríaquerevisarelestadoqueteníalaciudaduniver-sitariacuandoICOMOSrealizólaevaluaciónparasuinscrip-ciónenlalistadePatrimonioMundial.

El Hospicio Cabañas en Guadalajara y su entorno inmediato amenazado por la construcción de una torre de oficinas (CDD)

Identidad y lugar

Nombre actual: Hospicio Cabañas, Ciudad de Guadalajara, JaliscoClasificación / tipodelugar:zonaurbana,centrohistóricoEstadoactualdelaproteccióndelpatrimonio:ElHospicioCa-bañas esta inscrito en laListadelPatrimonioMundial de laUNESCObajolosCriteriosdeValorUniversalExcepcionalI,II,IIIyIVdurantelaXXIsesióndelComitédelPatrimonioMun-dialcelebradaenNápoles,Italia(diciembre1997)

Declaración de valoración e historia

EledificiodelaCiudadCreativaDigital(CDD)presentadoarevisiónse localizaa trescuadras(378metros)delHospicioCabañasdeGuadalajara.EselproyectodelPrimerMódulodelaCiudadCreativaDigitalquesepretendeedificarenelentor-noinmediatodelHospicioCabañas.LaUNESCOsolicitóalaCiudaddeGuadalajaraelcontroldelasalturasdelaedificaciónalrededordelHospicioCabañasyelGobiernoMexicanoloasu-miócomounaobligaciónnacional.EstePlanParcialconside-róelcontroldelasalturasdelaedificaciónenunperímetrodevariascuadrasalrededordelinmueblepatrimonialyelmejora-mientogradualdelaimagenurbanadesuentornoinmediato.ElplanparcialfuepublicadoenelPeriódicoOficialdelEstado“ElEstadodeJalisco”eldía5dediciembrede1998bajoelnombrede“PlanParcialdeUrbanizacióndelaZonaAledañaalAntiguoHospicioCabañas”,actuandocomopartemedulardealtarestriccióndealturasdentrodelaZonadeAmortiguamiento(BufferZone)paraelinmuebledefinidaporel“PerímetroA”deProtecciónalPatrimonioHistóricodelCentroHistóricodeGuadalajara.Portantoseestablecieron,deacuerdoaldocumentocitado,dospolígonosdecontroldelasalturasenelentornodelHospicioCabañas,laprimeradefinidacomounáreadecontrolestrictodelaedificaciónconcebidocomoZonadeAmortigua-miento conformada por 24 manzanas alrededor del monumen-toyunasegundaáreaconcebidacomoZonadeInfluenciaque

Mexico60

abarcaríaelPerímetroA:Áreadeprotecciónalpatrimoniohis-tórico.

Proyecto bajo evaluación

LaeventualconstruccióndeedificiosverticalescercadelInstitutoCulturalCabañas,propiciaríalaposibilidaddequeelsitiopudie-rapasaralaListadePatrimonioCulturalenPeligrocontempladaenlaConvencióndelPatrimonioMundialCulturalyNatural,almodificarseelentornohistóricodelazona.AntelaposibilidaddequeelAyuntamientodeGuadalajara

aprobaraelaño2012unaactualizaciónalosPlanesParcialesdeDesarrolloUrbanoplanteandoalturasajenasalPaisajeUrbanoHistóricodelaciudadafectandoseveramentealentornodelin-mueblepatrimoniomundial,elInstitutoNacionaldeAntropolo-gíaeHistoriayelInstitutoNacionaldeBellasArtesremitieronunacomunicaciónalasautoridadesdeGuadalajaraseñalandoqueeraabsolutamenteinviablelaaprobacióndeunplanparcialdeesascaracterísticasyaqueafectaríaloscompromisosdeMé-xicoantelaUNESCO.ComoproductodelasolicitudconjuntaentreelINAH,elIN-

BAylaSecretaríadeCulturadeJaliscoseestablecióunamesadenegociaciónquedespuésdeunlargoydifícilprocesopermitióqueelAyuntamientotapatíosecomprometieraabajarsignifica-tivamentelasalturasenelentornodelcentrohistóricoatravésdelAcuerdosobreAlturas,UsosyNivelesdeIntensidadparalosPlanesdeDesarrolloUrbanodeGuadalajaraincluidosdentrodel“PerímetroA”deProtecciónalPatrimonioHistóricofirmadoel28dejuniode2012.

Analisis

Conlafinalidaddedarusoalosprediosadquiridosparaelfra-casadoproyectodeedificarlasVillasPanamericanasenlosalre-dedoresdelParqueMoreloselAyuntamientodeGuadalajaralosofrecióencomodatoalFideicomisodelaCiudadCreativaDigital(CDD)paraedificarenelloslosprincipalesinmueblesdelaCiu-dadCreativaDigital,proyectoimpulsadoporelGobiernoFederalyelGobiernodeJaliscoparaestimulareldesarrolloeconómicodeGuadalajara.LaintenciónporpartedelospromotoresdelaCCDdeedificarunatorrede47metrosdealturaylademoliciónparcialdelafincaconocidacomoCasaBaezaAlzagaque,porsualtoimpactourbano,podríaafectarlapermanenciadelHospicioCabañasenlaListacitadaalserafectadopotencialmentesuValorUniversalExcepcional.Ademáspodríaafectarelpatrimonioar-quitectónicopresenteenlosPerímetros“A”y“B”deProtecciónalPatrimonioEdificadoenelcentrohistóricodelaciudaddeGuadalajara,perturbandoinmueblescomolaCatedralMetropo-litana,elPalaciodeGobiernodeJalisco,elTeatroDegolladoeinfinidaddemonumentoshistóricosalgradodequequedaríanjerárquicamentereducidosensucontextourbano.ElcomplejodelaCCDselocalizaasolo3manzanasdelHospicioCabañas.LaalturapropuestaparalaCCDesincompatibleconelPaisajeUrbanoHistóricoylosprincipalesmonumentosdelCentroHis-tóricodeGuadalajaraallocalizarseelcomplejoCCDasolo2cuadras de la Cruz de Plazas. El volumen planteado para la CCD tendríaunimpactovisualcompletamentenegativoparaelcon-juntohistóricoalhacerquepierdansuescalayjerarquíaurbana.

Acciones recomendadas

SegúnloestablecidoenelAcuerdosobreAlturas,UsosyNivelesdeIntensidadparalosPlanesdeDesarrolloUrbanodeGuadalaja-raincluidosdentrodel“PerímetroA”deProtecciónalPatrimonioHistóricofirmadoel28dejuniode2012,solosepuedenlevantarinmuebles de 9 niveles tomando como base la altura promedio de laedificacióneninmueblesdelaciudaddeGuadalajaraqueesunaalturaparacadanivelde3.00metros.Loquedaunaalturaautorizablede27metrossegúnloindicadoenelAcuerdocitado.Enesesentidoserecomiendarevisarlaalturadelprimermó-

dulo de la CCD para adecuarlo a una altura cercana a los 27 me-trosquesonautorizablesporlosPlanesParcialesdeDesarrolloUrbanovigentes.EnloqueserefierealMonumentoHistóricoconocidocomo

CasaBaezaAlzaga,serecomiendarevisarelproyectoparacon-servarelpartidoarquitectónicodelinmuebleincluyendocrujíasypatiocentral,pudiéndosereconstruirlapartedañadacomopartedel nuevo uso.

Por tal motivo se solicita respetuosamente al Fideicomiso de laCCD,aSIOPdelGobiernodelEstadodeJaliscoyalH.Ayun-tamientodeGuadalajaralarevisiónyadecuacióndelproyectorevisadoyaquepotencialmenteexpondríanelsitio,alpropiciarelaumentodealturasenlazonadeinfluenciadelHospicioCa-bañasdeGuadalajara,inscritoenlaListadelPatrimoniomun-dialdelaUNESCO,yaquedenomodificarse,podríanponerenriesgoladeclaratoriadelinmueblecomoPatrimoniodelaHumanidad,

Proyecto de la CDD con una altura de 47 metros

Mexico 61

Varias afectaciones al patrimonio de la Ciudad de Guanajuato, Gto.

Identidad y lugar

Nombreactual:AyuntamientodeCiudaddeGuanajuato,EstadodeGuanajuato,MéxicoClasificación / tipodelugar:zonaurbanaEstadoactualdelaproteccióndelpatrimonio: La ciudad se en-cuentrainscritaenlaListadeCiudadesPatrimonioMundialdeUNESCOcomo“ZonadeMonumentosHistóricosdeGuanajuatoyMinasAdyacentes”(diciembre1988)

Declaración de valoración e historia

LosrequisitosquecubrieronlaciudadysusminasadyacentesparasuinscripciónalalistadeCiudadesPatrimonialesfueronlossiguientes:a) Guanajuatoabrigaalgunosdelosmásbellosespecímenesde

arquitecturabarrocadenuevomundoydosobrasmaestrasdeestilochurriguerescomexicano.

b)LainfluenciadeGuanajuatoseejercióenlamayorpartedelasciudadesminerasdelnortedeMéxicodelsigloXVIalXVIII.

c) Guanajuatoofreceunejemplodeconjuntosdearquitecturaintegrada,legadosindustrialesyeconómicosdeunlugarmi-nero.

d)Guanajuatoestádirectamenteymaterialmenteasociadaalahistoriaeconómicadelmundo,particularmentealsigloXVIII.

e) ElValorUniversalExcepcionalquesustentólainscripcióndelCentroHistóricodeGuanajuato,estábasadoen4criteriosculturales,queresaltanlaintegridaddelaciudadhistórica,enparticularsudiseñourbanoformalyescaladentrodelValledelRío,dictadosporlatopografíaenunespaciosinuoso.

Proyectos bajo evaluación

a) Laintervencióndelosjardineshistóricos,principalmenteelJardínMadero,conformadoaprincipiosdelosañosde1900yFlorencioAntillon,construidoenelañode1872.

b)LaconstruccióndeampliacióndelHotelCasaColorada.c) Laconstruccióndeuncomercioenunadelaszonasmásim-

portantes de la ciudad.d)Laproliferacióndemesasysillasdebaresyrestaurantesen

losespaciospúblicosdelaciudad.

Analisis

Deloscasosexpuestoslosjardinessonlosmaslamentablespueselvalorhistóricoyelespíritudellugardeellossehaperdidoyporlomismolaautenticidad.Puestoqueseutilizaronmaterialesmodernosdandocomoconsecuenciaquelaintegraciónalrestode la ciudad no concuerde con su valor universal.Enelcasodelcomercioelimpactovisualenelpaisajedela

zonaesaberrante,lasalturas,elvolumenyelestiloarquitectóni-co moderno rompen bruscamente con el entorno inmediato, una

vialidadprimariayunparque.Laampliacióndelhotelimpactanegativamenteelpaisajenatu-

raldelaciudadpuessuubicaciónesdominantedesdecualquierpunto de la ciudad.Lasmesasylassillasenlosespaciospúblicos,aunqueesun

problemaqueseobservaanivelmundial,enlaciudadporsuscaracterísticasparticulares,impactanelpaisajeurbanoeinvadenvialidades peatonales.

Acciones recomendadas

– Paralosjardines,realizarobrasnecesariaspararecuperarunaparte de lo perdido, cambiar los pavimentos modernos por los decantera,retiraryvolveracolocarlasbancasqueseencon-trabanantesdelamodernizaciónylarecuperacióndelaflora.

– Laampliacióndelhotel,demolerloexistenteyregenerarelimpacto natural de la zona.

– Enelcomercio,lamentablementenadaquerecomendar,elda-ñoestáhecho.

–Mesasysillas,retirarlasconcluyentementepararecuperarlosespaciospúblicosyconelloelpaisajeurbano.

– A las dependencias que proveen de recursos económicos,INAH,INBAyCONACULTAalH.Ayuntamiento,revisende-talladamente el o los proyectos antes de avalarlos y revisar si elautoresespecialistaeneltema,posteriormentevigilarquequienrealicelaobratambiénseaespecialistaenlamateria.

Varias afectaciones al patrimonio de la Zona Monumental de Puebla

Identidad y lugar

Nombreactual:CentroHistóricodelaciudaddePueblaClasificación / tipo de lugar: Zona deMonumentosHistóri- cosEstadoactualdelaproteccióndelpatrimonio:En1977,elCentroHistóricodelaciudaddePueblafuedeclaradoZonadeMonu-

Vista de las obras de ampliación del Hotel Misión Casa Colorada en Guanajuato

Mexico62

mentosHistóricos(ZMH).En1987,quedainscritoenlalistadePatrimoniodelaHumanidad.Posteriormente,sedecretalaZonaTípicaMonumentaldelaciudaddePuebla,incluyendoelpatri-moniodelsigloXX.

Declaración de valoración e historia

ElCentroHistóricodePueblafueinscritoenlaListadePatrimo-nioMundialbajoloscriteriosIIyIVdelaConvención.Formópartedelprimerconjuntode5sitiosculturalesy1natural,pro-puestosporMéxico.

Proyectos bajo evaluación

a) IntervencionesenelcerrodeLoretoyGuadalupe.b)Laconstruccióndeunteleféricoparausoturístico.c) VariasintervencionesenelSectorSanFrancisco.d)Demolicióndeedificacionesparacreacióndeestacionamien-

tos. e) Afectacióndelaimagendeconjuntoconampliacionescon-

trastantes. f) Ampliacióndevialidadesrápidasenelcentro.

Análisis

Losdañosseverosseinician,conelentubamientodelríoSanFrancisco.En1993,seapruebaelProyectoPaseodeSanFrancis-co,endondeseplantealacreaciónde“polosdedesarrolloturís-tico”,demoliendovariascasasconvalorhistóricoporzonasco-mercialesydeservicios,ypornuevasedificacionesquerebasanlaalturadelosedificioshistóricos;loshabitantesdelosbarriosfueron desplazados por otros sectores de la sociedad; transfor-mándoseelpaisajecultural.

Enelaño2010,serealizarondiversasobras:setransformóeljardíndelCarmen,secreancorredoresturísticos,seintervinieronespaciospúblicoshoyconvertidosenestacionamientos.Enelperiodo2011-2012,conel“ProyectodeImagenurbana

delCerrodeLoretoyGuadalupe”,elhistóricocerro,sufredañosirreversibles.En2011,esdeforestadoparalaconstruccióndees-tacionamientos,localescomerciales,pérgolas,espejosdeaguayplazas. Los Fuertes, también se intervinieron estructuralmente, para“adecuar”ellugarcomomuseo,perdiéndoseelsentidoes-pacial,históricoeidentitariodetanimportantepaisajecultural.Enelaño2012,enelcerrodeLoretoyGuadalupeseiniciala

construccióndelastorresparaunteleférico,demoliéndoseentreotrasedificacioneslacasa-estudiodelMaestroJoséMárquezFi-gueroaylaCasadelTorno.Edificiosconvalorhistóricosehandestruidoporelabando-

no,lasincidenciasclimáticasquedebilitansuestructura;yporla“modernidad”.

Acciones recomendadas

– LlamarlaatencióndeICOMOSinternacionalasícomodelComitédePatrimonioMundialparaquesetomenlasmedidasnecesariasderehabilitacióndeltejidosocialyurbano,desusedificioshistóricosytradicionales,desusespaciosypaisajesurbanoshistóricosdelaciudaddePuebladeZaragoza.

– EsnecesarialapublicacióndelPlanIntegraldeRehabilitacióndelCentroHistórico,asícomodelPlandeManejo.

– SeríaimportantesolicitarlainclusióndelCentroHistóricodelaCiudaddePueblaenlaListadePatrimonioenPeligroparaasípoderaccederatodoslosbeneficiosydeberesqueestaLis-ta conlleva.

–AlgunosbienesincluidosenlaListadePatrimonioMundialestánsiendo intervenidosexcesivamenteyesta llamadadeatenciónpuedeydebeconvertirseenunaacciónpositivadelaConservacióndelPatrimonioCulturaldelpaís.

63

NEAR EAST

ICOMOS et le défi de la destruction à grande échelle du patrimoine culturel au Proche-Orient

Contexte

UneeffroyableguerrecivileravagelaSyriedepuis2011.Lesdestructionss’ymultiplientets’yaccumulent.Lenombredevictimesetderéfugiésnecessedecroître.L’insécuritéfavoriselepillageetladévastationdessitesarchéologiques.Touteslesformes de patrimoine culturel sont atteintes : monuments, cita-delles,villeshistoriques,objetsantiques,artisanat,traditions,etc.LegroupeextrémisteDaech-EIIL fait irruptionàMossouletconquiertunepartiedel’Iraken2014.Desdestructionsvolon-tairesetsystématiquesdupatrimoineculturelduesàdegroupesfondamentalistesliésàalQaïda,s’étendentdeBamyanàTom-bouctou, en passant désormais par la Libye, la Tunisie et le Yé-men,enplusdelaSyrieetdel’Irak.Ladiversitéetl’identitéculturelledespeuplesdelarégionsontmenacées.

Spécificités de l’ICOMOS

L’ICOMOSestuneorganisationinternationalenongouverne-mentaleàcaractèreprofessionneldisposantde10,000adhérentsàtraverslemonde.Laplupartdespaysarabestouchésn‘ontmal-heureusement pas de comités nationaux, mais comptent néan-moinsdesadhérentsindividuels,cequiconstitueunatout.L’undescomitésscientifiquesinternationauxsespécialisedanslapré-parationauxrisques(ICORP),maisl’évaluationdesdommagesetlareconstructionpourraientmobiliserd’autresCSI:ISCAR-SAH,CIPA,ICAHM,CIF,ICOFORT,ICICH,ICLAFI,CIVVIH,etc.L’activitédecomitésnationauxestégalementàprendreenconsidération(p.ex.Belgique,France,Royaume-Uni,USA).

Rôle de l’ICOMOS

Lepositionnementdel’ICOMOSaétéceluid’uneONGprofes-sionnelledanssonchampdecompétence,neutredanssesenga-gements,s’investissantdanslesuivi,laréflexion,l’information,laformation,l’assistanceetlepartenariataveclesautresacteursetenparticulieravecl’UNESCO.

Mobilisation de l’ICOMOS

Ungroupede travail permanent et opérationnel a été établi,d’abordd’unemanièreinformelleàpartirde2012pourlaSyrie,

puisde2014pourl’Irak,etenfind’unemanièreplusofficielleàl’occasionduvoteàl’unanimitédelarésolutionsurlasauvegardedupatrimoineculturelenSyrieetenIrakàl’assembléegénéralede Florence en novembre 2014. Celle-ci demande au Comité exé-cutif « de continuer à répondre à la tragédie culturelle en Syrie et en Irak en chargeant le groupe de travail de l’ICOMOS sur la sauvegarde du patrimoine culturel en Syrie et en Irak, en coopé-ration avec l’UNESCO et d’autres partenaires internationaux et nationaux, et avec le soutien de ICORP, de coordonner les acti-vités de l’ICOMOS ayant trait à la promotion de la coopération et des échanges, du suivi de la situation, de la sensibilisation, de la communication, de la formation, de l’assistance et de la planification appliquées à la sauvegarde du patrimoine culturel en Syrie et en Irak, aussi longtemps que le conflit actuel et ses conséquences ultérieures dureront ».LegroupedetravailcomporteactuellementKirstiKovanen,

RohitJigyasu,SamirAbdulac,BijanRouhani,GaïaJungblodtetReginaDurighello.

Actions menées par l’ICOMOS

1. Suivi (monitoring)

Legroupedetravailasuivid’unemanièredétailléelapresseetlessitesd’information,lesréseauxsociauxetenparticulierlessitesconsacrésaupatrimoineculturelsyrienouirakien,qu’ilsrelèventdugouvernement(DGAM),del’opposition(APSA),demilieuxscientifiques(Iraqcrisis)oudelapresseoudesréseauxsociaux.Descentainesd’articles,decommuniqués,d’étudesetd‘illustrationsontainsiétérassemblés.L’ICORPtravailleàlacréationd’unebasededonnéesconcernantlessitesendommagés.C’estlaprécisionetlaqualitédusuividesévènements,desdom-magesetdel’activitédespartiesprenantesdesconflitsquipeutenrichirlaréflexionetleséventuellespropositions.

2.  Réflexions et rencontres

Deséchangesinternessedéroulentenpermanence.Laréflexionporteessentiellementsurl’appréciationdelasituationactuelle,l’anticipationdesrisquesàvenirainsiqueladéterminationdesprioritésd’aujourd’huietdedemainentermesd’actionsetdestratégies.AucoursdusymposiumICOMOSdeBeijingenoctobre2012

(«Réduirelesrisquespourlepatrimoineculturelfaceauxcatas-trophesd’originenaturelleethumaine»),uneprésentationsurle«Suivid’unesituationdeconflit,lecasdupatrimoineculturelsyrien»quiavaitdonnélieuàunfructueuxéchangeavecdesmembresvenusd’horizonsdifférents.D’autresréunionsinternesd’informationonteulieuauseinde

comitésnationaux(Belgique,France,Etats-Unis,etc.),del’Euro-groupe(Strasbourg)oudeCSIs(ICORP,CIVVIH,etc.).

Near East64

L’ICOMOSaététrèsrégulièrementinvitéàparticiperactive-mentauxréunionsderéflexionetdeplanificationorganiséesparl’UNESCO(Paris,Amman),quecesoitsouslaformedecol-loques,d’ateliers,degroupesdetravailouderéunionsdehautniveaud’experts.Legroupedetravaildel’ICOMOSpoursuitetdéveloppedes

échangesavecsespartenairestraditionnels(ICCROM,ICOM,Bouclier Bleu), comme avec de nouveaux (APSA, PASD,ASOR,HeritageforPeace,etc.).Desliensontétéétablisavecdesuniversités(Cambridge,Durham,etc.)etdesreprésentantsdel’ICOMOSontparticipéàdesrencontresorganiséespardesorganismestiers,commel’InstitutduMondeArabeàParisoul’organisationdespaysislamiquesàIstanbul(IRCICA).EnSyriemême,desrelationsdeconfianceontétédéveloppées

aveclaDGAMetdesliensétablisavecl’universitédeDamas,l’Uniondesingénieursetarchitectes,l’associationAdiyat,desexperts individuels. Des contacts ont même été menés avec la «TaskForce»dugouvernementintérimaire.

3. Information et sensibilisation

L’ICOMOSaexprimésespréoccupationsetsesprisesdepositionpardescommuniquésetlescomitésnationauxégalement.LesactesdusymposiumdeBeijingontétépubliésen2014.Heritage at Riskadocumentécertainssitesetl’UNESCOapubliécer-taines interventions sous forme de PDF ou de DVD.Lesecrétairegénérald’ICOMOSFranceaétéassociéà la

remised’unprixinternationaleuropéendesauvegardedupatri-moineculturelàMaamounAbdelkarim,directeurdelaDGAMàVenise,enoctobre2014.Ilfutenparticulierchargédeprononcerl’élogedurécipiendaire.Enfin, suite à des demandes d’interviews ou d’articles,

ICOMOSestcitédansnombredepublicationsgrandpublic(NewYorkTimes,LeMonde,LeFigaroHistoire,etc.),commeauxEtats-Unis,enFrance,enNorvège,auQatar,auRoyaume-Uni,enSyrie,enTurquie,etc.

4. Formation

Ilauraitétésouhaitabled’organiseruneformationsurlapré-parationauxrisquesenSyriemêmependantqu’ilenétaiten-core temps.Lasituationsurplaceétantdevenuetropdange-reuselescontactsdugroupedetravailontpermisd’organiser,parl’ICORP,enpartenariataveclaDGAM,enassociationavecl’ICCROMetenconcertationavec l’UNESCO,dessessionsd’initiationàlapréparationauxrisquesàDamasetàIdleb,parliaisoninternetetprésentationdeprojections,avectraductionsimultanée sur place.Prèsde170personnesontétébénéficiairesdecetteformation:

descadresdelaDGAM,desuniversitaires,desprofessionnelsindépendants,dessecouristesducroissantrouge,quelquesétu-diants, etc. Les exposés portaient sur les inventaires rapides, les évacuationsd’urgence,l’accèsauxsitestouchés,l’évaluationdesdommages,etc.Cefuttechniquementunepremièredansunpaysenguerre.Lescoursontétéréunisettraduitsenarabe.Unthèmecomplémentaire,celuidelapréservationdesdébrisdoitbientôtêtre publié.Un relai est pris depuis novembre 2014 par l’UNESCOà

Beyrouthavecdesparticipationsindividuellesdemembresdel’ICOMOS.Unenouvelleinitiativedeformationestencoursdemontagesouslenomd’AMAL,enpartenariataveclefondsGHFetaveclaparticipationdel’ICCROMetduARCWH.

5. Conseil et assistance

Malgrélasituationsurleterrain,descontactsprofessionnelssepoursuivent avec des responsables sur le terrain et des conseils techniquespeuventêtreassurés. ICOMOSaainsiactivementparticipéàunesessiondebrainstormingàl’UNESCOenvued’élaborerunenotederecommandation(remiseenjanvier2014)surlesmesurespréventivesàprendrepourprotégerlavieillevilledeDamasinscriteaupatrimoinemondialdesdangersd’incendieetdedestruction.Desexpertsdel’ICOMOSétaientprésentslorsdelaprésentationàl’UNESCOduprojetderestaurationduKrakdesChevaliers(inscritauPM)enmai2014àParis.AlademandeduWorldMonumentsWatch,despropositionsconcernantcer-tainssitessyrienscommelavieillevilled’Alepontétéexaminéesenjuillet2013.Legroupedetravails’esttoutdernièrementpré-occupédemesuresdesauvegarde(mosaïques)auKhanMouradPachaàMaaratalNoomanainsiqu’aumuséenationaldeDamas,quiméritedefigureraupatrimoinearchitecturaldu20 esiècle.

6. Elaboration de programmes d’action

Unvéritablepland’actionenvuederéparerlesdommagessubisparlepatrimoineculturelenSyrieetenIraknepourravraimentêtreévaluéetmisenplacequelorsqueleshostilitésaurontprisfin.Saduréederéalisationrisquemalheureusementdes’étendresurplusieursdécennies.Relevonsnéanmoinsquedesrestaura-tionsontdéjàétéentreprisessurlamosquéedesomeyyadesàDamasetqu’uneéquipeprocèdeauxrelevésnécessairesàlares-tauration du Krak des Chevaliers.Cecin’empêchepasdeparticiper àdesprogrammesd’ac-

tionàcourtetmoyentermeetdesepréoccuperdel’élaborationd’orientationspour le jouroùleshabitantsvoudront tousen-semble reconstruire leurs maisons dévastées dans les centres his-toriques.C’estpourquoiilconvientdedisposerd’uneréflexiond’ensemble(comprehensive)etstratégique.ICOMOSaparticipéàl’élaborationd’unprogrammeconduit

parl’ICCROMinitialementetreprisensuiteparl’UNESCOpourlasauvegardedupatrimoinesyrien.Celui-cicomportelesvoletssuivants :– Evaluationdesdommages,cartographieetinventaires,– Communicationetcampagnesdesensibilisationpourfaireces-

ser les atteintes au patrimoine culturel,– Assistancetechniqueetrenforcementdescapacitésdesparties

prenantes.

Ceprogrammeareçuunfinancementde2,7millionsd’Eurosdel’UnionEuropéenneetdugouvernementflamand.Uneunitéspé-cifiqued’animationaétémiseenplaceàBeyrouthenseptembre2014.Unprotocoledepartenariat(Frameworkofcooperation)entrel’UNESCOetICOMOSaétérédigé.Unautrepland’urgenceaétéélaboréparl’UNESCOenfaveur

del’Irakenjuillet2014.Consulté,l’ICOMOSyavaitapportédescompléments.Ledépartementd’étataméricain(DoS)avaitlancéaucours

de l’été 2014un appel d’offres pour l’élaborationd’unpro-grammed’actionenfaveurdupatrimoinesyrien,d’unmontantde600.000dollarsUSetavecundélaideréalisationde6mois.C’estl’ASOR,uneassociationd’archéologues,quil’aemporté.ICOMOSestassociéauniveaud’unconsultantetdeconseillers.Enfin,ICOMOSamontéenpartenariataveclaDGAMune

propositionsoumiseàlafondationaméricaineCyArkenvuede

Near East 65

numériser et compléter la documentation architecturale et ur-baine de la vieille ville de Damas et de pouvoir ainsi la conserver en3D.CelleciaétéacceptéedanslecadredesonCyArk 500 challenge(lettred’acceptationdu21octobre2014).

Groupe de Travail – S. Abdulac 6 avril 2015

IRAQThe Future of Mosul Heritage after the DestructionItiscleartoeveryonewhathappenedinMosulwhenISIStookoverthecityinJune2014,andhowtheystarteddevastatingac-tionsfromthefirstmonthofinvasion.ThisreportfocusesonMosulcitybecauseoftheinformationresourcesavailableandtheextentofdestruction,morethaninothercitiessuchasSinjar,QarahQush,etc.Thereportalsocontainsinformationofrecentlydestroyedheritagesitesandthereisnotenoughspacetoindicateother devastations, such as of museums, memorial statues and heritagecemeteries,becauseofthepricelesshistoricbuildingsthat have been lost in this city. Recent statistics indicate more than40buildings,accordingtogroundinformationandsatelliteimages.

Heritage buildings

Asisknown,theheritagecityofMosulliesonthewestbankoftheTigrisRiverwithsomesitesalsoontheeastbank.Itissitu-atedonslightlyhighergroundthanthesurroundingareas.Dif-ferentheritagebuildingsaredistributedacrossthecity,suchasmosques,shrines(ofProphets,Awliya),monasteries,churches,schools,andothers.ISISdidnotcarefortheheritagevalueofthecityandnodifferentiationbetweenreligionsandsectswasmade.Itisworthmentioningthatnotalldestructionwasforreligious

reasons; some of it was related to political or economic matters, forexampleal-Kamalyiaschool,Mujahidal-Deenmosque(alKudher),HammualQadumosqueandAbdalschool.Theydidnotcontainanytombs,butthestrategiclocationintheSuqorbytheriverwasthereasonfortheirdestruction.Similarly,AjeelYawermosque,TellAfarcastle,Sinjarminaretandthepolicecentrewerealldestroyedfordifferentpoliticalreasons.

As a result of these destructions, many distinctive architectural features have been lost, for example all Ottoman pencil-shaped minarets (well-knownexample:alQalamya)whichappearedattheendof18thcenturyintheshrinesoftheProphetsJohan,GorgesandShith.TheconicalcupolaswhichwerefamousduringtheZengidagehavebeendestroyed,exceptthelastsmalloneatHassanalBakriMosque,inadditiontocountlesswonderfulMihrabsandMinbars.Many challengeswill occur after the liberation processes

whenthoughtscanbegiventotherestorationofthetangibleheritageinMosul:first,whatistohappenwiththepilesofrub-blethatwereremovedfrommostofthedestroyedbuildingsinordertoreusethesitesasparks(e. g.ShrineofProphetGorges);

Abdal school (photo Layla Salih, 2014)

Mujahid al Deen Mosque (photo Layla Salih, 2014)

Near East66

streetmarketsorrebuildingnewmosquesinaccordancewithIslamicrules(Hammual-QadumosquehasbecomeAlBaghdadimosque),secondlyisthequestionofpropertyofbuildings,eachowner,suchastheSunniEndowment(Waqaf),theAntiquitiesDepartmentandMosulMunicipality,havingaspecificplanofrestoration.Forexample,asfortheshrineforProphetNabiYon-isthereisagoodchancetodoanexcavationoftheAssyrian

layerbeforerebuildingtheshrine.Therearemanysimilarcasesinthecity.TheprotectionandrestorationoftangibleheritageinMosulrequiredetailedplanningtoavoidanymorelossesinfuture. Ifwedecidetorebuildsomeofthesesites,therebuildingneeds

to be based on documentation, but here is the problem, because notallbuildingsnowdestroyedhadbeendocumentedbySBAHoranyotherside.Atthebeginningof2014myteamworkedonaprojectthataimedtodoa3Ddocumentationfor200heritagebuildingsinMosul,butunfortunatelythetotalnumberwason-ly135.WhenISIStookoverthecitythisprojecthadalreadystopped.Inourdocumentationtherearedetailsfor13heritagebuildings,whichwillbeveryusefulifwetrytorestorethem.

Shrine of Prophet Gorges before destruction (photo Layla Salih, 2013)

New park instead of Shrine of Prophet Gorges

Layla Salih during the 3D documentation project 2014

Near East 67

UNESCO Director-General Condemns Destruction at Nimrud

UNESCO Press Release No. 2015-31

Paris, 13 April 2015 – UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova today denounced further destruction at the archeological site of Nimrud in Iraq, shown in graphic detail on a video circulating on social media channels.

“I condemn this mad, destructive act that accentuates the horror of the situation. It confirms that the terrorists are not only destroy-ing representations of figures and bas-reliefs. With their hammers and explosives they are also obliterating the site itself, clearly de-termined to wipe out all traces of the history of Iraq’s people.”

The Director-General expressed her solidarity with the peo-ple and government of Iraq, and recalled UNESCO’s action to protect heritage and coordinate the efforts of the international community in the struggle against illicit traffic of cultural goods.

“The deliberate destruction of heritage is a war crime,” Ms Bokova said. “We will do everything possible to fight against this

and document it, to ensure that those responsible are identified and brought to justice.

“The propaganda and hatred that underlies these acts, and which is circulating via the internet, demands in response messages of peace and knowledge of history. UNESCO supports all those – in Iraq and elsewhere – who are mobilizing to ex-plain the importance of this heritage and why nothing justifies its destruction. This message needs to be heard, and I invite political and religious leaders along with civil society to sup-port the #Unite4Heritage campaign launched recently by UN-ESCO, and to speak out against these crimes via all possible channels.”

UNESCO denounced the attack against Nimrud on 6 March. Last weekend’s video shows the total destruction of the north-west part of the Palace of Ashurnasirpal II, along with stone sculptures from the neo-Assyrian era. Situated 32 kilometres south of Mosul, the Palace was built dated back to 879 B.C when Nimrud, then known as Kalhu, served as the capital of the Assyr-ian Empire.

UNESCO is working closely with the Government of Iraq, neighbouring states and the full range of its other partners, to safeguard this millennial heritage.

Nimrud, damaged relief in the Northwest Palace (photo AP / Maya Alleruzzo)

Near East68

Nimrud, remains of an Assyrian winged bull deity near the gates of the ancient palace where it once stood (photo AP / Maya Alleruzzo)

Nimrud, amidst the rubble a damaged stone tablet with cuneiform writing (photo AP / Maya Alleruzzo)

Near East 69

SYRIA

Near East70

Near East 71

Near East72

Near East 73

Near East74

Near East 75

Near East76

Near East 77

Near East78

Near East 79

Near East80

Near East 81

Near East82

Near East 83

Near East84

Near East 85

Near East86

Near East 87

Near East88

Near East 89

Near East90

Near East 91

Near East92

Near East 93

Near East94

Near East 95

Near East96

Near East 97

War and Destruction in the Old City of Aleppo

ThesiteofOldAleppowasregisteredasaWorldHeritagesitein1986.Itmeasures364ha.Thisinternationalrecognitionin-creased public and private awareness of its social, economic, and culturalimportance.Inthelastthreedecadesofthe20thcentury,the population within the historical districts decreased by about one third and was reduced to about 100,000 inhabitants.

Rehabilitation projects before the war

The Committee for the Protection of the Old City of Aleppo was commissionedtoadviseandsuggestactionsdirectedtowardsheritagepreservation.Aninterimnewbuildingcodedesignedtocontrol and direct restoration and new construction was subse-quentlyadopted.Anewconceptofurbanmanagementhadtobeintroduced to cope with the current situation and a comprehensive overallstrategyfortherehabilitationoftheOldCitywasthere-fore prepared. The complex nature of urban rehabilitation, its in-terdisciplinaryapproach,anditsextensivefinancespromptedtheCity of Aleppo to seek assistance. The German Government and the Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development were asked to participate. Projectobjectivesmeanttakingimmediatestepstoaddressthe

urgentneedsoftheOldCityresidents.Theseincluded:emergen-cy home repair for lower income families, maintenance and re-habilitationofdilapidatedpublicinfrastructure.Itwasexpectedthatpublicinvestmentswouldencouragetheresidentstoactivelyparticipateintherehabilitationprocess.Theprojectincludedsev-eral phases:

Phase 0 (1992 –1994) Preparation and surveys: Charting the terrain

Detailedsurveyswereconductedtoevaluatetheexistingcondi-tions in the Old City and to identify priority intervention areas.

