Version 1.6.2018

THE PRESERVATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE DURING DISASTER RESPONSE AND HERITAGE RECOVERY PROCESSES

Picture: Heidi Wirilander, 2013

University of Jyväskylä Faculty of Humanities Department of Art and Culture Studies

Doctoral thesis Heidi Wirilander Sptember 2010- 2

University of Jyväskylä Faculty of Humanities Department of Music, Art and Culture Studies WIRILANDER, HEIDI: The preservation of cultural heritage during disaster response and heritage recovery processes Doctoral dissertation: 232 pages, 29 attachment pages Art History

Abstract

The topic of this doctoral research is protection, disaster response and heritage recovery of immovable and movable cultural heritage in accident and disaster situations. The study examines 19 different incidents that resulted in the need for protection, rescue and aftercare of cultural heritage. The researched incidents occurred in Finland between the years 1990 and 2010. Used research data consisted of four independent information sources: 1) disaster sites’ owners theme interviews (18 interviews, 19 cases), 2) subject matter specialist theme interviews (nine interviews), 3) Finnish crime statistics over criminal damage, attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage crimes and 4) six disaster cases trial conviction documents. Qualitative content analyses with the help of Atlas.ti 6.1 software were used in research data analyses.

The research gives basic information about how and with what type of mechanisms cultural heritage deteriorates in disaster and post-disaster situations. Methods chosen in the disaster response and heritage recovery work could either prevent or lead to significant heritage damages. Existing operational models and available material and personnel resources provided possibilities to succeed in heritage recovery work so that cultural heritage damages could be minimized.

Cultural values as a background factor had an impact on heritage recovery funding. This influenced how well disaster response and heritage recovery processes succeeded after disaster. Lack of disaster planning and economic resources caused ineffectiveness in disaster response and heritage recovery work. This could lead to significant secondary heritage damages, especially in water damage cases. Based on the research data, it was concluded that deliberate heritage destruction with the means of vandalism or arson creates significant threats that aim at Finnish cultural heritage. This should be considered in cultural heritage site disaster planning.

Keywords

Cultural heritage, cultural property, heritage studies, risk management, disaster management, heritage recovery, preservation, preventive conservation

3

Jyväskylän Yliopisto Humanistinen tiedekunta Musiikin, taiteiden ja kulttuurin tutkimuksen laitos WIRILANDER, HEIDI: Kulttuuriperinnön säilyttäminen onnettomuuksien pelastus- ja jälkihoitotöiden aikana Väitöstutkimus: 232 sivua, 29 sivua liitteitä Taidehistoria

Tiivistelmä

Väitöstutkimuksen aiheena on kiinteän ja irrallisen kulttuuriperinnön suojelu onnettomuuksien pelastus- ja jälkihoitotöiden aikana. Tutkimus tarkastelee aihetta 19 tapauksen näkökulmasta, joissa kulttuuriperinnön suojelu, pelastus ja jälkihoitotyöt ovat olleet tarpeellisia. Tutkittavat tapaukset ovat sattuneet Suomessa vuosina 1990 ja 2010. Käytetty tutkimusaineisto koostuu neljästä tietolähteestä: 1. onnettomuuskohteiden omistajien teemahaastattelut (18 haastattelua, 19 tapausta), 2. asiantuntijoiden teemahaastattelut (9 haastattelua), 3. Suomen rikostilastot vuosilta 1990-2010 ja 4. kuuden onnettomuuden oikeuskäsittelyjen tuomiot. Laadullista sisällön analyysiä ja Atlas.ti 6.1 tietokoneohjelmistoa käytettiin tutkimusaineiston analysoinnissa.

Tutkimus antaa perustietoa siitä, miten kulttuuriperintö vaurioituu onnettomuustilanteissa ja onnettomuuksien jälkeen. Menetelmät joita valitaan kulttuuriperinnön pelastus- ja jälkihoitotöihin voivat joko estää tai edesauttaa kulttuuriperinnön vaurioitumista. Olemassa olevat toimintamallit sekä käytettävissä olevat materiaali- ja henkilöstöresurssit loivat edellytyksen kulttuuriperinnön jälkihoitotyössä onnistumiseen, jolloin kulttuuriperinnön vaurioitumista voitiin ehkäistä.

Kulttuuriset arvot vaikuttivat onnettomuuksien pelastus- ja jälkihoitotyön taloudelliseen resurssointiin. Tämä vaikutti pelastus- ja jälkihoitotyön onnistumiseen onnettomuuden jälkeen. Kulttuuriperinnön pelastussuunnitelman sekä taloudellisten resurssien puuttuminen onnettomuustilanteessa aiheuttivat tehottomuutta pelastus- ja jälkihoitotöissä. Tämä saattoi johtaa etenkin vesivahinkotapauksissa merkittäviin kulttuuriperinnön toissijaisiin vaurioihin. Tutkimusaineiston pohjalta pääteltiin, että kulttuuriperinnön tietoinen tuhoaminen joko ilkivaltaisesti tai tuhopolttamalla muodostavat merkittävän uhan suomalaiselle kulttuuriperinnölle. Tämä tulisi huomioida kulttuuriperintökohteiden pelastussuunnittelussa.

Avainsanat

Kulttuuriperintö, kulttuuriperinnön tutkimus, riskien hallinta, onnettomuuksien hallinta, kulttuuriperinnön jälkihoito, säilyttäminen, ennaltaehkäisevä konservointi

4

Content

FOREWORD ...... 7

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 9 1.1 Research aims and objectives ...... 10 1.1.1 Background theories and previous research ...... 10 1.1.2 Background theories and research ethics ...... 14 1.1.3 Terminology of the research ...... 15 1.1.4 Implementation of the research ...... 18 1.1.5 Methodology ...... 20 1.1.6 Methodology and information production...... 23 1.1.7 Research data ...... 24 1.1.8 Research data analyses ...... 27 1.1.9 Semiotic analyses of deliberate heritage’s destruction ...... 30 1.1.10 Reliability and validity of the research ...... 32 1.2 Evaluation of the research’s relevance ...... 33 1.3 Contents of the research ...... 34

2 CULTURAL TRANSITION AND HERITAGE ...... 36 2.1 Cultural transition and heritage’s interaction with people ...... 38 2.2 Nationalism and cultural heritage ...... 40 2.3 Cultural heritage and memories ...... 42 2.4 Aesthetics of cultural heritage ...... 44 2.4.1 Cultural appreciations ...... 46 2.4.2 Cultural experiences ...... 48 2.5 Definition of cultural heritage ...... 50 2.6 Contested cultural heritage ...... 54 2.7 Collections as heritage representatives ...... 60 2.8 Memory institutions and heritage definition ...... 62 2.9 From cohesive cultural heritage into diversity of memories ...... 63 2.10 This research’s cultural heritage interpretation ...... 65 2.10.1 Heritage of Finnish Folk Churches ...... 67 2.10.2 Memory institution’s cultural heritage ...... 69

3 HERITAGE’S DETERIORATION AND PRESERVATION ...... 73 3.1 Early stages of preservation...... 75 3.2 Development of modern conservation ...... 77 3.2.1 Aesthetic theories of modern conservation ...... 80 3.2.2 New scientific conservation ...... 80 3.3 Contemporary conservation theory ...... 83 3.3.1 Risk management and risk assessment ...... 86 3.3.2 Preventive conservation ...... 92 3.3.3 Disaster preparedness ...... 93 3.4 Preservation theory of this research ...... 94 5

4 DISASTERS CAUSED BY ACCIDENTS ...... 96 4.1 Water damages ...... 97 4.1.1 Water based mechanical and chemical damages ...... 98 4.1.2 Biological deterioration caused by humidity ...... 99 4.1.3 Water damages recovery ...... 102 4.2 Fire and fire extinguishing based damages recovery ...... 108 4.3 Explosion based damages recovery ...... 109 4.4 Natural disaster based accidents ...... 110 4.4.1 Finnish Literature Society library’s water damage ...... 110 4.4.2 Finnish national library storage magazine’s water damages 111 4.5 Human activity based accidents ...... 113 4.5.1 Finnish Surveying Department’s archives water damage..... 113 4.5.2 Finnish Surveying Department’s archives roof fire ...... 114 4.5.3 Safety of Kiasma during VR magazines fire ...... 116 4.5.4 The Valvilla Wool Mill Museum’s archives fire in 2003 ...... 118 4.5.5 Finnish National Museum’s silver exhibition’s explosion .... 121 4.6 Discussion ...... 123

5 DISASTERS CAUSED BY VANDALISM ...... 127 5.1 Prevention of criminal damage and vandalism ...... 131 5.1.1 Crime prevention in Finland ...... 133 5.1.2 Cultural heritage crimes ...... 136 5.2 Symbolism of heritage’s destruction and vandalism ...... 138 5.3 Graffiti – art, intervention or vandalism ...... 142 5.4 Vandalism of movable cultural heritage ...... 145 5.4.1 Vandalism of ecclesiastical objects at Saint Jacob Church ..... 145 5.4.2 Vandalism at the Turku Castle’s museum exhibition ...... 146 5.4.3 Uspenski Cathedral icon larcenies in 2008 and 2010 ...... 149 5.5 Vandalism of immovable cultural heritage ...... 150 5.5.1 Vandalism of Kotka and Jyväskylä Orthodox churches ...... 151 5.5.2 Vandalism of Vartiokylä castle mountain archeological site 152 5.6 Discussion ...... 155

6 DISASTERS CAUSED BY ARSON AND ARSON ATTEMPTS...... 158 6.1 Research on arsons ...... 158 6.1.1 Peacetime church arsons ...... 162 6.1.2 Arsons and arson attempts in Finland ...... 163 6.1.3 Church arsons and arson attempts of this research ...... 164 6.2 Unsolved arson attempts in Lempäälä and Suomenniemi ...... 165 6.3 Hammarland church arson attempt ...... 167 6.4 Tyrvää Saint Olavi church arson ...... 168 6.5 Porvoo cathedral arson...... 171 6.6 Kaivoksela church arson ...... 175 6.7 Discussion ...... 178

7 RESULTS ...... 182 7.1 Direct and indirect threats that aim at cultural heritage ...... 189 6

7.2 Cultural heritage sites risk evaluation and risk management ...... 193 7.3 Heritage disasters impact on heritage deterioration ...... 202

8 CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION ...... 207

REFERENCES ...... 212 I PUBLISHED SOURCES ...... 212 Newspaper articles ...... 226 II UNPUBLISHED SOURCES ...... 227 Internet sources ...... 227 Unpublished documents ...... 229 Trial documents ...... 230 Transcribed research interviews ...... 230

ATTACHMENTS ...... 233

7

FOREWORD

While doing my MA thesis in conservation at the EVTEK Institute of Art and Design cultural heritage sites and collections disaster started to interest me. In 2008, there were no possibilities to continue studies in the field of conservation at the doctoral level in Finland.

In late 2000’s, many conservators started to do their conservation related studies in the discipline of museology at the University of Jyväskylä. Therefore, I also applied and entered first the master program studies at the University of Jyväskylä. In my masters’ thesis in museology at University of Jyväskylä, I surveyed the effectiveness of rescue plans of cultural heritage collections from the point of view of collections’ protection, evacuation and aftercare processes. The topic for my master’s thesis in museology originated from discussions with curator Karim Peltonen in Autumn 2008. At the time, Peltonen worked for the Department of Monuments and Sites at Finland’s National Board of Antiquities. My masters’ thesis in museology was finish in spring 2010.

In Autumn 2010 I started to do my doctoral thesis about cultural heritage’s preservation during disaster response and heritage recovery processes first in the discipline of museology and later in 2014 changed the discipline of my doctoral thesis into the discipline of Art History. The supervisors of my doctoral research have been professor of museology Janne Vilkuna (2010-2012), professor of art education Pauline von Bonsdorff (2010- ), adjunct professor of museology Susanna Pettersson (2013-2014) and professor of art history Annika Waenerberg (2014- ).

I thank all my supervisors for their work. The feedback and comments that I have received from my supervisors over my doctoral thesis manuscripts and presentations have had central influence on my research. My special thanks to adjunct professor Dr Susanna Pettersson, professor Pauline von Bonsdorff and professor Annika Waenerberg for inspiring and encouraging co-operation. My PhD research could not have been succeeded without their help.

I would like to thank the Finnish Cultural Foundation, Jenny and Antti Wihuri foundation, University of Jyväskylä, Fire Protection Fund, The Finnish Evangelical- Lutheran Church’s research center, Oskar Öflund’s Foundation, Norwegian Finnish Cultural Foundation and Alfred Kordelin’s Foundation for financial support and funding of my PhD research. I would like to thank all the organizations and persons who I had possibility to interview during my research.

During the research process the comments and feedback that I have received from several scholars during various seminars and conferences which I attended with either a paper or poster have influenced to this research. I thank them all. Also, the persons with whom I have discussed with over the years about my research topic deserve thanks and mentioning. Especially the student exchange period at the University of Uppsala and the 8 research exchange at the University of Oslo have influenced centrally to the development of this research. Thank you!

I dedicate this research to my parents Riitta and Juhani, who both have had a significant role in inspiring and courage me through the years in my life. My parents influence can be seen in my PhD research. I thank my family and friends, who have helped me through difficult times in my research.

In Helsinki June 7 2018, Heidi Wirilander

9

1 INTRODUCTION

This research focuses on cultural heritages’ protection, rescue, evacuation and aftercare in accidental and disaster situations. Questions regarding protection and rescue of both movable and immovable cultural heritage are always relevant. Enhancements to protect cultural heritage trough operating procedures during disaster response and heritage recovery processes facilitate better opportunity to minimize heritage damages in disaster and post-disaster situations. Effective heritage recovery and disaster response increase opportunity to maintain the integrity of cultural heritage and succeed in heritage’s recovery work.

“Scientist search for truth and conservators seek for solutions.”1 This Salvador Muñoz Viñas (2011) statement on the differences between scientists and conservators are present in this research’s problem setting that contain both truth seeking and solution developing in the context of cultural heritage’s long term preservation in disaster and post-disaster situations. The main goal of this research is to produce general information about how to use preventive conservation theory to prevent or minimize heritage’s damages during disasters, disaster response and heritage recovery processes. This research also attempts to identify which already existing working methods in disaster response and heritage recovery could be used to prevent damages in disaster situations.

This research analyses heritage disasters trough 19 cases that have taken place in Finland between years 1990 and 2010, it also documents Finnish history in the viewpoint of accidents and disasters that have taken place in association with cultural heritage in peace time Finland. This twenty-year time period represents in Finland era of strong economic, social and cultural change that has been influenced by such world political changes as the collapse of Soviet Union, expansion of the European Union and the NATO to some of the former Soviet Union and the WARSAW pact nations. Also, the establishment of Euro currency and the Euro zone’s crises situates into the second decade of this 20 years’ time period.

During the 20 years Finland has experienced strong cultural changes because of increased internationalization and globalization. There have also been two strong economic depressions that influenced many geographical areas, communities and people’s lives in Finland. Cultural heritage has been threatened in Finland by accident based disasters and deliberate works of destruction during the last 20 years. No previous research on heritage disasters has been done in Finland. No prior research on cultural heritage disasters has been done in preventive conservation approach and therefore this research may have both national and international audience.

This research tries to broaden the perspectives of preventive conservation and prevention of deliberate heritage destruction. Although technical security systems, devices and security services have improved safety of cultural heritage and heritage’s long term

1 Viñas 2011, 124 10 maintenance, technology have not so far enabled possibilities to prevent people’s deliberate actions that aim at heritage’s destruction. A good example of this is security cameras. Although cameras have in some cases helped to solve crimes they have not been able to prevent all crimes. Sometimes it has been the security cameras that have triggered people’s deliberate destructive actions.2 Based on the limits of technical security systems this research examines the possibilities that education and heritage interpretations change could have in prevention of deliberate heritage’s destruction.

1.1 Research aims and objectives

This research focuses on cultural heritage related accidents and disasters. The central objective of this research is to clarify what kind of methods can be used to prevent accidents and disasters that occur in association with cultural heritage. The working methods used in cultural heritage site’s disaster planning, disaster response and heritage recovery work are evaluated from the viewpoint of collection damages minimization. Aim of this research is to produce information about how well the used disaster management methods respond to the collection’s protection and damage prevention objectives in disaster situations and during disaster response and heritage recovery work.

This research approaches conservation and conservator’s role in similar perspective that it was established in 1830’s France and in 1840’s Germanic countries; means that are evaluated to prevent heritage’s deterioration can be used to promote preservation of cultural heritage. Conservator’s role in this approach was to promote heritage preservation, broaden overall awareness over heritage’s value and to provide principles for heritage’s preservation.3 This research acknowledges classical conservation theories tendencies that regard heritage in false state or that have false nature, does not exist as cultural heritage. Conservator’s moral duty is to promote the maintenance of heritage’s true nature.4

1.1.1 Background theories and previous research

This research represents heritage studies research that situates into the field of humanities and discipline of Art History. Because research tradition of humanities often aim at clarifying the cultural, ideological and political backgrounds of researched topics; also, this research tries to clarify the contexts of heritage disasters and why these disasters have certain end result from the perspectives of heritage’s deterioration and preservation.

Multidisciplinary approach in this research was result of the research topic that situates this research into both heritage studies tradition in the field of humanities and to the heritage’s preservation and preventive conservation research tradition in the field of

2 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 65 3 Jokilehto 1999, 125 4 Viñas 2011, 93 11 natural sciences. Multi-method research strategy aims at multiform and comprehensive research results production about the researched topic. Central fields of study in this research are: 1. cultural heritage, 2. heritage values and evaluations and 3. preservation. The research literature that was used to analyze the research data were heritage studies, museum studies, aesthetics, preservation, disaster management and preventive conservation. Objective of multidisciplinary research approach was to analyze different heritage management parameters in disaster prevention and disaster management work. Also, these parameters’ significance in cultural heritage’s deterioration and preservation processes in disaster response and heritage recovery situations were analyzed. The research objective is to identifying some of the possible relations that seem to relate to heritage’s deterioration and preservation in disaster response and heritage recovery situations.

Cultural heritage like any other form of culture is developed in contemporary societies and is highly influenced by the cultural values and norms of the societies in which it has been established. The cultural values and contexts that have once been connected with cultural heritage are not always apparent to cultural heritage’s audience. Neither are the values and cultural statements of cultural heritage fully transparent to the audience. Sometimes it may be unclear what kind of history and cultural values heritage truly represents. Whose culture and past heritage interprets? Cultural heritage as cultural product defines and underline certain fragments of history and interpretations of the past. This result that heritage is as much evidence of the past than it is evidence of the era in which it has been established.

This research is situates into the research tradition of critical heritage studies. Critical heritage studies approach in this research means that past and cultural heritage is analyzed so that authoritative approach to understand collective memory and heritage is abandoned and heritage interpretation is enriched with various approaches to the past.5 Critical heritage studies include also the opposite stories of the past that heritage have traditionally interpreted. The theoretical approach to analyze cultural heritage and heritage disasters is planned, so that both cultural heritage sites and heritage disaster can be analyzed as openly as possible without prejudging concepts of truth. Through this approach, new kind of knowledge about heritage disasters is tried to reveal. The researched 19 heritage disasters represent three disaster types: 1. accident based disasters caused by either natural forces or human activities nearby cultural heritage, 2. disasters caused by vandalism and 3. heritage site’s arson and arson attempts.

1.1.1.1 Previous research on cultural heritage

This research analyses history and ideological development of cultural heritage concept. This research agrees Brian Graham’s and Peter Howard’s (2008) claim that every society’s pasts, heritages and identities should be seen pluralistic, since heritage has both many users and producers. In Graham’s and Howard’s approach to cultural heritage public

5 Jones 2014, 132 12 and private, official and unofficial, insiders and outsiders have their part in creation and management of cultural heritage.6

Could there be also a more pluralistic way to define society’s past, one that would suit better for postmodern era and that would not exclude any visions of the genuine past? Collections and questions of collecting play a significant part in heritage definition process. Cultural heritage may become dangerous manifestation of the past if it does operate in undemocratic and unequal way towards people, communities and societies. Heritage becomes power manifestation if the defined heritage represents only people in power and the majority vision of the nation’s past. Dangers in cultural heritage’s definition start when it interacts with culturally diverse society’s hard histories and social taboos. How to deliver authentic past and genuine history to the present through cultural heritage, both tangible and intangible, that represents selected fragments of the past?

The great social segregation process in Western democracies has believed to have its backgrounds in the increase of cultural diversity.7 But it is also possible that cultural diversity has become more apparent in Western societies because of globalization and increase of civil rights. What makes individual people or small group of people willing to deliberately vandalize or sabotage their own community’s or society’s cultural heritage? This is one of the key questions that this research tries to reflect some kind of answers.

Aesthetics influence significantly in human communities’ cultural values and evaluations. These values and evaluations have an impact on the value statements that cultural heritage delivers to the surrounding society. Heritage values are also present in heritage disaster’s response and heritage recovery work. Previous researches of Pauline von Bonsdorff and John Dewey have been used to create this research’s approach to analyze aesthetic argumentation behind cultural heritage.

Eero Tarasti’s existential semiotics and post-colonial analyses have been used to analyze both the concept of cultural heritage and the resistance movement in associated with cultural heritage. Jean Francois Lyotard’s theory on postmodern societies creates central theoretical frame for this research. The disaster cases of this research have taken place during 20 years’ time period in Finland when the Finnish society has lived its most democratic and liberal time period of its history. This research’s Finland can be seen as postmodern Scandinavian society. Previous research on criminology in the areas of vandalism and arsons are used in research data’s analyses.

Memory institution’s position in heritage definition process has some resemblances with art institution’s position in artwork’s “establishment process”. Both art and memory institutions have central “gate-keeper role” in defining the subject matter of their specialty field. Memory institutions can also be seen as old power institutions that nation state has given the power to select from the society’s history tangible and intangible representatives of the past as collective memory.

6 Graham &Howard 2008, 1 7 Graham & Howard 2008, 1 13

Michel Foucault’s research has been used in the contemporary heritage studies. To the critical heritage studies tradition Foucault’s theory has perhaps been brought form the research tradition of New Historicism. Michel Foucault’s (1982) introduced the concept of anti-authority struggle.8 This concept has been used to analyze this research’s disaster cases where cultural heritage’s deliberate destruction has taken place.

1.1.1.2 Previous research on preservation

The extent of cultural heritage that ought to be preserved has grown rapidly both because of heritage definition’s changes and because of mass production of cultural items. It is not possible to preserve cultural heritage through item based remedial conservation. Therefore, this research approaches question of preservation from the perspective of preventive conservation and risk assessment. - Unexpected disasters create in contemporary societies perhaps greatest danger for cultural heritage’s long-term preservation. Although all three aspects of conservation – remedial conservation, preventive conservation and restoration – have their place in the measures of heritage preservation, heritage’s future in long term base on means that prevent heritage’s slowly proceeding deterioration and suddenly occurring damaging. Risk assessment and preventive conservation have significant part in this research’s preservation theory.

This research uses preventive conservation and risk management theories in evaluating the efficiency of cultural heritage’s disaster planning, disaster response and disaster recovery work from the viewpoints of damage prevention and damage migration. Theories on cultural heritage and heritage preservation support the idea of minimal intervention in remedial conservation treatments. The ethical principles of conservation underline approach where treatments base on minimal intervention. Conservation treatments, both interventive and non-interventive, bases on need to maintain heritage’s value and functions trough material and technical authenticity. To keep cultural heritage’s integrity intact, the long-term preservation base on measures that avoid or minimizes interventive treatments that influence directly on cultural heritage’s material technical construction.

All conservation treatments that are directly carried out on cultural heritage have influence on cultural heritage materials. This raises question of treatment reversibility. Remedial conservation treatments have sometimes lead to more complex problems in heritage’s long-term preservation and re-treatability. Preventive conservation is perhaps the only approach in preservation that enables preservation actions to have an impact on entire cultural heritage sites or collections at the same time. Because preventive conservation’s treatments are indirect they do not interfere with the structures and materials of cultural heritage, it has not either raised strong concerns over treatment reversibility. The reason for this is that preventive conservation operates through environmental factors on cultural heritage’s own material degradation process and therefore it has regarded to preserve heritage’s authenticity and integrity best.

8 Foucault 1982, 780-781 14

Continuous preventive conservation and risk assessment has a leading role in many nation’s preservation and conservation strategies of cultural heritage. Minimal intervention has proven cost-effective means to protect the historical integrity and authenticity of cultural heritage. Deteriorated heritage that is conserved with remedial conservation treatments does not make heritage un-deteriorated even if the damages are “repaired” and heritage’s condition has become stabile.

The central preservation research used in this research’s theoretical framework has been done in the areas of risk assessment and preventive conservation. Preventive conservation research includes the areas of risk management and disaster management as well as topics of disaster response and heritage recovery. Central preservation theorists for this research are Jukka Jokilehto in restoration philosophy, ideology and restoration history. In the area of modern and contemporary conservation theory Salvador Munoz Vinãs is the central theorist. Vinas has researched the theoretical changes in 1990’s and 2000’s conservation theory. In the area of risk assessment and preventive conservation central theorists are Robert Waller, Jonathan Ashley-Smith and Stephen Michalski.

Previous studies on heritage disaster’s management have been made on natural disaster and fires. These studies have concentrated on library collections, collections of natural history, historic buildings and in museum collections disaster response and heritage recovery work. This research approaches heritage disaster’s response and recovery from the perspective of preventive conservation and damage migration. Therefore, many sources that have been used as reference literature for this research are risk assessment, disaster management and preventive conservation publications.

In Finland previous conservation, related research has been situated in the scientific disciplines of art history, museology and adult education. Previous published conservation related doctoral research in Finland has been done on the development of Finnish conservation profession (Tuula Auer 2000, adult education), on paper material’s conservation and preservation processes (Istvan Kecskemeti 2008, museology), on cultural heritage material’s heritage functions and material research (Ulla Knuutinen 2009, museology), on art collection’s disposal questions (Nina Robbins 2016, museology) and cultural heritage object’s materiality and preservation philosophical questions (Ari Tanhuanpää 2017, art history). Currently conservation related doctoral research are done in Finland for example in the disciplines of art history, museology and contemporary art.

1.1.2 Background theories and research ethics

This research represents empirical research that bases on qualitative and quantitative research data. Multidisciplinary approach is used in research data analyses. The researcher’s observations are guided by concepts and theories that are known by the researcher.9 The

9 Macdonald 2002, 11 15 theoretical approach to analyze research data, base on source critical cultural studies tradition. Aesthetic and cultural heritage education approach of this research bases on the hypothesis that heritage interpretations have a role in people’s interaction with cultural heritage. The aesthetic and cultural heritage analyses of this research have their backgrounds in both existential semiotics, environmental aesthetics and in critical heritage studies.

The researcher’s standpoint and values influences strongly in all scientific research. Scientific work base on researcher’s standpoint and values, because they determine how the research is conducted and how the objectives are used in association with the research data. Because diverse approaches and methods are used in knowledge production, research approach can be seen through practical choice that bases on timing, accessibility and research data. These practical choices determine the research’s knowledge foundations.10 Because there was no ready research data that could have been used as this research’s data, the research data bases on centrally qualitative sources that are analyzed and evaluated in an interactive process between researcher and the research data.

This research rises from the idea that the researcher is obligated to research and draft the research results truthfully.11 Values and evaluations can influence the judgments of truth that are drafted from the research data. Scientific research or statement can be taken as valid if they represents the real order of events and facts drafted from the information source.12 The primary ethical principle of this research rises from the source driven approach. To gain valid information about the researched topic, one must base the research results on the researched data that is valid and reliable. The data driven approach means in this research, that the research results are drafted through the research data as objectively as possible.

The approach to study heritage disasters this way bases on cultural studies tradition. The research data consists of both theme interviews and the disasters archival documents. Research interviews divided into disaster sites owners and subject material specialists’ interviews about the researched disasters. The privacy of interviewed persons is secured by discussing the disaster cases at the institutional level. In this research, the interviewed institutions are referred to instead of individual employees of the organizations. Only interviewed criminal psychology specialist Jaana Haapasalo has been referred to with her own name. The persons who were responsible for or involved with this research’s vandalism and arson cases are presented anonymously gender and age based level. The analyses of research data will be stored as Atlas.ti document in a Finnish archive.

1.1.3 Terminology of the research

10 Macdonald 2002, 10 11 Edson 1997, 74 12 Edson 1997, 73 16

The central terminology of this research rises from the background theories that are heritage studies, preservation, preventive conservation and disaster management. Although there are differences between the use of terms cultural heritage and cultural property, both of these terms are used in this research as parallel terms in the context of society’s selected and defined cultural representatives of the past and “collective memory”. In this research, use of these two terms bases on the editorial needs of the research manuscript not on the intentional need to connect this research into certain heritage rhetoric’s tradition. Terms cultural property and cultural heritage reveal two central features of societies cultural heritage; it is established to underline society’s significant property that cultural representative manifests and this heritage is handed to the public assuming that this property would be cared for and cherished by the public.13

Defined cultural heritage result what kind of history interpretation the organized society wishes to culturally transfer from generation to generation as inheritance of the collective past. Cultural heritage represents for the society property that often is seen as spiritual property of the society. Cultural heritage term’s history is closely connected with the 18th century and the establishment of memory institutions. The term has been connected with the preservationist approach in heritage studies and it has been criticized on its ability to simplify cultures and social group’s relation to the past. History that heritage mediates is often repatriated so that this past becomes a certain social group’s inheritance and property. Although cultures may involve multiple groups of people, it does not mean that these cultures would be shared equally. Although cultural heritage might provide important identity source for local communities, cultural belonging may become socially harmful element that excludes social groups whose existence is not recognized as nation state’s significant cultural property.14

Cultural property term’s history is connected with the Second World War aftermath and the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflicts. This convention was developed after the Second World War to prevent the strategic and intentional use of cultural property in military actions during times of war. The Hague Convention defines cultural property as movable and immovable property that is important for all people. This convention expands the spiritual ownership of cultural heritage as property that belongs to all mankind.15

This research approaches the idea of preservation through the perspective of monumental preservation that was introduced by Michèle Cloonan in 2007. Cloonan’s monumental preservation covers both movable and immovable heritage of human communities and it aims at “survival of human record”.16 Monumental preservation seems to contain strong ethical ethos that relates to all cultures and heritages equality. This approach to cultural heritage is shared also in this research.

New scientific theory of conservation refers to the scientific approach in the field of conservation that uses natural sciences methodologies, means and equipment in heritage’s

13 Mezey 2007, 2013 14 Mezey 2007, 2012-2013 15 Mezey 2007, 2009-2010 16 Cloonan 2007a, 747 17 preservation. Although other theoretical approaches such as the aesthetics conservation theory may be drafted from humanities scientific tradition, scientific conservation term’s use in this research points at a certain conservation theoretical tradition that does not include humanities scientific tradition into the methodologies of scientific conservation. Preventive conservation term is used in the context of all methods that are used in heritage’s preservation and to prevent heritage’s deterioration and damaging with indirect means that improve heritage’s preservation process.

Disaster planning is part of memory institutions risk management and risk assessment work. This work is closely connected with the concrete actions of disaster response and heritage recovery during disaster and accidental situations. Disaster management and disaster planning terms are used in this research to define the actions of heritage owners that are done before the disasters to ensure heritage’s survival and long term preservation in disaster and post-disaster situations. Disaster response term is used to define the actions and methods that are used in cultural heritage’s rescue work just after the disaster. Objective of the disaster response is the immediate rescue of cultural heritage in the disaster situation from disaster’s deteriorative effects. Heritage recovery term is used to describe the working methods that are used in heritage’s first aid after the disaster response process. Objective of the heritage recovery is to stabilize heritage’s condition and to minimize or prevent the secondary damages that may occur after disaster response, because of the disaster and the means and methods of heritages’ disaster response.

In this research term museum and heritage studies are used parallel with the term museology, these terms define this research’s central approach to examine cultural heritage and memory institutions by studying, questioning and setting research based critical questions to these concepts and institutions. This research is more about cultural heritage than it is about memory institutions that have central role in defining cultural heritage.

Because this art historical research is about heritage site’s and object’s long-term preservation it represents technical art history. History of technical art history is connected with the establishment of the new scientific conservation that related to 1920’s and 1930’s efforts to use of technical devices such as X-ray in analyses of artworks and heritage objects. Technical art history as field of study is connected with the development of art forensics analyses in 1920’s and 1930’s United States of America.17

This research shares the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) approach to define cultural heritage. UNESCO’s cultural heritage conventions underline people’s, communities’ and societies’ equal and self- determinative right to define their culture and heritage. Through this perspective cultural heritage represent cultural elements from the past that are transmitted from generation to generation; heritage is continuously recreated by communities and social groups through their interaction with the environment and history. UNESCO defines cultural heritage as

17 Ainswoth 2005, From Connoisseurship to Technical Art History: The Evolution of the Interdisciplinary Study of Art 18 something that is established through communities’, groups’ and sometimes even trough individual’s recognition when they define their cultural heritage.18

Research on the concept of cultural heritage is relevant to this research because it leads to the roots of central questions. How cultural heritage becomes source of cultural conflict and contested question in societies. If heritage is about memories and past of human civilization, why cultural heritage raises so strong feelings in human beings? – This research’s approach to study and examine cultural heritage follows United Nations’ and UNESCO’s self-determinative approach to peoples, communities and societies cultural heritage. In this research, cultural heritage is categorized as the main concept of peoples, groups, communities’ and societies’ heritage and cultural memories. Memory institution’s heritage discourse represent sub-concept of cultural heritage and institutional approach to define and understand cultural heritage. This research recognizes peoples, small groups and communities valued cultural memories as defined cultural heritage. Cultural heritage as memory from the past can be defined also by people, group of people, community or memory institutions.

Use of term vandalism in association with cultural heritage’s deliberate modification follows in this research Salvador Muñoz Viñas’ (2011) framework19 on heritages modification. Vandalism means in this research harmful and destructive actions in culturally and materially significant property, that is defined as cultural heritage. Objective of vandalism is to destroy valuable cultural remains from the past or replace these remains with contemporary culture’s layers.

The difference between vandalism and malicious damage is sometimes unclear. Vandalism has seen as harming and destroying culturally and materially significant property. The destruction is focused on material culture that has both cultural and historical importance for the society. Vandalism has sometimes been connected with self-confident thoughts that the destructive actions are justified. Malicious damage unlike vandalism does not usually have a particular goal or target. This damage has seen usually economic.20 The motives of vandalism differ from those of terrorism. Vandalism does not often have clear political aims. The destructive act of vandalism is the goal and therefore it can be seen as expression of social nausea.21

1.1.4 Implementation of the research

This research’s case study featured design has been influenced by two central questions: 1. is cultural heritage interpretation triggering factor behind deliberate heritage

18 Unesco’s definition of intangible cultural heritage. http://www.unesco.org/services/documentation/archives/multimedia/?id_page=13&PHPSES SID=743f303f0b2452205c4a672fde9310bc 19 Viñas 2011, 102 20 Koski et all 2007, 37 21 Koski et all 2007, 38 19 destruction and 2. why cultural heritage’s long-term preservation has been endangered in Finland by disasters resulted by unintentionally occurred accidents and intentionally caused actions. This research is done as a source driven qualitative case study, where each of the 19 disaster cases form a smaller case study. Case study approach aims at studying the research topic through individual disaster cases as intensively as possible. All of the case studies are analyzed trough previous scientific research on heritage studies, preventive conservation and specific subject matter specialists theme interviews, where the interviewed person or the organization represent the experts of the interview topic.

Because case study is not able to produce generalizable information about the research topic, this research tries to understand and deeply interpret the researched disaster cases in certain socio-cultural context. This research may have possibility to produce information about the mechanisms, processes and internal laws that influence behind these disasters. This methodological decision bases on the hypothesis that heritage disasters can be either prevented or heritage’s deterioration in disaster and accident situation can be minimized when the needed disaster management actions are made and disasters’ deteriorative forces are understood.

Case study is empirical research and qualitative research represents a central mean in case studies’ information production. Multi-method and mixed methods approaches are often chosen for case study research. This can be seen also in this research. Although case study research produces mainly detailed descriptions about the research topic it also provides instruments in gaining deepened understanding over the research topic.22 Qualitative research does not have its own research methods.23 Jari Metsämuuronen (2000) suggests that qualitative research is valid methodological approach when the researched topic cannot be examined in controlled research conditions. Metsämuuronen defines qualitative research as relevant theoretical approach for research in which problem setting aims at research data that is able to reveal: 1. detailed construction of the researched phenomenon, 2. meaning of specific factors in this phenomenon and 3. analyses of researched topic’s factors correlation-relations.24 Based on Metsämuuronen’s definition qualitative research is relevant theoretical approach to research heritage disasters with the available research data.

The theoretical framework of this research bases on Anglo-American qualitative research tradition where methodological decisions may base on the epistemological needs that the research objectives and the available research data provides.25 The theoretical framework is used to analyze the researched cases’ disaster planning, disaster response and heritage recovery in disaster and post-disaster situations. Objective is to reconstruct the disasters and to evaluate heritage’s damages that disasters cause.

22 Metsämuuronen 2000, 14, 18. 23 Metsämuuronen 2000, 9. 24 Metsämuuronen 2000, 14. 25 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 44 20

From semantic perspective research questions have been defined as requests for information, but they may also be used to produce action that aim at knowledge.26 This case study’s research questions are: 1. What types of direct and indirect threats aim at cultural heritage? 2. How should cultural heritage sites, monuments and collections be risk evaluated and how should they be protected? 3. What type of heritage damages have disasters resulted in and why?

What makes question-answering reasonable? It may be argumentation chains that provide conclusion and information over the asked questions. This research is connected with the research tradition that approaches question-reply argumentation trough idea of dialogue. The research question answering tradition approaches scientific question-reply argumentation trough pragmatic idea of dialogue. This approach suggests there are differences between answers that are given to questions and a reply that does not clearly answer to the question. However, a response to a question can be regarded as legitimate even if the answer is not direct. Often in such cases research questions can be regarded as unreasonable or illegitimate in the perspective of respondent. Answers are not always direct or black-and-white. Direct answer provides often some but not wall-to-wall covering information concerning the asked question.27 This study’s research questions do not represent black-and-white questions that could be answered with a set of alternatives. Therefore, this research approaches research questions trough idea of information production that provides some answers and information to the research question but not all inclusive direct answer to the research questions.

Researched disaster cases are analyzed from the viewpoint of damage migration and prevention. Reconstructions of the disasters will base on the interviews of disaster site’s owner organizations and available archival documents. The interviews are transcribed and in the research data analyzes used qualitative content analysis and Atlas.ti 6.1 software.

1.1.5 Methodology

Qualitative research methods were chosen for this research, because it seemed that the only way to produce any new knowledge about heritage disasters in Finland was through the analysis of new research data. The disasters that could be used to produce new knowledge over this topic were the disasters and accidents that had occurred in Finland, had targeted on cultural heritage and were commonly known by heritage professionals. In Finland these disasters had not been systematically documented and there for there were no research data that could have been used as primary research source in this research. The disaster cases had to be reconstructed through the collected research data. There was no previously used theoretical framework that could have been used to analyze these disasters and therefore the research represents empirical research. Empirical research means in this

26 Walton 1989, 5 27 Walton 1989, 3 21 research that the used research data has fundamental part in the research and the data has also influenced to the selection of the literature sources.28 This research’s data driven intensity can be explained trough the fact that no previous research had been done on the same topic from the perspective of preventive conservation. The collected research data both from the disaster site owners and the subject matter specialists aimed at reconstruction of the 19 heritage disasters and these disaster cases management processes from the perspective of heritage’s preservation and damage migration.

To gain reliable vision about the disasters, research data was planned so that it would base on multiform primary research sources. Both disaster sites owners and the subject matter specialist half structured theme interviews were used to gain unwritten and undocumented knowledge and information about the researched incidents and researched themes of disaster management. The heritage sites owners theme interview’s questions can be found in attachments 1 and 2. The subject matter specialist theme interviews questions can be found in attachments 3-6. The use of qualitative content analysis and coding with Atlas.ti 6.1 software were used to have the research data in more systemize form to the background factors analyzes. Objective was to find ways to identify and show different disaster case’s parameters meanings in the unfortunate events and in the damaging of cultural heritage. The qualitative research data’s coding expected to reveal more clear vision about the relationships between variables that existed in the coded research data.

Qualitative research has a long history in the human sciences’ research. There are different opinions where qualitative research has been established. According to one approach origin of qualitative research is in Europe where it was adapted into the American research tradition and after some time this research tradition was brought back to Europe. This first approach in origins of qualitative research underlines the ethnographical and phenomenological backgrounds of this research approach. The second approach to the qualitative research connects the research approach with the history of American sociology. The third approach to qualitative research methods links the research approach together with American sociology and anthropology that relates to the history of ethnography.29

The qualitative research gives interpretive and naturalistic approach to the researched topic, because its methods try to create order in phenomenon by revealing the meanings that people attach to them. Because the qualitative research approaches researched topics trough interpretations and meanings of reality use of semiotics in meaning construction’s analyses is justified. Qualitative research’s objective is to produce better understanding over the researched topic.30 To produce scientific understanding over the researched topic with qualitative methods one has to analyze how understanding and meanings are constructed in the researched topics. This increases the validity and reliability of the research results.

Multiple methods can be used in qualitative research to achieve deep understanding about the phenomenon that is researched. Multiple research methods are used also in this research. Although entirely objective and absolute truth cannot be achieved in scientific

28 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 20 29 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 22 30 Denzin & Lincoln 2000, 3-4 22 research, especially in qualitative research, the research results that reveal the representations of the researched topic have scientific significance.31 Jouni Tuomi and Anneli Sarajärvi (2006) have defined seven research traditions in qualitative research. These are: 1. Aristotelian tradition and understanding research, 2. Hermeneutic tradition and humanities research, 3. Phenomenological-Hermeneutic tradition and interpretative research, 4. Critical theory tradition and action research, 5. Anglo-American qualitative research tradition, 6. Naturalistic methods and Naturalistic research and 7. Research based on postmodern science approach.32 There is no previous research or theories that could have been used directly as scientific framework for this research. Therefore, this research’s scientific approach to analyze cultural heritage and heritage disasters bases on Anglo- American qualitative research tradition. Anglo-American research tradition was chosen because also this research tries to argument the methodological decisions trough the research practice that contains both research aims and objectives and available research data and resources.33

Although this research tries to reach the traditional scientific principles in the scientific process, objectivity, rationality and data handling, it is realistic also to note that science’s nature is relativistic and all scientific research has its contexts and socio-cultural backgrounds. Therefore, this research also acknowledges criticism of postmodern science that is targeted on modern scientific worldview. There is no objective knowledge that could be used to analyze social life; knowledge is in correlation-relation with its cultural contexts and constructions. Post-modern science’s statement on “Great theories” disappearance is a direct conclusion that can be made after delusions over objective knowledge’s existence have vanished.34 Because scientific knowledge cannot show its validity and reliability trough itself without use of other information sources. Contemporary science legitimization for knowledge has become more problematic question. How to prove scientific knowledge correctly? And above all who decides the terms of truth?35 This research does not try to produce any “Great theory”, but it tries to produce some new knowledge and increase the overall understanding over the processes that take place in association with heritage disasters and heritage’s preservation in post-disaster phase.

This research approaches postmodern science’s statement on subjectivity’s die out and postmodern individual’s repressed position in the viewpoint that in order to gain “new knowledge” about a research topic boarders between disciplines and these discipline’s traditional research approaches and means of knowledge production have to be abandoned and new sources and research theories containing potential to produce “new knowledge “ should be used to analyze the research topic.36 Therefore this research has no direct discussion linkages with all used sources and not all reference studies’ linkages with this research have not fully been opened in this research. Source literature was selected for this research on the bases whether or not they suited into the thematic aspects of this research based on the research questions and used research data’s analyses needs. This research gives

31 Denzin & Lincoln 2000, 5 32 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 8 33 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 44 34 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 55 35 Lyotard 1985, 48-49 36 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 55 23 its contribution to the discussions that relate to critical heritage studies discussion on cultural heritage and heritage conflicts and disaster management and preventive conservation discussion in the field of heritage management.

Since qualitative research has no own paradigms, it uses multiple methods in research data’s analysis and in information production. Critics towards qualitative research have risen from the positivistic scientific tradition. Positivistic researchers have stated that qualitative orientation gives no means to verify the research findings and the truth through used research data. But this uncertainty of absolute truth and validity of research results are present in all scientific research both qualitative and quantitative. All new research results may show earlier research result’s truth statements invalid. Qualitative research can find answers to questions how social phenomenon are created and with what mechanisms they gain their meaning, but it does not directly produce research results in experimentally examined or measured manners.37 This is the case also in this research.

1.1.6 Methodology and information production

The available research data and research objectives resulted that the American qualitative research tradition seemed to provide the most useful orientation for this research, since also in this research results drafting from the research data based on epistemological argumentation. Although this research could have also been connected into the phenomenological research tradition, this research did not become valid phenomenological research because of the theoretical needs of this research. The fundamental focus of this research is not to understand people’s actions in association with heritage disasters and these disasters’ response and recovery work. The main focus of this research bases on theoretical needs set by the conservation science. Objective is to understand how cultural heritage becomes disaster scene and how this heritage is damaged or preserved in disaster and post-disaster situations.

Since this research is done by an individual researcher and the qualitative research data bases on individual people’s theme interviews, total objectivity can not be achieved. These limits that relate to the objectivity questions are rather common especially in qualitative research’s case. Although this research can achieve limited amount of objectivity, it still tries to underline the empirical nature of this qualitative research through research data analyses. – Although data is analyzed by an individual researcher, the research results base on the information drafted from the research data rather than the researcher’s previous knowledge that bases on education, work experience as conservator and knowledge that bases on previous studies. These factors influenced to the approach to analyze the research data and to the research result’s drafting. Since there is no previous research done on the same approach, there was no ontological approach that could provide a given approach to examine heritage disasters. This research tries to analyze research data as valid evidence of

37 Denzin & Lincoln 2000, 8 24 reality, based on the methodological research approach that connects this research to the Anglo-American qualitative research tradition.38

It is typical for qualitative research that the research data and research problems interact with each other in the information production of research. This interactive process of information production was present also in this research’s data analyses and research results drafting. Qualitative research data rarely provides direct answers to the research problems.39 Source driven research approach results, that the research methods are used to produce reliable and valid information and research results from the used research data. The chosen research methods have seen as accurate means to produce answers to the research questions from the used research data.

When research data bases on interviews, the acquired data often represents wide and comprehensive information source that can be approached many ways. Interview data’s categorizing, analyses and the research results drafting operate in information production. These three parts of research data analyses operate often simultaneously with each other and it is rather typical that analyses develop trough the data analyses process when the researcher becomes more familiar with the research data.40 This was also the case in this research data analyses: categorizing, data analyses and research result’s writing proceeded simultaneously.

In the Anglo-American qualitative research, there are several methods that can be used in the research data analyses. Also in this research different research data’s categorizing, analyzing and result drafting were done simultaneously. Disaster site owners’ interviews produce information about the disasters, owners of the disaster site and the history of the disaster site’s heritage. These interviews could also give indicative information how these heritage sites became seen of direct or indirect treats that caused the disasters.

1.1.7 Research data

Means of data collection represent one of the central factors that relate to research’s trustworthiness. The methods that are used in data collection ensure the qualitative content analyses reliability. The reliability relates to how well the collected data is able to refer to the intended objectives. The method of data collection that answers to the research questions is a central mean to ensure the reliable qualitative content analyses. In most qualitative researches data bases on unstructured qualitative material and combination of different research methods.41 This research’s qualitative research data consist of both many kinds of unstructured materials such as transcribed interviews, trial documents, newspaper articles and statistical documents that base on Finnish crime statistics over criminal damage, attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage crimes. Statistical data represent this

38 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 44 39 Ruusuvuori & Nikander & Hyvärinen 2010, 12. 40 Ruusuvuori & Nikander & Hyvärinen 2010, 11-12. 41 Elo et al. 2014, 3 25 research’s only quantitative research source that has been used as reference material for other research data.

Conservation science often approaches researched topic trough studies over group of heritage objects. Although all heritage objects and sites represent often unique artworks, group of heritage objects have thought to form reliable and valid research data because of multiple heritage objects or cases can provide possibility to produce research data that can be used to compare individual heritage objects or cases research results.42 Because heritage objects and sites preservation and deterioration processes are complex, the approach that bases on many individual cases that examines cultural heritage’s deterioration and preservation processes are needed to produce reliable set of research data.43

This research’s design follows the typical conservation science’s approach in research design. Objective is to collect research data that provides possibility to compare and analyze different unique heritage disasters’ and these disaster’s response and heritage recovery processes. Set of heritage disaster provides also possibility to analyze heritage’s deterioration routes during disaster and in post-disaster phase.

This research’s heritage disasters represent both museum safety and museum security categories incidents. The original list of disaster cases included all Finnish incidents that had taken place in association with publicly owned cultural heritage between years 1990 and 2010. In each of these cases cultural heritage was at risk to be destroyed or seriously damaged. The final list of disaster cases represents the cases, where the owners of the disaster site gave their permission to interview their representative about the disasters.

The heritage disasters of this research were: 1. Finnish Surveying Department’s office in Uusimaa, terminal archives water damage in 1994 2. Finnish Surveying Department’s archives, archive buildings fire during construction work in 2004 3. Tyrvää Saint Olavi’s church, arson in 1997 4. Finnish National Library (Library of Helsinki University), storage magazines under building Portania, humidity problems and water damages in 1990’s and 2000’s 5. National Board of Antiques, Vartiokylä castle mountain, vandalism events in 1990’s and 2000’s 6. Finnish Literature Society, library magazine, water damage in 2003 7. Valvilla Wool Mill museum, archives fire in 2003 8. Kiasma Museum of Modern art, VR magazines fire that caused safety preparations in Kiasma in 2006 9. Finnish National Museum, gas explosion in 2006 10. Porvoo cathedral, arson in 2006 11. Kaivoksela church, arson in 2006 12. Turku castle, art vandalism in 2008 13. Lempäälä Saint Birgita’s church, arson attempt in 2008

42 Viñas 2011, 129 43 Viñas 2011, 130 26

14. Saint Jacob church, art vandalism in 2008 15. Suomenniemi church, arson attempt in 2009 16. Hammarland church, arson attempt in 2010 17. Uspenski Orthodox cathedral, art larcenies in 2008 and 2010 18. Jyväskylä Orthodox church, vandalism incident in 2010 19. Kotka Orthodox church, vandalism cases in 1990’s and 2000's.

The trustworthiness of research preparations bases on reliable methods in collecting research data, valid sampling strategy and definition of proper analyses unites.44 In order to increase the scientific reliability of research data, this research’s data bases on four primary information sources. These sources are: 1. disaster sites owner’s theme interviews (18 interviews of 19 disaster cases), 2. subject matter specialists theme interviews (9 interviews), 3. six disaster cases trial judgments and 4. the Finnish crime statistics over criminal damage, attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage cases between years 1990 and 2010.

This research has features of comparative study because the used research data bases on five independent information sources that represent both qualitative and quantitative research data. Research data and the literature sources were compared in the research results drafting to increase information about the disasters. Objective was to detect possible differences and similarities in heritage disaster and heritage’s deterioration. The research data’s information was also compared with previous research findings that related to heritage disasters.

The subject matter specialists theme interviews were used to collect information from following topics and specialists: 1. Firefighter’s professional preparedness to protect cultural heritage in accident situations? Theme interview: Eastern Uusimaa regional fire and rescue services 2. Police’s professional preparedness to protect cultural heritage from criminal damaging and sabotages. Theme interview: Police university college of Finland 3. Authority guidance in protection, rescue, evacuation and aftercare of cultural heritage. Theme interviews: National Board of Antiquities, National Archives, Church Counsel of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland and the Church Museum of the Finnish Orthodox Church 4. Opportunities to prevent crimes and sabotages that may damage or destroy cultural heritage. Theme interview: Turku University’s and Eastern Finland University’s Legal and Criminal Psychology Adjunct Professor Jaana Haapasalo.

The secondary research data base on six disaster cases trial judgements, 21 newspaper articles and Finnish crime statistics over criminal damage, attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage crimes between years 1990 and 2010. Used statistical research data can be found in attachments 7-27. The secondary research data was collected and analyzed in order to increase the available information about the disaster cases and the geographical regions where these disasters occurred. The trial judgements provided background information only for six disaster cases.

44 Elo et al. 2014, 2 27

The public trial judgments covered seven of the researched disaster cases. These cases contained four church arsons, one museum archives fire, one icon larceny case and one riot that took place near by Kiasma little before a massive fire of the VR magazines that caused precautions at the Kiasma museum. Because all of these cases had been on trial at district courts and there had been pronounced sentences in these cases the trial judgements had become public documents that were available for research use. One of these disasters trial proceedings had declared as classified and therefore it was not possible to use this case’s trial documents as research data. This case was the natural gas explosion at the silver display of the Finnish National Museum.

1.1.8 Research data analyses

Qualitative content analysis was chosen to analyze research data. Although this analyses method has often been used its trustworthiness often lacks systematic evaluation. Qualitative content analyses represent one of many analyses methods in qualitative research and it has regarded as systematic and objective means to analyze phenomenon. According to Satu Elo et all (2014) accomplished qualitative content analyses requires that research data can be narrowed down into concepts that are able to characterize the researched phenomenon. Research questions are used to define the focus of the analyses and information production. Qualitative content analyses validity requires that research data analyses are documented so that research results and conclusions can be comprehended by also other researchers. Qualitative content analyses contain three stages; preparation, organization and result reporting.45 These three stages can also be seen in this research’s data analyses.

Qualitative content analyses three stages have been clarified so that, the preparation stage contains research data’s collecting and deciding of data’s analyses unites. Inductive reasoning’s organization stage consists of open coding and categorizing of research data. In reporting stage research results are described trough research data and this data’s categories that describe researched phenomenon trough chosen reasoning approach; inductive or deductive.46 Qualitative content analyses can base on both inductive and deductive reasoning.47 Qualitative content analysis that bases on inductive reasoning requires a research data that has not been structured.48

This research’s data analyses base on inductive analyses, because the research results and conclusions are made on individual disaster cases detailed information. This detailed information is used to make some wider generalizations about the researched topic. Inductive reasoning has both strengths and weaknesses in research validity questions. Inductive argumentation’s strengths base on the analyses method’s aim to use detailed

45 Elo et al. 2014, 1 46 Elo et al. 2014, 1-2 47 Elo et al. 2014, 1 48 Elo et al. 2014, 3 28 information in establishment of conclusions and generalizations from the research data. Research results and conclusion that base on inductive argumentation have often regarded as more probable and valid as those research results and conclusions that base on the deductive argumentation. Use of deductive argumentation in this research was not possible because there were no previous generalizations or theories that could have been used to analyze this research’s data. Use of deductive argumentation would have required an existing theory that could have been used in hypothesis testing and in research results and conclusion’s drafting. 49 Inductive reasoning’s weaknesses relate to its ability to detect in specific information all possible factors that can influence into researched topic. Inductive argumentation’s success in scientific research bases on grade of research result’s and conclusions probability and trustworthiness.50

All five research data groups – two transcribed theme interview groups, trial documents, news paper articles and Finnish crime statistics qualitative content analysis, coding and categorizing was done with Atlas.ti 6.1 software. The research data analyses were done with data-driven approach. This means that themes that were analyzed from the research data based on research objectives and aims. Theory based analyses was done, in order to reduce the possible over dominant researcher’s position in research data analyses and research result drafting. In practice this meant that the research data analysis was guided by the research questions and relevant source literature. The themes of the analyses based on both the research questions and the research data’s content.51 The areas of heritage disasters that were analyzed related to disaster sites and these heritage sites’ risk assessment work before the disaster and these disaster’s response and heritage recovery work from the viewpoint of heritage’s deterioration.

Analyses unites that were coded represented research data themes that provided widely information about the areas that related to the researched 19 heritage disasters. These coded themes were connected with disaster sites, heritage disasters and these disasters’ response and recovery work. In the coding phase, individual codes contexts in the specific heritage disaster was defined in the coding. These contexts were written after the actual thematic code that represented central heritage management areas of the researched topic. This resulted that the number of individual codes was after the coding 2420 and these codes contained also their detailed context information. At the first stage the individual codes were grouped and categorized under more precise code themes with the use of family element.

Coded research data was categorized into code families that based on the individual codes’ thematic differences and similarities. After the categorizing phase the individual codes were placed into 20 different code families that were regarded to represent central factors that could explain why heritage disasters had take place and how heritage either was damaged or preserved in disaster and post-disaster phase. Code families were placed under three larger thematic main categories that were evaluated to represent the central areas that influence into the heritage disasters and heritage’s long-term preservation in disaster and

49 Internet Ensyclopedia of Philosophy 2015: Deductive and Inductive Arguments 50 Internet Ensyclopedia of Philosophy 2015: Deductive and Inductive Arguments 51 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 97 29 post-disaster situations. These main categories represented umbrella categories of the researched topic.52

The research results were drafted from coded and categorized research data trough analyzing the categorized research data from the perspective of the research questions and through comparing the coded research data and trough observations that based on source literature’s information. Objective in Atlas.ti 6.1 software’s use was to make the wide research data more manageable. With Atlas.ti research data tried to systemize into more comparable form. Research data coding and categorizing made it easier to observe similarities and difference from the research data and to compare different research data’s information.

Anglo-American qualitative research tradition approaches rather practically the confrontation between qualitative and quantitative research.53 This confrontation between qualitative and quantitative methodologies perhaps bases on the ontological differences that traditionally have existed between humanities and natural sciences research traditions.54 Because this research through its topic and theoretical framework situates into the research tradition of both humanities through its heritage studies approach and to the area of natural science tradition through its heritage preservation and preventive conservation approaches, it was justified to approach the research topic trough practical needs of the research and trough the scientific traditions that the different research approaches set for this research.55

Finnish Crime statistics between years 1990 and 2010 are analyzed statistically with R Statistics Software. The analyses and analyses tables were ordered from professional statistician Lic.Phil. Aki Niemi (attachments 19-27). Analyses concentrate on the statistics of the regions where this research’s data on criminal damage, attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage cases have occurred. Six of the serious sabotage, attempted serious sabotage and criminal damage regions were also selected six reference regions that would represent nearly the same size and that would locate near by the original disaster case regions. Idea was to analyze the statistical differences between the six disaster regions’ and the six reference regions’ crime statistics (attachments 22-27).

Because of the complexity of the researched heritage disasters, this research does not make any exception with its theory of knowledge to the partial and incomplete nature of scientific knowledge. Like any postmodern research this study also questions the purpose of different scientific confrontations because of their excluding nature. Because contemporary global world resembles more postmodern than modern world scientific methods should also be approached more like useful tools to argument the credibility of the research.

52 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 112-113 53 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 67 54 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 66 55 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 68 30

1.1.9 Semiotic analyses of deliberate heritage’s destruction

Semiotics have been used widely in analyses of cultural phenomenon. Because semiotics provide tools to analyze historical and power related conditions, it is used to analyze cultural heritage that has been deliberately damaged, vandalized or arson.56 Objective of these analyses is to reflect an answer why these heritage sites are being deliberately damaged or destroyed and what kinds of symbolism is connected with heritage sites and actions of deliberate heritage’s destruction.

Discipline of semiotics usefulness was observed, when theoretical approach tried to find for the analyses of cultural heritage site’s and objects’ vandalism and church arsons cases. What could be said about the cases in which vandalism or arson has destroyed or damaged cultural heritage? These cases indicated that there exists a conflict between the party that “holds the ownership of the cultural heritage” and the person or persons who deliberately destroy this heritage. Relevant question was, did these disasters reflect some kind of cultural change in society where this cultural heritage located.57

Heritage site’s and objects deliberate destruction was analyzed as semiotic act. In Cyprus heritage’s deliberate destruction has been connected with the cultural and ethnic conflict that has led to that different ethnic groups destroy the opposition party’s cultural heritage.58 A similar cultural conflict took place between Estonian and Russian population in Estonia during the 2007 Tallinn Bronze Solder controversy. These cases indicate that semiotics and especially existential semiotics can give accurate approach to reveal something about the symbolism and cultural meanings of vandalism and arsons in cultural heritage context. Just as cultural heritage reflects the values and evaluations that are attached to it, vandalism and arson of cultural heritage carries some other kind of symbolic meaning and messages to the surrounding society. Are actions of heritage destructions attempts to start a new discussion in contemporary society trough damaging its valued manifestations of the past?

Heritage can be seen as cultural image that represents and symbolizes the surrounding society’s values and testimonies trough heritage’s interpretations. Semiotics provides means to analyze how cultural meanings, values and statements are transferred to the surrounding society trough cultural heritage and its interpretation. By connecting semiotics in heritage’s analyses, one acknowledges that heritage’s symbolic use influences into people’s values, beliefs and world vision meaningful way.59 Semiotic analyses in this research relate to the symbolic meanings that damaged cultural heritage has for both individual persons and human communities. According to Carl G. Jung (1972) human cultures have both conscious and unconscious side. Although society’s culture contains

56 Tarasti 2000, 8 57 Rose 2001, 17 58 Constantinou & Hatay 2010, 1600 59 McDowell 2008, 39 31 both symbols and signs that have obvious meanings for the society, cultural elements have also wider unconscious aspects that are hard to define and explain. People use symbolic expressions and sign both consciously and unconsciously to define concepts that cannot be defined with other means clearly.60

Because of symbolic side of human culture, semiotics has used to analyze some of this research’s heritage disasters. Why is the symbolic meaning of vandalism or arsons so important? Because cultural heritage symbolically manifest society’s collective memories and cultural values, semiotics has a central role in revealing the meaning making processes that occurs in deliberate destruction of cultural heritage. Semiotics may produce understanding over cultural phenomenon when the correct codes are found and applied for the analyses of cultural phenomenon.61

Deliberate heritage destruction’s cultural meanings activate trough act of understanding. Understanding resembles cognitive phenomenon that takes place in human being. Although understanding occurs at personal level, tradition and environment influences into people’s comprehension of the world.62 Can semiotics provide useful information about the people behind vandalism and arsons? Deliberate heritage’s destruction in peace time democratic societies can be seen as sign of cultural conflicts that occur in association with cultural heritage. Does this cultural conflict relate to the history interpretation that cultural heritage manifests or is heritage chosen randomly as target of destruction?

Heritage’s destruction has been used as strategic means to injure enemy population during times of war. The destruction of cultural heritage that takes place in contemporary peace time societies has not been that much researched. Even if heritage’s destruction does not take place in conflict areas or in war time society, heritage’s destruction injures people’s cultural identities, dignity and feelings of belonging. Because the traumatic memories of destroyed cultural heritage lasts for a long time, the symbolic meanings of cultural heritage and its destruction are analyzed more thoroughly also in this research.63

This research uses semiotic approach because there is very little available information about the persons who have committed this research’s heritage vandalism and arson cases. Many times, the only information that can reflect some kind of answers relates to the heritage itself and the means that have been used to damage or destroy this heritage. Although the people who deliberately damage or destroy cultural heritage did not know what kinds of cultural manifestations their destructive actions aimed at, it is likely that these people suspected what kinds of reactions their actions may cause in the local communities and in the environment. It is possible that, these sights have been selected on the bases of their symbolic nature and they are used as symbolic tools to cause certain response or way of behavior in the “discussion’s” other party.64 But discussion requires certain stage of togetherness between the discussion parties. This togetherness that makes used discussion’s

60 Jung 1972, 20-21 61 Tarasti 2003, 4 62 Tarasti 2003, 5 63 Koski et all 2007, 59,61, 62, 316 64 Tarasti 2003, 15 32 symbols understandable for discussion party bases on certain community where discussion’s parties already belong to. This mutual understanding in discussion requires parties who belong to the same “with-world”65 and who are able to communicate with certain “objective signs”66 and “expression signs”67. What kind of comprehension could this approach provide for the analyses of vandalism and arson that take place in association with cultural heritage?

1.1.10 Reliability and validity of the research

Knowledge bases on justified beliefs that something is true. These beliefs about truth that establishes knowledge are connected with contexts and time in which they have occurred. Because researchers are human, value neutrality cannot be achieved in scientific research, the researcher has central impact on the research process. Researcher’s values interact with the research approach that influences result of the research.68 Researcher’s interaction level with the research data varies in quantitative and qualitative research. Although research cannot gain value neutrality both qualitative and quantitative research’s validity and reliability can be evaluated. Researcher’s self-awareness is central in the research reliability.69

Although idea of reliability and validity base on positivist research tradition, these two criteria are used both in qualitative and quantitative research in the research’s trustworthiness evaluation. Although reliability and validity can be used in evaluation of both qualitative and quantitative content analyses it has often been used in association with qualitative research. Trustworthiness has regarded as central factor especially in qualitative content analyses that base on inductive reasoning, because the research results are drafted from the research data without any ready theoretical analyses matrix. Documentation of the qualitative content analyses process has often regarded as central instrument in promotion of the qualitative research’s trustworthiness.70

Even if qualitative research may produce valid and reliable results that can contain high trustworthiness, it is possible that these research results are not reproducible because of research conditions’ contextual reasons. It is possible that this is the case also in this research’s results case. Different philosophical approaches were used to develop research approach for the analyzes of the research data. The used research methods are central for the validity and reliability of the research.71 Since there is no absolute truth and foundation

65 Edmund Husler’s term “Mitwelt”. Tarasti 2003, 9 66 Edmund Husler’s term “objective signs” refer to that used signs follow certain coded system. Tarasti 2003, 9 67 Edmund Husler’s term ”expression signs” refers to signs that are used in certain situations. Tarasti 2003, 9 68 Macdonald 2002, 11 69 Elo et al. 2014, 4 70 Elo et al. 2014, 2 71 Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2006, 58-59 33 for scientific knowledge some researchers’ try to examine the subjectivity and the objectivity aspects of their research in order to increase the reflexivity of the research.72

Validity and reliability are evaluated differently in quantitative and qualitative research. In the question of qualitative research the reliability of the research can be evaluated trough the systematics of the research. According to Johanna Ruusuvuori, Pirjo Nikander and Matti Hyvärinen (2010) systematics in qualitative research mean that the entire research process including the made decisions are documented and opened up for the readers of the research. This means that the used research data, outlining of the research data and the principles of analyses can be evaluated trough perspective of systematics. Also, the observed limitations of the research data should be reported.73 Validity of qualitative research bases on validity evaluation of the conclusions that have been drafted from the research data with the means of used theoretical frames, research questions and analyses methods. Therefore, it is possible that validity in qualitative research base on high level systematics and argumentation that support the conclusion that proper data has been analyzed with proper means to fulfill the research objectives and questions. The fact, that the used four central research data are primary information sources increases this research’s reliability and validity.

1.2 Evaluation of the research’s relevance

Between years 1989 and 1993 the American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works (AIC) made a survey over conservation sciences role in concrete conservation practice. It was observed that many conservators felt that scientific research on heritage’s preservation had no relevance in their everyday conservation work. 74 There was lack of communication and research topics did not answer to concrete conservation problems.75 Also conservation scientist’s criticized conservators on their poor technological skills and education; and even on conservator’s unwilling attitude to adapt new knowledge.76 Currently these communicational problems between conservation scientist and conservators probably have reduced also because of the educational requirements of the independently working conservator have rose in many counties into masters (MA) level.

Idea of this research is to research and provide solutions to practical heritage’s preservation problems that relates to heritage’s long-term preservation in association with heritage disasters and accidents. In Finland, this research is the first research that analyses heritage disasters and disaster’s response and heritage recovery in preservation and damage prevention viewpoint. Also in international context, there is no prior research that has been

72 Macdonald 2002, 11 73 Ruusuvuori & Nikander & Hyvärinen 2010, 26-27. 74 Viñas 2011, 141 75 Viñas 2011, 142 76 Viñas 2011, 143 34 done in both movable and immovable cultural heritage disasters’ response and recovery work from the viewpoint of preventive conservation. There are international publications on heritage disasters on more defined disaster types such as fires and natural disasters. These publications generally focus on specific heritage types such as historic buildings, interior objects or archival documents in more framed parts of these heritage disaster response and recovery work.

1.3 Contents of the research

Chapter 1 introduces the research topic and the theoretical framework of the research. The research design, collected research data and used analyzing methods are described. Arguments and justification are given for the selected research methods. The means to increase the research results reliability and validity are discussed. The central objectives that have guided the research process will be described and augmented side by side with the research questions. The research design, central theorists and the justification for the theoretical decisions are presented. The central background theories of this research raise from the research traditions of heritage studies, preservation, preventive conservation and risk management.

