EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES

Heritage across Boundaries International overview Christopher Young Head of World Heritage and International Policy,

The historic environment straddles political boundaries and its future depends on close international cooperation.

Neither humanity nor environment exist in Secondly, we can exchange best practice. isolation. Even an island such as Great Britain Others, faced with similar problems, have dealt The Roman fort of has been heavily influenced by the rest of with them differently. Often we can learn from Saalburg (Germany), Europe since the beginning of human settle- their experience how to manage our own reconstructed by Kaiser ment here. Numerous distinctive features of heritage better. This is, of course, a two-way Wilhelm II, a centre of our landscape are common to much of Europe. process, as in the Italian adaptation of the investigation of the Examples include hillforts, Roman frontiers, model of our World Heritage Site frontiers of the Roman Gothic cathedrals, urban morphology, Management Plans. Empire for over a monastic precincts, industrialisation, modern Thirdly, the learning process can be carried century, now a part, fortifications and many, many others. forward by joint projects between different with Hadrian’s Wall, of Similarly many of the factors now affecting countries, often funded through European the Frontiers of the the rich evidence of our past are also common Union (EU) programmes. Such projects have Roman Empire World to much of Europe. The importance of the several possible outcomes, such as improved Heritage Site. historic environment, the need to improve and widen access to it and to manage it in a sustainable way, and its potential for supporting sustainable growth and modern communities are all widely recognised across Europe. Negative factors such as the intensification of agriculture, the impact of contemporary development on urban landscapes and the consumption of scarce resources are also European phenomena. Some threats to the historic environment, such as climate change, have to be dealt with on an international as well as a national basis. The English historic environment cannot therefore be treated as an isolated phenome- non. Just as we have recognised that individual sites have to be managed as part of their wider environment, so the English historic environ- ment has to be cared for as part of a much larger whole. There are five principal ways in which this needs to be done. First, we improve understanding of our own heritage through work being done by others on similar features. For example, study of the British elements of the frontier of the Roman Empire – Hadrian’s Wall and the – is enhanced enormously by working within a wider context, as has been demonstrated by the work of the

Congress since . © English Heritage Young Christopher

2 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Heritage across boundaries

cooperation and mutual understanding between The 19th-century professionals across Europe and further afield, neo-Gothic Rathaus or increased knowledge about a particular (Town Hall) of the City subject. Increasingly, such projects are focusing of Vienna, an expression on improving and widening access, both physi- of civic pride, one of cal and intellectual, including across frontiers. the drivers of European All these projects, if carefully selected and development and properly planned, can be of great benefit to culture through many participating bodies in , be they centuries. governmental, local authorities or charitable or academic. Fourthly, the UK has worked for the last  years as part of a network of inter-govern- mental organisations (IGOs) such as the United Nations (UN), the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), the Council of Europe (CoE) and the EU. Belonging to these bodies brings with it obligations on how we manage conservation of the environment, as for many other areas. Increasingly we work within an international

regulatory and advisory framework affecting © English Heritage Young Christopher what we do either by prescription or by recommendation. Both UNESCO and the The government’s subscriptions to CoE draw up conventions covering conserva- ICCROM and the World Heritage Fund, and tion and management of the historic environ- the separate and additional bilateral agreement ment, several of which the UK has joined and with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre all now has to apply. The EU does not legislate contribute directly to supporting heritage directly on cultural heritage but many of its conservation in less-developed countries. There directives impact on what we do. EU member- is room to do much more, particularly if more ship can also bring financial support for recognition can be gained for the contribution activities in our field. that heritage can make to sustainable develop- There are also non-governmental organisa- ment, as noted recently in the report of the tions (NGOs), such as Europa Nostra or the Prime Minister’s Africa Commission. International Council on Monuments and Sites International involvement for heritage bodies (ICOMOS), focusing on the historic environ- is not an optional extra. Our own heritage has ment, in which UK bodies play a considerable international roots and we manage it within a role. Such NGOs are networks of conservation framework of international obligations that we professionals and produce advice, often in the have to heed and need to influence. There are form of charters, which influence our policies opportunities for joint working with many and how we work. The  Venice Charter partners and our involvement is much sought. is still widely cited as a basis of conservation Limited resources and our own national needs policy in the UK. The more recent Burra mean that our response has to be selective, but Charter, produced by Australia ICOMOS for it is essential that we remain involved interna- Australian circumstances, has had a world-wide tionally in order to manage and protect our impact not anticipated by its authors. own heritage to the highest possible standards. Finally, as one of the world leaders in conservation philosophy and practice, the UK Christopher Young is well placed to provide assistance to others. English Heritage This is already done at government level through membership of the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), the international training body, and of the World Heritage Convention. UK experts play a leading role in policy development, training and conservation activities across the world while NGOs such as the World Monuments Fund provide support and help in many places.