Phase I (1994 –1997) Planning and pilot projects: Developing the rehabilitation instruments

Generalcomprehensiveplanningwasusedtoincorporateallas-pectsofurbanmanagement(landuse,housing,traffic,infrastruc-ture, social services, monument preservation, and public partici-pation).Thegeneralplanswerethenelaboratedonthelocallevelintheactionareas.Earlyprogrammeswereinitiatedintheformofmicro-creditloanstoassistlowerincomefamiliesintheurgentrestoration of their homes. Participatory measures were initiated in the action areas to identify needs, prioritise interventions and monitor results.

Phase II (1997–2000) Establishing institutions and procedures

Theplanningsystemwasrefinedasaresultoffeedbackfromfieldimplementation(infrastructure,socialservices,traffic,ur-banfacades).Contacttootherurbanstakeholdersenabledtheelaboration of an urban economy outlook for the Old City. The micro-credit system was widened to incorporate complex house restoration and architectural preservation. The intensive and com-

prehensiveworkprogrammenecessitatedtheestablishmentof a more permanent institutional structure: the Directorate of the Old City.

Phase III (2001 –2004) Developing sustainable management and financing tools: second implementation and consolidation phase

Newfundingschemesweretestedtoencourageenvironmental-lyfriendlyenterprises.Housingprogrammeswereelaboratedtoincludefundingfromotherdonors.Infrastructuremaintenancewasprogrammedtoensureefficientmanagement.Trafficwasregulatedwithaneyetothegeneralurbandevelopmentofthecityatlarge.Fromtheoutset,theprojecttookanintegrativeandcomplex

planningapproach.However,comprehensiveplanningwasnotlimited to analysis and theoretical work; it also involved prelim-inaryimplementation.Thecomprehensiveplanningstartedasa‘top-down’processandimplementationfolloweda‘bottom-up’approach.Animpressivequantityofhousingandinfrastructurewas already rehabilitated by the end of the 2000s. This urban re-habilitationprojectwasoneofthemostsuccessfulintheArabregion.The‘UrbanHistoricArchiveandDocumentationCenterfor

Aleppo’(UHADCA)wasestablishedasasub-sectionoftheOldCityDirectorate(DOC)tobeinchargeofsafeguardinganddocu-mentinghistoricandoriginalrecords,aswellassettingupadoc-umentation centre for any data available on the urban and archi-tectural history of Aleppo. With support from the former German DevelopmentService(DED)andtheassociationofthe‘FriendsoftheOldCityofAleppo’,thearchiveprojectwasstartedinJu-ly2008asacooperationprojectoftheDOCandformerGTZ(nowGIZ)withintheframeworkoftheUrban Development Pro-gramme (UDP).TheUHADCAwasestablishedonthepremisesof the Shibani complex, a former Franciscan convent located in theheartoftheOldCity,andhostedseveralofficesandfacilitiesfor social and cultural activities.Thearchivedidnotonlycollectoriginalphysicaldata,but

aimedatdigitisingandduplicating the collecteddocuments.Therefore,oneoftheessentialelementswasthesetting-upofamoderndigitaldatabase,incollaborationwiththeShomanFoun-dation,Amman.Thelargeramountofdatabetween2008–2011wasdigitalmaterial,providedbydifferentsources.TheUHADCAconcentratedonthefollowingdata:

–PlansandhistoricalphotosofAleppoofanyage;– Cadastral plans of the City of Aleppo;–MasterplansfromtheFrenchperiodandafterwards;– Architectural analysis and documentation.

Throughtheoutbreakofthecurrentconflictin2011,thecity’sUHADCAhasbeeninextremedanger.Unfortunately,thehardcopiesofthecollecteddocumentsareallegedlylost,whichwouldmakeacomprehensiverecoveryofthearchive’sdocumentsim-possible.Fortunately,digitalcopiesofthewholeinventoryarestill available.

Fighting inside the Old City

Armed rebellion started inAleppo’s popular suburbs and inneighbouringruralareasinlate2011.AmajorrebeloffensivewaslaterlaunchedtowardsthecentreofthecityinJuly2012.Af-

Near East98

terminorfluctuations,thesituationseemsstabilisednow,withagovernment-heldareatotheWest(about1,000,000persons)andanopposition-heldareatotheEast(about300,000persons).Thehistoric city has unfortunately become a stable front line between warringparties.Everypossiblekindofweaponhasbeenused:smallfirearms,Molotovcocktails,improvisedexplosivedevices(IED),rockets,mortar,“hellcannons”,artillery,classicalbombs,barrel bombs, bunker busters bombs, booby-trapped cars, tunnels loaded with explosives, and so on. Even how some monuments weredestroyedisnotclear,thenarrativesbeingtoodifferent.TheOldCityisterriblydamagedanditsresidentshavefled

ingreatnumbers.Thefamousvaultedsoukswereburnedandlootedfromthebeginning.TheOmayyadMosquehaschangedhandsfourtimesatleast.TheMuseumofArtsandPopularTra-ditions has been looted. The citadel has always stayed in loyalist armyhands,butithasconstantlyremainedamajorobjectiveforrebelgroups,forstrategicaswellasforsymbolicreasons.Ithasoften been shelled and its entrance tower still bears the marks ofaheavyattack.Oneofitslateraltowerscollapsedin2015aswellasasidewallin2016.In2014,severaltunnelexplosionsdestroyedmosthistoricbuildingslocatedneartheentranceofthecitadel:al-OtrushMosque,MadrasaKhusruwiyeh,MadrasaSultaniyeh,Khanal-Shouna,HammamYalbugha,aswellaslateOttomanbuildingsliketheformerserailandtheCarltonHo-

tel(aformerhospital).Cratersindicatethelocationofthemainexplosions.Thelastone,rightclosetotheentrance,datesbackto2015.Allsortsofbuildingshavebeendamagedinthehis-toricdistricts:mosques,churches,madrasas,khans,bimaristans,houses, etc.AccordingtotheUNITARaerialsurveyof2014,22Aleppo

monumentsaretotallydestroyed,48severelydamaged,33mod-eratelydamagedand32possiblydamaged.Thesefigureshavecertainlyincreasedsince.ADGAMreportmentions121damagedbuildingsinFebruary2016.A“freemunicipality”triedtosavemanuscripts,andprotect

mihrabsandminbarstogetherwithactivists.TheDGAMdigit-ised1,500plansofhistoricmonumentsinFebruary2014.Rep-resentativesoftheDGAMandoftheOppositionTaskForcemetatUNESCOHeadquartersinSeptember2014tostudyhowlocalfrozencombatareas(“culturalprotectedzones”)promotedthenbyUNenvoyStefandeMitsura,couldbeimplementedinAlep-po.TheOmayyadMosqueandtheNationalMuseumappearedas candidates. As this plan was not endorsed, most contents of themuseumhadtobeevacuatedtoDamascusin2015.Themu-seumwasshelledtwicein2016.UNESCOconvenedameetingonAleppoinJune2015andseveralinstitutionsinGermanywereveryactive.Atleasttwomeetingswereorganisedin2016:oneinBerlinandanotheroneatCottbusUniversity.

Old Aleppo, map of the World Heritage site (© DGAM and UNESCO)

Near East 99

Old Aleppo, the Omayyad Mosque and ancient city in the early 1960s (© DGAM)

Old Aleppo, the Omayyad Mosque in 2016 (© DGAM)

Near East100

Itappearsthatacompleteassessmentofremainingstructuresand infrastructures will be necessary of course, but the infra-structurenetworkmayhavetobelargelyredone,particularlywheretunnelexplosionsoccurred.Somearchaeologicalremainsmaybediscovered.Notonly reconstruction, restorationandrehabilitation are to be taken into account, but also a balanced revitalisationprocessshouldbesetup,includinghousing,com-merceandcrafts,withtheparticipationofstakeholders,takinginto account the experience of other countries with post-trauma experience.All collected surviving archives will be most precious.

Post-traumaguidanceandgeneralguidelinesmayhavetobepro-videdbyICOMOSbeforepossiblydevelopingdetailedplanningproposalsinthefuture.Urbanspeculationwillhavetobekeptatbayandstronginstitutionsandregulationswillbeneededtoad-vocateconcernforculturalheritage.Urbanreconstructionstrate-giesshouldalsorelyonacoordinatedmultidisciplinaryapproach,withinacomprehensiveeconomic,social,culturalandheritagepolicyandwiththeparticipationoftheinhabitants.Differentsce-narios may have to be compared.

The actions of public and private stakeholders should particu-larlybecoordinated.Positivedynamicsshouldbetriggeredandencouraged.Inanycase,goodknowledgeoflocalcommunitiesand of previous local achievements or concerns is needed to-getherwithanadequatearchitecturaldocumentation.Involvedreconstruction processes may unfortunately still need decades of involvementandefforts.

Samir AbdulacChair, ICOMOS Working Group for Safeguarding Cultural Heritage in Syria and Iraq

ReferencesAbdulac S., Suivi d’une situation de conflit, le cas du patrimoine

culturel syrien, in-Tangible Risk Preparedness and Response for Threats to Cultural Heritage.ProceedingsoftheICOMOSScientificSymposium,31October2012,Beijing.ICOMOS,Charenton-le-Pont,2014,pp.137–152.

Abdulac S., The Syrian Crisis and the Destruction of Urban Cul-tural Heritage. Three Case Studies: Palmyra, Damascus and Aleppo.SDCTJournalISSN:2241– 4002,http://sdct-journal.hua.gr/index.php/en/2015-10-18-22-23-19/2016-volume-1-a, pp.59–79.

DavidJ.-C.,DegeorgesG.,Alep, Flammarion, Paris, 2002.State Party Report on the State of Conservation of the Syrian Cul-

tural Heritage Sites,MinistryofCulture,DirectorateGeneralofAntiquitiesandMuseum,1February2015.pp.22–27.

Old Aleppo, entrance to the Citadel in 1964 (photo S. Abdulac)

Old Aleppo, Beyt Ajikbash (Museum of Popular Traditions) before the civil war (© ASOR)

Old Aleppo, Beyt Ajikbash (Museum of Popular Traditions) in 2016 (© DGAM)

Near East 101

For the Safeguarding and Preserva-tion of the Cultural Sites in Syria – Memorandum of the German National Committee of ICOMOS

Since the beginning of the civil war more than five years ago, the rich cultural heritage of Syria, including its six cultural sites on the World Heritage List of UNESCO, has been constantly threat-ened by destruction or has already been destroyed in parts. The great losses do not only affect the Syrian people, but all nations of the world, whose values are deliberately being attacked.

Implementing the Bonn Declaration on World Heritage

After its constitution was adopted on November 16, 1945 in Lon-don and based on the awareness that wars begin in the minds of men, UNESCO was commissioned to construct peace in the minds and in the moral solidarity of men. It is meant to help de-velop the democratic principles of dignity, equality and mutual respect of all men and prevent the propagation of prejudice and of the doctrine of the inequality of men and races. The education for justice, liberty and peace are indispensable to the dignity of man and constitute a sacred duty which all the nations must fulfil in a spirit of mutual assistance and concern.

With the aim to reinforce these goals the General Conference of UNESCO adopted the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 27 years later in Paris. The idea was to preserve cultural or natural heritage of outstand-ing relevance as part of the World Heritage of all humankind and to keep alive, deepen and broaden knowledge about this.

With the Bonn Declaration on World Heritage the World Her-itage Committee of UNESCO on June 29, 2015 unanimously condemned the destruction and looting of World Heritage sites as a tactic of war and recommended that the UN Security Coun-cil include heritage protection in the mandates of peacekeeping missions. Destructions as in Syria or in Iraq are ostracised as war crimes that should be prosecuted by every state. To this end, everything is to be done to combat the illegal trade of cultural properties.

Stopping the illegal trade of cultural properties

The cultural loss caused by looting of museums and archaeolog-ical excavation sites is immeasurable. Besides the trade of weap-

ons and drugs the illegal trade of cultural properties is one of the world’s most profitable illegal markets. International terrorism is increasingly profiting from this trade of illegally exported cultur-al properties.

Strengthening international cooperation

There have always been close cultural ties between Europe and the Near East. Starting from Africa via the Near East the European continent was settled. Important impulses for the history of humankind, such as the transition to a produc-tion-based economy, the development of cuneiform writing, the formation of states, and the three book religions originate from there.

Cultural exchange is the driving force of continuous change; in accordance with that, understanding beyond borders is the first step towards an exchange and contributes to the continuity and development of culture worldwide. Cultural monuments are im-portant milestones in the course of human history; in their diver-sity lies great potential for the future and they promote tolerance towards the other. Handing down monuments to future genera-tions is a humanist conditio sine qua non.

In this context, World Heritage sites are proof that there is an understanding of a joint narrative of the history of humankind. The recognition of a site as World Heritage underlines the in-ternational community’s appreciation of the achievements of a culture as contribution to a universal history.

The destruction of World Heritage sites is targeted at desta-bilisation. The related universal values of humankind cannot, however, be destroyed, if we are aware of them and remain to be so. Through international cooperation also in safeguarding, doc-umentation, preservation, research and rebuilding we can save these sites for the future and invigorate the idea of international solidarity.

Expanding networks for the conservation of cultural heritage

In view of war, violence, destruction and death people in Syria, Iraq and other conflict areas of this world are facing existential challenges. For the safeguarding and conservation of the cultural heritage professional knowledge needs to be provided on an in-ternational scale; necessary communication and information as well as networks have to be strengthened; possibilities of working in these conflict regions have to be fathomed; priorities for work need to be defined in international consultation and training on site should be supported.

Adopted by the Board of the German National Committee of ICOMOS on July 22–23, 2016 on behalf of the Annual General Meeting of November 28, 2015.

102

NEPAL

Cultural Continuity in Post Gorkha Earthquake Rehabilitation

Introduction

Throughouthistoryitwasthroughrecurringtestsofenduranceand trial that communities learnt to improve their cultural ex-pressions and create a resilient cultural environment. Similarly inKathmanduduringtheearlypartofthesecondmillenniumCEthetraditionalbuildingswerefirstadaptedtofirehazardsbyin-troducingasystemofbrickfirewallsthatstoppedthespreadoffiresfromonebuildingtothenext.Thesebrickandtimberbuild-ingswerethengraduallyadaptedtowithstandearthquakesbyinsertingwoodentiesandpegstodampentheseismicforces.In-novativesolutionswereusedtoensurestructuralstabilityagainstearthquakes,forexamplebybuildingsquaretimbertempleslacedwithwoodenbandsonhighsteppedplinthsthatfunctionedasbase isolations.

OnekepthearingofthegreatNepalBiharEarthquakeof1934andregularlyexperiencedsmallertremors.Thisraisedconcernthatthenextgreatearthquakewouldhaveadevastatingeffecton the Kathmandu Valley which over the decades had developed withuncontrolledurbanisation.DuringthepastyearstheKath-manduValleyWorldHeritageSitehadbeenpreparingfortheearthquakethatwastostrikeNepal(GovernmentofNepal2007).Theroughassessmentby thegeologists that therewasaslipdeficitalongthesectionoftheHimalayanarcinwesternNepalandanearthquakewaseminentcametobetrue.OnSaturday,25April2015a7.8-magnitudeearthquakestruckNepal,withtheep-icentreabout40kmnorthwestofKathmandu.Eventhoughtherewereseveralhundredaftershocks,withoneof7.3-magnitudeon12May2015,geologistshavebeenwarningthatnotsufficientenergyhasbeenreleased.

A woman in traditional attire standing in front of an area of historic Bhaktapur which was badly damaged

Naga-vasa-hrada, the lake of Nepal Mandala or Kathmandu Valley, with the Swayambhu Mahachaitya on an inland in the form of a lotus flower as depicted on the now destroyed mural in the Shantipur Temple

The Swayambhu hillock with the Mahacaitya used to be an island but now overlooks a sea of houses

Nepal 103

Therehabilitationoftheculturalheritagewillbeatestforthemotivation and resilience of the cultural communities. Consid-eringthefactthatthelastmajorearthquakewasover80yearsago,therehasbeenagenerationalinformationgap.Thelessonsthat would have been learnt from previous experiences seem to havebeenforgotten.Thegreatdifferenceintheresponsetothisearthquakehasbeentheintroductionofengineeredstructuresthathavereplacedthecenturiesoftraditionalknowledge.Oneofthegreatestchallengesinrestorationofmonumentshasbeentheab-solutelackofunderstandingofandconfidenceinthestructuralperformance of traditional structural systems.

The Moving Mountains – the natural and supernatural context

ThegeologicalprocessthatcreatedtheHimalayanrangeisde-finedbythecollisionoftheIndo-AustralianPlatewiththeEura-sianPlatesome40millionyearsago.Thefinalthrustwhichmighthavetakenplaceaslateas600,000yearsagosqueezedupgreatmassesofrocktocreatemassifswithpeaksover8000mhigh.

The mountains formed a climatic barrier with the northern areas dryingupandthemightyIndusandBrahmaputraRiversencir-clingthemountainrange.ThesouthernslopeswerepoundedbythehumidMonsoonwinds.Thetectoniccollisioncontinuedwiththegreatmassofrocksbeingfurtherpiledupuntiltheweightwassogreatthatitshearedfromthesurroundinglandmass.Thisblockedtheriversandcreatedlakesalongthewholerange.Riv-erscollectedandflowedalongthiseast-westfaultline,breakingthroughatafewspecificpointstoflowdownintotheGangeticplains(Hagen1960).Thisviolentandseeminglychaotictectoniccollisioncreat-

edalandscapethatreflectedthecosmicorder,theabodeofthegods.InthefoothillsofthemightyHimalayas,thelakeofNepalMandalaorKathmanduValleywascreated,whichwasNaga-va-sa-hrada,thekingdomoftheserpentkingorNagaraja.ItwasflankedoneithersidebysevenholyriversoftheKosiwatershedtotheeastandtheGandakiwatershedtothewest(Weise1992).TheearthquakethatallowedforthewatersofthelaketodrainoutalongtheBagmatiRiverpossiblyforthelasttimesomeeighteenthousandyearsagoisinterpretedasManjushreecuttingthroughthehillwithhermightysword.Thisshowshowcloselythepeo-

Collapsed structures of the Hanuman Dhoka Palace Museum, Kathmandu

Community and armed forces helping to salvage from a collapsed temple in Patan

A collapsed building in the historic city of Kathmandu

Nepal104

pleunderstoodtheirenvironmentandgeologicalprocesseswereattributedtothecreativeenergyofthegods(Smith1978).

The landscape within the Kathmandu Valley was created throughwatercuttingintothesedimentsthatgraduallydeposit-edfluvio-lacustrineclayandsandatthebottomofthelake.Theblackclaycontaineddecayedorganicmatterfromthelakewhichmadeitextremelyfertileandallowedforahighlyevolvedcivi-lisationtodevelop(Smith1978).Theinitialtimberconstructionthatwasvulnerabletofiresslowlychangedtoacombinationof

timberandburntbrick.Thishoweverrequiredtheadaptationofthebrickarchitecturetorecurringearthquakes,especiallysincetheparticularsoilcausedgreateramplificationandpossibleliq-uefaction.

Preparing for the Great Earthquake

Inanticipationofthenextbigearthquakepreparationswereun-dertaken.Severalkeygovernmentofficialswenttotrainingcours-esondisasterriskmanagement.Regularcommunitymeetingswereheld.Internationaltrainingcoursesondisasterriskman-agementforurbanheritagewerecarriedoutinKathmandu.InNovember2013,aweek-longsymposium“RevisitingKathman-du”wasorganisedbyICOMOSNepal,theICOMOSScientificCommitteeforRiskPreparedness,UNESCOandtheDepartmentofArchaeologywithsupportfromthelocalsitemanagers(Wei-se2015).The80thanniversaryofthe1934GreatNepalBiharEarthquakestartedthecountdowntothenextbigearthquake.Theinternational symposium was in preparation to the countdown, linkingthediscussionsbetweenauthenticity,managementandcommunity with disaster risk reduction.

One is however never fully prepared for such a formidable displayofnaturalforces.Eventhoughthequestionofaddition-allystrengtheningmonumentsmightbecontroversialformostconservation experts, the need for maintenance and restoration was clearly witnessed. The system and procedures for immediate response would also have needed to be established.

The earthquake did strike – immediate response

OnSaturday,25April2015justbeforenoonthe7.8-magnitudeearthquakestruck.Itwasanearthquakethatseemedtospecif-icallydamagevernacularbuildingsandhistoricalmonuments.Villagesin39districtswereaffectedwithabouthalfamillionhousescollapsingandafurtherquartermillionbeingseverelydamaged.ThemostbadlyaffectedwereelevendistrictswithintheareaspanningbetweenGorkhaandDolakha.Listedmonu-mentswereaffectedin20districts,with190beingrecordedashavingcollapsedand663havingbeenpartiallydamaged.Theimmediateresponseafter theearthquakestruckwasto

look for survivors. There were locations where special events werebeingheldontheSaturdayandwhenthestructurescol-lapsedlargenumbersofpeoplewereburied.ThephenomenonwecouldobserveinmostheritagesitesintheKathmanduValleywasthatpeopleseemedtoinstinctivelycontributetosalvagingandsafeguardingthecomponentsofthecollapsedanddamagedmonuments.Thefirst coordinationmeeting tookplaceat theUNESCO

KathmanduOfficejustfivedaysaftertheearthquake,togetherwiththevariousauthoritiesandstakeholders,aswellasorgan-isationsinvolvedintheculturalheritagesector.ThefollowingweektheEarthquakeResponseCoordinationOffice(ERCO)wasestablished at the DOA. To ensure that all stakeholders for the preservationofhistoricalmonumentswereworkingtogetherwithasharedapproach,thefirsttwomonthsweredeclaredaresponsephase.ThismeantthateverythingpossibleneededtobedonetopreparetheheritagesitesfortheonslaughtoftheMonsoon.Themainconstructionmaterialssuchaswood,brick,roofingtilesandstonealongwiththeartefactsandornamentswhichwerelyinginapileofrubbleneededtobesalvagedandstored.Damagedstruc-

The Swayambhu Mahachaitya showing the temporarily sealed cracks after removal of layers of lime-wash

The damaged entrance to Shantipur, the tantric temple, which can only be entered by an initiated priest

Nepal 105

turesneededshoringandprotectionfromtherain.ItwasdecidedthataproactiveapproachwouldbeappliedtotheWorldHeritageproperties, the sites on the Tentative List and the monuments on theclassifiedlistoftheDepartmentofArchaeology.Theremain-ingmonumentswouldneedtobelefttothecommunitiesandlocalauthoritiesforthemtorestore,howeverprovidingthemwithsupportandexpertisewhererequired.

Damage assessments

The historic settlements in the Kathmandu Valley

The historic settlements within the Kathmandu Valley would have foundtheiroriginsintheLicchaviperiodinthefirstmillennium,butthevisibleremainsarefromtheMallaperiod.Thoughthebuildingswouldhavebeenrebuiltoverthecenturiesandmightnotbemuchearlierthanthe17thor18thcentury,someofthereused wooden elements could date back to several centuries ear-lier(Gutschow1982).ThesecompactNewarisettlementswerebuiltonhigherground,wherepossibleonstableridgesprotrudingabovethefertilesedimentdeposits.Theagriculturallandwaspri-oritisedandcategorisedaspertype,numberofcropsandoverallyield,withthehighestrankinggiventothewetpaddycrop.Thesettlementswerestrategicallylocated,builtincompactformwithclearhierarchiesinpublicspacesandmonumentalbuildings(Ne-pali1965).

The traditional settlements within the Kathmandu Valley are beinglosttodevelopment.Theearthquakehasfurtherdecimatedthesettlementsthathavemanagedtoretainatleastasemblanceofthehistoriccharacter.ThesettlementswithintheWorldHeritagemonumentzonesthatwereseverelydamagedwerealargepartofthehistoriccityofBhaktapuraswellasthevillageofChanguNarayan.ThehistoricsettlementsontheWorldHeritageTenta-tiveListseverelydamagedwereSankhuandKhokanaalongwithnearbyBungamati.Theseareamongthe52settlementsidentifiedwithin and closely linked to the Kathmandu Valley.

Preliminary steps have been taken for the rehabilitation of the historic town of Sankhu where up to 90 percent of the traditional buildingswereaffectedbytheearthquake.Despitethemagnitudeofthedisaster,thelocalcommunityimmediatelygotinvolvedinsalvagingtheimportantwoodenelementsofthedamagedbuild-ings,ensuringthattheyweresafeguarded.Theinitialresponseshows that the community does want to rebuild the settlement initstraditionalform.Thishoweverwillrequirecriticaldeci-sionstobetakeninrespecttorebuildingtheentiresettlement,thepublicspacesandthebuildingsintheiroriginalstructureandform,whileensuringthereuseofthesalvagedelements.Thiscanonlytakeplacewiththecommitmentofthecommunity,financialandtechnicalsupportaswellasafunctioninglocalgovernancesystem.

The Swayambhu ensemble – the seat of Vajrayana Buddhism

TheSwayambhuMahachaityathatstandsonthetopofahillocktothewestofKathmanduisthecentreofVajrayanaBuddhism.Thisiswherelegendssaythelotuswithathousandpetals,mani-festingSwayambhu,theselfcreated,sprangfromthemurkywa-tersoftheNaga-vasa-hrada.Thedomesupportsasquareharmikawhichiscrownedby13ringsandaparasol,symbolisingBuddhaastheuniversalmonarch.TheearthquakeimpactedtheMahacha-itya,withover250metresofcracksonthedomeandthetopthree

ringsbeingdisplaced.Thecrackshavebeentemporarilysealedoffwithacrylicpasteandcoveredwithelasticpolymermembraneensuringthatwaterdoesnotpenetratethestructureduringthemonsoonandthatmonkeysdon’tremovethesealant.Aftertherainsthestructurewillrequiredetailedstructuralandmaterialin-vestigationtocomeupwithalong-termsolutionforstabilisation.

Practically all the monuments, both monasteries and the 17 housesownedbythepriestsontopofthehillock,weredamaged.Anentirereconstructionplanisrequiredforthehistoricensemblethatwillallowforpossiblerectificationofearlierencroachments.Of the twin tantric Shikhara temples, Pratappur recently rebuilt afterafirein2003andalightningstrikein2011hassurvivedwithsomedamagearoundtheplinth.Anantapurhowevercol-lapsed.ThenearbyTashiGolmashrinealsocollapsed,revealingthatitwasfilledwithceramic,stoneandmetalvotiveartefacts

Collapsed Kastamandap, the oldest monument which gave Kathmandu its name (meaning wooden structure), regrettably being cleared using excavators

Collapsed Chasin Dega at Hanuman Dhoka behind a stone plaque indicating World Heritage status

Nepal106

thatovercenturiesseemtohavebeencollectedandreusedduringprevious reconstructions.

The tantric shrine of Shantipur where only initiated priests are allowedtoenterwasalsodamaged.Oftheseriesofthreecham-bers,onlythefirstchamberadornedwithwallpaintingswasopento visitors. The internal walls collapsed, the entrance wall was deformedandlargepartsofthewallpaintsweredislodged.Thecomplexityofrestoringthismonumentislinkedtosalvagingthewallpaintingsandensuringthatthesanctityoftheinnercham-bersismaintained.Thisrequiresacarefullyorchestratedprocessofscreeningofftheinnersanctums,salvagingandproppingthestructure with the participation of the priests, the local communi-ty,theauthoritiesaswellasexpertsinvariousfields.

Kastamandap – the wooden pavilion

ThedamageonthemonumentsaroundHanumanDhokaDur-barSquarewasextensive.Kastamandap,theoldestmonumentwhichgaveKathmanduitsname(meaningwoodenpavilion)was

tragicallyhostingablood-donationcampaignwhenitcollapsed.ThecollapseofKastamandapraisesquestionsconcerningearlierinterventionsratherthandesignfaults.Intherushtoreconstructmonuments,simplifiedprocedureswereused.Itisimportanttounderstandthat therestorationprojectofKastamandapinthe1970s covered up the fact that one of the main four central posts wasnotrestingonasaddlestone.Atthebaseofmanyofthepoststhetendonsweremissingandtheholesinthesaddlestonefilled.The structure probably collapsed because it was not locked to the plinthandwasstandingononlythreeoutoffourmainposts.Wealso know that the structure did not collapse immediately and manywouldhavesurvivediftheyhadfled.Furtherresearchanddocumentationisrequiredtofullyunderstandwhathappened.

Rehabilitation of traditional settlements

Suchextensivedevastationof the low-risevernacularvillagehouseswasnotexpected.Thediscussionsaboutshelterquicklyflaredupwithwildcontributionsfloodinginfromalloverthe

Shoring to protect the façade from collapsing onto the main Hanuman Statue with the intact Agamchhen Temple that is raised on timber stilts over the palace

Archaeological investigations of the foundations of Kastamandap led by a team from Durham University found the foundations to be in perfect condition

Nepal 107

world.Highlydecoratedarchitectsjoinedthethrongsincomingupwiththe“idealdesign”.Therewasadrivetoget“pre-fab”buildingsonthemarket.Therewerecontributionsofdesignstest-ed under the harshest conditions of Caribbean hurricanes. There weredesignspresentedbyforeigndevelopmentagenciesofseis-micdesignsdevelopedinIndonesia.Amorepracticaldesignthatevenwell-meaningurbanitescouldhelpset-upwasthevaultedshelterofcorrugatedironsheeting.Inthemeantime,thevillagershadactuallysalvagedmaterialsthatwereavailableandconstruct-edshelters,cateringtotheirownneeds.Thedangerwas that theseblundersof the responseperiod

coulddetermoresustainablereconstructioneffortswhileintro-ducingmaterialsthatcouldpollutetheenvironment.Therearenoperfectsolutionstorebuildingthevillages.Atpresent,themostprioritised criteria are obviously the need for the shelters to be earthquake-resistant.However,theonlywayofensuringacertainlevelofseismicstabilityoveralongerperiodisbyprovidingacontinuous process of renewal. This will be the key consideration toestablishingsustainablereconstruction.Thegovernmentwillneedtodeliberateovertheseissuesandcomeupwithabindingpolicyonreconstructionforallinvolvedauthoritiesandagencies.The general trend for construction that is believed to be

“strong” is reinforcedcementconcrete framestructures.Thestructuralsystemisbasedonthecastingofcementconcreteandsteel reinforcement into a monolithic structure. This system func-tionsadmirablywellaslongasthemembersareproperlydimen-sionedandthematerialisintact.However,shouldthedesignbeinsufficientorthematerialsbedeterioratedovertime,itisnotpossible to renew this system without total demolition and recon-struction.Inthecontextofremotevillageswithlimitedresourcesthis periodic total reconstruction will not take place and death-trapsarecreated.Astructurebuilttobestrongtodaywillbecomeadeath-trapinafutureearthquake.

The process of renewal ensures maintenance and the continued replacementofdamagedelements.Thisrequirestheconstructionsystem to be such that replacement of elements is possible, which also links to the principles of reversibility. Should there be a lack oftimbertoreconstructthevastnumbersofvillages,themainstructuralelementsmightbereplacedbysteelorevenreinforcedconcreteelements.Iftheseindustriallymanufacturedelementsaredesignedtobeusedrespectingtraditionalconstructionsys-tems,thevillagerswillbeabletoreplacethemifandwhennec-essary.

The traditional settlements are the products of diverse cultural expressions.Allthecomponentsofthevillage,theshrinesandopen spaces, the individual houses, the terrain, the materials and theworkmanshipbecomeimportantforthespecificidentityoftheparticularvillage.Theseculturalaspectsare tangible,butlinkedtogetherbytheintangiblesignificancegivenbytheinhab-itants to the environment within which they live.

Strategic planning – pacing reconstruction

The earthquake response in respect to cultural heritage hasbeenstrategicallysegregatedintophases.Thefirstphaseoftwomonthswasexclusivelyreservedforearthquakeresponsewhichinvolvedpreparingtheaffectedculturalheritagefortheoncomingrains. This was followed by the monsoon season when the rains do not allow for much construction work to be carried out. The effortsoftheresponsephasearebeingmonitoredespeciallyinrespecttotheeffectsoftherainsondamagedmonuments.This

Indra Jatra being celebrated before the earthquake; despite the destruction this has continued, which ensures cultural continuity

Still lots of work to be done, taking a rest at Hanuman Dhoka

Sorting of salvaged wooden elements from Hanuman Dhoka Durbar Square

Nepal108

nextphasefocussingonplanningandresearchcomprisesfiveap-proaches(Weise2016).1.LegalApproach:Therewasanimmediateneedfortheprepara-tionofpoliciesandguidelines.ThePostEarthquakeRehabil-itationPolicyforCulturalHeritagewasformulatedbyateamfromtheEarthquakeResponseCoordinationOffice(ERCO)and was submitted to the ministry for adoption. The Conserva-tionGuidelinesforPost2015EarthquakeRehabilitation(Con-servationGuidelines2072)havebeenformulatedandadopt-ed.Theguidelinesalsolookatsites,monumentsandhistoricbuildingsovertimeandintroduceprovisionsformaintenanceand renewal. A post-disaster rehabilitation Procedures Docu-ment has been submitted for further discussions and adoption.

2.ResearchApproach:Extensiveresearchisrequiredtobetterunderstand the complexity of the sites in historical as well as technical terms. Detailed structural and material research of thedamageonmonumentssuchastheSwayambhuMahacha-ityaandHanumanDhokaPalacewillhelptoretainmostoftheoriginalstructure.UrbanarchaeologyatDurhamUniver-sityhasinvestigatedthefoundationofcollapsedtemplesandcross-sectionsoftheDurbarSquarestobetterunderstandthechronologyofthesesites.Geologicalresearchisrequiredtostudy stability of slopes and soil conditions. Furthermore, the safeguardingandsortingofsalvagedartefactsisbeingcarriedoutinsystematicmannerwithdetailedinventories.Alongwiththis,theconservationofmuralpaintinghasbeengoingon.

3.PlanningApproach:SeveralcomplexculturalheritagesitesandhistoricsettlementswillrequirespecificRehabilitationMasterPlans.ThesewillbepreparedforHanumanDhoka,Swayamb-hu,ChanguNarayanaswellasSankhu,NuwakotandGorkha.TheRehabilitationMasterPlanwillhelpclarifythemultitudeofinvolveddonors,managers,supervisorsandthecommuni-ties.Itwillalsodefinehowandoverwhattimeperiodthere-constructionwillrealisticallybecarriedout.Thiswillrequireproceduresforsupportingtherestorationofsettlementsandtraditionaldwellings.

4. Practical Approach: The rehabilitation and reconstruction of themonumentswillonlybepossibleifwehaveknowledgeable

and skilled artisans. The master crafts-persons must be identi-fiedandacknowledged.Theymustbeseenas“livingnationaltreasures”,astheJapanesedofor“keepersofimportantintan-gibleculturalproperties”.Thesystemofapprenticeshipmustimmediatelybeexpandedtoensurethatsufficientartisansaretrainedtoallowfortherestorationofthetangibleheritage.Thiswould have to be coordinated with the procurement of appro-priatematerials.Thegovernmentmustalsochangethesystemoftenderingandgivingsuchdelicateworktothelowestbidder.Asystemofprequalification,inclusionofartisansandqualitycontrol must be introduced.