Chapter 2 clarifies human communities’ and societies’ memory-work through perspectives of cultural transition and cultural heritage. The philosophical and aesthetic backgrounds that lead to the establishment of cultural heritage are described. The philosophical and aesthetic movements’ impact on the value evaluations of cultural heritage are analyzed. The concept of cultural heritage and memory-work are also analyzed through the perspective of this research’s 19 disaster cases cultural heritage. The meaning of cultural values and aesthetic traditions in defining cultural heritage are discussed also trough the 19 disaster cases. The meaning of cultural values and aesthetic ideals in heritage’s cultural evaluation are analyzed. Idea of collective memory and group based memories are analyzed. Position of memory institutions in heritage’s definition process is analyzed. Meaning of human rights, cultural diversity and education in associated with cultural heritage are discussed.

In chapter 3 the historical backgrounds of heritage’s preservation is described. Also, the philosophical movements that have influenced and are currently influencing the preservation policies are discussed. Heritage conservation’s and preservation’s engagement with the concept of cultural heritage and historic monuments are analyzed. Also, the philosophical changes that renewed the concept of cultural heritage and preservation practice are described. The philosophical backgrounds of preservation are analyzed from the perspective of cultural heritage’s value evaluations. Conservation and heritage preservation is analyzed through the perspective of this research’s 19 disaster cases. The preservation and conservation approaches of this research’s 19 disaster cases are described.

35

Chapter 4 analyzes accident based heritage disasters. These disasters have been caused either by natural forces or human activities that have led to accidental heritage disasters. Among the accident based disaster cases there were two water damage, two fire and one explosion based heritage disasters. In the beginning of the chapter common features of water damages, fires and explosion based damages in cultural heritage context are described trough previous publications. Through these publications are described the commonly used disaster response and heritage recovery means of these heritage disaster types. This research’s disaster cases’ disaster response and heritage recovery processes are described in the end of this chapter. This research’s disaster cases are analyzed trough previous publication’s cases in the discussion section of the chapter.

Chapter 5 analyses heritage disasters from the perspective of deliberate destruction and harming of cultural heritage that has been defined in this research as vandalism. There were tree vandalism cases where movable heritage objects had been vandalized and three cases where immovable heritage site had been target of vandalism. At first theoretical backgrounds of criminal damaging and vandalism are described through previous publications. Through these publications are described vandalism cases disaster response and heritage recovery methods. This research’s vandalism cases’ disaster response and heritage recovery processes are described in the end of this chapter. This research’s vandalism based disasters are analyzed trough previous publications in the discussion section of the chapter.

In chapter 6 heritage disasters are analyzed trough perspective of six church arsons and arson attempts. There were tree attempted church arson and three church arson cases among the researched cases. At first theoretical backgrounds of arsons are described through previous publications. Through these publications are described church arson’s common disaster response and heritage recovery methods. This research’s church arson and attempted church arson cases’ disaster response and heritage recovery processes are described in the end of this chapter. This research’s arson based disasters are analyzed trough previous publications in the discussion section of the chapter.

In chapter 7 research results are presented from the perspective of the research questions. Outcome of the qualitative content analyses with Atlas.ti are described and the statistical analyses results are reported in this chapter. The validity and reliability of the research results are discussed in the conclusions and discussion chapter 8. In this chapter also central research findings are concluded. Future research topics are presented in the end of this chapter.

36

2 CULTURAL TRANSITION AND HERITAGE

Idea of monuments and heritage originate from cultic objects and practices that were needed for social groups’ identity and feelings of continuity.77 The monotheistic religions such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam influenced heritage’s and historiography’s concept of cultural heritage from the perspective of cultural traditions, memories and place attachment.78 Italian Renaissance provided a concept of history that established the modern world’s idea of heritage and need to preserve this heritage. This new approach to history valued ancient Rome’s historical remains as important heritage. This recognition of historical remains limited into classical antiquities. During the period of Renaissance Northern European countries such as England and Sweden became also interested in their own national heritages.

The firs antiquarian studies on old documents, objects and pre-historic “rune stones” started in 16th century Sweden. King Gustavus Adolphus promoted the antiquarian studies and state antiquaries were nominated. Gustavus Adolphus supported also inventory journeys in 1630’s Sweden. In 1666 Sweden received as the first nation after Italy its first regulation over antiquities, “Antiquities Ordinance”. This regulation provided protection for antiquities and monuments. This regulation’s antiquities included mainly the memory of historic events, persons, places or significant families, especially kings and other nobleman’s life history. The antiquarian interest in Sweden resulted in the establishment of archeological and academic research on the antiquities. Antiquities Ordinance provided protection in Sweden for both movable and immovable antiquities.79

Heritage can be seen as a process in which people use the past to gain current era’s purposes. Heritage has also been defined as systems between different positions and relations.80 Concept of cultural heritage has been connected with the concept of cultural property since 195481.82 There is a historical debate over cultural heritage’s ownership that has contained both nationalist and internationalist approach to the ownership questions of cultural heritage. Nationalist tendencies regard that heritage that is found inside a nation state’s boarders belong to this nation state and its citizens. Internationalist approach in the context of cultural heritage defines all heritages as universal property of all mankind.83

Heritage’s existence requires a society or group of people that imply this representation of collective past.84 Concept of cultural heritage has been criticized on its colonized way to manufacture domesticated cultural products that expound the past as

77 Gamboni 2001, 5 78 Jokilehto 1999, 9 79 Jokilehto 1999, 44 80 Korsell et all 2006, 23 81 The concept of cultural property was first established in the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. 82 Mezey2007, 2009 83 Klung 2010, 711 84 Harvey 2008, 19 37 purified from human messiness of the history.85 Remembering and memories of the past are both individual and collective phenomenon. Memories have fundamental part in individual people’s and social group’s collective identification process. Identity is major concept in both individual people’s and social group’s notion of themselves as distinctive entity. Concept of identity has been connected with people’s social, cultural, religious, economic and political position.86

The connection between cultural heritage and identity was perhaps in the beginning established to serve nation’s needs to control the interpretation of the past and use of heritage was given to the nation state’s officials.87 Ideology of nationalism has been used in constructing social groups towards the direction of united nation.88 In Finland’s case the definition process of Finnish culture, identity and heritage rose strongly in the early 19th century when Finland’s over 700 years shared history with Sweden ended in 1809 and Finland became Grand Duchy of Russia for 109 years. When Finland was part of Sweden there was no great differences in the history interpretations of these two nations, Swedish power history was part of Finnish history. The need to define “new identity” in Finland possible related to the apparent cultural and religious differences that existed between Russia and Finland.89 Swedish antiquities interpretation of the significant past influenced also to the vision of significant Finnish history and heritage. It is possible that this Swedish history interpretation created the foundations for the Finnish cultural heritage’s canon. Cultural heritage was identified both in movable and immovable memories of history events in Finland, significant people, places or Finnish noble families. The Finnish antiquarian interest in 19th century promoted position of archeological and academic research that concentrated on Finnish pre-history and the inventories of Finnish Middle Aged churches and castles.

National romantic’s established Finland as a nation and cohesive culture. This can be seen as rather semiotic process that aimed at uniform vision of Finland and Finnish culture. In this process, selected elements of geographical Finland’s landscape, culture, languages and traditions were chosen as symbols and signs of uniform nation that did not yet had its independence. In Finland’s case the establishing process of the national culture and identity occurred simultaneously with the establishment of both the central National state offices and National culture and heritage institutions.90 Through this vision the roots of Finnish nation and identity can be seen as a cultural creation where selected cultural features were adopted as common understanding trough the institutions of education and communication. The process of national identification meant also inclusion and exclusion of cultural features.

Culture is something that binds people together and what separates them.91 The concept of culture refers to the existence of social groups.92 According to John Frow (1995)

85 Mezey2007, 2005 86 Kallio 2007, 116 87 Harvey 2008, 19 88 Graham & Ashworth & Tunbridge 2005, 26 89 Pettersson 2011, 261, 264 90 Pettersson 2011, 264 91 Frow 1995, 2 92 Ilmonen 1992, 101 38 social groups have seen in societies through the idea of the other.93 Social group’s reality is constructed and it is maintained by range of cultural practices and representations. The moral and temporal distance is an ascription of the otherness.94 Ideology of nationalism has been used in constructing social groups towards the direction of united nation.95

The idea of culture seems to repress the specific institutions and techniques through which the subjectivity is formed.96 Through this vision social identity can be seen as creation of culture and the institutions of education and communication. The principle of bonding and exclusion in societies may be more about cultural choices than question of classes, regions and ethnicities.97

2.1 Cultural transition and heritage’s interaction with people

Culture has its origins in human groups that transfer their knowledge, notions, values and behavioral patterns from generation to generation. Human civilization’s cultural evolution has proceeded as parallel processes with human spice’s evolution since the early prehistoric ages.98

Because material world gain its cultural meaning in discourses, it is not possible to have knowledge over the surrounding world outside this discourse. Discourse and its cultural statements are needed to construct a language needed in communication. Why cultural heritage often seems to reflect society’s past without cultural differences and conflicts? The idea that cultural meanings exist only in discourses. This does not explain how people situate themselves in cultural discourses. People often locate themselves in cultural discourses in a position from which the discourse makes most sense for them.99

One of the reasons why heritage’s cultural patrimony is very strong relates to heritage’s two uses. Cultural heritage is something that people make and invest creativity belongig to their culture. Heritage is connected with cultural objects that may have both using purposes in everyday life and cultic use in society’s religious ceremonies. Cultural heritage’s patrimony connects heritage objects with certain cultural group and its conventions that produces these objects’ significance.100

How to move on from cohesive past and heritage into diverse one? Idea of present- centered heritage has been dominating approach in heritage studies since the late 1990’s. David Lowenthal (1998) stated that heritage and past is used and explained trough present causes so that past is integrated with present purposes. Heritage’s examination is not directly engaged with the study of the past since heritages’ contents, interpretations and nature base on contemporary society’s demands and expected vision of the society’s future.

93 Frow 1995, 2 94 Frow 1995, 3 95 Graham & Ashworth & Tunbridge, 2005, 26 96 Frow 1995, 10 97 Frow 1995, 11 98 F́ath & Sarvary 2004, 611-612 99 Jeffersson 2004, 34 100 Appiah 2012, 73-74 39

This result that heritage is less about material representatives of the past than it is about the meanings that are connected with these heritages and their interpretations.101

The idea of culture seems to repress the specific institutions and techniques through which the subjectivity is formed.102 Institutional approach to cultural heritage has been strongly influenced by the ideologies of nation states and nationalism. Institutionalized cultural heritage as nation state’s heritage and collective memory represents for many citizens given concept of cultural heritage. Legitimations for the institutionalized heritage definition has its backgrounds in the establishment of nation state’s memory institutions.

Society’s existence depends on cultural transition that takes place between people in communication. The process of cultural transition has seen as equally important for the continuity of society’s life as the biological reproduction.103 Humans grow up to become members of their society under guidance of cultural pattern that guide the direction of people’s lives.104 Education as form of cultural transition aims at ensuring the continuity of society’s life.105

People’s ability to make symbols from objects and cultural practices result that they are used to transmit symbolic expressions in people’s communication.106 Cultural heritage’s capability to create cultural meanings in individual people and human community bases on heritage’s own features. Cultural heritage communicate with people and society trough materiality and it uses people’s values and thinking to create cultural meanings.107 Heritage as a symbol does not contain any direct cultural meanings, but it provides people possibility to make meanings that are constantly changing on the bases of people’s personal histories, cultural contexts and personalities.108 People are dependent on interaction with their culture and heritage and both have impact on people both intentionally and unintentionally. Interpretation of cultural heritage bases on material facts as much as its bases on people’s subjective beliefs and ideologies over their heritage. It can be said that heritage interpretations are created in people’s interaction with their material environment.109

Defined heritage sites and objects are established as heritage in order to become symbolic expressions and signs of certain past that is being transferred to the audience of cultural heritage. The interaction between people and cultural heritage operate both verbally and non-verbally. Heritage’s socio-cultural meaning is constituted trough the forms that it has in its environment.110 Since heritage represents selective use of history to fulfill the needs of the present and future society both memory and memorial ceremonies are often connected with heritage’s establishment process. National memory often

101 Graham & Howard 2008, 2 102 Frow 1995, 10 103 Dewey 1916, 4 104 Jokilehto 1999, 6 105 Dewey 1916, 4 106 Jaffé 1972, 232 107 Richardson 1989, 172 108 McDowell 2008, 39 109 Richardson 1989, 173 110 Richardson 1989, 172 40 represents official memory that raises form, nation state’s and memory institutions’ values and needs.111

Verbally contextualized heritage’s meaning operates as windows to the thinking and beliefs of heritage professionals who have defined cultural heritage. It also reveals heritage’s definition process character and the ideologies that have brought cultural heritage into existence. Because non-verbal meanings have central role in human communities, the presence of non-verbal messages and meanings often specifies individual person’s opinions on heritage interpretations of the past.112 Cultural values in association with cultural heritage can be expressed both non-verbally trough decision what to define as heritage and verbally trough heritage’s documentation and context writing. Verbal definition of heritage is often given for the heritage sites trough written information signs and other written sources about the defined cultural heritage.113 Verbal meanings are often used to define the position, status and values of social phenomenon’s differentiation.114

The relative meaning of cultural heritage is defined in human societies also through non-verbal expressions that may be communicated both intentionally and unintentionally.115 Difference between people’s verbal and non-verbal behavior in association with cultural heritage can perhaps bee seen most clearly through the cases where cultural heritage site or object has been deliberately harmed or destroyed with the means of vandalism or arson.

2.2 Nationalism and cultural heritage

Although the idea of cultural memorial was known in ancient world116, the more organized concept of cultural heritage and collective memory bases on romantic era and nationalism.117 Modern philosophy and Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reasoning118 challenged the beliefs over absolute experience of the past as the history that would base on collective and social experience that recognizes different ages and regions including their own feelings of togetherness. This new philosophical approach over diversity created new approach to write cultural history recognizing cultural pluralism and nations with variating cultures and values.119 During 19th century heritage had become a tool to promote both conservative and progressive movements in societies. Heritage’s aim was to both maintain social hierarchies trough certain heritage interpretations and it was used to promote the social and economic revolution in societies. In the middle of 19th century the popularization of history was strongly connected with the idea of nation.120 The rise of folklore as cultural

111 McDowell 2008, 40 112 Edson 1997, 33 113 Edson 1997, 34 114 Edson 1997, 35 115 Edson 1997, 34 116 Jokilehto 1999, 3 117 Kallioniemi & Lyhykäinen 2008, 107 118 First edition published in 1781. 119 Jokilehto 1999, 17 120 Harvey 2008, 27 41 heritage was used to strengthen national identity, national traditions and languages of the nation states.121

Nationalism is connected with ideologies of nation state and national identity that binds people’s feelings of belonging to a certain sociopolitical group in some geographical area.122 Concept of place attachment in association with cultural heritage is often result of cultural practice and behavior. Place attachment involves people’s affections, emotions, knowledge, believes and behavior in association with a place. Place attachment relates to peoples’ central feelings of belonging and security in connection with a place or places.123 The problems that related to cultural heritage’s use in stabilizing cultural identities in nation states or specific geographical area became apparent after the mid-1990’s during the Balkan wars. Alexandra Ålund (1996) recognized that there was connection between structural violation and personal identities deformation. Visibility and representativeness became notified parameters in the concept of cultural heritage. Elspeth Probyn (1996) and after her Anne-Marie Fortier (2000) observed that by replacing the concept of identity with more define and less intense term of belonging, human longing to feel attachment towards other people, places and social groups could be described.124 What would this mean for Finnish cultural heritage’s interpretation?

Many refugees from conflict areas have immigrated Western democracies and it was soon discovered that there was a need to replace concept of identity with other symbolic expressions of remembering. Concept of identity was critically raised into heritage studies discussion in the mid-1990’s.125

National identity requires cultural solidarity and feelings of togetherness to exist. These feelings are maintained trough collectively shared beliefs. National cohesion is maintained through collective perception and identity that recognizes shared historical experience. In most of the countries there are also rejected interpretations of the past and therefore besides the national or official memory there exists also unofficial memory that differs strongly from the official memory.126

In pre-modern Western societies people’s identities were rather fixed and predetermined because of their place in the social hierarchy and the dominating world order. The process of social and cultural modernization changed these old but stabile identity orders. The process of modernization resulted in that identity became in modern Western countries individual’s project in seeking the true nature of themselves. Process of modernization caused also people’s individualization development. Contemporary or postmodern societies project to form and maintain fixed and uniform core-identities is perhaps failing, because the world in which these projects take place is constantly changing. Since the days of nationalism, people’s identities have become more complex and flexible.127

121 Jokilehto 1999, 17 122 Graham & Ashworth & Tunbridge, 2005, 26 123 Groote & Hartsen 2008, 181 124 Buciek & Juul 2008, 118-119 125 Buciek & Juul 2008, 116 126 McDowell 2008, 41 127 Sevänen 2004, 3 42

Questions regarding human identity started to be theorized by French post- structuralists in 1960’s. This theoretical approach was adopted by American and British literature and art theorists. Anglo-American academic feminism emphasized the approach where human’s identities based on sociocultural constructions. This theoretical tradition resulted that human’s identities were seen unstable and scattered. Human’s themselves were seen as subjects whose identity and self was disintegrated and changing continuously. This approach to identity was criticized by several social and cultural researchers who claimed that identity could not be analyzed without recognition the contexts in which human identities were shaping.128 In 1990’s discussions about modernity and postmodernity were replaced with a new term of globalization. The changeover to globalization was seen through modernity’s and postmodernity’s continuity into a global world society.129

Nationalism and national identity has seen as legitimatizing power behind the state formation process.130 Nationalism’s creation of the past as national heritage has often been developed contemporaneous with the idea of “a nation” that consists of communities defined trough other social relations. Nation state needs its heritage for many purposes. Heritage consolidated the national identification and absorbed the possible competing social and cultural groups’ heritages from the national heritage. Heritage is often governmentally controlled question in nation states.131 Heritage’s definition process result that cultural heritage has a significant role in people’s national identities and it represents for the majority commonly appreciated cultural features of a nation states.132

The cultural change that was seen in technological changes started in the late 1950’s and these changes have had great impact on knowledge. Societies have reached era that has been called post-industrial, which means that cultures have shifted into postmodernity. Post-industrial era has resulted that both nation states and great ideologies have lost their social meanings for individual people. Ideologies that create social cohesion among people and social groups are more flexible and complex network of relations that have made people’s identities more transient.133 When great ideologies have lost their ability to guide people’s lives through higher ideals the meaning of life has become dependent on people’s lifelong personal quests.134

2.3 Cultural heritage and memories

When cultural heritage is mentioned, concept of collective memory is also discussed.135 Memories are to some degree both context and audience-dependent.136 In multicultural and

128 Sevänen 2004, 2 129 Sevänen 2004, 3 130 Graham & Ashworth & Tunbridge, 2005, 26 131 Graham & Ashworth & Tunbridge, 2005, 27 132 Turnpenny 2004 133 Lyotard 1985, 28-29 134 Lyotard 1985, 28 135 Buciek & Juul 2008, 112 136 Kavanagh 2000, 15–16 43 culturally diverse societies collective memories may represent for some people treasured and enjoyed memories, while to others the same memories are troubled and hard memories of social injustice. Some people see no cultural conflicts in the concept of cultural heritage, but others are troubled by their hard memories and feeling of injustice.137 Human memories are constructed socially. Therefore, it is not possible to divide individual memories from a social group’s memories because memories are created and transmitted through different customs of social groups.138 Oral testimony in the concept of collective memory has aimed at social unity. These memories are influenced by individual people’s memories; how people recalled episodes from the past and how they have learned their society’s cultural traditions and meanings that have been connected with these events.139

In the beginning of 2000’s the idea of a past that is fundamentally open, publicly owned and obtainable for many approaches was raised into the history inquiry. Objective was to create more vitiating approach to study the past.140 Modern societies use commonly defined places as memorials of conflicts or tragic events. These places represent significant memories loaded with meanings that typically represent certain peoples’, groups’ or communities’ version of the past.141 Memory institutions role have been highlighted in their ability to create linkages between professional and nonprofessional heritage practices.142

Why individual people in democratic societies must have united and shared memories of the past? Humans after all manifest their selves with the surrounding world through their own ability to conceive their own place in the surrounding world. World remains for its observer open and imagination attractive space. This surrounding world’s ability to deliver contextual meanings for humans may represent for individual people source of joy or sadness.143 Post-colonial semiotics show clearly the problems that relate to concept of cultural heritage in contemporary post-colonial or post-modern states. Nationalism and patriotism are regarded as positive forces in colonial state, but in the post-colonial state they represent negative forces that by defining some cultural features as national also transfer these national features into external reality that does not represent authentic cultural phenomenon.144 The process that selects cultural heritage as representatives of the past and even defines meanings of this heritage results that potentially some people and social groups are excluded and disinherited from their own past.145

The process of displacement and social exclusion is rather often present in human society’s history writing and collective memory. Whether or not people do have or do not have their representatives in the official collective memory discourse, they are one way or another present in this discourse. If some people or social groups are excluded from the past’s interpretation, does this mean that these people do not have any past or memories in

137 Kavanagh 2000, 85 138 Buciek & Juul 2008, 112 139 Kavanagh 2000, 41–42 140 Kean 2008, 60 141 McDowell 2008, 38 142 Kean 2008, 59 143 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 51 144 Tarasti 2000, 147 145 Buciek & Juul 2008, 113 44 the communities they live in?146 Purposes why the official discourses of the past may exclude people or groups of people from the concept of cultural heritage, may relate to hard histories or power political questions of the nation state.

2.4 Aesthetics of cultural heritage

Aesthetic distinction influences into the definition of cultural heritage. Aesthetic distinction that characterizes features of material world as aesthetic, bases on attitude used in the analyzes of the material world. The objects, environment and nature that are identified as aesthetic do not themselves have the ability to have any material elements that would become aesthetic unless they are recognized and defined as such.147 If aesthetic attitude or state of mind result what experience becomes aesthetic, it is unclear how aesthetic attitude is adapted.148

Creative powers have claimed to have central part in aesthetic experience.149 When aesthetic attitude is maintained one has ability to experience aesthetic.150 Aesthetic experience is produced by material world’s characteristics that are identified as aesthetic. Are there persons or group of people who have the ability to decide what is aesthetic and what should be experienced as aesthetic in the surrounding world? Do all humans have aesthetic attitude in them as their congenital character?

George Dickie stated that there could exist unity in the object of the aesthetic experience (artwork) but aesthetic experiences cannot be unified, because experiences base on effects that objects cause in individual people.151 Pauline von Bonsdorff’s (1998b) environmental aesthetics approaches aesthetic experiences through person’s subjectivity and cognitive featured experimental experience connected with places. The character of experiences according to von Bonsdorff are influenced by the subject’s personal history and knowledge over experienced environments or objects.152 Pauline von Bonsdorff underlines human feelings and affections role behind aesthetic experiences.153

Human experiences depend on both awareness and the object of this awareness.154 People who feel place attachment in associated with some specific cultural environment, identify themselves to this cultural environment and feel that it belongs to them alone or to them as part of larger social group or community. In place attached environmental experiences the environment is not experienced through its own characteristics but through certain socio-cultural framework. The experience is influenced by what people are experiencing in the environment and what they are as individuals and social groups in

146 Buciek & Juul 2008, 105 147 Mitias 1988, 4 148 Mitias 1988,5 149 Mitias 1988, 8 150 Mitias 1988,13 151 Mitias 1988,6-7 152 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 28 153 von Bonsdorff 1998a, 63 154 Mitias 1988, 25 45 association with this environment. Significant is how they are used to or toughed to handle and care for this environment.155 Aesthetic experience is always individual person’s experience that occurs in certain time and place in association with material world.156

Problems of aesthetic evaluation in cultural contexts relates to the system of aesthetic production. Aesthetic aspects of value influences into social organizations of societies. Question of value is involved with social power struggle and it possesses political tendencies into cultural questions.157 One of the problems in culture’s aesthetic evaluation has to do with the aesthetic distinction’s class and culture relation linkages. Culture is both negotiation of class position and an expression of this position. It is not clear how far the model of a class-based hierarchy of legitimacies can be generalized in contemporary Western societies.158

Aestheticizing sets concept of value into culture. Value has seen as intrinsic property of cultural elements. If value is rational and practical outcome of the process of negotiation and contestation, the primary function of aesthetic culture is based on status definition of societies.159 The ideas behind cultural interests and tastes have been shaped in class society. Descriptive relativism empties out to the processes of negotiation and discrimination that are fundamental behind cultural practice. It replaces these practices with pluralist formalism that approaches all domains equally. Reaction against the high culture’s privileging role has led to interventions where defined popular culture forms have been privileged, while other cultural forms remain un-privileged.160

Every generation re-evaluates and reinterprets their society’s culture.161 Heritage definition can be analyzed as aesthetic distinguishing process where certain attitude and state of mind results what elements from the society’s culture and past are risen into existence as cultural heritage. According to Kirsti Melanko and Pekka Elo (2000), cultural heritage that has traditionally been appreciated in Finland has had the values of beauty and goodness or features that relate to tendencies towards beautiful and good.162 But who and on what bases has defined what is beautiful and good heritage and history in Finland? Authentic past can hardly be only beautiful and good, especially in a nation that has experienced at least two civil wars163 and multiple wars164 on its landscape during centuries since the prehistoric ear.

What purpose intentionally chosen beautiful and good past and collective memory serve for a nation of hard history? Perhaps heritage interpretations of this kind partly serve official needs to forget the brutality of the past. But this past does not fulfill the needs of reconciliation of a nation’s hard history. Cultural heritage approaches that seems to favor

155 von Bonsdorff 1998, 48 156 Mitias 1988, 28 157 Frow 1995, 4 158 Frow 1995, 5 159 Frow 1995, 5 160 Frow 1995, 6-7 161 Blacking 1990,82-83 162 Melanko & Elo 2000, 17 163 Gudgel War (1596-1597) and Finnish Civil War (1918) 164 During multiple centuries with Novgorod, Russia and the Soviet Union. 46 past’s beautiful and good features must base on some kind of aesthetic interpretation that relates to aesthetics of beauty. If heritage only includes site’s and object’s that are good and beautiful does this heritage really serve people’s need to know authentic past?

The context information plays a significant part in heritage’s cultural meanings.165 But if the past documented trough cultural heritage reflects only idealized vision of happy past, how does this history interpretation influence into people who do not connect so positive memories to the history that heritage interpretants. The ability to respect cultural heritage often requires ability to see, identify and agree with the hidden values and meanings of cultural heritage. When cultural heritage is evaluated through an aesthetic perspective, it is defined, interpreted, and valued trough class based hierarchy.166 Therefore, concept of aesthetic experience and evaluations in heritage definition binds cultural heritage in association with the tradition of aesthetics.

2.4.1 Cultural appreciations

Philosophical and aesthetic studies in the field of cultural appreciations and evaluations are part of the fundaments of humanities research.167 Cultural values and appreciations have traditionally been studied in the disciplines of art history, philosophy, aesthetics and sociology; and these disciplines’ studies have often missed the psychological approach that would situate cultural appreciations in connection with individual person’s behavior.168

Authenticity and integrity represent currently central value characteristics of valuable cultural heritage. Authenticity and inauthenticity started to interest as semiotic question in late 1980’s. Umberto Eco established his theory on forgeries and concept of inauthenticity in 1987.169 Eco’s model had many similarities with the contemporary heritage theorist’s authenticity evaluation. Also 19th century philosopher John Ruskin’s approaches thematically authenticity trough the idea of truth. Truth in Ruskin’s philosophy differ from imitation. Truth as moral and material character in object was linked with both material qualities of an object and the feelings, impressions and thoughts that these objects rose in the observer.170

People experience culture many ways but in common for these experiences is that people often appreciate these aesthetic experiences that they have with culture.171 According to Jonathan Ashley-Smith (1999) cultural heritage’s value assessment contains multiple unstable arguments and illogical argumentation that has been used to justify difficult

165 Lehtonen 2000, 165 166 Melanko & Elo 2000, 18 167 Roald 2008, 192 168 Roald 2008, 191 169 Tarasti 2000, 114 170 Tarasti 2000, 122 171 Roald 2008, 207 47 decisions regarding cultural heritage. Ashley-Smith defines heritage’s value as social construct that is conditional with society’s existing social relations. Because there are no value evaluations that would not be connected with individual people, evaluations cannot achieve value neutrality. Values modify and change trough time and in peoples and cultures interaction. Although future values cannot be estimated at forehand, values should not be rejected as one of the factors that provide needed information for decision making over cultural heritage.172

Michael Thomson’s Rubbish theory described a cultural object’s life circle from the perspective of value changes. Although the theory analyses cultural objects values in general level many similarities exist currently also in cultural heritages’ value statements. At the first transient stage when the object is new and available for every people the value of the object is determinates by the people’s practical needs. In the rubbish stage that follows the transient period an object has lost its “fashion” and is regarded as objectionable. During this stage, many cultural objects are destroyed. After the long rubbish stage, cultural object’s value is recognized again and its value rises radically, during this durable stage many cultural objects are regarded as cultural heritage or valuable antiquities.173 Rubbish theory suggests that changes in cultural objects value from transient to rubbish and from rubbish to durable represents irreversible change in objects value definition and the value definition processes bases on society’s class control. Based on the unreliable nature of cultural heritage’s value evaluation some researchers have suggested that earlier unvalued cultural objects should be regarded as valuable cultural heritage.174

In semiotic perspective, cultural heritage’s value assessments’ life circle seams to follow Eero Tarasti’s (1999) existential subject’s journey via acts of negation and affirmation. In cultural heritage’s case Tarasti’s model suggests that at the first stage when cultural heritage is being established, it becomes existential and its first existence (Dasein175) is created, later on at some time heritage object’s value is being re-evaluated. At this point heritage object’s nothingness from the perspective of contemporary society’s needs is observed and the first stage existence of heritage object loses at least part of its grounds. This shift represents the first transcendence and the act of negation. When a heritage object receives its new value from a different perspective many of the first stage “original” vales are abandoned and these values have lost their meaning. At this point heritage object maintains part of its “original” significance. Those meanings that are preserved in the second existence of cultural heritage object are being modified with a new enriched content. As the time goes and cultural heritage is being preserved the second act of transcendence, affirmation, takes place and heritage object gain its meaningfulness once again. This third phase of existence represents new kind of significance that is independent from the heritage object’s first existence.176

172 Ashley-Smith 1999, 81 173 Ashley-Smith 1999, 87 174 Ashley-Smith 1999, 88 175 Dasein is philosophical concept and German word referring to “exsistence”. Dasein in cultural heritage’s case refers to meaning of cultural heritage’s exsistence. 176 Tarasti 2000, 11 48

In heritage’s value evaluation discussion, the long-lasting values of cultural heritage have regarded as more significant than the preliminary or short-term values that are often influenced by contemporary societies modes and values.177 Jonathan Ashley-Smith introduces five categories that have been used in analyses of cultural heritage. These categories are economic, informational, cultural, emotional and existence values.178 Cultural heritage’s value has been evaluated trough certain factors that have indicated the presence of significant cultural and historical values. The factors that have been used in cultural heritage’s value evaluation can be divided into three thematic value groups. First group of values, is connected with heritage’s material technical character and physical state. These values are for example manufacturing materials, complexity, quality and condition or physical state. The second group of values relate to both heritage’s information value and its cultural and historical contexts. Factors that contain informative, cultural and historical values are for example age, history, information and contexts of cultural heritage. The third value group refers to heritage objects features in relation to other cultural objects. These relational value factors are rarity and potential of heritage object.179

In cultural heritage’s value evaluation material culture have had dominating part. This has sometimes resulted that public participation into the value definition has not been present. This has sometimes lead to that heritage has been decontextualized from the local community because the heritage in question interprets the past disregarding the local community’s values and experiences of the past.180 This reduces local communities engagement with their own neighborhood’s cultural heritage.

Postmodernity increased the importance of critical theory in analyses of human societies and cultures. This philosophical change in Western democracies led to re- evaluation of entire value system. Postmodernity declared “the end of values” as well as it declared “the end of history” postmodern set a great challenge for the concept of cultural heritage.181 If both values and the history interpretations that heritage mediates are challenged by postmodern era’s critical analyses the future of cultural heritage can lay in the re-evaluation of both heritage’s history and the value systems that heritage mediates in societies.

2.4.2 Cultural experiences

Experiences base on human relation’s with the surrounding world.182 Individual experiences are required in establishing and changing personal visions of the world and people’s behavior.183 Although tradition of aesthetics has often moved aesthetic experiences

177 Ashley-Smith 1999, 87 178 Ashley-Smith 1999, 84 179 Ashley-Smith 1999, 85 180 Turnpenny 2004, 303 181 Ashley-Smith 1999, 84 182 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 72 183 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 72 49 from the everyday life into the area of extreme life experiences contemporary aesthetics have broaden understanding over aesthetic towards everyday life.184 Pauline von Bonsdorff’s (1998b) environmental aesthetics approaches all environments trough perspective where all human experiences are understood environmentally. Human experiences are connected with wider context of “gaining experiences” and “being experienced”.185 Experiences depend on surrounding world’s ability to provide reflections to the subject. The character of these reflections result what kind of experiences subject have in association with the reflections of the world and its contexts.186

Values do not exist as individual concepts without their social backgrounds. Value of a certain heritage object cannot be directly used in evaluation of another heritage object. Feelings that heritage objects cause in people have an impact on their behavior. Value assessments are used to define both cultural heritage and the actions that are connected with this heritage. Money has sometimes been used as reference standard in evaluating different heritage objects value, although the economic value can either rise positive or negative feelings in people who are connected with heritage’s definition.187

Knowledge has significant part in cultural evaluation. In the cases of artistic evaluation art theory that defines the criteria through which art is evaluated also manage to create demanded characteristics for arts production.188 Pauline von Bonsdorff (1998b) suggests that knowledge’s influence on human experiences bases on human’s natural born ability to contextualize and create meanings over their observations. The aspect of manipulation in association with cultural experiences has sometimes seen as vitally important aspect of socially coherent vision of the surrounding world’s contexts and meanings.189

Values bind to the cultural contexts change with time and place.190 John Dewey saw values mainly as set of appreciations and ways of operating. Appreciations base on previous experience and education.191 Values and appreciation influence into how cultural heritage is interpreted.192 Cultural meanings and social interaction influence each other strongly also in aesthetic experience. An individual’s inner personality is built on meanings which are organized by communities.193 Although the surrounding social groups and their values have an important role in the development and organization of an individual person’s values, differences in personality cause also diversity in values.194 Valuable places and items gain their meaning when the viewer is familiar with these places and items context information.195

184 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 72 185 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 18 186 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 18 187 Ashley-Smith 1999, 82 188 Reber2008, 367 189 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 26 190 Lehtonen 2000, 32 191 Väkevä 2004, 214 192 Melanko & Elo 2000, 17 193 Lehtonen 2000, 54 194 Ilmonen 1992, 5 195 von Bonsdorff 1998a, 223 50

According to Pauline von Bonsdorff (1996a) object activates observer’s aesthetic judgment through previous memories and thinking. Therefore, aesthetic experience can be seen in interaction between the subject and object.196 The object activates the subject’s experiential competence in the aesthetic experience. Experimental competence builds on both subject’s personal history and society’s values. Through experimental competence, the subject becomes part of both perceived phenomenon and the aesthetic experience.197

Aesthetic evaluations relate to existing values. Four factors have seen behind the aesthetic experience. At first, there is a close relationship between the subject and the object. Secondly the aesthetic experience is bind to certain norms that cause pleasure in the subject. Thirdly aesthetic experience is learned in a wide space where the object cause reactions that may also represent reversed norms. Fourthly the mature aesthetic experience is evaluated through features that base on the object’s visible and intentional features. Aesthetic understanding is constructed in the cognitive-effective experience where a mature understanding over an object is based on normative facts and context information.198

It is possible that most of the heritage sites and objects that are exhibited for the public require intellectually oriented experiencing. Intellectual approach is needed because mature and culturally aware appreciation and experience over cultural heritage require knowledge over heritages’ cultural contexts and historical relations. Heritage, like any other form of human culture has also ability to provide people emotional and perhaps also bodily experiences and therefore people’s personal differences influence into people’s way to experience cultural heritage. This can be seen especially in this research’s vandalism cases.

2.5 Definition of cultural heritage

Cultures and heritage gain their social meaning in known discourses. Cultural discourse bases on manifestations that are used in association with specific topics.199 Concept of cultural heritage contains historical, aesthetic and social value assessments. These values of cultural heritage result why individual people and society wishes to preserve this heritage for the future generations. Values influence on both heritage’s definition and its interpretation that is given to this heritage.200 Cultural heritage’s value assessment is not unchanging cultural construction. New features of cultural heritage are being underlined based on the contemporary society’s needs. Since the late 20th century the modern technologies in heritage interpretation’s production has promoted cultural heritage’s democratic and public features.201

Concept of cultural heritage contains dualistic character; nationalist and internationalist. These two approaches in cultural property’s ownership ideology have not

196 von Bonsdorff 1996a, 10 & von Bonsdorff 1996b, 131 197 von Bonsdorff 1998a, 226-227 198 Ross 1982, 9, 21 199 Jefferson 2004, 34 200 Avrami 2000, 19 201 Harvey 2008, 30 51 been able to reach any clear consensus on heritage’s ownership questions.202 These both heritage approaches, nationalist and internationalist, are present for example in the cultural heritage conventions of UNESCO. The nationalist approach of cultural heritage was internationalized through the 1970 Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, the 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and National Heritage and the 1995 International Institute for the Unification of Private Law Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects (UNIDROIT) that were adopted by UNESCO. The tension between nationalist and internationalist heritage approach have tried to resolve with the UNESCO 1976 Recommendation Concerning the International Exchange of Cultural Property.203

The nationalist tendencies of cultural heritage represent ideology that connected cultural heritage’s ownership as property with certain nation state based on that this heritage has been discovered inside certain nation state’s boarders.204 Idea of cultural nationalism bases on synthesis between cultural heritage and cultural definition. This ideology regarded that in order to have emotionally rich life and secure identity; people need to face their own history.205 The nationalist ideology of cultural heritage also regarded cultural heritage as nation state’s collective memory and self-image.206

The internationalist approach in cultural heritage underlines the universal nature of human civilizations’ heritage. Internationalist viewpoint contains idea that heritage’s higher property claim belongs to all humans equally.207 It is a matter of all mankind because all heritages can be seen part of the world's cultural heritage.208 The internationalist approach justifies the global ownership of cultural heritage trough human civilization’s shared history which results that all people are interested in preserving this heritage and also enjoy this heritages existence. Idea of cultural internationalism bases on the 17th century and French archeologist and architectural theorists Antoine-Chrysostome Quatremère de Quincy’s209 philosophy. The internationalist approach in heritage discourse resulted in that universal museums, that collected human communities’ cultural property worldwide, were established in different countries.210

Currently heritage conventions and laws create frameworks through which cultural elements are evaluated in nation states. Cultural heritage professionals and memory institutions use these criteria in determining valued elements from the past.211 The first cultural heritage convention which preparations started after the Second World War was the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed

202 Klug 2010,711 203 Klug 2010, 718 204 Klug 2010, 711 205 Klung 2010, 717 206 Welburn et all 2009, 2-3 207 Klug 2010,711 208 UNESCO 1954, The Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, 1 209Antoine-Chrysostome Quatremère de Quincy, who between years 1755 and 1849, was actively involved in the events of French Revolution that started in 1789. 210 Klug 2010, 715-716 211 Turnpenny 2004, 298 52

Conflict. It was Netherland that presented in UNESCO’s General Conference in 1949 the first draft paper concerning the protection of cultural property in the case of armed conflict.212

Conventions adopted by different Institutional bodies such as UNESCO reflect both cosmopolitan and nationalist features of cultural property. When conventions such as the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property and the 1972 World Heritage Convention reflect the cosmopolitan needs that heritage fulfill for all human civilization, the 1970 Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property represent more nationalist approach to safeguard cultural heritage. Cultural heritage’s importance for nation states was underlined in this convention because of its ability to mediate individual state’s “national spirit”.213

There are two main criteria that influence strongly on cultural heritage’s evaluation process: authenticity and integrity of cultural heritage.214 These criteria were first defined as fundamental values of cultural heritage in UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention (WHC) that started the List of World Heritage Sites.215 Concept of integrity has its bases in 1977 operational guidelines of WHC. Integrity measures the wholeness and intactness of natural or cultural heritage sites.216 It has been defined as heritage’s continuing significance over time.217 The concept of authenticity is influenced by cultural identity that consists of societies’ cultures and communities.218 Authenticity in cultural heritage’s case is defined as being genuinely what it is claimed to be.219 Parameters through which the authenticity of heritage is evaluated are defined in the "test of authenticity”. This test is used to justify nominations to the World Heritage List.220

The test of authenticity defines the World Heritage Convention’s genuine cultural heritage. First criterion of authenticity is that the work of human creativity is genuine and it stands on its own merits. Second criterion is that the authentic work refers to testimony or is a representative sample of defined cultural tradition. Third criterion of authenticity refers to the interchange of values or ideas and that the interchange of values has originally taken place in the heritage site in question.221 Authenticity originates from a specific cultural context which existence is confirmed in the evaluation process. The diversity of cultures and heritage has seen as irreplaceable sources of cultural richness that should be protected. Diversity of cultural heritage has defined to exist in modern societies.222

Herb Stovel (2007) analyses use of authenticity and integrity in cultural heritage’s nomination as World Heritage. Stovel sees the integrity and authenticity of cultural heritage

212 Vinson 2009, 91 213 Mezey 2007, 2010-2011 214 Welburn et all 2009, 2-3 215 Welburn et all 2009, 2-3 216 UNESCO 2012, Background Document on the Notion of Integrity, 23 217 Stovel 2007, 23 218 Welburn et all 2009, 2-3 219 Hargrove 2003, 2 220 Jokilehto & King 2000, 1 221 Jokilehto & King 2000, 1 222 ICCROM 1998, Nara Document on Authenticity – Report of the Experts Meeting, 1-3 53 as qualifying parameter’s in heritage definition. Both integrity and authenticity are needed to ensure that heritage sites and objects can be analyzed properly. These two parameters provide also needed information for cultural heritage’s management and conservation. If heritage’s definition bases on falsified or adjusted version of heritage’s authenticity and integrity, Stovel suggests that the heritage’s definition should be deconstructed and reconstructed so that this heritage’s authentic and integrite character could be observed.223

Even though international conventions and legal instruments create the frame through which cultural heritage is defined and evaluated, heritage in every country represents the nation’s vision of its significant history and culture. Means of heritage definition result that it has a significant role in defining national identity and culture.224 Cultural heritage has been used to preserve cultural values. People’s ability to understand values depend on the amount and the quality of information produced in the heritage’s definition process.225 Concept of authenticity has sometimes indicated shifting tastes that change through generations and times.226 The credibility of the values can be evaluated trough nation’s history. 227

The concept of authenticity can also give rise to phenomena that influence negatively on heritage’s definition. Cultural identities are sometimes presented through aggressive nationalism, which strives to eliminate minority cultures in societies.228 When authenticity is at risk, the credibility of cultural heritage is lost.229 Authenticity in cultural heritage’s preservation promotes the diverse nature of society’s collective memory and history.230

Vision of cultural heritage started to broaden after the World Heritage Convention (1972) when concept of heritage started to include both human and natural environment as well as architectural and archaeological sites. Concept of cultural heritage recognize both in rural landscapes and in urban or industrial environments.231 New approach in heritage studies have defined cultural heritage as a representation of contemporary society values.

UNESCO’s Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity in 2001 recognized the multiform nature of culture. This declaration states that versatile nature of culture can be reached through unique and plural groups’ identities. Cultural diversity was seen as important to humankind as biodiversity because it was the source of cultural exchange, innovation and creativity.232

Cultural heritage is used in societies to construct and reconstruct identities and multiple cultural and social values.233 Preservation of cultural heritage has used in nation

223 Stovel 2007, 35 224 Turnpenny 2004, 298 225 ICCROM 1998, Nara Document on Authenticity – Report of the Experts Meeting, 1-3 226 Welburn et all 2009, 2-3. 227 ICCROM 1998, Nara Document on Authenticity – Report of the Experts Meeting, 1-3 228 ICCROM 1998, Nara Document on Authenticity – Report of the Experts Meeting, 1-3 229 Welburn et all 2009, 2-3 230 ICCROM 1998, Nara Document on Authenticity – Report of the Experts Meeting, 1-3 231 Jokilehto 2005, 5 232 Jokilehto 2005, 5 233 Smith 2006, 3 54 state to maintain and strengthen national identity and self-understanding over the past.234 The cultural values that are possessed in cultural heritage are actively transmitted in societies from generation to generation in the process of cultural transmission.235 Cultural heritage just like any other form of culture is tightly bind with its context. Heritage interprets its establishment time’s political, social and cultural values that have used in the past’s elements to support contemporary society’s practical and political needs.

2.6 Contested cultural heritage

Pauline von Bonsdorff (1998b) suggests that in cultural environment otherness is always present. Even if people or groups of people may share some world views, people remain to be strangers one way or another in their cultural environments. Cultural and environmental changes and time provides also bases for feelings of otherness. Regardless of peoples’ feelings and wish to preserve environments are changing as time passes by.236

Although one might think that feelings of belongingness exists among social or cultural groups, at the individual level it does not necessarily exist. Sometimes public spaces such as heritage sites do not have social nature. Spaces and environments may also provide feelings that underline feelings of otherness and alienate.237 Best example of this is that through the history of human communities’ significant sites and memorials have been destroyed or damaged by individual people’s willful damaging.238 There are numerous examples of heritage’s destruction such as the University Library of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1992 during the Bosnian wars.239 More recant heritage sites and heritage object’s destruction have become worldwide known through media and internet. One of these incidents has been the looting of the National Museum of Baghdad, Iraq, in 2003.240

Sometimes heritage’s destruction has been planned, targeted and even announced and documented.241 This type of heritage’s destruction represented for example Nazis program (1927-1939) to stop the "corruption of art" connected with modern art and literature that was regarded as "Jewish," "Degenerate," and "Bolshevik".242 Although German National Socialist party’s heritage destruction concentrated on modern art and literature that perhaps had not gained established position as cultural heritage, this program has many similarities with other politized cultural heritage’s destruction actions.

Cultural heritage sites ideologically motivated destruction has been connected after the Second World War with for example Bosnian wars and with the Radical Islamist movement. In 2000’s and 2010’s ideologically rooted heritage sites destruction has been

234 Cloonan 2007a, 747 235 Dewey 1929, 236 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 45 237 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 143 238 Jokilehto 1999, 2 239 Cloonan 2007a, 746 240 Munch Rasmussen 2014, 14 241 Kavanagh 2000, 15–16 242 Teachers guide to the holocaust 25.3.217: webarticle 55 connected with Islamist terrorist groups actions that aim at purifying Islamic countries interpretations of past from culturally diverse elements regarded as “pagan” or “idolatrous” interpretations of the history. It was first the Taliban’s who executed and documented in 2001 the destruction of ancient Buddha statues in Afghanistan. These ancient remains represented UNESCO World Heritage.243 Like in the case of Nazi governed era of Germany in Afghanistan’s case it was the Taliban government of Afghanistan that ordered the ancient Buddha statues targeted destruction.244

Later during 2000’s and 2010’s it has been the Islamic State (ISIS) that has declared, executed and documented heritage sites destruction.245 Ideological archeological site and monument destruction has been integral part of ISIS ideology. This has resulted that heritage sites destruction has become part of terror which objective has been to search for cultural objects regarded as pagan or idolized and purify the world from these objects by destroying them.246

It is not only targeted heritage objects and sites destruction that can be understood as heritage interpretations’ contestation. Heritage objects and sites looting has represented also injuring part of armed conflicts where cultural heritage has been used to concur the opposition party’s past trough cultural heritage. One example of strategic museum collection’s looting was Kuwait National Museum’s two collections’ looting and transportation to Iraq during Iraq’s six months occupation over Kuwait in 1990 and 1991. This collection’s looting case did not represent randomly decided military actions. It was the employees of Iraq’s Department of Antiquities who were sent to Kuwait National Museum after the invasion to select and pack heritage objects that would be transported to Iraq. In this transportation process, approximately 60-70 % of the collections were moved to Iraq247. After the liberation of Kuwait in 1991 part of the conflict resolution process was to return the looted heritage objects to the Kuwait National Museum.248

One of the reasons why cultural heritage becomes target of destruction or looting may relate to the symbolic values that cultural heritage represents.249 Heritage is manifestation of power. According to Michel Foucault (1982) use of power means actions that are taken on somebody and that somehow aim at modifying this other person. Power’s existence requires that this power is being implemented or used on some person.250 Sometimes heritage’s contestation has been explained trough the power relation questions that relate to the history interpretations that heritage mediates.

Human impulse to preserve heritage seems to be equally strong than desire to destroy.251 These impulses do not necessary analyze heritage trough idea of equality. It is possible that some people, even heritage professionals, who wish to preserve their own

243 Chechi 2015, 84 244 Chechi 2015, 84 245 Chechi 2015, 84 246 Chechi 2015, 84 247 Norman 2000, 138 248 Norman 2000, 135 249 Kavanagh 2000, 15–16 250 Foucault 1982, 788 251 Cloonan 2007a, 746 56 heritage, are eager to destroy some other person’s or cultural group’s heritages. It has been observed that heritage’s destruction may take place when societies rebuild the interpretation of their national past.252

But heritage’s destruction has not only been part of human’s primitive and barbaric behavior that takes place during the times of war. Early days attempts to preserve and safeguard cultural heritage have sometimes later been evaluated trough today’s preservation ideologies heritage’s destruction. One of these later on criticized examples has been English Lord Elgin’s attempt to safeguard Ancient Greek Phidian sculptures of Parthenon during the time when Greece was part of the Islamic Ottoman Empire. Lord Elgin and his workers removed in early 19th century about half of the Parthenon’s sculptures from their original place and transported the sculptures from Greece to England in order to place them into the collections of the British Museum.253

Cultural heritage’s destruction has also been part of nation states’ internal conflicts. For example, the French Revolution did not only result strong development of heritage and conservation practices, it also started a time period of artworks and historic buildings plunder and destruction in France. Although the revolution aimed at social equality many Catholic churches’ and feudal noble families’ heritage objects and sites were destroyed as side effect of this social change. This destruction was even partly supported by the renewed legislation of France. The National Assembly of France declared in 1792 that the dignified principles of liberty and equality required that the monuments that represented “the old tyranny powers” could not maintain in the sight of the people. This meant that monuments and works of art that symbolized the old feudalistic society or the king of France were destroyed. During this time part of France’s significant historic sites and artworks were destroyed, reused or sold. For example, in Paris several mediaeval churches and convents were devastated or changed to serve other uses. The France Revolution resulted in that property of the Catholic Church, feudal noble families and the king became nationalized. After this the responsibility to maintain and protect the national heritage was given to the state.254

The cultural conflicts that have taken place in Cyprus bases on the islands history that has had times of Hellenic and Christian time period of Byzantine Empire and also Islamic time period that connects the islands history into the history of the Ottoman Empire. More recent history of Cyprus bases on the conflicts between Turkey and Greece. Currently in Cyprus the dominating population of the island is the Orthodox Christian Greek population and the minority Islamic Turkish population has resettled mainly the Northern Cyprus.255

Destruction of cultural heritage may be experienced by the communities and individual people differently.256 But cultural conflicts that have taken place in association with cultural heritage for example in Cyprus indicate that even majority population as well as any group of people consists of individual persons who can be very critical about their

252 Cloonan 2007a,747 253 Cloonan 2007a, 746 254 Jokilehto 1999, 69-70 255 Constantinou & Hatay 2010, 1603 256 Constantinou & Hatay 2010, 1613 57

“own” cultural heritage. According to Costas Constantinou and Mete Hatay (2010) the cultural conflicts that have taken place in Cyprus in association with cultural heritage show how even the majority population may experience their own heritage as negative cultural load that they have inherited from the past and this heritage prevents progression of people’s cultural identities. Both cultural heritage’s destruction and damaged heritage’s reconstruction have been connected with cultural conflicts that bases on conflicts between different ethnicities of the nation state. In Cyprus, the cases of heritage site’s deliberate destruction and deteriorated heritage’s reconstruction have taken place on the sites of dominant heritage discourse. In Cyprus, the deliberate destruction that have taken place in association with majority cultures heritage has been explained often with discourse where majority population represents the people who protect cultural heritage and the other groups of people represent those who destroy this heritage.257

Idea of cultural property has been criticized because it colonializes cultures and past as “collectively shared past” with given interpretation of the past. This process results that special values and legal protection are place in certain interpretation of the past that has not been defined and created in open interaction with the local communities’ majority and minority poppulation.258 Naomi Mezey (2007) introduced term “popular logic of cultural property” as human communities’ social attitude that cultural heritage law generates in societies. Cultural heritage law has often resulted in that people commonly understand cultural heritage as certain group’s cultural inheritance which gives to this group the intellectual ownership of this cultural heritage.259

According to Costas Constantinou and Mete Hatay (2010) cultural heritage’s ethnizing features provide possibilities for some ethnic group to establish dominating role in society’s cultural heritage discourse. This may result that heritage that once has been part of the entire society’s past becomes some ethnic group’s monopolized property while other social groups perhaps lose their existing cultural linkage with this cultural heritage.260 Because the cultural property discourse may easily colonialize both human cultures and these cultures past and collective memories, cultural heritage can be seen more like a set of property claims that base on collection of cultural features and fragments of history. Therefore, heritage’s linkages with certain individuals and group of people may later on prove to be superficial.261 Destroyed cultural heritage can be used as well as undamaged cultural heritage in ethnic identity production. The use of damaged cultural heritage may be reproduced in similar or even more intense way than the undamaged heritage would provide possibilities to do.262

Because of the group based nature of memories and cultural heritage, the concept of cultural heritage is both context- and audience-dependent.263 Contemporary cultural property theory approaches heritage’s property questions trough individuals and social groups cultural and human rightsperspective. People to whom cultural heritage has

257 Constantinou & Hatay 2010, 1600 258 Mezey 2007, 2005 259 Mezey 2007, 2018-2019 260 Constantinou & Hatay 2010, 1601 261 Mezey 2007, 2005 262 Constantinou & Hatay 2010, 1614-1615 263 Kavanagh 2000, 15–16 58 personal significance have been called stakeholders. This means that people and communities that have a stakeholder position should be able to give their opinions over cultural heritage and its maintenance.264 When non-professionals opinions are being noticed the territory that once belonged to the experts only becomes territory of people who are personally engaged and affected by cultural heritage.265

Naomi Marzey (2007) is both skeptical and interested in the idea of cultural heritage interpretations rewriting as mean to reduce the aggressiveness of cultural conflicts that take place in association with contested cultural heritage. Although this redefining of cultural heritage does or should not displace the hard history that lead to this contestation of cultural heritage, it could start some kind of process that may lead to reconciliation of the hard history. Marzey suggest that the power relation questions of contested cultural heritage could represent dangerous triggering subject matter that is raising peoples’ aggression towards heritage interpretations that relate to society’s hard histories.266

Logic of cultural property suggests that every cultural group should be obligated to respect cultural differences and should have right to control their own culture and past.267 Although logic of cultural heritage speaks for individual people’s and human community’s cultural rights, sometimes the attempts to change nation state’s official interpretations of the past have led to violent conflicts and destruction of the new conflicting history interpretation. These contested interpretations of the past have often related to hard histories and social taboos of the societies.268 The battle over the power in association with cultural heritage indicate that these conflicts over the interpretation of the past relate to the greater critical question who has the right to define, explicate and typify the collective memory through a specific places and objects.269

Because cultural heritage represents politically motivated history interpretation that deconstructs, constructs and reconstructs human society’s memories and identities, it has become in many countries contested question.270 Costas Constantinou and Mete Hatay detected that cultural heritage’s preservation and deliberate damaging have been used as political tool to support one-sided public information campaigns, without revealing that in fact it has been heritage discourse that was contested trough the work of destruction.271 Many nation states try to strengthen national identity and society’s dominant power legitimizations trough heritage monuments that are displayed in public spaces. Cultural heritage mediates trough the past’s interpretation a symbolic power statement over the public space. People and social groups that challenge use of public space with their actions are often trying to establish their own important places and interpretations of the past trough their actions.272

264 Viñas 2011, 161 265 Viñas 2011, 162 266 Mezey 2007, 2045 267 Mezey 2007, 2006 268 McDowell 2008, 46 269 McDowell 2008, 47 270 McDowell 2008, 43 271 Constantinou & Hatay 2010, 1601 272 McDowell 2008, 46 59

Cultural heritage has significant political and symbolic value in societies.273 In many countries strongest interest to produce and maintain cultural heritage have had the people who have best possibilities to use power in society. These people often need heritage’s history interpretation to legitimize the existing social order.274 Heritage sites that contain both significant memories and power are often built up in public spaces that operate as sites that both integrate and disintegrate people. Certain aspects of the past that cultural heritage mediates does not necessarily enjoy entire populations’ uniform support.275

Why cultural heritage is being deliberately destroyed in democratic peace time societies? Could these cultural confrontations be explained trough Michel Foucault’s analyses on the subject and the power instances relations? Michel Foucault (1982) defined the forms of resistance in power relations as anti-authority struggles. These confrontations are not limited in certain nation state although it is possible that such conflicts could have greater extent in certain country. According to Foucault the objective of these confrontations is the impact that power has over individual persons. These struggles’ or confrontations’ nature is instant. Resistance aims at powers that use their influence on individual people.276

According to Michel Foucault the target of these conflicts is not the main enemy but the instantly apparent enemy of the individual people. These anti-authority struggles do not try to find a settlement over these confrontations in the future, because these struggles represent anarchistic movements.277 These power struggles question role of individual person by underlining individual’s right to be unique and fighting against all use of power that breaks individual person’s connections with others in community and forces people into possessed roles. The anti-authority struggle’s objective is to resist government of individualization. This confrontation aims at powers that represent privileges of knowledge established trough information and proficiency. Michel Foucault suggests that one of the key questions in anti-authority struggles is the non-acceptance of the economic and ideological state’s, scientists’ or authorities’ use of power that rejects individual people’s identities and determinate who individual people are.278

In the area of conflict resolution has many theoretical models been used in analyses of violence and conflicts between social groups. Albert Bandura’s social learning theory that was presented in 1977 has been used in many conflict’s resolution. This theory approaches aggression and frustration that exists in conflict areas trough perspective of social learning. Aggression does not represent natural born character of humans neither is frustration’s natural outcome violence, Bandura suggests that they represent learned responses to conflicts.279

Cultural heritage site’s and object’s deliberate destruction can be approached trough perspectives of heritage conflicts and heritage’s contestation, even if these heritage conflicts

273 Graham, Ashworth & Tunbridge, The uses and abuses of heritage, 29. 274 McDowell 2008, 45 275 McDowell 2008, 45 276 Foucault 1982, 780 277 Foucault 1982, 780 278 Foucault 1982, 781 279 Ramsbotham et al. 2005, 304 60 does not take place in war zones or as a result of terrorism attack. How to resolve cultural and social conflicts with unknown persons who chose to deteriorate or destroy cultural heritage of their own society? – Denying existence of cultural resistance or heritage’s contestation in societies has not been able to stop heritage’s deliberate destruction. Source of the heritage conflicts in this research’s vandalism and arson cases seams to rise from more individual perspectives.

Source of heritage conflicts in democratic peace time societies could lie in individual people’s reactions on visual sings that indicate public bodies, religious communities, heritage authorities or institution presence in the environment or public bodies power over local environments. – Heritage sites are being preserved for entire society but heritage’s characteristics result that most of the local communities’ existence and lives are displaced from heritage interpretations.

2.7 Collections as heritage representatives

Archeological remains and artworks from the antique started to be collected for the needs of study in early Renaissance. The earliest collectors were both artists and important wealthy families. At the first stage, it was mainly Florentine banker families who followed artists’ and humanities’ example in establishing their own collections of antique arts. These collections were displayed mainly in palaces or villas and they also represented for collector’s status symbols.280

At first the idea of cultural heritage was strongly linked with collections and museums. Also, idea of museum was seen through objects that created collections.281 Collecting has seen as form of heritage’s preservation. The “authentic” objects and collections were seen as linkages between the past and the present. Later on, the thoughts on collections role in museums have changed a lot. The object as cultural heritage is able to deliver information only if it is connected with its contexts.282

The history of collecting is connected with the elite, because the earliest collections represented wealthy people from the society’s social and political elite. These people had formed large collections and their collections became the oldest part of the established memory institutions’ collections. Early forms of collecting based on research and knowledge interests.283 Later memory institutions have constructed vision of history and collective past trough the act of collecting. At first, collecting concentrated on privileged people’s history, and ordinary people’s past was mainly undocumented. Later the cultural contexts in association with cultural heritage became wider and memory institutions started to collect national folklore cultures heritage. This caused that categories of the genuine historical record changed. There have been two principal trends in collecting; first was to collect for the sake of collecting and the second approach saw collections objects as part of a documentary process where the genuine past was revealed. The difference between the two

280 Jokilehto 1999, 22 281 Rönkkö 2007, 70 282 Rönkkö 2007, 70 283 Knell 2004, 82-83 61 approaches is that the first approach links collections in association with the values of ownership and order; and the second trend analyses collection’s objects as evidence from the past rather than selected objects from the context of life.284

Collected objects have no longer that central role in society’s knowledge creation as they had in previous centuries. When an object started to represent evidence from the past, it became representative of absolute truth. In 2000’s memory institutions professionalization and social change in societies caused that the institutions started to develop their collections; collection’s objects were seen as interpretation of reality.285 Also the vision of memory institutions’ collecting changed towards direction where collection policies where replaced with strategies that adopted a long-term, holistic and rational vision to the purpose of institutional collecting.286

Simon Knell (2004) states, that the nature of collecting protects the concept of cultural heritage rather than reveal the true nature of it or the processes that has created collections as cultural heritage and collective memory. The problem of collecting has led to decision- making problems: what should be collected? This raises the difficult question of eternity. When something is collected, will it exist forever? Redefinition of collecting has led into a vision, where objects can flow in and flow out of collections.287 Does this life circle approach to cultural heritage mean that in contemporary heritage values and evaluations are influenced by similar kinds of forces that exist in Michael Thompson’s Rubbish theory? This would mean that cultural heritage’s value could shift on day’s demand from transient stage’s fixed value beliefs either to rubbish stage that evaluates heritage’s value through contemporary world view or to the durable stage that also recognizes heritage’s fixed value hypothesis. It is possible that in those cases when heritage object reaches the rubbish stage, there is a great danger that this object’s long-term preservation ends and heritage object is being disposed form the cultural heritage category because of the contemporary cultural values.288

Memory institutions preserve only a small amount of society’s material culture. This means that almost everything from the past and the contemporary time is lost.289 It is not possible to decide what is important or significant in contemporary society because the vision of the present is often scattered. If memory institutions decide at forehand what should be remembered from the present time, the risk of failure is great.290 The problems of collecting relate to recognizing what is important. This difficulty bases on partly the fact that collecting is done in the contemporary time without exact knowledge about the future generations needs to know that cultural heritage could mediate. If individuals have their own memories and construct their own values, there are no institutional processes that could lead to correct decisions about what should be collected and how should the past be interpreted trough cultural heritage. Simon Knell suggests that collections should be

284 Kavanagh 2004, 118-121 285 Knell 2004, 2-3 286 Knell 2004, 15 287 Knell 2004, 19 288 Ashley-Smith 1999, 89 289 Knell 2004, 19 290 Steen 2004, 196 62 contextualized, so that they would lead to understanding rather than possessing the ready- made truth about the past.291 Collection’s meanings can be revealed through their outer importance and inner significance.292 Collecting has been a major social phenomenon in cultural heritage’s definition process because objects have carried strong emotional and locomotive powers. Collections are used to make a linkage between the visible and the invisible realities between present and past.293

In 2000’s onwards there has been two dominant approaches in collecting: object- focused and people-focused. Object-focused approach takes cultural heritage in the center of the memory production, while the people-focused vision concentrates on the heritage object’s users.294 The challenge of collecting relates to difficult subject matter. Several problems rise, when memory institutions try to document a culture or a society. Cultures and societies do not exist as a homogenous mass, but the nature of institutionally defined heritage is to create stereotypical representations of the documented cultures.295

Expanding amount of cultural heritage and limited economic resources has resulted in cultural heritages’ and collections’ value based evaluation and categorizing. Although future society’s values and needs cannot be predicted, this prioritizing has for example in England represented a combination of economic value and usage requests.296 Memory institution’s collections relate to the meanings that the institution has decided to collect for itself. Although the objects of the collections have not changed, the change in thinking has caused re-evaluation of collections importance. It is not possible to ensure that items now judged to be important will have the same importance in the future as the correct or most representative heritage from the past.297

2.8 Memory institutions and heritage definition

The establishment of memory institutions and cultural heritage were partly caused by societies’ industrialization. There was a deep worry over disappearance of cultural features. Industrialization changed societies irreversibly, but it is also possible that cultural changes caused the society’s need to increase people’s feelings of belongingness and social cohesion trough “shared” representatives of the past.

Memory institutions such as museums have seen as ideological institutions that influences people’s identity process through the experiences that the collections deliver. These experiences can produce either feelings of separation or identification with the defined approach to the history.298 Memory institutions have had a significant part in nurturing establishment of national unity and national identity in nation states. Their role as maintainers of social unity and cultural cohesion can even today be seen in these

291 Knell 2004, 28-29, 33, 36 292 Pearce 2004, 49 293 Duclos 2004, 87, 98 294 Bursell 2004, 206 295 Clayton 2004, 146 296 Ashley-Smith 1999, 83 297 Dunn 2004, 62,66, 68-69 298 Kallio 2007, 116 63 institutions work. Also, currently memory institutions core task aim at defining what is important for contemporary internationalized and globalized postmodern societies. How to respond to the challenges that immigration, popular culture, social media and mass culture sets for the idea of nation state that was once established to underline the national characteristics of a nation state.299

In cultural heritage sites and objects case individual people’s accessibility has traditionally been very limited and their role as the public experiencing cultural heritage has been framed both physically and mentally. Heritage professional’s role in association with cultural heritage on the contrary contains wide accessibility of heritage site’s and objects and gate keeper kind of role in defining the frames of public’s physical or mental accesses on cultural heritage. Heritage professional’s role in establishing cultural heritage is influenced by the tradition and “canon” of cultural heritage in the nation state. Obligation to the cultural tradition and the canon of cultural heritage produces heritage sites and objects that manifest this canon from contemporary times perspective.

Framed position in association with cultural heritage means in public’s case that they are told where to go and what to behave about cultural heritage. Trough the information tables of cultural heritage visitors’ thoughts are directed into intended heritage interpretations and cultural contexts of the past. These cultural norms are adapted and culturally learned by people in association with cultural heritage trough the visits at the heritage sites. This strong control over individual people that is being signaled and sensed in the environment may very well has something to do with the triggering factors behind deliberate heritage site’s and object’s destruction and vandalism. There are many similarities in arts and memory institutions rose in societies where art or cultural heritage is being established.