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 3 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES

Heritage across Boundaries Who we work with

UK heritage bodies are linked to a growing network of organisations promoting international cooperation.

UNESCO for its work in international jurisprudence and especially human rights, the CoE plays a signifi- UNESCO, the United Nations Educational cant role in the historic environment, within Scientific and Cultural Organisation, is dedi- the concept of cultural heritage. Some newly cated to intellectual cooperation, practical action independent countries have based their historic promoting peace, mutual understanding, and environment laws upon the CoE’s work. equitable and sustainable development. An Steered by a committee of representatives important part of UNESCO’s work deals with from national heritage administrations, the CoE cultural heritage, via conventions such as the brings experts together to debate, establish World Heritage Convention. frameworks for action and disseminate good UNESCO produces recommendations on practice, eg European Heritage Days. A recent best practice and runs international campaigns project is the European Heritage Information to support heritage conservation of threatened Network (HEREIN) . sites, such as Angkor Wat in Cambodia. The CoE has a minuscule staff and issues Government departments and agencies, no directives; instead, its instruments are open including DCMS and English Heritage, work to acceptance or not by member countries. Its closely with parts of UNESCO such as the impact is out of proportion to its size, however, World Heritage Centre. The UK National because it has become adept at working with Commission (UKNC) comprises the National the grain of developing sectoral trends, whilst Steering Committee, five sector committees challenging member countries to move forward and a secretariat. Its role is to advise government more quickly from ideas to principles and from and provide expert input into UK policy- principles to rights. making, and to act as a link between UNESCO and civil society, working in partnership with Noel Fojut government and with the UK’s Permanent Principal Inspector,Historic Delegation to UNESCO in Paris. The UKNC Culture Committee ICOMOS (www.uknc-unesco-culture.wessexarch.co.uk) ICOMOS, the International Council on covers heritage and culture. It will set up a series Monuments and Sites (www.international. of working groups, including underwater icomos.org), is a non-governmental organisation cultural heritage, sustainable development and of professionals working for the conservation of pre-/post-conflict and disaster issues. the world’s cultural heritage. ICOMOS’s work Sue Davies is carried out through international and national UKNC Culture Committee Chair,c/o Wessex specialist committees and partnerships with Archaeology national and international authorities. In the Email: [email protected] UK, we particularly value our partnership with English Heritage, and Historic Scotland, The Council of Europe and their support for our work on World Heritage Sites (WHSs). The Council of Europe (www.coe.int), founded ICOMOS’s Europe Group coordinates in , unites  of Europe’s countries in a responses where a European approach is needed. forum for agreeing common approaches to ICOMOS-UK hopes to develop this work in shared problems. It develops Conventions, collaboration with English Heritage to promote Charters and Recommendations. Best known good UK conservation practice in Europe and

4 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Heritage across boundaries

to press for conservation to take a higher profile Feilden (–) and archaeologist Dr Nicolas in EU affairs. ICOMOS also actively supports Stanley-Price (–present). English conserva- HEREIN in the CoE. tion experts act as visiting lecturers for training With its multi-disciplinary membership, courses. John Fidler, English Heritage’s ICOMOS works with stakeholders and Conservation Director, is currently the UK communities to promote the integration of delegate to ICCROM’s General Assembly. conservation into sustainable development and John Fidler to ensure that conservation is seen as an essential Conservation Director,English Heritage and beneficial dimension of decision-making relating to the cultural environment. We run European institutions seminars, workshops and conferences, prepare publications and advocate international conven- Legislation from the EU (www.europa.eu.int) tions and guidelines to promote ‘best practice’ directly affects historic environment work in the for cultural heritage conservation. UK and its funding streams are an important ICOMOS is an adviser to UNESCO on resource. It is essential to maintain a constructive cultural WHSs, and prepares annual evaluations engagement with the various parts of the EU of nominated cultural properties and state- to influence strategy papers, technical working of-conservation reports for inscribed cultural groups and the development of legislation. WHSs for the UNESCO World Heritage This entails lobbying the European Commis- Committee. In England we work closely with sion, members of the European Parliament and English Heritage on new nominations for other European stakeholders and responding to World Heritage inscription and on the government consultations on European issues. management of existing WHSs. In recent years this has allowed the amend- ment of legislation not directly aimed at the Susan Denyer historic environment, but which could have Secretary,ICOMOS-UK damaging knock-on consequences if not dealt ICCROM with. It has also allowed the UK to make strate- gic inputs into plans for future structural funds, ICCROM (pronounced IKROM) is the research programmes and the EU’s small International Centre for the Study of the ‘culture’ fund. Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Civil society heritage organisations are active Property based in Rome, Italy at the EU level. English Heritage maintains a (www.iccrom.org). It is an inter-governmental link with Europa Nostra, with an umbrella organisation like UNESCO, with  staff and group of organisations working on VAT and a budget of £– million, run by a director with the European Federation for Culture and general and an expert council reporting to a Heritage. Close contact with these groups adds general assembly of over  subscribing useful weight when seeking to achieve changes member states. in EU proposals. English Heritage and the Museums Libraries Anita Pollack and Archives Council share the cost of member- Head of European Policy,English Heritage ship (£, per year each) on behalf of the DCMS. Besides helping developing countries Europa Nostra with their conservation work, UK involvement Europa Nostra (www.europanostra.org) is a showcases British technical expertise and pan-European federation of non-governmental standards of practice on a world stage. non-profit heritage organisations, based in The ICCROM aims at improving the quality of Hague. It is supported by the EU and public conservation practice and raising awareness authorities, corporate sponsors, private founda- about the importance of preserving cultural tions, member organisations and individual heritage through five main areas of activity: members. English Heritage is represented on its • postgraduate mid-career professional and Council. Europa Nostra organises conferences, technical training publications and exhibitions, distributes a • research newsletter and campaigns for the protection • heritage information management (library) of the historic environment. It operates the • technical, scientific and managerial collabora- European Union/Europa Nostra Awards tion and advice scheme for Cultural Heritage on behalf of the • advocacy for heritage conservation. European Commission (EC). British involvement is strong , with three UK experts having been directors-general: Harold Anita Pollack Plenderleith (–), architect Bernard Head of European Policy,English Heritage