5.InformationApproach:Thedamageassessmentislinkedtothecollection of a lot of information which will be closely linked tothepreparationforpost-earthquakerehabilitation.Thiswillrequireasystematicdatabaseandeasyaccesstoinformation.ForthisitwasdecidedtoestablishadatabasesystemusingARCHESastheinformationplatform.Theprocessofestab-lishingthedatabase,workingontheadaptationofthesoftwareasperlocalrequirements,andtheestablishmentofinventorieshasbeenchallenging.

Considerations for rehabilitation and cultural continuity

Therehabilitationofthecommunitiesandtheculturalheritagewilltakemanyyears.Aninitialsix-year-planisbeingpreparedsothatcertaintargetsaremetbyJuly2021.Thoughtherewillbeaformalsystemofcarryingouttherehabilitationofmanyoftheheritagesites,itwillbetheinformalinterventionsbythecom-munity that will be most critical. The response in most areas has beencontrolledandcommunitieshavebeenobstinatenottogiveintothedirecircumstances.Itisthisspiritofthecommunities,often in the form of the traditional Guthi system, that will be vi-taltoensurethatrecoverywilltakeplacerapidly(SharmaandShrestha2007).Theclashbetweenmodernengineeringinterpretationsandtra-

ditionalnon-engineeredknowledgeseemstohavecometoahead.Reconstructionisbeingproposedusingmodernengineeringpa-rameterswithoutevenproperlyassessingtheperformanceofthetraditionalstructureorunderstandingthereasonforthedamageorcollapse.WhydidthecentraltimbermastoftheBauddhanathStupagetdamaged?Wasitbecausethebaseoftheharmikahadbeencastusingcementconcrete?Wasthebrickmasonryinmudmortar in the plinth of Pratappur Temple shattered by the recent reconstructionofthesuperstructureinthemorerigidlime-surkhimortar?Didtheupperpartofthenine-storeypalaceatHanumanDhokacollapsebecauseofthefracturingofareinforcedcementconcretetie-beamintroducedduringthe1970srestoration?Therewere several tiered temples that collapsed that had concrete tie beams.Whatwasthecauseofthecollapse?EventhecollapseofKastamandapraisesquestionsconcerningearlierinterventionsratherthandesignfaults.Thelackofunderstandingofthetraditionalstructuresisalarm-

ing.Intherushtoreconstructcertainmonuments,simplifiedpro-ceduresareused.ItisimportanttounderstandthattherestorationprojectofKastamandapinthe1970scoveredupthefactthatoneofthemainfourcentralpostswasnotrestingonasaddlestone.Atthebaseofmanyofthepoststhetendonsweremissingandtheholesinthesaddlestonewerefilled.Thestructureprobablycollapsedbecauseitwasnotlockedtotheplinthandwasstandingon only three out of four main posts. We also know that the struc-

People lining up to pray at the Char Narayan Temple in Patan Durbar Square before its collapse

Nepal 109

ture did not collapse immediately and many people would have survivediftheyhadfled.Greatexpectationsareplacedonintangibleheritageastheve-

hicle for cultural continuity. The rehabilitation of the cultural sites willdependmoreonthestrengthoftheintangiblethanthatofthetangibleheritage.Wetalkofstrengtheningthemonumentstowithstandtheimpactofearthquakes.Therearemisconceivedideasfloatingaroundpromotingtheuseofmoderntechnologyand materials to ensure resilient structures. Over time it is not the structures that will persist. Cultural continuity can only be en-suredthroughtheknowledgeandskillsofthecommunitybeingpassedonfromgenerationtogeneration.

The measure of success of the rehabilitation process will de-pend on the continued performance of rituals, festivals and cel-ebrations.Theclearingofcertainspaceswasdeterminedbytheneed to carry out certain ceremonies. For example, the entrance chamber of Shantipur needed to be cleared for the priests to per-formcertaintantricritualson11June,pressurisingthosework-ingonthesalvagingofthefallenpiecesofmuralpainting.TheHanumanDhokapalaceareaneedstobeclearedtoensurethatthechariotsfortheIndraJatrafestivalscanbedrawnthroughtheceremonialroute.ThisisalsowhenthehugefaceofSetoBhairabisshowntothemassesandlocalalcoholflowsfromthemouthasPrasad.Thesurroundingstructuresare,however,inaprecariousstateandneedtobestabilised.FortheRatoMach-hendranath chariot this was the auspicious twelfth year when it

isdrawnfromBungamatitoPatan.However,itgotstuckwhencrossingastreamandisinaprecariousstate,sinceiftheceremo-ny is not carried out, the responsibility will be transferred from PatantoBhaktapur.Thesefestivalsmustbecontinuedandarecrucialforculturalcontinuity.Forexample,theCharNarayanTempleonPatanDurbarSquaretotallycollapsed,butthemaindeity was reinstated and covered with a temporary shelter allow-ingthecommunitytopray.With theearthquakeand theextensivedamage itcaused,a

wholeseriesofquestionshaveariseninrespecttoculturalcon-tinuityandtheuseofmoderntechnology.Beforebeginningwiththe reconstruction of traditional settlements and historical mon-uments, there must be a clear consensus on the approach and the reasonfortheseendeavours.Inrespecttoauthenticity,thesere-constructed structures must ensure a credible expression of their originalvaluethatwillensureculturalcontinuity.Atthesametime there must be further research done on the traditional ma-terials,technologies,structuralsystemsandformtodeviseanimproved means of reconstruction deeply rooted in the local tra-ditions. The extensive task of reconstruction will need to be coor-dinated to ensure that there is no duplication or misappropriation thatwillquestiontheverycoreoftheintegrityofthoseinvolved.Inanycase,thegrowingunderstandingofculturalheritagebeinginclusivewillrequirethecommunitytobeinvolved.Itwillbethroughthemotivationandskillsofthecommunitythatculturalcontinuity will truly be ensured.

Kai WeisePresident, ICOMOS Nepalpaharnepal@hotmail.com

ReferencesGovernmentofNepal.2007.The Integrated Management Frame-

work Document for the Kathmandu Valley World Heritage Site, DepartmentofArchaeology,unpublished.

Gutschow,N.1982.Stadtraum und Ritual der newarischen Städ-te im Kathmandu-Tal, Eine architekturantropologische Unter-suchung,Stuttgart.

GTZ / udle.1995. Images of a Century: The Changing Town-scapes of the Kathmandu Valley,GTZ/udle,Kathmandu.

Hagen,T.1960.Nepal, Königreich am Himalaya,Bern.Nepali,G.S.1965.The Newars, an Ethno-Sociological Study of

a Himalayan Community,Bombay.Sharma,D.R.andShresthaT.B.2007.Guthi: Community-based

Conservation in the Kathmandu Valley,UNESCOKathmanduOffice,unpublished.

Smith,W.W.1978.Mythological History of the Nepal Valley from Svayambhu Purana.

Weise,K.P.2016.Post Earthquake Reconstruction of Cultural Heritage in Nepal,ICOMOSNepal.

–(ed )2015,Revisiting Kathmandu, Safeguarding Living Urban Heritage,UNESCO.

– 1992, Kathmandu, The Metamorphosis & Present Issues, Case Study: Ason Chowk, Analysis of a Square,Thesis,FederalIn-stituteofTechnology,Zurich,unpublished.

CreditsAll photos taken by Kai Weise.

110

PAKISTAN

Lahore Orange Metro Train

Background

Lahore is the cultural capital of Pakistan. Apart from the World HeritagesiteofLahoreFortandShalimarGardensthereare62sitesthatareprotectedundertheAntiquities(Amendment)Act2012and176sitesthatarelistedunderthePunjabSpecialPrem-ises(Preservation)Ordinance1985.LahoreisalsoproudtohavethreeothermajorMughalperiodmonumentsonthetentativelist,namelyBadshahiMosque,WazirKhanMosqueandthetombsofEmperorJahangirandAsifKhanandtheAkbariSeraibetweenthetwotombs.ThewalledcityofLahorehasaveryrichheritagein terms of individual monuments as well as urban fabric com-prisingresidencesandcommercialestablishments. ThecoloniallegacyisalsodeeplyrootedwithintheCivilLines

areaandareasdevelopedbytheBritishovertheircentury-longrule. The population of Lahore today exceeds 10 million as the second-largestcityofPakistanandisgrowingatalmostthreepercentperannum,doublingitspopulationeverydecade,withspatialexpansionofthecityoveritsagriculturalhinterland.Thisgrowthhasitsimpactonthetransportofthemasses.Publictransportisnotveryefficientandoverthelasttwodec-

ades several transport studies have been carried out in order to improve the transportation systems.TheLahoreRapidMassTransitSystem(LRMTS)wasanoutcomeofthesestudieswhichrecommended four corridors for the city. The study proposed a rail-based mass transit prioritised network of the four lines of about97km,with82stations.Thestudyalsocompletedthefea-sibilitystudyofthe1stpriority(Green)Linein2007.Inparallel,theGovernmentofPunjab(GoPb)alsocommissionedconsult-antstoproceedwiththereferencedesignoftheGreenLine,and

alsothefeasibilityofthe2ndpriority(Orange)Line.Thesestud-ieswerecompletedin2008and2007respectively.Thefeasibili-ty studies concluded that the mass transit lines are economically viable and should be implemented as planned, i.e. approximately onelineaftereveryfiveyears.– GreenLine:27kmlongnorth-southalongFerozepurRoadfromKahnainthesouthtoShahdarainthenorth,with11.6kmlongasundergroundwithinthecitycentreand15.4kmlongasoverhead;

–OrangeLine:27.1kmlongalongMultanRoadfromDeraGu-jrantoAliTownonGTRoadwith20kmasanelevatedvia-ductand7kmundergroundthroughthedenselypopulatedcitywhere a number of historic sites and precincts are located;

– BlueLine:JinnahHalltoGreenTown–proposedfuture;– Purple Line: Data Durbar to Airport – proposed future.

However,in2012theGreenLinetrainsystemwasabandonedand converted to a rapid bus transit in collaboration with the Turkishgovernmentonthebuild – operate – transferbasis;itwasinauguratedonFebruary11,2013.Ithasbeendesignedasabar-rier-controlledlineon-gradewithan8.5kmelevatedtrack.TheelevatedportionofthebustrackrunsthroughtheheartofthecityalongFerozepurRoad,LowerMallandRaviRoadwheremanyhistoriccolonial-periodbuildingsarelocated.Thebarriersalongtheon-gradeportionhavedividedcommunitiesandtheelevatedcomponent is a visual intrusion.ThesecondpriorityOrangeMetroLinewasenvisagedtobe

27kmlongwithdetailedreferencedesignincorporatingtunneltechnology(TBM).Tunneltechnologyismoreexpensivethantheelevatedandcut-and-covertechnologyandalsotime-consuming.However,thelatteralsoinvolvesdisruptionoftheexistingcityutilityinfrastructureandthebuildings,communitydisruption,in-cludinglandacquisition,andvisualintrusion,particularlyinthehistoricpartofthecity.Italsoposesathreattoprotected/listed

Shalimar Gardens and hydraulic tanks on GT Road Construction of viaduct piers in front of Shalimar

Pakistan 111

heritagesites.Tunneltechnologyiscurrentlyemployedinmostpartsoftheworldasitovercomesallthenegativeaspectsofthecut-and-covertechnology.

The Orange Metro Line

ThesystemadoptedbythePunjabGovernmentin2014fortheOrangeLinehaschangedtheoriginallyproposedelevatedandTBMsystemwithanelevatedtrainfor25.4kmandcut-and-covertechnologyfor1.7kminthecentralareafromLakeRoadtoLakshmiChowkonMcLeodRoad,imposingdangertoher-itagesitessuchasvisualintrusionsanddisplacingthousandsofcommunities/people.Theproposalputstheoverallcostoftheprojectat$1.6billionbutdoesnottakeintoaccountthecostofshiftingtheinfrastructure,landacquisitionandreconstructionofdisruptedbuildingsandroads.Thecostofthevisualintru-sion of Lahore as a cultural site and its historic monuments is completelyignored,whichispriceless.Onaverage,theheightoftheelevatedportionis41feet,cuttingthrough12kmoftheheartof the historic and cultural centre of Lahore where the popula-tiondensityisalsoextremelyhigh.Twelvelistedandprotected heritagesitesarealongtheroutewithinafewmetresofthetrainline.Civilsocietyhasprotestedagainstthetechnologythatisbeing

employed,i.e.anelevatedviaductandcut-and-coverthroughthehistoricprecinctsofLahore.IthashelddemonstrationsfortheworktostopwhichtheGovernmentofPunjab(GoP)has

ignored.Thus,civilsocietywasleftwithnooptionbuttofileacaseintheLahoreHighCourtinDecember2015.ThecaseisongoingandinJanuary2016thecourtputastayontheconstruc-tionwithin200feetofthe12heritagesitesthatfallontheroute.InresponsetheGoPhasacceleratedthespeedofitsworksjustbeyond the 200 feet limit and 40 feet piers now stand as visual intrusionstotheseheritagesites.CivilsocietyhasalsodrawntheattentionofUNESCOtothedamagetotheWorldHeritagesiteofShalimarGardens,includingthehydraulictankswhichweredamagedin1999duetothewideningofGTRoad.ThepropertywasputontheWorldHeritageinDangerListuntil2012whenaftermucheffortitwasreinstatedbackontheWorldHeritageList.UNESCOPakistanandUNESCOParishavebothinstruct-ed the Government to halt all construction work in the vicinity of Shalimar.ThelatestupdatefromUNESCOaspertheirwebsiteisthefollowing:

The World Heritage Committee at its 38 th session (Doha, 2014) requested the State Party of Pakistan to submit to the World Her-itage Centre, by 1st December 2015, an updated report on the state of conservation of the Fort and Shalimar Gardens in La-hore property and the implementation of the decision of the World Heritage Committee.

In this context, the current UNESCO mission to Lahore (21 February 2016) will focus on information issues pertaining to the on-going Orange Metro Line project. In addition, it should be crucial that the Government of Punjab provides the World Heritage Centre, through the Federal Government, with the tech-nical details on the Orange Metro Line project, such as draw-

Construction of viaduct piers in front of Gulabi Bagh Construction of viaduct piers in front of Buddhu Ka Awa

Kinnaird School church on Nicholson Road Building typology on Mc Leod Road: Art Deco style

Pakistan112

ings, maps, technical data, etc. In particular the Heritage Im-pact Assessment is required on the basis of which a final report and working documents as well as a set of recommendations on this matter will be prepared and submitted to the World Heritage Committee at its 40th session for examination.

The state of conservation of this property will be reviewed by the World Heritage Committee at its 40 th session to take place from 10 to 20 July 2016 in Istanbul, Turkey.

TheprocessofinitiatingtheconstructionoftheOrangeLineisbeset with anomalies and the violation of the law of the land.

I. Violation of Laws

a. Pakistani law states that no new construction can be undertak-enwithin200feetoftheperimeterwallofaheritagesiteorlistedbuilding,seeAntiquitiesAct1975Article22,andThePunjabSpecialPremisesPreservationOrdinance1985,Sec-tion 11. The current situation is outlined below:

Buildings Protected under Antiquities Act 1975

1. ShalimarBagh(1641):perimeterwall,elevatedviaduct,dis-tance95feet

2. HydraulictanksofShalimarGardens(1641):elevatedviaduct,distance 7 feet

3. GulabiBaghGateway(1655):elevatedviaduct,distance69feet

4. BuddhukaAwa(mid-17thcentury):elevatedviaduct,distance59feet

5. Zaib-un-Nisa’sTomb(17thcentury):elevatedviaduct,dis-tance 110 feet

6. Chauburji(1646):elevatedviaduct,distance53feet

Buildings Listed under Punjab Special Premises Ordinance 1985

1. MaujDaryaDarbar(1591):excavationdistanceforcut-and-covertunnel,16feet

2. MaujDaryaMosque(associatedwithMaujDaryaDarbar):demolition

3. TheGeneralPostOffice(1902):excavationdistanceforcut-and-cover tunnel, 42 feet

4. LahoreCathedral(1898):sewagetreatmentpumpwithinthecompound of the church

5. ShahChiraghGarden(19thcentury):excavationdistanceforcut-and-covertunnel,66feet

6. StAndrewsChurch(1860):excavationdistanceforcut-and-covertunnel,6feet

7. TheSupremeCourtRegistry:excavationdistanceforcut-and-covertunnel,58feet

8. ShahChiraghDinBuilding:excavationdistanceforcut-and-covertunnel,66feet

9. LakshmiBuilding(1935):elevatedviaduct,distance34feet10. Numberofunlistedbuildingsdatingbacktothecolonialera

alongtheroute.

b. TheDirectorGeneral(DG)ofArchaeologyPunjabwhowasinchargeatthetimeofthebeginningoftheconstructiondidnotissuetheNoObjectionCertificate(NOC)whichisaprerequi-site if any activity is to take place within 200 feet of a protected monument.Thegovernmentignoredthisandbeganconstruc-

Lakshmi Building

Pakistan 113

tion. Aftervariouspublicproteststhegovernmenttriedtopres-surisetheDGtoissueanNOCwheretheOrangeLineviolatesheritagelaws.On12November2015,theDGwasremovedfromhispostandanewDGprovidedanNOCwithin48hours.

c. TheHeritageImpactAssessmentReport(HIA)wasinitiatedinFebruary2016attherequestoftheUNESCOmissionthatfinallypromptedthegovernmenttopreparetheHIA.Thiswasfivemonthsaftertheconstructionhadbeeninitiatedandsub-mittedtotheHighCourtinApril2016.Thisdocumentisanessentialcomponentofanyprojectpriortoitsimplementationprocesstoensureadequatemitigationandmonitoringsystemsareinplacefortheprotectionofheritagesites.TheHIARe-portpointsoutpermanentimpactonall12heritagesitesalongtherouteandhasrecommendedaseriesofmitigationmeas-ures which are yet to be implemented as construction work continues.

d. Multiplegreenspacesarebeingabsorbedbythemetrocon-structionandalargenumberofmaturetreesarebeingcut.Thereisnoinformationprovidedregardinginternationalcli-mateagreementsorenvironmentalprotocolsintheconstruc-tion process. Temperatures within the city are likely to rise as a result of these development initiatives and of the urban heat islandeffect.

II. Cultural Heritage and Community Dispersal/ Splintering

a. Manyaffectedcommunitiesarecloseknit,interdependentanduniqueculturalentitiesresidentintheirareasforacenturyormore.Manymorehavebeenresidentsince1947.KapurthalaHouseisonesuchareawhichhasalreadybeendemolished.SomecommunitieswhoselandwasbeingforciblyacquiredalsofiledacaseagainsttheGoPb.However,thegovernmentimmediatelysetaboutpayingcompensationtotheresidentsandbuyingthemoff.Largenumbersofpeoplelivinginthein-ner city areas have no property documents, and extended fam-ilieslivinginoneroomwithjointownershipareaveryeasybaittoacceptthecompensationandmoveouttopurchase/rentlegally.

b. Viabilityofpublicandprivatespace.TheOrangeLinetrackiselevatedataheightof41’for25.9kmofits27.1kmroute.Itpasseswithinmetresofdenselyoccupiedprivateandpublicspace,effectivelycompromisingbothprivacyandsecurity.

c. The250,000projectedpassengerstrengthwillbeabletoseeinto thousands of homes. Culturally this is not acceptable. Itwillthreatenthesecurityofchurchesandotherplacesofworship,aswellasofschools,colleges,etcandopenupthemost vulnerable of these to terrorist attacks. Current security measuresinresponsetoterrorismwillbecometotallyineffec-tive.Highwalls,barbedwirefences,securityguardswillallbe overlooked by the train.

III. Violation of Human Rights and Due Process

TheOrangeLinetrainroutehaschangedfourtimes.SincethepublichearingsannouncingtheprojectinJune2015,thepublichasbeengivennodefiniteinformationastothefinalroute,whileconstructionisunderwayandlargepartsofLahorehavebeendugupandpylonsinserted.Forexample,KapurthalaHouseresidents,many of whom live below the poverty line, have had their homes,

shopsandplacesofworshipdemolished,includinganunregis-teredImamBarga(congregationhallforShiacommemorationceremonies),asidefromtheshrineandmosqueofBabaMaujDarya,withouthavingreceivedadequateofficialnotification.AsageneralruleotherLahoreresidentshavealsobeenfor-

ciblytoldtovacatetheirhomesunderthefollowingconditions:i. Theyhavereceivedonly0.25ofthevalueofthevacatedprop-

erty as compensation. Full compensation will only be paid at a later date if residents can produce complete property owner-ship papers.

ii. All other residentswill receive nothing and their land ismarkedaspublic /government-owned.Alargenumberofcit-izensdonothavepropertypapers,becauseacquiringtheseisanarduousprocessrequiringtimeandmoneyforbribes.Mostresidentsbelongtothelowerincomestrata,ase.g.theresidentsofKapurthalaHousewhodonothavethefinancialbuffertoeitherfindalternativehousingortogetpropertyown-ership papers.

iii.ResidentsofKapurthalaHousehavebeenlivinghereforal-most70yearsormore.Thisisacommunitywithauniqueandancient cultural imprint.

iv.KapurthalaHouseresidents,JainMandirresidents,Shalamarbusinessowners,citizengroupshavebeenholdingprotestsconsistentlyagainsttheOrangeLineroutesinceconstructionhasbegun.

v. TheOrangeLinetrainandsimilarcompletedorplannedtrans-portnetworkprojectsprovidenofootorbicycleaccessacross;theyalsoremovespaceswhereinformalstallsprovidegoodsand services. They also divide the city and create exclusion zones by this fact.

IV. Transparency

Pakistan paid Rs. 92 million for a transport network feasibility studyin2006.ThisincludedtheOrangeandGreenLinetrainlinesandhadstringentmeasuresprotectingheritage,communityandtheenvironment.TheJICAplanwouldhaveusedtunneltech-nologywhichwouldnothaveimpactedthesurface.Mostissuespertainingtoheritageandcommunitydestruction,forciblelandacquisitionetcwouldhavebeenresolvedbythis.TheinterchangestationcurrentlypositionedontheKapurthalaHousecommunityandthreateningtheprotectedheritagesites(ShrineofBabaMaujDaryaandMaujDaryaMosque)wouldhavebeenpositionedonthecurrentcustomshousewhichisagovernmentbuilding.ThecurrentgovernmentrejectedthisstudyandpaidtheNORINCOTechnicalProposalforasecondstudy.ThecurrentOrangeLinetendershavebeenissuedonthebasisoftheNORINCOTechnicalProposal which proposes elevated viaducts and only a short 1.2 kilometredistanceusingcut-and-cover.TheHIAstudyaccordingtowhichtheimpactoftheconstructionofthemetrousingthistechnologyaftercompletionwillbepermanenthassofarbeenignoredandnomitigationmeasuresareinplace.ThePunjabGovernmentwantstocompletethisprojectbe-

forethe2018elections.ConsideringthespeedatwhichtheOr-angeLineisbeingbuiltthegovernmentwillprobablybeabletoachievethisgoal.However,itwillbeatthecostoflosingthesoulof the city of Lahore.

Fauzia QureshiVice President ICOMOS Pakistan

114

PERU

Rapport sur le centre historique de CuscoLapréservationdelaqualitéduCentreHistoriquedeCusco,re-connucommePatrimoinedel’Humanitéen1983,estgravementmiseendanger,àcausedumanqued’identificationparl’autoritémunicipaleetseséquipestechniques,ainsiquedelalégislationambiguëimposéeparl’Étatpéruvienauministèredelaculturepourcequiconcernelesattributionsetlaqualificationdespro-jets.Celaestrévélateurd’unmanqued’intérêtnotablepourlaprotectionducentrehistoriqueetlerespectdesréglementationsexistantes.Àlafindumoisdenovembre2015,celaaétémisenévidence

unefoisdeplus.LaCommissionTechniquedelaMunicipalitéProvincialedeCusco,danslaquelleinterviennentdeuxmembresadhocduMinistèredelaCulture,adonnésonautorisationpourlaconstructiondel’HôtelFourPointdeSheratond’unehauteurtotaledehuitétagesetdedeuxsous-sols.SituéauN º747delarueSaphiilpossèdeunesecondeentréeparl’AvenueDonBosco(laroutequiconduitàSacsayhuamán),àdeuxruesdelaPlazade Armas.

Ce bâtiment est composé de trois volumes, le premier de deux niveauxplusdescomblesdonnesurlarueSaphi,lesecondquiouvresurl’AvenueDonBosco,profitedelapentenaturelleduterrainetcomptehuitétages,letroisièmes’élèveégalementsurhuit niveaux et se situe entre les deux premiers.Laconstructionfaitirruptiondansl’environnement,d’unema-

nièrehautementagressivesansrespecterl’urbanismetradition-

neldelaville.Ellenes’adaptepasàlatopographieduversantquidescendverslarivièreSaphi,commecelaétaitfaitpendantl’èreinca,avecl’usagedeterrasses,etdanslavillecolonialedontlesplansetlesvolumescoïncidentàceuxquipréexistaient.Ellenes’adaptepasnonplusautissuurbain,danslequelbâtimentsetzonesnon-construites(coursetpatios)separtagentl’espace,puisquecetensembledeconstructionsmassifremplacel’archi-tecture traditionnelle dans la rue Saphi.Actuellementlesnormesquisontenvigueurdanslecentre

historiqueinterdisentlesconstructionsensous-sol,cependantcebâtimentpossèdedesniveauxsouterrainsquiontétécreusésdansleterrain,latéralementàlacanalisationincadelarivièreSaphi.Laconstructiondisposed’unepermissionmunicipaledepuis

2010,etdeschangementsdansleprojetoriginalontégalementétéapprouvésen2014.Lesautoritésn’ontpascommuniquésurlaconcordanceentreleprojetinitialetlaconstructionachevéenisurleséventuellesmodificationseffectuéesaucoursdel’édi-fication.

Histoire du projet

En2009,souslaresponsabilitédel’InstitutoNacionaldeCultura(INC;plustardDirrecciónDesconcentradadeCultura,organerégionalduMinistèredelaCulture)commencel’évaluationdudossier6622-2009,del’hôteldelacalleSaphi,présentéparlacompagnieR&GSAC,chargéedel’exécutionduprojet.En2010,lesrectificationscorrespondantesauxobservationsde

l’INCauprojetinitialsontprésentéesetledossierestalorsdéri-vépourapprobationàlaCommissionTechniquedel’institution(commissionforméedereprésentantsdescollègesd’architectes,membresdel’Université,etexpertsdelaMairiedeCusco).Lesobservations sont levées, et le dossier est approuvé par Résolu-tionDirectriceRégionaleN°252/INC-Cusco,enaccordaveclesconditionsnormativesenvigueur.Ceprojet initialétaitconforméd’unestructuredecinqvo-

lumes:troid’entreeuxdedeuxétages,undequatreétages,etledernierdedeuxétages,pluscinqétagesensoussol,pourrendrecomptedeladifférencedeniveauentrelesdeuxruesdélimitantleprojet.Unnouveauprojetfutprésentéen2014,approuvéetautorisé

parlacommissiontechniquedelamunicipalitédeCusco,etc’estceprojetquiestencoursdeconstruction.Le23décembrede2015,leDirecteurduCentreduPatrimoine

Mondialdel’UNESCOdemandeunrapportsurlaconstructiondel’hôteldelarueSaphiàl’AmbassadeurduPérou.Enconsé-quence, leMinistèrede laCultureconvoqueunecommissiond’expertspourrapportersurcethème.Lacommissiondésignéeestcomposéedecinqexperts,tousmembresdel’ICOMOSPérou.Iln’existepasd’informationsfiablessurdesatteintesportées

aupatrimoinearchéologiquedanslecadredeceprojet,bienque

Construction en 2013 de l’Hôtel Four Points de Sheraton, Calle Saphi N º 747. Vu d’en haut, on distingue dans la partie supérieure le bâtiment préexistant du Colegio Salesiano. A cette époque la hauteur était de trois étages dont un caché avec la façade sur la rue Saphi.

115

l’onaitdesrenseignementssurl’existencedetracesdeterrasse-mentsquidescendaientparleversantverslarivièreSaphi.Ilestprobablequ’àcetendroitlestravauxdeconstructionaientmisàdécouvertdesvestigesdeterrasses(voirunephotographiepu-bliéesurl’Internet;fig.##).Le29Décembre2015,suiteauxprotestationscitoyennes,la

municipalité,parlarésolutiondelagestionmunicipale822,adéclaré la nullité dumandat de licence de construction 155SDAUR-GDUR-MC-2014,du29Décembre,2014,pourinfrac-tionàlaréglementationurbanistiquedeprotectionducentrehis-torique.Cependant,laconstructionacontinué.Finalement,cen’estquele26février2016quelesfonction-

nairesdelamunicipalitédeCusco,armésd’unmandatjudiciaire,ontpupénétrerdans lechantiereteffectivementparalyser laconstruction(LaRepublica27/02/16).Ils’agitducasleplusmédiatiquegrâceauxprotestationsdes

citoyensmaiscen’estqu’unexempleparmid’autresdecequisepassedanslecentrehistoriquedeCusco.Uneautreconstructionrécente,l’HôtelHilton,situédansle

quartiertraditionneldeSantaAna,AvenueLaRaza,aubasdelaPlazaSantaAnaaétéinaugurérécemment.Cebâtimentutiliselapentedelamêmemanière;ilneprésentequ’unétageauniveaudel’AvenueLaRazamaissedéveloppederrièreenprofitantdudénivelénaturel.DanslaPlazadesArmasilnes’imposepasdemanièreagressivemaisvudeSanPedroetdesquartiersOuestet Sud-Ouest il apparait clairement comme un élément introduit

quinuitàl’harmonieduvieuxquartierhistoriquedu«TempledeSantaAna».Apparemment,lavalidationdesprojetsparleComitétech-

niquedelamunicipalitéprovincialedeCuscoselimiteàl’ob-servationdurendusousunangleuniquesanspriseencompteduvolumedel’ensemblenidesmodificationsqu’ilinduitsurletissuurbaind’unemanièreplusglobale.

Ces bâtiments, semblables dans leur fonction et leur ampleur remplacentdenombreusesconstructionspluspetitesainsiquedesvergersetdescoursanciennes.Cesconstructionssansquali-té architecturale ne respectent aucune des normes de hauteur, de matériauxoudecouvertureetellesmodifientconsidérablementletissuurbainetlepaysagequisontlescaractéristiqueslesplusinestimablesducentrehistoriquedeCusco.Demême,danslazonetampon,quidevraitêtrelazonequi

sertdetransitionentrelecentrehistoriqueetlanouvellezonedelaville,lesconstructionsnerespectentaucunsrèglements.Cettezoneencombréedebâtimentsdedifférenteshauteurs,etautreele-mentsintrusifsetaggressifsdanslecontexteducentrehistorique(parexamplelematerieldetoiture)aunimpactnégatifenacca-blantlazonehistoriqueetsesmonuments,quiétaientautrefoisdesrepèresvisiblesetmarquantsdanslaville.Auproblèmemajeurdesnouveauxbâtiments,s’ajoutelafai-

blessedel’applicationdesréglementationsconcernantletrai-tementdesfaçades,lerespectdel’authenticité,l’abusdesaffi-chagespublicitairesetlapollutionvisuelle.

Les bâtiments traditionnels sont adaptés à la topographie, descendant en terrasses vers le vieux lit de la rivière Saphi.

116

Dans les quartiers traditionnels, des bâtiments qui ne respectent pas les paramètres établis dans le plan directeur, qu’il s’agisse de la hauteur, des matériaux, ou du traitement, n’ont généralement pas de permis de construire. La municipalité ne fait pas appliquer la législation relative aux autorisations et à l’exécution des travaux.

Calle Suecia : à un demi-pâté de maison de la Plaza de Armas, il n’existe pas de contrôle de l’aspect de l’application des réglementa-tions ; les bâtiments sont considérés comme simples supports pour affichage.

Violeta Paliza, Jean-Jacques Decoster, Roberto Samanez, Manuel Ollanta AparicioComité ICOMOS Cusco

Vue de la zone tampon, entre le Temple et la Plaza de Belén (sud-ouest), avec perte totale de l’harmonie du tissu urbain traditionnel dans lequel s’imposent les bâtiments qui ne respectent pas les exigences minimum de couverture et de hauteu.

117

RUSSIA

Inside and Outside the Moscow KremlinInitsversatility,theMoscowKremlinstandsoutasanextraordi-naryculturalobject.Itsformidablecrenellatedwallsencompasseverythingthatisconsideredde rigeur for the historic nucleus of acity,andevenmore.ThroughtheepochsofRussianhistory,theKremlinhasalwaysbeensynonymouswiththecityofMoscowandtheRussianstate.Today,itretainsafirmfootholdintheepi-centreofcurrentRussianpoliticsandgovernance.Initsspacioussquaresandcourtyards,onewitnessesadelicatebalancebetweenpastandpresent,betweenagrandarrayofoldmonumentsandhistoricalmuseumsontheonehand,andthesomberofficialquar-ters occupied by the President, his administration, and even the guardsoftheKremlinRegimentontheother.Theuniqueobliga-tiontoensurethesmoothfunctioningoftheofficeofthenation’sleader adds to the burden of this ancient ensemble.Unlikeotherurbanareas, theKremlinanditssurroundings

are restricted territory that fall under the purview of the Federal GuardService(FSO)andthePresident’sAdministration.Deci-sionspertainingtothecontrolandmaintenanceofthisterritoryare almost always made behind closed doors, and approved plans aredeclaredtothepublicduringtheimplementationphase.Today,thebufferzonearoundthisWorldHeritagesite1 has be-

comeahotbedofvariousenterprises.Inasituationwhereculturalprioritiesareignored,it’sanybody’sguesswhattheconsequencesofsuchlarge-scaleactivitywillbeontheoutstandinguniversalvalueoftheKremlin.Hereisabriefoverviewofthehotspotsinthebufferzonethatarecurrentlysubjecttoarchitecturalin-tervention.

JustbehindtheSpasskyGate–theceremonialentrancetotheKremlin–the14thKremlincorpusisbeingpulleddown.TheadministrativebuildingthatstoodonthisspotforovereightyyearswastheonlylargebuildingintheKremlinthatwasnotaccorded the status of a protected monument. President Putin has supportedtheideaofdismantlingthisbuildingandrestoringthetwomonasteriesthatgracedthissitepriortothe1930s.However,theexpertcommunityremainshighlyskepticalofthepossibilityof a faithful reconstruction of these monasteries due to the lack of the basic data.Totheeast,theRedSquareishemmedinbythe19thcentury

UpperandMiddleMarketRowsthatformaunifiedensemble.TheUpperRowshousetheGUM,thedepartmentstorethatre-mainsthemeccaofhigh-endshoppinginMoscow.TheMiddleRowsexistedforalongtimeunderthejurisdictionoftheDefenceMinistrybeforetheyweretransferredtotheFederalGuardSer-vice.TheFederalGuardServicepromptlybeganthereconstruc-tion of this complex, the net result of which was the partial reno-vationofonehistoricbuildingcoupledwiththetotaldestructionoffourbuildingsinthecourtyard.Severalundergroundlevelswerealsoexcavatedinthecourtyard.TheMiddleMarketRowsnow wait to become part of the famous Kremlin museums.BorovitskayaSquare,thelegendarywellspringfromwhich

Moscowroseasafortifiedtownatthejunctionoftraderoutes,islocatedtothewestoftheKremlin,infrontoftheBorovitskyGate.AttheinitiativeoftheRussianMilitary-HistoricalSociety,chairedbytheRussianMinisterofCulture,VladimirMedinsky,agiantstatueofSt.Vladimirwillbeerectedonthissquare.Thestatue,whoseheightisplannedtoexceed20metres(anotchhigherthanthehighestKremlinwalls),willassertitselfasthenew architectural dominant in the vacant space between the

General view of the Zaryadye construction site

Russia118

KremlinandthePashkovHouse,aneo-classicalmansionofthe18thcentury.AtPresidentPutin’sbehest,theformersiteofHotelRussia,

dismantledin2006,wasallocatedtotheconstructionofapark.HotelRussiawaslocatedinZaryadye(literallymeaning‘behindtherows’inRussian)behindtheshoppingarcadesontheRedSquare.ZaryadyeistheoldestdistrictinMoscowbeyondtheKremlin walls. An intricate web of medieval streets lined with old buildingsexisteduntilthemid-20thcentury.Mostofthesebuild-ingswererazedtothegroundthereafterandremainunexploredto this day. This area was surrounded by the walls of Kitai Gorod, a16th-centuryfortress.Partsofthefortresswallandotheroldconstructionshavesurvivedbelowgroundlevelandareavailableforarchaeologicalresearch.ZaryadyewastheunfortunatevictimofStalin’sinsatiablepas-

sionformonumentalism.Duringtheperiodfrom1930to1950,severalprojects tobuildskyscrapersweredesignedand laterabandoned.The1935masterplancalledforthedemolitionofZaryadye,clearingspaceforthePeople’sCommissariatofHeavyIndustry,but theprojectdidnotmaterialise.Thenextprojectinvolvedbuildingaresidentialstructureforpartyleaders(2ndhouseoftheCentralExecutiveCommittee).Finally,inthelate1940s,theconstructionofahigh-risebuildingfortheMinistryof

State Security was envisioned by Dmitry Chechulin, a city plan-nerandleadingfigureofStalinistarchitecture.ThisbuildingwasprojectedtobethecrowninggloryofStalinistskyscrapers–cer-tainlythetallestamongtheeight.ConstructionwasterminatedintheearlystagesafterStalin’sdeathin1953,andthebuildingframework was dismantled. The same Chechulin returned to the Zaryadyestagetenyearslaterwithaproposaltobuildthelargesthotel in Europe.