2.9 From cohesive cultural heritage into diversity of memories

Modernity changed the traditional world’s approach to the past. The changes in the historicity and aesthetics approaches resulted that the relations between culture, religion, environment and nature replaced the traditional concept of time and cultural values. The society’s modern values separated the present from the past and resulted that it became difficult to value fully heritage’s significance.300 The need to promote cultural diversity in cultural heritage context rose from the needs of 2000’s globalized world. Since cultures had become strongly involved with each other because of peoples’ travelling and moving from one geographic area to another, UNESCO redefined its approach to cultures. In 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expression approaches cultural diversity’s maintenance trough perspective where cultural interaction and cultural exchange fosters cultural diversity in societies.301

299 Aronsson 2010, 556 300 Jokilehto 1999, 6 301 Mezey 2007, 2013-2014 64

Cultural changes have been fast and radical globally since the 1980s. This has resulted that cultural models and categories that have inherited from the past do not fit in the younger generation’s concepts of reality.302 For Johan Fornäs (1998), modernity represents ongoing dynamism that related to the growing need to historicize the concepts of societies, cultures, and subjects.303 Modernity and postmodernity have expanded around the world, and it has influenced globally. Globalization has not meant that cultures have become global. Differences between geographical areas, cultures, and subcultures are as large as in the previous decades.304

In early 2000’s started the discussions over cultural heritage’s and heritage management’s ability to integrate people into close relationship with their living environments’ cultural heritage. This has meant that other values than scientific or heritage professional have been applied to cultural heritage by the local communities. This may have led to that some individual persons or group of people could have also alienated from their own society’s cultural heritage. Although the importance of material culture’s and historic environments preservation has been recognized especially by the heritage professionals, both heritage professionals and researchers have more and more started to question if heritage’s management is aimed at cultural property that enjoy wider appreciation by the majority of the local communities. It has been evaluated that local communities do not perhaps value that much built environments, for them perhaps the origins of the surrounding cultures are more interesting.305

In the after modern societies generalized ideologies and cultural concepts have lost their meanings as commonly shared “great stories” and these stories have been replaced with many small stories.306 Jean-Francois Lyotard (1985) presented theory on postmodern society where nation states and institutions have no longer ability to unite people. Increased individualism has made it more difficult for people to identify with the grate cultural truths and therefore every person construct both their own identity and their cultural contexts.307 Changes that postmodern has caused in societies indicate that social connections between people are weakening and braking down.308

Individualization process that have been connected with postmodern societies aim at realization of individual person’s uniqueness. Individualization process takes place in humans’ unconscious self and during this process people live out one’s inner human nature.309 The concept of cultural heritage has not traditionally been open for diversity in past’s interpretations. In general, there has not been room for human uniqueness in cultural heritage that mediated society’s collective vision of the past. In contemporary, globalized world, is it possible to define nation’s past through uniform heritage and interpretation of the history?310

302 Hawkes 1984, vii-viii 303 Fornäs 1998, 34 304 Fornäs 1998, 45-46 305 Turnpenny 2004, 298 306 Ilmonen 1992, 101 307 Lyotard 1985, 28 308 Lyotard 1985, 29 309 von Franz 1972, 162 310 Turnpenny 2004, 298 65

John Dewey states that a conscious state of mind enables the revelation of predetermined values and norms that guide people’s actions.311 What would be defined as cultural heritage if cultural evaluations would not base on set values? Could it be possible to reveal new approaches to society’s past and heritage? People who work with living history try to recreate the history that represents probable and obvious in the past. Although living history has been used to create heritage interpretations, these heritage interpretation’s authenticity has been questioned because these interpretations reduces, purifies and romanticizes the past.312

2.10 This research’s cultural heritage interpretation

This research’s heritage interpretation bases on 19 disaster cases, which have damaged or endangered Finnish cultural heritage. The cases include both movable and immovable cultural heritage. Less than half of the cases have taken place in association with memory institutions such as museums, archives and libraries. Among the researched cases there were two archives’ disaster and two disasters that occurred in libraries’ storage magazines. There were four disasters that happened in museums. One of the disaster sites represented Finnish archeological cultural heritage. More than half of the disaster cases represent ecclesiastical cultural heritage. Three of the disaster cases have taken place in association with the Finnish Orthodox churches and seven of the disasters cases have happened in association with the Finnish Evangelical Lutheran churches’ cultural heritage. All of these disaster sites’ cultural heritages are owned by public organizations.

Both historical and contemporary vision of Finnish memory institution’s cultural heritage have their representatives in this research trough disaster cases. The cases that represent the earliest vision of the Finnish cultural heritage base on the national romantic interpretation of Finnish culture and Finland’s past, where sites underline nationally cohesive past of Finland as a nation. This heritage definition is strongly linked with the histories of the Finnish Literature Society’s (SKS)313 and the Finnish Antiquarian Society314. The model for these scientific societies was adopted from other European countries where ideology of national romantics had inspired the establishment of similar societies in the late 18th century.315

311 Dewey 1929, 68. 312 Jones 2014, 132 313 The Finnish Literature Society (SKS) was founded in 1831 by Alexander University’s scholars who were interested in Finnish language and folk traditions. At first the society’s central objective was to promote the collecting of Finnish folk traditions and folk poetry, but later in 19th century the society was committed to publish Finnish literature in order to develop written Finnish. (Finnish Literature Society 2015, History of the Society, website) 314 The Finnish Antiquarian Society was founded in 1870. The backgrounds of the society’s establishment was in the general concern over the deterioration of Finnish Middle Aged castle’s and gray stone churches. The Finnish Antiquarian Society’s objective was to operate as scientific association that educates the public and that collects ancient remains, arts and old items to the collections of the future Finnish National Museum. (the Finnish Antiquarian Society) 315 Finnish Literature Society 2015, History of the Society 66

There were ten disaster cases where heritage interpretation followed rather directly the historical, national romantic, idea what Finland’s past and cultural heritage is about. These cases were linked with the National memory institutions such the National Museum of Finland and Finnish National Library. Also, Finnish Middle Aged castles, pre-historic archeological sites, the Finnish Evangelical Lutheran churches and Finnish Literature Society’s collections have seen from the beginning as Finnish cultural heritage. Although the Finnish National Library as independent organization at the Helsinki University dates back in 2006, the idea of National memory institutions such as museums, libraries and archives can be seen as part of nationalism inspired way to organize and nationalize cultural heritage. The Finnish National Library’s storage magazine’s water damages could also be approached trough built cultural heritage’s view point, because the water damages at the Finnish National Library took place in a storage magazine that situated in Finnish modernist heritage site. Disaster cases that have taken place at nationalism inspired heritage sites are: 1. Vartiokylä castle mountain, vandalism events in 1990’s and 2000’s 2. Finnish Literature Society’s Library, storage magazine’s water damage in 2003 3. Finnish National Museum, gas explosion in 2006 4. Finnish National Library (Library of Helsinki University) storage magazines under building Portania, humidity problems and water damages in 1990’s and 2000’s 5. Turku castle, art vandalism in 2008 6. Tyrvää Saint Olavi church, arson in 1997 7. Porvoo cathedral, arson in 2006 8. Lempäälä Saint Birgita church, arson attempt in 2008 9. Suomenniemi church, arson attempt in 2009 10. Hammarland church, arson attempt in 2010

More recent heritage interpretation’s disasters represent nine cases where cultural heritage is approached in wider history documentation approach. Heritage serves as evidence of Finnish society’s cultural, political and economic changes and history. Also in these cases heritage represents socially widely accepted and recognized approaches to the past and the Finnish society. The cases of more recent and contemporary heritage interpretation are: 1. Finnish Surveying Department’s Uusimaa office, terminal archives water damage in 1994 2. Finnish Surveying Department’s archives, archives building’s fire during construction work in 2004 3. Valvilla Wool Mill museum’s archives, fire in 2003 4. Kiasma Museum of Modern art, VR magazines fire that caused safety preparations in Kiasma in 2006 5. Uspenski Orthodox cathedral, icon larcenies in 2008 and 2010 6. Jyväskylä Orthodox church, vandalism incident in 2010 7. Kotka Orthodox church, vandalism cases in 1990’s and 2000's 8. Kaivoksela church, arson in 2006 9. Saint Jacob church, art vandalism in 2008.

67

2.10.1 Heritage of Finnish Folk Churches

Religion has shaped local societies and cultural landscapes trough built environments and trough symbolic forms. These cultural forms of the past have seen as representatives of political control, social order, cultural identity and social power. Religion and cultural conflicts have long history both in the maintenance and shattering of the heritage sites that contain symbolic value for society.316

Christianity and the battle between western and eastern world have had its impact also on Finnish Folk religions. The history of the Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Church and the Finnish Orthodox Church, indicate Finland’s long history between east and west. But the history of Christianity started both in Scandinavia and in Russia before the Christian Church divided in 1054 into Eastern Orthodox Church and Western Catholic Church.

The historical documents of Christianity in Finland indicate that influences came to Finland both from the west through Sweden as Roman Catholicism and from the east through Novgorod as Orthodox faith. The first crusade to Finland was made in 1155.317 In this crusade, the Swedish King Erik IX was accompanied by Bishop Henry, later known as Saint Henry, English-born Bishop of Uppsala. Saint Henry has historically been credited with converting the Finnish to Christianity, even if Finland’s conversion to Catholicism was not completed until the late 13th century when Sweden’s third crusade to the eastern Finland had taken place.318

The Orthodox Christianity came into Karelia and Southeastern part of Finland in 11th century trough influence of Novgorod principality. In 15th and 16th century Orthodox Christianity had stabilized as Karelian people’s religion, but still Novgorod tried to expand its influence into western Finland while Sweden tried to broaden its influence into the eastern parts of Finland.319

The Catholic Church in both Sweden and Finland was reformed into Lutheran belief by King Gustaf Wasa, who enforced the Reformation in Vesterås, Sweden in 1527. This resulted that the kingdom of Sweden became Lutheran and, afterwards, previously Catholic parishs both in Sweden and in Finland became now known Evangelical Lutheran parishes.320 The state church development that had started during the time of the Catholic Church continued after the Reformation. The Evangelical Lutheran Church has had, since the 16th century a central position in Finland.321

In 17th century Lutheran orthodoxy and Sweden’s powerful position resulted that cohesion in the state tried to maintain by integrating different nationalities more strongly to Sweden, this resulted that for example Finnish Orthodox Cristian’s tried to convert to

316 Singh 2008, 125 317 The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland 2014, Suomalaiset lähetystyössä 318 Christensen 1995, 586 319 Uskonnot Suomessa 2015, Ortodoksiset kirkot 320 Kansallisbibliografia 2014, Gustaf Wasa 321 Christensen 1995, 588 68

Lutheranism. During the 17th century the pressuring against Orthodox Christians intensified. When Sweden had to give up the Karelia in Stolbova peace agreement in 1743, Finnish Orthodox Christians position improved in the areas that became part of Russia. When Sweden had to give up the entire Finland to Russia in 1809 on the bases of Hamina peace the Finnish Orthodox Church’s position improved in entire Finland. The Evangelical Lutheran faith remained as Finnish majority religion. During the 118 years that Finland was Grand Duchy of Russia, during this time new Orthodox parishs were established for example in Vaasa, Turku, Tampere and Helsinki.322

The Evangelical Lutheran Church had state-church status until it was officially separated from the Finnish state in 1869 and after this the Evangelical Lutheran church has been Finnish folk church that has recognized position and autonomy in its own administration.323 When Finland declared its independence in 1917 Finnish state recognized the Finnish Orthodox Diocese as independent Church. In 1923 Finnish state was active in promoting the Finnish Orthodox Church’s transfer from Moscow Patriarchate to Constantinople Patriarchate. Russian speaking Orthodox in Finland did not wish to change Patriarchate and they established a couple of new Orthodox parishs in Finland that belonged still to the Moscow Patriarchate.324

Since the late 13th century, the Evangelical Lutheran Church has represented the majority religion of Finland.325 It has had strong influences in constructions of Finnish society, cultural traditions, and cultural heritage. Also, Orthodox Christianity have had its influence into the Finnish society but mainly in the regions where Orthodox Christian population have lived. Especially cultural influences have been strong in Karelian and Eastern Finland. The Evangelical Lutheran Church has played a significant role in maintaining social stability and control in Finland. During the time when Finland was part of Sweden, Finnish society became part of Scandinavian legal and social culture.326

Both the Evangelical Lutheran Church and the Orthodox Church holds, today, a recognized position in Finland as Finnish Folk Churches. The Evangelical Lutheran Church has been during the last twenty years, both as an institution and as a religious community increasingly challenged by Finnish people. In 1995, discussions over the Evangelical Lutheran Church’s recognized position in Finland rose into public discussion, but so far there has not been any changes in the Church’s official status in Finnish society.327 The cultural changes in the Evangelical Lutheran Church’s position in Finland have been similar to those in Sweden and Norway. Finland, Sweden, and Norway are also the Scandinavian countries where church arsons and arson attempts have occurred since the 1990s.

Evangelical Lutheran Church have been central topic of antiquarian interests since the days of national romantics and Finland’s cultural self-determination in 1880’s. Commonly used term “Finland’s churches” has been use in the context of Finnish Evangelical Lutheran

322 Uskonnot Suomessa 2015, Ortodoksiset kirkot 323 Christensen 1995, 585 324 Uskonnot Suomessa 2015, Ortodoksiset kirkot 325 Christensen 1995, 586 326 Christensen 1995, 587 327 Christensen1995, 597 69 churches. The Evangelical Lutheran churches, especially the Middle Aged grey stone churches have been recognized heritage sites since the very beginning of Finnish cultural heritage’s definition and Finnish national awakening.328 There are four Middle Aged churches among this research’s disaster cases. These are Tyrvää Saint Olavi church that was arson in 1997, Porvoo cathedral that was arson in 2006, Lempäälä Saint Birgita church that tried to arson in 2008 and Hammarland church that tried to arson in 2010. There are also two younger churches that were arson in the late 2000’s. These were Suomenniemi church’s arson attempt in 2009 and Kaivoksela church’s arson in 2006. Saint Jacob church is Finnish Swedish Lutheran parish’s 1950’s church in the suburb of Lauttasaari in Helsinki. This church was target of burglary and ecclesiastical object’s vandalism in 2008. All of these younger churches have been recognized as cultural heritage in Finland.

This research’s disasters that have taken place in the Finnish Orthodox Churches were: Uspenski cathedral’s icon larcenies in 2008 and 2010, Jyväskylä Orthodox church’s vandalism incident in 2010 and Kotka Orthodox church’s vandalism cases in 1990’s and 2000's. All of these Orthodox churches have significant part in the history of the Finnish Orthodox Church.

2.10.2 Memory institution’s cultural heritage

Finnish Surveying Department’s Uusimaa office’s terminal archives had a water damage in 1994 and the same organization’s new archive building experienced a roof fire in 2004 just before the building’s construction work was completed. Finnish Surveying Department’s archival documents represent archival cultural heritage that have both significant cultural historical meaning and great social importance for the Finnish society. The archives are used by both researchers and authorities. Finnish Surveying Department’s archives form important information bases for many Finnish society’s official records and databases.329

Porthania represents significant 1950’s built cultural heritage in the city of Helsinki. International DOCOMOMO330 organization has listed Porthania as an example of Finnish modern architecture. Porthania was built in 1950’s as Helsinki University’s institution center and latest building techniques and architecture were used in the construction work.331 Into the ground floors of Porthania situated also storage magazines of Helsinki University Library. In 2006 Helsinki University’s Library was divided into two organizations on the bases of the library’s collections. This research examines water damages that deteriorated and endangered the collections of the later known Finnish National Library. The library’s collections placed in Porthania’s ground floor represented central Finnish national cultural

328 The Finnish Antiquarian Society 2015, Historia 329 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 330 DOCOMOMO = International Working Party for Documentation and Conservation of Buildings, Sites and Neighborhoods of the Modern Movement 331 RKY 2015, Helsingin yliopiston rakennukset keskustakampus 70 heritage. Water damages in the storage magazine started according to the interviewed representatives of the library in 1980’s. Water damages were caused by both natural forces such as heavy rains and the building techniques of Porthania.332

Finnish Literature Society was founded in 1831 to support Finland’s national identification development through promotion of Finnish language and culture. This promotion of Finnish language and culture fit into the early 19th century power politics of the region. Finnish Literature Society influenced centrally into Finland’s national development. Society promoted Finnish language’s position trough Finnish publications and gathered Finnish ethnographic data such as oral folklore and cultural traditions. Finland’s development into independent nation based on centrally established position of Finnish language and culture. Both Finnish language and culture had central part in Finnish people’s identification process as Finnish.333 Since the Finnish Literature Society has had a central position in Finland’s national development also the Society’s library collections represent central cultural heritage in Finland. The storage magazine where the water damage occoured in the summer of 2003 situated in an apartment house’s ground floor in the Helsinki city center.

Valvilla Wool Mill Museum was established in 1981 to preserve the traditional textile manufacturing history of the city of Hyvinkää. The museum also represents Finnish textile industries history especially wool textile production. Wool Mill Ltd., later known as Valvilla Wool Mill, was founded in 1892 in the city of Hyvinkää by Finnish manufacturer and engineer Mr. Ossian Donner.334 The establishment of the Wool Mill began Hyvinkää’s development into an industrial community. At first, the Wool Mill was a spinning mill but through the factory’s long history, it grew into one of Finland’s largest and most diverse wool mill in production.335 The factory also influenced into the growth of Hyvinkää.336 In 1981 textile manufacturing ended in Hyvinkää but the company still continued it production as a spinning mill until 1991.337 Finland underwent a severe economic depression between 1990 and 1993. The Wool Mill closed down in the early 1990s and the company donated both the museum and its entire collection to the city of Hyvinkää.338 In 2003, Valvilla Wool Mill Museum’s archives were badly damaged and partly destroyed in a fire and fire extinguishing.339

The Finnish National Museum was founded in 1893 and the foundations of the museum’s340 collections based on the cultural historical and ethnographical collections of the Imperial Alexander’s University and the collections of the Finnish Antiquarian Society. The architecture competition over the museum building organized in 1902 and it was the architects Herman Gasellius, Armas Lindgren and Eliel Saarinen whose plan won the competition. The museum was built mainly in 1905-1910 and it opened for the public in

332 Finnish National Library 4.2.2011: Theme interview 333 Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura 2015, SKS pähkinänkuoressa 334 RKY 2015, Hyvinkään Villatehdas 335 RKY 2015, Hyvinkään Villatehdas 336 Hyvinkää City Museum 2012, website of Valvilla Wool Mill Museum 337 Hyvinkää City Museum 2012, website of Valvilla Wool Mill Museum 338 Hyvinkää City Museum 20.5.2009: Theme interview 339 Hyvinkää City Museum 20.5.2009: Theme interview 340 in Finnish: Valtion Historiallinen Museo 71

1916. The museum building of the Finnish National Museum represents late 1890’s and early 1900’s idea of museum architecture, where the building itself reflected museum’s collections.341 There was a natural gas explosion at the Finnish National Museum’s Treasury Troves Silver display in January 2006.342 Both the museum building and the silver collections represent significant Finnish national cultural heritage.

Turku Castle is the oldest of the Swedish crown’s castles in Finland. It was in use from the Middle Ages until the early 19th century. Turku Castle was used as seat of Swedish government in Finland for the entire time when Finland was part of Sweden. The castle was founded in 1280’s and the oldest parts of the castle were built in the beginning of 14th century. New extensions of the castle were built during the late 14th and 15th centuries. In 16th century Turku castle was modernized as Renaissance castle. In 1770’s part of the castle started to use as prison because the seat of government had moved closer to the current city center of Turku. Turku caste was used as prison and storage during the late 18th century and almost entire 19th century. When Finland became Russian Grand Duchy, Turku castle operated as a prison. It was in 1890 when the Cultural Historical Museum of Turku was placed to one part of the castle. Plans to restore the entire castle as a museum started in 1939 and the restoration work continued after Finland’s Continuation War. When the restoration was completed the castle was opened for the public in 1961.343 Because Turku castle has central part in Finland’s history, it represents central national cultural heritage. The permanent museum exhibition in the castle presents both Finland’s history during Swedish rule and the history of Turku. Some museum objects, mainly portraits were vandalized at the Turku castle’s museum exhibition in 2008. Some portraits canvases’ and paint layers were damaged with carved or pressed marks.

History of Kiasma and the Finnish Museum of Contemporary Art begins in 1939 when the Finnish Contemporary Art Association was founded to improve modern art’s and artist’s position in Finland. The society had important role in Finnish art society especially in 1950’s. In 1983 founded Association for the Museum of Modern Art and the association’s objective was to participate into the public discussions and also to influence into Finland’s public opinion on modern art. The Museum of Contemporary Art started its work in 1990 in temporary premises, but it moved later into the renovated Ateneum Art Museum. The architecture competition over Finnish Museum of Contemporary Art won American Steven Holl in 1993 and the construction work of the Kiasma museum started in 1996. Opening of the Kiasma Museum of Contemporary art was in 1998.344 Kiasma represent centrally modern art’s history in Finland and both the museum building and its collections represent Nationally important cultural heritage in Finland. There was a massive fire at the VR magazines that is situated close to Kiasma. The fire caused safety precautions in Kiasma because of the fire gases, heath and the large crowds nearby Kiasma. Before the fire there had been strong public debate over the future of the VR magazines that were decided to torn down from the place of the Music Hall of Finland. For a large local community in Helsinki VR magazines represented important cultural heritage that was not fully recognized by Finnish building protection authorities.

341 National Board of Antiquties 2015, Kansallismuseo, Helsinki 342 Finnish National Museum 9.2.2011: Theme interview 343 RKY 2015, Turun Linna 344 Kiasma 2015, Birth of the Museum of Contemporary Art Kiasma 72

Vartiokylä castle mountain is situated in the suburb of Helsinki city. Site is surrounded by single-family house area near by the bay of Vartiokylä. Vartiokylä castle mountain has seen as one of Helsinki’s most important archeological sites because of its long and multi layered history. There are three archeological remains that relate to Finland’s military history. There are remains of late Iron Age or Early Middle-Aged fortress, remains of a brick mill that manufactured bricks for Suomenlinna Sea Fortress during the construction work and remains of the Fist World War fortress’s base V.345 As heritage site Vartiokylä castle mountain can be seen as part of Finland’s national awakening’s and heritage definition’s history. The archeological interest in this castle mountain began in 1877 when pastor Henrik August Reinholm during his visit to the site documented Vartiokylä castle mountain and published an article about the site in the Finnish Antiquarian Society’s Journal VI.346 The first recorded documentation of Vartiokylä castle mountain was done by J. E. Tuomala in 1886. Wider documentation and description over Vartiokylä castle mountain was done by the Finnish Antiquarian Society’s secretary Hjalmar Appelgren in summer of 1888. First map over the castle mountain was done on the bases of Appelgren’s description and after this Vartiokylä castle mountain has represented one of the Finnish pre-historic archeological heritage sites.347 The site was evaluated in 2011 as one of the first category archeological heritage sites in the capital city area of Finland.348 Vartiokylä castle mountain has been target of rather constant deliberate destroying and vandalism since 1980’s, the vandalism continued between the years 1990 and 2010.

345 Schulz 1998, 4-5 346 Schulz 1996, 6 347 Schulz 1996, 7 348 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 73

3 HERITAGE’S DETERIORATION AND PRESERVATION

Conservation means to keep and to preserve.349 Common approach in heritage’s preservation is that heritage objects and collections should be preserved as long as possible. This does not necessary mean eternity, but in most of the cases for a long time.350 Because currently concept of cultural heritage contains both tangible and intangible cultural heritage and also digital collections, challenges are great. It is possible to preserve some heritage objects for a long time, but it is unlikely that all of the expanding collections can be preserved forever.351

Conservation of cultural heritage has in all its forms and history pursued the preservation of values that are attached to cultural heritage.352 The modern concept of historicity resulted, that historical sites and artworks were seen as unique representative of specific culture and national identity that was worth conserving.353 Preventive conservation’s objective is to minimize deterioration and loss of cultural heritage. Damage prevention has a long history and tradition in societies. There is a long-standing practise of cultural heritage protection, such as buildings, sculptures, aesthetic objects and artworks from fire, floods, rainwater, earthquakes, insects, mould and high humidity.354 The tradition of preservation is much longer than the modern conservation history. Time period in conservation history before the contemporary conservation theory, has been called era of classical conservation theories. The classical conservation theories approached conservation and preservation trough a process that aimed at maintenance or revealing of heritage object’s true authentic nature and integrity.355

Jonathan Ashley-Smith (1999) suggests that cultural heritage’s value is in correlation relation with its overall state. Heritage’s deterioration mechanism influences into the time period in which heritage’s loss in value occurs and its overall condition is weakened.356 Through this perspective fast and catastrophic accidents and disasters that take place in association with cultural heritage are the most threatening events for heritage’s long-term preservation, because they can lead to either total loss or significant loss in cultural heritage’s value in a very short time.

Definitions of preservation have varied during the history of conservation and restoration. Heritage conservation’s historical development has been connected with the concept of European classical antiquity that created the idea of cultural heritage and heritage’s restoration practice.357 In the early days of conservation and restoration, ideals of

349 Petzet 2004, 9 350 Cloonan 2007b, 136 351 Cloonan 2007b, 145 352 ICCROM 1998, Nara Document on Authenticity – Report of the Experts Meeting, 1-3 353 Jokilehto 1999, 17 354 Lambert 2010, webarticle 355 Viñas 2011, 65 356 Ashley-Smith 1999, 24-25 357 Vison 2009, 91 74 preservation were strongly connected with the philosophical ideas of cultural heritage.358 Different statements on preservation have also existed in the era of modern conservation. Before the midd-20th century preservation was signified trough collecting of cultural heritage. The process that produced representatives of material culture as memory institution’s collections and heritage objects was regarded as heritage’s preservation. Individual heritage object’s physical preservation was at first defined as restoration and the professionals who committed restoration work were most often artists or craftsman. Later on, the scientific approach in heritage’s preservation placed cultural heritage’s physical preservation into the category of conservation.359 Currently conservation uses means of remedial and preventive conservation in heritage’s preservation. Sometimes restoration treatments may be part of individual heritage object’s remedial conservation.

Human society’s and nation’s need to preserve their cultural heritage may base on both conscious and unconscious need to maintain certain interpretation of the past that cultural heritage mediates. The preserved cultural heritage from different centuries indicate that societies have both valued some elements of the past and contemporary culture because all cultural phenomena represent at first contemporary culture and if they are preserved they may become cultural heritage from the society’s past. Societies have actively ensured the transmission of their cultural values and heritage to the future generations trough memory institutions that were established to organize nation state’s needs to preserve society’s cultural heritage.360

Preservation of cultural heritage has been “a moral responsibility” for organized societies because it maintains and strengthens nation’s cultural identity and definition of its past. The central objective of preservation has been since 18th century361 to safeguard the existence of humanity’s heritage. Micèle Cloonan (2007a) connects Immanuel Kant’s philosophy and Kant’s concepts of moral, duty and virtue in the context of heritage’s preservation. – Human duty to be moral, that Immanuel Kant assumes in the context of “the categorical imperative” could explain how heritage’s preservation perhaps is regarded as universally valid action for every rational human.362 This “moral imperative to preserve” that Cloonan points out in an international context can be read in various international cultural heritage conventions adopted by UNESCO and European Council.

The concept of continuous preventive conservation and risk management have today leading role in many organisations’ heritage preservation strategies. Minimal intervention has showed to protect the historical integrity of objects and apply the possibility of re- treatability.363 Current ethical principles of conservation support the idea that treatments should extent to minimal.

358 Viñas 2011, 66 359 Cloonan 2007b, 134 360 Cloonan 2007b, 133-147 361 Jokilehto 1999, 1 362 Cloonan 2007a, 747 363 Waller 1996, 7 75

3.1 Early stages of preservation

Ancient archives and libraries that have existed in the areas of contemporary Turkey, Iran, Syria, India, Greece, Egypt and Italy during various centuries B.C. and A.D. show that need to preserve important documents from the past has been part of human civilizations nature.364 The history of modern preservation and restoration started in 14th century’s Rome, where preservation and restoration aimed at old historical monuments and churches preservation that had use. Protection that aimed at ancient monuments were valued because of their documentary nature that resulted that monuments with inscriptions in Latin were preserved. Later on, documentary value was seen also in ancient objects and historical structures that had no inscriptions.365

The first measures of preservation tried to improve the overall condition of Rome trough maintenance and repairing of streets, bridges, walls, gates and in some cases buildings. The Catholic Church had central role in 15th century Italian preservation and restoration projects. It seems that while some of the ancient monuments such as statues and architectural elements were preserved and repaired some other monument such as the Colosseum that did not enjoy equal respect were broken down and reused as building material in new building’s construction work.366 The 15th century repairing contained also historic site’s renewals and enlargements. Both religious buildings and palaces were restored and repaired. In the cases when major changes were done on historic buildings objective was not only to repair but also to renew the building to fulfill the new requirements of the buildings use. Although much could be destroyed, some respect was shown towards some parts of the old buildings.367

In 16th century the most important construction project in Italy was the enlarging and the renewal of the Saint Peter’s Basilica. The construction work caused significant damages for many ancient monuments that were used as building material. This raised the awareness of the need to protect antique artworks and classical monuments. Monuments were seen as manifestations of Italy’s past and as representatives of the classical monuments’ greatness.368 Although the ancient monuments use as building material of the Saint Peter’s basilica was obviously approved by the popes in the 16th century, the Catholic Church was active in promoting the protection of classical buildings that contained inscriptions. Buildings with inscriptions were considered as important monuments and messages from the ancient Rome. Therefore these monuments required protection.369

The central concepts that founded modern conservation were presented during the Age of Enlightenment. During 17th century antiquarian practice had become popular also outside Italy. Classical antiquities collections and copies of noted artworks were collected also in other European countries. Significant classical antiquities’ collections were sold in 17th century to countries such as France and England because Italy’s economic position had

364 Cloonan 2007a, 746 365 Jokilehto 1999, 301 366 Jokilehto 1999, 29 367 Jokilehto 1999, 30 368 Jokilehto 1999, 32 369 Jokilehto 1999, 33 76 changed. Johann Joachim Winckelmann presented370 critical analyses over ancient artworks and monuments that lead to establishment of modern art history and archeology. Winckelmann’s methods to analyze differences between original and copied artwork became later central theoretical background for the restoration practice.371

The most important ideological development of modern heritage conservation occurred during Romantic era. The modern historical awareness resulted in that the original features of heritage sites and objects respected as part of heritage’s authenticity; not only because of aesthetic reasons but also as representations of history. Historic sites that represented national monuments were restored by architects and builders who tried to maintain heritage site’s ability to mediate certain interpretation of cultural history. This new philosophical approach resulted that heritage site’s restoration became professionalized process that aimed at stylistic unity.372

In 18th century’s England and Germanic countries historic buildings original style was respected during repairs, reconstructions and renewals. Objective was to maintain the buildings uniform and symmetric order also during renewal processes. During Romantic era, the value of aging was not widely recognized. Although heritage site’s renewal treatments were widely approved, there were also people373 who felt that the ancient monuments that had gone through renewal process had lost their original character.374

In the beginning of 19th century Romantic Movement was strengthened by both development of positivist philosophy and the modern scientific and industrial progression. The philosophy of historicism supported important historic sites restoration because these sites considered as national heritage. Restoration was implemented with most suitable means in order to illustrate the nation’s accomplishments. During this time architects and builders were still rather unenlightened about medieval building techniques and style.375 The concept of style related to sovereign features of historic site. This style was influenced by the use of the building. Relative style’s existence depended on the use of the historic site. The use of the building resulted what kind of style the building had. Religious buildings such as churches relative style differed from other buildings style.376

In 1830’s restoration practice started to be influenced by minimum intervention approach that based on precise research of cultural heritage. When the historic buildings protection in 1830’s France started to be promoted, heritage’s value evaluations in protection focused on documentary and artistic values of the heritage site.377 In 1840’s France central criticist of restoration movement was archeologist Adolphe Napoléon Didron378 who supported the idea of minimum intervention in preserving ancient

370 Johann Joachim Winckelmann’s History of Ancient Art was published in 1764. (Jokilehto 1999, 138) 371 Jokilehto 1999, 47 372 Jokilehto 1999, 101 373 Jukka Jokilehto (1999) mentions as one of the criticists Richard Gough who were the President of the Society of Antiquaries in England (Jokilehto 1999, 106) 374 Jokilehto 1999,109 375 Jokilehto 1999, 137 376 Jokilehto 1999, 151 377 Jokilehto 1999, 153 378 Adolphe Napoléon Didron (1806-1867) founded the journal Les Annales Archéologiques in 1844. 77 monuments. Didron’s approach to restoration was that even if some repairs would need to add to the heritage item, nothing should be removed from it. All time periods’ and styles’ heritages needed to be protected and preserved, but it was considered that the heritage sites worth restoring by the nation states should have national importance and value.379

The discussion over restoration principles continued the entire 1840’s. The core of this debate related to the scale of restoration treatments and also to the bases of restoration decisions. There were professionals who either supported the minimal intervention approach and others who preferred large-scale restoration. The professionals who preferred the minimal intervention approach augmented their opinion with heritage site’s documentary nature from the past. This heritage approach concluded that cultural heritage should be conserved intact, without falsifications even if they were multilayered. The full- scale restoration movement’s supporters underlined heritage site’s historic and monumental features that considered also the aspects of buildings use.380

While in France state had central role in protecting and restoring heritage sites, in England historic building’s protection and restoration based on active people’s decisions to fund such projects. The establishment of several English heritage societies was influenced by active British individuals who had a role in these societies. Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings was founded in 1877, and after this many other societies that promoted heritage’s protection and preservation. Some of these English societies were the Ancient Monuments Society, Victorian Society and the Council for British Archaeology. Significant development in English heritage management related to the establishment of the National Thrust in 1895. This trust was established to promote the preservation of significant places that contained historical interests or natural beauty. The idea of the National Thrust was followed by some European countries, United States, Australia and India; and also Scotland381 in 1931.382

3.2 Development of modern conservation

The modern movement of heritage conservation was from the beginning international. Modern conservation developed in the 18th century and it started at the same time in many European countries. In 19th century the modern conservation movement was adopted in North America, India and Japan.383 Many conservation researchers have defined as the first modern conservation theorists John Ruskin and Eugène Violet-le-Duc.384

The 18th century was important time period in heritage’s protection and conservation history, because the central concepts such as originality and imitation were defined in cultural heritage context.385 English 18th century aesthetic theories of picturesque and sublime

379 Jokilehto 1999, 138 380 Jokilehto 1999, 149 381 the National Thrust for Scotland was established in 1931. (Jokilehto 1999, 156) 382 Jokilehto 1999, 156 383 Jokilehto & King 2001, 33 384 Viñas 2011, 3 385 Jokilehto 1999, 17 78 influenced into the development of modern conservation. Picturesqueness was seen for example in Italy as one of the features that authorized ancient monuments protection and conservation. The term sublime in association with cultural heritage related to nobility, excellence and magnificence of features. Concept of sublime started to use in the context of classical landscapes in the late 17th century England.386

The French Revolution influenced strongly to the conservation policies’ development. Heritage’s maintenance became a national obligation for many countries. Central concepts of cultural heritage and modern conservation were established. Some of these concepts were for example idea of historical monuments, science and art as national heritages and heritage’s meaning for education. Proposals over cultural heritage’s systematic classification and inventory work was made in France. Heritages such as historic sites, artworks and archives were seen as nation’s significant property and these heritage’s protection norms were brought to both France’s and many other countries legislation.387

Modern conservation was first time in use during the Napoleonic period. Classical style had become dominant fashion and the interest in ancient heritages had risen. Because Napoleon wished to be connected with the ancient Rome that represented the most powerful empire in history, Napoleon supported ancient monuments restoration in Rome. Classical monuments became nationally significant and powerful. The Catholic Church authorized new archeologic excavations and restoration of some important monuments in Rome. A couple of decades later during the Romantic era interest in ancient Greek monuments rose, partly because they were seen as important symbols of democracy.388

Romantic era became central time period for the development of heritage conservation and restoration practices. Original style became respected part of cultural heritage’s authenticity. Before romantic era for example medieval buildings enlargements and changes had been done in contemporary style. Romantic era resulted that heritage preservation’s central objective was to maintain heritage’s authenticity and integrity. Changes in historic sites were designed so that they would fit into the building’s original architecture.389

Theoretical backgrounds of modern conservation based on late 18th century historicity and approach that observed heritage’s cultural diversity. According to Jukka Jokilehto (1999) this approach was seen in antiquarian criticism that aimed at classical church renewals in 1790’s England and in 1830s France. The criticism movement was followed in the midd-19th century by English writer John Ruskin who had leading role in both English arts and crafts movement and in cultural heritage’s anti-restoration movement.390 Ruskin’s anti-restoration movement underlined as heritage’s most valuable feature the signs of history that authentic cultural heritage could mediate to the contemporary era.391

386 Jokilehto 1999, 50 387 Jokilehto 1999,69 388 Jokilehto 1999, 69 389 Jokilehto 1999, 101 390 Jokilehto 1999, 174 391 Viñas 2011, 5 79

John Ruskin’s anti-restoration movement both criticized the classical restoration for destroying historical site’s authenticity and tried to promote historical buildings protection, maintenance and conservation. For John Ruskin buildings and work of art represented individual artists’ creative work and therefore it was authentic as it was. Anti-restoration movement saw aging of historic buildings and artworks as part of the beauty of these sites and objects. Although Ruskin did not establish a conservation theory, he was the first who defined the values and cultural meanings of historic sites and objects providing philosophical bases for the modern conservations.392

This new conservation movement’s ideas were exported to France, Germany, Italy, Greece and India. Although the movement based on criticism of classical restoration, conservation393 was regarded as valued mean to maintain historic sites and artworks.394 In 19th century France Gothic buildings’ preservation had become central national agenda. Many gothic buildings such as the Paris Notre Dame and the Cathedral of Amiense were restored before midd-18th century.395

Eugène Violet-le-Duc was a French architect and in charge of Paris Notre Dame’s and the Cathedral of Amiense’s restoration. Violet-le-Duc396 valued cultural heritage’s authenticity and influenced strongly to the contemporary conservation ethics development by regarding the most valuable state of cultural heritage the original state. This approach defined marks of heritages use as deforming factors of cultural heritage. Conservation aimed at maintenance of original or supposed original state of cultural heritage.397

The development of modern historicity and theory of preservation resulted that the state control over both cultural heritage and heritage’s preservation increased. The framework of the control created regulative norms and legislation that was used to protect heritage’s maintenance. At first the concept of cultural heritage contained mostly historical sites and works of art, but later on also ethnographic collections, historic gardens, cities and landscapes could become cultural heritage that required preservation. The regulative norms on cultural heritage’s protection and the heritage administration were established to maintain the publicly owned cultural heritage. Later the regulative protection was expanded to cover also significant privately owned heritage sites.398

Because two central criteria, authenticity and integrity, have strongly influenced into cultural heritage’s value evaluation.399 These values have resulted in the conservation ethical discussion over the acceptable intervention level of conservation treatments.400 This ethical discussion caused that suitable conservation treatment were regarded as such treatments that respected the authenticity and the effects of time in real cultural heritage

392 Jokilehto 1999, 174-175 393 At this stage conservation contained mainly remedial conservation treatments that were applied directly on cultural heritage. 394 Jokilehto 1999, 174 395 Viñas 2011, 4 396 as well as John Ruskin. 397 Viñas 2011, 4-5 398 Jokilehto 1999, 18-19 399 Welburn et all 2009, 2-3 400 Brooks 2014, 6 80 object. Idea of cultural heritage’s authenticity represents cultural construct, because different social groups may have different opinions over what is real and authentic in cultural heritage.401

3.2.1 Aesthetic theories of modern conservation

In mid-20th century two central theoretical movements of modern conservation started to gain more central part in the field of heritage preservation. These were aesthetic conservation theory and new scientific theory of conservation. Both of these conservation theories followed the tradition of classical conservation that also, aimed at preservation and recovering of cultural heritage’s integrity with the means of conservation.402

The aesthetic theory in modern conservation concentrated on aesthetic and artistic integrity of cultural heritage. Aesthetic theories provided for heritage’s conservation and preservation difficult tasks. One of these tasks was to both maintain heritage’s historical authenticity and to recover its artistic integrity.403

Classical aesthetics however approached heritage in a way that bound heritage object’s history and artistic authenticity together. Conservation field was strongly influenced by the theories of objectivism and the 20th century classical philosophes that examined the nature of truth. Use of the aesthetic theories as central theoretical bases of heritage’s conservation has seen problematic because aesthetic theories often underline heritage objects artwork nature and limit to analyze cultural heritage only trough historical and artistic integrity.404

3.2.2 New scientific conservation

New scientific conservation is guided by several principles, but the dominating principle is to preserve cultural heritage’s material information unchanged with the means of conservation. This material conservation principle rises from the belief in scientific knowledge and the need to preserve cultural heritage’s material truth. Also, scientific conservation follow classical conservation theories’ need to gain truth in cultural heritage’s preservation. The material truth in this context is regarded as truth of cultural heritage.405 The second important principle that influences both in the classical conservation theories and in the scientific conservation relates to heritage’s originality. This results that heritage’s

401 Brooks 2014, 7 402 Viñas 2011, 67 403 Viñas 2011, 67 404 Viñas 2011, 69 405 Viñas 2011, 81 81 conservation often aim at preservation of some era’s original appearance in cultural heritage.406

In the late 1880’s the scientific methods applied form natural sciences started to use in cultural heritage’s conservation and preservation. This resulted in that museums started to establish their own conservation laboratories. The firs conservation laboratories were established by the Berlin Staatliche Museum in 1888 and by the British Museum in 1919. Similar conservation laboratories were established by central museums in Cairo, Louvre and Harvard in 1925 and in Rome, New Delhi and Tokyo in 1938.407 Progress of scientific research methods408 and knowledge in the beginning of 20th century provided possibility to use new scientific methods in heritage’s conservation and preservation.409 Conservation treatments started to develop through the established research laboratories.

The overall development of natural science based modern conservation, resulted that both the conservator’s profession and regulated conservation treatments started to develop side by side strongly from 1930’s onwards. An important step in this was the International Museum Office’s410 establishment and this organizations active role in increasing both international scientific interaction between different nation’s conservators and researchers. The first International Conference for the Study of Scientific Methods for the Examination and Conservation of Works of Art was held in Rome in 1930.411 This congress perhaps lead to that normative agreements, charters, over heritage conservation were established and later these agreements became central means to develop conservation practise of conservator-restorers. The Athens carter that was published in 1931 was the first charter made by conservator-restorers and other heritage specialists over cultural heritage’s conservation and ever since charters have been central in defining professional ideas on conservation. Different countries conservation professionals and scientists started to have more regular interaction with each other in cultural heritage conservation questions.412

The International Institute for the Conservation of Museum Objects413 was established in 1950 to promote and support the natural sciences use in heritage conservation. After the 1950’s the scientific conservation theory started to receive more recognition in the conservation field and after a while it was regarded the best theoretical approach to preserve and maintain cultural heritage.414 New scientific applications started to use in heritage’s preservation and progression was made in conservation research especially during 1970’s and 1980’s.415

406 Viñas 2011, 82-85 407 Jokilehto 1999, 299 408 Jokilehto 1999, 299 409 Waller 1996, 1 410 International Museum Office was a body of the Languages of Nations that existed before UN (von Imhoff 2009, 2) 411 von Imhoff 2009, 2 412 Viñas 2011, 6 413 Currently known as International Instute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works (IIC). (Viñas 2011, 69) 414 Viñas 2011, 69-70 415 Jokilehto 1999, 299 82

There have also been differences between different geographical areas’ dominating theoretical conservation approaches. When in the Mediterranean countries and in the South America the aesthetic and artistic value approach in heritage’s conservation has been central theoretical movement, in Anglo-Saxon countries the natural sciences approach has been dominant approach in heritage’s conservation. Italian Cesare Brandi (1963) was one of the modern conservation theorists who underlined cultural heritage’s artistic and aesthetic value in preservation processes. This meant that heritage’s aesthetic values were recognized when conservation decisions were made.416

The cultural heritage concept’s development in the 18th and 19th centuries resulted that the universal heritage protection trough international agreements and conventions was developed.417 Before year 1931 heritage conservation had aimed at mainly historical heritage sites and artworks preservation, but after this also other forms of cultural heritage were included into the concept of cultural heritage that could be conserved.418

In 20th century and especially after the Second World War heritage’s protection started to have more international aspects.419 Once the United Nations (UN) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) were established, the International Museum Office was integrated with the International Counsel of Museums (ICOM) in 1946. The International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) was founded by UNESCO in 1965.420 The first international measures for conservation practice were given in 1931 in the Athens Charter. This charter later inspired the second measure setting document, the Venice charter in 1961.421

More regulated conservation approach led to establishment of conservation guidelines that later on were regarded as standards. Development of standards in conservation based on the early stages of modern scientific conservation previous experiences and contemporary knowledge. The objective of guidelines was to improve the preservation of cultural heritage and to maintain its usability.422 According to Rebeca Alcántara (2002) the use of standards was introduced in the field of conservation trough recommendations for preservation of collections in the late 1940’s. These standards gave recommendations for suitable levels of relative humidity, temperature and light. During the 1960’s these early recommendations began to use in association with preventive conservation measures. The earliest standards concerning preventive conservation were Robert Fuller’s Standards of Exposure to Light (1963) and Nathan Stolow’s Standards for the Care of Works of Art in Transit (1981).423

Although the profession of conservator had been established in France in 1830424, the current form of conservation profession started to develop in Europe and in the United

416 Viñas 2011, 6 417 Jokilehto 1999, 281 418 Alcántara 2002, 7 419 Jokilehto 1999, 18-19 420 von Imhoff 2009, 2 421 Vinson 2009, 90 422 Alcántara 2002, 15 423 Alcántara 2002, 8 424 Jokilehto 1999,125 83

States during 1950’s and 1960’s.425 Behind this development was a rising concern over treatments carried out by poorly trained conservation technicians and artisans.426 The International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works’ (IIC) American Group presented its first set of guidelines and standards for the field of conservation in 1963 in a document known as the Murray Pease Report. A code of professional ethics was later added to this document and it was published as The Code of Ethics and Practice in 1979.427

The history of organized conservation training begun in 1956 when UNESCO established the Rome Centre and the centre started its work in 1959. The Rome Centre has known as ICCROM since 1977.428 During the last decades of 20th century natural science’s methodology gained more central role in heritage’s preservation and conservation processes because of the increased use of natural sciences’ techniques and equipment in cultural heritage’s conservation.429 When the scientific conservation theory had become the leading and valid theoretical approach in preservation conservation was established as a university discipline.430 Since the early 1980’s many countries have established their conservation training at higher education institutions, mostly at universities.431

Changes in heritage and conservation fields’ theoretical thinking started from 1970’s onwards to recognize heritage’s value assessments as part of heritage’s preservation process.432 This resulted that in the 1970’s, the theoretical concepts of conservation started to evolve into appreciation of minimal intervention in the care of cultural heritage. This resulted the fast development of preventive conservation theory. Development and the re- evaluation of conservation’s reversibility questions influenced into minimalist tendencies becoming dominant in conservation practise.433 This progress made preventive conservation methods more precise and extensive.434 In the late 20th century new scientific conservation theory started to influence into the field of heritage conservation simultaneously with the aesthetic approach in conservation theory. The new scientific conservation theory underlined the scientific techniques in heritage’s conservation more than aesthetic and philosophical conservation theories.435 In new scientific conservation theory natural sciences such as chemistry and physics hade more significant part in cultural heritage’s conservation and the meaning of humanities in the field of conservation was slightly reduced.436

3.3 Contemporary conservation theory

425 Alcántara 2002, 7 426 Alcántara 2002, 8 427 Alcántara 2002, 7 428 Redondo 2008, 1 429 Viñas 2011, 6 430 Viñas 2011, 6 431 von Imhoff 2009, 4 432 Avarami 2000, 19 433 Redondo 2008, 1 434 Waller 1996, 1 435 Viñas 2011, 6 436 Viñas 2011, 7 84

Currently scientific conservation theories use multiform approaches to analyze cultural heritage in order to promote heritage’s preservation.437 According to Salvador Muñoz Viñas (2011) conservation theoretical discussion started to contain more critical and variating voices from 1980’s onwards. These opposite voices mediated an image of fragmental and disconnected theoretical thinking. The new theoretical ideas were presented in individual research papers, conservation reports and in conservation professionals’ communication with each other.

This new movement in heritage’s preservation was defined by Salvador Muñoz Viñas in 2005 as “contemporary conservation theory”. Viñas concluded that this new movement in heritage’s preservation represented theory because the new conservation ideals reflected uniform conceptual approach in heritage’s preservation. Contemporary conservation theory did not follow the classical conservation theories and it sometimes also presented conservation approaches that were opposite to the classical conservation theories.438 Contemporary conservation theory is guided by two central principles that are functional and value-led conservation.439 Functional approach in contemporary conservation does not concentrate only on cultural heritage’s aesthetic and historic aspects but also other uses of cultural heritage in societies that are perhaps driven by political, economic or cultural interests. Value-lead approach in contemporary conservation is tightly connected with functional conservation approach. The conservation criterion is led by a set of values that individual persons and social groups have placed in cultural heritage.440 The fundamental idea behind value-led conservation is that conservation decisions base on analyses of the values that cultural heritage represents for different people and social groups in communities and societies. Objective of conservation is to gain a result that will promote the balance between different parties in societies. This approach suggests that heritage’s preservation processes have become during 1990’s and 2000’s interactive process were public opinion influences into heritage professionals’ decisions in heritage’s preservation processes.

Since 2000’s values of cultural heritage have recognized as part of both conservation planning and the actual conservation process. It was the Nara Document and the Australian Burray Carter that influenced into heritage’s values assessment’s recognition as part of heritage sites and landscapes conservation processes. Participatory based processes involving heritage’s interest and stakeholder groups into preservation process became common approach in the Western countries’ conservation practice. Participatory processes were used to promote conservation treatments sustainability.441

In Salvador Muñoz Viñas’ contemporary conservation theory conservation processes take place in interaction with the stakeholders of cultural heritage. Objective is to reduce power related conflicts that could take place in association with cultural heritage’s conservation processes. Viñas states that the contemporary conservation theory bases on

437 Viñas 2011, 69 438 Viñas 2011, 7 439 Viñas 2011, 171 440 Viñas 2011, 177-178 441 Avrami 2000, 19 85

“negotiation, equilibrium, discussion and consensus”.442 This theoretical approach does not connect conservation to the concept of truth but to the three-dimensional meaning that was presented by Stephen Michalski as three main reasons for conservation. These reasons were: 1. to preserve and improve heritage’s scientific meaning as scientific evidence. 2. to preserve or improve the symbolic meaning that this heritage has for this heritage’s stakeholders and 3. to preserve or improve the emotional and symbolic meanings that this heritage has for various persons and groups of people.443

Contemporary conservation theory recognizes conservation’s expressive function. Expressiveness of conservation means that preservation has an impact on society although this feature of conservation would represent a by-product of the preservation process. It has evaluated that decision to conserve a cultural object results that this object is regarded as cultural heritage rather than already defined cultural heritage that would require conservation and preservation. This expressive nature of preservation may cause revaluation of cultural heritage trough provided funding and underlined social values in preservation actions. The classical conservation theories that were built on the concept of truth have not been open for this communication featured approach in conservation.444

The increase of the recognition of cultural diversity and heritage’s physical conditions has led to a new situation where meaning of cultural heritage and preservation politics has been reassessed.445 According to Michèle Cloonan (2007b) the shift from the traditional heritage’s preservation strategies that based on memory institutions guardianship and maintenance started to change into heritage’s preservation model where local communities had stronger contribution in the heritage’s preservation and maintenance processes in their own societies.446

From 2000’s onwards there has been also critical voices concerning the conservation and preservation especially in the cases of badly damaged or destroyed cultural heritage. One of these criticists has been Cornelius Holtorft (2006) who has argued that heritage’s destruction and loss are part of cultural heritages actuality. Holtorft regards that heritage’s destruction and preservation should not be treated in contemporary mass production societies as it had been done historically. He sees that heritage’s preservation culture and history have modified ideology of heritage-preservation so that all possible records are tried to preserve with the means of conservation and preservation.447

Also, the dominating new scientific conservation theory has been criticized.448 The core behind these critics has been the dominating role of natural sciences in heritage’s conservation and in conservation decisions making. Although science has been able to improve heritage’s preservation processes, the critical question has been the actual benefit and significance of science in conservation practice. The limits of conservation science result

442 Viñas 2011, 163 443 Viñas 2011, 175 444 Viñas 2011, 176-177 445 Jokilehto 1999, 19 446 Cloonan 2007b, 133 447 Holtorf 2006, 101 448 Viñas 2011, 144 86 that some areas of conservation practice cannot be solved with the means of science.449 According to Salvador Muñoz Viñas (2011) contemporary heritage’s long term preservation requires “techno-scientist” who are able to transform their scientific knowledge into useful solutions that are accessible for persons who are responsible for heritage’s long term preservation.450

3.3.1 Risk management and risk assessment

In 1980’s and 1990’s there was strong scientific progression in cultural heritage material’s preservation and deterioration processes’ research that was used to promote cultural heritage’s risk assessment work. In this scientific development of risk assessment were active North American scholars Stefan Michalski and Robert Waller and Brittish conservation scientist Jonathan Ashley-Smith. These pioneers’ research findings in the field of heritage’s risk assessment lead to that risk management means were applied for the use of preventive conservation.

Risk management contains actions before, during and after risks that aim at cultural heritage’s management in conditions that threatens its long-term preservation. Measures of risk management often do not have ability to prevent risks to happen, but risk management measures have ability to limit the effects of the disasters in cultural heritage and to minimize the loss in cultural heritages value after the disaster. Risk management bases on heritage preservation that is promoted by evaluation of general heritage risks, estimation of these risks impacts on cultural heritage and planning of risk management or reduction measures that aim at minimal loss in heritage’s value. Climate change has risen importance of risk management and assessment globally.451

Risks cannot be evaluated before they have been identified. Cultural heritage’s risk analysis does not contain only evaluation of the probability of the risk but it also analyses how this risk may influence on cultural heritage’s overall condition. The influence that risk may have in cultural heritage is evaluated trough condition and loss in value.452 Risk management bases on decision-making process that contains evaluation of possible impacts that made actions may have on cultural heritage. All of the possible options that can be used to reduce risks have to be evaluated and the possible risk management means are selected, introduced and monitored. The most important part in decision-making process is the selection of the risk management or risk reduction methods.453

Most of the risks that causes heritage’s degradation has been known for many centuries, but also most recent risks that have been identified have been discovered in the 1940’s. Risk analyses have regarded to aim at management of risks. Risk analyses and risk

449 Viñas 2011, 145 450 Viñas 2011, 146 451 Wang 2015, 212 452 Ashley-Smith 1999, 82 453 Ashley-Smith 1999, 22 87 assessment requires understanding over risks and how these risks can be assessed.454 To some extent the probability that some risk actualizes can be evaluated statistically. Risk analyses has regarded as needed instrument for the management of risks. Risk analyses base on thorough identification, assessment and evaluation of risks and there are four conceptual phases in risk assessment use. These phases are 1. release assessment, 2. exposure assessment, 3. consequence assessment and 4. risk estimation. Release assessment relates to the possible materials and deterioration agents in the surroundings of cultural heritage.455 Exposure assessment deals with the intensity, frequency and duration that heritage is being exposed to risk agents. Consequence assessment refers to documentation of the observed effects that certain exposure conditions have on cultural heritage materials. Risk estimation bases on release assessment’s, exposure assessment’s and consequence assessment’s information that provides possibility to evaluate the effects that certain exposure agents have on specific heritage objects.456

Risk assessment analyses does not only provide possibility to identify the central risks that aim at cultural heritage it also provides possibilities to define the most important actions in risk reduction and disaster response.457 Cultural heritage’s risk management does not contain individual decisions but a group or series of decisions that aim at process that either eliminates or reduces heritage risks. In order to manage heritage risks in accident and disaster situations made first stage and second stage decisions have to be defined at forehand and these decisions outcome have to be evaluated from the perspective of heritage risks management.458

Stephen Michalski (1990) presented an overall framework that contoured preventive conservation, disaster planning and remedial conservation for the use of heritage preservation. This early charter that contained perspective for the preservation process of cultural heritage approached heritage’s preservation trough deterioration agents, heritage’s deterioration stage, means of preservation and means of disaster planning. Michalski’s chart provided disaster management model that could be applied both for risk assessment and disaster management work. The five stages in Michalski’s chart are: 1. Avoid source of the deterioration agent, 2. detect the deterioration agent, 3. block the deterioration agent, 4. respond to the deterioration agent and 5. recover heritage from the deterioration agent.459

Stefan Michalski defined in 1990 nine factors that were responsible for tangible cultural heritage’s physical deterioration and one factor that caused cultural heritage’s non-physical deterioration.460 The factors that caused heritage’s physical deterioration were: 1. physical forces, 2. fire, 3. water, 4. criminals, 5. pests, 6. pollutants, 7. light and radiation, 8. unsuitable temperature and 9. incorrect relative humidity. The deterioration agent that caused non- physical deterioration of cultural heritage was custodial neglect.461 Almost all of these deteriorative agents are represented in this research’s disaster cases as factors that cause

454 Ashley-Smith 1999, 20 455 Ashley-Smith 1999, 20 456 Ashley-Smith 1999, 21 457 Pinhero & Macedo 2009, 434 458 Ashley-Smith 1999, 34-35 459 Michalski 1990, 589 460 Waller 1994, 12; Waller 1995, 21 461 Waller 1995, 22 88 significant threat to cultural heritage’s long-term preservation. Only deterioration that has been caused by pests, light and radiation are not represented in this research’s disaster cases. Stefan Michalski’s deterioration parameter did not contain deterioration that was caused by other living organisms such as fungi, bacteria and mold. Later on, the deterioration caused by all of these living organisms was defined as biological deterioration that contained both deterioration caused by pests and microbes such as fungi, mold and bacteria.

In the beginning of 1990’s there was no systematic means to identify risks that aimed at memory institutions collections that could provide precise information bases for the evaluation of the relative risk magnitude. Stefan Michalski had in 1990 defined 10 deterioration agents that provided bases for Robert Waller’s collection risk assessment models. Robert Waller (1994) described his risk assessment framework that had been developed at the Canadian Museum of Nature for the definition of cost-effective means to minimize risks that aim at museum’s collections. At this stage, Waller defined both benefits and the limitations of the developed framework, the limitations and uncertainties based on the limited understanding over the deterioration process and the difficulties to define precise and objective evaluations over certain deterioration parameters.462

Robert Waller (1995) continued to define Michalski’s deterioration agents, risk types and deterioration agents’ relative importance. Waller placed Stefan Michalski’s 10 deterioration agents into three risk types. Risk type definition based on evaluation how severe damages certain deterioration agent could cause in cultural heritage in certain disaster situation. These risk types that Robert Weller used in his risk assessment model were: 1. catastrophic, 2. severe and 3. mild or gradual. The relative importance evaluation based on four categories that varied from less important to most important risks. Waller placed in his risk assessment table different risk types frequency of occurrence and severity of effects into a framework where, rare and catastrophic risks that received first category, sporadic and severe disaster risks situated in second category and risks that occurred constantly and had mild or gradual effects were placed into third category.463

Risk assessment’s objective in Waller’s collection risk assessment model was to change different risks that aimed at cultural heritage into more measurable and defined form. Objective is to evaluate the severity that occurred risk possibly causes in cultural heritage and how probable it is that this risk will actualize. The first category risks such as floods or earthquakes probability evaluation requires geographical and meteorological knowledge. The second type’s risks can be evaluated by museum professionals. In this risk evaluation conservator’s have central role because they do condition evaluation of the cultural heritage. The category three risks require conservation scientists research findings in the fields of climatology and cultural heritage material’s research that relates to the climatological parameters impact on cultural heritage’s preservation or degradation.464

Robert Waller presented in 1996 a mathematical formula for cultural heritage’s risk assessment needs evaluation: P × FS × E × LV. In this formula, P represented probability of

462 Waller 1994, 12, 15 463 Waller 1995, 23 464 Waller 1995, 24 89 damages, FS the fraction of the collection susceptible to damages, E represented the extent of damages, and LV the expected loss of value in the collection.465 Robert Waller (1999) approaches risk assessment trough perspective of 100-year time period and trough evaluation of heritage risks magnitude. In 1999 Waller introduced his mathematical formula for the evaluation of cultural heritage’s risk magnitude (RM). Risk magnitude could according to Waller be evaluated trough the formula FS x LV x E = MR that gives the magnitude of a risk for certain collection for a specific risk type. In Robert Waller’s (1999) risk magnitude evaluation all of the parameters were evaluated trough 100-year perspective which resulted that probability (parameter P), extent (E), fraction susceptibility (FS) and Loss in Value (LV) that possibly take place in a 100-year time period varies between frequency of constant (3) to sporadic (2) and rare (1). This risk assessment model made it possible to identify certain heritage collections risk assessment needs and the potential methods of control in cultural heritage’s risk management.466

Robert Waller (1995) defined three basic risk management methods that can be used to control risks that aim at cultural heritage. Means that could be used to control heritage risks were: 1. eliminate the source that is causing risks for cultural heritage; 2. place barrier between cultural heritage and the risk source; and 3. influence on the deterioration parameters that are responsible for the risk. According to Waller it is rather often that all three can be used to migrate heritage collection’s risks but often one of the means could prove to be most effective method to reduce risks.467 Robert Waller placed under his three basic methods of risk migration eight possible areas where these tree means of risk migration can operate. These areas are: 1. location, 2. site, 3. building, 4. room, 5. cabinet, 6. specimen, 7. policy and 8. procedure.468 Robert Waller’s risk assessment model is used also in this research disaster cases analyses from the viewpoint of disaster site’s risk management, disaster response and heritage recovery processes.

Jonathan Ashley-Smith (1999) presented several dictions making models for heritage risks’ management. Common features of these risk management models469 were that all risk management stages where decisions had to be made all of the decision options, and these option’s estimated outcome would lead to either successful or unsuccessful management of risks. Jonathan Ashley-Smith evaluated that in risk management processes the decisions that are made at the first stage and these decisions outcome lead to a certain risk management route that framed the options that could be made during the processes that follow when a certain risk actualizes. The first stage decisions often result what kind of second stage decisions can be made. Through this perspective, it is the first stage decisions that seem to be the most significant from the perspective of risk management. The second stage decisions influence into the end result of the risk management work. The second stage decisions on the other hand influence centrally to the success of the overall risk management work. The made decisions’ outcomes result if risk management process proves to be successful or not.470

465 Waller 1996,3 466 Waller 1995, 24 467 Waller 1995, 24 468 Waller 1995, 25 469 Jonathan Ashley-Smith named his heritage risks management process models as “decision trees” 470 Ashley-Smith 1999, 36-41 90

Robert Waller (2002) presented a more developed version of his risk assessment model by the name of CMN.471 Waller’s collection risk model had both similarities and differences with the risk analyses methods that were widely used in different industries such as safety engineering some of these risk analyses systems are Faulty Tree Analyses (FTA)472, Reliability Block Diagrams (RBA)473, Failure Modes, Effect Analysis (FMEA)474, Failure mode, effects and criticality analysis (FMECA)475. Most of these risk analyses methods had originally been developed for the use of the United States Army between 1940’s and 1960’s. Later on, these analyses systems received their applications in various fields of industries.476

Robert Waller’s CMN collection risk model has been used to analyze this research disaster cases. Objective was to identify trough this risk model disaster response and heritage recovery processes that would lead to successful processes that are able to minimize or prevent heritage’s further deterioration and un-successful processes that result the continuing of heritage’s deterioration. Although risks cannot fully be removed with risk management model, Waller’s CMN collection risk model provides possibility to analyze more thoroughly heritage risks and how to manage these risks at certain level that does not increase the risks of heritage’s further deterioration. Remedial conservation activities are not contained into this risk management model’s preservation activities unless they are needed to gain stability in certain heritage objects long term preservation.477 This research shares Robert Waller’s preservation theoretical approach in heritage’s long-term preservation that bases on measures of preventive conservation and that may use means of remedial conservation and restoration in cultural heritage’s stabilization. Stabilization in this context means remedial conservation or restoration methods that are able to stop or effectively slow down ongoing deterioration process of cultural heritage.478

Robert Waller’s Risk Assessment models have later been applied also in other countries memory institutions’ collection risks management. The model was according to Ana Catarina Pinheiro and Maria Filomena Macedo (2009) applied successfully for the use of Portuguese archives.479After Waller’s risk management model also other risk management models have been established in more precise heritage risk types such as fires, insect invasion and in general preventive measures that relate to collections long term preservation.480

It was Stefan Michalski (2002) who brought into cultural heritage materials ageing discussion importance of temperature and relative humidity from the perspective of

471 CMN stands for Canadian Museum of Nature. 472 FTA was originally developed in 1962 for the needs of the United States Air Force’s Ballistic Systems Division. The system 473 RBD is also known as a dependence diagram (DD) both of these systems are used to evaluate diagram component’s reliability in the success or failure of a system. 474 FMEA failure analyses method was developed in 1950’s from the FMECA method for the use of the United States Army. FMEA was used in malfunctions analyses of military systems. 475 FMECA method that was originally developed by the United States Army in 1940’s. 476 Waller 2002, 102, 104-105 477 Waller 2002, 106 478 Waller 2002, 106 479 Pinheiro & Macedo 2009, 429. 480 Wang 2015, 210 91 chemical degradation processes. Aging studies often concentrated on archival materials such as paper but Michalski suggested that similar routes of aging could also take place in other organic materials such as films’ and painting varnishes’ case. Significant in Stefan Michalski’s contribution to the cultural heritage material’s ageing research was that he defined chemical decay processes correlation relation with temperature and acidic hydrolyses processes connection in cellulose materials with relative humidity and materials moisture content. According to Michalski every 5 °C degree drop in temperature “doubled” the chemical lifetime of cultural heritage materials and on the contrary every 5 °C degree rise in temperature rose twice as much the route of chemical degradation process in cultural heritage materials that in painting varnishes case could be identified as yellowing.481

Organic materials such as textile, paper and film materials acidic hydrolyses is influenced by the storage conditions relative humidity. High humidity increases organic materials acidifying process through acidic hydrolyses. According to Stefan Michalski by reducing the Relative Humidity (RH) in storage conditions from 70 % RH to half of the RH value 35 % the objects can expect to preserve more than two times longer and organic materials that are preserved in storage conditions where RH is 18 % the materials are expected to preserve four times longer than in the storage conditions where relative humidity is 70 % RH. This way every drop of the relative humidity decreases acidic hydrolyses in organic material and every rise in relative humidity increases organic materials acidifying trough acidic hydrolyses.482

Tom Strang and David Grattan (2009) continued research on humidity’s impact on organic heritage materials degradation processes. Strang and Grattan pointed out that it is the humidity inside organic materials in the form of moisture content that has ability to promote chemical degradation process in organic materials’ cell walls.483 Therefore it is cool and dry storage conditions that have ability to provide long term preservation with widest possible object lifetime.484

Jonathan Ashley-Smith defined in 1995 classification for heritage’s physical changing that could represent three different types: patina, restoration and deterioration. This framework was further developed by Salvador Muñoz Viñas (2011) who place these three factors in a framework that contained also the aspects of intention and value. Viñas also increased Ashley-Smith’s definition of heritage’s alteration types with concept of vandalism.485 According to Salvador Muñoz Viñas heritage’s modification that represented both non-deliberate changes and increased heritage’s value is patina. Changes that were seen as both deliberately maid and such that increase cultural heritage’s value is restoration. The alteration that was caused by non-deliberate changes and reduced heritage’s value were defined as decay and disaster. Vandalism was defined as deliberately caused change that reduced heritages value.486

481 Michalski 2002, 70 482 Michalski 2002, 70 483 Strang & Grattan 2009, 122, 126 484 Strang & Grattan 2009, 124 485 Viñas 2011, 101 486 Viñas 2011, 102 92

3.3.2 Preventive conservation

There is a correlation relationship between cultural heritage and environment where it is placed.487 Therefore preventive conservation approaches heritage’s preservation trough environmental control. Objective is to generate favorable conditions for cultural heritage’s storage, using, transportation and handling that would promote heritage’s long-term preservation.488 Measures of preventive conservation base on indirect actions that aim at slowing down or preventing cultural heritage’s deterioration.489 Scientific research on cultural heritage material’s deterioration and preservation made it possible to apply specific means of preventive conservation. The collection policies and the collection management strategies became the central instruments trough which cultural heritage’s preventive conservation started to develop in the memory institutions.490

ICOM Code of Ethics has defined preventive conservation as central instrument in museum collections’ maintenance that influences both in museum policies and in collections’ maintenance. Because preventive conservation has central part in memory institution’s preservation work, this theoretical approach can regard as one of the most cost- effective means to create and maintain a protective environment for cultural heritage’s everyday handling, storage, display and transition conditions.491

According to Joel Taylor (2005) integration of the collection’s condition and risk assessment research in 1990’s made it possible to establish probable cause of damage in addition to the type of damage. In 1990’s research on cultural heritage’s disaster management started to increase.492 Publications were made on cultural heritage’s first aid in fire, water damage and natural disaster situations. During the 1990’s and early 2000’s there were strong interest in risk assessment model’s development for the use of heritage’s preservation. These models improved the effectiveness of the preventive conservation in heritages long-term preservation.493

During 1990’s preventive conservation had become central heritage’s maintenance strategy in many memory institutions. The first areas where preventive conservation started to use in heritage’s management based on environmental research’s results that had been done in association with cultural heritage. This research aimed at development of such heritage’s storage and usage conditions that would preserve heritage as well as possible. Preventive conservation’s environmental control aimed at environmental conditions that would prevent or migrate microbiological growths’ and gaseous pollutants’ deteriorative

487 Dardes & Druzik 2000, 8 488 E.C.C.O. PROFESSIONAL GUIDELINES March 1 2002: I THE PROFESSION, I. Definition of the Conservator-Restorer 489 ICOM-CC 2008: Terminology to characterize the conservation of tangible cultural heritage 490 Rose & Hawks 1995, 1, 3-4 491 ICOM Code of Ethics: 2. Museums that maintain collections hold them in trust for the benefit of society and its development, 2.23 Preventive Conservation 492 Taylor 2005, 128 493 Waller 2002, 102 93 impact on cultural heritage.494 From the early 2000’s onwards preventive conservation theory started to regard as wider concept. It was also seen in other areas of heritage management such as in education and even in fundraising and political advocacy.495

Progression of preventive conservation changed also conservator’s professional role. Increased interaction with other heritage professionals resulted that conservators developed from “private practices” to a member of heritage professional’s specialist team.496 Education and training in the field of preventive conservation were seen as most effective way to promote heritage’s long-term preservation in memory institutions. This resulted that preventive conservation publication were made and these publications tried to raise the overall awareness over cultural heritage’s preservation among heritage professionals.497

According to Robert Waller (1994) effective preventive conservation work requires ability to identify the risks that endanger the preservation of cultural heritage and the quantity of the events where these risks could actualize.498 Because the risks and the deteriorative factors influence strongly to cultural heritages long and short-term preservation and deterioration, the development of both risk assessment and preventive conservation have proceeded simultaneously between 1990’s and 2000s.