HotelRussia,anoutsizedmodernisticparallelepiped,occupiedanentireblockanddominatedfor40years,squashinganyspa-tialcompetitionfromnearbyobjects,includingtheKremlin.Theconstruction of this hotel precipitated the complete destruction of theolddistrict.Onlyahandfulofuniquemonumentsandaminorfragmentofthe16th-centuryfortresswallsurvivedtheravage.LiningVarvarkaStreet,theydeterminedthelookofthecityandseemedintrinsicallyconnectedtotheWorldHeritagesitesoftheKremlinandtheRedSquare.TheChambersoftheRomanovs–thefamilynestofRussia’s

lastrulingdynasty–becameamuseuminthemiddleofthe19thcentury.TheChamberoftheOldEnglishCourt(16th –17thc.)istheoldeststonecivicbuildingoutsidetheKremlinandthefirstprestigiousofficeofaforeignstateinMoscow.ZnamenskyMon-asterycomplex(foundedin1631),thechurchesofSt.Varvara(1796 –1801),St.GeorgeonthePskovHill(1626),St.MaximtheBlessed(1698–99),andtheConceptionofSt.Anna(16thc.)areallhistoricalmonumentsofthe16th –17thcenturies.

An early 20th century complex of residential and administra-tivebuildingsgroupedtogetherunderacommonaddress–Var-varkaStreetno.14–isalsoamongtheluckysurvivors.DuringSoviet times, additional storeys were sometimes built on top of thesebuildingswithoutviolatingtheplanningstructureordam-agingtheinteriordecor.HotelRussiawasdemolishedin2006afterordinarycitizens

andexpertshadconcurredinbrandingthehotelasadiscordantobjectinthehistoriccentreofthecity.Foralmostadecade,thelandstoodinruinsuntilanextravagantlandscapeprojectwaslaunched.Theprojectthatoriginallywontheinternationalarchi-tecturalcompetitionhasundergonesignificantchanges.2 All of themincreasethevolumeofconstructionworkandthefinalcostoftheproject.Theoriginallandscapeprojectnowhasseveralap-

Demolition of the inner buildings of the middle rows

Zaryadye construction siteHotel project in Zaryadye

Russia 119

pendices:aconcerthallwith1500seatsandastreetamphitheaterfor4000people;anewhotelcomplex;undergroundparkingfacil-ities;tensofthousandsofsquaremetersofofficespace.TheriverviewoftheKremlinandSt.Basil’sCathedralwillbeblockedbya new observation deck, whose supports are likely to pulverise theundergroundremnantsoftheKitaiGorodfortresswalls.Alltheseunplanned‘accessories’willmakethefinalprojectjustasspace-consumingasthedestroyedgargantuanHotelRussia.

Overthepast25years,theurgeforurbandevelopmentneartheKremlinhasneverstopped.AnundergroundshoppingcomplexwasbuiltinManezhSquareatastone’sthrowfromtheKremlin;HotelMoscowwasleveledanderectedanewwithtotallylostinteriors;thebuildingofGostinyDvorbuiltbythefamousItalianarchitectGiacomoQuarenghiisnowcappedbyaglassdome;Kutafya Tower now has a checkpoint for Kremlin visitors; and the Tainitsky Garden can now boast of a helipad.

Petr MiroshnikCoordinator of the public ‘watchdog’ movement ‘Arkhnadzor’ for the preservation of historic Moscow

View of the Kremlin from Zaryadye

Footnotes1MoscowKremlinandRedSquare,Moscow,inscribedontheWorldHeritageListin1990.

2Authors:DillerScofidio+Renfro(US),HargreavesAssociates,Citymakers,TranssolarKlimaEngineering,BuroHappold.Projectlaunchedin2013;toberealisedin2017.

Russia120

Will the Medieval Town of Vyborg Lose Its Authenticity?Historical background

ThetownofVyborgliesonthenortheastcoastoftheGulfofFinland, close to the border between the Russian Federation andFinland.Administratively,VyborgispartoftheLeningradregion(oblast).ThehistoryofVyborgspansoversevencen-turies.VyborgwasfirstapartofSwedenandreceivedatowncharter in1403, thenpartofRussiaasa townof theGrandDuchyofFinland(1710–1917),thenpartoftheindependentrepublicofFinland(1917–1944),afterthatpartoftheSovietUnion,andsince1991itbelongstotheRussianFederation.VyborghasalwaysbeenanimportanttradecentrebetweenEast

andWest.TheSwedish,Finnish,RussianandGermanlanguag-escreatedamulticulturalatmosphere.ItwasonlyafterWorldWarIIthatitbecameaclosedbordertown,poorandfarfromthemetropolisesofMoscowandLeningrad(after1991againSt.Petersburg).Vyborgbelongs,togetherwithStockholm,VisbyandTallinn,

tothegroupofmedievalfortifiedharbourcitiesoftheBalticSea.ThecastlewasfoundedbySwedishcrusadersin1293.IntheMiddleAgesthe townwassurroundedbystonewalls,whichwere later renewed. An example of these later constructions is theroundcanontowerbuilt in1547–1550,whichstillstandsonthemarketsquare.Inthe17thcenturythemedievalirregularstreetpatternwasregulatedbyarectangularstreetgrid,whichlargelyremainstothisday.TheconstructionofnewfortificationswestofVyborgbeganaftertheGreatNorthernWar(1700 –1721),when the town was ceded to the Russian Empire. Work on this fortress,calledtheCrownofSt.Anna,beganin1731andwaslargelycompletedby1742.Untilthe1860s,alltrafficfromthewestleadingintothetownpassedthroughthevaultedgatesoftheCrownofSt.Anna.AftertheCrimeanWarinthe1850sitwas noted that the defensive constructions needed improvement.

Mostoftheoldfortresswasconsideredtobeuselessandanewfortificationsystemwasbuiltbetween1860and1877onanearbyhillintheeastpartofthetown,latercalledBatteryHill,Bata- reynaya Gora.

Each period of this history has left its own marks on the present townscape. In1809,TsarAlexanderIconqueredtheeasternprov-inces of Sweden and formed a new political unit of these areas by foundingtheGrandDuchyofFinland,inwhichVyborgandtheadjoiningareaswereincorporatedin1812.VyborgsoongrewtobecomethesecondlargesttowninFinland.In1917,Finlandbe-cameanindependentrepublic.AfterWorldWarII,KareliaalongwithVyborgwascededtotheSovietUnion.Thetownwasnotdevastatedbyrealstreetfightsduringthe

war, but the central area was heavily bombed. The Finns were evacuated and the Soviet state took over an empty and ruined town,whichwasthenrepopulatedbyRussians.ThefirstRus-

sian decades were almost as fatal as the war, the new rulers also demolishingmanyrepairablebuildings.However,theoldtownstructureremainedandthusthericharchitecturalandarchaeolog-icalheritagestillexists.

Protection of the heritage

Inthe1970s,whenthesecondgenerationofRussiancitizensgrewup,theirinterestwasarousedinthehistoryoftheirhometown.InearlySovietplans,thehistoricalcentreofVyborgwasprioritisedasatargetofrestoration.In2010,thetownwasin-scribed on the list of historical settlements of the Russian Fed-eration. Atpresent,Vyborgasalistedhistoricalsettlementhas264her-

itageobjects,ofwhich17areclassifiedasfederallyvaluable,81asregionallyvaluable,and166arelistedasculturalmonuments.Thedefinition“culturalheritageobject”canmeaneitherasinglebuildingorconstruction,oralargerentityofbuildings.Thescopeandrichnessofthetown’svalues,however,exceedthepresentday’sofficiallyacceptedandappliedevaluationsystems.Itisnec-

“Linna” in the middle of the old city (photo Maija Kairamo, 2013) Progonnaja uliza 10, reconstruction of a bombed house, rebuilt in 1994 (photo Maija Kairamo 2014)

Russia 121

essarytodevelopadeeperunderstandingofthetruecharacterofVyborg’surban,architectural,archaeological,culturalandartisticheritage.Thisrequiresadetaileddocumentationandevaluationofthetownstructure,itsbuildingsandarchaeologicalfindings.Preparatory material for this has been collected by Russian and Finnish experts.ThelegislationoftheRussianFederationontheprotection

andconservationoftheculturalheritageisrelativelywelles-tablished and theoretically provides a framework for protection. However,thislegalinstrumentdealingwiththeprotectionofthecultural,archaeologicalandarchitecturalheritagehasbe-come a complex bureaucratic and hierarchical system that is ineffective.Thenecessaryplanningprocesses,statements,spec-ifications,decisionsandpermissionsrequirefinancialresourcesandlotsoftime,andyetinthemeantimethefragileheritageismoreorlessbreakingintopieces.ThepresentstateandtheprospectsforVyborg’sheritageareasadexampleofthisprob-lemandshouldarousebothinterestandconcernamongthein-ternational community.

Present state of the heritage

ThenetworkofstreetsinVyborg’shistoriccentrehasescapeddramaticpost-warchanges.Thehistoriccentrecomprisesacon-siderablenumberofvaluablebuildings,whicharecentraltothetown’sidentity.Theseincludethebelltowerandtheruinsoftheformer cathedral, the Round Tower, the churches of the Val-dis-trictandthemarkethall.Buttheoldtownshouldbeseenasanentity,wherealsoordinarybuildingsfromvariousages,partlydilapidatedandpartlyaltered,aregenuine,authenticdocumentsofthetown’shistory.Vyborgisapoorborder town,withapopulationofaround

80000.Atpresenttherearenoadequatelegalinstrumentsfortheprotectionofbuildings.Vyborg’smasterplanlacksanappropriatecorrespondencebetweentheprotectionzonesandexistinghistor-ical and cultural values. The necessary document for the protec-tionzones,whichtheRussianscalla“specification”,requiresapaymenttotheOblastof150000rubles(c.3750euros),whichthetownhasnotyetagreedtopay.

There are a few positive examples of restoration of local ar-chitecturalobjects.ThefirstworthmentioningistherestorationoftheCentralCityAlvarAaltoLibrary,originallydesignedbythe world-famous Finnish architects Alvar and Aino Aalto. The librarybuildinghasFederalmonumentstatus.The20-year-longrestorationprocess–ajointRussian-Finnishproject–wascom-pletedattheendof2013.Thebuildingwasrestoredandcon-servedusingmostlytraditionalbuildingtechnologies.Specialcarewasgiventotheoriginalconstructionandfittings,butalsoafew of the later Soviet layers were conserved.

Another monument of Federal status is the Pantsarlaks bastion datingfrom1579–80,whichbelongstotheeasterndefensivefor-tifications.In1930,theFinnisharchitectUnoUllbergdesignedontopofthebastionanartmuseumandartschool.InitiatedbytheHermitage,LeningradOblastandmunicipalauthorities,anexhibitioninstituteHermitageVyborgwasfoundedandthewholecomplex was restored and re-opened in 2010.Alistedmonument,anapartmentbuildingatProgonnayaStreet

76,datingfromthe17thand18thcenturies,wasrenovatedbyaprivateowner,thehistorianBairIrintseyev,whoopenedanexhi-bitionintherestoredbuildingabouttheSoviet-FinnishWarandthe so-called Great Patriotic War.

In summer2013, the renovationof a red-brickneo-gothicbuildingatVyborgskayaStreet25,datingfrom1903,wascom-pletedandnowhousesachildren’sartcentre.TherestorationwasfinancedwithbothOblastandlocalbudgetfunds.Comprehen-sive restoration work will also start soon in the famous historic parkofMonRepos.Thehistoryoftheparkbeganin1788whenthechairmanoftheScientificAcademyofSt.Petersburg,LudvigHeinrichNicolay,boughtalargeestateinthevicinityofVyborg.Atthebeginningofthe19thcenturyawoodenneo-classicalman-sionwithalibrarywasbuilt,andsmallbridges,pavilions,andstatuesappearedinthepark.TheparkanditsbuildingshaveFed-eralmuseumandmonumentstatus.MonReposisparticipatinginaninternationalprogramme“TheprotectionanduseoftheRus-sianCulturalHeritage”,ajointprojectoftheMinistryofCultureoftheRussianFederation,theRegionalAdministrationandtheWorldDevelopmentBank.ThebudgetfortheMonReposproject

Demolished block in the middle of the town (photo Maija Kairamo, April 2013)

The Crown of St. Anna southern gate (photo Maija Kairamo 2014)

Russia122

is$23million,athirdofwhichcomesfromtheBank,andtherestfromFederal,OblastandVyborgRegionbudgets.Theworksstartedin2012andshouldbecompletedin2016.Buttherealstateofthehistorictownisdramatic.Manybuild-

ingsinthehistoriccentreareatpresentabandonedandalmostcompletelyruined.InApril2013,ablockinthemiddleofthemedieval town structure was demolished. This block included somebuildingsthathadbeenregisteredin1993asbuiltheritagebytheLeningradOblastInspectorofProtectionandConservationofHistoricalandCulturalMonuments.Theownerwasinformedabouttheprotection,butnothingwasdonetorenovatethebuild-ingsduringthetwentyyearsandtheauthoritiesoftheVyborgregiondecidedtodemolishthebadlyruinedblockforsafetyrea-sons. The demolition was stopped, however, by the Governor of theLeningradOblastAleksanderDrozdenko.ThebuildingatKrepostnayaUlitsa3,theso-called“Domus”,

wasbuiltin1904andapproachesthehighestpointofthestreet.Thebuildingsurvivedthewar.Inthe1980stherewereplanstoconvertthebuildingintoahotel,buttheworkswereinterruptedandafterthatthebuildingwaslefttothe“elements”.OnJuly13,2014,afirestartedatSevernyiVal 11, a four-sto-

rey-highbuildingerectedin1897.Thefiredestroyedtheroof,thecornertowerandtwoupperstoreys.Thisbuildingissignificantfor the northern townscape.Severalotherbuildingsintheoldestpartofthetownareeither

abandonedorpartlyruined.Theseinclude:theHackman&Cobuilding(1909)atSevernyiVal7,whichisempty;theGovern-er’shouse(1873)atKrepostnayaUlitsa22,whichhasdeteriorat-

ed;UlitsaStorozhevoiBashni4(1894),whichisoneofthefewwoodenhousesinthecentre;anoldfirewoodstorageshed(c.1898)atVyborgskayaUlitsa8,whichisinaruinedstate;andtheOldDominicanMonastery,foundedin1392andconvertedintoaLutheranchurchin1833,atVyborgskayaUlitsa13,whichisina ruined state.

A real threat appeared in 2011, when an investor received per-missionforanewbuildinginthecentreoftheoldtown.Theauthorities had formed a new plot from two and a half older plots, where also some ancient vaulted cellars were situated. Since the masterplanlacksprotectionzonesandastherearenolegalin-strumentsfortheprotection,thebuildingpermissionwasgiventoanoverlylargebuilding,leadingtothecreationofaDisney-land-likecastle.Inaddition,nodocumentationofthehistoriccel-larswascarriedout.Thequalityofthebuildingtechniques,thearchitecturalformsandthedetailingareinadequate,withlightconcreteblocks,plasticwindowframes,etc.ThisbuildingevenhasaFinnishname,“Linna”(meaning“Castle”).Theseverethreat to the urban fabric is that private investors can act on com-mercialandspeculativeinterestswithoutpayingrespecttothereal historical environment.

Legislation, official activities and financial problems

Withreferencetothedemandsofthepresentlegislationofthehistoricallyvaluablesettlements,in2013theCulturalCommittee

The city structure of the old town in 1933, the medieval city wall marked on the map (seminar paper by Petri Neuvonen 2014)

Russia 123

oftheLeningradOblastpreparedanapplicationforfundingthescientificresearchfortheplanningoftheprotectionzonesoftheculturalheritageobjectsinVyborg.Suchfundingshouldbepro-videdbythefederalprogramme“RussianCulture2012–2018”.Thegovernorof theLeningradOblasthas appealed to the

chiefofstaffoftheOfficeofthePresidentoftheRussianFed-eration,SergeiIvanov,totransferthehistoricobjectsoffederalstatustothepossessionoftheOblast.ThiswouldgivetheOblastthe possibility to fund the restoration of the monuments with a specialbudget.Primarilythiswouldmeanthatthe17thcentu-ry clock tower, which has acute cracks in the basement, could be conserved. The clock tower presently has no use; it has been opentothe“elements”andusedasa“publictoilet”.Suchmisuse,however,wasbroughttoanendwhenlocalactivistslockedthedoor.Theactionsareapositivesignaboutthecitizens’interestinheritageproblems.Immediatelyafterthefireinsummer2013atSevernyiVal11,

thegovernmentoftheVyborgregiondecidedtopreservethepart-lydamagedhouseandtrytofindanappropriateinvestor.Alsofundingforurgentprotectiverepairwasimmediatelygranted.This meant that research on the technical conditions, provisional protection and restoration of the preserved parts could be carried out.Accordingly,copiesoftheoriginaldrawingswereorderedfromFinnisharchives.However,thebuildinghasnowremainedwithout any protection for several years.Alsoaspecialistgrouphasbeennominatedtoplanthestrategic

programmefortourisminVyborg.TheauthoritiesofVyborghavebeguntounderstandthatthehistoricandculturalheritagecanbeanimpulseforeconomicgrowthinthetown.Butstill,whatismissingisalong-termfundingforthecom-

pleterestoration,conservation,repairandbuildingofthewholeentityoftheoldcentre,withitslistedandregisteredmonuments,ordinaryhousesandthenecessarynewbuildingstofillthelacu-nae.

How to protect the authenticity of the old town

Atfirst,anydemolitionandconstructionworkorestablishmentofnewbuildingplotsinthehistoricalcentreshouldbeprohibited.At present – ever since the replacement of the socialist system of governance–theownershipoflandisunclear.Theurbanstruc-ture of the old town based on the blocks and plots as they existed in1933shouldformthebasisforthefuturerealestateformation,planningandbuilding.Theurbanpattern,itsstructuralelements,streetgrid,plots,andheights,scaleandmaterialsofthebuildingsare important elements of the town and should be respected when future development is planned. Therearemanyemptysitesandruinedremainsofbuildings

intheoldtowncentre.Howshouldthesebefilled?Shouldtheoldtowncentreinthefuturebefilledwithreconstructions?Mostinternational recommendations are not in favour of reconstruc-tions.Infact,ICOMOSwasfoundedin1965ontheinitiativeofUNESCOtocreateacriticalattitude,wheninmanyEuropeancountriesrebuildingmeantreconstructionofthebombedbuild-ingsandtowns.The ICOMOSGeneralAssembly on November 28, 2011

adopted The Valetta Principles for the Safeguarding and Man-

agement of Historical Cities, Towns and Urban Areas. This doc-umentgivesvaluablerecommendationsforsolvingtheproblemsofVyborg.TheDisney-fashion“Linna”caseshowsthatthehis-toric structure of the town plan, the town and street views, and thearchaeologicalheritageareendangered.Anadditionalthreatistheuncontrolledandinferiorqualityofcontemporarybuildingtechnologies.

The future authenticity of the historic centre must be based ontraditionalbuildingtechnology,workmanshipandmaterials.Thismeansthatthenewbuildingsshouldbebuiltinatraditionalmanner, with massive brickwork plastered with lime plaster, and paintedwithlimepaint.Thevolumeofthenewbuildingsshouldbeinbalancewiththesurroundings,andtheheightoftheeavesandtheformsoftheroofsinharmonywiththestreetspace.Inthiswaythenewconstructionswouldliveandgainapatinainthesamewayastheoldsurroundings,whilestillallowingfree-domtoplananddesigninacontemporaryarchitecturallanguageandatthesametimefulfillingthemodernfunctionalneedsofthecitizens.ProgonnayaUlitsa10,afreereconstructionbuiltin1994atthesiteofabombedtwo-storeybuildingfrom1791,isanacceptable example.ThejointRussian-Finnishventurefortherestorationofthe

Alvar Aalto Library demonstrated that in Russia one still can findtraditionalbuildingskills,goodcraftsmanshipandpeoplewho can work with their hands. This made it possible to retain thegoalofhighqualitybuilding,andthewell-trainedworkingteammanagedtofulfilthisdemandingjobandachievedasuc-cessful result. Such an experience should be fully utilised in fu-ture works.TheICOMOSInternationalScientificCommitteesonShared

BuiltHeritageandonHistoricTownsandVillagesshouldcon-sidertherevivalofVyborgasaninternationalpilotprojectandshouldactaspracticaladvisersinthecomingyears.

Maija KairamoICOMOS Finland

Krepostnaja uliza 3 built in 1904; the last inhabitants left 25 years ago (photo Maija Kairamo 2013)

Russia124

BibliographyNeuvonen,Petri(1994).Viipurin Historiallinen Keskusta, Rak-

ennusperinnön nykytila / The Historic Centre of Vyborg, The Architectural Heritage. SuomenHistoriallinenSeura,SocietasHistoricaFinlandiae:Helsinki,Finland.

Neuvonen,Petri(2008).Viipuri: rakennusperinnön seitsemän vuosisataa. SuomalaisenKirjallisuudenSeuranToimituksia1156:Hämeenlinna,Finland.

Neuvonen,Petri;Pöyhiä,Tuula;Mustonen,Tapani(1999).Vii-puri Vyborg: opas kaupunkiin / Town Guide. Rakennustieto Oy: Tampere, Finland.

Unpublished references Twoyears’correspondenceofthepreparatorygroupofthesemi-

nar The Multicultural Heritage of Vyborg and its Preservation, February13 –14,2014.

A Road Map for the multicultural heritage of Vyborg. Approved April 7, 2014, by ICOMOSFinnishNational Committee,St.PetersburgRegionalCommitteeofICOMOS,TheFinnishArchitectureSociety,TheSt.PetersburgAssociationofArchi-tects,TheLeningradOblastBranchoftheAll-RussianSocietyforProtectionofMonumentsofHistoryandCultureVOOPIC,EuropaNostraFinland,AaltoUniversity,UniversityofTurku,andTampereUniversityofTechnology.

125

SERBIA

Current Risks in Heritage Protection

TheimportantpoliticalandsocialchangesinSerbiaintheear-ly21stcenturystartedaprocessofdemocratisation,establishingclosertieswithEurope,whichcontributedtointensifiedeffortsforratifyinginternationalconventionsinthefieldofheritagepro-tectionandmanagementfrom2007onwards.1However,despitepositiveefforts,theprotectionandpreservationoftheculturalheritageinSerbiastillshowsignsofatransitionalphasewithmanyofthegeneralproblemswell-knownintheformerEasternEuropeancountries,aswellasspecificconditionswhicharetheresultofrecentpoliticalconflictsintheregion,presentingarisktothepreservationofheritage.Inaddition,theculturalheritageinSerbiaisalsoexposedtoquitespecificrisksconnectedwithanextremely acute economic crisis, which marked all activities of theheritageprotectionserviceduringthe1990s.Thisisreflectedintheproblemsofcollaborationbetweenofficialinstitutionsandcivilorganisations.Acrucialproblemisnon-complianceofthecurrent Law on Cultural Properties from 19942 with international recommendations,andthereisanurgentneedtorevisethisact.Theconditionsunderwhichofficialprotectioninstitutionsop-

erateareunfavourable.Foralongperiodoftime,therehasbeenapermanentproblemoflackoffunding,whichiscausedbybothalackofofficialresponsibilityandbyinsufficientknowledgeaboutalternativefundingmethods(financingislargelytreatedasanexclusiveresponsibilityofthenationalgovernmentanditsbudget).Toagreatextent,theproblemoffinancingtheplannedconservation activities hinders or disables timely expert preventa-tiveandoperativeengagementandthedeterminationofadequate

protectivemeasures,includingconditionsofmaintenanceandutilisationofrecognisedheritage.Thepresentpracticeofincludingcitizens’participationinthe

processesofdecision-makinginplanningandreconstructionshas not produced satisfactory results. The established practice of spatialplanninginSerbiaallowscitizenstogaininsightonlyinalmostfinalisedplans.However,thispracticebypassestheroleofcitizensincreatingsolutionsatthestageofdefiningavisionofdevelopmentandaprogrammeforfuturedevelopment.InSerbia,cooperationbetweenthepublicandprivatesector

regardinginvestmentsinintegratedrehabilitationandconserva-tionofculturalheritageisnotdeveloped.Theculturalheritageisprimarilyprotectedwithscarcebudgetresourcesandthenation-al authorities are considered to be the only ones responsible for providingtheresources.Suchasituationhasresultedinapassiveattitude and a lack of interest of the local communities in the re-habilitationofheritage.IncertaincasestherehavebeenconflictsbetweentheauthoritiesandNGOorganisationsregardingthere-constructionanduseofarchitecturalheritage.Thisappliesespe-ciallytourbanzones:inBelgradethereareprojectsfornewhigh-risebuildingsatthewaterfrontsoftheSavaandDanubeRivers.These would dominate and threaten the authenticity and values oftheprotectedareas,BelgradeFortressandthecity’soldcentre.Amongthemajorproblemsarethequalityandprofessional

capacitiesofthestaffinvolved,whiletheavailablesupportvariesonthedifferentlevelsandinthedepartmentsofheritageman-agement.Thereisalackofknowledgeandexperienceinnewtechnologiesandagenerationgapwithinthepersonnel.Youngemployeeswouldbeabletoovercometheexistingdeficienciesinthesystem,iftheyweregivenfundingandtraining.Suchtrain-

The old miners’ houses in Senje Coal Mine near Despotovac, listed in 1975 (photo M. Roter)

House of the architect Jovan Ilkić, 1898 (photo M. Vukotić-Lazar)

Serbia126

ingwouldneedtoembracethewholemultidisciplinaryspectrum:specialistheritageknowledge,documentation techniquesandgeneralmanagementskills.Thereareparticulardeficienciesinprofessionaltrainingopportunities;forinstance,alackofpost-graduatecoursesinconservation.Inactualconservation, the focusonmedievalarchitecture,

monasteriesandfortified townsaswellasonprehistoricandancientRomansitesisstilldominant,whileheritagefromotherhistoric periods, traditional residential architecture from the 19th and20thcenturies,heritageinhistoricalruralandurbanareasisnotsufficientlycoveredincurrentresearchandprotectionactiv-ities.However,theimportanceofpreservinghistoricbuildingsandspacesforfuturegenerations,aswellastheirrehabilitationand inclusion in modern social and economic development have beenacknowledgedsofar.Also,treatingheritageasanintegralpartofthedevelopmentprocessandaimingtopreventitsdegra-dationanddisappearanceareofficiallyaccepted,buthavenotyetbeen applied in practice.

Protection of traditional rural architecture

Inrecenttimes,someattentionhasbeendevotedtotheprotectionoftheruralareasandsomeactionsinrecording,investigating

andpublishingoflistedtraditionalhouseshavebeenrealised.Furthermore,effortshavebeenmadetoincorporatethelatestin-ternationalrecommendationsintotheheritageprotectionmeth-odology.Inaccordancewithmodernprinciplesofconservation,someattentionisgiventorehabilitationofruralareaswithtra-ditional architecture, as part of the overall economic and social developmentbasedontheintegrationofruralareasintoregionalandurbanplanningprocesses.Inpractice,however,thereisnotenoughunderstandingoftheimportanceofpreservingtraditionalsettlements and old rural houses, neither of the ability to adapt to modern needs and standards.

Treatment of 19th and early 20th century architecture

Manyresidentialbuildingsbuiltinthe19thandearly20thcen-turies as part of the main commercial streets and districts in Ser-biantownsarelistedculturalpropertiesrecognisedasevidenceof modernisation and adoption of European styles. Today, with manyofthoselistedbuildingsthereareproblemsofownership,maintenance and use. Some structures are abandoned, have been lefttodecayforyearsandhaveonlyrecentlybeenrecognisedasculturalproperties,likethehouseofthearchitectJovanIlkićfrom1898(MilošaPocercaSt.No32,Belgrade).Somelistedbuildings

The Old Belgrade Fair Ground, 1937, design R. Tatić, M. Tričković, Đ. Lukić (photo M. Vukotić-Lazar)

The Printing Company in Belgrade, design D. Brašovan (photo M. Roter)

Serbia 127

havebeeninadequatelyreconstructedandadaptedtoanewpur-pose,likethehouseofthesculptorĐorđeJovanovićfrom1926(SkerlićevaSt.No6,Belgrade).

Lack of modernist architecture conservation

AsmallnumberofbuildingsrelatedtotheModernismmovementbetween the two World Wars are listed as cultural monuments, alongwithjustafewbuildingserectedafterWorldWarII.Theproblemisinsufficientknowledgeandunderstandingofthescien-tific,historicandartisticvaluesofthisculturalheritage.Todayanumberoflistedbuildingsandcomplexesofcontem-

poraryarchitectureareinverypoorcondition.Inadequateconser-vationmethods,useandmaintenanceofbuildingscanleadtoalossoftheircharacteristicsandvalues.Lackofmonitoringandofcontrollingtheprojectsandtheconservationprocess,alsofailuretoprovidepropermanagementandpreventinvalidinitiativesre-gardingtherecovery,restorationandreuseofthemonumentsarethe risks of modern architecture conservation in Serbia.OneofthelistedsitesisthemoderncomplexoftheBelgrade

FairGroundsbuiltin1937,withthecentraltowerandthepavil-ionsofTurkey,Italy,CzechoslovakiaandHungaryasnucleusof

NewBelgrade.After1941,duringWorldWarII,thesitebecameaconcentrationcampwheremorethan10,000Jewsand13,000Serbs and people of other nationalities were imprisoned and sent to death.3 AlthoughonlyasmallpartoftheinitialcomplexoftheOld

FairGroundshaveremained,thisculturalpropertylistedin1987isofgreatsignificanceasavant-gardeandmodernarchitectureinSerbia,aswellasamemorialplace.Thecomplexisgreat-lydeterioratedandinadequatelyused(restaurants,clubs,gyms,workshopsanddwellings).Therehavebeennumerousdesignsforthereconstructionofthedestroyedbuildingsandthememori-al complex, but none has been realised.During the transitionperiod, theStatePrintingShopbuilt

in1936–1940asoneofthelargestindustrialbuildingsintheBalkanswassold toaprivatecompanyandusedforoffices,warehouses,independentculturalactivitiesofyoungartists,etc.Thebuildingwaslistedasculturalpropertyin1992,butinaruinedanddevastatedstate.Theproblemisfindinganadequateandprofitableusewithgoodmanagementandpropermainte-nance. DuringtheNATObombardmentofBelgradein1999theCom-

plexoftheMilitaryHeadquarterandtheMinistryofDefencewasheavilydamagedandmostlydevastated.Thebuildingshavebeenin ruins for more than ten years and were listed as cultural prop-ertyin2005.Thestateastheownerhasneitherhadtheresourcesnoraninteresttorenewthestructurefor15years.Unfortunate-ly,thereisnoconsensusbetweenprofessionalandofficialinsti-tutions about the future of the complex. Some individuals have eventriedtoundermineitssignificance,identifyingitwiththeideologyandpoliticsofpost-warYugoslaviaandregardingthebuildingsasasymbolofthepost-warCommunistregime–un-worthyofbeingrenewed.Recently,theownerstartedremovingthedamagedpartsofthebuildingswithoutanyexpertiseandsu-

The complex of the Ministry of Defence and the Military Headquarter in Belgrade, 1955 –1965, design arch. N. Dobrović (photo M. Vukotić-Lazar)

The Museum of Modern Arts in Belgrade, 1962–1965, design arch. I. Raspopović and I. Antić (photo M. Roter)

Serbia128

pervisionbytheofficialconservationinstitutions.Thishasputthecomplexunderriskoflosingitsauthenticityandoriginalvalues.The public has not been informed about the future reconstruction andpurposeofthebuildings.

TheMuseumofModernArts,oneofthegreatestmonumentsofcontemporaryarchitectureinSerbia,builtin1962–1965andlistedasculturalpropertyin1987,hasbeenclosedandwillbeina process of reconstruction for years.

Prepared by: M. Roter-Blagojević, PhD, Faculty of Architecture University of BelgradeM. Nikolić, PhD, Faculty of Architecture University of Belgrade M. Vukotić-Lazar, PhD, Faculty of Philosophy, Kosovska Mitrovica

Footnotes1 Importantconventionsinthefieldofculturalheritagehaveal-readybeenratified:TheConventionfortheProtectionoftheArchitecturalHeritageofEurope(Granada,1985);TheEuro-peanArchaeologicalConvention(Valetta,1992);TheCouncilof Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural HeritageforSociety(Faro,2005);alsoUNESCOconventions:TheConventionConcerningtheProtectionoftheWorldCul-turalandNaturalHeritage(Paris,1972);ConventiononSafe-guardingofIntangibleHeritage(Paris,2003);andConventionon the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions(Paris,2005).SeetheofficialsiteoftheMinistryofCulture:http://www.kultura.gov.rs/lat/medjunarodna-sarad-nja/medjunarodna-dokumenta(accessedMarch19,2016).

2 Zakonokulturnimdobrima(TheLawonCulturalProperties),SlužbeniglasnikRS,br.71/94.See:http://www.kultura.gov.rs/lat/dokumenti/propisi-iz-oblasti-kulture/zakon-o-kulturnim-do-brima(accessedMarch19,2016).

3 Roter-Blagojević,М.,Vukotić-Lazar,М.(2013):RenewalofaDestroyedAuthenticity?TheSignificanceoftheOldFairGroundsandtheNewMilitaryHeadquartersforthePreserva-tionoftheCulturalandArchitecturalIdentityofBelgrade,in:AleksandarKadijević,MilanPopadić(eds.):Prostoripamćen-ja:zbornikradova / SpacesofMemory:collectionofworks,vol.1,Arhitektura /Architecture,Filozofskifakultet,Beograd /FacultyofPhilosophy,Belgrade.,pp.309–323.ISBN978-86-88803-33-5.

129

SPAIN

Patrimonio en Peligro: El Camino de SantiagoSummary

In the year 2016 we are celebrating the 22nd anniversary of the declaration of the ‘Routes of Santiago de Compostela: Camino Francés and Routes of Northern Spain’ as World Cultural Herit-age of UNESCO. Despite this distinction as World Heritage the Routes of Santiago have continued to be affected by dangerous aggressions that could lead to the destruction of a considerable part of the site’s integrity. The authorities in charge, in spite of the responsibilities taken on due to the inscription, have remained impassive in the face of such disasters, or even worse, have pro-moted very unfortunate projects of their own public administra-tions.

Some examples of why we consider this pilgrimage route to be in danger are: the industrial estates of O Pino (close to Santiago)

and Las Cañas (La Rioja); the technological park of Burgos; the growth of Yesa marsh; highways A-12 and A-54; urbanisations (duplex in Cizur); golf courses (Cirueña golf course); accesses to the historic centres; bridges (bridge close to the Renche mill); wind farms (park of the Oribio, in Triacastela); the hospital of Gran Caballero; the monasteries of Fromista and Santa María of the Tiendas; the need to detour the Route for the construction of the airport of Burgos; the asphalted surface of Cuesta de Moste-lares to the Castrojeriz exit; works carried out at the Cathedral of Santiago, etc.

ICOMOS Spain has been trying to stop this destruction on various occasions; following the same purpose, many other associations have also been involved in attempts to protect the Routes of Santiago, but have been unsuccessful, the only ex-ception being O Pino where, after an arduous battle, we have achieved our goal.

For this reason, we believe it is important to continue insisting on the need to include the Routes of Santiago in the List of World Heritage in Danger as soon as possible.

Alto del Perdón, (entre Pamplona – Puente la Reina) impacto visual de los aerogeneradores que ha querido disimularse con el “Monumento al peregrino” al que acompaña una mesa explicativa del mismo en la que se recoge el siguiente texto “Donde se cruza el camino del viento con el de las estrellas”

Spain130

ElCaminodeSantiagonohaparadodesufrirpeligrosasagre-sionesqueamenazanconladestruccióndegranpartedelainte-gridaddelbienynuestrasautoridades,pesealoscompromisosqueadquirieronenelmomentodesuinclusiónenlaListadelPatrimonioMundial,hanpermanecidoimpasiblesantetalesde-sastres, o peor: han fomentado desde las propias Administracio-nesPúblicasproyectosmuydesafortunadosqueenocasioneshanconseguidofrenarse,peroenotrasnohahabidotantasuerte.Entreloscasosenlosquelapeleadiosusfrutostenemosel

ejemplodeOPino,perohubootrasmúltiplesocasionesenlasquepormuchoquesetrabajóparaintentarfrenarelatentadonadaselogró.Elpasado18deseptiembrede2014pudimosleerenlaprensa

lasiguientenoticia:“ElSupremotumbaunpolígonodeMartinsa-Fadesaenpleno

CaminodeSantiago”. BajoestetítulosenosinformabadequetrasunalargabatallalegalconlaXunta,elfallodelTribunalSu-premoestablecequelapromotorainvadióuntramodelitinerariopara levantar una zona empresarial en O Pino.Estemáximoórganojurisdiccionalespañolresolviófinalmente

quelaXuntadeGaliciateníalarazóndesuladocuandodelimitóelCaminoFrancésenlazonaqueatraviesaunasuperficiedelAyuntamientodeOPino,yquelapromotoratendráquedevolverasusituaciónoriginalgranpartedelazona,limitandolasuperfi-ciebrutainicialdeunpolígonoindustrialinacabado,quellegóaperturbarlarutajacobea.Nohubotantasuerteenotroscasos,comoelqueplanteabael

recrecimiento del embalse de Yesa.ElCNEdeICOMOSen2009realizóundocumentosobrelas

afecciones de este recrecimiento sobre el Camino Francés de San-tiagoasupasoporAragón,enelque,entreotrasmuchascosas,decíatextualmente:

El proyecto de embalse reconoce la destrucción física de casi 5 km de Camino en la margen izquierda del pantano, la desapari-ción de elementos patrimoniales tangibles que lo jalonan (fuentes, abrevaderos, puentes,…) y la amenaza seria a monumentos tan importantes como las ermitas de San Jacobo o San Juan de Mal-tray en Ruesta. La afección es mucho más importante si conside-ramos que, además, se destruyen cerca de 15 kilómetros de Ruta Jacobea declarada por la UNESCO en 1993 en la margen dere-cha que no son reconocidos por el proyecto, y que el Camino está protegido legalmente con una banda de 30 metros a ambos lados.

Peseaello,elproyectocontinuóyen2014laprensarecogíaen numerosas ocasiones noticias al respecto, con titulares como elpublicadoel23dejuliode2014enelquepodíamosleer“ElrecrecimientodeYesaavanza‘segúnloprevisto’yenbreveco-menzaránlasobrasdelcuerpodepresa,segúnlaCHE1” y otros informandodelasprotestaspúblicasporlasobrasyaqueentreotrascosaslasconsiderabanpeligrosas.AlolargodelCaminohayobrasdetodotipo:Autovías(auto-

víaA-12,A-54),trazadosdelAVE(aunquenoenelCaminoFran-cés),concentracionesparcelarias,polígonosindustriales(OPino,LasCañas,ParquetecnológicodeBurgos,…),urbanizaciones(adosadosenCizur),camposdegolf(campodegolfdeCirueña),accesosalosnúcleosurbanos,puentes(puentejuntoalmolinodeRenche),parqueseólicoscomoelparqueeólicodelAltodelPerdón(Navarra)oelparquedelOribioenTriacastela,etc.Ytambiéndestruccióndeinmueblespatrimonialescomoel

monasteriodeSantaMaríadelasTiendasohospitaldelGranCaballeroeintervencionesderemodelaciónyrestauraciónqueatentanverdaderamentecontra laproteccióndelpatrimonio,como la del monasterio de Fromista o las de la propia Catedral deSantiago,porsólocitaralgunosdelosejemplosmásrele-vantes. Enelaño2010tuvolugar,del24al28denoviembreenMa-

drid,unaReuniónInternacionaldelComitéCientíficoInternacio-naldeItinerariosCulturalesdeICOMOS(CIIC),enlacualpre-sentéunaponenciatitulada“LasituacióndelCaminodeSantiagoenEspaña:Imágenesilustrativasyrelacióndeproblemasseriosensugestión”,seguidadelaproyeccióndelvideorealizadoen-tonces por la AGACS2titulado“DefensadelCamino”.Ellopro-dujounfuerteimpactoatodoslospresentesporloquesepropusoporpartedelCNEdeICOMOSrealizarunmanifiesto,quefirma-ronlacasitotalidaddelosasistentesadichareunión,solicitandoalaUNESCOlainclusióndelbienenlaListadePatrimonioenPeligro,bajoelepígrafede“SOLICITUDDEINCLUSIÓNDELCAMINODESANTIAGOENESPAÑAENLALISTADELPATRIMONIOMUNDIALENPELIGRO”.Esapeticiónestuvosecundadaporotroescritodesolicitud

alaUNESCOparala inmediata inclusióndelCaminoFran-césaSantiagoenEspañaenlaListadelPatrimonioMundialenPeligro,escritoconocidocomo “ManifiestodeCompostela”elaboradoporlaAGACS,quefuedadoaconocerenruedade prensael18dediciembrede2010,alqueseadhirieronungran

Monasterio de Santa María de las Tiendas o hospital del Gran Caballero, hoy destruido

Impacto del aeropuerto de Burgos

Spain 131

númerodeasociacionesjacobeas,culturalesydedefensadelpatrimonio.EnunanuevareunióndelCIICquesecelebróenSantiago-

Poio(España)enseptiembrede2012,vuelvoaabordareltemaenunacomunicacióntitulada“Demalenpeor,delatristesituacióndelCaminoFrancésdesdesuinclusiónenlalistadePatrimonioMundialcomoItinerarioCultural”yallísedacuentadenuevosdesastres, comoeldesvíodelCaminoparahacerelaeropuertodeBurgos,obligandoaltrazadoarodearlapistaytodoellosinquefueraprevistalaconstruccióndeunarcénovíaparalela.Otrorelevanteeselasfaltadoycompletadesnaturalizaciónde

lamíticacuestadeMostelares,alasalidadeCastrojeríz,sinqueelayuntamientodieraautorización.Siguenlosdesmanesdurantelosúltimosañosyasívemosco-

momuypocolequedaalafortalezadeSarriaantesdequesecaiganlosúltimosrestosdesuyaúnicatorre,ocomosellevanacabodistintasintervencionespúblicascomolayacitadaA-54que,envezdeintentarrespetarelCamino,vuelveaincidirsobreél destruyéndolo. Alcanzadalameta,enlacatedralcompostelana,aunquenove-

mosconmuybuenosojoslasexcesivaslimpiezasdelasfachadas

ytorres,nospreocupamuchomáslaresolucióndelosproblemasdelPórticoysurestauración, puesdesdelaDirectivadelCNEsehasolicitadoelproyectoendosocasionesdeformaoficialynosenoshaenviado,cuandoenteoríatendríanqueconsultarnostodos sus pasos.Nosonlosreferidoslatotalidaddelosdesastresquedebemos

lamentaralolargodelrecorridodelCamino,sinoquedíaadíavamossumandoaccionesquesuponenatentadoscontraelCami-noensíocontralosbienesqueseencuentranensuámbitodeprotección.Porello,creemosimportanteseguirinsistiendoenlanecesidaddequeelCaminodeSantiagoentrecuantoantesafor-marpartedelaListadelPatrimonioMundialenPeligro,aversiasílasautoridadesresponsablesreaccionanytomanlasmedidasadecuadasparaquecesesudestrucción.Paraconcluirelpresenteartículo,queremoshacerunallamada

deatenciónalosresponsablesdelainclusióndenuevosbienesenlaListadePatrimonioMundial:Señores,nosparecedescabelladoseguirincluyendoenlamismanuevasvariantesdetrazadosdelCaminodeSantiagoenEspaña,antesdeconseguirgarantizarlaintegridadyelcuidadoadecuadodelosyaincluidos.Porfavor,seamosseriosycongruentes.

M ª Esther del Castillo Fondevila Vocal de la Junta directiva del Comité Nacional Español (CNE) de ICOMOS

Torre de la fortaleza de Sarria, observese la gran grieta y el desplome del muro

Impacto de A-54 en Sarria

Spain132

Referencias y fuentesInformesdelCNEdeICOMOS,sobrelaAfeccióndelrecreci-mientodeYesaalCaminodeSantiago(2009),sobreelImpactoenelCaminodeSantiagoysuentornodelproyectodecons-truccióndeunpolígonoindustrialenelconcellodeOPino,próximoaSantiagodeCompostela(2007),sobrelaIncidenciadelaspropuestasdetrazadodelaautovíaa-12,entreSantoDomingodelaCalzadayBurgos,enelCaminodeSantiagoyenelconjuntodelosyacimientosprehistóricosdelasierradeAtapuerca(Noviembrede2007),etcétera.

DenunciasalCNEdeICOMOS.Prensavariadademúltiplesfechas.“La situación delCaminodeSantiago enEspaña: Imágenes ilustrativasyrelacióndeproblemasseriosensugestión”/Mª EstherdelCastilloFondevila.ReuniónCIIC2010.

“Demalenpeor,delatristesituacióndelCaminoFrancésdesdesuinclusiónenlalistadePatrimonioMundialcomoItinerarioCultural”/MªEstherdelCastilloFondevila.ReunióndelCIIC2012.

Video“DefensadelCamino”delaAGACS.Santiago:www.caminosantiago.org/cpperegrino /... / patrimonioc-

ritico.asp ElCaminodeFederaciónEspañolaPatrimonio...(PatrimonioJacobeocrítico2013-201)

Anotación1CHE:ConfederaciónHidrográficadelEbro2AGACS:AsociaciónGalegadeAmigosdoCamiñodeSantiago

133

UKRAINE

The Destruction of the Soviet Heritage

Alarming informationhascome to theattentionof ICOMOSfromUkrainiancitizensconcerningwidespreaddestructionoftheSovietheritageintheUkraine.AnanalysisofUkrainianinternetpublicationsconfirmsthefollowingfacts.Thisprocessstartedil-legallyandspontaneouslyaspartofthe“Euromaidan”protestsinKievattheendof2013andinvolvedthedestructionofmemori-alstoSovietleadersandalsotoSovietsymbolsonbuildings.OneofthefirststatuestobedestroyedbyprotesterswastheLeninstatueinKiev.AsthenewsagencyInterfax-Ukrainereported,

less than a day after it was demolished, parts of the statue were offeredforsaleontheinternet.Monumentsthenbegantobedestroyedinthesamewayacross

thecountry:theremovalofstatueswasusuallydoneatnightbygroupsofaggressivepeoplewithhammers.Ifthemunicipalau-thorities took part in this process, it was often done carelessly, causingseveredamagetothesculptures,asinthecitiesofZapor-izhzhiaandDniprodzerjynsk(nowKamenskoe).Atthattime,manyofthoseobjectswerestillofficiallyconsideredasheritageitemsoflocalornationalsignificance,becausetheywereusual-lycreatedbytalentedUkrainiansculptorsandhadhistoricalorartistic value.

The Lenin statue in Kiev, May 2009 (photo Alexey Nechay, Wikimedia)

Protesters are about to smash the head of the overthrown V. I. Lenin monument in Kiev, December 8, 2013 (photo Mstyslav Chernov, Wikimedia)

Ukraine134

The plinth of the demolished Lenin statue in Kiev, 2014 (photo V. Koragin)

The plinth of the demolished statue of Lenin in Kharkiv, 2014 (photo S. Smolenska)

Former Metalworkers’ Palace of Culture in Dnipro, condition in 2011 (photo S. Smolenska)

Ukraine 135

Italsoneedstobepointedoutthatinsomecaseslocalcitizensdid not support the destruction. For instance, in early 2014 people inKharkivprotestedagainstthedemolitionandremovaloftheLenin monument in the city centre. They erected tents and were on duty near the monument in order to save it from destruction. Nonetheless,themonumentwastakendown.InApril 2015, the Ukrainian Parliament legitimised the

process and thePresident signed thenew“Lawon theCon-demnation of the Communist andNational Socialist (Nazi)Regimes, and Prohibition of Propaganda of their Symbols”(9April2015,No.317-VІІІ;seealsotheEnglishversionun-der http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf =CDL-REF%282015%29045-e).TheLawdoesnotprovideforthescientificsubstantiationofdemolitionorpreservationofmon-uments,orforthedefinitionoftheartistic,architectural,historicalorurbanvaluesofobjects.Publicopinionisnottakenintocon-siderationwhenmakingsuchadecisionaboutwhichmonumentsshould be destroyed and which preserved. Therefore, most Soviet monumentshavebeendestroyedbynow.Inaddition,alllocali-ties and place names of the Soviet period have been renamed. The

photosshowsometypicalexamplesofmonumentsbeingdisman-tled and destroyed. Itshouldbeaddedthatthepresentconditionofarchitectural

andurbanmonumentsofthe20thcenturyintheUkraineisalsodisastrous. The revival of private business in the past 20 years has createdasituationwheretheindividualoccupiersrentingorbuy-ingseveralroomsorfloorsinahousechangethemtotheirtaste,oftensodrasticallythattheoriginalisnolongerrecognisable:e.g.byaddingnew,disfiguringfaçadeelements–windows,entranc-es,balconies,etc.Thisresultsinalossofintegrityandauthentic-ityoftheheritage,butauthoritiesleavesuchcasesunpunished.Eventhemostoutstandingbuildingsare inpoorcondition.

InthecityofDnipro(formerlyDnipropetrovsk)thereisoneofthefirstmajorclubbuildingsofearlymodernism(1920s)intheUkraine:theformerMetalworkers’PalaceofCulture(architectKrasnoselsky).Ithasnotbeeninuseformanyyears,hasfall-enintodecayandisgraduallybeingdestroyedbytheravagesof time. Repair works of the last decade on the facades of the eminentGosprom(1925–28)inKharkivhaveignoredtheuseofauthentic decoration materials.

At the request of ICOMOS prepared by Svitlana Smolenska on the basis of information of Ukrainian websites and letters from Ukrainian citizens

136

Endangered Historic Places

The“11MostEndangeredHistoricPlaces”arecompiledannual-lybytheNationalTrustforHistoricPreservationandaremeanttoillustratetheplightofmanyothersitesthroughouttheUnitedStates.TheNationalTrustisamajorpartnerorganizationofUS/ICOMOS.Herearethesitesfromtheyear2015.

East Point Historic Civic Block in East Point, Georgia

EastPointCityHall,CityAuditorium,CityLibraryandVictoryParkformacontiguousblockthathasbeentheheartofdown-townEastPointsincethe1930s.TheEastPointHistoricCivicBlockissituatedinanareaofEastPointthatisseeingrenewedcalls for private development. With no plans for protection and theconstantthreatofdemolitionbyneglect,thefutureforthesehistoricbuildingsremainsuncertain.AccordingtoStephanieMeeks,presidentoftheNationalTrust

forHistoricPreservation,theCivicBlock,locatedattheheartofthe predominantly African American community of East Point, isararecohesiveexampleofcivicarchitecturefromthe1930s.The block, which has borne witness to decades of the communi-ty’shistory,issufferingfromneglect.AlongwithitspartnersattheEastPointPreservationAllianceandtheGeorgiaTrustforHistoricPreservation,theNationalTrustencouragestheCityofEastPointtoconsideralternativestodemolishingtheseiconiccommunity landmarks.Theblock’shistoricbuildingsrepresentarchitecturalstylesthat

werepopularintheSouthduringtheDepressionera,formingararely seen cohesive block of civic architecture that tells the story

ofnotonlythisoneGeorgiacommunity,butalsooftownsacrossthestatebuiltinthatsameera.Untilafewyearsago,mostofthesebuildingswereafunctionalpartofthecitygovernmentandplayed important roles in the community. They are now vandal-ized,burglarizedandlefttodeteriorate.

Carrollton Courthouse

TheCarrolltonCourthouseservedastheseatofgovernmentforJeffersonParishuntiltheCityofCarrolltonwasannexedbyNewOrleansin1874.Now,thisstatelyGreekRevivalbuilding,de-signedbyoneofNewOrleans’mostnoteworthyarchitects,Hen-ryHoward,isthreatenedwithanuncertainfutureastheOrleansParishSchoolBoardpreparestosellitwithnopreservationsafe-guardsinplace.NTPresidentStephanieMeeksstatesthattheCarrolltonCourt-

houseisabelovedlandmarkwitharichtraditionofservingthecommunityandthereforedeservestohaveaspecialplaceinNewOrleans’ future.TheNationalTrusturges theOrleansParishSchoolBoardtojoinpreservationistsinplanningthenextphasefortheCarrolltonCourthousetoensureitslegacycontinues.ThecourthouseisanimportantpublicbuildingfromCarroll-

ton’sdaysasanindependentcityandisoneofthecity’smostsignificantlandmarkslocatedoutsideoftheFrenchQuarter.Intheearly1950s,thecommunityandthenon-profitgroupLoui-sianaLandmarksSocietystavedoffademolitionthreatthatledtothecourthouse’srebirthasaschool.From1957to2013,ithousedaseriesofpublicschools,includingBenjaminFranklinHighSchool,thefirstNewOrleanspublichighschooltointe-gratein1963.MusiciansWyntonandDelfeayoMarsalisandac-torWendellPierceareamongBenFranklin’sfamousgraduates.

East Point City Hall (photo Erin Rodgers) Carrolton Courthouse (photo Louisiana Landmarks)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

USA 137

Little Havana in Miami

LittleHavanahaslongbeenasafehavenforimmigrantsandasymboloftheAmericanmeltingpot.Amixeduse,walkable,seriesofneighborhoods,LittleHavanawasfirstapredominant-lyJewishneighborhoodintheearly20thcentury.Beginninginthe1960s,theseneighborhoodsbecamehometogenerationsofCubanimmigrants,andtothisdaytheyremainaculturalcenterforCubanAmericans,aswellasimmigrantsfromtheCaribbean,Central, and South America. TherearetwomainthreatstotheLittleHavananeighborhood:

upzoning,whichcoulddramaticallyalter thecharacterof thearea; and the lack of protections in place for scattered historic buildingtypes.Owingtotheneighborhood’sideallocation—closetoDowntownMiamiandtheBrickellFinancialDistrict—upzoningrepresentsthemostcriticalthreattothehistoricscaleandcharacterofLittleHavana.NationalTrustpresidentStephanieMeekssaysas themost

wellknownCuban-AmericanenclaveintheUnitedStatesandassymboloftheimmigrantexperienceandtheAmericanmeltingpot,LittleHavanaremainsathriving,diverseurbanarea.Acrossthecountry,citiesarelookingforcreativewaystoensurethatnewdevelopmentiscompatiblewithexistingneighbourhoods.TheNationalTrusturgesMiamitoexplorezoningpoliciesthatrespect the historic character of this beloved urban area. LittleHavana’sneighborhoodsarestillcomposedofresidential

blocksintersectedbycommercialstreets,creatingaself-sustainingcommunitywheregoodsandservicesarelocatedwithinwalkingdistanceofarearesidents–manyofwhomareimmigrantfam-ilies,seniors,andmiddle-to-low-incomeworkers.LittleHavanacontainsuniquelocalvariationsoficonicAmericanarchitecture,suchasthebungalow,thewalk-upapartment,andthecourtyardapartment.Ideally,thesescatteredhistoricbuildingtypeswouldbelistedtogetherasaprotectedcollectionofbuildings.

South Street Seaport in New York

The South Street Seaport features some of the oldest architecture inNewYorkCity.TheSeaport’srestored19th-centurycommer-cialbuildingstransportvisitorsbackintime,evokingthecom-mercialtradeofthatera.LocatedalongtheEastRiver,adjacenttotheFinancialDistrict,theSeaportisuniqueforitscontinuousrelationship to the waterfront and its status as the focal point of theearlymaritimeindustryinNewYorkCity.

While an 11-block area within the Seaport is part of a locally designatedhistoricdistrict,andalargerportionoftheSeaportisseparatelylistedontheNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces,it is currently under threat due to a series of development pro-posals that would disrupt the look, feel and low-scale historic characteroftheSeaport.TheHowardHughesCorporationhasproposedbuildingahigh-risetowerthatwouldbelocatedonapieroverthewateratthefootofBeekmanStreet.TheNewMarketbuilding,a1939structurelocatedwithintheNationalRegisterboundariesbutoutsidethelocallydesignateddistrict,would be demolished to make way for the tower. There are also concernsaboutthepotentialdemolitionduetoneglectofallorpartsofthenearbylocallydesignatedhistoricTinBuilding.Tak-entogether,thetowerandotherdevelopmentproposalsthreatentodramaticallyalterahistoricneighborhoodthathasenduredforgenerations.AccordingtotheNationalTrust’spresidenttheproposedde-

velopmentswillhaveanoverwhelmingimpactonthehistoricneighborhood,diminishingtheSeaport’suniquerelationshiptothewaterandcompromisingoneofthemostintact19thcenturyneighborhoodsinManhattan.Theissuesaroundtheredevelop-mentoftheSouthStreetSeaportareurgentastheapprovalpro-cessforpartialdemolitionoftheTinandNewMarketBuildingsisinmotionandthedeveloperhasstartedtheprocessofseekingCity approval for the new tower.

The Factory in West Hollywood

ThebuildingnowknownasTheFactoryisaTrusconSteelCom-pany-designedindustrialbuildingbuiltin1929toaccommodatetheboomingsuccessoftheMitchellCameraCorporation.Mitch-ellCamerasrevolutionizedfilmmakingandfuelledthegrowthofthefilmindustryinHollywoodandaroundtheworld.Bymini-mizingnoiseandmaximizingfunctionality,thesecamerasena-bledfilmstogofromsilentto“talkies”andcontinuedtoinfluencecameratechnologyuntilthedigitaleraarrivedintheearly2000s.Today,TheFactoryisoneofthelastremainingindustrialbuild-ingsinWestHollywoodbuiltspecificallyforthetechnicalaspectsofthefilmindustry.Following the camera company’smove to the suburbs in

1946,TheFactorywasconvertedtoserveaseriesofnewuses,includingacosmeticswarehouse,afurnitureshowroom,apri-

Street corner in Little Havana (photo Steven Brooke Studios)

South Street Seaport in New York, Schermerhorne Row (photo Jim Henderson, Wikipedia)

USA138

vatecelebritynightclub,anantiquemarketandanexperimentaltheatre.ItismostfamouslyknownasthehomeofStudioOne,apioneeringgaydiscothatopenedin1974.HostingthelikesofPattiLaBelle,JoanRiversandLizaMinnelli,StudioOneanditsBacklotTheatrewereopensevendaysaweek,hadcuttingedgesoundandlightsystems,andadancefloorthatregularlydrewmorethan1,000peopleanight.FoundedbyaBeverlyHillsop-tometristandopenlygayman,StudioOnebecameaplaceforgaymen to socialize and proudly and openly celebrate their identity. Assuch,itwasassociatedwiththegayrightsmovementthrough-outitshistory.WhentheAIDSepidemichitintheearly1980s,forexample,oneofthenation’sfirstmajorfundraisersforAIDSresearch took place at Studio One.NowTheFactory’slegacyisthreatenedwithdemolitionbya

large-scalehotelproject—oneofthemanynewdevelopmentsnowjeopardizingWestHollywoodandHollywood’sLGBTQheritageandearlyfilm industryhistory.TheRobertsonLaneHotelprojectcallsforapedestrian“paseo”orwalkwaytorundirectlythroughaportionofthesiteonwhichTheFactorynowsits,aroutethatcouldeasilyberealignedtosparethislandmarkfromthewreckingball.

A. G. Gaston Motel in Birmingham, AL

AccordingtoStephanieMeeks,presidentoftheNationalTrustforHistoricPreservation,theA.G.GastonMotelasagatheringplaceforprominentleadersintheCivilRightsmovementstoodatthecenterofoneofthemostsignificanteventsintheUnitedStates’history.ShehopesthataddingtheGastonMoteltothelistof11MostEndangeredHistoricPlaceswillhelpraiseawarenessaboutthisimportantplaceandfocusesattentionontheurgentneed to restore it. A proper reuse of the Gaston will allow it to becomealivinglibrarythatteachesfuturegenerationsaboutthepowerful events that occurred there.The two-storymotelwas built in 1954 byArthurGeorge

(A. G.)Gaston,apioneeringAfrican-AmericanentrepreneurandphilanthropistwhowasalsoinstrumentalintheintegrationofBirmingham.TheGastonMotel,whichsitsadjacenttothe16thStreetBaptistChurch,wasagatheringplaceforAfrican-Amer-

icanleadersoftheCivilRightsMovementincludingDr.MartinLutherKing,Jr.,ReverendRalphAbernathyandReverendFredShuttlesworth. In1963,Dr.Kingstayedinroom30whichwasusedas“war

room”bythemovement’stopleaders.There,Dr.Kingmadethedecisiontodefyacourtinjunctionandsubmithimselftobejailedasanactofsolidaritywithlocalprotestors.Mr.Gastonthenpaid$160,000tobailDr.Kingoutofjail.Forthepasttwentyyears,thepropertyhassufferedfromva-

cancy and disrepair. The City, which owns the motel, intends to create a tourism destination that includes reuse of the motel and new construction that would house the Freedom Center and Pub-licPolicyInstitute.

Chautauqua Amphitheater in Chautauqua, NY

ChautauquaAmphitheaterisaNationalHistoricLandmarklo-cated70milessouthwestofBuffalo,N.Y.KnowncolloquiallyastheAmp,theAmphitheater,whichhashostedawiderangeof

The Factory in West Hollywood (photo Hunter Kerhart)

A.G. Gaston Motel in Birmingham, AL, (photo City of Birmingham Archives)

Chautauqua Amphitheater during a performance (photo Dick Jensen)

USA 139

leaders, activists and artists over its 122-year history, is threat-enedbytheChautauquaInstitution’splantodemolishtheAmpforanewbuilding.AccordingtothepresidentoftheNationalTrustforHistoric

PreservationthestoryoftheAmpisthestoryofAmerica’spolit-ical, cultural and spiritual identity. For well over a hundred years, it has occupied a special place in American culture.Acoalitionofpreservationgroups, including theNational

Trust, isnowcallingon theChautauqua Institution’sdistin-guishedBoardofTrustees to reconsider theneed to replacethisuniqueandbelovedstructure.TheAmpisanauthenticandimportant part of the Institution’shistoryof intellectual en-gagement,entertainmentanddebate.ChautauquatransformedAmericanlifeasthefirstmulti-useretreatintheU.S.thatisanartscolony,musicfestival,villagesquareandsummerencamp-mentallatonce,spawningdozensof“daughter”ChautauquasthroughouttheU. S.Chautauquaprogramshaveexploredim-portantreligious,socialandpoliticalissuesoftheday;engagedindividuals and families in response to these issues; and fostered excellenceintheappreciation,performanceandteachingofthearts.InJanuary2015,theNationalTrustaddedtheAmptoitsre-

volvingportfolioofNationalTreasures–acollectionofthreat-enedhistoricbuildings,neighborhoods,communities,andland-scapesacrossthecountrywheretheNationalTrustiscommittedtofindingalong-termpreservationsolution.

Old U. S. Mint in San Francisco

Builtin1874,theOldU.S.MintinSanFranciscoisaNation-alHistoricLandmarkandoneoftheveryfewdowntownbuild-ingstosurvivethe1906earthquakeandfirethatdevastatedthecitycenter.Thecity’ssolefinancialinstitutionstillstandinginthewakeofthedisaster,theOldU.S.Mintnotonlysafeguard-ed$200millioningoldreservesthatbackedtheU.Sdollar,butalsoservedasthecity’sdepositoryforallemergencyfinancialtransactions as the city embarked on a monumental recovery ef-fort.The“GraniteLady”remainsacommandingpresencejustsouth

ofMarketStreet,anareathatisbeingtransformedbyanunprec-edentedtech-fueledconstructionboom,withhistoricbuildings

beingrehabilitatedanddozensofnewmid-andhigh-risecom-mercialandbuildingsalreadybuilt,underconstruction,orintheplanningstages.ArestoredandreactivatedOldU.S.Mintshouldbepartofthe

legacyofthecurrenteconomicboom.Instead,asglisteningnewconstructionrisesallaround,theOldU.S.Mintstandsshuttered,deteriorating,andatriskofbeingforgotten.Despitethebuild-ing’sprominenceandhistory,thisistheOldMint’ssecondstintontheNationalTrust’sAmerica’s11MostEndangeredHistoricPlaces list because its future is still uncertain. First named to the listin1994,thisiconicbuildingstandsforlornandforgottenintheheartofthecity,increasinglyatriskasdecadesofneglectandinattention to both its structural needs and cultural importance take their toll.Currently,thepublichasnoaccesstotheOldU.S.Mint,which

isownedbytheCity.ThereisstrongpublicdesiretorestoretheOldU.S.Mintasaculturalfocalpointwithincreasedpublicin-teraction in and around the space.

Oak Flat in Superior, Arizona

ProtectedinthepastbyPresidentsEisenhowerandNixon,theOakFlatcontainsmanyculturalresourcesincludingarchaeologi-calsites,historicalsites,andartifacts,aswellasmanyareaseligi-bleforinclusionontheNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces.OakFlat is a sacred site to the San Carlos Apache and several other NativeAmericantribes.Itiscurrentlythreatenedbycoppermining.Alandexchangein-

cludedintheNationalDefenseAuthorizationActof2015wouldopenthesiteuptomining.TheNationalTrustandpartnersin-cludingtheSanCarlosApacheencouragemembersofCongresstoreconsiderthislandexchangeasanyminingactivityatOakFlat would severely threaten this sacred place.TheNationalTrusthopesthisdesignationwillincreasenation-

alawarenessofOakFlatanditsprofoundimportancetoNativeAmericantribes.ItclaimsthetribeswhoregardOakFlatasasacredplacewerenotadequatelyconsultedbeforethislandex-changetookplace.Beforeanypotentiallyharmfulminingactivitytakes place at Oak Flat, it needs to be made sure that the tribes and others who care about this important place have a voice in shapingitsfuture.

Old US Mint, San Francisco (photo Hugh R. Rowland) Oak Flat in Superior, Arizona (photo Kevin Cassadore)

USA140

Grand Canyon in Arizona

Oneoftheworld’smostcelebratednaturalwonders,theGrandCanyonisalsoaplaceofimmensesacredsignificanceformanyAmericanIndiantribes,someofwhichconsidertheCanyontheiroriginalhomelandandplaceoforigin.EventhoughtheGrandCanyonisprotectedasbothaNationalParkandaWorldHeritageSite,itsculturalheritagefacesmultiplethreats:

– Reneweduraniumminingaroundthecanyonis threateningdrinkingwaterandencroachingonhistoricproperties,includ-ingtheNationalRegister-listedRedButteTraditionalCulturalProperty,whichisofcriticalreligiousandculturalimportancetotheHavasupaiandZunitribes;

– A proposed commercial and residential development at the SouthRimentrancetotheNationalParkatTusayancouldin-creasethelocalpopulationtenfold,strainingthepark’svisitorcapacityandthreateningtheaquiferthatisthesolesourceofwaterforHavasuFalls,theculturalfoundationoftheHavasu-pai tribe;

– TheproposedEscalade touristdevelopmenton theNavajoReservation includes an aerial tramway that would disturb the characterofthesitebyshuttling10,000visitorsadaytothe

confluenceoftheColoradoandLittleColoradorivers,anar-eaofgreatsacredsignificancetotheHopi,Navajo,andotherAmericanIndiantribes.

TheadministrationinWashingtonshouldexerciseitsexistingau-thorities and responsibilities under federal law and international treaty to preserve the Grand Canyon as the international icon and sacred place it is, and assure that its cultural resources are stew-ardedandculturalvaluesarevigorouslyprotectedfrominsensi-tive development.

Fort Worth Stockyards in Fort Worth, Texas

The Fort Worth Stockyards historic district is one of the most distinctive historic sites in Texas, representative of the economic andculturalwestwardexpansioninAmericaandtheemergenceofthecattleandlivestockindustry.AsthefirstindustryinFortWorth,thestockyards,andlatertheadjacentmeatpackingplants,transformed Fort Worth from a small frontier community into a majorurbaneconomiccenter.Today,theareaattractsmorethanthree million visitors annually, and its historic architecture, street-scapesandculturalidentitycontributetolocalheritagetourism,an economic driver for Fort Worth.

The stockyards are threatened by plans to implement a nearly 1millionsquarefoot,$175millionredevelopmentprojectintheFortWorthStockyardsHistoricDistrict.InspiteofitsdesignationasaNationalRegisterHistoricDistrict,lessthan10percentofthebuildingsinFortWorth’sStockyardsareprotectedfromdem-olitionthroughlocaldesignation.Theestablishmentofalocalhistoricdistrictwouldbethemosteffectivesolutiontothethreatof insensitive development.Commissioningahistoricresourcessurveyofthestockyards

willhelpHistoricFortWorthandlocalpreservationistsnavi-gatethepreservationissuesandwillaidcommunicationwiththe City of Fort Worth and its chosen development partner, MajesticofCalifornia.Thesurveyoutcomeswouldgreatlyas-sistlocalpropertyownersinpursuingdesignationsandtakingadvantageoflocal,state,andfederalpreservationfinancialin-centives.Grand Canyon, Havasu Creek (photo Alan English)

Fort Worth Stockyards (photo Kathryn A. Stephens)

141

YEMEN

Yemen’s Cultural Heritage at Risk due to Armed Conflicts

ICOMOS Statement on Safeguarding Yemen’s Cultural Heritage during the On-going Armed Conflict, April 23, 2015

In the face of the escalating armed conflict and military interven-tion in Yemen and the ensuing growing humanitarian emergency, ICOMOS, the International Council on Monuments and Sites, ex-presses its continuing deep concern for the protection of cultural property in Yemen at risk from the hostilities.

The cultural heritage of Yemen is a unique and irreplaceable witness of its rich and diverse history. Damage to it represents an irretrievable loss to the cultural heritage of all peoples in the world.

Yemen as one of the ancient centres of civilization of the Middle East and North Africa is home to some very significant ancient and Islamic sites.

Yemen has three cultural and one natural site on the UNESCO World Heritage List and ten other cultural and natural properties are included on its Tentative List.