Risk assessment and risk-based applications in preventive conservation have enabled since 2000’s mathematical modelling of environmental conditions in historic buildings. The estimative computer modelling has not only been used to simulate the historic building’s environmental conditions, but also to predict the effects that a single change may have on the collection’s preservation.499

3.3.3 Disaster preparedness

Disaster preparedness and disaster planning developed side by side with the concept of preventive conservation, risk management and risk assessment theories. According to Jukka Jokilehto (2000) the International Center for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM) was established by UNESCO in 1956 to have a leading role in heritage risks preparedness progression in the field of heritage preservation.500 The first larger disaster response involvement of ICCROM took place in 1966 when the massive flood in Firenze took place. It was the Arno River that flooded into the center of historic Firenze and water damaged the basement levels of historic building and storage facilities of museums and archives causing severe damages in paintings, museum objects and archival documents. ICCROM organized group of preservation

494 Dardes & Druzik 2000, 7 495 Dardes & Druzik 2000, 4-5 496 Dardes & Druzik 2000, 9 497 Dardes & Druzik 2000, 5 498 Waller 1994, 12 499 Watts et all 2001, 8 500 Jokilehto 2000, 173 94 experts to execute the first stage disaster response and heritage recovery in Firenze. The preservation achievements after Firenze floods led to that UNESCO started to create in close co-operation with ICCROM policies and guidelines in recovering and restoring historic sites in post-flood situations.501

In the late 1970’s there was strong earthquake in the province of Friulli Northern Italy. The disaster response activities and damage evaluation of heritage sites were done by an international heritage professional’s coordination committee. This project increased the overall knowledge over earthquake based heritage disasters but it was the 1979 earthquake in Montenegro that started more strategic disaster response planning in association with earthquakes. ICCROM started to develop disaster management after Montenegro’s earthquake and it organized series of short heritage recovery workshops for Montenegro heritage specialist.502 The first international course on Preventive measures of heritage’s protection in earthquake situations was organized in 1985 in Skopje.

In 1990’s several projects that related to risk and emergency preparations were connected with the development process of The Blue Shield503 movement. The Blue Shield movement was connected with the review process of The Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict given in 1954 and its second protocol that was adopted in 1999.504

The International Committee of the Blue Shield (ICBS) was established in 1996 to work for the world’s cultural heritage that is threatened by wars and natural disasters. Declarations such as the Assisi declaration (January 1998) underlined the importance of preventive measures and risk preparedness policies in association with heritage disasters. The Radenci declaration on the protection of cultural heritage in emergencies and exceptional situations (November 1998) promoted both heritage disasters preparedness development in different parts of the world both national and international level.505

The emergency preparation development lead to ICCROM’s international training program in risk preparedness and emergency actions. This training has from its beginning aimed at heritage specialists’ disaster response and heritage recovery skills improvement in association with natural disasters and armed conflicts.506

3.4 Preservation theory of this research

This research’s preservation approach bases on centrally preventive conservation and disaster management theories that have been drafted from risk assessment framework.

501 Jokilehto 2000, 174 502 Jokilehto 2000, 174 503 The Blue Shield is the symbol used to identify cultural sites that are protected by the Hague Convention. This name is also connected with the International Committee of the Blue Shield (ICBS) that protects world cultural heritage indangered by natural and man-made disasters. (ICBS 10.3.2017: About Us, website) 504 Jokilehto 2000, 177 505 Wang 2015, 212 506 Jokilehto 2000, 177 95

Robert Waller’s risk assessment models are used to analyse this research’s 19 disaster cases disaster prevention, disaster response and heritage recovery work from the viewpoint of preventive conservation and risk assessment.

This research’s preservation and conservation theory can be explained trough Salvador Muñoz Viñas’ contemporary conservation theory, since this research approaches heritage’s maintenance and preservation in disaster situations trough conceptual attitude that seeks all useful means to prevent heritage disasters and heritages deterioration during disaster response and heritage recovery processes.

In this research, preventive conservation and risk management theories are used to evaluate the efficiency of cultural heritage’s disaster planning, disaster response and heritage recovery from the viewpoints of damage prevention and damage migration. Theories on cultural heritage and preservation support the idea of minimal intervention in treatments. The ethical principles of conservation underline approach where treatments base on minimal intervention. This research supports the idea of minimal intervention in disaster response and heritage recovery processes.

In this research, Jonathan Ashley-Smith’s decision tree models have been used to analyze this research’s disaster cases disaster planning, disaster response and heritage recovery processes. Objective is to evaluate these processes end results from the perspective of heritage’s long-term preservation. In the evaluation process has been used changes in heritage’s value. Successful disaster response and heritage recovery processes have regarded as such that have preserved or maintained heritage’s authenticity and value as unchanged as possible. Unsuccessful disaster management processes in the perspective of heritage’s long-term preservation in disaster and post-disaster situations can be defined as such that have led to significant loss in heritage’s value or authenticity as outcome of the heritage recovery process.

96

4 DISASTERS CAUSED BY ACCIDENTS

This research’s seven accident based disasters have in two cases been caused by nature forces and in five cases by unexpected accidents that have been caused by human activities nearby the heritage site. The two disasters that were caused by natural forces were heavy rain based floods that caused water damages in two libraries storage magazines located in Helsinki city center. These cases were: 1. Finnish Literature Society’s library magazine’s water damage in 2003 and 2. Finnish National Library’s storage magazines water damages and humidity problems under Porthania building in 1990’s and 2000’s. Some of the water damages at the Finnish National Library’s storage magazine were caused by water or sewer pipeline leaks. Both of these natural disasters have taken place in the city center of Helsinki where different time periods buildings, construction work and technical infrastructure have modified the surrounding environment of the heritage sites. Both of these storage magazines situated in the underground levels of the building. These library collection’s water damages lead to instant need for disaster response and heritage recovery because of the water damages.

The accident based disasters that have been caused by human activity nearby the heritage site were: 1. Finnish Surveying Department’s archives water damage in 1994, 2. Finnish Surveying Department’s archive building’s roof fire in 2004, 3. Kiasma Museum of Modern art safety precautions during VR magazines fire in 2006, 4. Valvilla wool mill museum’s archives fire in 2003 and 5. Finnish National Museum’s silver exhibition’s gas explosion in 2006. Amon the accident based disasters that related to human activity near by the disaster site were three fires. Two of these fires507, were caused by unknown reason. It is also possible that these two fires may have been arson. It has evaluated that 20% to 40% of all fires caused by unknown reason have been arsons.508

Based on this research’s accident based disasters common features of these disaster types are described trough previous research. This chapter concentrates especially in water based damages disaster response and heritage recovery because water damages may also represent significant damage type in fire and fire extinguishing based disasters. The theoretical backgrounds of fire and explosion based disasters are being described. In the end of this chapter the researched seven accident based disasters and these disasters heritage recovery processes are being described.

507 VR magazines massive fire in 2006 and the Finnish Surveying Department fire in 2004 were resulted by unknown fire cause. (Theme interviews of disaster sites owners done by Heidi Wirilander.) 508 Jokinen 1994, 9 97

4.1 Water damages

Water damages that deteriorate cultural heritage can be caused by technical errors such as pipeline leaks or natural forces such as heavy rains or floods in the surroundings of the heritage site. Technical error based water damages can also be caused by construction work near by the heritage site or even in the same building where a cultural heritage collection is being stored.509

Damages that water has caused in cultural heritage most often deal with the mechanical, physical and sometimes even chemical changes and the impact that water and high humidity has in both organic and inorganic cultural heritage materials. Water based primary deterioration relate to different materials immediate interaction with water that may cause both mechanical damages and chemical changes such as paper cellulose’s and colour pigments dissolution in the water. The most significant secondary damages that delays in water damaged and high moisture containing materials’ disaster response may cause different biological deterioration factors such as moulding and growth of bacterias.

Microbiological attacks in indoor environments are related to the air temperature and relative humidity.510 Fungal filaments absorb water from the materials that they use as breeding ground. Therefore, best parameter for the fungal damage’s risk evaluation is the material’s water content. The water content of materials is influenced by relative humidity (RH) and materials physical and chemical characteristics. It is not the RH that controls the growth of fungal filaments; it is the water in materials.511

According to Lars Christoffersen (1995), different room temperatures and air pressures influence into air’s ability to bind moisture. When the absolute amount of humidity is reduced, the risk of mold damages can be minimized. High relative humidity is the most important parameter that nourishes the growth of mold. Therefore, in collections water damage situation, air-drying and dehumidifying is an important part of the collection recovery process. When the relative humidity is 75-100%, the conditions are ideal for intense and fast mold growth. When the relative humidity is between 65-75%, the growth of mold may start. Usually, there is no active mold growth when the relative humidity is under 65%. Drying of the air is therefore used to diminish the possibilities of active growth of most common mold species. High humidity in objects also promotes the degradation processes.512

In large scale water damage situations where large amount of heritage objects has water damaged, disaster recovery has often been planned so that most suitable recovery methods are used so that secondary heritage damages can be prevented. At first stage of heritage recovery less valuable heritage object’s dispose questions are usually connected with the heritage recovery work.513 Most commonly water damaged material’s recovery

509 Ellis 2000, 3 510 Dahlin 2002, 57-58 511 Florian 2000, 5-6, 9 512 Christoffersen 1995, 27, 29-30 513 Rusch & Herro 2000, 130-132 98 process contains initial storage and treatments such as dehumidification of wet items and dried items’ cleaning. The initial storage may be done at the accident site or at another site in cold storage or freezing facilities. Methods of drying may involve air flow, dehumidification, heat that is less than 37 °C and freeze-drying.514 The most important deteriorative element in temperature and relative humidity changes is the speed of these changes. When the relative humidity in room air is increasing dramatically, climate balancing becomes very challenging. If the temperature is raised rapidly, it influences objects both chemically and mechanically. Changes intensifies the chemical degradation process and causes tensions in the mechanical construction of objects. A high temperature also has an activating role in fungal filament’s growth.515

In order to prevent secondary damages such as fungal filaments growth in water- damaged collections, use of cold storage and freezing facilities in initial storage is a very important part of the heritage recovery process. Also, fast and dramatic changes in room climate should be avoided during heritage recovery process. Adjustments of both room temperature and relative humidity should be made smoothly and gradually. Important measure in water damaged objects air drying process bases on humidity removal from the wetted materials and the room air trough dehumidifying.

4.1.1 Water based mechanical and chemical damages

Water damages may cause cultural heritage’s mechanical, chemical and biological deterioration. Chemical damages that water damages may result bases on cultural heritage materials that may contain either water soluble substances or metals that start to corrode because of high humidity. Cultural heritage material’s water-soluble substances can cause for example water soluble colour’s bleeding or water-soluble surface treatment’s deterioration.

Mechanical damages that water damages may cause can be seen in such cultural heritage materials that contain organic or other hydrophilic materials. Mechanical damages that high humidity and moisture cause in cultural heritage bases on organic and other hydroscopic materials hydrophilic properties. This means that form example organic materials such as wood, paper, leather and most textiles at high Relative Humidity (RH) environment intake H2O molecules from the air and increase these hydrophilic materials moisture content causing swelling. In reversed conditions, when the RH levels are low organic and hygroscopic heritage materials start to release water molecules to the surrounding environment and materials moisture content decreases causing shrinking.516 Lars Christoffersen (1995) suggests that different room temperatures and air pressures influence air’s ability to bind moisture and increase the air’s RH.517 Mechanical damages that rapid moisture content changes in organic materials may cause are for example wooden

514 Florian 2000, 5-6, 9 515 Christoffersen 1995, 27, 29-30 516 Camuffo & Bertolin 2012, 23 517 Christoffersen 1995, 27, 29–30 99 objects’ twisting, paper materials deformation and in loss of textile and leather materials tensile strength.

4.1.2 Biological deterioration caused by humidity

Biological deterioration is unwanted changes in cultural heritage materials that have been caused by actively operating of microbes. Biological deterioration contains both microbes such as bacteria, archaea, fungus and deterioration caused by insects and pests.518 Prevention of fungal deterioration has based most often on environmental control of cultural heritage’s storage conditions and in some cases519 use of commercial fungicides such as Preventol O-Na (Sodium o-phenyl-phenol, NaOPP) and Neo-Desogen (Aqueous solution of ammonia with biocide action). Although use of fungicides in historic textile’s case has tested to provide effective means to prevent fungal deterioration in textiles, the long-term effects of fungicides in textiles are not known.520

At early stages, water damaged cultural heritage’s biological deterioration may be caused by various micro-organisms, but currently it is known that both fungi and bacteria cause in cultural heritage materials both significant aesthetic destruction and material decay. Both fungi and bacteria penetrate into cultural heritage materials as they grow or populate causing material decay that bases on acid corrosion, enzymatic deterioration and even mechanical invasion.521

Fungal growth, moulding, is typical secondary heritage damage that water damage and fire-extinguishing based moisture may cause in both heritage sites and objects.522 Stephen Michalski presented in 2000 framework that clarified the correlation relation between relative humidity and mould growth at the temperature of +25 °C. Michalski observed that the higher the relative humidity was the more quickly was the germination of mould spores and mould growth. When in relative humidity of 65 % RH there were approximately 1000 days’ time until visible marks of moulding could be seen, in the relative humidity of 85 % RH there are about seven days’ time until the visible marks of moulding could be seen in organic heritage objects.523

In water damage situations, moulding starts 48 hours after the water damage if the heritage recovery processes that could have prevented moulding (freezing or air drying) have not taken place effectively enough. In water damaged cultural heritage’s case, disaster response actions that may prevent mould growth have to be made within 24-48 hours from cultural heritage’s exposure to high humidity or wetting.524 The thickness of the wetted

518 Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9637 519 Conditions when organic heritage materials are placed in such geographical areas where the environmental conditions are most often favourable for fungal growth. 520 Abdel-Kareem 2010, 46 521 Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9637 522 Conservation center for art and historic artifacts 2013, 1 523 Guild & MacDonald 2004, 7 524 Conservation center for art and historic artifacts 2013, 1 100 material and the relative humidity of the surrounding air influences into the time in which the wetted material naturally dries in the air. 525

Mould’s microscopic spores are always in the air and they spread with air currents.526 The airborne fungal spores are not often identified in the indoor environments, because analytical methods to identify fungal spores often are used when microbial contamination has already occurred in the environment or directly on cultural heritage materials.527 Katja Sterflinger and Guadalupe Piñar (2013) suggest that dust layers on cultural heritage materials’ surface have ability to gather large amount of fungi spores on top of the materials. 528 When spores of mould are in favourable environment, they start to grow. For each fungal species, there are different favourable environment conditions. When mould’s spores exist on a host material, adequate moisture is needed to start the fungal growth.529 The mould species that most commonly start to grow after water damages represent species that need rather high humidity and moisture content in affected materials. Most of the filamentous fungi are able to dissolve for example paper materials cellulose with their cellulolytic enzyme. Microbes have also ability to break down and hydrolyse protein based materials such as leather, parchment and wool. Especially bacteria have significant role in deteriorating ancient parchment documents.530

Fungi’s spores that are germinated produce filaments that grow in all directions forming fungi colonies.531 Colony formation and fungal pigments are key factors that influence into cultural heritage materials aesthetic ruining.532 Colony formation requires nutrients and moisture in the host material where fungal growth occurs. When a fungi colony is mature, it starts to produce spores that may easily spread through air flows.533 Fungal species that may in water damage situation cause fungal growth on cultural heritage materials represent those fungal species that already exists in different quantities both in outdoor and indoor environments where cultural heritage is located.534

Fungal growth can inhabit, modify and deteriorate both organic and inorganic materials.535 Dario Camuffo and Chiara Bertolin (2012) and Mary-Lou E. Florian (2000) suggest that it is organic or hydrophilic material’s moisture content that provides favourable conditions for fungal growth.536 Mould’s host material provides nutrients for its growth.537 It is fungi’s enzymes that brake down organic host material into nutrients.538 But, mould growth can be observed even on inorganic materials and plastics but in these

525 Guild & MacDonald 2004, 8 526 Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9639 527 Pinzari & Cialei & Barbabietola 2010, 29 528 Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9639 529 National Park Services 2007: Conserve O Gram 3/4, 1 530 Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9640 531 Florian 2000, 2 532 Sterflinger 2010, 49 533 Florian 2000, 2 534 Florian 2000, 3 535 Sterflinger 2010, 48 536 Camuffo & Bertolin 2012, 23 537 National Park Services 2007: Conserve O Gram 3/4, 2 538 Guild & MacDonald 2004, 2 101 cases, it has assumed that it is the object’s soiling, dirt or dust cover that represents mould’s actual host material and source of nutrients for its growth.539

Mycotoxins are highly toxic cyto-, neuro- and genotoxicits that are secondary mould metabolas that may become airborne from mould contaminated surfaces. After water damage, there can be hundreds of mycotoxines in the water damaged environment.540 Without moisture in host material, the spores remain dormant as long as the favourable environmental conditions exist. Mould is resistant for drying out and it can be deactivated in extremely hot or cold temperatures. Mould does not need light’s energy for its growth.541

Katja Sterflinger (2010) suggests that fungal growth in historic materials is influenced by surrounding environment, amount of obtainable nutrients and in the contaminated materials. Even the frequency of the maintenance cleaning have its impact on fungal growth.542 Mold invasion on cultural heritage materials does not require massive water damage that wet cultural heritage materials, also several days high humidity in cultural heritage’s storage environment may lead to mold growth. This was the case in Detroit Michigan in the summer of 1995 when the city experienced extremely hot and high humidity time period. During this summer at the Detroit Historical Museum’s Collection Resource Center high humidity caused active mold growth in nearly 51000 objects. Diana Hobart Dicus (2000) estimated that the relative humidity inside the Collection Resource Center’s storage area had reached possibly 80-90 % RH during the summer. The active mold growth on several objects was observed in early August and at this time the storage magazine’s temperature was about +18 °C and the relative humidity was 72-75 % RH.543

For example, in paper materials case, mold species that most commonly attach paper materials represent fungi species that start to grow when relative humidity of the environment has reached 70-75 % RH and this RH (70-75 %) remains at this level for many days. High temperatures, poor air circulation and poor air ventilation promote fungal growth.544

Mold deteriorates permanently materials that are used for its growth. Because mold grows partly inside its host material’s surface, the infected materials even when cleaned, remain more sensitive for future fungal growth because of remaining fungal filaments in objects surface structure. Mold growth causes in organic materials staining and decrease of strength resulting that materials become more porous. In paper materials, some fungi species growth may cause loss of protein and sizing of starch resulting that paper becomes more water soluble. Leather is very vulnerable for molding that both stains and weakens it. Fungal growth may produce as byproduct organic acids that may react with inorganic

539 National Park Services 2007: Conserve O Gram 3/4, 2 540 Peizsch et all 2012, 908 541 National Park Services 2007: Conserve O Gram 3/4, 2 542 Sterflinger 2010, 49 543 Dicus 2000, 1, 3 544 Conservation Center for Art and Historic Artifacts 2013: Technical Series No. 1, 2 102 materials such as metals causing corrosion and etching of metal surfaces.545 Mold contamination may lead to very fast deterioration of organic heritage materials.546

Biological deterioration of cultural heritage materials is often noticed first visually. These observations base on changes in chemical compositions and the characteristics of cultural heritage’s materials. Also, climatological factors of cultural heritage’s environment indicate that biodeterioration has started in cultural heritage materials. As indicators for mold growth have been clearly visible pigmentations or powdery deposits on cultural heritage materials’ surface. Ultraviolet (UV) lights have been used as assisting equipment in detecting mold growth. Use of UV light bases on fungal growth’s luminescent property under UV light.547

Most effective way to prevent mold growth is trough environmental control. Significant parameters in mold growth’s prevention are good air ventilation, air circulation, temperature and the RH enough low so that mold is less likely to grow. Optimal storage RH for organic materials is between 45 % and 55 % RH and in this humidity, it is not probable that mold would start to growth. Organic materials storage and display environment’s RH should always remain under 65 %. Optimal temperature for organic materials preservation is +18 – +20 °C. There are however some micro-organisms that are able to grow in lower RH and temperature conditions and those objects that have been affected by such fungi types must be preserved in lower RH and temperature conditions.548

4.1.3 Water damages recovery

The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in the United States of America gave in August 1993 an emergency salvage instructions on flood damaged family papers recovery. There had been significant floods in the mid-west area of the United States and these instructions were developed by the United States’ National Archives. Objective was to give valuable document’s owners recommendations how to stabilize their valuable documents, photographs and books. These recommendations raised molding as the most important heritage risk that water damage could cause and therefore the drying of wetted materials was raised to the level of top-priority in heritage recovery.549

In water damage situation, collection’s drying and dehumidifying reparents important part of the collection recovery process. Water damage’s recovery process contains preliminary storage and treatments, dehumidification of wet objects and dried objects’ cleaning. In NARA’s instruction from 1993 concluded that wet documents and books that

545 National Park Services 2007: Conserve O Gram 3/4, 2 546 Abdel-Kareem 2010, 40 547 National Park Services 2007: Conserve O Gram 3/4, 2 548 National Park Services 2007: Conserve O Gram 3/4, 2-3 549 National Archives and Records Administration 1993, 1. 103 could not be dried with air drying methods in two days should be frozen in order to prevent active mold growth.550

In order to prevent significant mechanical damages in cultural heritage fast and dramatic changes in room climate should be avoided. Adjustments of both the room temperature and the relative humidity should be made smoothly and gradually. A significant parameter in water damaged objects air drying process bases on humidity removal from the materials trough water evaporation process that is connected with the room air’s dehumidifying process.551 Water damaged collections recovery should take place in isolated area where the environment’s RH can be reduced with dehumidifiers.552

In mold’s deactivation processes have been used both high and low temperatures, UV- light or sunlight exposure and radiation treatments.553 There are also some physical and chemical methods that have been used in microbes’ disinfection. Chemical treatments that have been used in disinfection contain both chemical biocides and fumigation with gases. Although there are several biocides that can be used in microbes’ disinfection only small number of them have tested to be suitable for historic materials disinfection.554

It is possible that none of the contemporary antimicrobe treatments have ability to eliminate totally fungal filaments. The chemical and physical treatments, containing harmful side-effects for cultural heritage, are still used because no safer applications for microbe disinfection have been applied for cultural heritage use. Use of biocides and physical treatments like gamma radiation have therefore been in use even if there may have been known deteriorative side effects for cultural heritage. More effective and safe microbe disinfection treatments development for cultural heritage use would require deeper understanding over heritage objects biodeterioration processes and precise monitoring of antimicrobial treatment’s effects. Katja Sterflinger and Guadalupe Piñar suggest that an alternative non-toxic and less harmful approach to manage microbe attacks in cultural heritage materials and objects could base on special climatization that have ability to stop or slow down biodeterioration of cultural heritage materials.555

Use of biocides and chemical treatments

Changes in host material’s pH have an impact on mold’s germination and growth. Guild and MacDonald suggest that mold’s germination occurs between pH 2 and 9, but the optimal pH conditions for mold growth situates between pH 4 and 7.556 Because of mold’s pH sensitivity different chemical compounds have been used in mold’s disinfection.

550 National Archives and Records Administration 1993, 2. 551 National Archives and Records Administration 1993, 2. 552 National Park Services 2007: Conserve O Gram 3/4, 3-4. 553 Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9641 554 Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9641 555 Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9642 556 Guild & MacDonald 2004, 3 104

Use of biocides in microbe colonies’ disinfection is problematic from the perspective of treatment-effectivity. The fact that cultural heritage materials are often attacked by several microbes result that all microbes may have different sensitivity levels towards used biocide. In worst cases this may cause that microbe communities are not disinfected during the treatment. This can result that microbe community transforms more resistant towards the used biocide and they become more harmful for the cultural heritage materials.557

In 1960’s and 1970’s extremely toxic organochlorides like pentachlorophenol was used in microbe disinfection. These old treatments may have influenced into possibilities to analyze certain characteristics of cultural heritage materials. For example, fumigated ethylenoxide that have been used earlier in microbes’ disinfection may have had impact also on cultural heritage material’s DNA and RNA remains that possible have destroyed by the treatment. Currently most common biocide that have been used in microbe disinfection is ethanol.558 In fumigation disinfection oxidizing gases such as ozone and peroxide have been used in mold damaged cultural heritage materials fumigation disinfection.559 However neither of these oxidizing gases are able to produce total disinfection of mold.

Fumigation with oxidizing gases

Ethylene oxide (EtO) has been used for mold contaminated cultural heritage objects fumigation sterilization since 1933. Ethylene oxide is used in room temperature and it does not need activation with energy during the fumigation process. Ethylene oxide’s use has stopped in many countries because of its potential carcinogenic properties.560 The other oxidizing fumigation gases that have been applied for mold contaminated cultural heritage materials disinfection are ozone and peroxide.

Ozone oxidizing gas is most commonly produced by machines that produces air’s O2 into ozone’s O3 that is very reactive oxidant.561 Ozone’s use in microbe disinfection bases on its ability to react with organic materials including microbes. If ozone is used in strong concentrations it has also ability to start to break down organic materials.562 Peroxide fumigation disinfection is done with commercial fumigation liquids like Penetrox-S. These liquids are fumigated into the air where heritage materials disinfection takes place. Also peroxide is strong oxidant and its ability to disinfect microbes bases on similar factors than in ozone’s case. The commercial peroxide products contain also other chemical products; for example Penetrox-S contains solvents like peroxide, butanperoxide and propyleglygol. Peroxide oxidizing processes end product in Penetrox-S case is water (H2O) 563

Research on mold damaged building renovation indicate that ozone possible is not able to prevent the molds ability to produce mycotoxins564 if oxidizing is being done on

557 Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9642 558 Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9642 559 Peitzsch et all 2012, 913 560 Michaelsen et all 2013, 334 561 Bloom et all 2010, 12 562 Bloom et all 2010, 26 563 Bloom et all 2010, 12 564 Possile exception with satratocxines (Bloom et all 2010, 26) 105 surfaces that have not been mechanically cleaned, it is also uncentring if ozone is able to break down mycotoxines. Use of ozone has not proven to be an effective disinfection method for building materials especially in the case of porous building materials such as gypsum. Difficulties in ozone’s use also relate to possibilities to adjust its concentration during oxidizing treatment, this may mean that used strong concentrations of ozone in historic materials disinfection may result that the treatment itself causes significant degradation of organic heritage materials.565

In building materials mold disinfection Penetrox-S has not been able to produce total sanitation of mold. The same research indicates that Penetrox-S treatment may cause in gypsum slight increase of satratoxin mycotoxine’s production while it decreases production of mycotoxines like verrukarol and trikodermol. It was also observed that after drying period amounts of satratoxin and verrukarol mycotoxines decreased while the ammounts of trikodermol mycotoxines increased nearly 5 times. It was also observed that peroxide had no significant effects on mycotoxines compared to the starting position. However the research results indicate that peroxide is able to reduce amounts of sterigmatocystin mycotoxine significantly. 566

Use of radiation treatments in microbe disinfection

Gamma irradiation has been used since 1960’s in disinfection of archival materials without significant changes in paper material’s tensile strength or apparent color.567 After this use of gamma irradiation treatments have expanded to cover also other cultural heritage materials such as mural paintings and sculptures microbe disinfection. Currently ionizing radiation568 has been used in cultural heritage materials microbe disinfection.569 Michaelsen et all (2013) suggest that in mold damaged paper materials case gamma irradiation treatments are suitable especially in large collection’s mold disinfection. In these treatments aim may be either to reduce into controllable level or to disinfect mold contaminated paper so that micro-organisms bio deteriorative actions in materials are stopped.570

Radiation technology has regarded as powerful technique for the disinfection of cultural heritage such as paper, textile and wood. Ionizing radiation applications for the disinfection of cultural heritage objects has been used successfully in co-operation with museums and libraries in 2000’s and 2010’s. In 2015 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) established the first Coordinated Research Project entitled Developing Radiation Treatment Methodologies and New Resin Formulations for Consolidation and Preservation of Archived Materials and Cultural Heritage Artefacts. The central aim of this research project was to evaluate the effects of irradiation on the base materials’ (heritage objects) functional

565 Bloom et all 2010, 26 566 Bloom et all 2010, 26 567 Sakr & Ghaly & Ali 2013, 283 568 Ionizing radiation represent electromagnetic radiation in the high frequency radiation wave lengths of X-ray radiation and gamma radiation. (WHO 2017: What is ionizing radiation?) 569 IAEA 2015: working material, 2 570 Michaelsen et all 2013, 340 106 properties, constituents and post irradiation effects. Objective of this research project has been to develop appropriate irradiation procedures for cultural heritage material’s disinfection and enlarge the usage areas of radiation treatments.571

Gamma irradiation572 has impact both on mold and other microbes. It is possible that different fungus and bacteria have their own radiation dose ranges that causes molecular destruction of the microbe in question. Because the needed radiation dose for effective mold and microbe disinfection are relative high573 and may also differ, the radiation may have deteriorative impact on cultural heritage materials causing cumulative depolymerisation of cellulose materials and ageing.574 The effects of gamma irradiation in microbe’s disinfection depends on used radiation doses and the irradiation sensitivity of microbe in the disinfected materials. Use of too low radiation doses in disinfection may cause for example Streptomyces575 bacteria’s case increased production of methabol acids, enzymes and pigments that may increase the deterioration of irradiated cultural heritage objects. Use of too high radiation doses can damage severely cultural heritage objects molecule constructions. In irradiation disinfection, the radiation dose determination has regarded as most important part of effective and safe gamma irradiation treatment. The proper dose evaluation bases on both microbe evaluation and heritage materials identification. The amount and type of the microbes and microbial communities that exist on cultural heritage objects and these microbes radio sensitivity represents significant parameters that may avoid radiation based secondary damages such as increased production of Steptomyces’ methabol deteriorating agents.576

The moisture content of cultural heritage objects influences into the gamma irradiation process. Radiation doses that have effects on high moisture content wooden objects do not necessary have noticeable effects on dry wooden objects’ molecular structure. However it has observed that lower radiation doses may have abblility to eliminate more microbiological population on wet host material because of the free radicals that the irradiation releases. Free radicals on wet soils have observed to have inhibitatory effects on irradiated Steptomyces, because of both direct and indirect effects of gamma irradiation. The sterilizing effects that gamma irradiation has on microbial cells may base on the indirect action that radiation causes - release of free radical atoms.577

571 IAEA 2015: working material, 2 572 Irradiation is the act of exposing or the condition of being exposed to radiation. It refers to the use or application of ionizing radiation, especially for the sterilization. (American Heritage – Dictionary of the English Language. 2016, Fifth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company). 573 Sterflinger & Piñar suggests that needed radiation dose for mold contaminated paper materials disinfection is 10-20 kGy (Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9641). Sakr & Ghaly & Ali 2013 however suggest that in the perspective of Streptomyces bacterias sterilization the needed radiation dose is 20-25 KGy (Sakr & Ghaly & Ali 2013, 284) 574 Sterflinger & Piñar 2013, 9641 575 Streptomyces is a Gram-positive bacteria that grows in different environments. Streptomyces resembles filamentous fungi, but its morphological differences involve the formation of a layer of hyphae that can differentiate into a chain of spores. Streptomyces have ability to produce bioactive secondary metabolites such as acids, enzymes and pigments that deteriorate cultural heritage materials. (de Lima Procópioa 2012, 466) 576 Sakr & Ghaly & Ali 2013, 283 577 Sakr & Ghaly & Ali 2013, 283 107

According to Akmal Sakr, Mohamed Ghaly and Mona Ali (2013) gamma irradiation has advantages that favours its usage. Gamma irradiation provides high energy that penetrate heritage objects and provides ability to reduce or eliminate microorganisms. Gamma irradiation does not produce dangerous traces or secondary radioactivity in treated materials and the gamma irradiation requires relatively short intervention time. In conservator’s perspective gamma irradiation is a non-toxic disinfection treatment that is relative low expensive means to disinfect cultural heritage materials.578 However gamma irradiation facilities result that this method is not possible to use in immovable heritage objects and sites disinfection processes. The effects of gamma irradiation may remain relatively short if there is no improvement in the environmental storage conditions of contaminated materials. Irradiation treatments cannot necessarily prevent the recolonizing of microbes. Sakr, Ghaly and Ali suggest that the effectivity of gamma irradiation treatment could be increased with the use of biocides. Commercial antibiotics such as Gantamycin and Spiramycin have also been used successfully in combination with gamma irradiation in Streptomyces bacteria’s disinfection.579

Use of high and low temperatures

Freezing has been used in water damaged heritage objects microbe damage prevention and even microbe deactivation. Freezing of collections has been used in cases where large heritage collections have suffered from large scale water damage that cannot freeze-dry or air dry at once safely. All of the water damaged heritage objects that are frozen after a water damage should be bagged into a separate polyethylene plastic bag or between plastic sheets in order to prevent mechanical damages in the objects during the handling of the objects, freezing and melting process of the wet objects.580 Freeze-drying however requires protective materials and means that enable humidity evaporation from the water damaged heritage objects during the freeze-drying process.

Although with deactivation methods it is possible to stop mold growth in organic cultural heritage materials, deactivation processes cannot avoid reactivation of fungal growth if the temperature and RH rises again in cultural heritage’s storage environment. Use of high temperatures between +30 and +40 °C have been connected with air drying method. Dried powdery mold is recommended to be vacuumed from the cultural heritage material if possible.581

High temperatures have been used as cultural heritage material’s disinfection method. Use of heat has also been used in disinfection of mold damaged building materials. In building’s case, very high temperatures or even flames have been used in mold contaminated materials sanitating. The research results in building materials case indicated that treatments made with heath do not have ability to decrease mold’s mycotoxine

578 Sakr & Ghaly & Ali 2013, 283 579 Sakr & Ghaly & Ali 2013, 284 580 Ellis 2000, 10 581 National Park Services 2007: Conserve O Gram 3/4, 3-4. 108 amounts instead it increased significantly the mycotoxine amounts of mold contaminated building materials.582

Freeze-drying has been considered as water damage situations mass-rescue process that has been used in large scale water damage situations such as floods. Michalsen et all (2013) suggest that important part of the freeze-drying process is to adjust the temperature of the freeze-drying into the level in which no fungal growth occurs. Michalsen et all suggest that most of the fungi species can be killed below 0 °C temperatures.583 Sherry Guild and Maureen MacDonald (2004) however suggest that freezing temperatures are able to kill mold’s active growth, but there are some spores that are able to survive long time periods in very cold and hot temperatures. Both very high and low temperatures possibly diminish mold spores’ viability.584

4.2 Fire and fire extinguishing based damages recovery

Fire takes place when burning material’s temperature rises to ignition temperature because of a heat source in an environment that contains oxygen. Fire extinguishing often aims at removal of one of these three elements of fire because fire continue to burn as long as there are enough heath, oxygen and fuel in the fire.585 Fire spreads through materials that are able to conduct and enlighten materials that are heated. Fire is able to spread also trough burning materials that fire and smoke are able to move away from the fire source.586

The damaging mechanism of smoke and hot gases of fire bases on smoke’s movement during the fire. When fire takes place inside a building smoke and fire gases move straight upwards until they reach horizontal layer such as the ceiling of a room. After this smoke and hot gases move in the room towards the vertical layers such as the walls and smoke layer start to get thicker. Fire generates constant production of smoke, hot gasses and results the further progression of the fire. Thickening of smoke will continue until there is an open window or door through which the smoke can evaporate outside.587

Central means that have ability to prevent or minimize fire and fire extinguishing based damages bases mainly on building’s structural fire protection and the technical equipment that facilitate the fast fire extinguishing and rescue work at the disaster site.588 It has observed that in the buildings that were built according to the structural fire protection regulations the fire-resistance ability was the central factor that succeeded to prevent damages that the fire and fire extinguishing could have caused. The fire damages have

582 Bloom et all 2010, 27 583 Michalsen et all 2013, 337 584 Guild & MacDonald 2004, 3 585 Kidd 1995, 14 586 Kidd 1995, 15 587 Kidd 1995, 14 588 Jokinen 1994, 40 109 detected to be much smaller in the buildings that have higher fire technical classification than in the lower fire technical classification’s buildings. The technical equipment that are used to promote fire situation’s disaster response and fire extinguishing work are automatic fire alarm systems, smoke evacuation systems and automatic fire extinguishing systems.589

Fire and fire extinguishing based damages often cause significant damages in cultural heritage. Fires may cause smoke, shoot and burning damages directly on cultural heritage sites and objects. It may also cause mechanical damages in cultural heritage because of collapsing and burning remains of the building that houses heritage objects.590

Both fire and fire extinguishing may either damage cultural heritage or destroy it totally. Destruction that fire causes may happen in a couple of hours. Fire does not damage only the areas that are burning, heat and shoot damages heritage sites and collections in a larger area.591 In fire based disaster cases cultural heritage’s damages relate to often smoke, sooth, heat and humidity based damages. If water has used in fire extinguishing also damages that have been caused by object’s direct contact with water may be observed on cultural heritage that has survived from a fire.592

Fire based damages recovery have many similarities with water damages recovery. In the cases were fire extinguishing has caused also humidity damages, the heritage recovery often follows the pattern of water damages recovery. Fire and fire extinguishing based damages recovery contain water damaged collection’s drying and clearance cleaning measures such as cleaning of sooth and smoke damages.

Acquiring of salvage space for the damaged heritage collection have represented significant part of the first heritage recovery measures that have taken place after fire and fire extinguishing situation. Also safe transportation of the heritage objects form the disaster site to the salvage space is important part of the response process that influences into the further deterioration of cultural heritage.593 In heritage sites case basic cleaning of the disaster site can be understood as means to prevent further damages in the heritage site in post-disaster situation.594

4.3 Explosion based damages recovery

Explosion based heritage disasters have in contemporary time been connected with events of armed conflicts or actions of terrorists. Explosion’s often cause similar kinds of

589 Jokinen 1994, 41 590 Severson et all 2000, 5 591 Kidd 1995, 12 592 Mohr 2000, 61 593 Mohr 2000, 60 594 Mohr 2000, 61 110 damages in heritage objects and sites that natural hazards such as earth quakes. Explosions may cause mechanical damages such as smashing, cracks, scratches and tears that may either destroy or damage cultural heritage materials and constructions. Cultural heritage object may damage or deteriorate in an explosion directly by exploding or it can be damaged by particles that the explosion’s air wave hit against object or its immediate storage facilities such as exhibition showcase.

Sometimes explosion damages base on accidents. This was the case also in the Finnish National Museum’s silver exhibition’s explosion in 2006. Explosion based heritage disaster’s recovery often based on similar kind of approach than in natural hazards recovery. Documentation of the objects and their damages represented significant part of the recovery process. Explosion based damages recovery often require actions of remedial conservation. Actions may contain restoration that aim at removing the visible marks of the explosion. If the number of damaged objects is relatively small all of the objects may be conserved, but in such cases where large amounts of objects have been deteriorated for example during earth quakes it is possible that only the most important objects are conserved and many objects are stored in deteriorated state.

4.4 Natural disaster based accidents

There are two natural disaster based disasters in this research. Both cases occurred in Helsinki city center in association with floods caused by heavy rains. Both heritage’s storage magazines situated in a building’s underground floors. These water damages show how also well-planned buildings may have unexpected weaknesses in the cases of flood and rainwater based water damages. Both of the storage magazines were evaluated as suitable heritage collection’s storage magazines when they were built. Natural disaster based cases are: 1. Finnish Literature Society’s library collection’s water damage in 2003 and 2. Finnish national library’s storage magazines water damages and humidity problems under Porthania building in 1990’s and 2000’s.

4.4.1 Finnish Literature Society library’s water damage

The storage magazine where the water damage occurred situated in an apartment building’s basement floor in Kruununhaka, Helsinki city center. The collection’s that were placed in this storage magazine included both the Finnish Literature Society’s Library and Archives collections. To this storage magazine had also moved from the society’s main building old Fennica collection, because the new storage magazine believed to improve the long-term preservation conditions of the collection.595 The Finnish Literature Society’s Fennica collection represent Finnish literature that was published before year 1810. This collection include Finnish Reformist Mikael Agricola’s rare publications, Finland’s oldest

595 Finnish Literature Society’s Library 10.2.2011: Theme interview 111 university’s Turku Academy’s Doctoral dissertations and bibliographies from 17th and 18th centuries.596

The Finnish Literature Society had renovated a new storage magazine for long term preservation of library’s and archive’s collections. In this storage magazine there were no technical water damage alarm systems. The collections were moved to the new storage magazines in spring 2000. Summer of year 2000 was very rainy in Helsinki and because it was the holyday season there was possibly couple of weeks or days time gap in disaster response because the water damage was observed only when the employees returned from their holidays.597

The first stage disaster response was to pump the water out of the collections’ storage magazine. The Fire and rescue services in Helsinki was responsible for the water pumping. Only the library collections that were placed in the bottom shelves of the storage magazines had got wet. Because of the high humidity and the capillary phenomenon in the storage magazines also collections that were placed in upper shelves in the storage magazines had suffered from water damages and had active mold growth.598

The collection recovery was completed in the Finnish Literature Society’s and the EVTEK University for Applied Sciences’ Conservation Departments’ co-operation. The paper conservation line of the EVTEK University for Applied Sciences had earlier assisted the library in the collections’ move to these new storage facilities and when the water damage occurred the paper conservation line’s lecturer István Kecskeméti also helped the library to plan the recovery of the collection. The water damaged library collection was moved to the conservation department’s cold storage. The collections that were not so badly deteriorated were dried and conserved by the paper conservation line’s students. The more deteriorated objects were conserved by professional conservators in Estonia. The collection’s conservation work was supported by a Finnish foundation that granted financial support for the conservation work of the water damaged collection. In this water damage’s heritage recovery remedial conservation had significant part.599

4.4.2 Finnish national library storage magazine’s water damages

There have been water damages in the storage magazine that situated under Porthania building since the late 1980’s and the number of water damages continued to be high during 1990’s and early 2000’s before the Finnish National Library received its new storage magazine called “book cave” and Porthania was renovated in early 2000’s.600

596 SKS 26.2.2016, Kokoelmat ja tiedon lähteet. http://www.finlit.fi/fi/arkisto-ja- kirjastopalvelut/kokoelmat-ja-tiedonlahteet#.VtCIUECVd-w 597 Finnish Literature Society’s Library 10.2.2011: Theme interview 598 Finnish Literature Society’s Library 10.2.2011: Theme interview 599 Finnish Literature Society’s Library 10.2.2011: Theme interview 600 Finnish National Library 4.2.2011: Theme interview 112

The water damages that occurred in the storage magazine were sometimes caused by building technical accidents such as water pipeline’s or waste pipeline’s water leaks. Also natural forces such as heavy rains and floods caused water damages in Porthania’s storage magazine. Because Porthania is built in slope and it is surrounded by other stone houses and asphalted streets, heavy rains have been able to enter the building’s constructions. The outside drainage wells have not been able to remove all the water from the streets and near by the building during heavy rains.601

There was no technical water damage alarm system in the storage magazine that situated in Porthania’s underground floors. Therefore in some cases a time gap existed between water damage and disaster response. This caused some hours or a couple of days delays in the library’s disaster response work. Both types of water damage were most often observed by the National Library’s own personnel or the Helsinki University’s personnel such as caretakers of Porthania.602

The disaster response and heritage recovery work was mainly done by the National Library’s own personnel both librarians and paper conservators. Sometimes the caretakers of Porthania could assist the library personnel in the removal of water from the storage magazine. The personnel that was responsible for the disaster response were well trained professionals and therefore the used disaster response means were used very effectively.603

The first stage of disaster response contained both removal of water from the storage magazine and evacuation of the collections that were directly in contact with water. The National Library had bought for the water removal water vacuum cleaners and these vacuum cleaners were used in water removal. Sometimes water removal stage could take rather long time because purchased services were not used for water removal.604

The drying of water damaged library collections was mainly done with air drying methods. In air drying were used both fens and dehumidifiers. Dehumidifiers made airdrying methods more effective. It is possible that many water damages also lead to some library collection’s objects destruction but in large scale library’s qualified employees were able to save the collections from the water damages trough effective disaster response and collection recovery work. After the drying of the wetted collections only the most important parts of the collections were fully conserved by the library’s own conservation department.605

In these water damage cases the dominating preservation approach in heritage recovery based on preventive conservation approach. Indirect means, such as fens and dehumidifiers were used to dry the wetted material. Remedial conservation means were used only in most valuable documents preservation.606

601 Finnish National Library 4.2.2011: Theme interview 602 Finnish National Library 4.2.2011: Theme interview 603 Finnish National Library 4.2.2011: Theme interview 604 Finnish National Library 4.2.2011: Theme interview 605 Finnish National Library 4.2.2011: Theme interview 606 Finnish National Library 4.2.2011: Theme interview 113

4.5 Human activity based accidents

Five accidents in this research have happened because of human activities that have taken place in the surroundings of cultural heritage. All of these cases have taken place in urban environments and human’s actions have influenced into these disasters. The researched cases show that unexpected actions and environmental conditions nearby heritage’s storage facilities may lead to unexpected disasters that threaten heritage’s existence and long-term preservation. Technical failure based disasters also show the weaknesses of the buildings where cultural heritage has been placed and it also shows how the building’s use by other users than memory institution may causes unmanageable risks for cultural heritage. Researched cases are: 1. Finnish Surveying Department’s archives water damage in 1994, 2. Finnish Surveying Department’s archive building’s roof fire in 2004, 3. Kiasma Museum of Modern art safety precautions during VR magazines fire in 2006, 4. Valvilla wool mill museum’s archives fire in 2003 and 5. Finnish National Museum’s silver exhibition’s natural gas explosion in 2006.

4.5.1 Finnish Surveying Department’s archives water damage

The Finnish Surveying Department’s Uusimaa province’s office and archives situated in Pasila, Helsinki. The water damage occurred in the permanently preserved documents archives in 1994. The archival magazine was built according to the building regulations for permanently stored archives. The building where the archival magazine located was not entirely in the use of the Finnish Surveying Department and its archives.607 There were also other users and other working activities in the same building. Above the archives magazine located a hair dresser shop and there was a burglary in the shop during one weekend. The shop’s sanitary fittings were broken, which caused water damage. The water entered the archival magazine that situated above the hairdresser’s shop. In the archives surveying documents and maps in the area of one archive shelf got wet. The water damage did not cause in the archives any other damages.608

Because the water damage took place during weekend, the disaster response was delayed for some time. The disaster response and collection recovery started on Monday. During the disaster response and collection recovery process the archival collections were not evacuated from the archives. Only the archival documents that had water damages were moved in another part of the archival magazine for heritage recovery.609

The primary task in the disaster response process was to remove water from the storage magazine. The water was removed from the storage magazine by the Fire and Rescue Services. In the collection recovery process drying of the water damaged archival

607 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 608 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 609 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 114 documents was the first conservation treatment. Collection recovery process was done by the employees of the Finnish Surveying Department and the work was led by the Surveying Department’s own paper conservator. The damaged archival documents were condition evaluated and the conservation treatments were documented.610

Before the water damage the archival documents were much in use. Therefore it was hard to evaluate which of the mechanical damages were caused by the handling of the water damaged documents. Because the disaster response of the water damage started rather fast and limited number of archival documents were damaged and could be air-dried fast enough, the secondary collection damages such as molding could be prevented. The leaked colors of archival documents could not be removed entirely during the heritage recovery process and during the remedial conservation that took place after the heritage recovery.611

The water damage at the archival magazine caused damages only in a small part of the archives. Both the water damaged document’s air drying and the deteriorated materials conservation were done by the Finnish Surveying Department’s paper conservator.612

The typical damages that humidity and water caused in archival documents were leaking of colors in the wetted paper documents and papers sticking together. Although the water damaged archival documents believed to be made with archive resistant colors on achievable paper material the documents colors leaked when they got wet. The use of professional paper conservator and archivists in the heritage recovery process influenced centrally into that secondary collection damages like mechanical tears and molding could be avoided.613

The water damaged archival documents and maps were air dried. The documents and maps that were water damaged so badly that the colors had leaked the first stage of disaster response was to quickly make a copy of the document and to ensure the preservation of the document’s information content. The Finnish Surveying Archives’ employees selected the water damaged archival documents that were conserved after the drying. Other dried documents were left to wait for remedial conservation.614

4.5.2 Finnish Surveying Department’s archives roof fire

In the early 2000’s The Finnish State’s real estate company Senate Properties was building in Jyväskylä central archives for the use of the Finnish Surveying Department. The new archives was built next to the Jyväskylä Provincial Archives. The construction work of the archives building was nearly finished when unexpected roof fire occurred.615

610 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 611 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 612 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 613 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 614 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 615 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 115

During the construction work thorough risk analyses had been done for the archives and its security planning. The archives safety equipment were planned based on the risk analyses. The archives building was inspected by the Finnish National Archives and it was confirmed that the building was built according to the Finnish archival regulations on permanently storaged archives storage magazines.616

When the roof fire occurred all the building techniques were ready and archive’s furniture and equipment had already been moved to the building. The archival collections had not been moved to the building and the building had not been handed over to the user. The fire was detected by the Jyväskylä Provincial Archives’ employee who arrived to work at 6 am. The employee informed the Fire and Rescue Services about the fire. The cause of the fire was not officially found and it is possible that the construction work had caused the fire.617

The fire department arrived at the accident site fast and the Finnish Surveying Department’s archives’ director was contacted. To the disaster site arrived the builder consultant, representative of the construction company and the construction works’ chief. Fire extinguishing was done in co-operation with the archives director, Construction Company, builder consultant and the construction work’s chief. Objective of the co- operation was to minimize the building’s damages. The Finnish Surveying Department’s archives director was on her way to Helsinki when she was informed about the archives roof fire and she was kept up-to date about the events at the archives during the day. The fire extinguishing was done with the use of controlled burning tactics. This meant that fire department let the building’s roof to burn down in control so that use of water in the fire extinguishing could be minimized and avoided.618

By choosing the controlled burning tactics the fire department and the builders accepted that both the entire roof with its constructions were destroyed in the fire but the building techniques could be preserved from the fire and fire extinguishing damages. The fire extinguishing succeeded so well that the electricity was working in the entire building after the fire extinguishing. Formation of smoke was prevented inside the building.619

Archives storage magazines were undamaged and only in the top-floor of the building’s northern end had some water damages from the fire extinguishing. In this part of the building some water had used in fire extinguishing. The use of water in the fire extinguishing lead to the conclusion that water’s use tried to avoid in the fire extinguishing. The same controlled burning tactics in fire extinguishing would have been used if the archival collections had been inside the building. The controlled burning tactics and the minimal use of water in fire extinguishing prove to be best fire extinguishing method for the archival building. The used fire extinguishing method minimized the building’s and furniture’s damages inside the archives building.620

616 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 617 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 618 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 619 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 620 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 116

The damage evaluation and the reconstruction work were done in insurance company’s supervision. Before the reconstruction work the building was strength measured and its constructions were examined. The building’s constructions strengthened during the fire. The air condition routs of the building were examined and no large-scale cleaning operations needed to do in all parts of the building. The rebuilding concentrated on rebuilding of the roof and the air condition and cooling system. Some of the top floor archival furniture had to be taken in parts and had to be cleaned because of smoke, soot and fire extinguishing damages.621

After the fire the Finnish Surveying Department’s archives checked and updated their disaster and security plans. The crises communication part of the disaster plan was re- written. After the disaster the crises communication was described more thoroughly in the disaster plan. Because the cause of the fire could not be found number of security alarm devices in the building’s roof was increased after the fire. The entire archives personnel were also trained in first stage fire extinguishing.622

After the disaster Finnish Surveying Department’s archives has had its own safety manager, but every level of the archives building has also their own safety responsible persons for disaster situations. There have been regular rescue exercises where both people’s and the collection’s safety have been part of the exercises. All the employees are encouraged to inform about security problems to the safety manager. The safety manager analyses after this all the safety notifications and decides whether or not to do something about the noticed risks.623

The archives unite have as their background support the Finnish Surveying Department’s security manager. In the archives unite the director and the security manager has the responsibility to do security and disaster planning for the archives. Part of the security planning is that the Finnish Surveying Department’s archives documents and data bases are duplicated. The duplicated document formats are either on microfilms or digitized document formats. The Finnish Surveying Department’s archival collections have significant national importance and therefore it has recourses for exceptional disaster management such as to duplicate the archival documents. The duplicated archival documents are stored in different regions of Finland.624

4.5.3 Safety of Kiasma during VR magazines fire

The VR magazines were designed by architect Bruno Granholm and they were built between years 1898 and 1899. The railway transportation use continued at the VR magazines until late 1980’s when the magazines started to use in different cultural and arts activities.

621 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 622 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 623 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 624 Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview 117

In 1990’s Helsinki’s most popular second hand sale situated at the VR magazines as they represented for young adults in Helsinki a central place.625

The fire at the VR magazines took place only a couple of days after there had been a violent May Day eve’s riots and a couple of days before the VR magazines planned demolition should have taken place. The fire at VR magazines started between 7 and 8 p.m. in May 2006. The fire proceeded very fast and around 8 p.m. the fire had preceded so much that the production of thick smoke was massive. The fire resulted that large groups of people gathered near by the VR magazines and to the yard of Kiasma to watch both the fire and the fire extinguishing of the buildings.

The massive fire in the Helsinki city center caused that people’s behavior had clear features of public disorder and this could be seen in the nearby area of the disaster site. Fire caused both heat and massive amount of smoke and shoot containing toxic burning gasses. The fire and fire extinguishing continued many hours. Heat, smoke, shoot and burning gasses endangered both people and heritage sites such as Kiasma museum of modern art, the Hakasalmi villa, the Finnish National Museum’s building and the Finnish parliament house. This research concentrates on Kiasma’s disaster response and safety precautions during the VR magazine’s fire.

The massive fire at the VR magazines that situated near by Kiasma caused that museum started to do security precautions that based on museum’s security plan. The first disaster prevention means was that the museum was closed from the public and the museum employees who had a role in disaster plan were called to the museum. It took a couple of hours to get all the key persons at the museum.

The fire and fire extinguishing of VR magazines had caused massive production of heath, smoke, shoot and toxic burning gases, which resulted that Kiasma started to prepare for observed security threats and to prevent fire and fire extinguishing based damages in Kiasma.

In order to prevent smoke, shoot and burning gases spreading into the entire museum, Kiasma’s air condition system was stopped. Luckily wind was blowing away from Kiasma and therefore heath did not create a central threat for the museum building. There was no significant risk that the fire could have spread to the museum.

The public disorder that the magazines fire caused resulted that the museum decided to close from the public. Some works of malicious damage were observed outside the museum building after the fire. The fire at VR magazines caused further development of Kiasma’s disaster plan and risk assessment work.

625 http://www.magito.fi/makasiinit.net/historia.htm 118

4.5.4 The Valvilla Wool Mill Museum’s archives fire in 2003

In 2003, the factory hall below the Valvilla Wool Mill museum's archival magazine was rented to a small company that manufactured components for the Finnish industry.626 On September 25th in 2003, the company carried out metal construction demolition work. While an employee was using a flame cutter, neglecting standard regulations, on a stand near the old factory hall’s wood panel ceiling. Fire broke out and spread to the archival storeroom.627 When the employee noticed that there was a heated glow in the wood panel ceiling, he stopped the flame cutting and tried to extinguish the fire with the production hall’s fire extinguisher, but it was apparently broken and could not be used.628

The old factory building’s ceiling construction was not very tight and it had gaps in some places between the wood panels. According to the fire investigators, the heat produced by the flame cutting and a welding spark that had gone through one of these gaps started the fire in the production hall’s multilayer ceiling.629 The fire proceeded into the museum’s archival storeroom in the second floor.630

Even though the Wool Mill’s sprinklers dated from the early 1900’s, they alerted the fire department and started to extinguish the fire with water. The firemen arrived at the disaster site approximately five minutes after the alarm. When the fire source had been spotted to the second-floor archival storeroom, fire department opened the building’s roof to shut down the fire with water. The firemen evacuated archival material that the museum curator guided them to rescue as the most valuable part of the collection from the archival storeroom to the building’s roof.631

The wool mill’s old sprinklers slowed down the fire’s progression and prevented the total burning and destruction of the museum’s archival collection. However, the sprinklers and use of water in fire extinguishing ensured that the archival collection was wet after the fire. Fortunately, some important parts of the museum’s archival collection had been temporarily placed in the museum’s office and, therefore, were not damaged.632

After the fire was extinguished, a private logistic company packed and moved the damaged archival materials into an undamaged production hall of the factory building. Because the city of Hyvinkää owned the entire Wool Mill building, it could provide a free production hall for the heritage recovery process. Unfortunately, the standard packing boxes used in moving were made of plastic and were unventilated which prevented the water from draining out from the packing boxes.633

626 Hyvinkää City Museum 20.5.2009: Theme interview on the Valvillan Wool Mill museum's fire 627 Hyvinkää District Court’s Judgement no: 05/1077 23.12.2005 628 Hyvinkää District Court’s Judgement no: 05/1077 23.12.2005 629 Hyvinkää District Court’s Judgement no: 05/1077 23.12.2005 630 Hyvinkää City Museum 20.5.2009: Theme interview on the Valvillan Wool Mill museum's fire 631 Hyvinkää City Museum 20.5.2009: Theme interview on the Valvillan Wool Mill museum's fire 632 Hyvinkää City Museum 20.5.2009: Theme interview on the Valvillan Wool Mill museum's fire 633 Hyvinkää City Museum 20.5.2009: Theme interview on the Valvillan Wool Mill museum's fire 119

When the accident happened there was no rescue plan for the museum’s archival collections and no aftercare plan for fire and water damage situations. Because the rescue work was not planned, there were no material resources ready or plans for rapidly getting a large group of museum professionals into the rescue work after the disaster.634 All rescue plans concentrated on people’s safety and the well-being of the building. Collection safety issues were not considered.635

The disaster response and the archival collection’s recovery were very challenging and the process continued nearly for two weeks. The number of totally wet archival material was large (110 meters of archive shelfs) and it was known that if the damaged collections were not dried or frozen in three days the collection would mold. All archival documents had both fire and water damages, but the archive library section where the fire had started was badly burned.636 There were no existing possibilities at that time to arrange immediate large-scale freezing and freeze-drying facilities for large quantity of water damaged archival or museum collections in Finland. Also, freezing and freeze-drying methods in water- damaged collection aftercare were not so familiar methods in Finland.637

The Valvilla Wool Mill museum and its employees were well connected with the local non-governmental organizations and museum professionals who were willing to help. The museum’s employees managed to get help from a couple of paper conservators who voluntarily planned the aftercare methods with the resources that could be provided rapidly and at the minimum cost. Also, the decision-making organization of the city of Hyvinkää was not prepared for this type of disaster or to provide large investments for collection rescue work at the fast rate.638

The two professionals who were employed in the museum worked long hours for several weeks to get the archival material dry and to prevent the total loss of the collection.639 There were also several local voluntary organizations in Hyvinkää that participated in the drying of the wet archival material. Some of the organizations worked for a weekend and others for several days. The city of Hyvinkää also funded a group of local unemployed people to work for the museum during the collection’s drying process.640

The lack of disaster planning meant that the disaster response and the collection recovery were done in shock and using short-notice planning with the available economic and material resources. Unfortunately, the use of minimal economic and material resources in the disaster response and collection recovery caused expansive growth of secondary collection damage such as moulding.641 In retrospect, it is possible to say that freezing and

634 Kasnio & Lindberg 2004: Concition report and conservation plan of Valvilla Wool Mill Museum’s collection after fire 635 Hyvinkää City Museum 20.5.2009: Theme interview on the Valvillan Wool Mill museum's fire 636 Kasnio & Lindberg 2004: Concition report and conservation plan of Valvilla Wool Mill Museum’s collection after fire 637 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 638 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 639 Kasnio & Lindberg 2004: Concition report and conservation plan of Valvilla Wool Mill Museum’s collection after fire 640 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 641 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 120 controlled freeze-drying and air-drying of smaller collection parts separately could have prevented most of the secondary collection damages. For audio-visual materials, instant air- drying would have probably been the most useful solution in all cases.

Since the archival collections had not been previously documented, the rescue work could not be prioritized at the level of individual documents and collection parts by their cultural and historical value. After the accident, the collection’s objects had to be spontaneously prioritized through the overall condition and level of damages in individual objects.642 The prioritization was performed with a preliminary view of the collection’s most historically significant parts. The textile sample notebooks were given top priority in the aftercare, being the main goal to preserve their information content. Because the air-drying used in the aftercare was not very effective and the notebooks were very thick, the original leather covers were cut off to improve the drying efficiency of the textile samples and paper material in the books. The objective was to prevent secondary damage such as molding, but the drying method was not effective enough to prevent this.643

During air-drying, the textile sample notebooks were placed open on large tables and on the floor in vertical position.644 Unfortunately, this type of air-drying was not optimal for the notebooks drying. The textile samples were fastened to the book pages with water- soluble glue which, in some cases, caused that the fans’ airflow to blow the textile samples from their original places in the book pages.645 This was even more unfortunate because those textile samples lost their linkage to their context information since this information existed only in the original notebook pages and in the badly damaged book covers that were already cut off in order to improve the air-drying process.646

Since there were not enough museum professionals working on the heritage recovery process during the first weeks, some wet archival material stayed wet and could not be saved. This material was completely destroyed by mold and water that stuck the pages tightly together. Most parts of the collection were saved but these objects had significant secondary damage. The fire had also caused soot and burn damage. The water had, for example, rinsed the color of both the writing ink and textile samples onto the notebook pages. Also, the collection’s logistic moves during the rescue and the aftercare caused mechanical damage such as tears in pages. A large part of the collection had mold damage. The only archival documents that were undamaged after the fire were those that had been placed temporarily in the museum office before the fire.647

Strong changes in relative humidity and temperature had caused permanent damage to the archival material.648 The largest nine textile sample notebooks did not dry fast enough

642 Kasnio & Lindberg 2004: Concition report and conservation plan of Valvilla Wool Mill Museum’s collection after fire 643 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 644 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 645 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 646 Kasnio & Lindberg 2004: Concition report and conservation plan of Valvilla Wool Mill Museum’s collection after fire 647 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 648 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 121 and their book covers, bindings, pages, and textile samples were molding in October 2003.649 The pages were photographed and the textile samples were removed from the pages. Textile samples were packed for future conservation treatments. After this, the original book pages and the book covers were destroyed due to the mold damages. Also, the most molded textile samples were removed from the collection. During the condition evaluation, 708 molded textile samples were destroyed.650

The conservation plan concentrated on the remedial conservation of the damaged archival materials. There were no mass conservation treatments designed or applied for the collection’s recovery. The goal of the conservation treatment was to stop the deterioration process of the original materials and to improve the overall condition of the collection.651

The conservation plan concentrated on preserving the information content of the archival collection. The primary objective was to conserve the collection so that its information content was preserved and the material could be handled and researched safely. The most important information content was seen in the individual textile samples and in their context information.652 The original objects, such as the textile sample notebooks, were not the primary focus of the conservation work. Written description information from the extremely dirty textile sample notebook pages were moved onto new cardboard sheets. The dirty textile samples were cleaned and washed and the moldy textile samples disinfected.653 The collection’s conservation has carried out using this conservation plan for five years and the work was still ongoing in 2009 when the museum employees were interviewed about the accident.654

4.5.5 Finnish National Museum’s silver exhibition’s explosion

In January 2006 there had been rather long and very cold time period in Helsinki. The explosion took place at the Finnish National Museum on Monday in January 2006. A natural gas pipeline had cracked near by the Finnish national museum possibly because of freezing and moving of the ground. The movement of the ground had evaluated to be caused by construction work that took place nearby the gas pipeline. The natural gas that leaked from the broken pipeline was not able to evaporate trough the frozen ground layers to the air and the natural gas started to move under the frozen ground layers to the main sewer pipeline of the area. In the sewer pipeline there was a fracture and this way the natural gas entered the sewer pipeline that also led to the Finnish National Museum’s main building. Through the main sewer pipeline the natural gas was able to enter the sewer pipeline of the Finnish National museum. In the museum’s ground floor there was a cleaning room, which floor

649 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 650 Kasnio & Lindberg 2004: Concition report and conservation plan of Valvilla Wool Mill Museum’s collection after fire 651 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 652 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 653 Kasnio & Lindberg 2004: Concition report and conservation plan of Valvilla Wool Mill Museum’s collection after fire 654 Wirilander 2009: Theme interview at the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum in 20.5.2009 122 drain had dried. The cleaning room that situated next to the silver exhibition room was built rather air tight because in this room situated also one of the museum’s electronical cabinet.655

It has estimated that the powerful gas-explosion was triggered by current change in the cleaning room’s electronic cabinet. Because rather large amount of natural gas had filled the cleaning room and also some parts of the nearby museum display the explosion was rather strong. The explosion caused that all of the museums fire and burglary alarms started to alert and everybody who was in the building noticed the explosion. Explosion tore broken both the blaster board walls of the cleaning room and blew open the cleaning room’s wooden door. The explosion’s air wave caused that all of the Silver exhibition’s windows were broken. Also all other walls and ceilings that were not made of stone and that situated near by the cleaning room had significant damages. The explosion and its air wave caused that the nearest silver exhibition’s burglary secured show cases tumbled down, collapsed and the showcase windows were broken. The silver exhibition’s further away showcases remained standing but were heavily damaged. The showcases’ windows were made of laminated security glass.656

The first disaster response means after the explosion related to the prevention of further damages. In this case further damages prevention meant minimizing of heritage object’s larcenies. Because the explosion had smashed the outside windows of the silver exhibition room, the museum’s employees had to check if any objects or object parts had flown from the museum because of the explosion’s air wave. Fortunately, no objects were found outside the museum building.657

Because the museum exhibition room’s windows had broken in the airwave, broken windows had to be covered so that burglaries in the museum could be prevented. Before the windows were fixed the windows were covered with other means that prevented burglaries and also were able to maintain the exhibition room’s temperature warmer than outside. After all it was freezing cold winter when the disaster occurred.658

Police’s criminal technical examinations required that inside the silver exhibition room nothing was touched. Objects could not be moved from the collapsed exhibition showcases before the police had completed their examinations. Fortunately, none of the showcases did not broke down completely during the criminal technical investigations.659

When police had completed the criminal technical examinations at the museum, the museum staff could move the silver objects form the damaged showcases. The overall condition and damages of the silver objects were documented and evaluated.660 Luckily only small part of the silver collection was damaged in the explosion. The primary damages that were observed in the silver objects were mechanical damages such as scratches, dents,

655 Wirilander 2011: Theme interview at the Finnish National Museum in 9.2.2011 656 Wirilander 2011: Theme interview at the Finnish National Museum in 9.2.2011 657 Wirilander 2011: Theme interview at the Finnish National Museum in 9.2.2011 658 Wirilander 2011: Theme interview at the Finnish National Museum in 9.2.2011 659 Wirilander 2011: Theme interview at the Finnish National Museum in 9.2.2011 660 Wirilander 2011: Theme interview at the Finnish National Museum in 9.2.2011 123 blows, twisting and rapture of silver object’s parts. The museum building itself, that represents built cultural heritage, was damaged mechanically because of the explosion and the air wave. For example, there were damages in the cleaning room’s and silver exhibition’s walls, ceilings, windows and doors that were made of plastered board, wood or glass.661

The silver objects that were exhibited in the museum represented the most valuable part of the Finnish National Museum’s silver collection and the damaged silver objects decided to conserve and restore. The damaged silver exhibition room was restored and repaired after the disaster. Silver objects’ conservation was mainly done by the Finnish National Museum’s own objects conservators. Some of the silver soldering was ordered from a silver smith who had worked much with old silver objects’ repairing.