Yemen’s Cultural World Heritage Sites are: – Historic Town of Zabid – Old city of Sana’a – Old Walled City of Shibam

In addition to its World Heritage properties, many other places such as the old town of Mukallah, the cities of Tarim, Shibam Co-coban, and Rada’a, the archaeological site of Ma’in and the cul-tural landscape of Wadi Do’an are of great cultural importance.

The museums and collections of Yemen, particularly the Na-tional Museum of Yemen in Sana’a, are repositories of ancient, Islamic and folkloric artefacts and documents, as well as the manuscript libraries in Tarim, Sana’a and Zabid.

ICOMOS supports and reiterates the call already launched by UNESCO on 27 March, to protect Yemen’s cultural heritage, and urges all parties involved in this armed conflict, including State and non-State actors and the members of the regional coalition engaging in military operations in Yemen, to respect and protect cultural properties and refrain from any attack or act of hostil-ity directed against movable or immovable cultural properties, by shelling or by air strikes, or by using cultural heritage sites and buildings and their immediate surroundings for military pur-poses.

By recalling the international humanitarian law, and in par-ticular the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, the additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions; and customary international law, ICOMOS calls on all armed forces and countries who are fighting

on the ground or leading airstrikes to spare all types of cultur-al property, including but not limited to those on the UNESCO World Heritage and Tentative lists.

ICOMOS expresses its solidarity with Yemeni cultural heritage organizations and professionals, and supports their appeal for the protection and safeguarding of cultural properties during and after the end of the current armed conflict.

Blue Shield Statement on Yemen, June 3, 2015

The Blue Shield offers its unequivocal support for the United Na-tions Secretary General’s statements (26 May 2015). We agree that the only durable resolution to the current crisis in Yemen is an inclusive, Yemeni-led, peaceful transition process towards a negotiated political settlement. We share his aspiration that a long and lasting peace can be achieved as quickly as possible so as to alleviate the current intolerable humanitarian situation.

We also offer our total support for UNESCO’s Director Gen-eral’s calls on all parties to protect Yemen’s unique cultural her-itage.

Over the last few days and weeks there have been extremely worrying reports of destruction of cultural property including the bombing of the World Heritage Site of the Old City of Sana’a and the old city of Sa’adah, which is included on Yemen’s World Heritage Tentative List; the bombing of the Dhamar Museum; the reported damage to the archaeological site of the pre-Islamic walled city of Baraqish; and the reported targeting and destruc-tion of the 1,200 year old mosque of Imam al-Hadi, located in the city of Saada; or the reported damage to the 10th century BC historic castle of Al-Cairo (Al-Kahira or Al Qahira), overlooking the city of Taiz; and the destruction of the Marib Dam.

We urge all parties, and in particular Yemen and Saudi Arabia, which are both States Parties to the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Con-flict, to abide by the terms of the 1954 Convention. We ask that they not use cultural property for military purposes, to refrain from any targeting of cultural property, and to avoid wherever possible any collateral damage to cultural property.

The world needs to take humanitarian action to help protect those who have been most harmed by this conflict and to help to protect the remains of their, and our, common past.

The Director-General of UNESCO Condemns the Destruction of Historic Buildings in the Old City of Sana’a

In the early hours of 12 June 2015, the Old City of Sana’a, a UNESCO World Heritage site, was hit by a bombing raid. Sever-al houses and historic buildings were destroyed, causing human casualties. Among the buildings destroyed was the magnificent

Yemen142

complex of traditional houses in the Al-Qasimi neighborhood, bordering an urban garden (Miqshama), near the Sailah water channel.

“I am profoundly distressed by the loss of human lives as well as by the damage inflicted on one of the world’s oldest jewels of Islamic urban landscape. I am shocked by the images of these magnificent many-storeyed tower-houses and serene gardens re-duced to rubble. This destruction will only exacerbate the human-itarian situation and I reiterate my call to all parties to respect and protect cultural heritage in Yemen. This heritage bears the soul of the Yemeni people, it is a symbol of a millennial history of knowledge and it belongs to all humankind” declared the Di-rector-General.

Sana’a has been inhabited for more than 2,500 years and bears witness to the wealth and beauty of the Islamic civilization. By the

first century AD, it emerged as a centre of the inland trade route and its houses and public buildings are an outstanding example of a traditional, Islamic human settlement. Sana’s dense rammed earth and burnt brick towers, strikingly decorated, are famous around the world and are an integral part of Yemen’s identity and pride.

Since the beginning of the conflict in Yemen, several houses within the heritage city of Sana’a have suffered damage and col-lapses as a consequence of shelling and explosions. On 9 June, the Ottoman era Al-Owrdhi historical compound, located just outside the walls of the Old City, were severely damaged. Historic residential buildings, monuments, museums, archaeological sites and places of worship have not been spared. The historic val-ue and memories enshrined in these sites have been irreparably damaged or destroyed.

UNESCOPRESS, June 12, 2015

Yemen 143

THEMATIC REPORTS

144

INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON SHARED BUILT HERITAGE

Togetherwiththeauthoritiesandtheclinicmanagementonsite,theyworkedoutconceptsfortheutilisationofthe“CliffBlock”andmadejointsuggestionsforitsrealisation.Bothengineersprofitedfromthefactthatcomprehensiveinformationaboutthestate of conservation and the construction as well as an analysis ofthedamagesandmaterialsofthe“CliffBlock”alreadyexisted.In2006,twostudentstravelledtoTangainordertoprepare

their diploma thesis about the prospects for a rehabilitation of

Oriel window at the rear side

Cliff Block, contemporary drawing showing the original facade

The “Cliff Block” in Tanga, Tanzania

History

The“CliffBlock”asformergovernmentalhospitalofTangainTanzania,featuringatropicalarchitecturalstylewithArabianmo-tifstypicaloftheformercolony”Deutsch–Ostafrika”,wasbuiltaccordingtodesignsoftheformergovernmentarchitect,imperi-alseniorcivilservantandgovernmentbuildingofficerFriedrichGurlitt.ItisamassiveconstructionofcorallimestonewithclaymortarandwasfinishedonApril1,1903afterathree-yearcon-struction period.

After the end of the German colonial rule, some replacements werecarriedout.However,sincetheBritishwithdrawalin1961,scant investments have been made for the maintenance of the building.Therefore,thebuildingisstillinneedofrehabilitation.Untiltheyear2000,thebuildingontheBombohospitalground,aregionalclinicwith600patientsperday,wasusedasahospital.The“CliffBlock”featuresthefollowingtechnicaldata:

Construction type:Walls: rubble stone masonryCeilings: PrussiancapceilingsRoof: doublepitchroof,hippedwithtriangledormerFoundation: plane,stripfooting

Materials:Walls: coral limestone, clay mortar, loam plasterCeilings: mouledironbeamswitharchedcapsof coral limestone Facing: tilesRoof: domestichardwoods,coveringofbricksWindows/doors: domestictimber

Robert Koch and the “Cliff Block”

RobertKoch,NobelPrize laureateof1905anduntil todayahighlyrespectedscientistworldwide,spentsometimeatthegov-ernmenthospitalinTangaduringtheyears1906and1907,inordertoadvancehisresearchinthefieldsofmalariaandsleepingsickness.The”CliffBlock”wastheonlyhospitalinAfricawhereRobert Koch worked.

The Present

In2015,InterplastGermany,sectionRastatt,travelledtoTangatogetherwithtwoGermanengineersinordertoevaluatethestateofconservationoftheabandonedbuilding,todeveloprepairstrat-egiesandgetaroughestimateofthecostsfortherevitalisation.

ISC Shared Built Heritage 145

the“CliffBlock”.EngineersRalphEgermannandRalfHeuernow use this thesis as a basis for a further restoration of the hospital. DuringtheTangacampaignin2015,thebuildingwasthor-

oughlyexaminedandcomparedwiththeconditionin2006:thebuilding’soverallconditionhasnotdramaticallydeclinedinthepast few years so that a rehabilitation has been considered to be possible from the technical point of view.

The plastered walls of coral limestone are stable and very re-sistant.Thewallsshownoseriousstructuraldamages;thusthestabilityisnotatrisk.Inmanyareas,theroofbearingstructurehasbeendestroyedbyinsectdamage,sothatitneedstobere-newed. Furthermore, the natural ventilation of the rooms, which ensuresanairexchangeinsideandkeepstheroomscoolinthesummer,mustberestored.Thebuildingequipmentmustbere-newed completely.

Front view

Narrow side of the building Operation theatre

ISC Shared Built Heritage146

The Future

After the completion of the planned restoration works, which incaseofanunsecuredfundingcouldbein2020,thebuildingshouldonceagainbeusedasahospital.Theoldoperationtheatrecould be reactivated and a number of further practices could cov-ertheincreasingmedicalneedsoftheregion.Hencetherehabil-itationofthe“CliffBlock”wouldbeafundamentalcontribution

tothedevelopmentassistanceintheregionandatthesametimewould help to preserve German architecture of the early 20th cen-tury in Africa.Ifitnotpossibletorepairthe“CliffBlock”andfindanade-

quateuseinthenearfuture,thisbeautifulbuildingwillbelostsooner or later. This type of loss can already be seen at the old Bomanearthe“CliffBlock”,whereapartfromsomefoundationwallsthebuildinghasalreadydisappeared.

Ralf Heuer

147

Socialist Modernist Heritage in the Republic of MoldovaTheSocialistModernismprojectwasconceivedin2013,withtheaimofprotectingthebuiltsocialistheritageerectedbetweenthe1960sand1980sinthecountriesofEasternEurope.Oneim-portantgoaloftheprojectistoidentifyrelevantpublicbuildingsand public spaces within the mentioned area. The Eastern Euro-peanSocialistModernismhasbeenexcludedfromthehistoryofarchitecture.Also,intheRepublicofMoldovathisphenomenonhasbeenignoredbyfellowexpertsandlocalauthoritiesalike.This type of architecture encountered a spectacular development which today could be improved and put to use in a new way. Inthiscontext,thenextsteptowardsclassifyingandrestoringthehistoricalheritageoftheRepublicofMoldovawouldbefirsttotakealookatthebuildingsfoundinthemostadvancedstateofdecay.TogetherwithBACU(BureauforArtandUrbanRe-search)wearecurrentlyadvocatingagroupoffourbuildingsinChisinau,requestingthattheybecomerecognisedaspartoftheheritageandlistedashistoricmonuments.Thefirstphaseoftheprojectdealswiththearchitectureofthe

RepublicofMoldovaandmorespecificallywithfourimportantbuildings:the“Romanita”CollectiveHousingTower,theHotelNational(formerIntourist),theCosmosHotel,andtheCircusinChisinau.

The “Romanita” Collective Housing Tower, Chisinau

Thebuildingissituatedat29/2ArheologIonCasian-SuruceanuStreet,on theperipheryof theValeaTrandafirilorPark,neartheRepublicanClinicalHospital.Inthemid-1970s,duetothehousingneedslocalauthoritiesdecidedtobuildablockofflatsforsmallfamilyunits.Itwasdesignedandbuiltbetween1978and1986bythearchitectO.VronskiandtheengineerA.Mari-an,incollaborationwithO.Blogu,S.Crani,N.RebenkoandP.Feldman.Intermsofstructuralengineering,thebuildingisanimportantachievementofthe1970s-80s:allthedwellingunitsonall16residentiallevelsaredesignedandbuiltinconsole,thusenhancingtheslenderimageofthebuilding–arareshapefor that time.Afterthe1990s,thesesocialhousingsforsmallfamilyunits

changedtheirstatus into“residentialapartments”afterbeingprivatisedbytheowners.IntheUSSR,allarchitecturaldesignwascontrolledbypoliticalauthorities’directives.Forthatrea-son,eachpersonhadanareaofsixsquaremetresassignedintheconceptphaseoftheproject.Theprincipleofthehousingunit/housingcellwasapplied,consistingoftworoomsassignedto two people, with a hall and a bathroom. Communal kitch-ens, recreation rooms and technical areas were provided on each residentialfloor.Thistypeofcompartmentingrepresentsthere-ality of the socialist period, when experts had to comply with theimposedrulesforlivingareas,withoutbeingabletomakeanychangeswithoutapprovalfromtheauthorities.Hereisonepopularexampleofspacedivision:eightunitswithtworoomson each residential level, connected by a circular corridor with commonareasbenefitingfromnaturallight.Allroomshaveac-cess to the terrace.Approximately77metreshigh,thetowerknownas“Romani-

ta”usedtobethetallestbuildinginChisinau.Thebuildingcon-sistsoftwobasements,agroundfloorand22storeys.Itsmainfunction is collective accommodation. The circular shape of the buildingandthelong,verticalorientationwereinfluencedbytheproximitytoValeaTrandafirilorPark.Thearchitecturalandspa-tialcompositionofthecylindricalbuildingincludesfourfloorsforutilities(laundryandcleaningroom,dryingroomandotherhouseholdutilityrooms)and16residentialfloors.Thetwounder-groundlevelsarebuiltfortechnicalareas.Fromafunctionalpointofview,theupperpartofthebuilding

wouldbesuitableforatwo-levelcoffeebarandanareades-tinedtoinvitetouriststoenjoythepanoramicviewofChisinau.Fromalegalpointofview,theresidentialbuildingisdividedasfollows:thegroundfloorandthefollowingthreefloors(ex-ceptforthestairsandutilities),aswellaspartofthehousingunits(16residentialfloors)areprivatelyowned,whiletherestofthebuilding(upperfloorsandtechnicalfacilities)isundertheadministrationoftheMunicipalEnterpriseofHousingFundManagementNo.9.

INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON 20th CENTURY HERITAGE

The “Romanita” collective housing tower, Chisinau

ISC 20th Century Heritage148

Current State

“Romanita”wassupposedtobepartofalargercompoundcon-sistingofatowerbuilding,acafeteriaandasportshall.Onlypartofthisplanwasfollowedthrough,whiletheadjacentbuildings(thecafeteriaandthesportshall),theconnectingperimeterinfra-structure(courtyardwithparkingspaceandpassages)andthelasttwofloorsof“Romanita”werenotconstructed.Atthemoment,“Romanita”isexperiencingadeclineandisinastateofadvanceddecay.However,itisstructurallystableandfunctionalforatleastone hundred years.Anotherissueregardingtheuseofthespaceisrepresentedby

the small size of the apartments in relation to the density of ten-ants.Manytenantshaveexpandedthesurfaceoftheirapartmentsbybuildingmakeshiftterraces/balconies(ofbrick,cementbrickorboard).Thistypeofillegalinterventiondistortstheimageofthebuildingandcreatesarealthreattothesafetyofitsusersforseveralreasons:firstofall,anincreasingnumberofsuperstruc-turebuildingsaddstothestructuralloadofthemainbuildingandsince they were not authorised, we cannot predict their behaviour over time. Secondly, many additions are made of extremely cheap andlowqualitymaterials,whichincreasesthecrashrisk.Thegroundfloorisdividedintothereceptionandformercom-

mercial spaces, where access is both from inside and outside the building,butatthemomenttheentrancesareoutofuse.Verticalaccessismadeavailablethroughacentraltrafficnode,whichin-cludesaspiralstaircaseandthreeelevators,twoforpassengersandoneforfreight.Thebuildingisprovidedwithafireescapestaircasewithaccessfromthebalconiestotheresidentialfloors.Mostofthecommercialspaces(foodstore,barbershop,shoe

repairshop)functionedduringthe1980sandwereoncelocatedonthegroundfloor,butthespaceswheretheyusedtobehavebeenvandalized.Thejoinery,thewindowsandtheexteriorcon-creteplatforms,aswellasthefinishesandtheinteriorinstalla-tionshavebeendestroyed.Therailings–whererailingsarestillavailable–aremadeofminimalelementsanddon’tactuallyse-cure the place as they should.

Although theconstructionhas the functionof a residentialbuilding,thehousingtypologyofthesocialistperiodnolongermeetsthecurrentstandards.Apartfromthisaspect,atfirstsight,thebuildingpresentsitselfasanunhealthyandunsuitableenvi-ronmentforthefunctionforwhichitwasdesigned,becauseofthecurrentstateofdegradationinwhichthe“Romanita”Toweris.

The State Circus of Chisinau

TheoriginalsiteoftheStateCircus(CirculdeStatChisinau)isat38RenasteriiBlvd.Atpresent,themainentrancecanbeaccessedviaGrigoreVieruBlvd.,whichusedtobeapartofRenasteriiBlvd.until2010.ThefirstbuildingoftheChisinauCircuswasbuilt in the early 19th century in Alexandru Street, at the site of thepresent“MihaiEminescu”theatre.Thecircusbelongedtothefamous circus impresario Vilhelm Suru, who worked between 1870and1874.In1874,thecircusbuildingwasreconstructedandre-purposedasatheatre.Towardstheendof1875thetheatrebuildingburntdown.Beforethepresentconstructionwasbuilt,theperformancestookplaceintemporarybuildings.TheChisinauCircusconstructionwasbuiltin1981bythear-

chitectsAlaKirichenkoandSimionShoyhetandtheengineersA.SnipelishskyandT.Grryunov.Theprojectwasinnovativeandrisky,consideringthatfromthebeginningconflictseruptedbetweenthesponsors“Союзгосцирк”(theCircusUnionoftheUSSR)fromMoscowandthedesignteamfromChisinau.Nev-ertheless,ChisinauStateCircuswasopenedin1982.ThemoneyrequiredfortheconstructionwasallocatedfromthebudgetoftheUSSRasagiftforthecelebrationof545yearssincethefirstmentionofChisinaucity.Theauthorsoftheprojectwereaward-edtheStatePrizeoftheMSSR.Theedificerepresentsacomplexandtechnologicallyadvanced

construction.Tiltedpillarsonthefacade,alargescaleandanac-curatepacerepresentasynthesisofMoldovan“Hora”dancing,thesestructuralelementsconveyinganimpressionofceleritytothebuilding.TheChisinauStateCircusconsistsoftwomajorparts:acylindricalbuildingintendedmostlyfor theaudienceandanadjacentbuildingwithhousingunitsforartistsandani-mals. The circus also has approximately three acres of land. The buildingintendedforthepublicincludesthemainhallwheretheperformancesrevolvearoundthemainarena.Ithasadiameterof13metres,thestandardsizeforcircusarenas.Thefloorwhichprovidestheaccessforthepublichasthemainfunctionoftrafficdistribution and representation. From the access area the visitors enteracircularfoyerwherethemainaccessstairstotheseatingareasarelocated.Inthelobbyisacateringareaandtherearealsorestroomsadjacenttothisarea.Theauxiliarybuildinghousesallthespacesdestinedforartists(accommodationunitsandgreenrooms)andforanimals(stables,manège).Inthisbuildingthereare three distinct areas, each with a separate entrance: that for the artists, the animals and the technical area. The spaces are located aroundthesecondaryarena,asinthecaseofthebuildingforthepublic.In1988,alargesculpturegroupcreatedbythesculptorMatvey

Levinson was installed above the main entrance. The sculpture representstheimageoftwoclowns–acrobatsgreetingthevisi-torswithasmile.ThissculpturalworkwasincludedintheReg-isterofProtectedMonumentsoftheRepublicofMoldovaon22June1999,asapprovedbytheParliament.

The Chisinau State Circus has hosted concerts and performanc-esofbothlocalandinternationalartists(fromBelarus,China,

The “Romanita”, detail of the facade

ISC 20th Century Heritage 149

Finland,Germany,Russia,Ukraine,etc).Whiletheothercircusesof the former Soviet bloc had up to 14 performances per year, theChisinauCircususedtoholdtherecordwithupto57showsayear,withastaffofabout60people.AfterthecollapseoftheUSSR,thecircus’activitiescontinuedataslowerrate.In2004,theChisinauCircusstoppeditsactivityduetourgentrenovations.In2006,theCircuswaslistedonthestockmarket,followingadecreeoftheMinistryofCultureandTourism.In2008,ausufructcontractwassignedforaperiodof29yearsinvolvingtheCyp-riotcompany“PesnexDevelopmentsLimited”.Thecommercialoperator was bound to take on the restoration and maintenance expenses,butfailedtomeetitscontractualobligations.InMarch2011,the2008contractwasdeclaredinvalidbytheEconomicCourtofAppeal;thereforethecircusreturnedtoMoldavianstateownership, but remains in an advanced state of deterioration.

Current State

Foralongtime,thesmallarenaintheadministrativeareawastheonly place where performances were held. Recently, this small arenaoftheStateCircuswasrestoredthroughapublic-privatepartnership,withtheofficialopeningon30May2014.However,rehabilitationworksofalladjacentareasarestillneededinthisbuildinginordertofunctionunderappropriateconditions.Atpresent, thebuildingoftheChisinauCircusis inanad-

vancedstateofdecay.Accordingto theexperts’findings, thestructuralframeworkofthebuildingisingoodconditionanddoesnotrequireintervention,butthereareareaswheresomeofthedecorativeelementsonthefacadearelikelytocollapse(nat-uralstonecladding,metalelements).Alargeglazedareaofthe

circularbuildingisbroken,coveredwithfiberboardsorwalledup. Some of the marble tiles on the facade have disappeared and the main entrance is about to collapse.

The main arena is destroyed, as well as the auxiliary rooms and mostoftheseatsinthestallsaregone.Concerningtheinteriorfinishes,thedegradationsaregreaterthantheexteriorfinishes:the interior decorations are shattered or have disappeared, the suspendedceilingsaretorn,thefloorsarebrokenwithceramictilesmissing,theinteriorpaintispeeling,somedoorshavedis-appearedortheirjoineryisbrokenandanumberofimportantmetal elements from the interior installations have been stolen. Currently, part of the makeup booths as well as the automatic heatingsystemsarestillingoodcondition,butthereisariskthatthey will be stolen if no one interferes.Themetalrelief(sculpturalgroupcreatedbythesculptorMat-

veyLevinson)representsanattractionforprowlers,whohavedamagedthebuildingoverthelastyears.Recently,theheadofone of the clowns on the frontispiece was stolen. The same has happened with the metal elements of the cupola.Thetechnicalconditionofthebuildingisquitegood.Howev-

er,itrequiresurgentintervention,thebuildingbeingunusableatpresent.

The National Hotel, Chisinau

TheNationalHotelissituatedinthecentreofChisinau,ononeofthemainthoroughfares,nexttotheUnitedNationsSquare(PiataNatiunilorUnite),attheupperendofStefancelMareBlvdandintheproximityofsomebuildingsoffunctionalvariety,suchastheChisinauHotel,theNationalAcademyofScienceandCiufleaChurch.Asmallsquarewithanumberoffountainsislocatedinfrontofthebuilding.AccordingtothelocalurbanplanningregulationsofChisinau,thebuildingisplacedintheCentralAd-ministrativeDistrict(SectorulAdministrativCentru).TheNationalHotelistheformerIntouristHotel,whichwas

designedbythearchitectsA.GorbuntsovandV.Shalaginovandcompletedin1974.TheNationalHotelwaspartofthe“Intourist”Soviet hotel network until 1992, was then state property between 1992and2006,andafterwardsprivatised.Asafunctionalchar-acteristic,thegroundfloorandthemezzaninecontaintherecep-tionareas,themaintrafficareasandtheareasforpubliccatering.Thesespacesaretreateddifferentlyfromthefloorsplannedforlodging:thevoidspaceispredominant,themezzanineisraisedonpillarsandthereisemphasisonhorizontalitythroughmulti-ple sash windows and the use of oversized concrete parapets. All thesefeaturesarespecifictomodernism.Thishotel,consistingofthegroundfloorand15floorsabove,wasoneofthemosticonichotels in Chisinau.The former IntouristHotel hosted aBerezka shop on the

groundfloor.Berezkawasthefirstnetworkoftradingstores,cre-atedin1961byorderoftheUSSRCouncilofMinisters.Insuchshopsonecouldfindtraditionalsouvenirs:vodka,caviar,folkartobjects,etc.Tradesweremadeinforeigncurrencyandthecli-entswereforeignersonly.“Berezka”chainstoresremainedopenuntilthelate1980s,whenMikhailGorbachevdeclaredthewaragainstprivileges,duringthePerestroikaperiod.Duringitsbesttimes,theIntouristHotelalsohostedanumberofpopularbars(theLidoBaronthegroundfloorandanotheroneontopofthebuilding).TheotherlandmarkwastheIntouristRestoran(restau-rant),designedaspartofthehotelcompound.DuringtheUSSRperiod,theIntouristRestaurantwasthemostfrequentedplacein

The State Circus of Chisinau

ISC 20th Century Heritage150

town.IthostedlavishpartiesandweddingswherepopularartistsfromMSSTusedtoentertainwiththeirsongs.TherestaurantislocatedontherightsideoftheStefancelMareBoulevard,asacontinuationoftheNationalHotel.Theformerrestaurantspacewas used in the aftermath of privatisation as a casino and as space for private parties.

Current State

Currently,thebuildingisinanadvancedstateofdecay.Thewallsinsidethebuildingaresoiled,theplasterhasbeendestroyed,theinteriorjoineryhasdisappearedandagreatpartoftheexteriorwindowsarebroken.Theinteriorstairrailingsandthefurniturein the accommodation units have either been destroyed or stolen.TheNationalHotelisownedbytheAlfaEngineeringCom-

pany,whichholds83.25%oftheshares.AlfaEngineeringwasboundbyasignedcontracttocarryoutreconstructionandmod-ernisationworks,sothatthebuildingwouldbeconvertedintoafive-starhotel.Theprojectalsoincludestherestorationofthesquareinfrontofthebuilding.Althoughthecompanyhasnotmetitscontractualobligations,theprivatisationcontracthasbeenextended over the years and the restoration works have been con-stantlydelayed.Today,thebuildingsitsintact,overlookingthepassers-by like an empty concrete shell. Thenewownerhasbeendelaying the rehabilitationof the

monumentforsevenyears,withoutfulfillinghiscontractualob-ligationsandnowhehaslaunchedpreparatoryworkstowardsdemolition.Because today the securityof thebuilding isnolongerensured,thehotelhasbeenseizedbyhomelesspeopleandthesanitarysituationisinverypoorcondition.TheNationalHotelisanexampleofsocialistmodernistarchitectureandrepre-sentsanedificethatshouldberehabilitatedandthenreintroducedintheMoldaviantouristcircuits.

The Cosmos Hotel, Chisinau

TheCosmosHotelissituatedinthecitycentre,whereConstantinNegruzziBoulevardandDimitrieCantemirBoulevardmeet.Bywithdrawingfromthealignment,asmallsquarewascreatedinfrontofthebuilding,inwhichtheequestrianstatueofKotovskiislocated. A controversial personality, the communist activist Gri-goryIvanovichKotovski(1881–1925)isforsomeaBolshevikhero and for others a worthless man.Theconstructionworkof theCosmosHotel lastedfornine

years,from1974to1983,whenitwasputintouse.Thelabourun-ionsoftheRepublicofMoldova,whichownedtwoothersmallerhotels,“Tourist”and“Doina”,atthattime,fundedwhatwastobe-comethecountry’slargesthotel–theCosmosHotel.ThebuildingwasdesignedbythearchitectsB.BanykinandIrinaKolbayeva.Thehotelconsistsofthegroundfloorand19floorsabove;dur-

ingthesocialistperioditwasoneofthelargesthotelsinMol-dova. The materials used for its construction include reinforced concretestructuresandprefabricatedelements.Thegroundfloorand the mezzanine are developed horizontally and include sev-eralannexeswithdifferentpurposes,besidetheaccommodationfacilities:cateringspaces,acasinoandabusinesscentrewithconference rooms.Thebuildingsitewasintendedtobeastrategiclocation,since

the hotel was built close to the only railway station, near the cen-tralsquareandnexttothebusstation,11kmawayfromChisinauInternationalAirport.Duetothefactthatvacationopportunitiesinthe1980swereoftenlimitedtotheSovietUnionborders,Mol-dovawasaverypopulartouristdestination.Inthisperiod,thehoteloccupancyratereached90%duringthesummerseasonandoften100%fromSeptembertoNovember.Withthepoliticalchangesafter1990,thebusinessstatusof

thelargesthotelinMoldovachangedandthenumberoftouristsdecreaseddrastically.Inordertousethehotelatitsfullpotential,

The National Hotel in Chisinau

ISC 20th Century Heritage 151

consideringthestrategiclocationofthebuilding,theadministra-tiondecidedtoleaseroomsasofficespacesandthelobbyasareafor commercial purposes.Between1997and2004,aseriesofinvestmentsweremadeat

theCosmosHotel,inordertoincreasetheeconomicefficiencyandthequalityoftheservicesprovided.Followingitsmoderni-sation,thehotelwentfromatwo-startoathree-starclassification.Somemajorinvestmentswerecarriedoutduringtherenovationoftherooms,includingcarpentrychanges,wall-finishingrepairs,bathroomreconditioningandplumbingreplacements.

Current State

Currently,thehotelisnotoperatingatfullcapacity.Thefinish-esaredeterioratedinmostoftherooms,theceramictilingandsanitaryfacilitiesinthebathroomsaredegraded,whilethepublicspacesonthegroundfloorandatthemezzaninelevelareinbet-tercondition.NexttotheCosmosHotelbuilding,anumberofparasiteconstructionshavebeenbuilt(aGrandHallCommercialcomplex, built in 2002, further extended in 2011; a Casino built in2008,andothercommercialspacesthatreplacedtheDiscoPEOPLE,whichinitiallyappearedin2005).Thoseextensionsareanegativeexampleofcommercializationofspace,neglectingtheinitialfunctionprovidedbytheCosmoscomplex.Inadditionto these considerations, there is also a stylistic inconsistency be-tween the socialist modernist period and the latest additions.

Conclusions

Ourconservationproject(socialistmodernism.com)isfocusedonarchitectural complexes from the socialist modernist period. We believe the liberal policies promoted by the municipal authorities

overthelastfewdecadeshaveneglectedthehistoricalheritageofthecitywithregardtothatperiod.Therefore,anumberofbuild-ingsofimportantarchitecturalvaluearenotfoundintheRegisterofHistoricalMonumentselaboratedin1993bytheParliamentoftheRepublicofMoldova.Theregenerationstrategywillconsistinpreservingthebuild-

ingsofheritagevalue,whichhadamajorinfluenceondefiningthe identity of the city, as well as on the urban modernization of these attractions.Consideringtheabovementionedinformationandalsothefact

thattheobjectsgenerallypresentamediumtypeofdegradation(sinceinterventionsinthestructuralframeworkarenotneces-sary),weproposetheurgentlistingofthe“Romanita”CollectiveHousingTowerforsmallfamilyunits,theNationalHotel,theCosmosHotelandtheStateCircus(CirculdeStatChisinau)intheRegisterofHistoricalMonumentsprotectedbythestate.Althoughintermsoftimetheobjectshavealowrating,the

planimetricandstructuralcoherenceprovidesahighvaluetothebuildings.Moreover,thebuildings’constructionhighlightstheideologyofthesocialistperiod,beingrepresentativeofthewaycollectivehousing,hotelsorcircuseswerebuiltandofthecomplianceofbuildingswithcollectivehousingprogrammesorbuildingregulationsforcircusesatthattime.Giventheunique-nessofthearchitecturalobjectsintheRepublicofMoldova,weproposethelistingintheRegisterofHistoricalMonumentsandthedesignationasaconservationareafortheentirecomplexofproposedbuildingsrelatedtosocialistmodernism.Subsequently,byrestoringthebuildings,asignificantcontribu-

tion will be made to the tourist and socio-economic development of the community. From a social point of view, the sense of com-munitycanbeenhancedbyinvolvingthecivilsocietyinrestoringtheStateCircus.Atthesametime,byconvertingtheCollectiveHousingTowerforsmallfamilyunitsthesocietymaygraduallydepartfromtheminimalhousingtypology.Fromaneconomicpointofview,thesocietywillbenefitfromthecreationofnewjobs(forhealthprofessionalsandexpatriateartistswhonolongerhaveanywheretoperform)andfromtheincreaseofthetouristpotentialofthecity,byofferingroomsandaccommodationatcontemporary standards. Byrehabilitatingthefourbuildings,itisintendedtoinitiate

adialoguebetweenallpartiesinvolvedinthedevelopmentofthecity,todefinetheprioritiesforactionandthestrategiesforintervention,andfinally,tocreateandimplementprogrammestorestorethenationalheritage

Dumitru Rusu

The Cosmos Hotel in Chisinau, detail

BibliographyKatharina Ritter, Ekaterina Shapiro-Obermair, Dietmar Steiner,

Alexandra Wachter: Soviet Modernism 1955–1991, 2012.WolfgangThöner:‘Alien,HostilePhenomenon’tothe‘PoetryoftheFuture’:OntheBauhausReceptioninEastGermany,1945–70,GHI Bulletin,Supplement2(2005).

Inger-ElinØye:TheFeelingforGray,Aesthetics,Politics,andShiftingGermanRegimes,Social Analysis,vol.51,Issue1,Spring2007.

Anders Aman: Architecture and Ideology in Eastern Europe during the Stalin Era, 1992.

BernardTschumi:Architecture and Disjunction,1996.GregoryAndrusz,MichaelHarloe,IvanSzelenyi:Cities Af-

ter Socialism: Urban and Regional Change and Conflict in Post-Socialist Societies,1996.

SebastianMuth,FrederikWolf:The linguistic landscapes of Chişinău: Forms and functions of urban public verbal signs in a post-Soviet setting,LancasterUniversityPostgraduateConference, 2009.

Alexandru Panaitescu: From Scanteii House to People’s House. Four decades of architecture in Bucharest 1945–1989, 2012.

AugustinIoan:Modern Architecture and the Totalitarian Project – a Romanian case study, 2009.

AugustinIoan:O (noua) Estetica a reconstructiei, 2002.

152

Foreword

ThereportingperiodiscompletelyovershadowedbytheviolentdeathofMr.KhaledAl-AsaadinPalmyrainthelatespringof2015.Wefindourselves,aslegalpractitioners,intheunusualpredicamentonprovidingadviceandsupporttocolleaguesonthefrontlinesofculturalheritageprotection.Thefollowingre-portincludesacrosssectionoflegalconcernsandchallengesintheprotectionofmonumentsandsitesrelevantduringthere-portingperiod,andthewaysinwhichrecenteventsshowtheneedtoupdatethelawsprotectingculturalheritage.Specifically,wereportontheprogressoftheSecondProtocoloftheHagueConvention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event ofArmedConflict.Also,weproposeexpandingthedefinitionofculturalheritageandsystematizingeffortstoevaluaterisktoculturalheritage.Wehopethatthesewritingswillinspireourcolleaguestofindnovelmethodsfortheprotectionoftheirre-placeable, and to provide some small measure of support by so doing.

The Most Recent Advances in the Implementation of the Hague Conven-tion of 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, and its ProtocolsAnalysis of the latest important decisions taken by the Committee for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict

TheintergovernmentalCommitteefortheProtectionofCulturalPropertyintheEventofArmedConflict(hereafter“ theCom-mittee”),establishedbytheSecondProtocolof1999(hereafter“theSecondProtocol”)totheHagueConventionof1954fortheProtectionofCulturalPropertyintheEventofArmedConflict(hereafter“ theConvention”)celebrateditstenthanniversaryinDecember2015,justayearafterthecelebrationofthe60yearsoftheConventionand15yearsoftheSecondProtocol.IncreatingthisCommittee,alongsideotherpositiveinnova-

tions,theauthorsoftheSecondProtocolwishedtobringaboutabetterimplementationoftheHagueConvention,adormantcon-vention1 that until now has been deprived of any instrument of internationalcontrol.Inthissummaryofitsaction,canweclaimthattheirhopeshavebeenmet?

First of all, the Second Protocol only came into force on 9 March2004,whichwasthetimeneededtodepositthe20instru-mentsofratificationasrequiredbythistreaty. 2Thefirsttaskforthe Committee was to provide the necessary documents so that

theMeetingofthePartiescouldcarryoutitsmandateasprovidedbytheSecondProtocol, 3 in particular:– “(…)ApprovetheGuidingPrincipleselaboratedbytheCom-mittee,conformingtosubparagrapha)ofparagraph1ofarticle27;

– ProvidedirectionconcerningtheuseoffundsbytheCommit-teeandensuringitssupervision;(…).”

InNovember 2009, following unrelenting preparatoryworkundertheguidanceofsuccessiveChairpersonsChristophBazil(Austria),KarimPeltonen(Finland),andofJanHladikfortheSecretariat,theMeetingofthePartiesadoptedtheGuidingPrin-ciples for the Application of the Second Protocol, the Guidelines ConcerningtheUseoftheFundfortheProtectionofCulturalPropertyintheEventofArmedConflict(hereafter“theFund”),and the Financial Rules of the Fund.Thefollowinganalysiswillfocusontheprogressmadebythe

Committeebetweenits5thsessionin2010andits10thsessionin2015,underthechairsNoutvanWoudenberg(Netherlands,2010 –2012),theauthor(Belgium,2012–2014)andArtemisPa-pathaniassou(Greece,2014)inthefollowingareasofconcern:41. The development of enhanced protection for cultural property;2. The creation of a distinctive emblem for enhanced protection;3. Thedevelopmentofstrategicsynergies;4. Thegrowingroleofachairperson;5. TheuseoftheFundfortheProtectionofCulturalPropertyin

theEventofArmedConflictandactionsontheground.

1. The development of enhanced protection for cultural property

AspecificfeatureoftheSecondProtocolisthecreationofanewinternational system for the protection of cultural property at risk, namely“enhancedprotection”.5 This new type of protection sup-plants6“specialprotection”(forculturalpropertyofverygreatimportance)setoutbytheConvention,7whichlacksefficacy.Inbrief,theCommitteecanagreeuponenhancedprotectionif

the proposed property meets three criteria8specifiedinarticle10of the Second Protocol:a. It is a cultural heritage that assumes the greatest importance

for humanity; b. It is protected by adequate internal, legal and administrative

measures that recognise its exceptional cultural and historic value and that guarantee the highest level of protection;

c. It is not used for military means or to protect military sites, and the Party under whose control it falls confirms by means of a declaration that it will not be used in these ways.

The status of enhanced protection ensures the immunity of the cultural property.9 Violation of this10 is considered as a serious vi-olationofinternationalhumanitarianlaw(i.e.awarcrime)ifit

INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE ON LEGAL, ADMINISTRATIVE AND FINANCIAL ISSUES

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues 153

happens, which needs to be incriminated and reprimanded by the Parties.11

The development of the List of Cultural Property under En-hancedProtectionisthefollowing:– thearchaeologicalsiteofChoirokoitia–Cyprus(2010),– PaintedChurchesintheTroodosRegion–Cyprus(2010),– thearchaeologicalsiteofPaphos–Cyprus(2010),– CasteldelMonte–Italy(2010),– thearchaeologicalsiteofKernavé–Lithuania(2011),–WalledCityofBakuwiththeShirvanshah’sPalaceandtheMaidenTower–Azerbaijan(2013),

– thearchaeologicalsiteofGobustan–Azerbaijan(2013),– thehouseandworkshopofVictorHorta–Belgium(2013),– NeolithicFlintMinesatSpiennes–Belgium(2013),– Plantin-MoretusHouse-Workshops-MuseumComplexandtheArchivesoftheOfficianaPlantiniana–Belgium(2013).

Since2013,notasinglerequesthaslandedonthetableoftheCommittee,whichmeantthatatthelastMeetingofthePartiesto the Second Protocol,12 several States expressed their concern. Differentfactorsexplainthis:– AlackofPartiestotheConvention(127)andtotheSecondProtocol(68);

–ManyofthoseStateshavestillnotadoptedrelevantprovisionsof the Second Protocol in their domestic law, in particular Chapter4thatsetsoutanactiveroleoftheStatesinthefightagainstimpunityintheeventofviolationoftheProtocolorofthe Convention, which is considered as a failure to meet crite-rion10,b),oftheSecondProtocol;

– The Secretariat should develop a more comprehensive posture, despitehavingdevelopedamoreproactiveattitudewithandsupport to the States;

– A lack of action from the States, proven by the fact that the emergencyprocedure13tobenefitfromenhancedprotectionhasneverbeenactivated,eventhoughsomesituationshavecom-pletelyjustifiedit(withsuspensionoftheconditionsetoutintheaforementionedarticle10,b);

– TheStates’lackofinformation.Forexample,MexicoinscribedelevennewpropertiesintheInternationalRegisterofCulturalPropertiesunderSpecialProtection,eventhoughthisregisteris considered obsolete.

Nevertheless,theCommittee,apartfromconstantlyreaffirmingits wish to see a number of cultural properties placed under enhancedprotection,hastrieditsbesttodothegroundworkforthe future:

– ByadoptingaTentativeListmodel,14whichisofanon-bindingnature,inordertoencouragetheStatestocarryoutthefirstselectionstageforculturalpropertiessuitabletobeputforwardforenhancedprotectionaccordingtoarticle11,par.1,oftheSecond Protocol;

– BycommissioningICOMOStodoastudyontheimplementa-tionofcriteria10,a)andb).15Ineffect,thecriterionofarticle10,a)oftheSecondProtocol(cultural heritage of the greatest importance for humanity)necessarilycoversaseriesofculturalpropertiesontheWorldHeritageList(ofoutstandinguniver-sal value)16 but also extends to some cultural properties not on theWorldHeritageList(immovableculturalpropertiesnotofoutstandinguniversal valuebutofthegreatestimportanceforhumanity).ThereforeitwouldbestrategictohaveaCommit-teewiththepowertorespondtosucharequest,andequippedwithamethodologyandpreciseandmeasurablecriteria.InDecember2015,theCommitteedecidedtoputpressureonthe

Secretariat, which will need to submit, with the support of the BureauoftheCommittee,afirstprojectofstatutorymodifi-cationstotheGuidingPrinciplesinordertofollowupontheresultsoftheICOMOSstudy.

– Inthesamedecision,17theCommitteerequestedtheSecretariattopresentaninformationdocumentonthenotionsof“control”and“jurisdiction”setoutinarticles10,c)and11,point2,18 of the Second Protocol, in international law and case law. This is toclarifythesepreciselegalnotionsofinternationalhumanitar-ian law, in tempore non suspecto, inordertoanticipaterequestsforfundingenhancedprotectionofculturalpropertyforwhichthe application of these notions could prove to be problematic.

2. The creation of a distinctive emblem for enhanced protection

Surprisingly,theauthorsoftheSecondProtocoldidnotincludeamethodforvisuallyidentifyingculturalpropertiesthatwouldbenefitfromenhancedprotection.Theimportanceofconspicu-ouslymarkingprotectedpropertiesisoftremendousconcernifimplementationof theSecondProtocol is tomeetbasic legalrequirements.Areflectiononthis,initiatedbytheBelgianpres-idency,startedatthebeginningof2013.TheCommitteetookapositionintwostages.InDecemberofthatyear,itadoptedtheprincipleofcreatingaspecificdistinctiveemblemandalegalpathwaytoachievethis.Thefollowingyearitselectedapictorialproposal19anditscorporateidentitywassubmittedtotheMeet-ingoftheParties.Thislatterbody,afteralivelydebate,finallyapprovedthespecificdistinctiveemblemproposedbytheCom-mittee, as it was convinced that this emblem would play a role in improvedprotectionandvisibilityofculturalpropertiesofsignif-icantinterest,andwouldguaranteeimprovedlegalsecurityforwarringfactionsthatwillbeabletoidentifyculturalpropertiesunderenhancedprotectionandthusavoidanyattackagainstthem(suchattackconstitutesawarcrimesubjecttoprosecutionandrepression).20 Internationalhumanitarianlawnowhasanewdistinctiveem-

blem that is suitable to disseminate as widely as possible:

TheGuidelinesfortheImplementationoftheSecondProtocolwill be amended in order to take into consideration this emblem and to provide the modalities of its use.

3. The development of strategic synergies

ThequestionofthesynergiesbetweentheHagueConventionanditsProtocolsandotherUNESCOinstrumentsandprogrammeshas been posed since the session of the Committee in 2010.21 Momentumbehindthisgrewuntilin2013twoconcreteplansemerged:synergieswiththeotherUNESCOCulturalConven-tions,andsynergieswithotherrelevantinternationalactors.

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues154

3.1. Synergies with the other UNESCO Cultural Conventions

AmongUNESCO’sCulturalConventions, theConventionof1972concerning theprotectionofworldculturalandnaturalheritage(hereafter“theWorldHeritageConvention”)occupiesavery important place thanks to its visibility and importance within UNESCO.

Synergies with the World Heritage Convention

ThispointwasputontheagendaforthefirsttimeatasessionoftheCommitteein2012upontherequestofBelgium,whichproposedaworkingdocumenttothiseffect,22 next to that from the Secretariat.23 While the document from the Secretariat set the scene and put the emphasis on what had already been realised (interestinglyaCulturalConventions’LiaisonGroup,whichre-groupstheirsecretariats),theBelgiandocumenthadaverycon-creteobjective:grantStatesthatarePartiestoboththeSecondProtocolandtheWorldHeritageConventionthepower,onavol-untarybasis,torequestenhancedprotectionaspartoftheformforrequestinginscriptionontheWorldHeritageList.24 Inthefirstinstance,thispragmaticproposalhadtobenefitcul-

turalproperties,butitwasalsotransformedbyastrategiccon-sideration: the Convention could use this explicit reference in theWorldHeritageinscriptionformtohaveacertainvisibilityandattracttheattentionoftheStates.ItisnecessarytonoteherethatwhiletheWorldHeritageConventionhas191Parties,theConvention only numbers 127 at present, and the Second Pro-tocol68. TheCommitteeadoptedtheprojectandsentittotheDirec-

tor-GeneraltoaddtotheagendaoftheWorldHeritageCommit-teeinJune2013.25Asafirststep,theWorldHeritageCommitteeacceptedtheprincipleofthissynergy,re-submittedthequestionforadecisiontoitsCommitteeof2015andchargedtherespec-tivebodieswithpursuingthiswork.ItmustbeacknowledgedthattheWorldHeritageCentredid

notbuyintothisreform,andatthesessionoftheWorldHeritageCommitteeinBonnin2015theprojectcouldnotgetthroughtheWorkingGroupontheRevisionofGuidelines,inspiteofalast-minuteattemptbyBelgium.Theresponsibilityforthisfailurefalls partly on the Committee itself: neither of the two States that hadtheprivilegeofbeingmembersofbothCommitteesatthesametimeintervenedintheWorkingGrouporintheCommitteetodefendtheproject,nordidanyMemberStateoftheCommit-tee for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict.TheironyisthattheStatessupportingtheprojectthemost,AlgeriaandFrance,aretwooftheStatesyettoratifytheSecondProtocol(thoughtheyareatthepointofdoingso).Thiscruellyunderlinesamongotherthingstheproblemofinternalcommunication between the States and the separation of exper-tise, which led to this problem of an incoherent position of these countries:theexpertswhovotedenthusiasticallyforthesynergiesprojectintheCommitteefortheProtectionofCulturalPropertywerenotnecessarilythosethatparticipatedintheWorldHeritageCommittee. Havingsaidthat,thisproposalcouldbelookedatagaininthe

WorldHeritageCommitteein2017.Thistypeofreformneedstosucceedsoonerorlater.ThenecessityofsynergiesbetweentheConventionsandsuchthingswillprevailoverthebureaucraticlogicofdefenceofone’sownterritory.26 Education and advocacy totheStateswillbeequallyindispensableinmakingthisprojectsuccessful.

Inanycase,since2012,thequestionofsynergies,particularlywiththeWorldHeritageConvention,hasconsistentlyappearedontheCommittee’sagenda.

Synergies with the other cultural conventions

TheConventionof1954isacross-functionalconvention,includ-ingbothimmovableandmovableculturalproperty.Synergieswith the Convention of 1970 concern measures to prohibit and preventtheimport,exportandthetransferofillegallyownedcul-turalpropertyornature.ItisalsonecessarytonolongerforgettheConventionof2001ontheProtectionofUnderwaterCultur-alHeritageandtheConventionof2003fortheSafeguardingofIntangibleCulturalHeritage.Ineffect,intangibleheritageisnottotallydisembodied,asitlivesonthroughcertainobjectsandorplaces.27

Given the lack of concrete advances, notably the resound-ing lack of room for dialogue between theCommittees andUNESCO,witheveryinstitutionworkingonitsownthing,theCommittee, inspired by the initiative of the Chairperson of the SubsidiaryCommitteeoftheConventionof1970,MauricioEs-canero(Mexico),tookthedecisioninDecember2014toinvitethe Director-General to hold, at least once a year, consultation meetings with the Chairpersons of the statutory organs estab-lished by the Cultural Conventions, with the objective, among other things, of developing synergies between these Conventions, and where relevant to make a report to the statutory organs. SotheDirector-GeneralIrinaBokovahadtheexcellentidea 28

ofbringingtogethertheChairpersonsoftheCommitteesoftheUNESCOCulturalConventionsontheoccasionofthe39thses-sionoftheWorldHeritageCommittee(Bonn,29June2015).Un-fortunately this ambition was limited by some interventions from variousaforementionedchairpersons(ortheirrepresentatives)asapreludetothepresentationofaJointDeclaration29negotiatedin advance.

The Chairperson of the Committee for the protection of Cul-turalPropertyintheEventofArmedConflictherselfcontinuedtoresearchsynergies,inparticularwiththeConventionof1970.Asaresult,ajointmeetingofthetwoBureaus(BureauoftheCommittee for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event ofArmedConflictandtheBureauoftheSubsidiaryCommitteetotheMeetingoftheStatesPartiestotheConventionin1970)wasorganisedon7December2015.Itsaimwastoexchangein-formationconcerningfirstlythedestructionofculturalheritageaspartofarmedconflicts,andsecondlyorganisingactionstoraiseawarenessandtrainsoldiers,policeofficersandcustoms’officersregardingprotectionofculturalheritageintheeventofarmedcon-flictandthefightagainstillegaltraffickingofmovableheritage.30

We can salute this advance, even if it is a timid one, and hope thatthenextmeetingsoftheChairpersonsoftheCommitteewilltaketheformofaworkinggroupaimingtogetsomeresultsthatare more concrete than symbolic. Finally, the Committee also ap-provedtheprincipleofgreaterinvolvementinthequestionofintangibleheritage,withoutitbeingsubjecttoaformaldecision.

3.2. Synergies with relevant international actors

One particularity of the Second Protocol is the very important positionthatitgivestoitspartnerassociation, 31theInternationalCommitteeoftheBlueShield(ICBS),foundedbythefouras-sociationsofcompetentexpertsinthefieldofapplicationoftheConvention:theInternationalCouncilonMonumentsandSites

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues 155

(ICOMOS),theInternationalCouncilofMuseums(ICOM),theInternationalCouncilonArchives(ICA),andtheInternationalFederationofLibraryAssociations andInstitutions(IFLA).Since2013,theChairpersonhasmultipliedexploratorycon-

tactswiththeICBSanditsSecretariattoestablisharealpartner-ship with the Committee.32Atthesametime,theICRChasbeenapproached,seeingthattheprotectionofculturalpropertyinthecaseofarmedconflictfallswithinitsmandatewhichconsistsinworkingforthefaithfulapplicationofinternationalhumanitarianlawandforitsunderstandinganddisseminationingeneral.In-deed,accordingtothe1999SecondProtocol,theICRCisoneofthemainorganizationsabletocooperatewiththeCommitteeandto assist it in the implementation of its functions.33 Two concrete examplesofcooperationbetweentheCommitteeandtheICRCcanbehighlightedsincethen:– ThesendingofajointlettertothechairpersonsoftheNationalCommitteesofIHLin2014inordertoencouragethemtosetupastandingworkinggroupthatwillsupporttheimplementa-tionoftheHagueConventionanditsProtocols;

– The support of the fourth Chairperson of the Committee to the organizationofasideeventduringthe32ndInternationalCon-ferenceoftheRedCrossandRedCrescent(8–10December2015)on“Newchallengesfortheprotectionofculturalprop-erty:fromincidentaldamagetodeliberatedestruction”.TwomodelpledgesaddressedtotheStatesandtheNationalSoci-eties of the Red Cross and Red Crescent were proposed at the endofthesideeventinordertopromotetheratificationoftherelevantconventionsrelatingtotheprotectionofculturalprop-erty, their implementation at the national level, their dissemina-tionandtheestablishmentofastandingworkinggroupontheprotectionofculturalpropertywithintheNationalCommitteesofIHL.

Onthebasisofdecision8COM.3,34 the Chairperson of the CommitteebroughttogetherrepresentativesofUNESCO,theInternationalCommitteesoftheRedCrossandoftheBlueShieldinMarchandJune2014tocreateadiscussionplatformforallthequestionsrelatedtotheprotectionofculturalproper-tyintheeventofarmedconflict,includingcommunicationintheeventofanemergency.Themainobjectiveofthisinterna-tional platform is to ensure the dissemination of information on culturalheritageamongalltheactorsinvolvedandtostrength-eneffortsintheeventofacrisis.Thefollowingobjectivesweredefined:

– disseminatinginformationtoallthestakeholdersinvolvedintheprotectionofculturalheritage,whethertheyparticipateinthe platform or not;

– reinforcingcooperationforcommonactions,includingintheeventofarmedconflict;

– promotingtheworkoftheNationalCommitteesoftheBlueShield,theNationalCommissionsforUNESCOandtheNa-tional Consultative Committees established as part of Resolu-tionIIadoptedbytheConferenceofTheHaguein1954.

Aroundthesetwomeetings,therewasdiscussionofquestionssuchastheincidenceofanarmedconflictonculturalpropertyorthepossibilityofproposingtechnicalassistance.35 We note that theDirector-GeneralIrinaBokovawasinspiredbythisdynam-ictoconcludeapartnershipagreementwiththeICRCinFebru-ary2016.36Thisagreementaimsat:encouragingStatestoratifytheHagueConventionanditsProtocolsandtoimplementthesetreatiesatthenationallevel;raisingawarenessofhumanitarianactorsworkinginarmedconflictsontheprotectionofculturalpropertyandrescuingculturalpropertyatimminentriskunder

specificconditions.Thesesynergiesthathavebeenforgedwithinstitutional and associative counterparts will be followed up and strengthened,37inparticularthosewithICCROM.38

4. The growing role of a Chairperson

AChairperson’s room formanoeuvre sometimes lacksclari-ty.ThefunctionwastraditionallyperceivedinUNESCOasanimportantfunctionforthemanagementofdebatesandformingconsensus,butremainedratherhonorific.However,anewgen-eration of more determined and reactive Chairpersons seems to haveemergedinthedifferentCommitteesinrecentyears.ConfrontedbythedramaticravagesonculturalpropertyinMa-

li,andthenintheMiddleEast(Syria,Iraq,Yemen),theCommit-tee was asked to provide the Chairperson of the Committee with greaterroomformanoeuvrethanthatauthorisedbyarestrictivereadingoftheSecondProtocol.Itshouldbeunderlinedthatsince2013numerousstepshavebeentakenbytheChairperson,thanksto the implicit support of members of the Committee, notably withtheStatesinconflictortheStatesthatarenotPartiestotheSecond Protocol. One move forward, which remains at an infor-malstage,wasbegunbyrelyingonarticle36,subparagraph2,ofthe Second Protocol which sets out that in the absence of Protect-ingPowers39 and on the invitation of one the Parties or the Di-rector-General, the Chairperson of the Committee can propose to the parties in conflict to have a meeting of their representatives, and in particular those authorities responsible for the protection of cultural property, potentially on the territory of a State not party to the conflict.Theobjectiveherewastohavethepowertodispatchamissionofexpertsonthegroundinordertoevaluatedamageandestablishanactionandrestorationplan,withoutin-terferinginthepoliticalprocessforresolutionoftheconflictordefiningresponsibilityforthedamage.Experiencehasshownthatthe process of reconciliation could be accelerated, or conversely sloweddown,dependingonthereappropriationofculturalherit-agebyitsinhabitants.Ineffect,amonumentthathasbeenguttedand left abandoned simply rubs salt into the wound.Furthermore,theCommittee,ontheinitiativeofthedeparting

Chairperson,encourages,bymeansofitsDecision9COM.3 40 :– the Chairperson, in consultation with members of the Commit-

tee, to make public statements on behalf of the Committee as well as together with UNESCO and/or other statutory organs established by the Cultural Conventions and/or the Interna-tional Committee of the Blue Shield on the protection of cul-tural property in the event of armed conflict, including occupa-tion;

– the Chairperson to assume her responsibilities under the rele-vant provisions of the Second Protocol with the view to exerting conciliation efforts among concerned Parties to an armed con-flict including occupation in order to strengthen monitoring of cultural property on the ground.Since then, the Chairperson has used the mandate on three oc-

casionstomakeaDeclaration(inMay41 and September 422015andaspartofthejointBonnDeclarationcitedabove43 ).Inturn,theCommitteehasalsogotusedtoterminatingitsses-

sion with a Declaration since this session in 2014 44, and in so do-inghascollectivelybroughtitsvoiceintotheinternationalsphere.ItwasindeedparadoxicalthattheintergovernmentalCommitteeinchargeoftheprotectionofculturalpropertyintheeventofarmedconflictremainedcompletelysilentwhenattacksagainstculturalpropertyweremultiplying.

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues156

5. The use of the Fund for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and actions on the ground

Thedecision9COM.3oftheCommitteeasmentionedabove,re-questedthatthe International Committee of the Blue Shield pro-vide a report on the situations where cultural property is at risk in the context of an armed conflict including occupation, to be examined during the Tenth Meeting of the Committee, in order to develop proposals for action.Unfortunately,theICBS,whichwasundergoingawholesaleinternalreorganisationandwaswith-outfinancestodrawupthisreport,couldnotprovidethisforthetenthmeetingoftheCommittee.Therefore, in its following session inDecember2015, the

Committeetookanextremelyimportantstrategicdecision,De-cision10COM.945, in which:

The Committee,1. Invites the Chairperson, with the assistance of the Secretariat,

to continue the dialogue with the International Committee of the Blue Shield with a view to writing a report on the situa-tions where cultural property is at risk in the context of an armed conflict including occupation;

2. Encourages all the Parties to the Second Protocol to mutu-alize, where necessary, financial resources with a view to the preparation of this report;

3. Decides, if the call for contributions addressed to the Parties does not gather the necessary resources to finance this report, to use the Fund for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, and requests the Secretariat to in-form the members of the Committee by electronic means, as part of the procedure already used for funding the financial assistance to Mali, about the amount that needs to be taken from the Fund;

4. Requests that this report could be submitted to the meeting of the Bureau in September 2016, to analyse and establish a coherent action plan with the strategy of “Reinforcement of the action of UNESCO regarding the protection of cultural heritage and the promotion of cultural pluralism in the event of armed conflict” (Document 38 C/49) adopted by the Gener-al Conference in its 38th session;

5. Furthermore, requests that this report and action plan are pre-sented at its eleventh meeting.46

SotheCommitteewants,withsupportofICBS,tohaveasur-veillance tool at its disposal for the areas where cultural proper-tiesareatrisk(accordingtotheICBSreport),andacontroltoolaimingtopromoteadvancesontheground(viatheactionplan).Therefore,theobjectiveoftheCommitteeistoleaveitsdiplomat-ic comfort zone to attempt to concretely respond to the problems it needs to deal with. This is an exceptional move.Furthermore,accordingtoarestrictivereadingoftherelevant

texts, the Fund that the Committee has at its disposal can only beactivatedbythePartiestotheSecondProtocol.BelgiumhasunderlinedthestrangeparadoxthattheCommitteefindsitselfinneedingtomanageaFundthat47 it is unable to use for its own actions.ThankstotheneutralpositionoftheNetherlands,theprincipal contributor to the Fund, the Committee decided to side-

stepthislimitingconceptionandrelyonthegeneralmandatesetout in article 27, f, of the Second Protocol 48 which stipulates that theCommitteeisdesignatedtodecide on the use of the Fund. WhiletheDecisioncurrentlyonlyaimstocoverthefinancingoftheICBSstudy,onecanimaginethatinfuturethemeasurestakenbytheCommitteetoapplyitsactionplancouldalsobefinancedby these means.

Conclusions

Despite numerous hurdles, the Committee has taken its place in theinternationalcircle.However,therearecertainlyanumberofchallengesremaining,including:1.ThenumberofratificationsoftheSecondProtocol,althoughtheprogressionisconstant,remainsverylow.Forexample,tothisdaynoMemberoftheSecurityCouncilisPartytotheSecond Protocol.49

2.IstherestillaseriouslackofdialoguebetweentheCommitteeandUNESCO?DespiteUNESCO’sofficialdiscoursewherethewords“synergies”and“collaborations”aresystematicallyemployed,thedialoguewiththeCommitteecouldstillbeim-proved.50Inaddition,theSecretariatoftheCommitteehason-lybeenprovidedtwopeople,oneofwhomis0.3FTE,whichis indicative of its level of priority in the institution.

3.TheinvolvementoftheStatesalsovariesgreatlyfromonecountrytotheother,withoutcountingtheinternalcompart-mentalisation referred to above. The implementation of the Second Protocol and the Convention by the States also often posesproblems,mainlybecausethesearenotonlyenvisagedasusefultoolsintheeventofanarmedconflict;thepointistorealizethemeasuresofprevention,traininganddisseminationin times of peace.

Nevertheless,theCommitteehasbeenabletogrowanddevelop.Ithaschalkedupanumberofstepsforward,including:– The development of the List of Cultural Property under En-

hanced Protection;– Thecreationofadistinctiveemblemformarkingculturalprop-

erty under enhanced protection;– ThesuccessfulactionsinElSalvadorandinMali,thefirstaspartofanoperationofpreventionandawareness-raising,andthesecondaspartofavastsafeguardingoperation,inacontextofemergencyandcrisis,incollaborationwithMINUSMA;

– Thedifferentadministrativeandlegalclarificationsandim-provementsaimingtomakelifeeasierfortheStatesandthefunction of the Committee;

– The establishment of contacts with a series of institutional and associativepartners,withwhichthedialogueisopenandac-tive.

Thesedecisivedevelopmentsweretakenprogressivelywiththedesiretoactbysteeringandfinancingactionsonthegroundaspartofaglobalandlong-termvision.ThenextmeetingoftheCommitteeinDecember2016will thereforebedecisiveandemblematic of the collective capacity to continue to move for-ward.

Benjamin Goes

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues 157

Recommendation to Expand the Definition of Cultural Heritage in Heritage at Risk

We would like to call upon the Philosophy Commission to deter-minecorrectlywhatthelimitscorrespondingtothecategoryofheritageatriskareconsideringculturaldiversityasameasure-ment parameter, and then to normalize, model and propose an objectivetooltoevaluatecasesatrisk.TakingintoaccountDr.JoséErnestoBecerril’sdoctoralthesis

Changing the Paradigm for the Protection of Cultural Heritage in Mexico: Its Identification as a Human and Social Right some conceptswereextracted,especiallythedefinitionofculturalher-itageandheritageatrisk,whichisincorporatedinthediagnosisand proposal for this work.

Introduction

Heritageat risk isaverycontroversial subject inalmostanyaspect; therefore all its macro variables to the minutest aspects should be studied. For the macro command, the presence of rep-resentativesoftheMemberStateswithheritageatriskshouldmeetinacommissiontoanalyzetheproblemsinvolved.Itscon-clusionsandagreementsshouldbesubmittedtothebureautotrytofindsolutionstogetheraccordingtothedifferentenigmas.ICOMOSisanorganismofpeace.Itacceptsculturaldiver-

sity as an essential source of information and respect for peace. Therefore,therecanbenosingleanswertotheproblemofher-itageatrisk,becausecountriesarealldifferentintheiridiosyn-crasies and that must be respected, as the identity of each people embodies cultural diversity.Ithasbeensuggestedtogenerateasinglestandardcontractfor

allcountrieswithheritageatrisk.Butthismaynotbefeasibleduetotheculturalandthereforelegaldiversity.AttheScientificSymposiumofthe18thGeneralAssemblyofICOMOSamethodcalledHeritageEconomicValuationwassubmittedandaccepted.Thismethodhastheabilitytoexpandonthetopic“HeritageatRisk”.Inordertostudyitsimplicationsineachcountryitisnec-essarytostudytheproblemholisticallytolaterconfinetoeachparticular case.ThefifthprincipleoftheHeritageEconomicValuationmethod

called“event”ishowtoanalyzetheitemheritageatriskbythefollowingformula.

V1 = represents any kind of event that occurs in the house, author, changeofuse,interventions.Thecalculationisbasedoncatalogmethodology.Itisthevalueofthetangiblefactmodifiedbytheevent.Thiseventcanalsobe“HeritageatRisk”.Italwayshasastarttimeandendtimeplusthesumofseveralcausesorjustacause “ ξ ”.ThestudyofthecausesofhowheritageatriskoccursiswhatisgoingtobestudiedbasedonthedetailedanalysisbyDr.ErnestoBecerril.Thismethodologyreliesuponideasofthetheoryoffuzzysub-

sets.Thistoolcangenerateahierarchybasedontheobservationsofaspecialistonanobject(heritageatrisk).Thistoolcanalsoidentifylegalandillegalfactsquantitatively.Accordingtothismethodologylegalfactsaremarkedwiththepositivesignand

illegalfactswiththenegativesign.Itismathematicallyhandledthroughnumericalintervals.Forexample:Iftheinterval[–1,1]istaken,itcanbedeveloped

as follows:

–1 Thereisheritageatrisk–0.9–0.8 Therearehighindexessothatthereisheritageatrisk–0.7–0.6–0.5 Thereareaverageindexessothatthereisheritageat

risk–0.4–0.3–0.2–0.1 Thereareminimumindexessothatthereisheritage

at risk00 Culturalheritagewasnotvalued0.1 Heritageassessmentbegins0.20.30.40.5 Thereisanaveragescoreofheritageinrelationto

others0.60.70.8 Thereisahighscoreofheritageinrelationtoothers0.91 Thereisculturalheritageduetoitsassessment

Other intervals can be taken; this will depend on the values each countryassignstoit.Thismethodologicalstudyisusedasatooltoseetheobjectivedegreeoftheprofessionalwhoanalysesherit-ageatrisk.Whataretheindicesandcausesthatalterandgenerateheritageatrisk?– Politicalactionsandrelationshipwithsociety?– Theenvironment?– Theeconomy?– Legalactions?– The actions of constructive intervention: from the perspective ofarchitectureorfromtheperspectiveofengineeringortownplanning?

– Theactionsofarchaeological/paleontological/intervention:extremeorminimal?

– The actions of tourism: the impact and the ability to support thingsnottobedestroyed?

– Thedegreeofreuseofheritageproperty?

Itisobviousthateachcountrywith“heritageatrisk”presentsanyofthesevariablestobedeterioratedtogetthiscategory;thesevariablesarenotequalforallcountries.Asystemshouldbemod-eledwhereeverythingisincluded,takingthedifferentparametersandtryingtoincludethemall.Forexample:IfyoucompareArgentinaandFrance,inArgen-

tinathelegaldefinitionoftheterm“good”isnotthesameasin

Ve(t)=Σ V1 (e Σ ξ(t–ti) –1)·Δ (t–t i )

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues158

France.Forthelatteritisequaltothelegaldefinitionof“thing”definedinArgentina.Sothedefinitionoflegalconceptsisveryimportantinordertobegintounderstandheritageatriskglobally.Taking intoaccount theprevious linguisticdivergenceand

comparingitmethodologicallythereisalackofunderstandingof0.1heritagepointswhentalking,unlesshavingtheknowledgeofthelegalglossaryofeachcountry.

Thedefinitionsoflegaltermsthatarecommontoall 00Thedefinitionsoflegaltermsthataredifferent 0.1Thelegalrulesthatarecommontoall 0.2Thelegalrulesthataredifferent 0.3Illegalfactsthatarecommontoall 0.4Illegalfactsthataredifferent 0.5

Anotherexample:considering“interventionataheritagesiteinthespecificcategoryofFacade”

Facade Intervention ValorizationPlacinglooseitems

Heritagethatcontinuessurvivingand reversibility or identifyingintervenedareasthroughrestorationtechnique

(0;1]

Fixing of carpentryPainting of carpentryPaintingplasteringFixingofplasterFixingofmasonry (somemasonry)MinimumstructuralfixingFixingof50%ofplastering

Thereisaturningpoint to start consideringheritageat risk because part of the system is lost andthegoodorthingbeginstodeteriorate.

(0;1](–1;0]

Fixingof50%of the masonry

HeritageatRisk (–2;–1]

Fixingof50%of the structureFixingof100%ofplasteringFixingof100%of the masonryReplacement of timberFixingof100%of the structureDemolition /destruction

Non-existenttangibleheritagebecomesintangibleheritage

(–2;–1](–1;0]

Diagnosis and Proposal

Firstprinciple:CulturalHeritageisanassetthatcannotbere-placed,butitisatconstantriskofbeinglostordamaged.Itisanon-renewableresource.TheHumanCulturalHeritageisoneofthemostsignificantorexclusiveelementsofGlobalPublicGoods.Themessagewegetistheimportanceofpreservationdueto the relevance of the cultural property.Thelossofvalueorphysicalintegrityoftheseassetsisanun-

fortunate fact that must be prevented. For this reason, we must understandthatthebestwaytopreventdamagetoCulturalHer-itagereferstotheunderstandingoftherisksthatthreatenit(J.E.Becerril2016).

This last concept is the model intended to be used as an evalua-tiontoolforspecialistswhointerpretthelegalandillegalfactsofdeteriorationoccurringinheritage.AccordingtoErnestoBecer-ril´sdoctoralthesistwomajorthreatsaffectingCulturalHeritagecan be found:1.Immediatecauses:pillageandillicittrafficofculturalprop-

erty2.Mediatecauses:lossofCulturalHeritageforreasonsranging

from uncontrolled urban development to the intentional destruc-tionofheritagebyarmedconflicts(knowingthatbetweenbothendsexistsadiverserangeofassumptions)(J.E.Becerril2016).

Immediate risks in the protection of Cultural Heritage

Illicit traffic of cultural property and destruction of cultural her-itage are among the main problems of public, academic and so-cial institutions that have been detected. The two phenomena are serious problems for the conservation of cultural property and it is important to fight against them in a decisive manner. (J .E. Becerril 2016)

Illicit traffic of cultural property (J. E. Becerril 2016)

Pillage processa) location of places where these goods

(which may vary from an archaeological site to a religious building) are deposited

(–1;0] (illicitfact)

b) illegitimate extractionc) transportation to other places different

from where they were discoveredd) in some cases fraudulent reproduction of

partse) sale:f) g) h)

A) Nowadays by electronic means

B) Without having evidence of those behind these acts

C) Involving organized crimeD) On a smaller scale farmers

who fortuitously find a piece of cultural value (archaeological, for example) and decide to sell it

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues 159

Archaeological pillage is also applicable to the robbery of antiquities (J. E. Becerril 2016)

1. The enormous amount of archaeological sites, a large part of which are in suburbs or private properties make the management and control of these spaces a difficult task;

(-2;-1]o(-1;0](illicitfact)

2. Lack of adequate financial resources for conservation, monitoring and control of archaeological sites;3. Lack of specialists and effective organization and optimization of the few human resources available in this area, 4. Lack of social recognition and an adequate financial compensation to these human resources for the services they provide to the nation;5. Modernization of the country frequently sacrificing archaeological goods for the sake of roads, dams, housing units, etc;6. Disarticulation of governmental departments; 7. The lack of defined and consistently structured official plans for the preservation of our heritage;8. The low valuation of our archaeological wealth; 9. Careers and specialties taught at universities oriented to research in this field: History (architecture) and anthropology; the lack of efforts to convene the competition in this field.