4.6 Discussion

In United States role of volunteers at the first stage heritage recovery work has been significant in many water damage cases. These voluntaries were found trough heritage site’s curatorial professional’s co-operation networks. This resulted that voluntaries could be for example members of the local conservation association and therefore professionally qualified to execute heritage recovery work. In one of this research’s disaster case voluntary workers had significant part in cultural heritage collection’s recovery work.

In the 1990’s and even in early 2000s Finland, the public buildings risk evaluation and risk management work concentrated mainly on the security of people, not on protection of valuable cultural heritage. It is possible that the international conventions such as The Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with Regulations for the Execution of the Convention 1954 and its second protocol in 1999 have given the impulse for Finland to start to make plans for cultural heritage’s protection in disaster and accidental situations.

International journal articles that described disaster response and heritage recovery processes in after water damages approached heritage recovery trough over all evaluation of both the size of the water damage and the evaluation of the water damage’s impact on collections. Both library and textile collection’s water damage situations heritage recovery mean that based on entirely air drying represented often cases were small scale water damage had only little water damaged cultural heritage collections or there was only small amount of water damaged heritage objects. In such cases where large number of heritage objects had severe water damages or objects had got entirely wet, heritage recovery approach based on both freezing or freeze-drying of most challenging part of the water damaged collection and air drying of limited part of less water damaged objects during the first stage heritage recovery. It seems that this heritage recovery model existed rather clear in heritage professionals’ minds when they in accidental situations received emergency call and started to plan and execute disaster response and heritage recovery work. It is likely that this heritage recovery approach in water damage situations based on primary objective to prevent secondary microbial damages in water damaged cultural heritage materials.

661 Wirilander 2011: Theme interview at the Finnish National Museum in 9.2.2011 124

In this research’s water damage disasters there was some delay in disaster response and heritage recovery work because the information about the water damage did not reach the organization instantly when the water damage had occurred. In all three cases the primary damages that water damage caused was wetting and mechanical deformation of paper materials either with direct contact with water or very high humidity. Collections documents could get in direct contact with water when water poured directly on some document or water in the storage magazine reached the level where the books were placed in the storage magazine’s book shelves. Library collections had also got wet in flood based water damages trough capillary phenomenon that based on humidity that was rising with the help of wooden book shelves, other books and archival cardboard boxes.

The secondary collection damages that the delays in acute disaster response work such as removal of the water from the storage magazine and the drying of the wetted materials started could be seen in biological damages of cultural heritage. Also, the used first stage disaster response methods such as air dying with fens could have increased the mechanical damages and deformation of wetted paper materials.

In such cases where the water damage’s disaster response work and first stage heritage recovery work were made by the memory institution’s own employees means of preventive conservation seamed to dominate in the first stage disaster response work. Use of preventive conservation approach in collection’s recovery work also dominated when large number of collection’s objects had deteriorated in the water damage. In those cases where preventive conservation approach trough environmental control was central approach in heritage’s recovery work, object based remedial conservation was used only in cultural historically most valuable deteriorated object’s conservation. Remedial conservation took place after the first stage heritage recovery that based on air drying of the water damaged materials. In such case where heritage recovery was in post disaster situation acquired from conservation professionals the dominating preservation approach based on longer cold storage period of deteriorated documents, air drying of wetted and frozen documents in series and in individual water damaged materials remedial conservation.

In this research, there were three fire based accidental disasters. The accident based fires could be caused by human error or technical system’s disorder. Fire causes in primary stage toxic gases, smoke and shoot based damages. In those cases, when fire took place in side heritage building or building where heritage objects had been placed primary damages could cause also actual burning damages.

In one disaster case the fire that threatened cultural heritage objects inside museum building occurred near by the museum. In this case, there was no significant threat that the fire could have spread to the museum building. It was the smoke, shoot and toxic gases that endangered the heritage objects inside the museum. First stage disaster response means in this case was to stop the air conditioning and air ventilation system inside museum so that the toxic gases’ and smoke’s effective access inside the building could have been prevented.

125

Trough the analyzed cases it was observed that in such cases where controlled burning tactics and fire extinguishing foam were used in fire extinguishing instead of heavy use of water, less water damages could be observed in cultural heritage sites and objects. Use of different fire extinguishing methods were influenced by the nature of the fire and the conditions where the fire occurred. When fire started inside the heritage site or the progression of the fire was extremely strong, heavy use of water in fire extinguishing was common. Where roof fire started from certain spot of the roof the fire extinguishing could be done with controlled burning tactics and with fire extinguishing foam. In these cases, use of water tried to be avoid so that water damages could be prevented. In one case the first stage fire extinguishing started from an old sprinkler system that was connected to the water pipelines. This caused significant water damages both in the building and in the heritage objects.

In fire and fire extinguishing based disaster cases the protection of cultural heritage and the first stage disaster response were done in heritage site’s owner organization’s consultants or heritage professionals and fire and rescue service’s employees co-operation. The actual heritage’s protection and heritage’s recovery in post-disaster situation was heritage’s owner organization’s responsibility. Owner organizations either had the needed conservation professional resources in their organization or the heritage’s owner organization tried to otherwise acquire the needed conservation professional knowledge to plan and do the actual heritage’s recovery. There were differences between heritage site owners how they were able to acquire the needed financial, material and personnel resources for the heritage recovery process.

The first stage approach in fire and fire extinguishing based heritage damage’s recovery based mainly on preventive conservation approach. The primary task was to prevent further damages that for example water damages could easily cause if the drying process of water damaged materials was delayed. The drying process based on multiple objects environmental control that aimed at objects’ fast air-drying. In such fire and fire extinguishing case where entire large collection had wetted during the fire because of the sprinklers (connected with water pipelines) and the fire extinguishing made with water, more object to object based handmade work was required in order to start the drying process of the collection. Also in these cases the first stage heritage recovery plan based on badly water damaged collection’s drying trough air drying and environmental control of collection’s drying process.

The decision to save money just after the fire and during the first weeks of the disaster response and collection recovery meant in one case that the collection’s damaging continued for several weeks after the disaster. The collection recovery method, air-drying, that was chosen for entire wet archival collection’s drying, was one of the main factors that lead to the large-scale secondary damage. Ineffective heritage recovery methods were employed due to lack of disaster planning and economical resources. These circumstances resulted more permanent and serious collection damages and expanded need for further collection’s recovery and remedial conservation in order to save some parts of the collection. The attempt to save money just after the fire may have increased the overall cost of the 126 collection’s recovery because in the end the badly damaged collection has required many years remedial conservation work.

127

5 DISASTERS CAUSED BY VANDALISM

The contemporary understanding over concept of vandalism is connected with the ideological tradition of the French revolution’s aftermath. Vandalism was connected in 1798 with use of systematic revolutionary motivated violence and cultural discretion that aimed at destruction of art, architecture and cultural heritage.662

Deliberate destruction of art and cultural heritage has been connected with strategic means of warfare, terrorist groups’ actions, juvenile offenders work of criminal damage and even with contemporary artists work. Chines contemporary artist Ai Weiwei is for example one of the contemporary artists whose artworks have contained heritage objects smashing663 and modification664. Ai Weiwei has used smashed and colored Han Dynasty urns in his artworks.

These Weiwei’s artworks have also lead to that one artists’ art vandalism has aimed at Ai Weiwei’s art. In February 2014 artist Maximo Caminero destroyed one of Ai Weiwei’s colored urn vases at the Perez Art Museum in Miami, USA. By destroying an urn Caminero protested against the Perez Art Museum's policy that did not support exhibitions of the local artists. The difference between traditional forms of vandalism and Ai Weiwei’s heritage objects smashing and modifying has been that Ai Weiwei had bought and he owned the Han Dynasty Urns that he worked on although these heritage objects possibly had originally been bought through illegal heritage markets.

The phenomenon of heritage objects and sites deliberate destruction are approached in this research trough the idea of contestation of public spaces’ and cultural heritage’s owner ship. Although the destructive actions are perhaps not aimed at cultural heritage on the bases that the site represent society’s official cultural heritage it is possible that these destructive actions are aimed at these heritage sites because they symbolize and manifest society’s institutional powers and power relations of the society. In the United States of America vandalism, malicious damage and arsons were observed to aim at institutional properties in late 1970’s. These incidents did not occur in association with riots or protestations they represented purely incidents of criminal damage that aimed at institutional property. In late 1980’s this phenomenon of vandalism and malicious damage had become increasing problem for various institutions in the United States of America.665 This phenomenon has regarded as an indicator of other social problems in society.666

As criminal offence vandalism has been defined as willful damaging, destruction or disfigurement of public or private immovable or movable property. Vandalism is linked with concept of disorder. Because vandalism aims at certain intentional damaging of the

662 Merrills 2009, 156 663 One of these artworks is Ai Weiwei’s Dropping a Han Dynasty Urn from 1995. 664 In 1994 Ai Weiwei painted a Han Dynasty Urn with red Coca Cola logo and his Colored Vases art work was made in 2009-2010. 665 Sadler 1988, 556 666 Ceccato & Haining 2005, 1638 128 environment, it has been linked with physical disorder. Two forms of disorder have been connected with vandalism; physical and social disorder. Physical disorder represents the visual signs that mediate image of abandoned, mistreated or unmaintained environment. Social disorder on the other hand represents human behavior in environment that causes physical destruction of environment. While physical disorder represents on-going state, social disorder refers to a few events that take place in the environment at some time. Graffiti writing has seen as form of social disorder.667

Vandalism relate to entertainment of a certain group of young people. It may also represent a symbolic action that is used to mark a certain area of the environment as certain group’s territory. Vandalism may also represent expression of feelings such as frustration and revolt that certain life conditions or cultural conflicts involve several generations. Vandalism can represent revenge motivated, play motivated, tactical behavior or malicious vandalism. These different vandalism types indicate the multiple reasons why willful destruction on environment takes place. Graffiti and braking of windows have been defined as examples of play oriented vandalism and sabotage of a workplace has seen as form of tactical vandalism. Malicious vandalism points at deliberate destruction of environment that is being done because of frustration or boredom.668

The existence of vandalism in living environment has been linked with the concepts of social capital and cohesion, collective efficiency and local attachments. It has estimated that strong social relations, thrust among people and level of civil engagement in local communities have regarded as such social resources that may operate as protective factors in vandalism prevention.669

Vandalism takes place more often in common unclaimed environments than in private homes. People behind vandalism have sometimes been defined as group of young people who come from poor areas that have high population density. These young people commit vandalism nearby their own homes or close by neighborhoods. The nearby areas that become scene of vandalism do not primary become a target because of the nature of these environments, but because they locate geographically close to these poor and unstable urban areas. Vandalism may represent for these young amusement or expression of discontent that poverty causes. Use of land and environments structure has significant part in vandalism’s existence; it exists both in central areas of cities and in erratic, poor areas or close by neighborhoods of these poor areas.670

Vandalism and other crimes existence has linked in relation with society’s economic history and level of political and economic inequality of the society. Even if Sweden approaches western capitalism trough strong social welfare state tendency it has suffered since the late 1980’s growing problems with vandalism especially in the urban areas. Number of vandalism cases has increased in Sweden since late 1980’s over 30 %.671

667 Ceccato & Haining 2005, 1638 668 Ceccato & Haining 2005, 1639 669 Ceccato & Haining 2005, 1637 670 Ceccato & Haining 2005, 1639 671 Ceccato & Haining 2005, 1638 129

Research on vandalism’s background factor connects community disorder with neighborhoods low economic position, ethnic diversity and instability caused by violent subcultures and crimes.672 Social disorders have often caused that local communities have difficulties to maintain effective social control and existence of common values. Lack of social order have also caused that people are not engaged with their own neighborhood because both formal and informal public control does not exist. Social capital that has regarded to represent a protective factor against vandalism can be identified through high social thrust and inhabitants’ collective co-operation for common good and social engagement. Social cohesion on the other had requires existence of social order, social capital and social efficacy673.674

Graffiti writers have defined their cultural practice as attempt to take over abounded urban environments or attempt to claim ownership to their environment.675 This may suggest that vandalism in urban environments and public spaces relates to confrontation between public power and individual people over question who has the power to modify, take over and claim ownership over the environment.

Vandalism in cultural heritage context represents unwanted public interventions from the heritage’s preservation perspective. These interventions also question the terms and means of people’s engagement with society’s collective memory and accessibility of cultural heritage. Why does public interventions take place in associated with cultural heritage? Public interventions are part of ongoing contestation of ownership and accessibility of public spaces in contemporary western countries. Malicious damage and vandalism in the form of smudges and graffiti are present everywhere in the contemporary urban environments. Therefore, it is possible that these heritage sites or objects do not became targets of vandalism or malicious damage, because they represent cultural heritage, it is more likely that they become targets because they have come in some persons way at the right time. Is it possible that collective memory and cultural heritage have become a new forum where to claim ownership over public environment by taking the power to express destructive opinions and feelings to a given interpretation of the past. From heritage professionals perspective these interventions are unwanted because they damage or destroy cultural heritage’s authenticity and diminishes its informative value. It is possible that reactions like these have something to do with the questions of displacement and feelings of not belonging to those who have part in the celebration of cultural heritage.

Definition of vandalism and malicious damage can vary on the bases of who and from which perspective the events are analyzed.676 Graffiti culture often represents for those who “make pieces” art and creative culture while for the majority society and the society’s officials these subcultural forms of art or creativity represents annoying problem that distorts the urban environments. This research analyses graffiti from the preventive conservation where graffiti made on cultural heritage represents vandalism or criminal

672 Ceccato & Haining 2005, 1639 673 Social efficacy means peoples willingness to act for something united with thrust and shared expectations. (Ceccato & Haining 2005, 1640) 674 Ceccato & Haining 2005, 1640 675 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 163 676 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 43 130 damage. This approach base on the fact that graffiti made on heritage sites or objects reduces heritage’s authenticity and integrity and therefore diminishes possibilities to analyze heritage as information source of the past.

The young who have committed vandalism or malicious damage in their community defines malicious damage as trashing, braking, messing up and blotting of property both public and private.677 It has observed that girls’ participation in acts of vandalism is lower than boys.678 Malicious damage was seen as form of teasing majority people or causing disruption in the society. According to the young who committed malicious damage the motive could base on either plan based intentional actions or unintentional behavior caused by incidental factors. Malicious damage was seen as result of other problems and lack of wellbeing. One of the problems that influenced as background factor behind criminal damage was other people’s carelessness. Some young even thought that some people may continue to do malicious damage because they have not been cached. Vandalism and malicious damage are caused by people’s careless and disregarding attitude towards each other and the society. Young people’s wish may be to gain attention trough vandalism which is not much thought at forehand. Often the young did not think of that much consequence of their actions. The overall vision is that the common respect for public property is missing. Uncomfortable environment is not regarded as people’s own living neighborhood and this often leads to vandalism and malicious damages. This development increases because of the bad quality of the environment easily causes more criminal damages.679 Also use of alcohol and lack of activities influences people’s decision to vandalize or to do malicious damage. These actions may later on seem insane also from the offender’s perspective. The unclear motives behind people’s actions in vandalism and criminal damage make these crimes’ prevention difficult. Although vandalism can be planned braking and destroying of places the aim of these actions may remain unclear or these actions lack a goal that is achievable.680

It is possible that vandalism as almost normal way of life in urban environments has reached the stage where there are no limits where to target actions of vandalism or criminal damage and heritage sites became scenes of deliberate destruction and vandalism just like any other places and sites in the environment. In general reasons for vandalism have defined as disregard, lack of control, nausea and deprivation. The disregard relates to people’s carelessness and disregard over their own living environment. Because the environment is not respected and valued it is not taken care of.681 It has observed that in the evaluation of vandalism probability the environment’s material and constructional factors have influence into people’s willingness to do criminal damage. The graffiti’s presence in the environment often attract people who also write graffiti. The actions that are done to discourage people’s willingness to do vandalism should be done in the environmental planning. It seems that the increase of vandalism and criminal damage follows the same pattern in the Western counties.

677 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 43 678 Smith 2003, 222 679 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 44 680 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 45 681 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 46 131

In Finland deliberate cultural heritage’s destruction has not earlier been researched as cultural phenomenon. This research’s vandalism cases concentrate on both immovable heritage sites and movable heritage objects vandalism. The researched vandalism cases are: 1. Saint Nicolas Orthodox Church in Kotka, vandalism cases in the 1990s and 2000s 2. The Orthodox Church of Christ’s Resurrection in Jyväskylä, vandalism case in 2010 3. Saint Jacob Church in Lauttasaari, Helsinki, vandalism case involving designed sacral objects and artworks in 2007 4. The Turku Castle, vandalism case involving artworks in the museum exhibitions in 2008 5. Uspenski Ortodox cathedral, icon larcenys in 2008 and 2010 6. Vartiokylä castle mountain in Vartiokylä, Helsinki, vandalism cases in the 1990s and 2000s.

5.1 Prevention of criminal damage and vandalism

There are different crime prevention theories that have been used to prevent criminal damages and vandalism. The approaches that have used to prevent vandalism and criminal damages base on either environmental changes or use of technical security systems. Although technical security systems have improved safety of many cultural heritage sites, they cannot provide total safety for cultural heritage. For example cameras as heritage sites security systems have sometimes helped in solving crimes but in some cases it has been the security camera that have provoked people to do vandalism and criminal damage. It has also observed that the situational crime prevention actions with the means of technical security systems have sometimes caused that criminal behavior has moved from one place and time to another. In the cases of criminal damage and vandalism crime forms rarely change into another one. Criminal damage and vandalism either exists or not.682

Idea of crime prevention also prevention of vandalism and criminal damage, bases mainly on changes that are made in the physical environment. These environmental changes aim at factors that have ability to reduce possibilities to commit crimes such as malicious damage or vandalism. Often crime prevention work concentrates on the possibilities to commit crime and not that much attention is played on people’s criminal propensity. Crime prevention theory approaches crimes as events that often require three factors to exist; a person who is motivated to commit crime, tempting target of a crime and shortages in control and security management. This approach indicates that crimes most likely do not take place if not all of these factors do not meet at the same time. Situational crime prevention tries to prevent crimes trough environmental changes that could avoid possibilities to commit crimes.683 It has observed that potential persons who commit

682 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 65 683 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 9 132 malicious damage or vandalism are active offenders, persons who have committed vandalism but are not currently actively vandalizing or persons who have just started to do vandalism.684 According to Martha Smith (2003) the offender’s previous experiences in committing criminal damage or vandalism influences into the selection process of the target of the criminal damage. The experience often results that the targets are selected on the bases of “what has previously proven to work” in for example graffiti writing.685

Zero tolerance thinking has used in vandalism and criminal damage crimes prevention. This crime prevention ideology underlined forms of official control. Zero tolerance thinking was established in the New York city and it tried to use in Finland in modified form first in Tampere and then in Helsinki in illegal graffiti prevention. In Helsinki zero tolerance thinking became known trough “Stop töhryille”686 campaign that aimed at crime prevention of illegal graffiti. The zero tolerance ideology was connected with the theory of broken windows. According to this theory the social control prevents people to commit criminal damage and vandalism but if this control is missing the reckless attitude becomes more dominant in the society. The broken window theory supports the idea of fast reaction on criminal damage and instant repairing of the damages as means to prevent crimes.687 By reacting to all crimes and social disorder clearly the society maintains people’s feelings of security.688

The challenges in the early intervention and the zero tolerance crime prevention was that the early crime prevention should reach the young who are in danger to commit crimes before any crimes have taken place.689 There is also a possibility that very strong society’s control does not only fail in preventing vandalism and criminal damage, it might even provoke people to commit these destructive actions.690 The impacts of fast cleaning of graffiti and smudges can have two-sided effects. It can reduce graffiti making as a phenomenon or it can also create a challenge for the young who write graffiti and the young might even start to contest who gets to be the first to make a peace or smudge on a cleaned wall again.691

Society’s revitalization as means of crime prevention bases on people’s inclusion into society life and use of unofficial forms of social control. This approach minimizes the official crime prevention means and uses people’s social interaction as means to secure urban areas. Cultural criminology raises the cultural conflicts that exist between the younger generations and the majority population. According to this approach contemporary organized society creates subcultures that are in conflict with society’s norms. Therefore, cultural criminology approaches crime prevention trough cultural understanding that approaches phenomenon pluralistic and open-minded. This approach underlines the constructive dialogue and

684 Smith 2003, 223 685 Smith 2003, 225 686 Word to word translation for Stop töhryille is Stop smudges. 687 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 10 688 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 11 689 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 68 690 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 69 691 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 70 133 common sense between conflicting parties as means to solve the problems that malicious damage causes in the society.692

Rather than form of dialogue, vandalism and malicious damage has been seen as people’s cry for help in their own society.693 Because social exclusion contributes to the increase of criminality in society, criminal damage’s prevention has in some cases concentrated on prevention of social exclusion, because by defining a person as criminal also this person’s social exclusion process is promoted. Aim of crime prevention has been to maintain dialogue between society’s different population groups.694

Anarchistic criminology approaches crimes and criminality from the perspective of subculture. This approach in crime prevention rejects the authority of crime prevention and recognizes also subcultures such as graffiti and hip-hop cultures equal right to exist in the public environments as the majority cultures have. According to the anarchist crime prevention theory the traditional crime prevention means seldom produces significant results, more important mean to prevent crimes relate to subcultural groups illegal and unvented behavior trough wider perspective that influences on society’s power relations, inequality and cultural pluralism questions in the society.695

Sometimes people’s place attachment is more significant factor in promotion of vandalism and criminal damage prevention that the use of technical security devises. The reputation of a place bases on history, public image (both official and unofficial) and interaction between people. The bad reputation that a place has received changes slowly. The reputation influences into people’s attitudes and values both inside the social community and outside of it. The regional identity has central meaning in successful crime prevention. The regional identity and people’s place attachment influences into how well malicious damage’s prevention succeeds regionally. Regional identity and place attachment are very important for children and young people. Strong regional identity causes that people are more interested about their own living environment and they are more interested to take care of the environment and take responsibility over the environment. Both the reputation of the neighborhood and the resident’s subjective opinions about the region represent central background factors in crime prevention.696

5.1.1 Crime prevention in Finland

In mid-1990’s the common attitude towards urban environments and people’s interaction with these environments changed rapidly. It was thought that changes related to larger social change in Finnish society. 697 This cultural change was observed by foreign

692 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 11 693 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 75 694 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 76 695 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 11 696 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 12 697 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 9 134 tourists when they visited Helsinki.698 The graffiti writing disturbed many business owners and in 1994 it was Helsinki Chamber of Commerce that first suggested to the city of Helsinki that illegal graffiti and smudging should be controlled in Helsinki.699 After three years real estate owners in Helsinki started their own regional projects in prevention of vandalism. In the area of Vallila was established “Töhrimättä paras” project and soon after this in the other part of Helsinki in Pikku Huopalahti started same kind of project in 1997.700

Graffiti and tagit writers had provoked many people in Helsinki and this uncontrolled situation in the urban environment later lead to the Helsinki city’s “Stop töhryille” project that aimed at prevention of vandalism. According to the graffiti writers the project meant also attempt to destroy graffiti culture that was regarded as smudging by the Helsinki city’s officials. The graffiti writers’ opinion was that the vandalism prevention project resulted that they were regarded as large scale criminals in their own home city.701 Although the counsel initiative that started the “Stop töhryille” project did not contain zero tolerance approach to graffiti and vandalism prevention these zero tolerance practices were later applied for the project by the public works department of Helsinki city.702

“Stop töhryille” project was not liked among young people who wrote graffiti and who liked this form of subculture.703 It was seen as city official’s use of power over Helsinki’s environment.704 The project possibly increased young people’s aggressive attitudes towards the city’s officials and some security firm’s employees who where known on their heavy- handed actions against the writers when they caught young on graffiti writing. The establishment of the project was seen as attempt to bring “American broken windows theory” and war against graffiti from New York city to Helsinki city. The people who strongly resisted this project disagreed with the idea that existence of graffiti would automatically activate young peoples need to do graffiti and other writings. The people who criticized the project also disagreed with the broken windows theory statement that suggested that disturbance behavior like graffiti writing would automatically increase other crimes such as robberies and assaults.705 Although this critique against such conclusions might have been true in some graffiti writer’s case, it cannot be rejected that some other offenders perhaps did both graffiti writings and commit assaults and robberies. It is not possible to say if some crime have later on lead to other offences as well.

The people who were part of this subculture or admired graffiti subculture had difficulties to understand the trial convictions and indemnities scale on graffiti writings. They seemed unreasonably high for the young writers. This confrontation between public power and marginal group of people who appreciated graffiti culture perhaps lead to that war against graffiti and smudges did not succeed to prevent people’s graffiti writing in Helsinki. Since the project did not reach its goals in “smudge prevention”, it was closed

698 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 13 699 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 14 700 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 15 701 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 9 702 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 160 703 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 9 704 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 160 705 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 9 135 down in 2008. 706 Attempt to remove graffiti culture from Helsinki’s streets was seen as city official’s attempt to reduce inhabitants’ possibilities to have independent and autonomic cultural practice. It has been evaluated that because graffiti culture did not represent mainstream culture or Arts established by the institutions of Art, it has been tried to remove from the urban environment.707

It has suggested that the same confrontation in attitudes between the authorities and the subcultural group of young has led to different demonstrations in Helsinki between years 2005 and 2008. Some of these demonstrations were graffiti approached “Vapaa Helsinki”708 and “Töhryfestari”709 that followed the anarchistic demonstrations or riots of “Euro May Day” that took place in Helsinki during years 2005, 2006 and 2007.710 The violent riots at the VR magazines before the massive fire at the VR magazines took place in 2006 during the same night when “Euro May Day” demonstrators had caused malicious damage in other parts of Helsinki city center.

Common approach in crime prevention is that in order to succeed in preventing crimes one needs to have knowledge, prioritization and control. 711But it seems that means of control is a delicate question in contemporary Western societies. The research done on vandalism and criminal damages support the idea that in urban environments control and rule over public spaces seems to be central factors causing conflicts.712

The Finnish State Council established in 1999 the national crime prevention program called “Turvallisuustalkoot”713. This crime prevention program approached local and regional crime prevention from the viewpoint where both all people and all organizations in Finland have both motives and obligations to participate voluntarily in their own living neighborhoods security maintenance and security improvements. Objective of this program was to develop working models for crime prevention and increase security. The project also aimed at developed uniform operational policies in Finland. These operational policies contained methods that could be used to minimize the possibilities to commit crimes and to prevent some people’s process to become a criminal. This national crime prevention program received later on in 2004 internal security program called “Arjen turvaa”, everyday security that aimed at individual people’s increased security. In 2006 the Finnish Ministry of the Interior established “Paikallisen turvallisuustyön kehittäminen” program that was established to develop regional and local security planning for the needs of the future development of national security planning.714 Ideological approach in these crime prevention programs was that criminality in the societies can be prevented more effectively

706 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 9 707 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 163 708 Word to word translation of Vapaa Helsinki is Free Helsinki. 709 Word Töhryfestari means in English Smudge festival. 710 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 11 711 Korsell et all 2006, 184 712 Brunila & Ranta & Viren 2011, 11 713 Finnish “Turvallisuustalkoot” term contain maintaining that security is improved and maintained as collective and voluntary based work within society that aims at improvement and maintenance of local communities security in Finland. 714 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 15 136 at the early stage crime prevention work rather than through the fear of possible social punishments and convictions that criminal life would lead to.715

5.1.2 Cultural heritage crimes

Cultural heritage has been target of deliberate destruction and larcenies globally. High profile cultural properties that have become target of crime are often raised into world news category. The deliberate destruction and looting of cultural property have become globally known and visible threat that aim at cultural heritage because of the attention that media has given to them. Backgrounds are multiform in cultural property’s destruction and looting. Most often heritage situated in politically instable conflict areas and have large amount of valuable cultural property are at risk of heritage crimes.716 One example of unstable geographical areas that have become material resources of illicit heritage trafficking has been Africa. It has estimated that only Nigerian museums have lost in illicit heritage trafficking cultural property worth approximately hundreds of millions US dollars. These stolen heritage objects have sometimes been able to track down in the custody of heritage dealers based in New York and in London. In Nigeria’s case it has estimated that the heritage larcenys taking place in museums have succeeded with the assistance of people inside these museums’ organization.717

UNESCO’s Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property started in 1970 a process that aimed at creating legal framework to intensify cultural heritage’s protection against crimes. This process was accomplished in 1995 when UNESCO’s Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects (UNIDROIT) was adopted. After this UNIDROIT convention has been central international convention aiming at prevention of the illicit heritage’s trafficking. The convention tried to protect both movable and immovable cultural heritage against crimes such as works of destruction and vandalism; illicit excavations, export and import of cultural property and illicit transfer of heritage’s ownership.718 The process that leads to establishment of the UNIDROIT convention indicated that already in 1995 United Nations and UNESCO regarded crimes that aimed at cultural heritage as one of the greatest threats that globally endangered cultural heritage.719

Financial profit based heritage crimes require the demand and needs of antiquity markets. It has estimated that some of the heritage objects reach the legal or illegal antiquities markets as result of entrepreneurs and different kinds of criminals’ co-

715 Koskela & Nurminen 2010, 15 716 Munch Rasmussen 2014, 14 717 Appiah 2012,73 718 UNESCO 2015, Prevention of Looting and Illicit Traffic of Cultural Property (website accessed in 21.6.2015) http://www.unesco.org/new/en/phnompenh/culture/tangible-cultural-heritage/prevention-of-looting- and-illicit-traffic-of-cultural-property 719 Munch Rasmussen 2014, 14 137 operation.720 UNESCO’s 1976 Recommendation Concerning the International Exchange of Cultural Property was adopted in the General Conference meeting in Nairobi in 1976. This recommendation opposed legal heritage trade and it has suggested that this recommendation caused the rise of cultural heritage prices, which increased the illicit heritage trade.721 Modern heritage criminality has not only concentrated on archeological sites, also heritage objects that belong to both private persons and public institutions may become target of heritage larcenies.722 International community’s concern over heritage crimes has increased during 2000s.723

Illegal movement and export of cultural heritage has been main stream in the research on cultural heritage crimes. Vandalism and malicious damages that take place in association with cultural heritage has not that much researched in peace time societies. In Sweden published in 2006 first research on in Nordic countries’ heritage crimes. The research based on 2111 questioner answers collected in Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland and on 150 interviews of subject matter specialist’s from these counties. Criminality in the field of cultural heritage variates on the bases of the heritage objects, this object’s place of storage and the nation state where these heritage objects situate.724

Many kinds of people can be found behind heritage crimes.725 There are people who use all possibilities to steal heritage objects in order to collect or sell them. There are also people who have some kind of substance abuse problem and in order to survive they steals whatever they think might have some value. There are thieves who steal specific heritage objects on contract.726 In the Nordic context heritage objects larcenies in churches was observed in the majority religions, Evangelical Lutheran, churches in the early 2000’s. It has been mainly silver candle sticks and other silver objects that have been stolen, but also wooden objects and other antiquities. Especially Swedish churches have been target of heritage larceny series that have led to several significant heritage objects disappearance.727

Even if crimes that aim at cultural heritage have also aspects of economic loss in the cases of churches’ heritage objects larcenies the emotional impact that heritage object’s larceny has for both the local community and the parish’s members, have greater importance for the community. The emotional impact bases on the fact that these objects have perhaps been in the churches for centuries and these objects have been donated to the parish by local people or local community.728

In this research there is one disaster case, Uspenski Cathedral’s icon larcenies, that could also be analyzed trough perspective of heritage object’s larceny or heritage trafficking. These icon larcenies are however analyzed in the context of vandalism since these crimes have taken place in association with Orthodox Cristian Church‘s essential objects that have

720 Korsell et all 2006, 23 721 Klug 2010, 737 722 Korsell et all 2006, 23 723 Klug 2010, 737 724 Korsell et all 2006, 7 725 Korsell et all 2006, 8 726 Korsell et all 2006, 7 727 Korsell et all 2006, 8 728 Korsell et all 2006, 8 138 religious functions in both the Orthodox Church’s services and the Orthodox Christians’ prayer life. Larceny of the icons and the jewelry donated to these icons can be seen as vandalism that disgraces the sanctity of these essential objects and religious beliefs of Orthodox Christians.

Heritage larcenies motives are rather often financial. The financial motives relate to offenders aim either to sell or to collect the stolen heritage objects.729 Collectors motives for committing heritage object’s larceny relate to mainly unknown reasons and secondly financial causes. The heritage objects dealers primarily motives for heritage object’s larcenies relates to financial reasons and in some cases secondly unknown reasons.730 Uspenski Cathedral’s icon larcenies form a group of robberies that took place during two time-periods in 2008 and 2010. Although it is not possible to say if these two time-period’s icon larcenies are related, the stolen property type and the church where the property was taken were the same during the both occasions. In the cases where heritage objects have been stolen from memory institutions it has observed that there has been in some cases the memory institution’s employee involved with the crimes. In the cases where churches’ heritage objects have been stolen it is not often the organization’s own employees have been involved with the heritage crime.731 Illegal removal of heritage objects require an opportunity. These opportunities often base on existing security weaknesses. Security refers to adequate crime prevention measures.732 Security gaps in the sites containing significant cultural heritage, like churches, relates to most commonly on insufficient protection means, imprecise inventories, inaccurate security routines and poor security prioritizations.733

5.2 Symbolism of heritage’s destruction and vandalism

What can be said about the cases in which vandalism has destroyed or damaged cultural heritage? This research approaches heritage sites deliberate destruction and vandalism trough Pauline von Bonsdorff’s (1998b) model on area’s appearance. Based on the model this research’s vandalism cases have taken place in such heritage sites and areas that seem to manifest society’s history in the context of spiritual or administrative power. Four of the vandalism cases have taken place nearby city centers that represent areas of administration and power but also included residential areas features like apartment houses. Two of the vandalized heritage sites represented clearly areas of spiritual or political power that located in residential areas of Helsinki suburbs.734 All of these heritage sites seam to dominate the surrounding area where they locate. These heritage sites are dominated by rules of proper behavior. Pauline von Bonsdorff suggests that accessibility influences into the character of public places. Accessibility is influenced by factors that are connected with individual people’s social position in the society that is connected with the given roles in the construction of the environments.735

729 Korsell et all 2006, 119 730 Korsell et all 2006, 165 731 Korsell et all 2006, 84 732 Korsell et all 2006, 95 733 Korsell et all 2006, 105 734 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 178 735 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 178 139

- Can heritage vandalism be explained trough society’s cultural change and trough postmodernist cultural values? Are these contemporary values in conflict with the fundamental idea of cultural heritage that even now have many tendencies that date back to the philosophical movement of national romantics? Because cultural heritage’s definition process is rather often authoritative in nature, Michel Foucault’s concept of anti-authority struggle can provide valid answer why these destructive actions take place in association with heritage sites and objects. Based on Foucault’s power relation theory the damaged cultural heritage or memory institutions’ defined cultural heritage does not represent “the main enemies” of the individuals who chose to destroy cultural heritage but “the immediate enemies” of the people.736 This suggests that works of destruction that take place in association with cultural heritage perhaps aim at the institutional bodies and nation state that control and use power over individual people, public space and environment.

Vandalism reflect the circumstances in which it has occurred.737 Therefore the visual impression of vandalism may sometimes be the only information source that can reveal something about the motives of vandalism. Just like heritage is defined statement of society’s past, vandalism that takes place in association with cultural heritage may cary also some kind of symbolic message about the cultural conflict that takes place between a person and cultural heritage.

According to Eero Tarasti (2000) people’s environmental experiences have strong cultural bondages. This bondage between people and environment result that aesthetic statement over environment and the environmental experiences are strongly influenced by individual people’s cultural background, cultural values and aesthetic taste which are context dependent. Individual people’s cultural contexts and linkages also result is the environment and the environmental experience situated inside or outside people’s cultural values.738

Environment can be defined as positive or negative environmental experience. Environments are situated either inside or outside in the viewer’s cultural context. The positive cultural interpretations represent valued and liked cultural elements in environment and the negative environment interpretations are disliked culturally by the viewer. If landscape or environment is experienced positively or negatively has much to do with the environments cultural similarities or cultural differences with the viewer’s values.739

Pauline von Bonsdorff’s (2002) environmental aesthetics underlines cultural tradition’s meaning as context of the surrounding world’s aesthetic interpretations. The aesthetic experience that the environment causes increases people’s ability to detected environment’s aesthetic features. Individual people’s aesthetic literacy skills are modified

736 Foucault 1982, 780 737 Rose 2001, 17 738 Tarasti 2000, 154-155 739 Tarasti 2000, 157 140 by personal aesthetic experiences and feelings of engagement.740 The aesthetic experiences are influenced by people’s cultural and experimental learning.

Pauline von Bonsdorff (1998a) suggests the aesthetic experiences base on individual people’s cultural knowledge, know-how and values that operate in the aesthetic analyses of the environment. Aesthetic experience is influenced by both individual people’s emotional bondages with the environment and people’s cognitive skills in the analyses, classification and identification of the environment that activates the aesthetic experience.741

Pauline von Bonsdorff (1996) states that people’s previous memories and thinking that the environment causes activates the aesthetic evaluation. Therefore aesthetic experience can be seen through environment’s and people’s interaction relation. Environment uses people’s empiric knowledge to deliver the aesthetic experience.742 Empiric knowledge in aesthetic experience has its bases in individual people’s history and his/hers social group’s culture.743 In environmental experiences people are engaged with both aesthetic experience and the experienced environment through their empiric knowledge. Environment and its cultural representation exist independently but they are connected with each other interactively.744

At least two semiotic processes take place when cultural heritage is being deliberately vandalized or destroyed. The first semiotic process takes place in the act of deliberate destruction. This act occurs in the mind and actions of the offender in association with cultural heritage that is damaged, modified or destroyed. The second semiotic process that was identified occurred in existence (Dasein) of the cultural heritage site or object that was changed trough the act of deliberate destruction and its disaster response and heritage recovery processes.

The semiotic act of heritage vandalism in which the offender or offenders deliberately damages, modifies, destroys or even removes from the environment cultural heritage object or parts of the object seams to follow Eero Tarasti’s (1999) semiotic act and event model. In this model integral part of the semiotic act can be understood in the context of both pre- signs and the post-sings of the act. Although Tarasti uses this model in very different cultural context this model provides useful framework through which the symbolic features of the act of vandalism can be described.

In deliberate heritage’s destruction the semiotic act of vandalism is being committed with the help of pre-signs. These pre-signs can be understood as preliminary thoughts and preparations that may take place before the act of heritage’s deliberate damaging or destroying. It is possible that pre-signs take place in rather short time period through spontaneous featured idea that bases on more or less randomly created conditions. The semiotic heritage destruction act’s post-sign represents the interpretation of cultural

740 von Bonsdorff 2002: 94-95 741 von Bonsdorff 1998a: 221 742 von Bonsdorff 1996: 10, 131 743 von Bonsdorff 1998a: 223 744 von Bonsdorff 1998a: 226-227 141 heritage’s vandalism or deliberate destruction act. In the context of heritage vandalism post- signs in my opinion represent the symbolic change that actualizes in vandalized cultural heritage’s interpretation both physically and symbolically.745

Eero Tarasti suggests that the pre-sign’s change to act sign requires that acting person abandons the pre-sign phase in favor of the semiotic act. The act sign changes into the post- sign with the means of the semiotic act.746 In heritage vandalism’s case the post-sign means that the act of cultural heritage’s deliberate destruction takes place and decision is being made in order to gain the complete idea of vandalism act. It is possible that at least Uspenski Cathedral’s icon larcenies represented semiotic acts that were committed after longer preparation time. But it is not possible to estimate if the liturgical object’s vandalism at the Saint Jacob Church or the portraits damaging at the Turku Castle museum exhibition took place spontaneously after short preparation time. The characteristics of these two acts however refer to emotions driven actions that may have risen spontaneously into the offender’s mind. All tree heritage site’s vandalism cases represent semiotic acts that possibly have occurred after shorter preparation time. The ide of the vandalism act based perhaps on spontaneously gained idea. In Jyväskylä Orthodox Church’s vandalism case it is possible that the target of the vandalism was chosen more randomly as the offender or offenders passed by the Orthodox Church. In other two heritage site’s vandalism case it is possible that the sites selected as seen of vandalism because they represented places where young people liked to gather and meet each other. The impulse to deliberately damage heritage site based on perhaps other people’s earlier works of destruction that encouraged also other people to leave their marks into the environment.

The second semiotic process that takes place in deliberately damaged cultural heritage’s existence in association with heritage objects and sites vandalism. This changing process in cultural heritage’s existence can be described through Tarasti’s model on Existential Subjects journey via the act of Negation and Affirmation.747 Although the context in which Eero Tarasti originally presented this model is very different form this context in which it is used now, this model is able to reveal what symbolically happens in heritage object’s or site’s existence during act of destruction and during disaster response and heritage recovery processes.

Heritage object’s or site’s first existence can be understood as cultural heritage’s interpretation before the vandalism act. The first existence bases on the religious, cultural, social and historical values that the cultural heritage objects or sites mediates to the surrounding society and environment. Act of vandalism aiming at these heritage objects or sites can be understood as process of Negation. Target of this Negation process is to reveal the nothingness, emptiness or not-existence of the first existence of the object or the site. In reverse of the establishment of the first existence that bases on cultural interpretation and manifestation established by an institutional power (memory institution). In heritage vandalism case this negation process may take place because of one or some person’s decision to contest the existing cultural heritage in the environment. Trough act of

745 Tarasti 2000, 33 746 Tarasti 2000, 34 747 Tarasti 2000, 10 142 vandalism the nothingness of the heritage objects or sites are mediated to the surrounding society. Trough the act of vandalism heritage objects or sites new existence is being established. This represents the second heritage objects’ or sites’ interpretation that includes also message of the nothingness and contestation of the vandalized cultural heritage. The processes of disaster response and heritage recovery can be understood as processes of affirmation committed by institutional powers. This process aims at rebirth of the heritage objects’ or sites’ semiotic signification. The process of affirmation establishes cultural heritage’s third existence that represents recovered interpretation of cultural heritage. The third existence of cultural heritage objects or sites aim at in most cases rebuilding of the first interpretation of the heritage objects or sites. In two heritage site’s vandalism cases the financial reasons caused that heritage site’s reconstruction could be made only partly or after longer period of time. In most of the cases some security improvements tried to be made in order to prevent further vandalism of cultural heritage. These security improvements can be understood as symbolic fragments of the heritage sites contestation that have occurred: there might exist someone who could contest cultural heritage’s existence again and therefore security changes are needed.

5.3 Graffiti – art, intervention or vandalism

Graffiti is a pictorial image or written text that has been painted or carved on material site that is rather often publicly owned. At first, the term ‘graffiti’ was used only for carved texts, but in the 1980s, the term expanded to include both painted and carved figures and texts.748 The history of graffiti started in New York city in the 1960’s when young people started to write their chosen nicknames into their own neighborhood’s walls creating a public street identity for themselves. At first graffiti had territorial function, gang members marked their territories and local young people wrote their comments to their friends or for their enemies.749

Criminology approaches graffiti culture as phenomenon that has features of both art and crime.750 According to Mark Halsey and Alison Young (2002) graffiti and vandalism has been used in same context, but there are also differences with these two approaches. The official approach to graffiti regards the act of writing graffiti nearly always as an act that damages public or private property. But this does not mean that all persons who are involved in making graffiti would do vandalism with other means in the surrounding environment. Halsey and Young suggest that the act of graffiti is also fundamentally different from some other forms of vandalism such as braking and destroying of public and private property, because graffiti writing’s objective is to gain access to a certain favored place. The most significant difference between graffiti’s and other forms of vandalism can be seen through the actions motives and reactions that these actions cause in other people.751 Graffiti have become globally an important question for communities, local authorities, companies and for the young people who write graffiti. Presence of graffiti influence into different people and social groups differently. There are people who enjoy graffiti’s

748 Jokinen 1989, 199, 200 749 Cooper & Chalfant 1996, 14 750 Halsey & Young 2002, 165 751 Halsey & Young 2002, 168 143 presence and those who see them as indicators of social degeneration and juvenile delinquency in society.752

Since cultural heritage represent nation states’ collective memory and statement of values,753 graffities that are made on cultural heritage have strong influence for both local community and the society. Graffities made on cultural heritage mediate multiform message to the surrounding society and the stakeholders of this cultural heritage. Violent actions such as vandalism that shows disrespect towards other people’s cultural values and beliefs injure people and societies emotionally. Memory of vandalized cultural heritage lives for a long time in stakeholder societies.754

Koski et all suggests that minorities’ cultures and heritages are more prone to be vandalized than those of majorities.755 This research’s disaster cases suggest that both minorities and majorities cultural heritage can become target of vandalism in contemporary western societies. Therefore victimizing of certain heritage site trough deliberate works of destruction or vandalism can perhaps be more explained trough cultural heritage’s power relation representative nature and trough the person or person’s mental state of mind and need to destroy and show disrespect towards society’s norms and the existing power relations of the society.

Many writer’s experience of their own subculture, graffiti culture, is structured.756 Writers seek for fame and reputation in courage and artistic features of their graffiti writing. The fame belongs to the symbolic personality, that is known through a tagi.757 Most of the writers follow certain route of career. Writers start at the bottom of the graffiti culture’s hierarchy and through hard work they may proceed upwards in the internal hierarchy of the culture. According to Macdonald most of the graffiti writers are between ages 15 and 19. It has observed that graffiti writing is very rare among young over 19 years of age. One of the reasons why writers careers end at this age base on the fact that making a graffiti does not provide material or financial rewards for the writers758 Strong feelings are present in graffiti writing. Fame and respect has seen as driving forces for making writings.759 Also power and freedom to create and have fun are strong motives in graffiti writing. The excitement that is linked with making graffiti relates to seeking of excitement. Excitement base on the fact that making graffiti is illegal and there is present danger of being couth on this offence.760 Central motives for graffiti writing has seen through excitement and flush of adrenaline that making a graffiti gives for the writer.761

752 Halsey & Young 2002, 165 753 Welburn et all. 2009, 2-3. 754 Koski et all 2007, 59,61, 62, 316. 755 Koski et all 2007, 59,61, 62, 316. 756 Macdonald 2002, 63 757 Latvala 2000, 30 758 Macdonald 2002, 64-65 759 Macdonald 2002, 65 760 Latvala 2000, 30 761 Latvala 2000, 30 144

Graffiti culture came in Finland in 1980’s but through the years the culture has become part of youth subculture both in cities and in country side of Finland.762 Graffiti culture was strongly linked with skating culture in 1990’s Finland.763 Most often the motivation for graffiti writing rises from personal need to make a statement against organized society, but sometimes also institution’s or public body’s actions may have caused the need to express resistance.764 The graffiti writes generation in early 1990’s Finland has claimed to be more anarchistic and subculture oriented than the following generation. These early 1990’s graffiti writers attacked also on old historic buildings and privately-owned buildings. In late 1990’s about 3000 people wrote graffiti in Helsinki, but about 80 % of these writings were made by 100-200 active graffiti writers. In Finland graffities were mainly made by 18-25-year-old young men, but 9 to 16-year-old did about 20 % of all graffiti in 1990’s Finland.765

Graffiti writers often contain manifestation of their goals in their tags or graffiti, which claim writer’s territorial rights over certain area. Writers may also compete their rule on area through greatest graffiti to have or maintain certain position among writers.766 When the available wall space and trains filled with graffiti, graffiti writers started to develop a style to make their name stand out from the other writer’s names.767

This research’s vandalism cases contain graffiti that have both painted or carved figures and texts. Only one of the five vandalism cases did not contain graffiti featured forms of vandalism. In Saint Jacob church’s vandalism case the form of harming cultural heritage was done through destroying and tearing up sacral objects, no carvings or graffiti were done.

There are different classifications for graffiti. One the definitions groups graffiti into public and private categories. Public graffiti often contain initials and nicknames; they are painted or carved on the object. The general purpose for public graffiti has estimated to tell the society about the writer’s existence in the society. Public graffiti were seen in 1980’s typically in lower social groups neighborhoods, and they did not appear that often in the higher social groups’ neighborhoods.768 Later on public graffiti have become more common phenomenon in contemporary societies. Graffiti that concentrates on sexuality and private taboos have defined as private graffiti. Such graffiti are usually anonymous because of the shame related to these taboos. The low risk of being caught in making graffiti encourages people to break their private taboos. Aggression toward cultural norms may also cause some people to make private graffiti. When graffiti represents a subculture, it often contains political messages to the political leaders of the society and to the nation state.769

Vandalism can be analyzed through different perspectives. Motives for vandalism can be divided into known and unknown reasons. Known motives for vandalism can base on political, religious, moral, and ethical reasons. The unknown motives for vandalism may

762 Komonen 2012, 171 763 Latvala 2000, 30 764 Komonen 2012, 173 765 Latvala 2000, 30 766 Cooper & Chalfant 1996, 54 767 Cooper & Chalfant 1996, 14 768 Jokinen 1989, 203. 769 Jokinen 1989, 204–205. 145 rise from human emotions such as greed, jealousy, anger or lust to destroy. When vandalism is driven by ideological reasons without any apparent motive, the reason may be physical stress, fear or anger that causes irrational actions.770 Also social group’s cohesion force may cause people’s irrational actions.771 There are factors that may drive people to take part in vandalism. One of the reasons relates to the possibility to do damage without facing any personal responsibility. Vandalism may also occur when societies are ignorant over destructive actions that are targeted at minority cultures.772

5.4 Vandalism of movable cultural heritage

Vandalism that has been done on movable cultural heritage objects has been done in more guarded and controlled environments inside a historic building where heritage objects have been placed as interior objects. In this research, there are three vandalism cases that have been done to movable cultural heritage objects. These are: 1. sacral objects destruction at Saint Jacob Church in 2007, 2. portraits carving at the Turku Castle’s museum exhibition in 2008 and 3. Uspenski Cathedral’s icon larcenies in 2008 and 2010.

5.4.1 Vandalism of ecclesiastical objects at Saint Jacob Church

Saint Jacob’s Church is located next to the Lauttasaari Church. Both churches are designed by architect Keijo Petäjä, and the interiors, furniture, and all the original sacral objects are designed by interior architect Ilmari Tapiovaara. Both churches were built in 1958, and they are protected by the church law.773

Saint Jacob Church was broken into one night in May 2007. Nothing was stolen, but one religious artwork (a sculpture) in the church’s vestibule and several design objects with sacral functions at the church hall were vandalized and destroyed. The person who destroyed the objects injured him- or herself in this attack and therefore some of the damaged objects were also stained with blood.774

In the church vestibule, the person used a separated part775 of the artwork to destroy the other parts of the same artwork. In the church hall, vandalism targeted at the altar area: the altar table and candlesticks, church textiles, and the font and its stand were damaged. Also, the church hall’s audio system components, such as microphones, were torn from their places and broken. The original lightning, votive ship, and other original furniture in the church hall and the vestibule were not damaged.776

770 Koski et all 2007, 17. 771 Koski et all 2007, 18. 772 Koski et all 2007, 19. 773 Federation of Helsinki Parishes 29.3.2017: Lauttasaaren kirkko 774 Johannes congregation 8.2.2011: Theme interview 775 The separate part was a cross made of granite. 776 Johannes congregation 8.2.2011: Theme interview 146

The primary damages that the vandalism attack caused in cultural heritage were mechanical damages such as braking down, tears, dents and twisting of object’s parts. Because the person who was responsible for the vandalism attack was injured, some of the objects had also bloodstains.777

The vandalism attack was observed in the morning by the parish’s employee. Police was alerted to the disaster scene and they made their criminal technical investigations at the disaster scene. After the criminal technical investigations, the first stage of heritage recovery work was to clean up church hall and vestibule. Those heritage objects that could be restored were restored or conserved but such objects that were totally broken in the vandalism attach such as font and audio system were replaced with similar kinds of objects.778

The church textiles that had damaged in this vandalism attack were washed and conserved by textile conservators. The twisted candle sticks were restored by silversmith and the altar table was repaired by carpenter.779

5.4.2 Vandalism at the Turku Castle’s museum exhibition

Castle of Turku is owned by the Finnish state and it has been rented to the city of Turku for museum purpose. The Turku Castle is one of the Turku museum center’s museums. Almost all of the heritage objects placed in the castle’s exhibition belongs to the Museum Center’s own collections, but there are also some heritage objects owned by other organizations that are deponated780 to the Turku Castle’s exhibition.781

History of Turku Castle begins in 1280’s when the construction work started in the island situated in the confluence area of Aura River and the sea. The building was used as Swedish crown’s administrative castle. During the following decades the castle was enlarged and it was modernized into its contemporary outlooks as renaissance castle between years 1556 and 1563 during the time period of Duke Juhana.782

During 1630’s Turku Castle became governor-general Pietari Brahe’s residence and governing castle. Finally in the late 18th century when the governor’s residence and the court of appeals moved from the Turku caste nearby the Cathedral, many changes were made in the castle. The castle was changed to serve as prison and state storage magazine. The castle served as prison as late as 1890’s and after this Turku’s cultural historical museum started

777 Johannes congregation 8.2.2011: Theme interview 778 Johannes congregation 8.2.2011: Theme interview 779 Johannes congregation 8.2.2011: Theme interview 780 Deponation is a deposition that can contain either one object or entire collection. In deponation the tenure is passed from the owner to the museum and the object or collection becomes part of the museum’s collection. There are no changes in the ownership questions. Museum has the full responsibility if deponated object or collection deteriorates in the museum management. (Álen & Laczac & Lindfors & Tuppurainen 30.10.2006, 3.) 781 Turku Museum Center 17.6.2009: Theme interview 782 RKY 2015, Turun linna. 4 147 to use part of the castle. Turku castle deteriorated badly during the bombings of Finland’s Continuation War in 1941. The rebuilding and renovation work of the castle started in 1946 and the renovation was completed in 1961. The latest large scale restoration at the Turku castle implemented under the supervision of the Finnish National Board of Antiquities between years 1975 and 1993.783

The vandalism incident at the museums exhibition took place one Thursday afternoon in November 2008. There were nine museum guard’s and one doorman’s vacancies at the Turku castle’s museum exhibition when the vandalism attack occurred. During the time when this vandalism took place three of these vacancies were not filled, because of the economic reasons.784

There are about 160 rooms in the museum of Turku Castle. This means that one museum guard is responsible for about 26 rooms’ security. The museum exhibition’s camera and security systems during the time when the vandalism incident occurred dated back in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s.

It was about ten or eleven artworks that were vandalized with a small metal object like a key. In some of the paintings the metal object was used to push a hole through the painting’s canvas. In those painting’s where wooden frame prevented the metal object to penetrate the canvas the metal object was used to make a dent to the painting’s canvas and x-letter shaped carving on top of the dent. These carvings and holes were made in the left bottom corner of the paintings. At the same time also some Photostat pictures were damaged and therefore the museum regarded that the vandalized objects that were selected rather randomly.785

The damaging of the museum objects had no eyewitnesses. Most of the damaged paintings were placed into certain area and route of the museum exhibition. The museum guard who was responsible for this area’s safety had noticed the damaging of the objects just before she left from the work to spend couple of day holyday and forgot to inform the museum’s doorman about the vandalism incident at the museum exhibition. When the employee came back to the work she informed the incident to the museum’s doorman. After this museum and its conservation department started its normal safety precautions and examination of the museum display’s collection. Also police was alerted to the museum to do their own examinations about the damaging of the museum objects.786

Early in the following week the museum’s conservators evaluated all of the exhibited museum objects condition. In this condition evaluation it was observed that ten or eleven artworks were vandalized. One of the paintings was owned by the Ateneum art museum and therefore Ateneum sent its conservator to do condition evaluation for the painting. The museum exhibition’s security camera system could not provide the needed information

783 RKY 2015, Turun linna. 784 Turku Museum Center 17.6.2009: Theme interview 785 Turku Museum Center 17.6.2009: Theme interview 786 Turku Museum Center 17.6.2009: Theme interview 148 concerning the artworks’ damaging. Also the identity of the person who was responsible for the artwork’s deliberate deterioration could not be revealed trough security cameras.787

The vandalism incident resulted that there were instant security improvements made on the museum exhibition and only after this the museum started to conserve the deteriorated artworks. During the following week Turku museum center’s conservators had started to do condition evaluations of the museum objects, the museum protected the most valuable artworks with security alarm systems and the museum acquired an internal communication system for the museum exhibition’s guards. With this system the museum’s security guards and the museum’s doorman could communicate from different parts of the museum. With this communication system museum could improve the guarding and museum personnel’s communication in the museum exhibition.788

After the vandalism incident Turku museum center received funding from the city to full the three open museum guards’ vacancies in the beginning of the following year. The deteriorated paintings’ conservation started on the following month after the incident and the conservation work was completed a couple of months later. The deteriorated paintings were moved for the conservation to the Turku museum center’s conservation department. After the vandalism incident the museum center started to plan modernizing of Turku Castle’s camera and security systems. The funding for new camera and security system was received from the city of Turku on the following year.

After the vandalism attack Turku Museum Center concluded that its crises communication had failed when the vandalism occurred at the museum exhibition. The vandalism incident came into publicity on the bases of museum visitors’ tips. As result of this experience Turku Museum Center changed its strategy in crises communication. Objective was to take more active role in informing public about accidents. For museum this was also way to influence the public image that the media mediates about the disasters.789

Turku Museum Center had done risk management and risk assessment work since the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. City of Turku ordered in 1990’s for the insurance company a risk evaluation and risk management plan over the city’s different fields of practice. When this risk evaluation was made also the city museum’s collections and collections’ safety were evaluated. After this large entire city organization’s risk evaluation and risk management plan Turku Museum Center has maintained their risk evaluation and risk management plan at the Museum Center. Turku Museum Center has its own rescue and risk management plan. In 1990’s disaster plan was made for Turku’s museums, these plans contained information how at first people and secondly the collection are protected in crises situations.790

787 Turku Museum Center 17.6.2009: Theme interview 788 Turku Museum Center 17.6.2009: Theme interview 789 Turku Museum Center 17.6.2009: Theme interview 790 Turku Museum Center 17.6.2009: Theme interview 149

5.4.3 Uspenski Cathedral icon larcenies in 2008 and 2010

The icon larcenies that have occurred at the Uspenski Cathedral in Helsinki are analyzed in this research as vandalism cases, because of the religious nature of these icons in the Orthodox Church. The first icon larceny occurred in August 2008, the second icon larceny in June 2010 and the attempted icon larceny took place in August 2010. The offenders in both year 2010 icon larceny and attempted icon larceny were the same people.791

During the first icon larceny, only one icon, St Nicolaus, was stolen from the cathedral during daytime when the church was open for visitors. There was a parish’s trainee working at the cathedral while it was kept open for the public. It was a very warm day in August 2008 and the cathedral’s all entrance doors were open because of the air ventilation. There were many people visiting the cathedral during that day. According to the interviewed parish’s employees there must have been several people participating into the stealing of the icon. The employees suspected that the trainee’s attention had been moved from security checking into something else when the icon was stolen. The employees who kept the cathedral open for public were responsible for both guarding and souvenir and candle selling when the cathedral was kept open for visitors.792

Possibly there were many people who participated into the icon’s larceny. It is possible that group of people made a human wall around the icon so that the removal of the icon and its showcase from the stand could not be seen. At the same time, there were many tourists visiting the cathedral. It is possible that the icon was taken from the cathedral inside a large bag. The interviewed employees suspected that it took about 10 or 15 minutes before the icon larceny was observed by the parish’s employees.793

The second icon larceny occurred in June 2010 at night time. A man burglered into the cathedral through its north side window that was rather narrow. Inside the cathedral two icons showcases’ windows were broken and Kozeitsan Mother of God icon as well as significant amount of gold objects, jewelry, pearls and diamonds donated to icons were stolen from the cathedral. The offender had escaped from the cathedral when the security company’s employee and the parish’s employee had arrived to the cathedral.794

During the attempted icon larceny in August 2010 there were three men involved in the attempted icon larceny. Two of the men had burglered into the cathedral trough the same north side window and the third man was waiting outside the cathedral’s north side window. Two of the men were cached inside the cathedral when the police and the security company’s employees arrived at the cathedral. There was also one parish’s employee who arrived at the cathedral 5 minutes after the burglary alarm.795

791 Helsinki Orthodox congregation 29.12.2010: Theme interview 792 Helsinki Orthodox congregation 29.12.2010: Theme interview 793 Helsinki Orthodox congregation 29.12.2010: Theme interview 794 THE DISTRICT COURT OF HELSINKI 2010: Judgement 10/9573, 2 795 THE DISTRICT COURT OF HELSINKI 2010: Judgement 10/9573, 2, 6 150

The first disaster response action in both icon larceny cases was to alarm police about the crimes and to make a crime report over the incidents. The icon larceny cases resulted that top priority disaster response action was in security improvements of the cathedral. The Orthodox Parish received advice and recommendations from the police after the icon larcenies. The parish also used a private security company’s services to make a security plan for the Uspenski Cathedral. The available economic resources however lead to that only less expensive security improvements could be made in the cathedral’s security systems.796

For example, the parish decided that only one entrance door that passes the sexton’s security desk inside the cathedral would be in the future open when the church was kept open for the visitors. Also, the icon’s display boxes were fastened into their stands. The first icon larceny resulted that the parish’s personnel became aware of the possibility that someone could target larcenies at their valuable religious objects and cultural heritage such as icons.797

In the District Court’s judgement concerning the icon larceny and the attempted icon larceny were evaluated as compound larceny because of the economic value and the religious nature of the stolen property. The icon larcenies were well planned and the means how the property was stolen from the cathedral were used as arguments for compound larceny conviction.798e

The known secondary damages that the second icon larceny caused for the Kozelshtshanin mother of God icon were caused by the wrong storage means that were used to hide the icon after the larceny. The icon was buried in the ground in Turku. The hiding place of the icon was revealed by one of the offenders in February 2011 and the icon was returned to the Helsinki Orthodox Parish. None of the jewels could be found after the icon larceny that occurred in June 2010. Before the icon was return to its place at the Uspenski Cathedral it was conserved at Valamo Closter’s conservation department. Remedial conservation was used to conserve the icon’s damages.799

Part of the disaster recovery process was the icon’s return to the Uspenski Cathedral in a cross procession across Helsinki city centre. The icon’s journey in Helsinki started at the Holy Trinity Orthodox Church and it ended at the Uspenski Cathedral where liturgical ceremonies took place honouring the return of the Kozelshtshanin mother of God icon.800

5.5 Vandalism of immovable cultural heritage

Three of this research’s vandalism cases have taken place at immovable heritage sites. All of these heritage sites are situated in rather large cities. These sites are located in the

796 Helsinki Orthodox congregation 29.12.2010: Theme interview 797 Helsinki Orthodox congregation 29.12.2010: Theme interview 798 THE DISTRICT COURT OF HELSINKI 2010: Judgement 10/9573, 7-8 799 Helsinki Orthodox Congregation 17.1.2017: Kozelshtshanin Jumalansynnyttäjän ikoni. 800 Helsinki Orthodox Congregation 17.1.2017: Ihmeitätekevä Kozelshtshanin Jumalansynnyttäjän ikoni palasi ristisaatossa läpi Helsingin. 151 environment so that they are freely accessible. The cases where immovable cultural heritage site has been vandalized are: 1. Vartiokylä castle mountain archeological site’s vandalism in suburb of Vartiokylä, Helsinki in 1990’s and 2000’s, 2. Jyväskylä Ortodox church’s vandalism attach in 2010 and 3. Kotka Ortodox church’s vandalism cases in 1990’s and 2000’s.

The Vartiokylä castle mountain archeological site is managed by the Finnish National Board of Antiques. Although both the archeological site and the orthodox churches locate in urban environment they also are situated so that many people do not often pass by the sites during late evening or night time. The two orthodox churches are at some level guarded by people who live close to the church and who are members of the parish. The buildings were not at that time protected with expensive technical security systems such as recordable camera surveillance system. There are detached houses that situate next to the Vartiokylä castle mountain archeological site.

5.5.1 Vandalism of Kotka and Jyväskylä Orthodox churches

In the cases of the Orthodox churches’ vandalism in Jyväskylä and Kotka, the destructive actions focused on the outside walls of the church buildings. Both churches have significant religious and cultural historical value in Finland. The Orthodox Church of Kotka was built in 1801 and it is the oldest buildings in the city of Kotka.801 The Orthodox Church of Jyväskylä was built in 1954 for the Orthodox parish of Sortavala that was resettled in central Finland after the Continuation War. The church represents the first so-called reconstruction period’s Orthodox churches in Finland.802 In Kotka the park where the church locates has been for rather long time a popular place for young people’s gatherings.803

In Jyväskylä there is only one vandalism incident that has aimed at the church building. In Kotka the Orthodox Church has been for a rather long time (from the late 1980’s onwards) target of small scale vandalism or criminal damages. In Jyväskylä Orthodox Church’s case vandalism targeted also at outside walls, windows, doors, and the separate church belfry. However, in Kotka the forms of vandalism have contained small writings and marks on the church’s outside walls, moving of church step’s paving stones, and braking of the cenotaphs in the churchyard next to the church.804

In Jyväskylä’s case the vandalism seems to have rather clear message that contains strong feelings (rage or hatred). But in Kotka’s case the forms of vandalism have had more similar kind of features as in general graffiti making. The writer makes his or hers existence

801 RKY 2018: Kotkan ortodoksinen kirkko ja Kirkkopuisto. 802 Ortodoksi.net 2018: Jyväskylän ortodoksinen kirkko 803 Kotka Orthodox congregation 11.5.2011: Theme interview 804 Jyväskylä Orthodox congregation 25.1.2011: Theme interview & Kotka Orthodox congregation 11.5.2011: Theme interview 152 known.805 The vandalism attack in Jyväskylä occurred rather soon after the church building and its belfry had been painted. During the vandalism attack in Jyväskylä the Orthodox Church’s outside walls, doors, windows and the belfry were entirely spray-painted with light grey text and marks such as 666. The only walls and windows that were not spray- painted were those that faced the street and the sidewalk that passed by the church.806

In both of the vandalism cases the primary disaster response was to remove all possible marks of vandalism and criminal damage from the church building soon after the vandalism incident. The first disaster response action was to alarm police about the vandalism. After police’s criminal technical investigations, the parishs organized as soon as possible the cleaning of the marks of criminal damage and vandalism.807

Both in Kotka Orthodox Church’s and in Jyväskylä Orthodox Church’s case the general approach to do heritage recovery after the vandalism attack was to restore the church building as it has been. Both parishs have used insurance compensations to finance the restoration work after the vandalism attack. Parishs found it sometimes difficult to find funding for the deductible part of the restoration costs.808

In Jyväskylä Orthodox Church’s case the restoration approach to recover heritage site was that the spray painted texts form the church building’s plastered walls were overpainted, because the church had recently painted and the correct color code and the paint were known. The windows and wooden window frames that were stained with the paint were cleaned.809

In Kotka Orthodox Church’s case the restoration approach meant cleaning of the made tag’s and repairing of the carvings. It is possible that the broken down old cenotaphs from the church yard were removed from their original place at the church yard. The moved church stairs were fixed by moving the steps back to their original place.810

5.5.2 Vandalism of Vartiokylä castle mountain archeological site

Vartiokylä castle mountain is situated in the suburb of Helsinki city. Site is surrounded by single-family house area near by the bay of Vartiokylä in Gulf of Finland. Vartiokylä castle mountain has seen as one of Helsinki’s most significant archeological site because of

805 Jyväskylä Orthodox congregation 25.1.2011: Theme interview & Kotka Orthodox congregation 11.5.2011: Theme interview 806 Jyväskylä Orthodox congregation 25.1.2011: Theme interview 807 Jyväskylä Orthodox congregation 25.1.2011: Theme interview & Kotka Orthodox congregation 11.5.2011: Theme interview 808 Jyväskylä Orthodox congregation 25.1.2011: Theme interview & Kotka Orthodox congregation 11.5.2011: Theme interview 809 Jyväskylä Orthodox congregation 25.1.2011: Theme interview & Kotka Orthodox congregation 11.5.2011: Theme interview 810 Kotka Orthodox congregation 11.5.2011: Theme interview 153 its long and multi layered history. At the archeological site there are three archeological remains that relate to Finland’s military history: 1. remains of late iron age or early middle age fortress, 2. remains of a brick mill that manufactured bricks for the Suomenlinna sea fortress and 3. remains of Fist World War fortress’s base V.811

The first fortress in Vatiokylä castle mountain was built in the late Iron Age or early Middle Age time period. The fortress formed multiple stone wall construction. Since the precise time when the first fortification was built is not known, also builders of this fortification remain uncertain. Vartiokylä castle mountain fortification resembles Aincent fortifications that are located in Sweden and in Åland area, but it could have been built according to the local traditions and the requirements of the building place’s landscape.812 On the bases of Uusimaa province’s population history, it has estimated that the fist fortification in Vartiokylä castle mountain was built by Swedish settlers in the beginning of 13th century.813

In 1754 to the area was built a horse powered brick manufactory. This manufactory was established to fulfill the needs of bricks during Suomenlinna sea fortress’ construction work. The remains of the brick manufactory can be identified in the landscape of the archeological site. The second fortification’s construction work took place at the castle mountain in 1915 by the Russian army. These construction work related to the fortification work’s that were made for the protection of Helsinki during the First World War. At the Linnavuori castle mountain situates First World War fortification’s base V and station 8, that was used as ammunition cave. Cave’s corrugated iron roof and steel door were later removed.814 The cave’s or bunker’s walls and floor have been cast form concrete. In the cave’s concrete wall was wall painting possibly from the First World War. Many of the moats and dugouts walls at the station 8 were cast from concrete. Some of the station’s moats walls were supported with logs.815

It was observed that the restoration work at the Vartiokylä castle mountain archeological site has activated some people’s destructive actions. After year 1973 restoration work, the Ancient fortress stone walls started to be deliberately destroyed. One form of destruction was stone wall’s stones rolling down the hill.816 Vartiokylä castle mountain archeological site’s destruction continued between 1970’s and 1990’s.817 The vandalism both intended and unintended has continued at the castle mountain archeological site between years 1990 and 2010. The site has been used in many destructive ways. The Fist World War ammunition cave has been burgled into many times in the turn of 1990’s and 2000’s. The cave’s walls have been spray painted with graffiti. Cave has also been trashed. According to the National Board of Antiquities the cave was used in 1990’s for example as living place and even as a scene of devil’s worship ceremonies. Also moats and dugouts concrete walls have been painted with graffiti.818

811 Schulz 1998, 4-5 812 Schulz 1998, 20 813 Schulz 1998, 4-6, 10-13 814 Schulz 1998, 5 815 Schulz 1998, 5 816 Schulz 1998, 10 817 Schulz 1998, 6 818 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 154

The archeological site’s information signs and walking path’s infrastructure have sometimes been vandalized. The signs have been regularly repainted after they have been cleaned. Walking path’s guardrails have been torn of their place. The residents of the single- family houses have transported their raked leaves and branches to the Fist World War fortification moats. People have also transported trashes to the site and they have also trashed while they have walked at the site.819

Vandalism that have also disturbed the people living next to the archaeological site have been throwing of stones from the site to the single-family houses’ yards. This vandalism has tried to prevent by building flow barriers into the First World War moats. However it did not take long time when the flow barriers were broken down. After this the moving in the moats have tried to prevent by covering the moats with logging waste.820

As disaster response means when the First World War cave’s lock on the door has been broken or burgled the National Board of Antiquities has acquired more heavier lock to the cave door and after this the cave has been left in peace inside. After locks were acquired the spray painting continued outside the cave. City of Helsinki co-operated with the National Board of Antiquities in maintaining Vartiokylä Castle Mountain. The city tried to regularly clean up the spray paintings form the cave’s outside concrete walls and solid rock walls. The continuing spray-painting and cleaning of the walls have deteriorated also the concrete walls. 821

The built infrastructure at the archaeological site such as armor fences above the cave has been broken some times and these fences have tried to repair because of the safety reasons. There have been two wooden stairs at the archeological site that have led to the site and both of the stairs have been broken down constantly. Also, the handrails have torn down. The broken stairs have tried to repair when there have been financial resources. If the spray-paintings have been cleaned from the site’s signages, they have been spray- painted very rapidly again. There are not that large resources so that larger damages could be repaired or cleaned instantly after the criminal damage. Sometimes it could have taken year or two before the damages could have been repaired. It could also be that the damages only are being documented and the site remains deteriorated.822

In archaeological site’s case criminal reports about criminal damage at the archaeological sites are rarely made to the police, because the criminal reports very seldom lead to pressing charges against somebody. The legal evidences are often missing and it cannot be proved that somebody has committed criminal damage at the archaeological site. Most often if people’s lives are endangered because of the vandalism police has been informed about the criminal damage by the National Board of Antiquities.823

819 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 820 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 821 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 822 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 823 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 155

In Vartiokylä Castle Mountain’s case primary disaster response means have based on active actions that both the National Board of Antiquities and the City of Helsinki has made at the archaeological site in order to maintain the site as it has been. Central disaster response actions have been cleaning up the made spray-paintings, trashes and to repair site’s infrastructure that is necessary to repair in order to maintain the site safe for the visitors. Regularly made reconstruction works have based on received special funding for the damaged infrastructure’s rebuilding at the archaeological site. Once in 1970’s the ancient fortifications stone walls tried to rebuild by returning the removed stones from the site’s landscape to their supposed original places.824

Both the spray-paintings and the spray-paintings’ cleaning from the First World War fortification’s concrete walls have deteriorated the walls. This can be regarded as secondary damages that the regular cleaning of the concrete walls has resulted in. Because the vandalism causes often need to clean up or to repair infrastructure at the archaeological site, only the needed repairs and necessary cleaning are made in maintaining of the castle mountain. The made repairs and restorations bases on approach that aims at entire archaeological site’s maintenance.825

5.6 Discussion

Vandalism has regarded as an indicator of social problems in society. It is difficult to present reliable reasons for vandalism in cultural heritage context. The six researched vandalism cases indicate that there are some kind of cultural resistance and power struggle over these heritage sites exists between the memory institutions and individual people or small groups of people. Memory institutions and heritage authorities try to preserve; maintain and cherish the collective memory of the nation state trough cultural heritage. This heritage has been established by the memory institutions and it is valued by the society’s majority. Cultural heritage seams to cause in some people or groups of people need to damage or destroy these valued heritage sites and objects in their own living environment. These vandalism cases indicate that cultural heritage does not share entire society’s or local community’s unconditional respect. The same cultural heritage seams to cause in different people variating experiences. Could these different reactions be result of people’s cultural background, previous memories and thinking that the environment activates? In this case the emotions and impulses for destructive actions could have something to do with people’s personal history and experiences that the environmental experience in association with cultural heritage causes in people.826

This research’s vandalism cases represent cases of social disorder. Four of the vandalism cases indicate that vandalism made on heritage site or object may have features

824 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 825 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 826 von Bonsdorff 1996a, 10 & von Bonsdorff 1996b, 131 156 of both public and private graffiti. In this research only Saint Nicolas Orthodox Church’s vandalism case in Kotka can be seen as public graffiti based case. All other cases have had also strong emotional message for the society. These cases have represented private graffiti based vandalism. The vandalism that was done at the Orthodox Church of Christ’s Resurrection in Jyväskylä and at the exhibition of the Historical Museum in Turku Castle represent private featured graffiti. There is reason to believe that more than one person or group of people have been responsible for the vandalism that has taken place at the Vartiokylä castle mountain archeological site and at the Saint Nicolas Orthodox Church in Kotka. It is also possible that couple of generations, who have lived nearby the sites, have been responsible for the actions that have deteriorated the site. In Vartiokylä castle mountain archeological site vandalism has taken features of both private and public graffiti. It may be possible that different people are behind private and public featured graffiti.

Both Eero Tarasti’s existential semiotics on landscape and Pauline von Bonsdorff’s environmental aesthetics binds peoples’ environmental experiences and interaction with the environment in association with people’s cultural context and knowledge. Because there is reason to believe that people behind the destructive action in five vandalism cases are local and perhaps also native Finnish persons, the cultural importance of defined cultural heritage for the local community, Finnish state and the society is known by these persons. Therefore, the mechanism that directs people to select cultural heritage as target of vandalism relates to the position that heritage has in Finland: it is visible monument of Finnish state’s, local administration’s and Finnish authorities’ power over public environment.

Cultural heritage that manifest organized society’s presence and fragments of nationally cherished past in the environment are trough act of deliberate destruction being transferred from the honored and respected phase trough modification and destruction to another phase that openly dishonors and disgraces the established heritage manifestations. The active parties in these transferences of signs are at the first stage heritage professionals who try to produce cultural manifestations in the environment through heritage interpretations. The persons who trough their destructive actions changes, distorts or even remove from the environment the given heritage manifestations and changes the existence of the cultural heritage object or site.

Can all this destruction be explained trough misunderstandings and lack of heritage knowledge? Can this destruction be explained through Tarasti’s landscape semiotics idea that environment’s messages are understood trough the viewer’s own cultural context and personal values? People’s exclusion in societies can bee also cultural – heritage does not represent excluded people’s past and memories. Local communities’, society’s and individuals’ possibilities to influence into the heritage definition process have increased gradually from 1990’s onwards.

In both movable and immovable cultural heritage’s vandalism cases the primary heritage damages were caused by the actual act of vandalism. Vandalism cased in cultural heritage mechanical damages such as braking down, scratching, loosing of parts or even losing the entire heritage objects. In immovable cultural heritage’s case also overpainting 157 such as graffiti and tag made with spray-pains or indelible ink have modified heritage sites chemically. Among this research’s six vandalism cases most common means to deliberate damage heritage objects was to cause mechanical damages such as braking down, carving and modifying of cultural heritage. All of this research’s movable heritage object’s vandalism cases, liturgical objects damaging at the Saint Jacob Church, portraits damaging at the Turku Castle’ museum exhibition and the icon larceny cases at the Uspenski Cathedral heritage objects were either broken down, taken or modified with carving, tearing or by removing parts that belong to a cultural heritage object.

In immovable cultural heritage’s vandalism cases it is possible that actions of vandalism are more often committed during longer period of time by more than one people. Therefore also the forms of vandalism had also more variation that contained both mechanical damaging, modifying and chemical damaging of cultural heritage site with over-paintings. Both in Vartiokylä castle mountain’s and Kotka Orthodox Church’s vandalism case the vandalism has occurred at the sites during a long period of time and there have possibly been many people who have damaged the heritage sites both mechanically and chemically with over-paintings. It is possible that existing marks of vandalism encouraged other people to do new acts of vandalism at the heritage site. In the case of Jyväskylän Orthodox Church’s vandalism case there is only one vandalism incident that is analyzed in this research. This act of vandalism contained only chemical damaging of the church building with spray-paintings. The heritage site was not mechanically damaged.

In immovable heritage site’s case the primary disaster response action was in most of the cases to report the criminal damage or vandalism to the police. After police had done the criminal technical investigations at the heritage site, first heritage recovery action was to repair or to clean up the made damages at the disaster site. In most of the cases heritage recovery also contained restoration of the deteriorated heritage site. But in those cases, where vandalism was being done at the heritage site constantly or rather often the heritage recovery work had features of minimal intervention. This meant that only the needed restoration or conservation actions were done. Complete restoration actions were not evaluated to be very long lasting and therefore only the necessary conservation or restoration work were done to conserve the heritage site. Also the financial resources of the heritage site’s owner organization were limited so that at annual stage planned restoration actions could be done at the heritage sites that were often vandalized. The conservation approach in the heritage site’s conservation based on holistic approach to maintain the entire heritage site.

158

6 DISASTERS CAUSED BY ARSON AND ARSON ATTEMPTS

This research analyzes arsons that have taken place in Finnish Evangelical Lutheran churches between years 1990 and 2010. Finnish arson statistics follow the other westarn counties’ arson statistics. In 1994 arson was defined in many counties as the largest individual factor causing fires.827

Both majority and minority religions’ sacred buildings have been target of arson or attempted arson in Finland between 1990 and 2010. This research concentrates on arson and arson attempts that have occurred in Finland’s majority religions’ churches. The analyzed cases are Tyrvää Saint Olavi church arson in 1997, Porvoo Cathedral arson in 2006, Kaivoksela church arson in 2006, Lempäälä Saint Birgita church arson attempt in 2008, Suomenniemi church arson attempt in 2009 and Hammarlan church arson attempt in 2010.

In late 1980’s United Kingdom research was done on arson prevention. In 1988 published a theoretical frame for arson prevention. According to this research arson types could be divided based on the motives behind the arson. It was observed that when the motives behind arson related to vandalism, the work of destruction was most often deliberate and it could take place anywhere but especially at schools and other public buildings. Vandalism based arsons are often made by young man and the probability of vandalism-based arsons was evaluated to be high.828

When the motive for arson relates to revenge or hatred different kinds of persons may have caused the arson and the target of the crime may be any site. Revenge and hatred- based arsons probability is mediocre. Almost all of this research’s solved church arson and two attempted arsons indicate that hatred or revenge motivated features can be found behind the Finnish church arsons. There was only one case where the reason for arson the church was caused by attempt to hide traces of burglary. Arsons that are committed by mentally disturbed persons are rather rare. The probability of this kind of arson was evaluated to be small in 1988. The people who can commit arson as mentally distorted can be any kind of person; also all kinds of targets can become scene of arsons.829 In this research two church arsons out of four solved arson cases clear mental disturbances that required treatment were observed as background factors. These two cases also had features of hatred or revenge that aimed at the Finnish Evangelical Lutheran church or a specific parish of this church.

6.1 Research on arsons

In the mid-1990’s United Kingdom both nationally and internationally significant heritage sites were seriously threatened by fire more than once a year. The study showed

827 Jokinen 1994, 9 828 Laitinen & Ahonen 2000, 8 829 Laitinen & Ahonen 2000, 8 159 that there was no scientific proof that historic sites would be at greater risk of fire than any other buildings.830 In England deliberate started fires in historic buildings represented in 1995 one of the leading fire causes. People behind these historic buildings arsons could represent vandalism motivated persons, thieves trying to hide their crimes, visitors with unclear motives and even mistreated employees.831

Also this research’s arson and arson attempt cases that Finnish police has solved indicate that the Finnish church arsons motives have similarities with the English heritage sites arsons. Persons behind these Finnish church arsons had in two cases vandalism featured motivation, in one case burglary’s traces tried to hide by setting the church on fire and in one case mistreated member and old employee of a parish tried to arson the church. Heritage buildings such as churches contain in societies significant symbolic value. It is possible that in general historic sites and churches are not at greater risk to be arson or attempted to arson than any other buildings.

Arson takes place most often on weekends in the evening or at night. There are no differences between months when arson takes place. In Finland the persons who had committed arsons were more often born in cities than in the country side. Also two out of three arsons occur in cities. The places that have been chosen as targets of arson represented emotionally important place for the person who committed the arson.832

The research on pyromania started in 1830’s France and in 1840’s United States where pyromania was first evaluated as illness. In the beginning of 20th century the psychodynamic bases of arson was examined and in the middle of 20th century the characteristic features of the persons who committed arson became central research topic.833

Arsons increased annually in Finland from 1965 to 1991 nearly tenfold.834 Expansive growth of arson followed in Finland Western countries fire statistics progression. When arson was defined in 1980 as 5,7% of the all fire’s cause, the same number of arson in official fire cause statistics in 1989 was 10,8% of all fires.835 Number of arsons were in Finland nearly 772 cases per year in 1991.836

Between years 1980 and 1990 90% of arsons were done by men and annually about 11% of the arsons were done by young person aged 15 to 20 years old.837 It has observed that there are different kinds of persons who commit arson. Also the motives behind arsons may vary.838 At first the subnormal intellectual features of a persons who commit arsons was discovered after some time personality disorders, alcoholism, inadequate home life and adolescence aged behavior disorders were defined as important characteristics of the

830 Kidd 1995, 12 831 Kidd 1995, 21 832 Räsänen 1995, 26 833 Räsänen 1995, 33 834 Räsänen 1995, 23 835 Jokinen 1994, 16 836 Räsänen 1995, 61 837 Räsänen 1995, 61 838 Räsänen 1995, 22 160 persons who arson.839 Multiple classifications have been made on people who commit arson. Some classification typify male who arson as most often 30-34-year-old single or divorced person who suffer from low social position, poor education and unemployment.840

Pirkko Räsänen (1995) has defined typical arsonist as poor educated and unemployed male, who suffered from alcoholism841, suicidal842 behavior and psychiatric diseases843.844In early 1990’s Finland most of the persons who had committed arson were male, about 25% of these persons were underage and 10% of them were female.845 According to Jaana Haapasalo (2008) especially female who commit arson have often observed to be depressed. They also have had also difficulties in expressing their aggressive feelings with other means.846 Sometimes arson may relate to directly a person’s attempt to commit suicide.847 The family backgrounds of the persons who commit arson have observed to bee unsocial and problematic; therefore they have difficulties to solve their problems constructively.848

The mental state examinations indicate that people who have committed arson often suffer from personal disorders, unstable personality or asocial personality problems.849 The persons who committed arson and suffered from personal disorders had rather often also alcohol addiction. Alcohol addiction was detected more often in male offenders than female. About 10-25% of the people who committed arson suffered from psychoses and 10% of the people had mental disorder such as depression. It has evaluated that only about 1% of the persons who had committed arson have been pyromaniac.850

Jaana Haapasalo has divided arsons into two categories goal-oriented and reactive arson. The goal-oriented arson aims at achieving some personal objective such as getting financial advantage, covering of a crime and demand to get help and treatment for personal problems and arsons that are motivated by political and social reasons. Reactive arsons represent often impulsive reactions that may be caused by internal emotional conflicts that relate to some acute crises or long term chaotic life situation. But sometimes reactive arsons cannot be explained trough offender’s obvious life crises or long-term life situation. These cases have been connected with the delayed intellectual growth. Objective of reactive arsons is to gain a change in life conditions. Pyromaniac personalities have been often connected with the reactive arsons.851

839 Räsänen 1995, 33 840 Räsänen 1995, 24-25 841 In early 1990’s 84% of the persons who committed arson suffered from alcoholism. (Räsänen 1995, 61.) 842 It was observed that 68,4% of the people who committed arson had the personalities that indicated directly towards self-harming and suicidal behavior. (Räsänen 1995, 61.) 843 About 85% of the people who committed arson had before the crime received psychiatric care. (Räsänen 1995, 61.) 844 Räsänen 1995, 7 845 Räsänen 1995, 22 846 Haapasalo 2008, 201 847 Haapasalo 2008, 201 848 Haapasalo 2008, 209 849 Räsänen 1995, 24-25 850 Räsänen 1995, 27 851 Haapasalo 2008, 201 161

Jaana Haapasalo suggests that arson can represent for the offender either individual crime or series of crimes that take place during shorter or longer time period and sometimes even multiple arsons are committed simultaneously. The target of the arson can be randomly selected or it may have symbolic meaning for the person who commits arson. For example arson of a church may represent symbolic work of destruction. Arson may aim at another person, publicly owned property or private property. The arsons that aim at another person contains dynamics of violent crimes.852

The target of arson is often selected on the bases of the sites’ security level in order to prevent the threat of being caught from the arson. Most often unguarded or poorly guarded sites that are situated in outlying area are most often selected as target of arson. Arson takes place most often at night or in the evening.853 Several different classifications have been used when persons who have committed arson have tried to reach through criminal investigation profiling. Arsons have been divided into two categories based on does the arson aim at some person either the offender self or some other person or does the target of the arson represent some material object and does the motive base on expressive or indirect reasoning.

In 1994 the most common scenes of arson were defined in Europe schools, churches and restaurants.854 Motives to commit arson may have related to the persons wish to die, commit suicide or need to escape a hard life situation.855 Sometimes before committing arson the offender has experienced some traumatic event or crises situation.856 Before arson is committed the person has often suffered from depression, many disappointments in various areas of life and has a low self-esteem. Almost all of the persons who commit arson suffer from loneliness and feelings of insecurity. Revenge and hatred are common motives for arsons. Other motives for arson may be jealousy, attempt to explore heroism, get surrounding society’s attention, and appeal to get help for mental distress.857 In 1994 there were statistical differences between motives of arson in Finland and in other Western counties. In Finland there were three major motives that lead to arson. These were: 1. alcoholism and mental problems, 2. hatred, jealousy and revenge and 3. children under 15 years of age playing with fire. In other countries about 50% of the arsons had caused by vandalism or criminal damage based motives.858

Fire prevention work has been done in Europe since 1980’s and it became more organized part of European fire prevention work in 1990. Coordinated arson prevention work started in Finland in 1999 when The Finnish Ministry of Internal appointed a co- operation working group for arson prevention work. This working group gave its report for the Ministry in 2002 and after this started five years long arson prevention program that continued between the years 2003 and 2008. The co-operation group continued its work as the Arson prevention program’s coordination group during the time periods 2003-2005 and 2006-2008. Rising of the public awareness over the criminal sentences of arson and dangers

852 Haapasalo 2008, 200 853 Räsänen 1995, 32 854 Jokinen 1994, 33 855 Räsänen 1995, 30 856 Haapasalo 2008, 200 857 Räsänen 1995, 30 858 Jokinen 1994,39 162 of arson has been important part of arson prevention from the beginning.859 Crime prevention ability of public awareness rising base on the estimation that individual people of the community start to behave so that arsons could be prevented.860 There are many organizations that have central role in arson prevention work. These are social and health care, fire department, police, insurance companies and schools’ teachers.861 Also building regulations and fire technical classification have both direct and indirect impact on arsons and the damages that possible arson can cause.862

6.1.1 Peacetime church arsons

Historically arsons have violated strongly society’s norms. Already in 18th century Europe arson were strictly criminalized and convictions over arson could even lead to death sentence.863 In emergency conditions and in wartime societies significant building’s arson have been used by conflicting groups as a strategic mean to injure the enemy trough their cultural heritage. Arsons have increased in the Western countries since the middle of 20th century.864

Church arsons in the United States of America (USA) have indicated cultural conflicts. There were several church arsons and bombings in the United States between years 1990 and 1997.865 During this time, most of the over 400 church arsons, bombings, and bombing attempts were investigated by the USA Department of Justice.866 Most of the church arsons and bombings were reported in the southern states of the United States, and these incidents were seen as expression of old racial conflicts between the white and the African-American population of these areas. John Bartkowski, Frank Howell, and Sun-Chuan Lai (2002) characterized the most likely area for church arsons in the United States to be in small metropolitan statistical areas or in non-metropolitan statistical counties in the South that contained cities of more than 10,000 inhabitants.867 The churches that were more likely to be burnt, according to the statistics, were situated in areas that had higher percentages of minority residents. Also, 40% of the churches that were subject to arson or were bombed represented minority-dominant parishs’ churches. More than 33% of attacked minority- dominant churches were located in the Southern part of the USA.

Arsons in majority religions churches in Norway, Sweden, and Finland do not have same kind of cultural background as those in the United States. The Scandinavian arsons speak more about resistance towards the majority’s religion and culture. The Scandinavian church arsons can be seen also as some kind of expression of hate that is targeted toward

859 Räsänen 1995, 32 860 Jokinen 1994, 10 861 Räsänen 1995, 32 862 Jokinen 1994, 48 863 Räsänen 1995, 33 864 Räsänen 1995, 33 865 Bartkowski & Howell, & Lai 2002, 578 866 Bartkowski & Howell, & Lai 2002, 579 867 Bartkowski & Howell, & Lai 2002, 578 163 either the Evangelical Lutheran Church as an institution or towards a local parish. The Scandinavian arsons in Norway, Sweden, and Finland have many similarities.

In Norway, there was a strong rise in church arsons in the 1990s that were linked strongly with Satanists who were involved with Black Metal music. In 1997, almost 33 wooden churches were arson in Norway. The church and the state have been in allies since the beginning of Christianity in Norway; however, only after the Evangelical Lutheran reformation did the Church officially become the state church in Norway, as well as in Sweden and in Finland.868

In 2004, the Swedish National Board of Antiquities published research on church fires in Sweden. Some of the church arsons that were analyzed in this research were connected with Satanism. In these cases, the central motive for the arson was reported as only to burn down the church. In a couple of Swedish church arsons, suicide was connected with the arsons.869 The Swedish National Testing and Research Institute published, in 2006, a fire research project’s report An overview of fire protection of Swedish wooden churches. This report featured statistics for more than 17 historic wooden church fires in Sweden between 1959 and 2001. These statistics showed that arsons became, since the early 1990s, the most frequent cause of wooden church fires. After 1990, five or six fires were caused or suspected to be caused by arson. Three of the fires that occurred after 1990 were reported as unknown cause of fire. Only one wooden church’s fire was caused by technical error, and one fire was suspected to be started as a result of restoration work at the church.870

6.1.2 Arsons and arson attempts in Finland

Most of the arsons that have occurred in Finland have had emotional backgrounds, such as revenge or hate. Irrational or unexplained reasons behind arsons have detected in about 20% of the cases.871 The number of serious arsons increased in Finland between the mid-1970s and the mid-1990s. Although arsons represented in the 1980s, 10% of all fires, in 2000, the number of arson-based fires had increased to more than 25% of all fires. It has estimated that the reasons that have caused increase of overall criminality have also expanded the number of arsons. The social reasons behind criminality have claimed to be increased wealth in society, urbanization, and expanded possibilities to do crimes.872

In Finland, arsons focus in certain areas. On the basis of Finnish statistics, arsons in general seem to be crimes committed in economically and socially “affluent” areas of Finland. There is a large variety in arson-based incidents in Finland. Although, in 2002, about 16% of all the fires were caused by arson, in the capitol city area, over 30% of all fires

868 Norton 1995, 60 869 Alexandersson and Karls Fors 2004, 6. 870 Arvidson 2006, 13 871 Tuhopolttojen yhteistyöryhmä, Tuhopolttojen ennaltaehkäisyohjelma 2003-2008. (Helsinki: Pelastusliitto, 2002), 4-5 872 Tuhopolttojen yhteistyöryhmä, Tuhopolttojen ennaltaehkäisyohjelma 2003-2008, 3 164 were arson-based. In the cities of Oulu, Salo, and Kouvola, almost 40% of all fires in 2002 were arson based.873

Most arsons are committed upon easily accessible and poorly guarded property, such as waste bins, mailboxes, and abandoned buildings. Public buildings have also been targets of arson, but mainly during night time, when the building has been empty.874 All of this research’s church arsons and arson attempts were set on fire during late evening or nighttime. Usually arsons are lit inside the building, but when the fire is lit outside the building, a common mean is to use movable objects or trash bins to set the building on fire.875

6.1.3 Church arsons and arson attempts of this research

All of these churches have a significant part in society’s cultural heritage and history. Four of these church arsons occurred in Finnish medieval stone churches. These churches are situated in the provinces of Pirkanmaa, Uusimaa, and Åland. Tyrvää Saint Olavi church is a 16th-century stone church located in Pirkanmaa, Porvoo cathedral in Uusimaa was built in the 15th century, Lempäälä Saint Birgita church in Pirkanmaa was built in early 16th- century and Hammarland church was built in early 14th-century in Åland.

Two of the arson churches represent younger Finnish church architecture. Kaivoksela church was built in 1969 in the suburb of Kaivoksela Vantaa and it represents Finland’s 1960’s suburb church architecture in the capitol city are. Suomenniemi church was built in 1866 and it represents Finnish South Karelian rural wooden church architecture. Suomenniemi is a small municipality near by the city of Mikkeli. The municipality of Suomenniemi united with the city of Mikkeli in the beginning of 2013.

In this research, only one of the six church arsons was lit inside the church building. In every case where the fire was lit outside the building, the person who started the fire had brought the ignition materials to the disaster site outside the churchyard. In the only case where the church was set on fire inside, the person used movable objects that belonged to the church to start the fire.876

It is possible to analyze at the general level the environments in which church arson’s occurred. Pauline von Bonsdorff’s environmental aesthetics place atmospherically churches into the context of centers of administration and power. Before the era of organized city planning villages and cites were built around castles or churches, that represented institutions of strong religious or political power in the society. Church buildings were often considered to be built in the places that were regarded as holy so that these place’s holiness would increase with the built church.877

873 Tuhopolttojen yhteistyöryhmä, Tuhopolttojen ennaltaehkäisyohjelma 2003-2008, 3 874 Tuhopolttojen yhteistyöryhmä, Tuhopolttojen ennaltaehkäisyohjelma 2003-2008, 3-4 875 Tuhopolttojen yhteistyöryhmä, Tuhopolttojen ennaltaehkäisyohjelma 2003-2008, 3-4 876 Sastamala congregation 27.5.2009: Theme interview 877 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 177 165

Trough Pauline von Bonsdorff’s definition of environmental atmosphere it was observed that also this research’s church arsons and attempted church arson cases’ churches represented in their environments either most important or one of the most important buildings when they were compared to the other buildings of the environment.878 These churches also represented both religious and central local administrative power in the environments where the church located. All of the churches manifested regionally and even nationally important cultural, historical and religious values that connected the local community and sometimes even larger group of people with the arsoned church with place attachment featured feelings. Five of the arsoned churches were local parish’s church in the region and one of the arsoned churches was cathedral that symbolically represents the main church of a diocesan where “the bishop’s seat situate”.

Four of the churches located in agricultural areas and three of the churches situated close by conurbation featured environment. One churh, Tyrvää Saint Olavi church, that had been replaced in 1855 as parish’s church with a new church building was situated further away from contemporary conurbation area of Tyrvää. Two of the church arsons occurred in urban areas, in Vantaa Kaivoksela suburb and in the old administrative center of Porvoo city.

6.2 Unsolved arson attempts in Lempäälä and Suomenniemi

Lempäälä Saint Birgita church was target of nighttime arson attempt in January 2008. It has been estimated that someone had first tried to break into the church. When this brake in did not succeeded, the person tried to set the church on fire in two places. At first the outer pane of the church’s side window was broken and crumpled paper was placed between the windows. The papers that were placed between the windows were then set on fire. The paper did not succeed to set the window frame on fire, and the fire self- extinguished. The person had also twisted the church door slightly open and put some papers between the door and doorframe. After this, the paper was set on fire but the paper did not succeed in igniting the door on fire.879

The security firm received a burglary alarm from the church and, when the security guard arrived at the church, the person who had tried to arson the church was still on the scene. The security guard tried to catch the would-be arsonist and the person succeeded to escape from the scene. The arson attempt caused rather small damage to the church. Damages were found in the window frame, window glass, and the wooden entrance door. The fire also caused minor smoke and soot damages inside the church.880

878 von Bonsdorff 1998b, 177 879 Lempäälä congregation 28.3.2011: Theme interview 880 Lempäälä congregation 28.3.2011: Theme interview 166

The church arson attempt in Suomenniemi had much resemblances with the arson attempt in Lempäälä. A nighttime arson attempt was made against the Suomenniemi church in December 2009. In Suomenniemi, the arsonist also tried to set the church on fire in two places. At first, the arsonist tried to set the church’s main entrence door on fire with some kind of lighter. Then, the church’s left side window was partly broken and some kind of small fire was lit between the windowpanes on the window frame. The temperature was very cold; therefore, the fire’s progression was not very fast.881

The fire in the main entrance door caused a fire alarm inside the church vestibule. The alarm alerted the local volunteer fire department to the church, and the fire managed to extinguish. The arson attempt caused minor damages to the broken window and its frame. The main entrance door burned almost a hole through the door. There was some smoke and soot damage in the church vestibule. The person who had tried to burn down the church escaped from the scene before the fire department arrived.882

Although these two arson attempts have many similarities, on the basis of police inquiries it has suggested that the persons behind these two arson attempts are different. The person who tried to burn Suomenniemi church was possibly a bit older person because he or she used non-slip components in his or her shoes.883 Lempäälä Saint Birgitta church arson attempt was done by rather young and physically fit person, because the person managed to escape from the scene running. It is not possible to say anything about the motives for these two arson attempts because both of the cases are still open.884

The arson attempts caused in both cases shoot, smoke and burning damages in the church buildings door, windows and window frames. Damages were caused by braking of a window, fire and heath. Fire extinguishing was made in both cases with foam extinguisher. The fire extinguishing did not cause any noticeable secondary damages in cultural heritage.885

The first stage disaster response actions after the church arson attempts was to report the arson attempt to the police. In both cases the arson attempt also started security plans updating and the needed technical security improvements were made. After police had made their criminal technical investigations at the disaster site, the marks of the arson attempt and the fire extinguishing were cleaned and repaired.886

In both church arson attempts heritage recovery approach based on restoration of the church building. Objective was to restore the church building after the attempted arson as

881 Suomenniemi congregation 15.3.2011: Theme interview 882 Suomenniemi congregation 15.3.2011: Theme interview 883 Suomenniemi congregation 15.3.2011: Theme interview 884 Lempäälä congregation 28.3.2011: Theme interview 885 Suomenniemi congregation 15.3.2011: Theme interview & Lempäälä congregation 28.3.2011: Theme interview 886 Suomenniemi congregation 15.3.2011: Theme interview & Lempäälä congregation 28.3.2011: Theme interview 167 it had been before the arson. Partly burned door was replaced with similar new door, windows and window frames were repaired. Shoot and smoke damages inside the churches were cleaned.887

6.3 Hammarland church arson attempt

An arson attempt was made at Hammarlan church in a late evening of February 2010. The two girls who tried to arson the church were both older than 15 years of age but younger than 18 years old.888 The girls first broke a side window of the church hall and then threw seven lit firebombs, known as “Molotov cocktails”, inside the church hall. These firebombs were made of glass bottles that were filled with an ethanol-gasoline mixture. Around the bottles, the girls wrapped fabric patches that were soaked in gasoline, kerosene, and ethanol.889 The church’s fire alarm alerted the local volunteer fire department to the scene. The two girls had already left the churchyard and gone to the bus stop, where they were waiting for a bus that would drive them back to Mariehamn when they were caught. The local voluntary fire department managed to extinguish the fire very quickly. The fire sources inside the church building were extinguished with foam extinguisher.890

Hammarland church was selected to be the target of church arson because of the good bus connections between Mariehamn and Hammarland. The girls found the instructions for the firebombs in the Internet and had manufactured the firebombs before they boarded the Mariehamn – Hammarland bus, bringing the firebombs with them.891 Both of the girls suffered from depression and mental derangement.892 One of the girls had earlier needed psychiatric treatment. After the arson attempt, the girls realized they had done wrong and regretted their actions.893

Although seven firebombs were used to arson Hammarland church the voluntary fire department, that was based at the same village was able to arrive at the disaster site so fast that the actual damages of the arson remained rather small and these case are analyzed as arson attempts. The fire extinguishing means that the voluntary fire department chose were also such that detectable water damages could be avoided.894

The arson attempt caused as primary damages significant burning damages in one pew and minor damage to two other pews. The gasoline-ethanol mixture of the glass bottles

887 Suomenniemi congregation 15.3.2011: Theme interview & Lempäälä congregation 28.3.2011: Theme interview 888 Judgment 10/394 DNO: R 10/223 (The District Court of Åland 2010), 2 889 Judgment 10/394 DNO: R 10/223 (The District Court of Åland 2010), 1 890 Hammarland congregation 12.4.2011: Theme interview 891 Judgment 10/394 DNO: R 10/223 (The District Court of Åland 2010), 1 892 Judgment 10/394 DNO: R 10/223 (The District Court of Åland 2010), 4–5 893 Judgment 10/394 DNO: R 10/223 (The District Court of Åland 2010), 10 894 Hammarland congregation 12.4.2011: Theme interview 168 also burned the church’s wooden floor causing also damages in church’s electrical and speaker wiring.895 The flames and smoke that the fire resulted inside the church hall caused significant soot and smoke damage in both the interior and the objects such as church textiles, the altarpiece, pulpit, artworks, chandeliers, and organ.896

Although the first stage disaster response action’s after Hammarland church arson based on fire department’s fire extinguishing and police’s criminal technical investigations, the parish also started to plan how to improve the safety of the church building. The secondary damages in both church building and its objects tried to avoid by covering the church buildings broken window until it was repaired. This first stage approach to prevent secondary damages in cultural heritage based on idea of climatological control and preventive conservation.897

Heritage recovery in Hammarland church’s case was approached through individual objects remedial conservation and restoration. Primary heritage recovery means based on remedial conservation cleaning. After the disaster, the church hall’s window and pews were restored. Both the church interior and the church hall’s objects were cleaned by conservators after the arson attempt. Organs were cared by organ specialist.898

6.4 Tyrvää Saint Olavi church arson

Before the arson Tyrvää Saint Olavi church had burned down once in the beginning of 17th century.899 The church situated in a sparsely populated area near a lake. Tyrvää Saint Olavi Church was not used permanently for church services; the old, unheated, early 16th- century church was mainly used during summertimes. There was no burglar or fire alarm system in the church before the arson. Before the arson, the church had received much attention in the local media, because its roof had restored as part of a volunteer project donated by members of the local community.900

One night in September 1997, a 25-year old man broke into the church through the church hall’s side window. According to this young man, he was very drunk and he broke into the church to steal something and to drink the sacramental wine. There was nothing to steal and to cover up the burglary and his tracks, he decided to burn down the church.901 To set the church on fire, he placed church candles under the church hall pews and lit them. After this he escaped from the disaster scene. Fire department had estimated that the church

895 Åland District Court Judgment 10/394 DNO: R 10/223, 1–2 896 Hammarland congregation 12.4.2011: Theme interview 897 Hammarland congregation 12.4.2011: Theme interview 898 Åland District Court Judgment 10/394 DNO: R 10/223, 1–2 899 Hiekkanen 2007, 263-265 900 Sastamala congregation 27.5.2009: Theme interview 901 Judgment DNO: R 02/369 (The District Court of Tampere, 2003), 2–3 169 was set on fire between 3:00 and 4:00 am. At that time there was nobody near by the church.902

There was neither automatic sprinkler system nor fire or burglary alarm system in the church. Therefore the fire was detected by people who lived near by the church. The information about the fire reached Fire and Rescue Services early in the morning, which occurred more than 30 minutes after the fire had started. The fire was informed to the Fire and Rescue services by a person who lived near by the building.903 The fire destroyed the entire interior of the Tyrvää Saint Olavi church. Also the stone and mortar construction of the church suffered significant damage because of the heath and the fire extinguishing water that was used by the fire department.904

Sastamala parish’s vicar received information about the arson at 6:30 or 7:00 am. It was Sunday morning, the old church was on fire and there was nothing that could be done to prevent total destruction of the church’s wooden construction and inside interior. The church’s destruction was total at 8:00 am. All wooden parts had burned down and the church’s roof had collapsed. The church hall’s interior had burned down. Only the 16th century stone walls and pediments had not collapsed or destroyed. All dirt and shoot in the church’s inside walls burned away and the walls crystalized white.905

The arson destroyed very badly Tyrvää Saint Olavi church. Nearly all of the wooden parts of the church burned down and destroyed. Only some wooden parts of the church floor were preserved. The stone, brick and mortar constructions of the church were preserved, although in very deteriorated state. The first stage heritage recovery action based on environmental control and preventive conservation. In order to prevent further deterioration of the church’s ruins the building was protected from rain rather soon after the fire extinguishing work had been completed. After the police’s criminal technical investigations, the burned timber remains of the church were examined and documented. Some parts of the timber floor that were preserved from the fire were later reused during the reconstruction work. Police succeeded in apprehending the person who was responsible for the arson more than five years later in connection with other investigations.906

In 1997 Vammala, where the Tyrvää Saint Olavi church sitates, was still an independent parish and after the arson the parish received broad support that lead to the decision to rebuild the Tyrvää Saint Olavi church as it was before the church arson. The central approach in the rebuilding work based on restoration approach especially in the church buildings case, but the inside interior’s idea was restored with contemporary art’s means. Tyrvää Saint Olavi church was rebuilt mainly as voluntary work between years 1997 and 2007. Finland’s best architects and experts in the field of church restoration planning provided their assistance for the parish.907

902 Judgment DNO: R 02/369 (The District Court of Tampere, 2003), 2–3 903 Sastamala congregation 27.5.2009: Theme interview 904 Tampere Judgment DNO: R 02/369, 2 905 Sastamala congregation 27.5.2009: Theme interview 906 Sastamala congregation 27.5.2009: Theme interview 907 Sastamala congregation 27.5.2009: Theme interview 170

The International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) Finland was central co- operation partner for the parish when Tyrvää Saint Olavi church’s reconstruction was planned.908 Also the Finnish National Board of Antiquities was involved with the disaster recovery and renovation of the church right after the church was arson. The National Board of Antiquities provided its expertise on church restoration questions from the beginning.909 It was the National Board of Antiquities’ experts who planned the church’s restoration and the Vammala parish put into action these restoration plans between years 1998 and 2003. One of the most challenging questions in the church’s renovation was how to restore church’s stone constructions that represented valuable preserved cultural heritage in the building.910

Because church’s pediments did not collapse in the fire extinguishing, pediments’ stone constructions were carefully examined. The Middle aged mortar was analyzed at the Åbo Academy in Turku. Conservation and restoration plan was made on the church’s rebuilding.911 It was inevitable that during the restoration work destroyed and broke down parts of the church’s stone constructions when joints between the stones were chiseled open and the stone construction were plastered with mortar again.912

During the rebuilding project parish employed only a overseer and all the others who participated into the reconstruction work were voluntary workers. The first employed overseer was between years 1997 and 2000 a decorator master and from 2001 a person who had been for a long time a voluntary worker in the church’s rebuilding project.913 The stone constructions restoration was completed by a local Arts and Crafts School as student work. It took four summers to complete the stone constructions restoration work.914

The reconstruction of the church’s inside interior and the church’s painting program were very difficult to solve.915 When church’s new inside interior started to plan there were two options that could be used in the rebuilding of the church. The first option was to try to rebuild the interior as it had been before the arson. The second option was to build a modern interior inside the church that would follow the original inside interior’s atmosphere. The architect who was in charge of the rebuilding work planned that the church’s inside interior would base on interior reconstruction.916 The architect tried to plan the church’s inside interior so that the original atmosphere of the church would be reconstructed inside the church. This meant that the interior was not tried to be constructed as a copy of the old church’s interior, it was designed as a new interior.917 The parish gathered a working group

908 Sastamala congregation 27.5.2009: Theme interview 909 Laurila 2004,123 910 Ojansivu 2003, 6-7 911 Sastamala congregation 27.5.2009: Theme interview 912 Hiekkanen 2007, 261 913 Vammalan seurakunta 12.8.2009: Tyrvään Pyhän Olavin kirkon jälleenrakennus. http://www.pyhaolavi.fi/jalleenrakennus.shtml 914 Sastamala congregation 27.5.2009: Theme interview 915 Ojansivu 2003, 7 916 Vammalan seurakunta 12.8.2009: Tyrvään Pyhän Olavin kirkon jälleenrakennus 917 Sastamala congregation 27.5.2009: Theme interview 171 for the rebuilding of the church’s interior. The reconstruction was completed according to the old hand craft methods.918

Before the arson there had been a triumph crucifix in the church’s altar wall and therefore Pyhäjärvi foundation tried to gain to the rebuild church an old crucifix that had been in the Karelian Pyhäjärvi parish’s church before the Finnish Winter War. The crucifix was rescued from the church during the Winter War and the Church Council that was established after the Continuation War had placed the crucifix to the custody of the Pello parish. The crucifix was moved to the Tyrvää Sain Olavi church on Pyhäjärvi foundation’s initiative. Before the crucifix was moved it was restored.919 In 2003 the parish decided that the new church paintings that followed the old church paintings’ theme would be painted into the church to the places of the old church paintings. The artists who were chosen to paint the new church paintings were Osmo Rauhala and Kuutti Lavonen. The artists were asked to use figurative and pictorial visual arts. The idea of the church painting’s reconstruction was not to copy the original church paintings visually but to reconstruct the original atmosphere of the church’s inside interior with the means of contemporary art. The Tyrvää Saint Olavi church’s paintings that contained 101 paintings was published in Autumn 2009.920

6.5 Porvoo cathedral arson

Before 2006 arson Porvoo cathedral had partly or entirely burned down in years 1570, 1591 and 1708. These fires situated in the time periods of wars between Sweden and Russia. These wars were the Nordic twenty-five-year war (1570-1595) and the Great Hate (1700- 1721). In the beginning of Finland’s Continuation War Porvoo cathedral was hit by aerial bomb in 1941. The damages were rather small because the bomb exploded under the church’s floor in the soil layers. The bomb caused both hole in a vault and some damages inside the church that were caused by the bomb fragments.921

Porvoo cathedral’s arson occurred at night in May 2006. The cathedral was set on fire by 18-year old young man.922 The person who set the church on fire had been entire night in company of two other young. Three young adults, an 18-year-old girl, an 18-year-old boy, and a 20-year-old boy, left a restaurant when it closed. They all had drunken, that evening and night, a significant amount of alcohol. They headed towards the Porvoo cathedral, which located in the center of the old town.923 On the way there, the 18-year-old boy had

918 Vammalan seurakunta 12.8.2009: Tyrvään Pyhän Olavin kirkon jälleenrakennus 919 Ojansivu 2003, 7 920 Vammalan seurakunta 15.8.2009: Oli riemu, kun sain tulla sun, Herra, temppeliis 921 Hiekkanen 2007, 460-461 922 Uusi Suomi 25.3.2009: Tuomiokirkon tuhopolttaja: En pysty maksamaan 923 Judgment 6/700 DNO: R 06/558 (The District Court of Porvoo, 2006), 5. 172 picked up some paper brochures.924 As they were walking towards the church, the 18-year- old boy shouted that he was going to burn down the church. He also insulted the church before the group arrived at the cathedral.925 The 20-year-old boy and the 18-year-old girl thought that their friend was joking and they did not believe that he would really set the church on fire.926

When they arrived at the church, the 18-year-old boy entered the churchyard and ran to the sacristy side of the building. Next to the sacristy there was an old sweeping ladder fastened to the church’s wall. The young man climbed with the ladder to the sacristy’s roof and placed some wrapped brochure papers in the roof’s wooden eaves. Then, he set the papers on fire with a lighter. The church’s roof was shingled, and the boy was aware of its sensitivity to burn. After the papers were lit, the fire proceeded rather quickly. After he had lit the papers, the boy returned to the churchyard and met the young girl. Both 18-year-olds walked to their friend, who was in the church’s parking lot, and the young man told his friends that he had set the church on fire. The fire’s glow started to show in the church wall after some minutes. All three continued their journey after this, walking from the church to Porvoo’s old town.927 The 18-year-old young man sent an SMS to his acquaintance and told he had set the church on fire.928

All tree young claim that they panicked after the church ignited and left from the accident scene without informing Fire and Rescue Services about the fire.929 The fire department arrived at the scene some minutes after the cathedral was set on fire and the fire was detected by other person who informed Fire and Rescue Services. There was a great threat that the fire would spread to the larger area of the old town. The fire entirely destroyed the church’s wooden roof. The stone and arch constructions suffered from damages. Because of the fire and fire extinguishing the cathedral’s interior sustained smoke and water damages. Three large chandelier mountings were broken because of the fire’s heath and the chandeliers damaged when they dropped to the church floor. Additionally, some of the church windows were broken because of the fire. The smaller wooden church and the belfry that situated next to the cathedral were in danger to be damaged.930

The motive for the church arson has seen as criticism towards Christianity, which the 18-year-old man saw as a foreign religion in Finland. There were indications that the inspiration for Porvoo cathedral arson came from the Norwegian church arsons.931

The Fire and Rescue services was informed about the fire at the Porvoo Cathedral just after 2 am. Alarm was made by a person who passed by the cathedral at night and phoned the Emergency Response Centre.932 Because it was not an automatic fire alarm system that alerted the Fire and Rescue services it is possible that there was some minutes delay until

924 Judgment 6/700 DNO: R 06/558 (The District Court of Porvoo, 2006), 13. 925 Judgment 6/700 DNO: R 06/558 (The District Court of Porvoo, 2006), 4–5. 926 Judgment 6/700 DNO: R 06/558 (The District Court of Porvoo, 2006), 13. 927 Judgment 6/700 DNO: R 06/558 (The District Court of Porvoo, 2006), 14 928 Judgment 6/700 DNO: R 06/558 (The District Court of Porvoo, 2006), 6 929 Judgment 6/700 DNO: R 06/558 (The District Court of Porvoo, 2006), 9 930 Judgment 6/700 DNO: R 06/558 (The District Court of Porvoo, 2006), 2 931 Judgment 6/700 DNO: R 06/558 (The District Court of Porvoo, 2006), 6 932 Federation of Porvoo Parishes 25.5.2009: Theme interview 173 the information about the fire reached first the Emergency Response Center and after this the regional Fire and Rescue services based in the city of Porvoo.

When the Regional fire department arrived at the disaster scene, the fire department was forced to break some part of the stone wall that surrounded the cathedral’s yard in order to drive the fire truck near by the disaster site. The church yard entrances were too narrow for the fire truck. The fire extinguishing at the cathedral started instantly after the fire department had arrived to the disaster site. In order to exhaust the smoke inside the cathedral one of the cathedral’s altar areas glass painting windows was broken. There were no instructions what window could be broken to exhaust smoke from the building and in order to promote the fire extinguishing work. Firemen covered during the fire extinguishing at night church halls heritage objects such as altar painting, organs and piano with light tarpaulin. During the fire extinguishing work police officers guarded the disaster site and saw to that any outsiders could not get to the disaster site.933

Federation of Porvoo Parishes’s real estate manager received information about the arson from the fire department at 3 am. When the real estate manager was at the disaster site he started to inform different parish’s employees about the fire and also these people arrived to the disaster site. After the fire extinguishing the real estate manager ordered a large Finnish real estate management firm’s catastrophe unite to the disaster site to protect cathedral’s pews and some other furniture that had not been protected by the fire department during the fire extinguishing. All the plastic sheets nearby Porvoo were needed for the covering of the cathedral’s pews.934

Controlled burning tactics were used in the fire extinguishing of Porvoo cathedral.935 Cathedral’s entire timber roof constructions were controlled burned down in order to minimize water’s use in fire extinguishing and to protect the cathedral’s vaults from collapsing because of heavy use of water in fire extinguishing. Fire department used extinguishing foam and small amount of water in fire extinguishing of the cathedral. The buildings such as the belfry, small timber church and neighboring timber buildings that situated close to the cathedral were protected from the heath and fire with water. The timber parts of the cathedral’s roof collapsed on top of the cathedral’s vaults that did not fortunately brake down. The chandeliers fastening devices broke down and the chandeliers collapsed to the cathedral’s floor. The inside interior of the cathedral was damaged by the smoke and fire extinguishing water.936

The fire endangered the entire Porvoo old town because of the burning wooden parts of the cathedral’s roof that flew hundreds of meters away from the disaster site.937 When police had completed criminal technical investigation at the Porvoo cathedral the parish’s employees could go inside the cathedral and detect the damages that the fire had caused. At the same time Porvoo museum’s employees arrived to the cathedral to photograph and

933 Federation of Porvoo Parishes 25.5.2009: Theme interview 934 Federation of Porvoo Parishes 25.5.2009: Theme interview 935 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s operative unite 4.5.2011: Specialists teem interview 936 Federation of Porvoo Parishes 25.5.2009: Theme interview 937 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s operative unite 4.5.2011: Specialists teem interview 174 rapidly document the heritage objects of the cathedral. The most valuable heritage objects were transported and stored by a Finnish art logistic firm. Cathedral’s less valuable objects were stored in both Federation of Porvoo Parishes’s and Porvoo diocese’s storages and in various places in Southern Finland, Vantaa and Helsinki.938

In post-disaster situations the approach in heritage’s preservation based on environmental control and preventive conservation. With this approach further deterioration and secondary heritage damages tried to be avoided. Preventive conservation approach can be seen for example in the ways how the cathedral was protected after the arson. After the Porvoo cathedral had emptied from objects and artworks, the building’s environmental conditions tried to stabilize by building a protective cover roof above the cathedral. The parish ordered scaffoldings around the cathedral, a temporary roof construction and protective net to prevent the further deterioration of the building. After this the plastic sheerings that had been placed above the vaults could be removed. Objective of the temporary roof construction and the protective net was to air-dry cathedral’s roof constructions and vaults after the fire and fire extinguishing.939

In Porvoo cathedral’s case central heritage recovery approach in post-disaster situation based on heritage site’s restoration and rebuilding. Objective was to rebuild the damaged cathedral as it had been before the arson. Some changes in the building were made because of safety reasons. In movable heritage object’s case the primary heritage recovery approach based on individual heritage object’s remedial conservation that contained mainly cleaning. In some heritage objects’ case also restoration and repairing work were needed before these heritage objects could be returned to their original place at the cathedral.

Updating of Porvoo cathedral’s security systems started at the same time when the cathedral’s restoration planning started. The Federation of Porvoo Parishes ordered risk evaluation and security plan from a private security company. Both the Porvoo Cathedral’s security plan and the technical security systems were updated and renewed during the restoration project.

Before the arson Federation of Porvoo Parishes had already started to prepare the renovation of the cathedral because of the Porvoo parliament day’s 200-year jubilee. The parish had planned to do painting and renovation work at the cathedral. The architect had been chosen to plan the renovation work. After the arson the existing planning organization was used to plan the rebuilding and restoration of the cathedral.940

Federation of Porvoo Parishes received very much assistance and help from heritage professionals for the rebuilding and restoration of the cathedral. Instantly after the arson the parish established a restoration committee where members gathered form Federation of Porvoo Parishes’s employees, parishs’ elected officials, politicians and employees of Porvoo city and the National Board of Antiquities’ officials, architects and representatives of Porvoo museum. The insurance company was tightly involved in the rebuilding project during

938 Federation of Porvoo Parishes 25.5.2009: Theme interview 939 Federation of Porvoo Parishes 25.5.2009: Theme interview 940 Federation of Porvoo Parishes 25.5.2009: Theme interview 175 every phase. Both the architect and the construction company that provided the construction management services for the Federation of Porvoo Parishes were experienced in churches restoration projects.941

Inside the cathedral the water damage’s recovery happened step by step when the protective plastics were removed above the church halls immovable heritage objects. The cathedral’s brick vaults were repaired, cleaned and the damages were restored. In the cathedral’s church hall restoration concentrated on the water and smoke damages that were cleaned and restored. The church hall’s damages had penetrated through the church hall’s plaster.942

The destroyed timber constructions of the cathedral’s roof were rebuilt according to the original model. The roof’s new timber construction was made of solid wood and the roof construction’s parts were attached with bolts and nuts. A sprinkler system was built at the cathedral’s attic and the sprinkler pipelines were also used to ensure the fastening of the roof constructions during fire situations. Some of the roof constructions attachments were made with old attachment methods with timber.943 The roof construction was supported to the exterior walls and the brick pillars of the cathedral. The roof’s cover was made according to the original model with tarred pine shingles.944

During the restoration project a thorough risk analyses was made for Porvoo cathedral. According to this risk analyses was building’s security techniques planned and many security improvements were made during the restoration project. Both the cathedral and its roof constriction received automatic sprinkler system and automatic fire alarm systems were increased both inside and outside the cathedral. Also a new camera surveillance system and new locks were acquired to the cathedral. Cathedral’s old sweeping ladder was removed from its original place in the cathedral and the stone wall’s entrance was broadened so that fire trucks could access the church yard in the case of emergency.945

6.6 Kaivoksela church arson

The Kaivoksela church arson occurred in October 2006 five days after the Jehovah’s Witnesses Kingdom Hall’s arson in Kaivoksela. The 25-year old man who was responsible for both arsons interacted with both of the parishes whose churches he burned. These

941 Ympäristöministeriö & Museovirasto 5.4.2007: Porvoon tuomiokirkon vaurioista suuri osa on jo korjattu, verkkodokumentti 942 Ympäristöministeriö & Museovirasto 5.4.2007: Porvoon tuomiokirkon vaurioista suuri osa on jo korjattu, verkkodokumentti 943 Ympäristöministeriö & Museovirasto 25.6.2007: Puutöitä valvotaan tarkasti, verkkodokumentti 944 Ympäristöministeriö & Museovirasto 5.4.2007: Porvoon tuomiokirkon vaurioista suuri osa on jo korjattu, verkkodokumentti 945 Federation of Vantaa Parishes 21.4.2011: Theme interview 176 buildings were also situated close to his home.946 The young man had acquired a canister and gasoline on the day he committed arson upon the Jehovah’s Witnesses Kingdom Hall in Kaivoksela.947

The young man had been at a bar until it closed in Sunday night and when he arrived at home he “lost his nerves.” He took the gasoline canister with him and rode his bicycle (as he did five days earlier, before the first arson) 200 m to the Kaivoksela church from his home. The young man walked around the church and checked that nobody was inside the church (this routine took also place during the first arson). He then poured gasoline inside the kitchen of the building and along the kitchen’s outside door and set the kitchen on fire.948 This took about 15 minutes. Then he returned to his home.949 The church was set on fire about 4 am in the Sunday morning.950

The fire spread into the kitchen, café room, entrance, and church hall. The fire completely destroyed the Kaivoksela church’s interior and objects in the areas where the fire spread.951 The motive for these two arsons related to the arsonist’s loneliness and failed attempts to seek help from both the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Evangelical Lutherans. He wanted to be near God, but was disappointed with both the Evangelical Lutheran parish and the Jehovah’s Witnesses parish in Kaivoksela, who had both “berated” him when he searched for their assistance.952 During his trial, the young man was found mentally incapable to be responsible for his actions.953

There was a delay before the information about Kaivoksela church’s arson reached the Emergency Response Centre and the Regional Fire department in Vantaa. The Kaivoksela church’s fire was noticed by a person who passed by the church building about 5 a.m. and this person alerted the fire to the Emergency Response Center. When the Fire and Rescue services arrived to the disaster site the church was on fire, there was not much that could be done to save the church building. However, the church building’s wing containing its interior and heritage objects were preserved because of closed door to the church hall was able to prevent spread of the fire to the wing part of the church. The door was made of wood and plywood.954

The information about the fire reached the Emergency Response Centre in Sunday morning round 5 am and it was the police patrol that arrived to the disaster site firs at 5:13 in the morning and fire extinguishing at the Kaivoksela church started about 5:30. Kaivoksela church’s fire extinguishing continued nearly entire Sunday. In total there were 12 fire department unites containing 34 firemen participating into the Kaivoksela church’s

946 Interlocutory judgment 07/325 DNO: R 07/91 (The District Court of Vantaa, 2007), 6. 947 Interlocutory judgment 07/325 DNO: R 07/91 (The District Court of Vantaa, 2007), 5. 948 Interlocutory judgment 07/325 DNO: R 07/91 (The District Court of Vantaa, 2007), 2. 949 Interlocutory judgment 07/325 DNO: R 07/91 (The District Court of Vantaa, 2007), 5. 950 Federation of Vantaa Parishes 21.4.2011: Theme interview 951 Interlocutory judgment 07/325 DNO: R 07/91 (The District Court of Vantaa, 2007), 2. 952 Vantaa Interlocutory judgment 07/325 DNO: R 07/91, 5. 953 Judgment 07/1583 DNO: R 07/91 (The District Court of Vantaa, 2007), 1. 954 Federation of Vantaa Parishes 21.4.2011: Theme interview 177 fire extinguishing. According to the interviewed Federation of Vantaa Parishes’s employees water was used in Kaivoksela church’s fire extinguishing.955

Kaivoksela church was Vantaakoski parish’s church building in Vantaa. Part of the first stage disaster response was to informing the media and the public about the accident. In Kaivoksela church’s arson case Vantaakoski parish’s vicar took responsibility at the first stage in informing about the accident. Part of the first stage disaster response work represented also police’s criminal technical investigations.956

Kaivoksela church was badly destroyed in the arson, only church building’s concrete walls and floors did not burn down or collapse during the fire and fire extinguishing. However, the concrete constructions were evaluated to be highly deteriorated because of the fire and heath that estimated to be during the fire over +1000 °C. The fire destroyed the entire inside interior of the church hall, church vestibule and kitchen. The heritage objects that were placed in the church building’s wing, were church’s sacristy located, were preserved but had some shoot and smoke damages. This resulted that some Kaivoksela church’s heritage objects such as communion vessels, some church textiles and framed graphics artworks that were stored in the sacristy during the fire were preserved.957

According to the interviewed Federation of Vantaa Parishes’s employees Vantaankoski parish had no need for Kaivoksela church because the parish had already two other churches and one chapel in the area of the parish. Because there was no further need for Kaivoksela church as a church building Federation of Vantaa Parishes tried to first get permissions from the city of Vantaa and the National Board of Antiquities to build apartment houses and senior housing apartments to the place of the Kaivoksela church. In these plans Kaivoksela church’s church hall would have remained but it would have been built as refectory of the senior apartment houses. Since Federation of Vantaa Parishes could not receive permissions form the City of Vantaa and the National Board of Antiquities for these building plans, finally 5 years after the church arson Federation of Vantaa Parishes’s council decided to tear down the remains of Kaivoksela church and appeal for a change in the area’s building plan. Objective was in 2011 to build apartment houses in the place of Kaivoksela church.958

The Federation of Vantaa Parishes’s approach to recover Kaivoksela church’s cultural heritage based on dualistic approach that served the Federation of Vantaa Parishes’s practical needs. In movable heritage objects case the approach based on smoke and shoot damaged heritage objects cleaning. Framed graphics artworks were cleaned with remedial conservation means, but the preserved church textiles were washed in the cleaner’s shop.959

In immovable cultural heritage’s case the heritage’s preservation approach based on idea where some marks of Kaivoksela church’s existence tried to be preserved even if the

955 Federation of Vantaa Parishes 21.4.2011: Theme interview 956 Federation of Vantaa Parishes 21.4.2011: Theme interview 957 Federation of Vantaa Parishes 21.4.2011: Theme interview 958 Federation of Vantaa Parishes 21.4.2011: Theme interview 959 Federation of Vantaa Parishes 21.4.2011: Theme interview 178 restoration or rebuilding of the church building as it had been did not serve Federation of Vantaa Parishes’s interests. First plan to maintain the memory of Kavoksela church based on idea where church building’s hall would be part of new real estate entity, in this case senior housing center. Because the Federation of Vantaa Parishes did not receive Vantaa city’s and the National Board of Antiquities’ permission for their plan, the Federation of Vantaa Parishes decided five years later to demolish the ruins of Kaivoksela church. As part of the maintenance of Kaivoksela church’s memory the church bells decided to re-use in the Federation of Vantaa Parishes’s other building, Saint Lauri chapel, that was completed in August 2010. 960

6.7 Discussion

The Finnish Evangelical Lutheran churches arsons and arson attempts between 1990 and 2010 are strongly connected with native Finnish children’s and young adults’ behavior in association with their own local communities. The arsons seem to tell more about Finnish young people’s social and mental problems than about their religion. The Finnish church arson motivation cannot be repeatedly explained through ideology of Satanism. Also questions of mental problems, alcohol and substance abuse and social exclusion may have their part in these incidents. It is hard to say if these churches and the Evangelical Lutheran Christianity have become source of conflicts for some Finnish people? It may be that the arsons are made because of the institutional power they represent in Finnish society, not because of religious reasons.

Is the social exclusion of Finnish youth also behind church arsons in Finland? To gain more reliable research results, further research on criminology and criminal psychology is needed. According to these six church arsons, boys were more likely to set churches on fire and to do so alone. In only one case, the church was set on fire by two persons and, in this case, girls tried to burn down a church.

Different classifications have made on arsons. For this research’s church arson classification was used Hans Andersson’s classification over arsons that dates back in 1995. According to this classification Saint Olavi Church arson in Tyrvää, represents an arson that had clear objective. This aim was to destroy the evidence of the burglary that was made to the church.961 Since there was not much valuable property that could have been easily stolen and sold afterwards, the church was set on fire inside the building. Burning candles were placed under the church pews.

The tree other church arson solved by the Finnish police represented emotionally operating people who committed arson. Motives for emotional decision to arson may base on either revenge, hatred, conflicts or mental disorder. Behind mental alienation could be found two types of orientation in the work of destruction. These were mental disorder that related to non-suicidal revenge or hatred that lead to arson, the second orientation behind

960 Federation of Vantaa Parishes 21.4.2011: Theme interview 961 Laitinen & Ahonen 2000, 7 179 arsons was suicidal behavior that can be seen as cry for help.962 Two of the three solved church arsons, the Porvoo cathedral’s arson and Kaivoksela church’s arson had features of emotionally motivated arson that based on non-suicidal hatred and conflict with the Evangelical Lutheran Church or the local parish. In the case of Porvoo Cathedral’s arson the young man’s impulsive action can perhaps be explained trough the perspective of critical approach towards Christianity, especially the majority Christianity in Finland and the heavy use of alcohol before the church was set on fire. Kaivoksela church’s arson based on mentally insane person’s non-suicidal hatred that based on previous bad experiences in association with the local parish which church the person arson. By the arson the person tried to get revenge for the perceived feelings of injustice. Although during the trial the person was found mentally incapable to be responsible over the arson, there was a clear reason that resulted that the church was arson. The third church arson, Hammarland church’s arson, had features of emotionally motivated arson that was possibly motivated by suicidal mental disorder and hate towards the society. The arson can be seen as the two persons’ desperate cry for help from the society.

There are two church arsons, arsons of Suomenniemi church and Lempäälä Saint Birgitta church that have remained unsolved crimes and the police inquire is still ongoing in these cases. The features of these two arsons indicate that the motivation behind these two arson seams to base on emotional behavior. The fire tried to light in both of the churches similar ways. Since the churches were lighten outside there was possibly no other crime that tried to hide with the fire. It is possible that the arsons were caused by mental disorders. In the case of Lempäälä Saint Birgitta church’s arson the person who arson the church succeeded to escaped from the disaster site when the security guard arrived to the church yard. The motivation for the arson has been non-suicidal.

Based on Jaana Haapasalo’s categorizing this research’s church arson cases seem to have three out of four arson types’ features. These are: 1. expressive arsons that aim at inanimate objects, 2. indirectly motivated arsons that provide satisfaction for the offender and 3. indirectly motivated arson that aim at inanimate objects.963 This research’s arson and arson attempt cases seems to represent both goal-orientated and reactive arsons. Based on Jaana Haapasalo’s definition on arson’s motives this research’s church arsons have features of 1. covering of criminal evidences, 2. anger and revenge, 3. cry for help, 4. political reasons and 5. feelings of power.964

All of the cases where set fire at the church remained attempted arson level damages were rather small. In all three arson attempt cases technical alarm system, either burglary alarm or fire alarm system, alerted the fire or the security personnel to the disaster site. Fast fire extinguishing succeeded in these cases because the technical alarm systems alerted to the disaster scene either local fire department or nearby security company’s employee. In one case the fire self-extinguished.

962 Laitinen & Ahonen 2000, 7 963 Haapasalo 2008, 205 964 Haapasalo 2008, 203-204 180

In all church arson cases where set fire at the church led to large scale damages did not either have any technical fire or burglary alarm systems or did not have an alarm system that could detect the fire in the place where it had started. This caused that the technical alarm systems did not alert the fire to the Fire and Rescue Services. The regional Fire and Rescue services received information about the fire trough a person who had detected the fire. Fast fire extinguishing succeeded to prevent total destruction of the arson church. Delays in disaster response caused more sever damages in the church building.

Burning of religious building contains strong symbolic meanings. In Finland churches represent in many regions the oldest buildings that contain strong cultural value for the local communities. Churches as local parishs most noticeable real estate often are understood as representatives of the church in the environment. Although Finland does not have a state church, parishs are historically connected with both regional and national administrative power and authorities. Symbolically churches manifest local and national cultural values and history.

Symbolically there can be observed at least two significant semiotic processes that takes place when a church building is being arson or attempted to arson. The first semiotic process takes place in the act of church arson that takes place in the actions of the arsonist in association with the arsonists relation with the church (both as an institution and as a religious building). The second semiotic process can be seen in existence of the church building that is influenced by the arson, its disaster response and heritage recovery processes. I have used Eero Tarasti’s (1999) existential semiotics’ models to analyze and describe the processes that symbolically takes place in association with church arsons and attempted arsons.