Illicit traffic that may have many actors

Participation and ignorance of the value of cultural property

A network of complicities

Local authorities (–1;0] illicit fact

(–2;–1] illicit factCustoms authorities

Authorities law enforcementArt expertsLocal policeCustodians of archaeological sitesChurchesParsonsPrivate museumsAuction housesFarmersTouristsCollectorsArt galleriesTreasure huntersCarriersAntique sellersConstruction companiesTransnational companiesBrokers IntermediariesDrug dealersothers, etc.

Illicit traffic, a phenomenon that could have many actors  (J. E. Becerril 2016)

Illicit traffic of cultural property can be assumed  (J. E. Becerril 2016)

Art market1. When there is a market with plenty

of money, art prices rise;(0;1]o(1;2] (licitfact)(–2;–1]o(–1;0](illicitfact)

2. When there are recessions, political upheaval or fiscal crisis, art prices rise;

3. When there is an economic boom art prices rise rapidly

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues160

Activities related to illicit traffic of cultural property (especially  in the case of archaeological heritage) (J. E. Becerril 2016)

1. Excavations, when properly done, represent a window into history. The archaeological sites are a non-renewable resource that can be excavated only once, so you have to seize the opportunity.

(0;1]o(1;2](licitfact)(-2;-1]o(-1;0](illicitfact)

2. In case of pillage, essential details of the origin of the object (where it was found) and context (what it was found with), are irreparably lost3. Loss of historical information sources.4. Many vestiges that looters despise, such as bones and broken pottery, provide invaluable clues to entire cultures.5. When archaeologists access intact sites they can find answers to more general questions regarding our past. 6. When the only material available for the study is of unknown origin, the idea that we have of ancient people is poor and distorted.Another way of illicit traffic in cultural property that has been very little explored is the seizure of traditional knowledge:a) manifestations,b) practices andc) assets of the Intangible Heritage of native communities. Its commercial exploration does not benefit them.

Destruction and deterioration of cultural heritage for different reasons (J. E. Becerril 2016)

1. Who decides to demolish the old house to build a condominium building,

(-2;-1]o(-1;0](illicitfact)

2. Who alters a central square of a small town,3. The mayor who decides to sweeten a traditional party including foreign elements to “modernize it”,4. The mayor who destroys an archaeological site and its surroundings to construct a road,5. There are infinite variables of destroying or damaging the evidential or significance values in areas of interest of very different nature, bad faith and even ignorance,6. A mayor who generates a norm that prioritizes “real estate development” to “heritage protection”.

Serious inconsistencies in the design of a cultural heritage contradicted by a misunderstood concept of development have brought a series of subtle but serious losses of this asset (J. E. Becerril 2016).

It is also true that the owner of a heritage property faces a prospect that may involve significant burdens in order to preserve the testimonial value of that property and lack of stimuli: conser-vation and building maintenance requires specialized advice; in some cases these tasks require increased investment, there are restrictions of use, there is an administrative burden greater than other real estate transactions, etc., and in general, few states and municipalities provide tax benefits to owners who restore their cultural goods (J. E. Becerril 2016).Aproposalforthissituationistogenerateatrustasalegaltool

ofprotectionbetweenthedifferentstatespartiesthathaveWorldHeritageatrisk.Butthissituationinalarge-scaleareacanbemuch more complicated. Addressing the issue from a perspective of technical analysis destruction or deterioration of cultural her-itage can occur through three main agents: physical, social and economic (J. E. Becerril 2016).

The patina of time and varying degrees of deterioration and destruction.

(–1;0] (illicitfact)

Social partners that have influenced the destruction of heritage:1) Obsolescence and disuse;2) The deliberate destruction is contrary to the conservation of architectural and urban heritage;3) Particular group interests, whether economic, social or ideological, have totally or partially destroyed heritage;4) Misuse is another cause for deterioration; 5) They deal with objects that go beyond their ability and endurance;6) Lack of civic education;7) Theft of building materials of abandoned buildings, stone, carpentry, etc., to be reused in new constructions;8) Introduction of urban infrastructure.

Economic agents: the case of the city of La Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Urbancodelaws (0;2] (licitfact)Modificationsofurbancodeswherethe

patrimonial aspects for cultural protection that promote conservation of monuments are introduced;Newmodificationofurbancodeswherethehousingvalueisconsideredmoreimportantthantheheritageprotection.

(–2;0] (illicitfact)

The behavior of real estate capital promotes the destruction and deterioration of the monuments (total income)ground rentconstruction rentActions of the Supreme Court request to return to the previous rule and to the heritage protection norm.

(0;2] (licitfact)

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues 161

When investments in urban infrastructure take place the price of landrentexceedstheincomethatthebuildingproduces.Forthereal estate capital it means that the time has come to demolish it anderectanewbuildingthat,foritscomfortfeaturesandavail-abilityofthearea,willproduceanincomecorrespondingtotheground...(J.E.Becerril2016).Indeed,theproblemofthedestructionanddeteriorationofcul-

turalheritageisamultidisciplinarysubjectwhosesolutionre-quiresmanyagentsofvarioussocialsectors(J.E.Becerril2016).InthefieldofIntangibleCulturalHeritage,thewaysthatmay

altertheevidentialvalueandsignificanceoftheintangibleman-ifestationscanrangefromthemostinnocentendstothetotalil-legalend.Therealityisthatintangibleheritagecanbedifficulttoprotectagainsttheseexternalnegativeinfluences(J.E.Becerril2016).

Description Testimonial Value orSignificanceValue

The intervention of national or transnationalcompaniesaddforeignelements to a traditional feast,

(0;1](licitfact)(-1;0](illicitfact)

Alterationofconstructiontechniquesin architecture as a result of the reconstruction of traditional architecture to adapt them to other cultures,Tourism as a show.

Thealterationproduceserosioninthetestimonialvalueorsignif-icanceofgoods.E.Becerrilstartsthestudyofthecauses,phe-nomena linked to the way in which man interacts with cultural heritageandreflectingthevariousnegativeattitudes.

Mediate risks in the protection of Cultural Heritage. Review of legal instruments, especially at the administrative level (J. E. Becerril 2016)

Howthepermitsandlicensesaregranted (0;1] (licitfact)(–1;0] (illicitfact)

howagreementsbetweenthevariouslevelsofgovernmentareachievedforacoordinated actionhowtoimproveverificationprocesseshowtoincreasethefileworkhow can one increase inventory workhowtodefinetechnicalcriteriaothers, etc.

Whenreferringtomediateriskstotheconservationofculturalheritage,humanandcomplexphenomenaarefaceddeeply,wherethe values of cultural property can be threatened from the condi-tions in which the current world moves.

Forvaluationanalysisof culturalheritage fourvaluesarepresented:testimonial,significance,useanddevelopment(J. E. Becerril 2016).

Values AnalysisaccordingtoMethodologyofHeritageEconomic Valuation

TestimonialSignificanceUseDevelopment

Extrinsic values are relative to the way the Cultural Heritage is inserted in an appropriate way in social life. The different scen-eries that may pose a risk to the conservation of cultural property should be studied. None of these causes can be understood as an isolated act, there is always the interaction of more than one of them in the same situation (J. E. Becerril 2016).

Contempt for the Cultural Heritage

Contempt for the cultural heritage is the most important risk in relation to its conservation

Wars, religious, political, social conflicts

Historical Times

(-1;0](illicitfact)

By bad habits: excess, vendettas; debauchery; abuses

Modern TimesGlobalized Times

By ignoranceIntangible heritage (contempt for cultural heritage before public politics, generating regulations, opinions, etc. against it)

The reality is that humans have repeatedly destroyed the proper-tyoftheirperceivedenemiesthroughouthistory.Sinceancienttimes,thevictorshavesingledoutthemostsymbolicandmean-ingfulgoodsforpublicdenigration.Despitethis,therewereiso-latedexamplesofadifferentattitude,whichmadehistorybytheirrespectforthecultureofthevanquished.Contemptfortheculturalheritagehasnowbecomeevenmoreperilousbecauseitisnotnecessarilylinkedtoanarmedconflict,butstandsonitsownasatestimonytothepredationsofaggressorswhoseekthespotlight.Butcontemptforculturalheritagecanbebornofignorance:

those who paint artistic monuments, who scratch the walls of theoldcolonialconventswithoutunderstandingtheneedfortheirconservation.Allthesearewaysofdespisingculturalher-itage.Inthecaseofintangibleheritage,contemptforthesecultural

assetsandtheirhighdegreeofsignificanceresultsinintolerance,prohibition and even violence, as in the case of wars based on ethniccleansing,religiousconflicts,bansoflocalidentities,etc(J.E.Becerril2016).

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues162

Falsification of Cultural Heritage

FALSIFICATION Quantitativeassessment

Cultural heritage has potential monetary value and a unique character (0;1]

(licitfact)Reproduction /Reconstruction from the documentation

Environmental –NaturalPhenomena

HUMANEVENTS–ARMEDCONFLICTS

(0;2] (licitfact)

Replica / ReplayRECYCLING / FASHION

Submitting objects of recent manufacture, but copying the same witness of cultural heritage to present it as authentic.FALSIFICATION /adulterate / Downgradeheritagevalues

(–2;0](illicitfact)

Itistruethatmanyhistoricalortraditionalpopulationssufferdamageordevastationduetonaturalorhumanphenomenaandin some cases it is necessary to add new elements to the old struc-tures.

There are ruined houses that are adapted to maintain their use-fulfunctionintime.Therearepaintingsorsculpturesthatrequirerestorationinsomeofitsparts.Butinallthesecases,thereareprinciplesinscienceandrestorationtechniquesallowingustoknowwhattheoriginalpartsareandwhatpartshavebeenadded.Inthecaseofforgery,themainelementisdeception:tricking

thebuyer,cheatingtourists,deceivingthesamepopulationatthetime,foolingthosewhobelieveingoodfaithintheauthenticityoftheobjectandthetranscendentvaluethatobjectinquestionhas,forthesakeofanillicitprofit.Inotherwords,itisfraudtoculture.Therearemanywaystofalsifytheheritageandinallthese

cases,theevidentialorsignificancevaluesareoflittlerelevancefortheforger.Theresultoffalsificationofculturalheritageisthedegradationoftheinternalvaluesinordertodeceivestrangersforthesakeofprivateprofit.Inthisprocessmanysectorsareinvolved

Actors Quantitative assessmentart dealers (0;2](licitfact)

(–2;0](illicitfact)

(0;2](licitfact)(–2;0](illicitfact)

collectorsmanipulated populationspoliticians who seek to promote a region or town economicallytourism promotershotelsartisanscriminalsothers

Translated into the language of the tourism promoter, this means that the program aims at new tourism products to make them

more attractive or merchantable. It is justifiable to conceive new intangible manifestations, artificially create new legends, and modify new meanings to places: everything is right if it helps tourism. The danger is that the real significance of cultural her-itage will be lost: that is the risk of falsification (J. E. Becerril 2016).

The Commodification of Cultural Heritage

The current commodification of cultural heritage simply means reducing it to a mere object of trade, under the rules of trade and not of heritage. This is one of the main causes for the destruction of cultural heritage (J. E. Becerril 2016).

The commodification of cultural heritage

Valuation and devaluation

used (0; 1] (licitfact)currencymisused (–1; 0] (illicitfact)the cultural heritage can be alteredmodifiedwasteddiscardedforgottendemolished

Inthesecases,theevidentiaryvalue,significanceordevelopmenthas no importance: its real value is understood in terms of eco-nomicbenefitstobeobtained.Inthissense,thevalueofculturalheritageasagoodofsocialsignificancegoestoasecondtermandthelogicisthatculturalgoodshaveanownerwhohasthepowertodecideontheirdestinyinanunlimitedmanner(J.E.Becerril2016).

GlobalizedTestimonial values and cultural heritage significanceThey can be reduced to tourist attractions

(0; 1] (licitfact)(–1; 0] (illicitfact)

AssetsSuppliesResources (in the field of higher materiality of this meaning)Simple information for product developmentThe provision of services that can be usedThe provision of services that can be discarded

(1; 2] (licitfact)(–2; –1] (illicitfact)

The provision of services that can be alteredOthers, etc.

The Manipulation of Cultural Heritage

This is a situation that has been repeated throughout history. In fact, many monuments from antiquity are the result of the decision

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues 163

of rulers to preserve their political ideas, achievements or at least their own presence over time.

Apart from the economic aspects, and in its capacity as an ele-ment contributing to other interests such as political, social, eco-nomic or group interests, cultural heritage can be the foundation or support for speeches or ideologies handled by these groups.

Handling of Intangible and Tangible Heritage

DevaluationTestimonials Significance

Group (–2; 0] (illicitfact) (–2; 0] (illicitfact)Individual (–1; 0](illicitfact) (–1; 0] (illicitfact)

In this sense, testimonials and significance values can be mag-nified above any other; but their intention is not the protection of these values for themselves, but as tools to justify a political prestige, a project for a nation, a religious current, etc (J. E. Bec-erril 2016).

In this case, when cultural property is contrary or ceases to be useful for these projects or interests, it is left to its fate or de-stroyed. In the case of cultural property that is not useful for these interests, it is simply forgotten, neglected and even destroyed when it can be threatening (J. E. Becerril 2016).Thenationalheritageistheconstructioninwhichinterestsof

differentclassesparticipate.It is certain that in the construction of heritage there is a de-

gree of manipulation when the interests of power or group are involved.

This also happens in terms of the intangible heritage. Handling this heritage involves transforming the intangible manifestations to distort its meaning: heroes, facts and legends perhaps nonex-istent are created; other manifestations are discredited, etc.

However, the risks for cultural heritage, whether from political, religious or any other interest, increase when those who represent these interests decide to use messages of hate, intolerance or vio-lence. In such cases, the results turn out to be devastating for any of the parties involved. (J. E. Becerril 2016)

The Sanctification of Cultural Heritage

The sanctification of cultural heritage has been a phenomenon that has also been registered through history in different times and with different results (J. E. Becerril 2016). “Sanctification”representsanexaltationofvaluesandeventestimonialsandsig-nificance,negatingthepositiveeffectsofuseanddevelopmentvalues.

SanctificationExaltingsignificanceandtestimonialvaluesDenialofpositiveeffectsofusevalues (-1;0]

(illicitfact)

Denial of development values

In the process of sanctification of cultural heritage, “the monu-ment” must become immutable. Immutability is a kind of immac-ulate space.

Specialists should take part in the decisions about cultural her-itage, but it is not the privilege of a profession, because in these

times, our great responsibility is the protection of cultural prop-erty for the public at large and society as a whole.

The negative effects of sanctification of cultural heritage are the notion that this matter should be the sole responsibility of a group of notables and that the community has no commitment to the cultural property. Another consequence is that there is no authentic transmission of the values of cultural heritage; this in turn makes them vulnerable to falsification.

When cultural heritage is deified, it becomes something alien and strange, and in opposition to the original purpose of this attitude, the cultural property will be devalued and normally lost (J. E. Becerril 2016).

Lack of Concern for the Heritage

Social unconcern about the fate of cultural heritage is one of the main problems monuments, sites, landscapes, etc face (J. E. Becerril 2016).

The mainstay for the conservation of cultural heritage is the conviction of society that it is important to protect it. As soon as this conviction changes, deterioration or destruction processes are accelerated exponentially.

The reasons for this lack of concern can range from lack of ed-ucation and social awareness, to the messages we receive through mass media broadcasting.

It is not necessary to write much about this issue, because its main feature is impassivity or lack of action. Cultural heritage is destroyed and nobody cares nor generates an action of society to save a monument. This is an unfavourable scenery for the preser-vation of a cultural good. In these circumstances, the significance value of cultural heritage is lost and becomes meaningless for society (J. E. Becerril 2016).

Lackofconcernforheritage

(–1;0] (illicitfact)

impassivity or lack of actionsocial unconcern about the fate of cultural heritageisoneofthemainproblemsmonuments, sites, landscapes etc facelack of educationsocial awarenessbroadcastingofmassmediamessagesValueofsignificancethe mainstay for the conservation of cultural heritageistheconvictionthatitisimportantto protect it

(0;1] (licitfact)

Conclusion

Usingtheenclosedtablestoelucidatethevalueofheritageatthe‘zerohour’forpolicymakersmayfacilitateassessingthede-valuationofculturalheritageaffectedbyviolentconflict.Fromthelegalpointofview,itcanbeappliedunderthelegalconceptoffinancialtrust.Eachactorwhocreatesorparticipatesinthevaluation,legaldeclaration,interventionorheritagedevaluation,shouldpayatax,similartowhatisnowa“constructionright”.Thistaxwouldbecalculatedusingacoefficientaccordingtothesquaremetresoftheheritagegoodtobeevaluated.

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues164

BibliographyJoséErnestoBecerrilMiró(2016),“Tesisdoctoral:Cambian-doelparadigmaparalaproteccióndelpatrimonioculturalenMéxico:suidentificacióncomoderechohumanoysocial”.EnCapitulo I: El Patrimonio Cultural.Ed.UniversidadMarista.ReconocimientodevalidezoficialdeestudiosNº2006379defecha-07-2006,otorgadoporlaSEP.México

MaríaMartaRae (2009),“TesisMagister.Unnuevocaminodegestión:ElPatrimoniotangiblecomoinversióneconómicayfinanciera.NaceelCoeficientePatrimonial”.EnTitulo II Pro-puesta. Capitulo 9: Metodología de valuación económica pat-rimonial, basada en un proceso matemático patrimonial. Ed. MaríaMartaRae-MaestríadeGestióneIntervenciónenelPatrimonioarquitectónicoyurbano.UniversidadNacionaldeMardelPlata.MardelPlata.

Maria Marta Rae

Closing Remarks

Intheweeksfollowingthecallforcontributionsforthisreport,agroupofarmedmilitiamenenteredtheheadquartersofMalheurWildlifeRefugeinBurns,OregontoviolentlyprotestagainsttheUnitedStatesGovernment’sadaptivemanagementofpublicgrazingactivitiesonlandbelongingtotheU. S.Government.51 Manyartifacts,sacredsites,charterdocumentsandlandsbe-longingtotheBurnsPaiuteTribelocatedattheRefuge 52 were commandeered by the protesters, and repeatedly referred to in theirdemandstothefederalgovernment–purportingtoactinthe interests of the tribe.53CharlotteRoderique,chairpersonoftheBurnsPaiuteTribe,refusedthemilitants’request tomeetandaskedtheU.S.governmenttoprosecuteanydamagetotheirculturalheritageunderthetermsoftheArcheologicalResourc-esProtectionActof1979.WhenthestandoffcametoanendinFebruary2016,videosofblatantdesecrationofBurnsPaiuteheritagehadbeencirculatedwidelythroughpublicmedia.Themilitantshadmodifiedrefugelandandgroundsastheysawfitusinggovernmentearthmovingequipment–creatinganewroad,aparkinglot,trenches,destroyingpartofaU.S.FishandWildlifeService-ownedfence,andremovingsecuritycameras. 54Insuper-sedingindictmentfiledFebruary11,2016,federalprosecutorsincludedchargesfordesecrationoflandssacredtotheBurnsPai-

ute Tribe.55Ultimately,theoccupiers’abhorrentactswereindict-ednotundertheArcheologicalResourcesProtectionAct,butas“depredationofgovernmentproperty”over$1,000.00,anoffensethatcarriesapotentialten-yearjailsentence.56 Takenasawhole,theforegoingrecommendationsbyMa-

riaMartaRaeandBenjaminGoescouldhaveprovidedmuchneededsupportforcallstoprotectPaiutecultureatMalheurduringtheoccupation.InthewordsofCharlotteRoderique,“We are the Wadatika people. The plants we are named after growonthebanksoftheHarneyandtheMalheurLake.” 57 Ex-pandingprotectiontoformsofheritagesuchaspracticesandtraditionscanonlystrengthentheprotectionsofmonumentsand sites. Traditions, crafts, or stories all need source materials, background,andsubstance.Sitesandmonumentscansupporttheintegrityofintangibles;intangibleheritageisthelivinglinktocontinuingsignificanceforsitesandmonuments.AsMs.Raenotes,erosionofintangibletraditionslikewiseunderminestes-timonialvalueorsignificanceofgoodsthatembodyculturalheritage.TheMalheurstandoffshowstheterribleparadoxofourwork

– places, ideas, and items critical to the centuries-old identity of a nation are open to be co-opted and abused for the purposes of violentextremism,infullviewofasomnolentpublic.ThoughtheexperienceoftheBurnsPaiuteisadistantparalleltowarcrimestakingplaceduringthereportingperiod,wenotewithnosmallironythatchargesfordestructionofthefenceandmis-useofgovernmentearthmovingequipmentappeartobeeasiertobringthanthosefordesecrationofthePaiute’ssacredburialgrounds.58Thedestructionofculturalheritageisnotnew,buthasbecome

even more powerful today as a means to obtain attention across a multitudeofsocialplatforms.Accordingly,ourcontinuedcooper-ationtoadvocateandengagestatepartiesineffortssuchasthosetowardtheimplementationoftheSecondProtocolisstronglyen-couraged.Systemizationofculturalheritageprotection–evenforthepurposesofquickcommunicationtothegeneralpublicinemergencycircumstances,orforeaseofreferenceinabusinesscontext–mightserveculturalheritageadvocacyandadvanceourcapabilitiestocommunicateinteragencyeffortsamonglike-mind-edorganizations.EarthquakemagnitudeisdescribedbywayofreferencetotheRichterScale;oursuggestionshereinmightal-solaythegroundworkforasimilarsystematizationofculturalheritagecommunicationsworldwide.Weaskourcolleaguestoconsiderthesecommentsandsuggestionsassteppingstonestocooperationwhenculturalheritageisunderthreat.

Eve Errickson

Footnotes1 WenotethattheHighContractingPartiestotheConventionshouldmeeteverytwoyears.YetnothingtookplacebetweenthefirstMeetingin1962andthesecondMeetingin1995,morethan30yearslater.

2 Article43,subparagraph1,PII.3 Article23,subparagraph3,b)andc),PII.4 Theelementsmentionedareanecessarilysubjectiveselection,

and this article does not claim to be exhaustive, notably in its references.

5 Articles10to14,PII.6 Article4,b),PII.

7 Articles8to11,CLH.8 Seealsoarticles11,§7and27,§1,b,PII.9 Theenhancedprotectiongoesdeeperthanthegeneralprotec-tionforeseeninadditionalProtocolsIandIItotheGenevaConventionsandtheConventionof1954:thepossibilitiestolosetheprotectionareveryrestricted(seearticle13,PII).

10Violations such as “intentionallymaking cultural propertyunderenhancedprotectiontheobjectofattackorusingsuchculturalpropertyoritsimmediatesurroundingsinsupportofmilitaryaction”,art.15,PII.

11Articles15to21,PII.

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues 165

12December2015.13Article11,9,PII.14In2012,asvicechairoftheCommittee,Belgiumbecamethefirststatetomakesuchalist.Thislistselectsalltherelevantculturalpropertieson theWorldHeritageList. It ison thisbasisthattheCommitteeadoptedinDecember2013amodelofaTentativeListgoingtotheStates.Sincethen,onlyoneothercountryhasproposedsuchalist,namelyMaliinMarch2015.Formoreinformation:http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/armed-conflict-and-heritage/protection-of-cul-tural-property/tentative-list/

15ThisstudywasfinancedbyBelgiumfor10,560euros.16Ineffect,theConventionof1954doesnotcovernaturalsites

while the Convention of 1972 does.17ThisdecisionisbasedonthealternativeprojectofthedecisionmadeinasessionoftheCommitteebyBelgium,andwhichproved to be more resolute than that of the Secretariat, which inshortwaslimitedtoproposingcontinuedreflection.

18 The Party that has the jurisdiction or control over a cultural property can request the inscription of this property on the List that will be established by virture of article 27, paragraph 1, subparagraph (b). (…)

19ThedifferentpropositionsfortheemblemandthefollowingupofinstructionsbytheBureauandtheCommitteeweredonebyStijnDesplenter,graphicdesignerattheChancelleryoftheBelgianPrimeMinister.

20 For more information on the debate and the decisions taken: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002301/230109E.pdf http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/9COM-4-Distinctive-emblem-rev2_en.pdf http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/DistinctEmblem-Austrian-comments_en.pdf http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002353/235317E.pdf.AFAQonthenecessityandthemannerofcreatingadis-tinctiveemblemwasalsodisseminatedaspartofabriefingsession thatwasheldon30November2015atUNESCO,aweekbeforetheMeetingoftheParties,organisedbythePermanentDelegationsalongsidetheUNESCOofBelgiumand of Greece, with the support of the Chairperson of the Committee.

21http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001897/189747E.pdf22http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/6-7COM-synergies-Belgium-en_20121107.pdf

23http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/3-7COM-synergies-en_201211107.pdf

24ItisnecessarytoknowthatthisinitiativestemmedfromrealexperienceinMali,aconflictthatbrokeoutin2012andduringwhichthecultural treasuresof thecountry, includingsomeWorldHeritageSites,weredestroyedorthreatenedwithbeingdestroyed.IfWorldHeritageSitesareconsideredexceptional,dotheynotmeritexceptionalprotection?Thisseemsobvious.

25It is interesting to note here that itwas not a State but aCommitteethatreferredtooneofitsalteregos,whichisanunprecedented step.

26Iamnotgoingtoexpandonalltheprocessesandalltheirchar-acteristictechniques,asthiscouldbethesubjectofaseparatearticle.

27InDecision10.COM4,§6,theCommitteeinvites its Bureau to (…) develop (…) synergies with the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage.

28Unfortunately,withouteverreferringtothisdecisionoftheCommittee.

29http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/Statement_EN_FINAL_300615.pdf

30Thereportandthedocumentsofthismeetinghaveyettobemade public.

31Articles 11 and27of theSecondProtocol,Paragraphs13and24oftheGuidingPrinciples;articles6,12and37oftheInternalRulesoftheCommittee.

32NotethatacloserelationshipwasalsodevelopedwithANCBS,theAssociationoftheNationalCommitteesoftheBlueShield.

33Article27,paragraph3oftheSecondProtocol.34Decision8COM.3,initsparagraph6,encourages the Bureau

and the Secretariat to reinforce partnerships with all the stake-holders involved in the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflict.

35Unfortunately,thisplatformhasnotmetsince.ThisfactwasquestionedbyseveralstatesattheMeetingofthePartiesinDecember2015.

36http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/about-us/who-we-are/director-general/singleview-dg/news/unesco_and_icrc_part-ner_on_the_protection_of_culture_heritage_in_the_event_of_armed_conflict/#.VxXpgXC3ZJi

37ItisthesenseofcertainparagraphsoftheFinalDeclarationofthe10thsessionoftheCommittee:http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002435/243584E.pdf

38ICCROM (International Centre for the Study of thePreservationandRestorationofCulturalProperty)isaninter-governmentalorganisationfoundedbyUNESCOwhoseman-dateisthepromotionandpreservationofculturalheritageinallitsformsandacrosstheentireplanet(www.iccrom.org).

39TheconceptofProtectingPowersissetoutbyarticle8/8/8/9commontothefourGenevaConventionsof12August1949andarticle5oftheFirstAdditionalProtocolof1977.TheroleoftheProtectingPowersisalsoreaffirmedinarticle21oftheHagueConventionof1954and inarticle34of itsSecondProtocol.Inaconflict,thewarringpartiescouldbenefitfromthesupportofprotectingpowers.AneutralStateoranotherStatewhichisnotpartytotheconflictthatisdesignatedbyonewarringpartyandacceptedbytheadversaryisabletocarryoutcertaintasksduringtheconflict.ProtectingPowershavethedutytosafeguardtheinterestsofthepartiestotheconflictandtocooperateforthefaithfulapplicationoftheIHLconventions.

40ExtractsfromDecision9COM.3,December2014:http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/images/9_COM_Decisions_EN.pdf

41http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/Statement_FINAL_ENG.pdf

42http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/Statement-Chairperson-Palmyra_03.pdf

43http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/Statement_EN_FINAL_300615.pdf

44Declaration 2014: http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/images/9_COM_Statement_EN.pdf;Declaration2015:http://unesdoc.unesco.org/imag-es/0024/002435/243584E.pdf

45ThisprojectintroducedbyBelgiuminsessionwastheobjectofalivelydebatearounditswording,butverylittleaboutitsba-sis.http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002435/243563E.pdf

46Underlinedbytheauthor.47371,271USDasof25September2015.48Thiswasthecasein2011attherequestofElSalvadorandin2012attherequestofMali.

ISC Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues166

49Wenote,however,announcementoftheUnitedKingdomtoratifytheHagueConvention,whileFranceandChinahavepublically indicated that they will ratify the Second Protocol soon.

50 We note by way of examples the creation of an Emergency Preparedness and Response Unit that works without link to theCommittee;theestablishmentofapartnershipagreementbetweenICRCandUNESCOwithouttheCommitteebeinginformedatanypoint;orinNovember2015theholdingofaninternationalmeetingofexpertsatUNESCOontheresponsi-bility of protection applied to the protection of cultural heri-tage,whereitisratherirritatingtonotethatMechtild Rössler, Director of the Heritage Division, closed the meeting, by high-lighting the need for broad cooperation and complementaries among organizations, while the Chairperson of the Committee wasnoteveninvitedtoparticipate(http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/1398/).

51Bernton, Hal (January 27, 2016). “The story behind theMalheurNationalWildlifeRefuge,ranchersandarmedan-ti-governmentprotesters”.TheSeattleTimes(Seattle,WA:TheSeattleTimesCompany).RetrievedMay6,2016.

52The Burns Paiute Reservation is located north of Burns,Oregon inHarneyCounty.Thecurrent tribalmembersareprimarilythedescendantsofthe“Wadatika”bandofPaiuteIndiansthatroamedincentralandsouthernOregon.TheBurnsPaiuteTribe,http://www.burnspaiute-nsn.gov/.RetrievedMay13,2016.

53Thetribereceivedfederalrecognitionin1968.RobertH.Ruby,JohnA.Brown&CaryC.Collins,AGuidetotheIndianTribesof thePacificNorthwest (3d ed.:UniversityofOklahomaPress:2010)

54Levin,Sam(January16,2016).“Oregonmilitia’sbehaviorin-creasinglybrazenaspublicpropertydestroyed”.TheGuardian

(London:GuardianNewsandMediaLimited).ISSN0261-3077.RetrievedMay6,2016.

55“NewchargesaddedforBundys,othermilitia”.KOINNews.March9,2016.RetrievedMay6,2016.

56Keeler,Jacqueline(March9,2016).BurnsPaiuteTribeMakeFirstVisitAfterArmedTakeoverofMalheurRefuge.IndianCountryMediaNetwork.http://indiancountrytodaymedianet-work.com/2016/03/09/burns-paiute-make-first-visit-after-armed-takeover-malheur-refuge-163679RetrievedMay13,2016.

57Keeler,Jacqueline(January19,2016).“OregonMilitiaNutshold Paiute History,Artifacts Hostage.” Indian CountryMedia Network. http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2016/01/19/oregon-militia-nuts-hold-paiute-history-arti-facts-hostage-163116.RetrievedMay13,2016.

58UnderthetermsoftheArcheologicalResourcesProtectionActof1979,firsttimeoffenderscanbefinedupto$20,000.00andimprisonedforuptooneyear.Secondtimeoffenderscanbefinedupto$100,000.00andimprisonedforuptofiveyears.King,ThomasF.,CulturalResourceLawsandPractice:AnIntroductoryGuide.WalnutCreek,CA:AltaMira,1998.

Publications of InterestShutDowntheArtifactsforArmsMarketDoors,Greg& MarionWerkheiserandRyanRowberry

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-werkheiser/shut-the-arti-factsforarms_b_8463386.html

TheKnoedlerGallerySettlementistheBiggestMissedOp-portunityforGreaterArtMarketTransparencyin100Years,Leila Amineddoleh

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editori-al-we-just-missed-the-biggest-opportunity-for-increas-ing-art-market-transparency-in-100-years

167

The Heritage at Risk Series

Heritage at Risk, ICOMOS World Report 2000on Monuments and Sites in Danger,edited by Dinu Bumbaru, Sheridan Burke, Michael Petzet,Marilyn Truscott, and John Ziesemer,Munich 2000: K. G. Saur VerlagISBN 3-598-24240-9

Heritage at Risk, ICOMOS World Report 2001/2002on Monuments and Sites in Danger,edited by Dinu Bumbaru, Sheridan Burke, Jane Harrington,Michael Petzet, and John Ziesemer,Munich 2001: K. G. Saur VerlagISBN 3-598-24241-7

Heritage at Risk, ICOMOS World Report 2002/2003on Monuments and Sites in Danger,edited by Dinu Bumbaru, Sheridan Burke, Jane Harrington,Michael Petzet, and John Ziesemer,Munich 2003: K. G. Saur VerlagISBN 3-598-24242-5

Heritage at Risk, ICOMOS World Report 2004/2005on Monuments and Sites in Danger,edited by Marilyn Truscott, Michael Petzetand John Ziesemer,Munich 2005: K. G. Saur VerlagISBN 3-598-24243-3

Heritage at Risk, ICOMOS World Report 2006/2007on Monuments and Sites in Danger,edited by Michael Petzet and John Ziesemer,Altenburg 2008: E. Reinhold VerlagISBN 978-3-937940-47-2

Heritage at Risk, ICOMOS World Report 2008–2010on Monuments and Sites in Danger,edited by Christoph Machat, Michael Petzetand John Ziesemer,Berlin 2010: hendrik Bäßler verlag, berlinISBN 978-3-930388-65-3

Heritage at Risk, World Report 2011–2013on Monuments and Sites in Danger,edited by Christoph Machat, Michael Petzet and John Ziesemer,Berlin 2014: hendrik Bäßler verlag, berlinISBN 978-3-930388-24-0

Heritage at Risk, World Report 2014–2015on Monuments and Sites in Danger,edited by Christoph Machat and John Ziesemer,Berlin 2017: hendrik Bäßler verlag, berlinISBN 978-3-945880-26-5

Special Editions

Heritage at Risk Special Edition:Underwater Cultural Heritage at Risk –Managing Natural and Human Impacts,edited by Robert Grenier, David Nutleyand Ian Cochran,Munich 2006

Heritage at Risk Special Edition:The Soviet Heritage and European Modernism,edited by Jörg Haspel, Michael Petzet, Anke Zalivako,and John Ziesemer,Berlin 2007: hendrik Bäßler verlag, berlinISBN 978-3-930388-50-9

Heritage at Risk Special Edition:Cultural Heritage and Natural Disasters –Risk Preparednessand the Limits of Prevention,edited by Hans-Rudolf Meier, Michael Petzetand Thomas Will,Dresden 2008: TUDpressISBN 978-3-940046-64-2

Online at:www.icomos.org/en/get-involved/inform-us/herit-age-alert/heritage-at-risk-reports

9783945880265

20142015

HERITAGE AT RISKWORLD REPORT 2014-2015 ON MONUMENTS AND SITES IN DANGER

H@

R2014-2

015

HERITAGE AT RISK

WORLD REPORT 2014-2015 ON MONUMENTS AND SITES IN DANGER

ICOMOS is dedicated to the development of common doc-trines, the evolution and circulation of knowledge, the crea-tion of improved conservation techniques, and the promotion of cultural heritage significance. As an official advisory body to the World Heritage Committee for the implementation of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, ICOMOS evaluates nomi-nations and advises on the state of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List. ICOMOS has built a solid philosophical, doctrinal and managerial framework for the sus-tainable conservation of heritage around the world. The ICOMOS Heritage at Risk Reports, first published in 2000, are part of this framework. From a strictly preservation-based approach this publication series offers world-wide information about the dangers that are threatening our cultural heritage, in order to provide help in the case of risks and to promote practi-cal measures to avert or at least allay these risks. The Heritage at Risk Reports are also addressed to the world public as an urgent appeal to commit itself to saving our heritage. Available also on the Internet, the reports furthermore serve as data base for the ICOMOS Global Monitoring Network.

www.icomos.org ISBN 978-3-945880-26-5