The semiotic act of church arson where the arsonist has set the church on fire follow Eero Tarasti’s semiotic act and event model. In church arson’s case the semiotic act of church arson is being committed with the help of pre-signs. My research data on church arsons shows that these pre-signs can be identified as preliminary thoughts and preparations that take place before the arson. These pre-signs may take place either in short period of time through spontaneous featured idea or in longer period of time when both the mental and material preparations for church arson act are more organized. At least two of this research’s church arson cases represented acts that were committed after longer preparation time. Other two solved church arson cases of this research were decided to commit in shorter period of time. The semiotic act’s post-sign represents the interpretation of the church arson act. In the context of church arson post-sign represents the symbolic change in church building’s cultural interpretation that arson or attempted arson causes physically and symbolically in the religious building.965

Eero Tarasti suggests that the pre-sign’s change into act sign requires that the acting person abandon the pre-signs in favor of the semiotic act. The act sign’s change into the post-sign means that the act of church arson or attempted arson takes place and decision is being made in order to achieve more complete idea of the church arson act.966

965 Tarasti 2000, 33 966 Tarasti 2000, 34 181

The second semiotic process that occurs in church building’s existence (Dasein) in association with church arson or attempted arson. This changing process in church building’s existence can be described trough Tarasti’s model on Existential Subjects journey via the act of Negation and Affirmation.967 Church building’s first existence can be understood as church building’s heritage interpretation before the arson or attempted arson. The first existence bases on the religious, cultural, social and historical values that the church building mediates to the surrounding society and the environment. Act of arson or attempt arson aiming at a church can be understood as process of Negation. Target of this Negation process is to reveal the nothingness, emptiness or not-existence of the church’s first existence. In reverse of the establishment of the existence that bases on social groups established interpretation of church the process of Negation often takes place by one or two persons decision to contest the existing heritage interpretation’s existence. By burning the church, the nothingness of the church’s interpretation is being mediated to the society. Trough the act of arson or arson attempt church building’s second damaged or destroyed church’s existence is being established. This represents the second church’s interpretation that contains also message of contestation. The processes of disaster response and heritage recovery can be understood as processes of affirmation that aim at rebirth of the church building’s semiotic signification. The process of affirmation establishes church building’s third existence that represents recovered heritage interpretation of the church. The third existence of the church in this research’s church arson and attempted church arson cases aimed at reconstruction of the first interpretation’s idea of the church containing some changes that based on security improvements of the building. These security improvements could be understood as symbolic fragments of the heritage sites contestation that took place; there could exist someone who might contest the church’s existence again.

There was one church where heritage recovery process did not aim at rebuilding of the badly damaged church building. In Kaivoksela church’s arson case the parish’s need for the badly damaged church had changed the continuity of “the church’s interpretation”. The memory of the arson church was preserved trough individual objects of the church that were preserved from the fire. The bells of the church were reused in a new chapel building of the same Federation of Parishes.

967 Tarasti 2000, 10 182

7 RESULTS

In this chapter research results are presented to the research questions: 1. What types of direct and indirect threats aim at cultural heritage? 2. How should cultural heritage sites, monuments and collections be categorized for risk and how should they be protected? 3. What type of damages have cultural heritage disasters resulted in and why?

Both primary and secondary research data coded with Atlas.ti 6.1 software. The primary research data was disaster site owner’s theme interviews (18 interviews of 19 disaster cases) and subject matter specialists theme interviews (9 interviews). The secondary research data based on six disaster cases trial judgements and Finnish crime statistics over criminal damage, attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage cases.

Objective in Atlas.ti 6.1 software’s use was to make the wide research data more manageable for the research results drafting. With Atlas.ti research data tried to systemize so that different research data’s comparing would have been easier. Research data coding and categorizing with Atlas.ti made it easier to observe similarities and difference from the research data. This made it easier to compare different research data’s information.

Observations were made from both primary and secondary research data and these datas were coded including contextualized information about how coded parts of the data reflected heritage disasters and heritage disasters response and recovery work. contextualized coding resulted that in the end of the research data analyses there were 2420 individual codes that were grouped into 20 thematic code families. The largest number of codes were grouped into disaster effects (380 codes), disaster backgrounds (309 codes), disaster (284 codes) and disaster response (276 codes) families. All 20 code families were categorized under three thematic areas of heritage disasters that influenced into the heritage disasters prevention, disaster response and heritage recovery work. These three categories were: 1. disaster prevention’s impact area, 2. disaster plan’s impact area and 3. disaster response’s impact area. In figure 1 Atlas.ti analyses outcome is presented.

183

Figure 1. Primary and secondary research data’s analyses with Atlas.ti 6.1 software grouped the coded research data into 20 families and under three larger categories that were 1. disaster prevention’s impact area (seven code families), 2. disaster plan’s impact area (eight code families) and 3. disaster response’s impact area (five code families).

The research results were drafted from coded and categorized research data trough analyzing the categorized research data from the perspective of the research questions. The coded and categorized research data were compared with each other and with source literature’s information. Trough this comparing central observations were made that lead to the research results.

This research’s disaster cases risk management processes supported Jonathan Ashley- Smith’s observations concerning first stage decision’s importance from the perspective of second stage decisions outcome. Trough the analyzed research data was drafted figure 2. In this figure was clarified observations that were made from the research data concerning heritage disasters and how these disaster’s response and recovery work influenced into 184 heritage’s primary and secondary damaging. From the research data was identified factors that either prevented or promoted successful disaster response and heritage recovery work. It was observed that difficulties in disaster response and heritage recovery often lead to secondary damages in cultural heritage. Also factors that supported successful and effective disaster response lead to less severe heritage’s secondary damages. This figure was inspired by Jonathan Ashley-Smith’s decision tree model.

Figure 2. Observations that made from the research data through qualitative content analyses with Atlas.ti 6.1 software. The researched heritage disaster’s analyses outcome in disaster, disaster response and heritage recovery phases is being described.

The research data showed that both disaster prevention and disaster planning phases of heritage risk’s management had significant influence into heritage disaster’s creation and what kind of primary damages occurred disasters caused in cultural heritage. From heritage disasters’ type could observe accident based disasters that were caused by natural forces, human activity or technical error. This research’s vandalism and arson based disasters could base on either intentionally selected works of destruction or randomly selected targets of destruction. Heritage disasters could cause either major or minor damages in cultural heritage based on the disaster and this disaster’s response. In the post- disaster phase the success of the heritage recovery process depended on the available material and personnel resources in heritage recovery process.

Statistical analyses

Finnish Crime statistics between years 1990 and 2010 were analyzed statistically with R Statistics Software. The analyses and analyses tables were ordered from professional statistician Lic.Phil. Aki Niemi. Analyses concentrate on the statistics of the regions where the research data on criminal damage, attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage 185 crimes had occurred in association with cultural heritage. In the analyses numbers of crimes in disaster case regions were evaluated trough the cases per 1000 inhabitants in the region. Central figures of the statistical analyses can be found in attachments (attachments 19-27).

Six of the serious sabotage, attempted serious sabotage and criminal damage regions were compared with six reference regions crime statistics that would have nearly the same size and that would locate near by the original disaster case regions. Idea was to analyze the statistical differences of these crime types between the disaster site regions and the reference region. In figure 3 is presented the six chosen disaster site regions and their reference regions.

Figure 3. Following six disaster site regions (Jyväskylä, Turku, Lempäälä, Porvoo, Sastamala and Vantaa) represented this research’s criminal damage, attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage cases. The cases were compared with six reference areas (Kuopio, Tampere, Akaa, Loviisa, Hämeenkyrö and Espoo) criminal damage, attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage crime statistics between years 1990 and 2010.

Trough the statistical research data no clear answers for cultural heritage’s vandalism and church arson cases could be found. It is possible that heritage sites becomes target of vandalism or arson just like any other site that is able to draw the offender’s attention. When the six disaster site region’s number of criminal damage crimes, attempted serious sabotage crimes and serious sabotage crimes were compared with the their reference region’s crime statistics it was observed that the numbers of the crimes were higher in the disaster site regions than in their reference regions when this research’s disaster cases occurred.

Statistical research data seem to support the information that criminal damage crimes are more probable in urban environments than in smaller conurbation areas. This research’s criminal damage cases occurred in the regions where number of criminal damage crimes were higher than in the entire Finland during the year when the disasters occurred. In those cases where criminal damage crimes occurred during the entire time period 1990-2010 there were annual differences in the numbers of criminal damage crimes. Three out of five criminal damage incidents occurred during decreasing time period of criminal damage 186 crimes in the region. Two of the incidents occurred during time period when the number of criminal damage crimes were increasing in the region.

In church arson and attempted church arson cases statistical research data supported the observation that there is no significant difference between larger and smaller conurbation areas number of attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage crimes. There are strong annual differences in attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage crimes in the regions. In four out of six church arson and attempted church arson cases the arson or attempted arson took place during decreasing time period of attempted serious sabotage and serious sabotage crimes in the region. In two church arson or attempted church arson cases the arson or arson attempt occurred during increasing number of serious sabotage crimes in the region. In two of the church arson and attempted church arson cases the number of serious sabotage crimes were lower in the disaster regions than in the entire Finland. In four of the church arson and attempted church arson cases the number of serious sabotage crimes was higher in the disaster site regions than it was in entire Finland at the time when the disaster case occurred.

Cultural values

Trough the research data it was observed that cultural heritage was evaluated after the disaster through its use and function. For example, church arson was evaluated to cause significant economic loss for the parish on the bases of the rebuilding costs of the church. In these evaluations the National Board of Antiquities’ statement on the church's cultural historical value had significant role. Through heritage disaster’s response and heritage recovery work it was possible to identify cultural values that were connected with cultural heritage. In cultural heritage appreciated old historical remains, religious institutions and heritage that represented social power and wealth in Finland. Researched disaster cases’ cultural heritage seams to underline the uniformity of Finnish culture. After the disasters cultural heritage that represented dominating heritage discourse in Finland were reconstructed or restored after the disaster. Those disaster sites where cultural heritage was not clearly identified as nationally important cultural heritage by the owners of the cultural heritage the preservation approach did not contain full restoration of the deteriorated cultural heritage. In disaster response and heritage recovery process, collection’s disposal decisions were made often on the bases of cultural heritage's overall condition.

Cultural appreciations could be seen in the financial resourcing that the cultural heritage owner’s used in heritage sites’ recovery work. Trough the researched disasters it was observed that the oldest cultural heritage that represented Finnish regional or national history was defined as top priority in disaster response and heritage recovery work.

Heritage recovery

Heritage recovery often based on the available resources and co-operation networks. If the disaster site’s owner organization did not have any preparedness material stockpile ready for disaster response and heritage recovery work, at the first stage of disaster response 187 and heritage recovery work much time was used to acquire needed materials and equipment for disaster response and heritage recovery work. During heritage recovery process time could go to manufacture the needed supports and tables for heritage recovery. After the disasters there was often acute need for heritage professionals during the disaster response and first weeks of heritage recovery work. If these resources did not exist heritage recovery work was less effective.

In massive water damage cases where large collection had wetted entire collection’s air drying proved to be too slow and ineffective method to dry the collection at the same time. In Finland small heritage owner organization’s successful disaster response and heritage recovery work often based on good co-operation networks which resulted that these heritage disasters response and heritage recovery based on voluntarily made museum professional's plans. Not existing disaster recovery plan and lack of material and personal resources caused in most cases delays in the actual collection recovery work. This resulted that guidance for heritage recovery came outside cultural heritage’s owner organization, trough co-operation network’s voluntary museum professionals who decided to help the organization in their heritage recovery work. Heritage professional’s voluntary guidance and help often lasted for limited time for example in one case for three days, when the actual first state collection recovery work in massive water damage situation could take weeks with small personal and material resources.

The importance of qualified heritage professionals’ use in collection recovery could be seen in possible secondary collection damages that perhaps had prevented or minimized cultural heritage’s secondary damages during heritage recovery work. Use of qualified personnel in heritage recovery work and existence of some kind of material and technical resources that could be used in heritage’s recovery often lead to that clearly improper heritage recovery methods could be prevented and secondary collection damages were avoided or minimized.

In 1990’s and 2000’s Finland the most common water damage’s recovery method was air drying. In the researched disasters there were no water damage case where other means of drying, such as freeze-drying, of wetted heritage materials had been used. Heritage owner’s good co-operation networks with museum professionals were important background factor in successful heritage recovery processes. In large scale heritage disasters when the heritage’s owner organization did not have a disaster plan or instructions for the heritage recovery the spontaneously made heritage recovery plans did not in all cases fit into the scale of the damages and the available resources. After the collection’s fist stage recovery, drying, it could take a couple of weeks before the damage evaluation could start.

Use of minimal financial and personnel resources in the first stage heritage recovery caused that the work proceeded slowly. Delays in collection recovery, especially after water damages lead to secondary damages such as molding of wetted collections. Ineffectivity of the disaster response was partly caused by the fact that there was not enough material or museum professional resources in the heritage's recovery work. Lack of resources in one archival collection’s water damage recovery resulted that the used air drying method 188 caused that large amount of wetted materials stayed wet for about two weeks. This resulted significant secondary heritage damages such as molding.

People’s engagement

The researched cases indicate that the heritage site's importance for the local community caused in disaster situations that voluntary people participated into the heritage recovery work both independently and trough local associations. These voluntary people could be either heritage professionals or non-professionals. In the cases where the financial resources for the heritage recovery work were very limited the voluntary workers part was significant in prevention of the total destruction of the damaged cultural heritage.

In the cases where no extra heritage professional resources could be found for the heritage recovery, the employees of the memory institution worked all day and night during the first most important weeks of the heritage recovery. Therefore heritage disasters also endangered the health of these disaster site’s museum professionals.

Authority guidance

Authority guidance done by police, Fire and rescue services and museum authorities represented vitally important information source when heritage owners started to develop their heritage sites and collections safety questions. Trough the subject matter specialist’s interviews it was observed that both security authorities (police and firemen) and memory institution’s authorities gave their instructions for the cultural heritage owners when asked both before accidents and after occurred disasters. The Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Church’s counsel and the Finnish Orthodox Church’s counsel gives statements and instructions over the parishes’ building protection and heritage objects management. In 2010 the National Board of Antiquities did intensive co-operation with other Finnish memory institutions in cultural heritage’s safety questions.

In post-disaster situations heritage authorities’ guidance concentrated mainly on disaster response work’s coordination and on suggestions how to change the actual heritage recovery work to make it more effective. For example in the case of the Valvilla Wool Mill museum archives fire the Uusimaa regional museum's textile and paper conservator did not participate into the heritage recovery planning. The disaster response methods were designed spontaneously by a voluntary paper conservator who lived in Hyvinkää where also the Wool Mill museum located.

When the research data was collected the Finnish museum authorities and the regional museums did not have any stand-by consultation services that could have been used by fire and rescue authorities in early stages of heritage disasters response. The heritage site’s owners were responsible for the safety of the used disaster response and heritage recovery methods. This meant that the heritage site’s owner organization either had the needed knowledge to ensure the safe disaster response and heritage recovery or the organization acquired the needed know-how in disaster situation to consult the fire and rescue services 189 in disaster response situation.968 The guidance for the fire and rescue services’ disaster response work comes rarely outside the cultural heritage’s owner organization.969

7.1 Direct and indirect threats that aim at cultural heritage

Trough the research data it was observed that there are five factors that influence into the direct and indirect threats that aim at cultural heritage. These are: 1. social segregation process, 2. shortages in economic resources, 3. natural forces, 4. human activities taking place nearby cultural heritage and 5. cultural heritage’s deliberate deterioration.

Social segregation process influences into people’s social exclusion process and in general increase of criminal behaviour in societies. Both of these factors may have increasing influence into the crimes that aim at cultural heritage. Shortages in economic resources that create direct and indirect threats for cultural heritage bases on both the heritage owners and the authorities economic funds. Shortages in the heritage site’s owners economic funds have its impact on heritage’s owners ability to maintain their cultural heritage both before disasters and during the disaster response and heritage recovery work. Shortages in authorities economic resourcing can be seen for example in heritage authorities possibilities to provide assistance and recommendations for heritage owners in their cultural heritage’s protection and heritage recovery work. In security authorities case shortages in economic funding can lead to that crimes that aim at cultural heritage are not prioritized in police investigations.

It was observed that natural forces, especially storm and heavy rains have caused in urban environments floods that have lead to heritage collections’ underground storage magazines water damages. In accident based heritage disasters human activities such as construction work and other use of the building where the cultural heritage collection is placed contained direct risks of accident based heritage disasters. Human activities could lead to for example fire in a museum archives, water damage in an archives and natural gas explosion in a museum exhibition.

This research’s vandalism and arson based heritage disasters represented the cases where cultural heritage was deliberately being deteriorated or destroyed. It was observed that vandalism could be caused by intentional or unintentional actions. Vandalism that aim at cultural heritage is more probable in urban environments close to socially unstable conurbation areas. In church arson’s case there were no differences between small and large conurbation areas probability to become scene of church arson.

968 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s operative unite 4.5.2011: Specialists teem interview 969 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s operative unite 4.5.2011: Specialists teem interview 190

Main focus in the research results that concern direct and indirect risks that aim at cultural heritage in disaster situations rises three central factors that influence into the fact that heritage disaster occur and how well disaster response and heritage recovery processes succeeded from the perspective of collection’s damage prevention. These factors are risk management work before disaster, disaster planning and economic, material and personnel resources of heritage recovery work after the disaster.

This research supports Naomi Marzey’s observations concerning power- connectedness of cultural heritage’s vandalism. Trough the research data it was observed that cultural heritage’s deliberate destruction with the means of vandalism and arson created significant threat that aimed directly at movable and immovable cultural heritage. These risks were evaluated to be caused by cultural heritage’s noticeable relations with society’s authorities and social power. This power related character of cultural heritage possibly led to that some small groups of people or individuals started to contest their own neighbourhood’s cultural heritage if it was possible and easy. This resistance is possibly more about resistance over institutional power and society than it is about resistance over cultural heritage. Therefore, cultural heritage’s deliberate destruction should be regarded as noticeable risk that is more probable in urban environments than in the country side of Finland.

This research’s vandalism and arson cases show Brian Graham’s and Peter Howard’s observations true that both insiders and outsiders have their part in cultural heritage process. If people locate themselves in cultural discourses in a position from which the discourse makes most sense for them;970 does this mean that people who do not find themselves meaningful part in cultural heritage discourse may aim their aggression at cultural heritage? In figure 4. is described cultural heritage’s interaction in contemporary democratic society in this case Finland. This research’s data shows that both individual people, social groups and nation state, municipalities and other public bodies are in interaction with cultural heritage and memory institutions that have central role in defining cultural heritage. This interaction does not in all cases secure cultural heritage’s long-term preservation. This research’s data indicates that postmodern era’s process of individualization has had its impact also in the concept of collective memory, and the society’s vision of the past. There is diversity in feelings and opinions over defined cultural heritage.

970 Jeffersson 2004, 34 191

Figure 4. Approach to the interaction that takes place in association with cultural heritage and contemporary democratic society.

Municipaties, nation state and public bodies have special needs and demands for the memory institutions and other organizations that maintain significant cultural property. To fulfill these needs and demands organizations receive public funding and support to provide the needed and demanded services for the society. There is also marginalized featured civil society group that consists of marginal social groups or people that have features of social exclusion. This social group approach cultural heritage trough power relations, resistance and disrespect. Although memory institutions’ and other public organizations provide heritage services “for everybody” in the society they also mediate trough their work how these marginal groups and people have perhaps excluded from the society. It is possible that this triggers small social groups and people to aim their destructive actions at cultural heritage.

It is possible that general crime prevention theories observations over crimes existence suits also for this research’s disaster cases. This research’s vandalism and arson based disasters possibly occurred because right person met in certain state of mind a tempting target of vandalism or arson that also had shortages in security management. It is possible that public property is more vulnerable to become target of people’s destructive actions than private property. Michel Foucault’s anti-authority struggles can be find behind this research’s vandalism cases. These struggles may be about resistance over use of power that rejects individual people’s identities and determinate what their collective memory is. Key question may be that concept on cultural heritage forces people into possessed roles. 192

The research data indicate that criminal actions such as arson and vandalism in cultural heritage context have become more known phenomenon in Finnish society because of the mass media that writes about these events. It is not possible to say if this has also influenced into people’s actions that aim at heritage’s destruction so that cultural heritage vandalism and arson cases have increased.971

The National Board of Antiquities has observed that in Finland’s capital city region the archaeological sites have suffered from strong actions of deliberate destruction and vandalism since 1990’s. The vandalism bases on both aware actions that deteriorate archaeological sites and sometimes lack of understanding may have led to that an archaeological site is destroying. The forms of vandalism during the 2000’s have varied from deliberate actions such as braking down of the signages of the archaeological site, spray painting of the site and trashing all over the site. The forms of vandalism may also base on lack of understanding for example events where separate stones are being removed form Bronze Age mounds. Archaeological sites may also destroy because of rough playing at the sites. Sometimes the National Board of Antiquities has used as disaster prevention means co-operation with local people, schools and regional associations in maintaining the archeological site. Objective in this co-operation has been to rise the local communities interest to maintain and preserve their own neighborhood’s cultural heritage.972

Vandalism can represent revenge motivated, play motivated, tactical behavior or malicious vandalism. The clear motives for this research vandalism cases are not known but when this research’s vandalism cases are placed into these motivation themes, it was observed that possibly at least two of the vandalism cases, Vartiokylä castle mountain’s and Kotka Orthodox church’s vandalism cases had features of both play and malicious vandalism based motives. In one of the vandalism cases, Saint Jacob church’s case, the act of vandalism may have been revenge motivated. In the case of Jyväskylä orthodox church’s vandalism case the actions may have been motivated by malicious vandalism. Uspenski Orthodox Cathedral’s icon larcenies had features of tactical behavior.

Vandalism in the form of graffities may have territorial features. Objective of making graffities may relate to young people’s gaining access to a certain favoured place. This means that the heritage site that is graffiti painted represents somehow special and important place for the writers. In immovable heritage site’s case it is possible that the phenomenon of vandalism is partly connected with the popularity of the heritage site among young people of the region. The Finnish National Board of Antiquities has detected in archaeological site’s case that sometimes heritage site’s vandalism may base on some local youth generation’s free time activities and the site may represent important gathering place for the young. It has observed that when some heritage site has left in peace the next generation’s young have found their own special places for their free time activities and gatherings.973

971 Police University College 12.1.2012: Specialists teem interview 972 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 973 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview

193

In accident-based heritage disasters it was observed that human activities nearby cultural heritage’s place of storage caused most of the accident-based disasters, therefore human activities such as construction works and fire-work that takes place nearby cultural heritage’s place of storage should at forehand be planned so that risks for the cultural heritage could be prevented. Two of this research’s accident-based heritage disasters were cause by accidents that occurred because of human activity in the other users’ premises in a building where cultural heritage collection was placed. Therefore, it can be that buildings that have also other users and use than cultural heritage’s preservation contains more risks that aim at cultural heritage directly and indirectly. Increased risks should be noticed in the cultural heritage collection’s disaster plans and risk management work.

Trough the researched natural force based heritage disasters it was observed that in Finland’s climate greatest natural force based disasters risks related to storm and heavy rain based floods that resulted in urban environments heritage’s undergrown storage magazines water damages. It is possible that the climate change may increase the probability of heavy rain based floods in Finland’s cities. This may danger cultural heritage’s storage magazines especially if they are placed in underground levels of buildings. Flood based water damages represents in urban environments direct risk that aim at heritage collection’s undergrown storage magazines.

Lack of economic resources endangers cultural heritage’s management both in basic collection’s management and in heritage disaster’s management work. In one disaster case lack of economic funding for the collection’s documentation before the disaster caused difficulties from the perspective of collection’s disaster response and value based heritage recovery in post-disaster phase. Lack of technical security systems (for example automatic fire alarm systems) have caused delays in observing the fire in six disaster cases. In two of this research’s church arson cases not existing automatic fire alarm system resulted such delay in Fire and Rescue Services alarming that resulted very severe fire-based damages in arson church. In one church arson case it was burglary alarm that alerted security company to the disaster site and the arson attempt was observed this way. In this case fire was self- extinguished.

7.2 Cultural heritage sites risk evaluation and risk management

Trough the research data it was observed that from the perspective of risk categorizing two heritage region types were important: cultural heritage in urban environments and cultural heritage in larger and smaller conurbation areas. Cultural heritage that is placed in urban environments may become more likely target of deliberate heritage’s deteriorating. Also human activities that take place in urban environments close to cultural heritage may more likely lead to accidents that endanger cultural heritage. Natural forces especially storms, heavy rains and floods may cause water damages in underground storage 194 magazines in conurbation areas. Cultural heritage collection’s underground storage magazines should be prepared for water damages especially in conurbation areas.

It was observed that both small and large conurbation areas churches can become target of church arson. In church arson’s damage prevention important technical security devices were automatic fire and burglary alarm systems. It is possible that church arsons that occur in smaller conurbation areas may lead to more severe damages because of the Fire and Rescue services stand by time to the disaster site. Fast disaster response and fire extinguishing have been the best way to prevent damages that church arson may cause in cultural heritage.

There are measures of social and welfare services that can be used also in cultural heritage crimes prevention. The factors that possibly could have a decreasing impact on cultural heritage crimes are: overall democracy and people’s social equality in society, prevention of social exclusion, well-functioning social and welfare services and crime prevention programs that would start at early age.

Cultural change has caused that cultural heritage is experienced many ways. Researched disaster cases indicate that heritage is being contested by small groups of people or individuals in local communities. It is possible that this phenomenon has something to do with the young and young adults social exclusion in Finland. Possibility of deliberate heritage’s destruction should be regarded as one possible risk that aim at cultural heritage sites and objects directly. The probability of this risk may be larger in cities and in conurbation areas that are socially unstable. It is possible that the triggering factor behind cultural heritage’s deliberate destruction relates to heritage sites’ administrative power related features. People and social groups that challenge public space with their actions are perhaps trying to establish their own important places trough their actions.974 It is possible that this is the case in Vartiokylä Castle Mountain’s and Kotka Orthodox Chuch’s vandalism cases.

In prevention of vandalism it has estimated that strong social relations, thrust among people and high level of civil engagement in the local communities represent such social resources that may operate as protective factors in vandalism prevention. It is possible that heritage site becomes target of vandalism because of its geographical location near by an unstable or poor environment. It is possible that by increasing social relations, thrust among people and the level of civil engagement in the local communities could also cultural heritage’s vandalism be prevented.

It is possible that prevention of Finnish youth’s social exclusion could have decreasing impact on also cultural heritage’s deliberate destruction.975 Possibilities to reduce cultural heritage’s power related features can for example base on projects that increase local communities children’s and young people’s engagement with their own neighborhood’s cultural heritage. In Finland good example of this is the Adopt a Monument project that has aimed at engaging people and local communities to take care of and to take responsibility

974 McDowell 2008, 46 975 Haapasalo 12.12.2011: Specialists teem interview 195 over heritage buildings and archeological sites in Tampere (since 2008), Jyväskylä (since 2015) and Helsinki (since 2017-2018) regions. The model for this work came from Archeology Scotland organization’s Adopt a Monument work.976 Educating and hands on experiencing of cultural heritage from the early childhood state onwards could have an impact on children and young when they engage with their own neighborhood’s cultural heritage. Hands on approach in cultural heritage education is important in gaining experimental competence over cultural heritage.977

It is possible that by rising the overall public awareness about cultural heritage also the public engagement with cultural heritage is increased. Increase of overall public awareness over cultural heritage may also increases heritage sites’ overall safety. When both cultural heritage’s owners and Fire and Rescue services knowledge over heritage risk’s management and heritage’s damage prevention is increased cultural heritage is more secured also in disaster situation. It is possible that lack of local people’s involvement and engagement with their own neighborhood’s cultural heritage preservation and maintenance may cause security risks for cultural heritage.

In two heritage vandalism cases and three church arson cases the information about the disaster came to the authorities trough some person who was some way engaged with the heritage site and detected the vandalism or arson and decided to inform the authorities about the accident. It is possible that public engagement with cultural heritage possibly could increase the overall safety of cultural heritage. People’s engagement with cultural heritage may prevent some people’s destructive actions that aim at cultural heritage.

Based on this research’s disaster cases technical security systems for example automatic fire alarm and burglary alarm systems have been able to prevent at least three church arsons’ creation into massive fire. In those cases where church arson caused major damages churches did not either have an automatic fire alarm system or the fire started in such place that the existing automatic fire alarm systems were not able to detect the fire. Therefore automatic fire alarm and burglary alarm systems should be regarded as significant measures in heritage risks management especially in church arson cases.

Trough Robert Waller’s mathematical formula of risk: P × FS × E × LV 978 it was observed that high probability of vandalism, fraction of collection susceptible to damages, extent of damages and expected loss of value in cultural heritage exists in urban environments. Most vulnerable heritage sites for vandalism may be urban area’s unguarded heritage site and archaeological sites that locate nearby socially unstable areas. In church arson’s case there was no clear difference between large and small conurbation areas probability to become scene of church arson, but it is possible that there is greater risk that occurred church arson in smaller conurbation areas may lead to greater collection damages such as fraction of collection susceptible to damages, extent of damages and loss in heritage’s value because of Fire and rescue services stand by time. Through the researched

976 Adoptoimonumentti.fi 22.4.2018: Info 977 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 978 In Waller’s formula P stands for probability of damage, FS is the fraction of the collection susceptible to damage, E stands for the extent of damage, and LV the expected loss of value in the collection. (Waller 1996, 3) 196 accident-based disasters probability of disaster seems to be higher in urban environments. This research’s accident-based disasters fractions of collection susceptible to damages, extent of damages and loss in cultural heritage’s value was influenced by how large area of the heritage site was damaged in the accident. The larger the disaster was the larger faction of collection was susceptible to damages, extent of damages and loss in heritage’s value was.

This research’s disaster case types risk magnitudes were evaluated trough Robert Waller’s risk magnitude evaluation model FS x LV x E = MR. 979 Table 1 presents this research’s 19 disaster cases risk magnitude evaluations that were drafted from Waller’s model. In this table occurred disaster cases risk magnitudes were evaluated from the perspective of the following 100-year time period.

Disaster case Risk Risk Risk magnitude: magnitude: magnitude: 3 constant 2 sporadic 1 rare Finnish Surveying Department’s office in Uusimaa, terminal archives X water damage in 1994 Finnish Surveying Department’s archives, archive buildings fire during X construction work in 2004 Tyrvää Saint Olavi’s church, arson in 1997 X Finnish National Library, humidity problems and water damages in X 1990’s and 2000’s National Board of Antiques, Vartiokylä castle mountain, vandalism events X in 1990’s and 2000’s Finnish Literature Society, library magazine, water damage in 2003 X Valvilla Wool Mill museum, archives fire in 2003 X Kiasma Museum of Modern art, VR magazines fire that caused safety X preparations in Kiasma in 2006 Finnish National Museum, gas explosion in 2006 X Porvoo cathedral, arson in 2006 X Kaivoksela church, arson in 2006 X Turku castle, art vandalism in 2008 X Lempäälä Saint Birgita’s church, arson attempt in 2008 X Saint Jacob church, art vandalism in 2008 X Suomenniemi church, arson attempt in 2009 X Hammarland church, arson attempt in 2010 X Uspenski Orthodox cathedral, art larcenies in 2008 and 2010 X Jyväskylä Orthodox church, vandalism incident in 2010 X Kotka Orthodox church, vandalism cases in 1990’s and 2000's. X Table 1. Risk magnitude evaluation of this research’s disaster cases based on Robert Waller’s risk magnitude evaluation model.

There were three disaster cases that were evaluated to be at the third constant risk magnitude level. These cases were two heritage sites vandalism cases and one library collection’s storage magazines water damages. Among the researched disaster cases there were 13 disaster cases that were evaluated to the second sporadic risk magnitude level. These cases were one archival collections’ and one library collection’s water damage, one archival collection’s fire and four vandalism cases. All of this research’s church arsons and attempted church arsons (six cases) were also evaluated to contain second sporadic risk magnitude level. Four of this research’s disaster cases were evaluated to the first rare risk magnitude level. Among these cases was one archival building’s roof fire, one museum building’s preparations during massive fire outside the museum building, one museum collection’s gas explosion and one vandalism case that took place in museum display.

979 Waller 1995, 24 197

Through the researched heritage disasters, it was observed that two of the heritage sites Vatiokylä castle mountain and the Finnish National Library were clearly prepared for occurred disaster type before the disasters occurred. It is possible that the long-lasting problem with specific disaster type at the heritage site influenced into this. Only in these two cases Robert Waller’s three general control means in cultural heritage’s risk management could be identified in the heritage site’s disaster management although these methods could not totally eliminate the risks that aimed at the heritage site. Waller’s three general control means are: eliminate the source of risk; place a barrier between the source of the risk and the cultural heritage; and act on the agent responsible for the risk.980 After the disaster in most of the disaster sites were done risk management improvements that resembled Waller’s general means of heritage risks’ control.

Disaster management

There is variation in heritage owner’s professional skills in heritage management and risk management. These professional skills influence into organizations disaster management, disaster response and heritage recovery skills. Poor professional skills in risk management represent one of the factors that may lead to unsuccessful disaster management work.

Based on the researched disaster cases heritage recovery processes was not refocused and developed during heritage recovery process. Therefore the heritage recovery process did not change towards any new conservation approach during the heritage’s recovery process that was ongoing and that would have made the process more effective.

The researched disaster cases indicate that heritage sites disaster plans and existing operational models for heritage recovery have central part as background factor in successful disaster response and heritage recovery work. The heritage site owners should be active and they should at forehand start to do disaster planning. Heritage owners should together with the authorities search for most effective way to prevent heritage disasters and thefts. It is possible to prevent the spontaneous crimes that rise from the possibility to commit crime. Means to prevent heritage crimes base on partly technical protection systems of heritage sites and risk reduction measures.

Disaster response development requires museum authorities and safety authorities’ co-operation. According to the Police College University's representatives it would improve heritage site's overall safety if the National Board of Antiquities would visit the regional police stations and inform the regional police department's personnel about the significant heritage sites that situate in their region.981

Heritage site’s owners functioning disaster organization that is able to do fast decisions that enable purchasing of professional and material resources for the heritage recovery work

980 Waller 1996, 3 981 Police University College 12.1.2012: Specialists teem interview 198 quickly promotes successful disaster response and heritage recovery work. This increases the effectivity of disaster response and heritage recovery work. Fast decision making increases the possibility to succeed in heritage recovery so that heritage’s secondary damages can be prevented. Trough the researched disaster cases it was observed that the disaster sites owners’ most important co-operation network in disaster and post-disaster situations were 1. museum authorities and security authorities (such as police, fire and rescue services and army), 2. subject matter specialists in heritage recovery and 3. local community. These co-operation networks influenced into how well disaster response and heritage recovery work succeeded during the disaster and post-disaster situations. These co-operation networks also influenced into the quality of the improved disaster planning that often occurred after the disaster. Further development and strengthening of such co- operation networks in Finland would perhaps increase the overall preparedness of heritage disasters response and heritage recovery work.

Trough the researched disaster cases it was observed that those heritage sites where similar kind of heritage disaster had occurred more than once the organization had observed the existing heritage risks and done also work to reduce existing risks. In those cases where similar kind of disaster occurred more than once risks could not totally be eliminated.

Currently part of the archaeological sites’ disaster prevention takes place after the archaeological excavations. At archeological sites vandalism is tried to prevent by doing the infrastructure so that it is not possible to destroy them or if they are destroyed they can be easily rebuild with minimal costs. In infrastructures case objective is also to build such infrastructure that does not draw peoples’ attention into them. It has observed that strong vegetation removal often draws people’s attention and may result some people’s destructive behavior at the archeological site.982

In archeological sites case it has been sometimes maintenance and conservation of the archeological site that has triggered some people’s works of destruction. Before any decisions are made over archeological site’s maintenance and conservation, risk evaluation should be made over the heritage site. In some cases, it may be better not to conserve and maintain an archeological site if it would preserve this way better. Risk of vandalism is high especially in archeological sites, that situate in residential areas or other areas where they are surrounded by many people. These risks in urban environment’s archeological sites cannot totally be removed and therefore they have to be admitted.983

Cultural heritage’s documentation in post-disaster situation is important part of heritage recovery. Documentation and damage evaluation are needed both for insurance companies and to restore damaged cultural heritage. It may be that there are no existing architectural drawings over all details of an old historic building. Documentation is needed also to have possibilities to use parts of the damaged remains in heritage site’s restoration work. Cultural heritage’s documentation in post-disaster phase can be divided into police’s criminal technical investigations that are done when a fire or a suspected crime has taken

982 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 983 National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview 199 place and in museum professionals heritage damages’ evaluation that is made by museum professionals, usually conservators.

Heritage crimes prevention

People's security, life and welfare are the top priorities for Finnish police. Cultural heritage is recognized as society's important cultural resource, but cultural heritage is not prioritized in the common police practice so that for example heritage site’s and collection’s vandalism cases would be investigated thoroughly. This may result that there is not enough high probability of being cathead from heritage site’s vandalism. This may encourage some people to continue their vandalism that aim at cultural heritage sites and objects. Police has co-operated in significant heritage sites security planning. This has meant that when significant heritage sites are identified the regional police department does in co-operation with other regional authorities and the heritage sites owners security plan for the heritage site.984

It is possible that criminality that occurs in association with cultural heritage such as vandalism, arsons and heritage objects’ larcenies have similar kinds of psychological reasons than in general have observed to be as background factors in all criminal behavior. Means of social and welfare services may represent significant measures that can have an impact on heritage site’s vandalism and arson reduction. Well-functioning welfare and social services can represent means to prevent heritage site’s vandalism and arson cases.985

Crime prevention programs represent important means to prevent crimes such as vandalism and arsons also those that aim at cultural heritage. Finnish Ministry of Justice had by the year 2010 arranged in different parts of Finland crime prevention projects that concentrated on both young people’s thefts and also on campaigns against school bullying. The bullying prevention projects at Finnish schools were not only aimed at school bullying defeat. Through these projects tried also to prevent creation of criminal behavior and to stop young people’s later criminal activities. Crime prevention work should start in the early childhood stage in order to be effective.986

Social equality of the society can be understood as means to prevent crimes also those that aim at cultural heritage. Jaana Haapasalo suggests that increase of equality in society trough providing equal possibilities for everybody to build their life represents effective means to prevent crimes, also those that aim at cultural heritage. Factors that may have possibility to prevent crimes are overall democracy and equality of all people.987

Education and awareness-rising may represent possible means to prevent criminality that aim at cultural heritage. According to Jaana Haapasalo awareness-rising could prevent some peoples acts of vandalism and criminality that aim at cultural heritage, but there are

984 Police University College 12.1.2012: Specialists teem interview 985 Haapasalo 12.12.2011: Specialists teem interview 986 Haapasalo 12.12.2011: Specialists teem interview 987 Haapasalo 12.12.2011: Specialists teem interview 200 also people who just wish to destroy things and to express their aggressions. These people do not care whether or not they destroy something valuable such as cultural heritage.988

Prevention of fires

According to the Fire and Rescue Service’s specialists the Finnish fire departments, police and social sector has made co-operation in the field of arson prevention. This means that when a young person is couth on arson attempt or lighting of fire, they have a meeting with police's, fire department's and social service’s representatives. This young person or child is directed to receive health care. Aim is to prevent future arsons committed by this young person.989

Use of Fire and Rescue Services authorities in educating children and young people about fires and arsons can be seen as fire risk reduction work. The Fire departments have made visits to the kindergartens and schools to educate children and young people about arsons and fires impacts to the society and people's lives. There has also been special fire safety projects where fire departments have been involved.990

According to the interviewed Fire department’s specialist the Finnish society's overall awareness in fire safety issues has risen. This has resulted that the overall safety of heritage sites has improved largely because of developed technical fire alarm systems and improved disaster prevention work. This research’s disaster cases also support the importance of the automatic fire alarm systems.991

The museum professionals’ dialogue with the Fire and Rescue Service's authorities has provided new information for the museum professionals’ use. This dialogue has developed heritage authorities’ disaster management guidance work. Co-operation has revealed what improvements should be done in heritage authorities’ disaster planning guidance in order to improve heritage site’s disaster planning.992

Disasters often activate regional disaster prevention work and disaster planning improvements are made. Objective is to prevent further heritage disasters. Disasters such as fires often increase heritage site’s owners and in general peoples’ interest in fire and safety questions. Also Fire and Rescue Service’s own fire inspections have activated after church arson and concentrated on examination of the potential fire risk sources of heritage buildings that the occurred fire had revealed. For example in Porvoo it was observed that when an old building burned down in Porvoo old town, local people became very interested in improving their houses fire safety. Also the fire department started to examine in which

988 Haapasalo 12.12.2011: Specialists teem interview 989 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s preparedness unite 8.1.2012: Specialists teem interview 990 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s preparedness unite 8.1.2012: Specialists teem interview 991 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s preparedness unite 8.1.2012: Specialists teem interview 992 Finnish National Board of Antiquities, Department for Built History 27.4.2011: Specialists teem interview 201 condition the heritage site’s old fire places were. The fire at the Porvoo cathedral resulted that people became very interested in fire safety and security questions in the region.993

Heritage site’s fires were often approached like any other fire in 2000’s Finland. In such regional fire departments that have experience in heritage site’s fire extinguishing and that have developed and trained in heritage site’s disaster response further training is not that much needed.994 It is possible that part of the heritage fire’s disaster response development can be done through fire departments routine activities. According to the interviewed fire department's employee the disaster response in heritage sites would be improved if the fire departments would do more operative fire inspections and visits to their region's museums and other heritage site before any disaster takes place.995

Development work in disaster response occurs often after disaster when practical problems have observed during disaster response work. During the fire extinguishing of Porvoo Cathedral the regional fire department almost had shortage of extinguishing water, therefore the fire department arranged shortly after the Porvoo Cathedral arson a large fire exercise where regional and voluntary fire department trained extra water resourcing from the Porvoo river during a large fire in Porvoo old town. This disaster model has also been topic of one fire officer's final thesis at the Emergency Services College. Also the voluntary fire department received the needed fire truck type that could be used in water pumping from the river. Regional fire and rescue services development work has based on practical co-operation with heritage site’s owners and visits to the heritage sites.996

Heritage site’s disaster response could improve if heritage site's owners would do a one-page instruction or check list for the fire department for emergency situations. This instruction page would improve heritage damage’s prevention in disaster response situations during the first minutes and hours before the heritage site's representatives arrive at the disaster site to give information and instructions for the fire department.997

The fire extinguishing methods that have been used also in heritage sites fire extinguishing have improved trough the overall technical development of fire safety industry. New fire extinguishing equipment have made it possible to use effectively small amount of water in fire extinguishing. This has reduced water damages that water-based fire extinguishing has caused also in heritage sites. The Emergency Services College has central role when new fire extinguishing methods are brought into professional fire department's disaster response work. The young firemen who have recently graduated from the school provide new knowledge and fire extinguishing methods for the fire extinguishing work in Finland. Regional disaster response management and development work base on strongly local fire departments regular annual training.998

993 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s preparedness unite 8.1.2012: Specialists teem interview 994 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s operative unite 4.5.2011: Specialists teem interview 995 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s operative unite 4.5.2011: Specialists teem interview 996 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s operative unite 4.5.2011: Specialists teem interview 997 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s operative unite 4.5.2011: Specialists teem interview 998 Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s preparedness unite 8.1.2012: Specialists teem interview 202

Voluntary fire departments have had significant role in such heritage site’s disaster response work that situate further away from the cities where professional fire departments locate. In these cases where voluntary fire departments have succeeded to extinguish a fire at early stages in heritage site had an automatic fire alarm systems. This research’s fire based disasters indicate that the fast and on time disaster response requires both functioning fire alarm system that is able to detect the fire at the early stage and the disaster site situates in such conurbation area where the voluntary fire department can be alarmed about the fire quickly.

Especially in church arson’s case the geographical location of the heritage site and the Fire and Rescue Services stand by time to the disaster site has its impact on how quickly the fire extinguishing is starting at the disaster site and how well disaster response is able to minimize fire-based damages in cultural heritage during the fire and fire extinguishing. Evangelical Lutheran Church’s parishes had in 2000’s rather often financial possibilities to make the needed technical security investments in post-disaster situations. For example rather small parishes had possibilities to increase the technical security of the church building with their own funding or with the Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Church Counsel’s financial aid.999

7.3 Heritage disasters impact on heritage deterioration

Trough the researched disaster cases there were four disaster types that caused damages in cultural heritage. These disaster types were: 1. vandalism based damages, 2. accident based fires and arsons, 3. explosion based damages and 4. accident based water damages. In vandalism based disasters primary damages could be grouped under four different damage categories: 1. braking and tearing of cultural heritage, 2. modifying of cultural heritage, 3. spray painting of cultural heritage and 4. trashing at the heritage site. Only spray painted cultural heritage materials deterioration could continue and cause secondary cleaning based damages in cultural heritage materials. Accident based fires and arsons caused as primary damages in cultural heritage burning, shoot and smoke based damages. These fire based damages could cause in cultural heritage materials chemical degradation that was caused by fire’s toxic gases and heath. First stage fire extinguishing could cause humidity and water based damages in cultural heritage materials. Water damages disaster response and heritage recovery work could cause as secondary heritage damages mechanical damaging, deformation and molding.

Explosion based primary damages were caused by explosion’s air wave that caused braking of constructions and museum exhibition showcases braking. Explosions caused in cultural heritage objects dents, scratches and mechanical damages that were caused by

999 Church Counsel of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland 23.12.2011: Specialists teem interview 203 collapsing exhibition showcases. Burglary protected showcase glasses were able to minimize the damages that explosion caused in exhibition showcases and in cultural heritage objects. Accident based water damages were caused by technical errors or natural force based floods. The primary damages that water damages caused were wetting of materials. Unsuccessful disaster response and heritage recovery work could lead to secondary damages such as mechanical damaging, deformation and molding of cultural heritage materials.

This research’s disaster cases indicate that cultural appreciations and heritage values had an impact on economic resourcing of cultural heritage management in 1990s and 2000s Finland. When heritage site’s owner and the society did not clearly identify cultural heritage’s value also the economic resources were small in heritage’s management both before and after the disaster. Identified cultural heritage value had its impact this way also in the success of the disaster response and heritage recovery work. Economic resourcing had its influence into how well cultural heritage’s owner organization had possibility to maintain their cultural heritage in basic collection management perspective such as documentation and disaster planning. Economic resources influenced into heritage management’s material and personnel resources. These resources had a clear impact on disaster response and heritage recovery work.

Both the material-technical features of cultural heritage and the occurred disaster type result in what kind of primary damages disasters cause in cultural heritage. Also, the place where cultural heritage is situated in disaster situation has relevant meaning in disaster situations. Heritage’s secondary damages and deterioration is caused by the events that take place in post-disaster situations. Secondary damages are influenced by cultural heritage’s material-technical character and events that take place after the disasters. Means of disaster response and heritage recovery after disaster may either minimize further deterioration of cultural heritage or result in continuing of heritage’s deterioration.

Cultural heritage’s damaging during disasters is influenced by cultural heritage, disaster site and the disaster type. The material and technical aspects of cultural heritage and the scale of the disaster have significant impact on heritage’s deterioration in disaster situations. During disaster response process cultural heritage’s damaging depends on the scale of the occurred disaster, means of heritage recovery and the available resources in heritage recovery work. In post-disaster phase heritage recovery’s damages depends on chosen heritage recovery methods and available material and personnel resources. Secondary heritage damages depend on how effective heritage recovery methods are from the perspective of collection damages prevention.

Heritage disasters often lead to primary heritage damages that the actual disaster and immediate disaster response work causes such as fires cause smoke, shoot and burning damages. The secondary heritage damages are caused by first stage disaster response and heritage recovery work. For example in fire situations fire extinguishing can cause water and humidity based damages. This may lead to secondary mechanical and biological heritage damages that the water damaged material’s ineffective drying may cause.

204

When the researched disasters were compared with Robert Waller’s Cultural Property Risk Analyses Model (CPRAM) it was observed that the disaster response decisions that lead to successful heritage recovery process and small scale secondary heritage damages based on good economic resources that provided the needed resources for heritage recovery on time and qualified professionals co-operation during disaster response and heritage recovery work. There was linkage between cultural heritage’s recognized cultural value and the economic resourcing in heritage’s management before the disaster, in disaster situation and in heritage recovery process. Economic resources had an impact on material and personnel resources especially during the disaster response and heritage recovery work. Those cultural heritage’s owners that had among their employees trained conservators succeeded to organize and execute disaster response and heritage recovery rather quickly after the disaster.

It was observed that actively working disaster organization was able to protect both heritage items and the heritage site quickly after the disaster. This possibly minimized the damages that the disaster caused in cultural heritage. Effective disaster response work in heritage sites requires existing disaster plans that contain some kind of operational models how to recover cultural heritage in post-disaster situations. For example after Valvilla Wool Mill museum archives’ fire spontaneously made first stage disaster response and heritage recovery approach based on unrealistic evaluation how to recover the large water damaged collections during the disaster response and heritage recovery work. In fire based disaster’s case water and humidity damaged collection’s recovery and drying should start as quickly as possible after the fire extinguishing. All delays in the drying process increase the risk of secondary heritage damages such as molding.

In one disaster case occurred disaster activated radical real estate development needs that were in conflict with cultural heritage’s preservation. This was the case of Kaivoksela church arson. Because Federation of Vantaa Parishes had no need for church building in Kaivoksela preparation were made for tearing down the arson church. In this case the memory of the arson church was tried to preserve trough moving the Kaivoksela church bells into another chapel of the same Federation of Parishes and trough moving of the preserved heritage objects to the parish’s main church.

In those cases where heritage recovery based on memory institutions co-operation with conservation specialist that were part of the institutions own co-operation network heritage recovery could start rather quickly after the disaster response. This resulted that both the needed facilities and personnel resources for heritage recovery were effectively found trough these co-operation network. Small scale collection’s water damage required less storage facilities. Prioritizing in heritage recovery resulted effective use of economic funds. Impact of good co-operation networks resulted that conservation professionals, who were familiar with the heritage site’s owner helped the disaster site's owner organizations personnel to plan collection recovery.

Insurance questions influenced into the possibilities to do collection recovery, especially when the insurance compensation was low. In these cases possibilities to do 205 disaster response depended on the owners existing funds that could be used for disaster response and heritage recovery work. This had its impact on heritage’s deterioration.

Even the most important memory institutions in Finland do not themselves own all of the needed equipment that are used in large scale water damages disaster response and heritage recovery. This causes some delays in water damage’s heritage recovery work. For example in the Finnish National Library’s case the library did not own the dehumidifiers that were needed in water damages disaster response work. The library rented dehumidifiers when the water damage occurred. The library had some material resources ready for water damage’s response and heritage recover work. This made disaster response and heritage recovery work more effective after water damages.

In those cases were cultural heritage’s owner organization had minimal financial resources for the disaster response work in acute disaster situation and did not have any employees who had conservators’ training had to acquire professional help or expertise trough their professional networks from conservators who were willing to advise them voluntary in the disaster response work. This caused difficulties in heritage recovery work and lead to secondary heritage damages in post-disaster situations.

In acute disaster situation the heritage sites owner organization and its employees received often mental support from the surrounding society and this good will also in some cases lead to voluntary based work that promoted the heritage recovery process. Use of voluntary workers in large scale heritage disasters recovery could increase the effectivity of heritage recovery work especially in water damage cases.

In water damage cases the primary objective of the disaster response was to dry the water damaged materials. Drying of the wet archival material aimed at minimal secondary heritage damages that could be caused by humidity and biological deterioration such as molding. When the museum’s disaster plan did not contain collection’s preliminary prioritizing for disaster situations, the disaster response and heritage recovery processes’ collection prioritizing based on randomly made decisions and collections overall condition in post-disaster situation.

Unplanned and spontaneously decided disaster response and heritage recovery process increased probability of secondary heritage damages in post-disaster phase. This can be seen for example in the fire of Valvilla Wool Mill museum’s archives. Because the collection’s aftercare methods were not planned, in crises situation spontaneously chosen collection’s recovery method, air drying, was chosen because it was easy to acquire and cheap to use in water damage’s heritage recovery. Spontaneously applied air drying did not contain all of the methodological features that could have increased the collection’s drying process such as dehumidifiers and wind tunnels. Also use of air drying in large water damaged archival collection’s recovery so that the entire collection tried to dry as a whole did not prove to be effective. This resulted that large secondary damages in archival collection could not be prevented, because the collection’s items did not dry fast enough. Secondary damages could be seen in objects mechanical and biological damages that resulted loss of both archival documents and their cultural historical value. 206

207

8 CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

Trough the researched disaster cases it is possible to conclude that the means that can be used to prevent heritage disasters may base on both technical security systems and on more indirect means to prevent heritage disasters such as functioning social services, crime prevention programs and education. Because it is possible that criminality that aims at cultural heritage (heritage objects larcenies, vandalism and church arson) have same kind of sociological backgrounds than crimes in general it is possible that by increasing the resourcing in general crime prevention programs and prevention of social exclusion also crimes that aim at cultural heritage can be reduced.

One of this research’s findings related to cultural heritage education’s use in heritage disasters prevention through basic awareness rising and trough projects in which local communities different age groups, especially children’s and young’s, engagement with cultural heritage is increased from the stake holder approach. These educational measures may increase the overall safety cultural heritage.

Trough the researched disaster cases it was also observed that it is possible to prevent or to reduce cultural heritage’s deterioration in disaster situations with the means of disaster planning and risk assessment work. In disaster situations disaster response and heritage recovery methods influenced into heritage’s secondary damaging. It can be concluded that planned disaster response and heritage recovery models would have made heritage recovery more effective in disaster situations. This could have prevented or minimized heritage’s further deterioration in disaster and post-disaster situations.

Previous research used as theoretical background in this research’s data analyses show that many research findings that have been made on heritage disasters earlier especially in vandalism and arson cases but also in water damage cases were found also in this research’s data findings. This research support the earlier research findings made on vandalism, arsons and water damages.

Research on heritage collection’s water damages show that freezing and controlled air- drying methods were commonly used in USA and in Canada in 1990’s and 2000’s. The operational models in disaster response and heritage recovery work were also well developed at that time in USA and in Canada. In Finland there were no existing operational models for large scale heritage disasters’ response and heritage recovery work. This resulted that operational models were often spontaneously made on the bases of easily acquirable material and personnel resources. Air drying of entire water damaged collection in post disaster phase was the most common disaster response approach in this research’s water damage cases. Only in one case, Finnish literature society’s library collection’s recovery were used cold storage means in order to dry the material in smaller quantities.

International research that concentrates on natural hazard disasters concentrate on earth quake, storm and flood-based disasters. This research’s natural force based water 208 damages were caused by heavy rains and floods in urban environments. Based on the research in Finland’s climate storm and heavy rain based floods represented between 1990 and 2010 the grates natural disaster risk that aimed at cultural heritage.

Previous research on deliberate deterioration of cultural heritage with the means of vandalism and arsons is strongly connected with studies on heritage’s deliberate destruction during armed conflicts and terrorist attacks. This research’s disaster cases reveal image of deliberately damaged or destroyed cultural heritage that one person or small group of people choose to target destructive actions.

It seems that vandalism that aims at cultural heritage challenges both memory institutions and cultural heritage’s existence. Although these actions have not always caused major damages or total destruction of cultural heritage they have modified and changed the physical appearance of heritage objects or sites. This research’s vandalism and arson cases show Brian Grahams and Peter Howard’s observations true that both insiders and outsiders have their part in cultural heritage process. Question is how memory institutions could engage and provide services for also people who perhaps belong to marginal social groups and perhaps have somehow excluded from society’s life. How could cultural heritage become less powerful manifestation of values and increasingly meaningful cultural remain from the past for all people?

In Finland participatory based conservation processes have not been commonly used in conservation practice. Participatory based conservation processes have been internationally used to gain more sustainable conservation treatments. Participatory based conservation processes should be tried to use in vandalized cultural heritage site’s conservation. This could possibly reduce the risks of heritage’s deliberate destruction in the future.

If heritage interpretations are created in people’s interaction with their material environment, what kind of heritage interpretation is being established in the act of vandalism? What kind of relative meanings cultural heritage’s deliberate destruction has? Researched cases indicate that in the cases when heritage sites have been intentionally damaged or destroyed the triggering factor for destructive actions may relate to obvious institutional and authority powers presence at the heritage sites. Although heritage is not perhaps being destroyed because it represents cultural heritage, the destruction may relate to individual persons resistance and demonstrations against the nation state, authorities and institutions. The way heritage sites for example modify the environment may represent triggering factor when criminal damaging and vandalism is aimed at heritage site. Memory institutions’ and authorities’ strong role is present when for example archeological excavations are done, when archeological remains are restored and supported, when vegetation that could deteriorate the site is removed and when the heritage site’s visitor infrastructures are built. These actions that change the outlook of the site have observed sometimes to start some people’s destructive actions that aim at the heritage site. Does continuing heritage site’s vandalism problem indicate some kind of place attachment featured feelings in the person who chose to deteriorate the same cultural heritage site? How 209 could these place attachment feelings be used in more constructive interaction with cultural heritage?

The process of displacement and social exclusion is present in human society’s collective memory and whether or not people have or do not have their representatives in the official collective memory discourse, they are one way or another present in this cultural heritage discourse.1000 Does this mean that deliberate destruction of cultural heritage represents visible reaction towards displacement in the cultural heritage context? This research’s disaster cases indicate increase of cultural individualism, existence of cultural conflicts and lack of collective engagement with cultural heritage. The responsibility to care for cultural heritage lies side by side with the institutional bodies whose traditional role in heritage’s management and administration has been contested by individuals or small groups of people.

Dimensions where aesthetic and cultural heritage education could be used in heritage disaster’s prevention are not easily shown valid and reliable means to prevent heritage disasters. Educational methods that could have an impact in disaster prevention may relate to reduction of the power relation questions of cultural heritage that relate to increase of peoples’ overall heritage literacy skills and engagement with cultural heritage through increased possibilities to influence into the heritage definition and management processes.

Common features of this research’s accident based disasters were that they have taken place very suddenly and they also show that external factors such as human’s actions in cultural heritage’s surroundings may cause uncontrolled and hardly manageable threats towards cultural heritage. These cases also indicate that in contemporary Finland human activities that take place close to cultural heritage create more significant threat towards cultural heritage than purely natural force based threats. Currently water damages that are caused by storms and floods seem to create most common natural disaster based threat for cultural heritage in Finland.

The central risks that aim at cultural heritage in contemporary Finland perhaps do not centrally base on strong natural hazards such as earth quakes or tornados, although floods, storms and thunderstorms that take place in wrong place at a wrong time may cause catastrophic and severe damages for some heritage sites or collections. This research data shows that the central risk that aim at Finnish cultural heritage perhaps currently and in the near future could be caused by individual people and small groups of people who perhaps suffer from social exclusion and end up to radicalize in the Finnish society and start to aim their destructive actions at cultural heritage. Behavioural models for high profile heritage sites’ destruction are available through media globally because of contemporary terrorist movements that aim their terror also against cultural heritage.

Concept of accessibility in cultural heritage’s case should not only be seen as physical factor also mental accessibility should be noticed. Concept of accessibility of cultural heritage should also mean educating people cultural and heritage literacy skills and providing people possibility to make up their own visions and opinion about the past that

1000 Buciek & Juul 2008, 105 210 cultural heritage mediates. Cultural heritage education is needed to understand source critically heritage and its contexts. Museum professionals further training is needed to improve heritage site’s disaster planning, disaster response and heritage recovery work. Information should be provided to the cultural heritage owners over disaster planning, disaster response and heritage recovery work.

Because case study cannot produce generalizable information about research topics, also this research provides information about the researched topic in specific socio-cultural context. This research provides information about the mechanisms and processes that influence behind these heritage disasters. Even if this research’s results may represent valid and reliable results that can contain high trustworthiness, it is possible that research results are not reproducible because of research conditions’ contextual reasons. It is possible that this research’s results are partly reproducible in similar research conditions. Different philosophical approaches were used to develop research approach for analyzes of this research’s data. The used research methods influence into the validity and reliability of this research. Since there is no absolute truth and foundation for scientific knowledge the subjectivity and the objectivity aspects of this research were examined in order to increase the reflexivity of this research.

In the question of qualitative research, the reliability of the research has been evaluated trough the systematics of the research. Systematics in qualitative research mean that the entire research process including the made decisions are documented and opened up for the readers of the research. This research tried to increase the research results reliability trough systematic documentation of the research process. Limitations of the used research data based on the fact that only part of the disaster cases were well documented after the disasters. The reconstructed vision of the disaster cases based centrally on what the heritage sites owners told during the interviews. The fact that only six of the disaster cases’ trial convictions were available and the analyzed news articles covered only part of the disaster cases may increase the uncertainty of the research data. The research results that were drafted from the research data are evaluated to be valid, because the research results were drafted from the data with the means of used theoretical frames, research questions and analyses methods. This research’s validity bases on systematics and argumentation that supported the conclusion that accurate research data was analyzed with proper means to fulfill the research objectives and questions. The fact, that the used five research data represent primary information sources and these sources do not base on each other, increases this research’s reliability and validity.

Because this research’s topic has not been earlier researched, it can be admitted that this research’s qualitative content analyses’ inductive argumentation may have weaknesses in the area of detecting all possible variables that have influenced into the researched disaster cases. Therefore, use of inductive argumentation in this research bases on strong level of probability that it is unlikely that these conclusions proves to be false.

This research could reflect answers to the research questions and the research succeed in solving most of the research problems. The greatest limitations that the research approach contained related to the width of the research data and research approach that contained 211 many disasters and disaster types. If the researched disaster cases would have concentrated only on arson, vandalism or accident based heritage disasters the research data could perhaps been more easy to analyze. On the other hand the width of the used research data can also be seen as strength of this research. The made analyses and received research results cover different kinds of heritage disasters. This increases the reliability of the research results.

Trough the documented and analyzed heritage disasters this research increases the basic information about heritage disasters and these disasters response and heritage recovery work in peace time society. The research produces information especially about church arsons, cultural heritage’s vandalism cases and accident based heritage disasters. This research also documents different disaster response and heritage recovery processes. Trough this documentation it was possible to identify factors that supported successful disaster response and heritage recovery work and promoted heritage damage’s prevention. Through research results it is possible to start to develop heritage sites’ disaster planning, risk management, disaster response and heritage recovery process. This development work could increase heritage site’s overall preparedness for disasters and accidents.

Future research topics that this research rose related to public engagements impact on heritage site’s deliberate destruction. Another research topic related to water damaged collections heritage recovery work and mold contaminated heritage objects disinfection and cleaning processes. Research on public engagement’s impact on heritage sites vandalism is needed in order to develop new measures to protect heritage sites especially archeological cultural heritage in urban environments. Library and archival collections water damages challenge cultural heritage’s long term preservation. Effective heritage recovery measures should be researched and mold contaminated collection’s cleaning and disinfection processes should be researched more thoroughly in order to develope more effective measures to clean mold contaminated heritage collections.

212

REFERENCES

I PUBLISHED SOURCES

ABDEL-KAREEM, Omar 2010: Fungal deterioration of historical textiles and approaches for their control in Egypt. e-PRESERVATIONScience, Volume 7. Morana.RTD d.o.o. Pp: 40-47

ALCÁNTARA, Rebeca 2002: Standards in preventive conservation: Meaning and Applications. ICCROM, Location: 7-8, 12. Available online at http://www.iccrom.org/pdf/ICCROM_04_StandardsPreventiveConser_en.pdf (accessed 04/10/2012).

ALEXANDERSSON, Kerstin & KARLSFORS, Anette 2002: Kyrkan brinner! Vad händer sedan? Rapport från Riksantikvarieämbetet 2004:2. Riksantikvarieämbetet. Sweden.

APPIAH, Kwame Anthony 2012: Whose Culture Is It? In book: Cuno, James (ed.) 2012: Whose Culture? : the promise of museums and the debates over antiquities. Princeton University Press. New Jersey, USA. Second edition in 2012. First published in 2009.

ARVIDSON, Magnus 2006: An overview of fire protection of Swedish wooden churches. Brandforsk project 500-061. SP Swedish National Testing and Research Institute. SP Fire Technology. SP REPORT 2006:42. Borås, Sweden.

ARONSSON, Peter 2010: Uses of the Past; Nordic Historical Cultures in a Comparative Perspective. Culture Unbound – Journal of Current Cultural Research, Volume 2, 2010. Pp. 553–563. Linköping University Electronic Press. Accessed in: 15.10.2015. Available online at: [ http://www.cultureunbound.ep.liu.se ]

ASHLEY-SMITH, Jonathan 1999: Risk Assessment for Object Conservation. Butterworth-Heinemann. Biddles Ltd. Oxford, Great Britain.

AVRAMI, Erica 2000: Values and Heritage Conservation. Conservation, The Getty Conservation Institute Newsletter Vol. 15 2/2000. The Getty Conservation Institute. Los Angeles, USA

BARTKOWSKI, John P & HOWELL, Frank M & LAI, Shu-Chuan 2002: Spatial Variations in Church Burnings: The Social Ecology of Victimized Communities in the 213

South. Royal Sociology 67 (4), 2002, pp. 578-602. The Royal Sociological Society. United Kingdom.

BLACKING, John 1990: Culture and the arts. In book: Swanwick, Keith (ed.1990): Arts and Education – Papers from the National Association for Education in Arts 1983- 1990. NAEA. United Kingdom. Pp: 82-83, 88.

BLOOM, Erica & MUST, Aime & ÅMAND, Linda & PEITZSCH, Mirko & LARSSON, Lennart 2010: Sanering av mögelskador - SBUF rapport nr 12079, Mögelsaneringsmetoders effektivitet. B1898. Maj 2010. IVL Svenska Miljöinstitutet AB.

von BONSDORFF, Pauline 1996a: Tapauksen opetus – huuto, joka muuttuu lauluksi. In book: von BONSDORFF, Pauline (ed. 1996): Ympäristöestetiikan polkuja. International Institute of Applied Aesthetics Series Vol. 2. Gummerus kirjapaino Oy. Pp:

von BONSDORFF, Pauline 1996b: Place of Change. In book: von BONSDORFF, Pauline (ed. 1996): Ympäristöestetiikan polkuja. International Institute of Applied Aesthetics Series Vol. 2. Gummerus kirjapaino Oy. Pp:

von BONSDORFF, Pauline 1998a: Hav och sten – naturens och kulturens växelverkan på Sveaborg. In book: af HÄLLSTRÖM, Magdalena & SARANTOLA-WEIS, Minna (ed. 1998). Sveaborg – Samtiden och Eftervärlden – Bidrag till Sveaborgs historia VI. Samfundet Ehrensvärd r.f. Miktor Oy. Pp:

von BONSDORFF, Pauline 1998b: The Human Habitat – Aesthetic and Axiological Perspectives. International Institute of Applied Aesthetics Series Vol 5. Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy. Jyväskylä, Finland.

von BONSDORFF, Pauline 2002: Maisema elintilana. In book: Pitkänen, Inkeri and Rahikainen Esko (ed. 2002): Suomalainen maisema – maisemantutkimuksen näkökulmia. Kansalliskirjaston Gallerian julkaisuja Nro. 1. Finland

BROOKS, Mary M. 2014: ‘Indisputable authenticity’: engaging with the real in the museums. GORDON, Rebecca & HERMENS, Erma & LENNARD, Frances (ed.) 2014: Authenticity and Replication – The ‘Real Thing’ in Art and Conservation. Proceedings of the International Conference held at the University of Glasgow, 6-7 December 2012. Archetype Publications. Great Britain, Plymouth. Pp: 3-12.

BRUNILA, Mikael & RANTA, Kukka & VIREN, Eetu 2011: Muutaman töhryn tähden – Helsingin töhrysota 1998-. Into Kustannus Oy, Helsinki. InPrint, Riika, Latvia.

BURSELL, Barbro 2004: Professionalising collecting. In book: KNELL, Simon J. (ed. 2004): Museums and the future of collecting. Second edition. Ashgate Publishing Limited. Great Britain. Pp: 204-210.

214

CAMUFFO, Dario & BERTOLIN, Chiara 11.10.2012: Towards Standardisation of moisture content measurement in cultural heritage materials. e-Preservation Sciense, 2012, Issue 9. Pp: 23-35. Published by MORANA RTD d.o.o. Accessed in: 1.2.2017. Available in: [ http://www.morana-rtd.com/e-preservationscience/2012/Camuffo-01-06-2012.pdf ]

CECCATO, Vania & HAINING, Robert 2005: Assessing the Geography of Vandalism: Evidence from a Swedish City. Urban Studies, Vol. 42, No. 9. Pp: 1637–1656. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. United Kingdom.

CHECHI, Alessandro 2015: Rescuing Cultural Heritage from War and Terrorism: A View from Switzerland. Santander Art and Culture Law Review, Volume 1, Number 2. Santander Group. Pp: 83-100

CHRISTENSEN, Elizabeth 1995: Is the Lutheran Church still the state church? An analysis of church-state relations in Finland. Brigham Young University Law Review, Vol. 1995 Issue 2. The United States of America. Pp: 585-601

CHRISTOFFERSEN, L. D. 1995: ZEPHYR – Passive climate controlled repositories – Storage facilities for museum, archive and library purposes. Birch & Krogboe A/S Consultants & Planners, Lund University, Department of Building Physics. Rapport TVBH-3028. Pp: 27, 29-30, 34.

CLAYTON, Nikki 2004: Folk devils in our midst? Collecting from “deviant” groups. In book: KNELL, Simon J. (ed.) 2004: Museums and the future of collecting. Second edition. Ashgate Publishing Limited. Great Britain. 146-154.

CLOONAN, Michéle, V. 2007a: The Moral Imperative to Preserve. Library trends, Vol. 55, No. 3, Winter 2007, pages: 746-755, The Board of Trustees, University of Illinois.

CLOONAN, Michéle, V. 2007b: The Paradox of Preservation. Library trends, Vol. 56, No. 1, Summer 2007, pages: 133-147, The Board of Trustees, University of Illinois.

CONSTANTINOU, Costas, M. & HATAY, Mete 2010: Cyprus, ethnic conflict and conflicted heritage. Ethnic and Radical Studies, Vol. 33 No. 9, October 2010, Pp. 1600-1619. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. United Kingdom.

COOPER, Martha & CHALFANT, Henry 1996: Subway Art. Thames and Hudson Ltd. London.

DAHLIN, Elin 2002: Preventive conservation strategies of organic objects in museums, historic buildings and archives. Conference paper. 5th European Commission Conference. May 16-18 2002, Cracow Poland. Institute of Catalysis and Surface Chemistry. Polish Academy of Sciences. Pages: 57-60 Available in address: [ http://www.cyf- kr.edu.pl/~ncbratas/pdf/full_dahlin.pdf ]

215

DARDES, Kathleen & DRUZIK, James 2000: Managing the Environment – An Update on Preventive Conservation. Conservation, The Getty Conservation Institute Newsletter Vol. 15 2/2000. The Getty Conservation Institute. Los Angeles, USA

DE LIMA PROCÓPIO, Rudi Emerson & DA SILVA, Ingrid Reis & MARTINS, Mayra Kassawara & DE AZEVEDO, João Lúcio & DE ARAÚJO, Janete Magali 2012: Antibiotics produced by Streptomyces. The Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases, Volume 16, Issue 5, September–October 2012. Pp: 466-471

DENZIN, Norman K. & LINCOLN, Yvonna S. 2000: Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research. In book: DENZIN, Norman K. & LINCOLN, Yvonna S. (ed.) 2000: Handbook of Qualitative Research. Second edition. Sage Publications Inc. California, USA. ISBN 0-7619-1512-5

DEWEY, John 1916: Democracy and education – an introduction to the philosophy of education. Published in: 1996. The Free Press. New York, USA

DEWEY, John 1929: Pyrkimys varmuuteen. Original book: The Quest for Certainty – A Study of the Relation of Knowledge and Action. Finnish translation: Määttänen, P. (1999). Gaudeamus Helsinki University Press. Helsinki.

DICUS, Diana, Hobart 2000: One response to a collection-wide mold outbreak: How bad can it be - How good can it get? The Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, Vol 39, Number 1, Article 7. Available online at http://cool.conservation- us.org/jaic/articles/jaic39-01-007.html (accessed 07/26/2012)

DUCLOS, Rebecca 2004: The cartographies of collecting. KNELL, Simon J. (ed. 2004). Museums and the future of collecting. Second edition. Ashgate Publishing Limited. Great Britain. Pp. 84-101.

DUNN, Richard 2004: The future of collecting: lesions from the past. In book: KNELL, Simon J. 2004 (ed.): Museums and the future of collecting. Second edition. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Great Britain. Pp. 62-71.

EDSON, Gary 1997: Ethics and truth. In book: EDSON, Gary, (ed.) 1997: Museum ethics. Routledge, London, United Kingdom. Pp. 73-89

ELO, Satu & KÄÄRIÄINEN, Maria & KASTE, Outi & PÖLKKI, Tarja & UTRIAINEN, Kati & KYNGÄS, Helvi 2014: Qualitative Content Analysis: A Focus on Trustworthiness. SAGE Open. January- March 2014: 1-10. The United States of America. Accessed in 15.9.2015. Available in address: [ www.sgo.sagepub.com ] Pp: 1-10.

F́ATH, Ǵabor & SARVARY, Miklos 2004: A renormalization group theory of cultural evolution. Science direct. Physica A 348, 2005, Pp. 611-629. Received 21 September 2004. Available online 29 October 2004

216

FLORIAN, Mary-Lou E. 2000: Aseptic technique: a goal to strive for in collection recovery of moldy archival material and artifacts. Pp: 107-115. The Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, Volume 39, Number 1, Article 8. Available online at http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic39-01-008.html (accessed 07/26/2012)

FORNÄS, Johan 1998: Kulttuuriteoria – Myöhäismodernin ulottuvuuksia. Finnis translation: LEHTONEN, Mikko (ed. 1998). Vastapaino, Tampere.

FOUCAULT, Michel 1982: The Subject and Power. Critical Inquiry, Vol. 8 No: 4 (Summer, 1982). The University of Chicago Press. The United States of America. Accessed in 1.9.2015. Available in address: [ http://www.unisa.edu.au/Global/EASS/HRI/foucault_-_the_subject_and_power.pdf ] Pp: 777-795.

von FRANZ, Marie-Luise 1972: The process of individuation. In book: JUNG, Carl G. & von FRANZ, M.-L. ed. 1972: Man and his Symbols. Aldus Books. London. p. 158-229.

FROW, John 1995: Cultural Studies and Cultural Value. Oxford University press. United Kingdom.

GAMBONI, Dario 2001: World Heritage: Shield or Target? Conservation, The Getty Conservation Institute Newsletter Vol. 15 2/2000. The Getty Conservation Institute. Los Angeles, USA

GRAHAM, Brian & ASHWORTH, Gregory J. & TUNBRIDGE, John E. 2005: The uses and abuses of heritage. In book: CORSANE, Gerard (ed. 2005): Heritage, Museums and Galleries. Routledge. London, United Kingdom.

GRAHAM, Brian & HOWARD, Peter 2008: Introduction: Heritage and Identity. In book: GRAHAM, Brian & HOWARD, Peter (ed. 2008): Heritage and Identity. The Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Identity. Aldershot: Ashgate. Great Britain. Pp: 1-16.

GROOTE, Peter & HARTSEN, Tialda 2008: The Communication of Heritage: Creating Place Identities. In book: GRAHAM, Brian & HOWARD, Peter (ed. 2008): Heritage and Identity. The Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Identity. Aldershot: Ashgate. Great Britain. Pp: 181-194.

GUILD, Sherry & MACDONALD, Maureen 2004: Mould Prevention and Collection Recovery: Guidelines for Heritage Collections. Canadian Conservation Institute. Technical Bulletin No. 26.

HAAPASALO, Jaana 2008: Kriminaalipsykologia. PS-kustannus. Jyväskylä, Finland.

HALSEY, Mark & YOUNG, Alison 2002: The Meaning of Graffiti and Municipal Administration. The Australian and New Zeland Journal of Criminology. Volume 35, Number 2 2002. Pp: 165-186. 217

HARGROVE, Cheryl 2003: Authenticity in cultural heritage tourism. Reflections 34(4): 2. Available online at http://sohosandiego.org/reflections/2003-4/authenticity.htm (accessed 03/08/2012).

HARVEY, David C. 2008: The History of Heritage. In book: GRAHAM, Brian & HOWARD, Peter (ed. 2008): Heritage and Identity. The Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Identity. Aldershot, Ashgate. Great Britain. Pp: 19-36.

HAWKES, Terence (ed. 2003). General editor’s preface. In book: HOLUB, Robert C. 2003: Reception Theory – A critical introduction. Routledge. New York, USA. Pages: vii-viii

HIEKKANEN, Markus 2007: Suomen keskiajan kivikirkot. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran toimituksia 1117. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. Helsinki, Finland.

HOLTORF, Cornelius 2006: Can less be more? Heritage in the age of terrorism. Public Archaeology, Volume 5, No: 2/2006. Maney Publishing. United Kingdom.

ILMONEN, Kari 1992: Kulttuuripalvelujen käyttö ja kulttuuriarvostukset. Jyväskylän yliopisto, Chydenius-Instituutin tutkimuksia 1992/5.

von IMHOFF, Hans-Christoph 2009: "Aspects and Development of Conservator- Restorer’s Profession since WWII". e-conservation magazine Nro. 8 / 2009. (accessed 17.04.2012) Pp: 53-61.

JAFFÉ, Aniela 1972: Symbolism in the visual arts. In book: JUNG, Carl G. & von FRANZ, M.-L. ed. 1972: Man and his Symbols. Aldus Books. London. Pp. 230-271.

JEFFERSON, Tony 2004: From Cultural Studies to Psychosocial Criminology: An Intellectual Journey. In book: FERRELL, Jeff & HAYWARD, Keith & MORRISON, Wayne & PRESDEE, Mike 2004: Cultural Criminology Unleased. Glasshouse Press. Cavendish Publishing Limited. Great Britain. Pp. 29-40.

JOKILEHTO, Jukka 1999: History of Architectural Conservation. Butterworth- Heinemann series in conservation and museology. Butterworth-Heinemann publishing, Oxford, United Kingdom.

JOKILEHTO, Jukka 2000: ICCROM’s involvement in risk preparedness. The Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, Volume 39, Number 1, Article 14. Available online at http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic39-01-014.html (accessed 07/26/2012)

JOKILEHTO, Jukka & KING, Joseph 2000: Authenticity and Conservation: Reflections on the Current State of Understanding. In book: SAOUMA-FORERO, Galia (ed. 2000): 218

Authenticity and Integrity in an African Context. Expert Meeting – Great Zimbabwe 26-29 May 2000. (accessed 05.10.2015) Available in: [ http://whc.unesco.org/en/events/443/ ]

JOKILEHTO, Jukka (Selected by) 2005: Definition of Cultural Heritage. Reference to documents in history. ICCROM Working Group for “Heritage and Society”. (Originally for ICCROM in 1990). Revised for CIF: 15 January 2005. Page: 5. Available in address: http://cif.icomos.org/pdf_docs/Documents%20on%20line/Heritage%20definitions.pdf

JOKINEN, Heikki 1989: Onni on suuri valkoinen seinä. In book: PÖYSÄ, Jyrki (ed.) 1989: Betoni kukkii – kirjoituksia nykyperinteestä. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. Tietolipas 115, Helsinki

JONES, Ceri 2014: Bringing the past to life? Exploring the role of authenticity in developing young people’s historical understanding. GORDON, Rebecca & HERMENS, Erma & LENNARD, Frances (ed.) 2014: Authenticity and Replication – The ‘Real Thing’ in Art and Conservation. Proceedings of the International Conference held at the University of Glasgow, 6-7 December 2012. Archetype Publications. Great Britain, Plymouth. Pp. 131- 139.

JUNG, Carl G. 1972: Approaching the unconscious. In book: JUNG, Carl G. & von FRANZ, M.-L. ed. 1972: Man and his Symbols. Aldus Books. London. p. 18-103.

KALLIO, Kalle 2007: Museon yhteiskunnalliset tavoitteet. In book: KINANEN, Pauliina (ed. 2007): Museologia tänään. Suomen museoliiton julkaisuja 57. Suomen museoliitto. Helsinki, Finland. Pp:

KALLIONIEMI, Arto & LYHYKÄINEN, Kaarina 2008: Cultural heritage education in senior secondary schools – A Finnish perspective. In book: FERREIRA, Antonio Gomes & FELGUEIRAS, Margarida Louro (orgs. 2008): Buildings Telling European Heritage – Pedagogical Perspectives. EUBuildIT – A proposal for teachers and student. Colbra 2008. Pp: 107-119

KAVANAGH, Gaynor 2000: Dream Spaces – Memory and the Museum. Leicester University Press. Great Britain.

KAVANAGH, Gaynor 2004: Collecting from the era of memory, myth and delusion. In book: KNELL, Simon J. (ed. 2004): Museums and the future of collecting. Second edition. Ashgate Publishing Limited. Great Britain. Pp. 118-127.

KIDD, Stewart (ed.) 1995: Heritage Under Fire – A guide to the protection of historic buildings. Second edition. The Fire protection association for the UK Working Party on Fire safety in Historic Buildings. The Lavenham Press. Great Britain, Lavenham, Suffolk.

KEAN, Hilda 2008, Personal and Public Histories: Issues in the Presentation of the Past. In book: GRAHAM, Brian & HOWARD, Peter (ed. 2008): Heritage and Identity. The Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Identity. Aldershot, Ashgate. Great Britain. Pp: 55-70. 219

KLUNG, Nicole 2010: Protecting Antiquities and Saving the Universal Museum: A Necessary Compromise Between the Conflicting Ideologies of Cultural Property. Vol. 42: 711 Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, pp: 711-738.

KNELL, Simon. J. 2004: Altered values: searching for a new collecting. In book: KNELL, Simon. J. (ed. 2004): Museums and the future of collecting. Second edition. Ashgate Publishing Limited. Great Britain. Pp: 1-46

KOMONEN, Pauli 2012: Graffitimaalarin vaiheet alakulttuurissa ja toiminnan luonne. In book: SALASUO, Mikko & POIKOLAINEN, Janne & KOMONEN, Pauli (ed. 2012): Katukulttuuri Nuorisoesiintymiä 2000-luvun Suomessa. Nuorisotutkimusseuran/Nuorisotutkimusverkoston julkaisuja 124. Helsinki, Finland. Pp:

KORSELL, Lars & HEDLUND, Göran & ELWÉR, Sofia & VESTERHAV, Daniel & HEBER, Anita 2006: Cultural Heritage Crime – the Nordic Dimension, Report 2006:2. Brottsförebyggande rådet 2006. Edita Norstedts Tryckeri AB. Stockholm, Sweden.

KOSKELA, Hille & NURMINEN, Riikka 2010: Nollasta on pakko luopua: Jakomäen ilkivallanehkäisyprojekti paikallisena rikoksentorjuntahankkeena. Yhdyskuntasuunnittelun tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskuksen julkaisuja / Aalto yliopisto. Yliopistopaino. Espoo, Finland.

KOSKI, Sami & RISSANEN, Mika & TAHVANAINEN, Juha 2007: Hävityksen historiaa. Ateena kustannus Oy, Jyväskylä.

KORSELL, Lars & HEDLUND, Göran & ELWÉR, Sofia & VESTERHAV, Daniel & HEBER, Anita 2006: Cultural heritage crime – the Nordic dimensions. Report 2006: 2. Brå – Brottsförebyggande rådet. AGIS Programme, European Comission – Directorate General Justice, Freedom and Security. Edita Norstedts Tryckeri AB. Stockholm

KOSKELA, Hille & NURMINEN, Riikka 2010: “Nollasta on pakko luopua” Jakomäen ilkivallanehkäisyprojekti paikallisena rikostorjuntahankkeena. Yhdyskuntasuunnittelun tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskuksen julkaisuja. Aalto yliopisto, Teknillinen Korkeakoulu, Insinööritieteiden ja Arkkitehtuurin tiedekunta, Yhdyskuntasuunnittelun tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskus. Yliopistopaino. Espoo

LAITINEN, Ahti & AHONEN, Timo 2000: Tuhopolttojen ehkäisytoiminnasta eräissä maissa. Sisäasianministeriön Pelastusosaston julkaisuja 4/2000. Sisäasianministeriö. Helsinki, Finland.

LATVALA, Tero 2000: Aktivismin alkuvoimaa. Katsaus 1990-luvun nuorten maailmoihin. City of Helsinki, Urban Facts Study Reports 2000: 1. Helsingin kaupungin tietokeskus, Helsingin kaupungin nuorisokeskus. Helsinki.

220

LAURILA, Anu (ed.) 2004: Can we learn from the heritage lost in fire? – Experiences and practices on the fire protection of historic buildings in Finland, Norway and Sweden. Museovirasto, Museoviraston rakennushistorian osaston julkaisuja 26. Offset-Koppinen Oy. Helsinki, Finland.

LEHTONEN, Mikko 2000: Merkitysten maailma. 4. painos. Tampere, Finland, Vastapaino.

LAMBERT, Simon 2010: Italy and the history of preventive conservation. (Accessed in: 08.02.2012). Available in address: [ http://ceroart.revues.org/1707#tocto1n2 ]

LYOTARD, Jean-François 1985: Tieto Postmodernissa yhteiskunnassa. Translation in Finnish: LEHTO, Leevi. Name of the original publication: La condition postmoderne. Vastapaino. Gummerus Oy. Jyväskylä, Finland.

MACDONALD, Nancy 2002: The Graffiti Subculture. Youth, Masculinity and Identity in London and New York. Paperback. Palgrave Macmillan. Anthony Rowe Ltd. Great Britain.

MCDOWELL, Sara 2008: Heritage, Memory and Identity. In book: GRAHAM, Brian & HOWARD, Peter (ed. 2008): Heritage and Identity. The Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Identity. Aldershot, Ashgate. Great Britain. Pp: 37-54.

MELANKO, Kirsti & ELO, Pekka 2000: Kulttuuriperinnön arvot. Teoksessa: ELO, Pekka & JÄRNEFELT, Heljä & MELANKO, Kirsti (toim.) 2000: Kulttuuriperinnön kauneus, hyvyys ja totuus. Museovirasto, Opetushallitus ja Suomen UNSCO -toimikunta. Painopaikka: G. F. Lönnberg

MERRILLS, Andy H. 2009: The Origins of ‘Vandalism’. International Journal of the Classical Tradition, Vol. 16, No. 2, June 2009. Pp. 155-175. Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

MEZEY, Naomi 2007: The Paradoxes of Cultural Property. 107(2007) Columbia Law Review. pp. 2004-2046. Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works. Paper 899. Accessed in 27.8.2015. Available in address: [ http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/899/ ]

METSÄMUURONEN, Jari 2000: Laadullisen tutkimuksen perusteet – Metodologia - sarja 4. International Methelp Ky. Jaabes OÜ, Estonia.

MICHAELSEN, Astrid & PINZARI, Flavia & BARBABIETOLA, Nicoletta & PIÑAR, Guadalupe 2013: Monitoring the effects of different conservation treatments on paper- infected fungi. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, Number 84. Pp: 333-341.

221

MICHALSKI, Stephen 1990: An overall framework for preventive conservation and remedial conservation. ICOM-CC, 9th triennial meeting, Dresden, German Democratic Republic, 26-31 August 1990: preprints. ICOM-CC. Paris, France. Pp: 589-591

MICHALSKI, Stephen 2002: Double the life for each five-degree drop, more than double the life for each halving of relative humidity. ICOM-CC, 13th Trienniel Meeting, Rio de Janeiro, 22-27 September 2002: preprints, Volume 1. ICOM-CC. James & James publisher. United States. Pp: 66-72

MITIAS, Michael H. 1988: What makes an experience aesthetic? Elementa. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg. Rodopi, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

MOHR, Paula A. 2000: The Treasury Building Fire of 1996: Protecting Cultural Resources in a Nonmuseum Environment. The Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, Volume 39, Number 1, Article 4. Pp: 57-63. Available online at http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic39-01-004.html (accessed 07/26/2012)

MUNCH RASMUSSEN, Josephine 2014: Saving objects, securing collections – Motives and justifications for dealing, digging and collecting antiquities. University of Oslo, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Archeology, Conservation and History.

NORMAN, Kirsty 2000: The Retrieval of Kuwait National Museum’s Collections from Iraq: an Assessment of the Operation and Lessons Learned. The Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, Volume 39, Number 1, Article 11. Pp: 135-146. Available online at http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic39-01-011_indx.html (accessed 06/04/2017)

PEARCE, Susan 2004: Collections and collecting. In book: KNELL, Simon J. (ed. 2004): Museums and the future of collecting. Second edition. Ashgate Publishing Limited. Great Britain. Pp: 47-51.

PEITZSCH, Mirko & BLOOM, Erica & ROCCO, Haase & MUST, Aime & LARSSON, Lennart 2012: Remediation of Mould damaged building materials – efficiency of a broad spectrum of treatments. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 2012, Issue 14, Pp: 908-915. The Royal Society of Chemistry. United Kingdom, London.

PETZET, Mihael 2004: Principles of Preservation – An Introduction to the International Charters for Conservation and Restoration 40 Years after the Venice Charter. In book: PETZET, Michael & ZIESEMER, John (ed. 2004): International Charters for Conservation and Restoration – Monuments and Sites Vol. I. ICOMOS. Lipp GmbH, Graphische Betriebe . (accessed 05.10.2015) Available in: [http://openarchive.icomos.org/431/ ] Pp: 7-29.

PETTERSSON, Susanna 2011: National museums in Finland. In publication: ARONSSON, Peter & ELGENIUS, Gabriella (ed. 2011): Building National Museums in Europe 1750-2010. Conference proceedings from EuNaMus, European National Museums: 222

Identity Politics, the Uses of the Past and the European Citizen, Bologna 28-30 April 2011. EuNaMus Report No 1. Published by Linköping University Electronic Press. Available in: http://www.ep.liu.se/ecp_home/index.en.aspx?issue=064 (accessed: March 10 2014)

PINHEIRO, Ana Catarina & MACEDO, Maria Filomena 2009: Risk assessment: A comparative study of archive storage rooms. Journal of Cultural Heritage, Volume 10, Issue 3. Elsevier Masson SAS. Pp: 428-434.

PINZARI, Flavia & CIALEI, Vanja & BARBABIETOLA, Nicoletta 2010: Measurement of the fungal deteriorating potential in the dust of indoor environment. e- PRESERVATIONScience, Volume 7. Morana RTD d.o.o. Pp: 29-34

RAMSBOTHAM, Oliver & WOODHOUSE, Tom & MIALL, Hugh 2005: Contemporary Conflict Resolution. Second edition, Fully revised and expanded. Polity Press. MPG Books Ltd. Bodmin, Cornwall, United Kingdom. Pp: 302-315

REBER, Rolf 2008: Art in Its Experience: Can Empirical Psychology Help Assess Artistic Value? Leonardo. Vol. 41, Issue 4 / 2008. Pp: 367-372.

REDONDO, Maria Rubio 2008: Is Minimal Intervention a Valid Guiding Principle? E conservation magazine. Available in address: [ http://www.e- conservationline.com/content/view/618/211 ]

RICHARDSON, Miles 1989: the Artefact as abbreviated act: a social interpretation of material culture. In book: HODDER, Ian (ed.) 1989: The Meaning of Things – Material Culture and Symbolic Expression. One World Archeology 6. Harper Collins Academic. Great Britain. ISBN 0-04-445017-6 Pp. 172-177.

ROALD, Tone 2008: Toward a Phenomenological Psychology of Art Appreciation. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, Volume: 39, 2/2008. Pp:189-212.

ROSE, Gillian 2001: Visual Methodologies – An Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual Analysis. Sage Publications. London United Kingdom.

ROSE, Carolyn L. & HAWKS, Catharine A. 1995: A preventive conservation approach to the storage of collections. In book: ROSE, Carolyn L. & HAWKS, Catharine A. & GENOWAYS, Hugh H. (ed. 1995): Storage of Natural History Collections: A Preventive Conservation Approach, Volume 1. Society for the Preservation of Natural History Collections. New York, the United States of America. Pp. 1-20.

ROSS, Malcom 1982: Introduction. In book: ROSS, Malcom (ed. 1982): The Development of Aesthetic Experience. Curriculum issues in Arts Education Volume 3. Pergamon Press. United Kingdom. Pp: 1.

RUSCH, Stacy & HERRO, Holly 2000: Midnight in the Garden of Soggy and Damp: the New Year’s Eve Disaster at the Virginia Historical Society. The Journal of the 223

American Institute for Conservation, Volume 39, Number 1, Article 10. Pp: 127-134. Available online at http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic39-01-010.html (accessed 07/26/2012)

RUUSUVUORI, Johanna & NIKANDER, Pirjo & HYVÄRINEN, Matti 2010: Haastattelun analyysin vaiheet. In book: RUUSUVUORI, Johanna & NIKANDER, Pirjo & HYVÄRINEN, Matti (ed.) 2010: Haastattelun analyysi. Vastapaino. Tampere, Finland.

RÄSÄNEN, Pirkko 1995: Mielentilatutkittu murhapolttaja. Murhapolttorikollisuuden kehitystä sekä murhapolttajien psykososiaalisia ominaisuuksia, kongnitiivista suoritustasoa, aggressiivisuutta ja mielenterveyden häiriöitä selvittävä tutkimus. Acta Univeritatis Ouluensis Medica, D340. Oulun yliopisto, Monistus ja kuvakeskus. Oulu.

RÖNKKÖ, Marja-Liisa 2007: Museon idea ja historia. In book: KINANEN, Pauliina (ed. 2007): Museologia tänään. Suomen museoliiton julkaisuja 57. Suomen museoliitto. Helsinki, Finland. Pp:

SADLER, Wilbert, L. 1988: Vandalism in Our Schools: a Study Concerning Children who Destroy Property and What to Do About It. Education, Summer 88, Vol. 108 Issue 4, pp. 556-560

SAKR, Akmal Ali & GHALY, Mohamed Farouk & ALI, Mona Foad 2013: The Use of Gamma Irradiation in the Sterilization of Streptomyces Colonizing the Tempera Paintings in Ancient Egyptian Tombs. The International Journal of Conservation Science. Volume 4, Issue 3, July-September 2013. Pp: 283-294.

SEVERSON, Kent & KOOB, Stephen & WOLFE, Julie & CHOE, Perry & HORNBECK, Stephanie & MCGREGOR HOWARTH, Sarah & SIGEL, Anthony 2000: Recovery of Unbacked Mosaics from a Storage Depot Fire at the Sardis Excavations, Turkey. Pp: 3-13. The Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, Volume 39, Number 1, Article 1. Available online at http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic39-01-001.html (accessed 07/26/2012)

SEVÄNEN, Erkki 2004: Introduction: From Modernity and Postmodernity to Globalisation. In book: KUPIAINEN, Jari & SEVÄNEN, Erkki & STOTESBURY, John A. (ed. 2004): Cultural Identity in Transition – Contemporary Conditions, Practices and Politics of Global Phenomenon. Athlantic Publishers and Distributors. Nice Printing Press. Delhi, India. Pp: 1-30.

SINGH, Rana P. B. 2008: The Contestation of Heritage: The Enduring Importance of Religion. In book: GRAHAM, Brian & HOWARD, Peter (ed. 2008): Heritage and Identity. The Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Identity. Aldershot, Ashgate. Great Britain. Pp: 125–44.

SMITH, Laurajane 2006: Use of heritage. United Kingdom: Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group.

224

SMITH, Martha, J. 2003: Exploring Target Attractiveness in Vandalism: An Experimental Approach. In Book: SMITH, Martha J. & CORNISH, Derek B. (ed.) 2003: Theory for Practice in Situational Crime Prevention. Crime Prevention Studies, Volume 16. Criminal Justice Press. Nonsey, NY, USA. Willan Publishing. Devon, UK. pp. 197-236.

STEEN, Anna 2004: Samdok: tools to make the world visible. In book: KNELL, Simon J. (ed. 2004): Museums and the future of collecting. Second edition. Ashgate Publishing Limited. Great Britain. Pp: 196-203.

STERFLINGER, Katja & PIÑAR, Guadalupe 2013: Microbial deterioration of cultural heritage and works of art – tilting at windmills? Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, November 2013, Volume 97, Issue 22, pp 9637–9646. Springer Link. Available online at http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00253-013-5283-1 (accessed 02/12/2012)

STERFLINGER, Katja 2010: Fungi: Their role in deterioration of cultural heritage. Fungal Biology Reviews Number 24, 2010, Pp: 47-55. The British Mycological Society.

STOVEL, Herb 2007: Effective use of authenticity and integrity as world heritage qualifying conditions. City & Time 2(3): 3. Available online at http://www.ceci- br.org/novo/revista/docs2007/CT-2007-71.pdf (accessed 02/12/2012). Pp: 21-36

STRANG, Tom & GRATTAN, David 2009: Temperature and humidity considerations for the preservation of organic collections – the isoperm revisited. e- PRESERVATIONScience, Volume 6. Morana RTD d.o.o. Pp: 122-128

TAYLOR, Joel 2005: An Integrated approach to risk assessments and condition surveys. Jaic – Journal of the American Institution for Conservation, volume 44, Number 2, Article 6, pages: 127-141. (accessed 10.04.2012) Available in address: [ http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic44-02-006_6.html ]

TARASTI, Eero 2000: Exsistential Semiotics. Indiana University Press. Bloomington, the United States of America.

TARASTI, Eero 2003: Understanding, Misunderstanding and Self-Understanding. In book: TARASI, Eero (ed. 2003): Understanding / Misunderstanding – Contributions to the study of the hermeneutics of signs. Acta Semiotica Fennica XVI. The International Semiotics Institute. Hakapaino. Helsinki, Finland. Pp: 3-22.

TUOMI, Jouni & SARAJÄRVI, Anneli 2002: Laadullinen tutkimus ja sisällön analyysi. Kustannusosakeyhtiö Tammi. Helsinki. 1.-4. painos.

TURNPENNY, Michael 2004: Cultural Heritage, an III-defined Concept? A Call for Joined-up Policy. International Journal of Heritage Studies, Vol. 10, No. 3, July 2004, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

225

VIÑAS, Salvador Muñoz 2011: Contemporary Theory of Conservation. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. USA.

VINSON, Isabelle 2009: ICCROM’s Contribution to the Ethics of Heritage. Museum International, Vol. 61, No: 3 2009, No: 243. Pp. 90-97.

VÄKEVÄ, Lauri 2004: Kasvatuksen taide ja taidekasvatus. Estetiikan ja taidekasvatuksen merkitys John Deweyn naturalistisessa pragmatismissa. Oulun yliopisto. Kasvatustieteiden tiedekunta. Oulu University press. Accessed in 1.9.2015. . Available in: [ http://herkules.oulu.fi/isbn9514273109/isbn9514273109.pdf ]

WALLER, Robert 1994: Conservation risk assessment: A strategy for managing resources for preventive conservation. Preprints of the Contributions to the Ottawa Congress, 12-16 September 1994, Preventive Conservation: Practice, Theory and Research, A. Roy and P. Smith (Eds.), IIC, London, pp. 12-16.

WALLER, Robert 1995: Risk Management Applied To Preventive Conservation. In: ROSE, C.L., HAWKS, C.A. and GENOWAYS, H.H. (eds.) 1995: Storage of Natural History Collections: A Preventive Conservation Approach. Society for the Preservation of Natural History Collections Iowa City. Accessed in 1.9.2015. Available in: [ http://www.museum- sos.org/docs/WallerSPNHC1995.pdf ] Pp 21-28.

WALLER, Robert 1996: Preventive conservation planning for large and diverse collections. Pages: 1-9. Preservation of Collections: Assessment, Evaluation, and Mitigation Strategies. Preprints of the June 10-11, 1996 Workshop, American Institute for Conservation, Washington. Available in address: [ http://www.museum- sos.org/docs/WallerAIC1996.pdf ] Pp: 1-9

WALLER, Robert 1999: Internal pollutants, risk assessment and conservation priorities. International Council of Museums, Committee for Conservation, Preprints of the 12th Triennial Meeting, Lyon, 1999, pp. 113-118.

WALLER, Robert 2002: A Risk Model for Collection Preservation. Published in the 13th Triennial Meeting Rio De Janeiro, Preeprints Vol. I. ICOM Committee for Conservation. Pp: 102-107.

WANG, Jieh-Jiuh 2015: Flood risk maps to cultural heritage: measures and process. Journal of Cultural Heritage, Vol. 16, Issue 2. Pp: 210-220. Elsevier Masson SAS

WALTON, Douglas, N. 1989: Question-Reply Argumentation. Contributions in Philosophy, Number 40. Greenwood Press Inc. Connecticut, The United States of America.

WATTS, David & COLSTON, Belinda & BÜLOW, Anna 2001: Predicting damp-related problems in historic buildings and monuments used for library and archive purpose. Cobra 2001. Conference papers. Available in address: 226

[ http://www.rics.org/site/scripts/download_info.aspx?fileID=2608&categoryID=559 ] Pp: 1-13.

WELBURN, William & PITCHFORD, Veronda & ALIRE, Camila & BROWN, Malore & DOWNING, Karen E & RIVERA, Alexandra & WELBURN, Janice & WINSTON, Mark 2009: Memory, Authenticity and Cultural Identity: The Role of Library Programs, Services and Collections in Creating Community. Pages: 2-3. IFLA. World Library and Information Congress: 75th IFLA General Conference and Council. 23-27 August 2009, Milan, Italy. Available in address: http://www.ifla.org/files/hq/papers/ifla75/158-welburn-en.pdf

Newspaper articles

NORTON, Will 1995: Arsons Mar Millenary Celebration. Christianity Today Vol. 39 Issue 8. Publication date: 17.7.1995. Pp: 60.

OJANSIVU, Osmo 2003: Tyrvään Pyhän Olavin kirkko – Palanut ja palannut. Kirkonpalwelija 3/2003. Julkaisija Kirkonpalvelijat ry. Available in address: [ http://www.kirkonpalvelijat.fi/dokumentit/kirkonpalwelija/Kirkonpalwelija_2003_3.pd f ] Accessed in: 1.4.2010. Pp: 6-7.

UUSI SUOMI 25.3.2009: Tuomiokirkon tuhopolttaja: En pysty maksamaan. http://www.uusisuomi.fi/kotimaa/54615-tuomiokirkon-tuhopolttaja-en-pysty- maksamaan

227

II UNPUBLISHED SOURCES

Internet sources

ADOPTOIMONUMENTTI.FI 22.4.2018: Info. (accessed in 22.4.2018) Available in address: http://adoptoimonumentti.fi/info/

AINSWOTH, Maryan W. 2005: From Connoisseurship to Technical Art History: The Evolution of the Interdisciplinary Study of Art. The Getty Conservation Institute Newsletter 20.1 (Spring 2005) (accessed in 9.10.2017) http://www.getty.edu/conservation/publications_resources/newsletters/20_1/feature.h tml

AMERICAN HERITAGE – DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. 2016, Fifth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. (accessed in 30.1.2017) Available in address: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/irradiation

CONSERVATION CENTER FOR ART AND HISTORIC ARTIFACTS 2013: Managing a Mold Invasion: Guidelines for Disaster Response. USA, Philadelphia. (accessed in 30.1.2017) Available in address: http://www.ccaha.org/uploads/media_items/managing-a-mold-invasion-guidelines- for-disaster-response.original.pdf

E.C.C.O. PROFESSIONAL GUIDELINES March 1 2002: I THE PROFESSION, I. Definition of the Conservator-Restorer. Accessed in: 1.9.2015. Available in address: [ http://www.ecco-eu.org/about-e.c.c.o./professional-guidelines.html ]

HELSINKI ORTHODOX PARISH 17.1.2017: Ihmeitätekevä Kozelshtshanin Jumalansynnyttäjän ikoni palasi ristisaatossa läpi Helsingin. Accessed in 17.1.2017. Available in address: [ http://hos.fi/www/fi/ajankohtaista/index09fe.html?we_objectID=545 ]

HELSINKI ORTHODOX PARISH 17.1.2017: Kozelshtshanin Jumalansynnyttäjän ikoni. Accessed in 17.1.2017. Available in address: [ http://hos.fi/fi/uspenskin- katedraali/kozelshtshanin-jumalansynnyttajan-ikoni ]

FEDERATION OF HELSINKI PARISHES 29.3.2017: Lauttasaaren kirkko. Accessed in 11.4.2018. Available in address: [ https://www.helsinginseurakunnat.fi/lauttasaarenkirkko/artikkelit/7sj4ly9gp ]

HYVINKÄÄ CITY MUSEUM 2012: Valvillan tehdasmuseo (Webpages of the Valvilla Wool Mill Museum). Available online at http://www.hyvinkaa.fi/Kulttuuri-ja-vapaa- 228 aika/Kulttuuri-ja-taide2/Museot-galleriat-nayttelyt/kaupunginmuseo/Valvillan- tehdasmuseotekstiilimuseo/ (accessed 02/05/2012).

IAEA 2015: Working material - First Research Coordination Meeting of the Coordinated Research Project: “Developing Radiation Treatment Methodologies and New Resin Formulations for Consolidation and Preservation of Archived Materials and Cultural Heritage Artefacts”. 28 September - 2 October 2015, IAEA Headquarters. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Vienna, Austria.

ICBS 10.3.2017: International Committee of the Blue Shield – About Us. Available at: http://www.ancbs.org/cms/en/about-us/about-icbs (accessed 10/03/2017).

KANSALLISBIBLIOGRAFIA 2014: Gustaf Wasa. Accessed in: 4.3.2014. Available in address: http://www.kansallisbiografia.fi/kb/artikkeli/315/

KIASMA 2015: Birth of the Museum of Contemporary Art Kiasma (website accessed in 27.4.2015) http://www.kiasma.fi/en/kiasma/story-of-kiasma/

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION 1993: Emergency Salvage of Flood Damaged Family Papers. USA, Washington DC. Accessed in 1.2.2017. Available in: [ https://www.archives.gov/preservation/conservation/flood- damage.html ]

NATIONAL BOARD OF ANTIQUTIES 2015: Kansallismuseo, Helsinki (website accessed in 25.4.2015) http://museovirastorestauroi.nba.fi/museot/kansallismuseo

NATIONAL PARK SERVICES 2007: Mold: Prevention Of Growth In Museum Collections. Conserve O Gram, August 2007, Number 3/4. USA, Washington, DC. (website accessed in: 30.1.2017) https://www.nps.gov/museum/publications/conserveogram/03-04.pdf

ORTODOKSI.NET 2018: Jyväskyän ortodoksinen kirkko. Accessed in 11.4.2018. Available in address: http://www.ortodoksi.net/index.php/Jyv%C3%A4skyl%C3%A4n_ortodoksinen_kirkko

RKY 2015: Helsingin yliopiston rakennukset keskustakampus (website accessed: 24.4.2015) http://www.rky.fi/read/asp/r_kohde_det.aspx?KOHDE_ID=4633

RKY 2015: Hyvinkään villatehdas. Museovirasto. Valtakunnallisesti merkittävät rakennetut kulttuuriympäristö. (accessed in 15.06.2015). Available in address: http://www.rky.fi/read/asp/r_kohde_det.aspx?KOHDE_ID=4023

RKY 2015: Turun linna. (accessed in 15.06.2015) Available in address: http://www.rky.fi/read/asp/r_kohde_det.aspx?KOHDE_ID=1844

229

RKY 2018: Kotkan ortodoksinen kirkko ja Kirkkopuisto. Accessed in 11.4.2018. Available in address: http://www.rky.fi/read/asp/r_kohde_det.aspx?KOHDE_ID=1165

SUOMALAISEN KIRJALLISUUDEN SEURA 2015: SKS pähkinänkuoressa (website accessed: 24.4.2015) http://www.finlit.fi/fi/suomalaisen-kirjallisuuden-seura/sks- pahkinankuoressa#.VTpq-_CitOY

UNESCO 1954: The Hague convention for the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflict. Meeting, Location: 1. Available online at http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php- URL_ID=13637&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html (accessed 03/12/2012).

UNESCO 2012: Background document on the notion of integrity. International World Heritage Expert Meeting on Integrity for Cultural Heritage, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates: 2. Available in address: http://whc.unesco.org/uploads/events/documents/event-833- 7.pdf (accessed 04/10/2012).

UNESCO 2015: Prevention of Looting and Illicit Traffic of Cultural Property. (Accessed in 21.6.2015) Available in address: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/phnompenh/culture/tangible-cultural- heritage/prevention-of-looting-

THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH OF FINLAND 2014: Suomalaiset lähetystyössä. Accessed in: 4.3.2014. Available in address: http://evl.fi/evlfi.nsf/Documents/60F1795C5F785657C225752F0045966A?openDocument &lang=FI

THE FINNISH ANTIQUARIAN SOCIETY 2015: Historia. (website accessed in 28.4.2015) Available in address: http://www.muinaismuistoyhdistys.fi/historia.html Uskonnot Suomessa 2015: Ortodoksiset kirkot (website accessed in: 29.4.2015)

Unpublished documents

ALÉN, Inka & LACZAC, Riikka & LINDFORS, Anna & TUPPURAINEN, Riitta 30.10.2006: Museologian erityissanastoa. Accessed in: 1.10.2015. Available in address: [ http://www.helsinki.fi/museologia/Museologian_erityissanasto.pdf ]

JOKINEN, Teppo 1994: Tuhopolttojen tekniset torjuntakeinot ja niiden taloudelliset vaikutukset. Diplomityö 19.5.1994. Teknillinen korkeakoulu, Rakennetekniikan laitos, Talonrakennustekniikka, Palo- ja turvallisuustekniikka

KASNIO, Anu & LINDBERG, Sara 2004: Valvillan tehdasmuseon tulipalossa 25.9.2003 vaurioituneen arkiston kuntoarvio‐ ja konservointisuunnitelma 30.6.2004 (In the 25th 230

September 2003 the Valvilla Wool Mill Museums fire damaged archival collections condition report and conservation, Cultural Historical Department, Hyvinkaa, Finland.

SCHULZ, Eeva-Liisa 1998: Helsingin Vartiokylän linnavuori – Arkistolähteisiin ja kirjallisuuteen perustuva selvitys. Date of survey: 23.11.1998. Museovirasto. Helsinki, Finland.

Trial documents

THE DISTRICT COURT OF HELSINKI 2010: Judgement 10/9573 DNO: R 10/9209

THE DISTRICT COURT OF HYVINKÄÄ 2005: Judgment 05/1077, DNO: R 05/677

THE DISTRICT COURT OF PORVOO 2006: Judgment 6/700 DNO: R 06/558

THE DISTRICT COURT OF TAMPERE 2003: Judgment DNO: R 02/369.

THE DISTRICT COURT OF VANTAA 2007: Interlocutory judgment 07/325 DNO: R 07/91

THE DISTRICT COURT OF VANTAA 2007: Judgment 07/1583 DNO: R 07/91

THE DISTRICT COURT OF ÅLAND 2010: Judgment 10/394 DNO: R 10/223

Transcribed research interviews

Disaster site owner’s theme interviews

Hyvinkää City Museum 20.5.2009: Theme interview on the Valvillan Wool Mill museum's fire. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Federation of Porvoo Parishes 25.5.2009: Theme interview about the Porvoo cathedral arson. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Sastamala parish 27.5.2009: Theme interview about the Saint Olavi Church arson. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Hammarland parish 12.4.2011: Theme interview about the Hammarland church arson attempt. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Johannes parish 8.2.2011: Theme interview about the Saint Jacob Church’s vandalism case. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander 231

Jyväskylä Orthodox parish 25.1.2011: Theme interview about the vandalism event at the Jyväskylä Orthodox Church. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Kotka Orthodox parish 11.5.2011: Theme interview about the vandalism events at the Kotka Orthodox Church. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Federation of Vantaa Parishes 21.4.2011: Theme interview about the Kaivoksela church arson. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Suomenniemi parish 15.3.2011: Theme interview about the Suomenniemi church arson attempt. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Lempäälä parish 28.3.2011: Theme interview about the Lempäälä Saint Birgita’s church arson attempt. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

National Board of Antiquities, Department of Archeology 2.3.2011: Theme interview about vandalism events at Vartiokylä Castle Mountain. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Finnish Literature Society’s Library 10.2.2011: Theme interview about storage magazine’s water damage in 2000. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Finnish Surveying Department’s Archives 22.5.2009: Theme interview about Uusimaa office’s archives water damage in 1994 and the roof fire of the archives building in 2003. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Helsinki Orthodox parish 29.12.2010: Theme interview about the icon larcenies at the Uspenski Cathedral. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Finnish National Museum 9.2.2011: Theme interview about the Silver display’s explosion. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Turku Museum Center 17.6.2009: Theme interview about the vandalism incident at the Turku castle. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Finnish National Library 4.2.2011: Theme interview about the water damages in 1990’s and 2000’s. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Subject matter specialist’s theme interview

Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s operative unite 4.5.2011: Specialists teem interview about heritage disasters. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Eastern Uusimaa fire department’s preparedness unite 8.1.2012: Specialists teem interview about heritage disasters. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander 232

Police University College 12.1.2012: Specialists teem interview about heritage crimes prevention. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Haapasalo, Jaana 12.12.2011: Specialists teem interview about heritage crimes. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Finnish National Archives 8.1.2012: Specialists teem interview about heritage disasters. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Church Counsel of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland 23.12.2011: Specialists teem interview about heritage disasters. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Finnish National Board of Antiquities, Development unite 23.12.2011: Specialists teem interview about heritage disasters. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Finnish National Board of Antiquities, Department for Built History 27.4.2011: Specialists teem interview about heritage disasters. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

Finnish Orthodox Church Museum 29.12.2011: Specialists teem interview about heritage disasters. Interviewer: Heidi Wirilander

233

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1. Heritage site’s owners half structured theme interviews’ questions (in Finnish)

Onnettomuuskohteiden omistajien haastattelukysymykset

Yleiset kysymykset I: 1. Kuvailkaa omin sanoin organisaationne kulttuuriperintökohteessa toteutuneen onnettomuuden kulku? 2. Kuinka nopeasti kiinteän ja irtaimen kulttuuriperinnön pelastustöihin onnettomuustilanteen jälkeen päästiin? 3. Kuinka nopeasti tieto onnettomuudesta tavoitti organisaationne oman henkilöstön? 4. Kuinka nopeasti konservointi- tai museoalan asiantuntijat olivat pelastustöitä tekevän henkilöstön käytettävissä kiinteän ja irtaimen kulttuuriperinnön pelastustöitä koskevissa kysymyksissä? 5. Millaisia menetelmiä pelastusviranomaiset käyttivät kiinteän ja irtaimen kulttuuriperintönne pelastustöissä?

Yleiset kysymykset II: 1. Mitkä olivat toteutuneen onnettomuuden ensisijaiset kiinteän ja irtaimen kulttuuriperinnön kokoelmille aiheuttamat vauriot tai vaurioitumisen uhat? 2. Minkälaisia kokoelmavaurioita onnettomuuden pelastustyöt aiheuttivat välittömästi onnettomuuden aikana tai tilanteen jo rauhoituttua? 3. Millaisia mahdollisia irtaimen tai kiinteän kulttuuriperinnön kokoelmavaurioita onnettomuuden jälkihoitotyö aiheutti kokoelmillenne? 4. Osasiko organisaationne ennakolta varautua toteutuneen kaltaiseen onnettomuuteen?

Riskien kartoittaminen ja hallintamenetelmien suunnittelu: 1. Onko toteutunut onnettomuus vaikuttanut organisaationne työmenetelmiin kulttuuriperintökokoelmiinne kohdistuvien riskien kartoittamisessa? 2. Vertailkaa riskien kartoittamisen menetelmiä ennen onnettomuutta ja sen jälkeen? 3. Onko toteutunut onnettomuus vaikuttanut organisaationne riskien hallintamenetelmien suunnitteluun? 4. Vertailkaa organisaationne riskien hallintamenetelmien suunnittelua ennen ja jälkeen toteutuneen onnettomuuden?

Toimitilojen ja toiminnallisten puitteiden suojaaminen: 1. Onko toteutunut onnettomuus vaikuttanut organisaationne valmiuksiin ylläpitää kulttuuriperintökokoelmianne aikaisempaa paremmin erilaisissa kriisi ja poikkeustiloissa?

Kokoelmien suojaaminen: 1. Onko toteutunut onnettomuus vaikuttanut kulttuuriperintökokoelmienne pelastussuunnittelutyöhön 2. Vertailkaa organisaationne valmiuksia kulttuuriperintökokoelmienne onnettomuuksien jälkeiseen pelastustyöhön ennen ja jälkeen toteutuneen onnettomuuden?

Organisaation turvallisuusjohtaminen: 234

1. Onko toteutunut onnettomuus vaikuttanut organisaationne turvallisuusjohtamiseen? 2. Mitkä henkilöstöryhmät osallistuvat turvallisuuskysymysten suunnitteluun organisaatiossanne? 3. Ovatko turvallisuuskysymykset osa organisaationne säännöllistä strategia ja budjettisuunnittelua?

Turvallisuusasioiden jatkuva suunnittelu: 1. Tehdäänkö organisaatiossanne säännöllisesti kulttuuriperintökokoelmiin kohdistuvien riskien kartoittamistyötä? 2. Arvioidaanko organisaatiossanne säännöllisesti käytössä olevien riskien hallintamenetelmien toimivuutta? 3. Onko kulttuuriperintökokoelmiinne kohdistuvien riskien hallinnan suunnittelu osa organisaationne toimintojen arkea?

235

Attachment 2. Heritage site’s owners half structured theme interviews’ questions (in Swedish for Hammarland parish)

Intervjufrågor för Hammarland församling

Allmänna frågor I 1. Beskriv med egna ord förloppet av en i er organisations kulturarvsmål skedd olycka. 2. Hur snabbt efter olyckssituationen kom räddningsarbeten av fast och löst kulturarv igång? 3. Hur snabbt nådde kunskapen om olyckan den egna personalen i er organisation? 4. Hur snabbt var konserverings- eller museibranschens experter till personalens som gjorde räddningsarbeten förfogande gällande frågor av fast och löst kulturarvs räddningsarbeten. 5. Hurdana metoder använde räddningsmyndigheterna i räddningsarbeten av ert löst och fast kulturarv?

Allmänna frågor II 1. Vilka var primära skador eller hot av skada till fast och löst kulturarvssamlingar tillfogade av skedda olyckor? 2. Hurdana skador orsakade räddningsarbeten till samlingar omedelbart under olyckan eller då situationen redan lugnat sig ner? 3. Hurdana möjliga skador till era samlingar av fast eller löst kulturarv orsakade eftervårdsarbetet? 4. Kunde er organisation i förväg vara beredd på en sådan olycka som skedde?

Kartläggning av risker och planering av kontrollmetoder 1. Har den skedda olyckan påverkat arbetsmetoderna i er organisation gällande kartläggning av riskerna som riktar sig mot kulturarvssamlingar? 2. Jämför kartläggning av risker före olyckan och efter den. 3. Har den skedda olyckan påverkat planeringen av kontrollmetoderna för risker i er organisation? 4. Jämför planering av kontrollmetoder för risker i er organisation före och efter den skedda olyckan.

Skyddandet av verksamhetsutrymmen och verksamhetsmässiga ramar: 1. Har den skedda olyckan påverkat er organisations beredskap att uppehålla era kulturarvssamlingar bättre än tidigare i olika kris- och undantagsfall?

Skyddandet av samlingar: 1. Har den skedda olyckan påverkat räddningsplaneringsarbetet av era kulturarvssamlingar? 2. Jämför beredskapen av räddningsarbetet efter olyckor beträffande kulturarvssamlingar i er organisation mellan före och efter skedda olyckan.

Säkerhetsledning av organisation 1. Har skedd olycka påverkat säkerhetsledningen i er organisation? 2. Vilka personalgrupper deltar i planeringen av säkerhetsfrågor i er organisation? 3. Är säkerhetsfrågor en del av er organisations regelbundna strategi- och budjetplanering?

Fortlöpande planering av säkerhetsärenden: 1. Kartlägger man regelbundet i er organisation kulturarvssamlingars risker? 2. Bedöms regelbundet funktionsduglighet för ibrukvarande kontrollmetoder av risker? 236

3. Är planering av kontroll av risker riktade sig mot era kulturarvssamlingar en del av er organisations verksamhets vardag?

237

Attachment 3. Subject matter specialist theme interviews’ questions / Fire and rescue services (in Finnish)

Asiantuntijoiden teemahaastattelut / Pelastusviranomaiset

Haastattelun teema: Palomiesten ammatilliset valmiudet suojella kulttuuriperintöä onnettomuustilanteissa?

Yleiset kysymykset I: 1. Mikä on näkemyksenne Suomessa työskentelevien palomiesten ammatillisista valmiuksista kulttuuriperintökokoelmien suojelu-, pelastus-, evakuointi- ja jälkihoitotyö toteuttamisessa erilaisissa onnettomuustilanteissa (vesivahingot, luonnonkatastrofit, räjähdysonnettomuudet ja tulipalot)? 2. Mistä arvioitte nykyisen valmiustason johtuvan? 3. Millä tavoin palomiesten ja muiden pelastustoimintaan keskeisesti osallistuvien henkilöiden koulutuksessa tai täydennyskoulutuksessa on kiinnitetty huomiota kulttuuriperinnön yhteiskunnalliseen merkitykseen sekä kulttuuriperintökokoelmien suojelu-, pelastus-, evakuointi- ja jälkihoitotyöhön onnettomuustilanteissa? 4. Millä tavoin palomiesten ja muun pelastushenkilöstön koulutusta on pyritty kehittämään kulttuuriomaisuuden suojelun osalta?

Yleiset kysymykset II: 1. Kuvailkaa omin sanoin kulttuuriperintökohteissa käytettyjä pelastustyön erityismenetelmiä vuosina 1990-2010 (vesivahingot, luonnonkatastrofit, räjähdysonnettomuudet ja tulipalot)? 2. Millaisia kokemuksia näiden työmenetelmien käytöstä on ollut kulttuuriperintökohteiden ja -kokoelmien kannalta? 3. Millaisia vaikutuksia näille työmenetelmillä on ollut kulttuuriperintökokoelmille (ensisijaiset ja toissijaiset kokoelmavauriot)? 4. Pystytäänkö mielestänne pelastustöissä nykyisellään Suomessa huomioimaan kulttuuriperintökohteiden erityispiirteet pelastustyön menetelmiä valittaessa? 5. Pystytäänkö pelastustöiden toteuttamisessa käyttämään ja valitsemaan kulttuuriperinnön ennaltaehkäisevään konservointiin ja kokoelmavaurioiden minimointiin tähtäävät työmenetelmät? - Jos pystytään niin miten? 6. Mitä muuta tahtoisitte kertoa pelastustoimen mahdollisuuksista huomioida työskentelyssään kulttuuriomaisuuden suojeluun liittyvät kysymykset?

238

Attachment 4. Subject matter specialist theme interviews’ questions / Police (in Finnish)

Asiantuntijoiden teemahaastattelut / Poliisi

Haastattelun teema: Poliisin ammatilliset valmiudet suojella kulttuuriperintöä varkauksilta, ilkivallalta ja tuhotöitä?

Yleiset kysymykset I: 1. Mikä on näkemyksenne Poliisin resursseista ja valmiuksista suojella ennakoivasti kulttuuriperintökohteita ja –kokoelmia rikoksilta kuten varkauksilta, ilkivallalta ja tuhotöiltä? 2. Mistä arvioitte nykyisen valmiustason johtuvan? 3. Mistä mielestänne johtuu tietoinen kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuva rikollisuus: eriteltynä vastaus 1. varkaudet, 2. ilkivalta ja 3. tuhotyöt? 4. Millainen mielestänne on kulttuuriperinnön omistajien roolin varkauksia, ilkivaltaa ja tuhotöitä ehkäisevässä työssä? 5. Millä tavoin poliisien koulutuksessa tai täydennyskoulutuksessa on kiinnitetty huomiota kulttuuriperinnön yhteiskunnalliseen merkitykseen sekä kulttuuriperintökokoelmien suojelua koskeviin kysymyksiin? 6. Millä tavoin poliisien koulutusta on pyritty kehittämään kulttuuriomaisuuden suojelun osalta? 7. Mitä muuta tahdotte kertoa Poliisien ammatillisista valmiuksista Kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvien rikoksien torjunnassa?

Yleiset kysymykset II: 1. Kuvailkaa omin sanoin millaista kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuva rikollisuus on ollut Suomessa vuosina 1990-2010 (esim. varkaudet, ilkivalta ja tuhotyöt)? 2. Mihin suuntaan mielestänne kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuva rikollisuus on Suomessa menossa? 3. Miten mielestänne voitaisiin ehkäistä tehokkaimmin Suomessa kulttuuriesineiden varkauksia? 4. Miten mielestänne voitaisiin ehkäistä tehokkaimmin Suomessa kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvaa ilkivaltaa? 5. Miten mielestänne voitaisiin ehkäistä tehokkaimmin Suomessa kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvat tuhotyöt? 6. Mitä muuta tahtoisitte kertoa pelastustoimen mahdollisuuksista huomioida työskentelyssään kulttuuriomaisuuden suojeluun liittyvät kysymykset?

239

Attachment 5. Subject matter specialist theme interviews’ questions / Criminal psychology (in Finnish)

Asiantuntijoiden teemahaastattelut / Sosiaali- ja kriminaalipsykologinen näkökulma

Haastattelun teema: Kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvien rikoksien ennalta ehkäisemisen mahdollisuudet?

Yleiset kysymykset I: 8. Mistä mielestänne johtuu tietoinen kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuva rikollisuus: eriteltynä vastaus 1. varkaudet, 2. ilkivalta ja 3. tuhotyöt? 9. Millaiset motiivit ovat käsityksenne mukaan taustalla kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvassa rikollisuudessa: eriteltynä vastaus 1. varkaudet, 2. ilkivalta ja 3. tuhotyöt? 10. Millaiset psykologiset tekijät mielestänne lisäävät tai vähentävät kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvaa rikollisuutta? Eriteltynä vastaus 1. varkaudet, 2. ilkivalta ja 3. tuhotyöt? 11. Millaiset sosiaaliset tekijät mielestänne yhteiskunnassamme lisäävät tai vähentävät kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvaa rikollisuutta? Eriteltynä vastaus 1. varkaudet, 2. ilkivalta ja 3. tuhotyöt? 12. Millaiset yhteiskunnalliset tekijät Suomessa lisäävät tai vähentävät kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvaa rikollisuutta? Eriteltynä vastaus 1. varkaudet, 2. ilkivalta ja 3. tuhotyöt? 13. Mitä muuta tahdotte kertoa Kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvan rikollisuuden erityispiirteistä?

Yleiset kysymykset II: 1. Kuvailkaa omin sanoin millaista kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuva rikollisuus on ollut Suomessa vuosina 1990-2010 (esim. varkaudet, ilkivalta ja tuhotyöt)? 2. Mihin suuntaan mielestänne kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuva rikollisuus on Suomessa menossa? 3. Voidaanko mielestänne kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvaa rikollisuutta ehkäistä: eriteltynä vastaus 1. varkaudet, 2. ilkivalta ja 3. tuhotyöt? 4. Millaisin psykologisin tekijöin mielestänne voitaisiin ehkäistä kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvaa rikollisuutta? Eriteltynä vastaus 1. varkaudet, 2. ilkivalta ja 3. tuhotyöt? 5. Millaisia sosiaalisia rakenteita tukemalla mielestänne yhteiskunnassamme voitaisiin ehkäistä kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvaa rikollisuutta? Eriteltynä vastaus 1. varkaudet, 2. ilkivalta ja 3. tuhotyöt? 6. Millaisin yhteiskunnallisin tekijöin ja/tai rakentein Suomessa voitaisiin ehkäistä kulttuuriperintöön kohdistuvaa rikollisuutta? Eriteltynä vastaus 1. varkaudet, 2. ilkivalta ja 3. tuhotyöt?

240

Attachment 6. Subject matter specialist theme interviews’ questions / Heritage authorities (in Finnish)

Asiantuntijoiden teemahaastattelut / Kulttuuriperintöviranomaiset

Haastattelun teema: Viranomaisohjaus kulttuuriperintökokoelmien suojelu-, pelastus-, evakuointi- ja jälkihoitotyössä?

Haastateltavat tahot, joihin lähetetty haastattelupyyntö: 1. Museovirasto: Museoviraston kehittämisyksikkö ja/tai Museoviraston Rakennushistorian osasto 2. Valtion taidemuseo: Kehys 3. Kansallisarkisto 4. Kansalliskirjasto 5. Suomen evankelis-luterilaisen kirkon kirkkohallitus 6. Ortodoksinen kirkkomuseo

Yleiset kysymykset I: 6. Kuvailkaa omin sanoin organisaationne roolia kulttuuriperintökokoelmien suojelu-, pelastus-, evakuointi- ja jälkihoitotyön ohjaamista ja ohjeistamista koskevissa asioissa? 7. Kuinka pitkään organisaationne on antanut kulttuuriperintöön ja kokoelmien suojeluun liittyviä ohjeita toimintakentällänne? 8. Onko viranomaisohjauksen kehittäminen ollut suunnitelmallista ja säännöllisesti päivittyvää vai ovatko käytännön onnettomuuksista nousseet kehittämistarpeet johtaneet ohjaustoiminnan kehittämiseen? 9. Kuinka usein keskimäärin organisaationne pyrkii tiedottamaan kokoelmien suojeluun liittyvistä asioista toimialueensa kulttuuriperintökokoelmien omistajia? 10. Kuinka usein ja millaista palautetta saatte toimialueenne kulttuuriperintökokoelmien omistajilta antamistanne kokoelmien suojeluohjeista? 11. Onko saatu palaute johtanut ohjeistusten muuttamiseen?

Yleiset kysymykset II: 5. Kuinka paljon organisaationne antamat ohjeet ja suositukset ottavat kantaa käytännön tason kokoelmien suojelu-, pelastus-, evakuointi- ja jälkihoitotyön menetelmiin? 6. Onko pelastustyön ohjeissa huomioitu ennaltaehkäisevän konservointiin ja kokoelmavaurioiden minimointiin tähtäävät työmenetelmät? 7. Mitä muuta tahtoisitte kertoa organisaationne kulttuuriomaisuuden suojeluun liittyvästä viranomaisohjauksesta ja sen painotuksista?

241

Attachment 7. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Population

Table 1. Population of entire Finland and the regions where heritage vandalism cases have occurred between years 1990 and 2010. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database).

242

Attachment 8. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Criminal damage crimes

Table 2. Criminal damage crimes reported by the police. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database).

243

Attachment 9. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Serious sabotage crimes

Table 3. Serious sabotage crimes reported by the police. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database).

244

Attachment 10. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Attempted serious sabotage crimes in disaster regions and entire Finland

Table 4. Attempted serious sabotage crimes reported by the police. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Statistics Finland 2015, database).

245

Attachment 11. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Population in six disaster regions and six reference regions

Table 5. Population of six disaster site regions and six reference regions. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database).

246

Attachment 12. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Criminal damage crimes in six disaster regions and six reference regions

Table 6. Criminal damage crimes of six disaster site regions and six reference regions reported by the police. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database).

247

Attachment 13. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes in Vantaa and its reference region Espoo

Table 7. Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes reported by the police in Vantaa and its reference region Espoo. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database).

248

Attachment 14. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes in Jyväskylä and its reference region Kuopio

Table 8. Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes reported by the police in Jyväskylä and its reference region Kuopio. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database).

249

Attachment 15. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes in Lempäälä and its reference region Akaa

Table 9. Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes reported by the police in Lempäälä and its reference region Akaa. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database).

250

Attachment 16. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes in Porvoo and its reference region Loviisa

Table 10. Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes reported by the police in Porvoo and its reference region Loviisa. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database).

251

Attachment 17. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes in Sastamala and its reference region Hämeenkyrö

Table 11. Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes reported by the police in Sastamala and its reference region Hämeenkyrö. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database).

252

Attachment 18. Statistical data used in ordered analyses / Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes in Turku and its reference region Tampere

Table 12. Serious sabotage (1.) and attempted serious sabotage (2.) crimes reported by the police in Turku and its reference region Tampere. Table used in statistical analyses of Ph.D. research’s data. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database).

253

Attachment 19. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of criminal damage crimes at the cities / towns where this research’s criminal damage crimes have occurred.

Figure 1. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of criminal damage crimes at the cities / towns where criminal damage crimes have occurred. In the figure has been marked the years when this research criminal damage crimes have occurred. In Helsinki, Turku and Kotka the number of criminal damage crimes were during the entire time period 1990-2010 higher than in entire Finland. In Helsinki this research’s criminal damage cases took place in two cases when the number of criminal damage crimes were decreasing and in one case when the number of criminal damage crimes were increasing in the region. In Turku this research’s criminal damage case took place when the number of criminal damage crimes were decreasing in the region. In Jyväskylä the number of criminal damage crimes were during the time period 1990-2010 close to entire Finland’s criminal damage crimes numbers. In Jyväskylä this research’s criminal damage crime case took place when the number of criminal damage crimes were slightly increasing after decreasing time period in the region. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database, Aki Niemi 2017). 254

Attachment 20. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of attempted serious sabotage crimes at the cities / towns where this research’s church arson or attempted church arson cases have occurred.

Figure 2. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of attempted serious sabotage crimes at the cities / towns where this research’s church arson or attempted church arson cases have occurred. In the figure is marked the years when this research church arson or attempted church arson cases have occurred in the city or town. It seems that church arson or attempted church arson cases have occurred mainly in the regions when the number of attempted serious sabotage crimes were decreasing in the regions. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database, Aki Niemi 2017).

255

Attachment 21. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of serious sabotage crimes at the cities / towns where church arson or attempted church arson cases have occurred.

Figure 3. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of serious sabotage crimes at the cities / towns where church arson or attempted church arson has occurred. In the figure has been marked the years when this research church arson or attempted church arson cases have occurred. It seems that many of the church arson or attempted church arson cases have occurred in the regions when the number of serious sabotage crimes were decreasing in the regions. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database, Aki Niemi 2017).

256

Attachment 22. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of criminal damage crimes in Jyväskylä, its reference region Kuopio and entire Finland.

Figure 4. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of criminal damage crimes in Jyväskylä, its reference region Kuopio and in entire Finland. In Jyväskylä the criminal damage case occurred during slightly increasing time period of criminal damage crimes. In Kuopio number of criminal damage crimes was at the same time decreasing. Both in Jyväskylä and in Kuopio number of criminal damage crimes were higher than in entire Finland at the same time. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database, Aki Niemi 2017).

257

Attachment 23. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of criminal damage crimes in Turku, its reference region Tampere and entire Finland.

Figure 5. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of criminal damage crimes in Turku, its reference region Tampere and in entire Finland. In Turku the criminal damage crime occurred during decreasing time period of criminal damage crimes. In Tampere number of criminal damage crimes was at the same time increasing. Both in Turku and in Tampere number of criminal damage crimes were higher than in entire Finland at the same time. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database, Aki Niemi 2017).

258

Attachment 24. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of attempted serious sabotage crimes in Lempäälä, its reference region Akaa and entire Finland.

Figure 6. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of attempted serious sabotage crimes in Lempäälä, its reference region Akaa and in entire Finland. In Lempäälä the attempted church arson case occurred during decreasing time period of attempted serious sabotage crimes. In Akaa number of attempted serious sabotage crimes was at the same time increasing. Both in Lempäälä and in Akaa number of attempted serious sabotage crimes were higher than the entire Finland’s number of attempted serious sabotage crimes at the same time. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database, Aki Niemi 2017).

259

Attachment 25. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of serious sabotage crimes in Sastamala, its reference region Hämeenkyrö and entire Finland.

Figure 7. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of serious sabotage crimes in Sastamala, its reference region Hämeenkyrö and in entire Finland. In Sastamala the church arson case occurred during decreasing time period of serious sabotage crimes. In Hämeenkyrö there were no serious sabotage crimes at the same time. In Sastamala number of serious sabotage crimes was higher than in the entire Finland at the same time. In Hämeenkyrö number of serious sabotage crimes was lower than in the entire Finland at the same time. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database, Aki Niemi 2017).

260

Attachment 26. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of serious sabotage crimes in Porvoo, its reference region Loviisa and entire Finland.

Figure 8. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of serious sabotage crimes in Porvoo, its reference region Loviisa and in entire Finland. In Porvoo the church arson case occurred during decreasing time period of serious sabotage crimes. In Loviisa there were less serious sabotage crimes than in Porvoo. In Loviisa the time period was also slightly decreasing in serious sabotage crimes at the same time. Both in Porvoo and in Loviisa number of serious sabotage crimes was higher than in the entire Finland at the same time. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database, Aki Niemi 2017).

261

Attachment 27. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of serious sabotage crimes in Vantaa, its reference region Espoo and entire Finland.

Figure 9. Aki Niemi’s figure over number of serious sabotage crimes in Vantaa, its reference region Espoo and in entire Finland. In Vantaa the church arson case occurred during increasing time period of serious sabotage crimes. In Espoo there were less serious sabotage crimes than in Vantaa at the same time. In Espoo the time period was also increasing in serious sabotage crimes at the same time. In Vantaa number of serious sabotage crimes was higher than in entire Finland at the same time. In Espoo number of serious sabotage crimes was lower than in the entire Finland at the same time. (Source: Statistics Finland 2015, database, Aki Niemi 2017).