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 5 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES

Understanding Historic Landscapes Sharing knowledge across boundaries

AN EMBARRASSMENT OF RICHES enormous and fascinating laboratory for experi- menting with heritage management and Pioneering work in the Netherlands has identi- exchanging ideas and experiences in the aware- fied new ways of understanding and managing ness that ‘there is more than one road leading the archaeological/historical landscape. to Rome’. The Dutch national heritage policy is one example of this mosaic of approaches and deals A source of diversity and creativity with a landscape characterised by the invisibility of its archaeological/historical relics and the The combined archaeological and historical intensity of its present-day land use. The Dutch landscape embodies the legacy of our common landscape has been formed by the interaction of European past. It extends back in time many the great river systems of the Scheldt, Meuse thousands of years, and represents an embarrass- and Rhine and the North Sea, with occupation ment of riches. This heritage is an immense, by man on the fringes of rising land and water. affluent and diverse source of mostly unwritten This is why the country is called ‘The documents concerning the development of Netherlands’ and why current metaphors like man, culture, nature and the environment over ‘Netherland – waterland’, ‘the eternal battle time. It materialises the behaviour and identity with the sea’ or ‘Deltametropole’ serve not of human communities in an almost unimagin- only st-century planning purposes, but able diversity. What is observed and known also reflect meaningful feelings of long-term today is the product both of centuries of identity within the European context. research and heritage management, and of long-term evolution, creation, destruction and preservation caused by natural and cultural The Dutch national heritage policy mechanisms – a continuing process. The In  the Dutch government initiated the awareness of this richness creates a great embar- Belvedere Programme as a result of a joint rassment for a modern European society, which initiative by four separate ministries and has exploits the present-day landscape in a very made about ¤– million available to imple- intensive and often highly dynamic way. How ment the programme between  and . can we identify the characteristic elements and The Belvedere Programme deals with the three structures contained by the archaeological/ types of cultural resources – archaeological, historical landscape of which the vast majority historic/geographical and historical – from an is invisibly hidden in the soil or under the integrated perspective. Fundamental to the water? How can we understand and value these programme is the notion of archaeological/ elements in a legitimised way as part of the historical values as a resource for experiencing planning processes aiming at a sustainable and expressing identity through conservation, development of human life and environment? innovation and design and providing a source These dilemmas are common to all of inspiration, creativity and story-telling. European countries, but the diversity of land- Consequently, ‘cultural-historic identity is to scapes, societies, scientific and cultural tradi- be seen as a determining factor in the future tions in combination with the variety of spatial design of the Netherlands, for which political institutions and socio-economic the government shall aim to create appropriate transformations favours different solutions and conditions’. The aim of Dutch policy is to creates the opportunity to develop different link the transformation of the present-day approaches. This diversity makes Europe one landscape with sustainable management of the

6 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  Selected landmarks in EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Understanding historic landscapes the rural and urban land- scape around Amsterdam charac- terised by the relation- ship between land and archaeological-historical elements and structures hides layers of fossil landscapes reaching to a water. of the cultural landscape. The central concept is depth of more than m in the west. As a result 1.Almere: urban ‘protection by development’. of the rising sea level during the past , gardens designed to The activities initiated by the Belvedere years, many of these earlier landscapes have protect the fossil Programme are both a national map of the been excellently preserved by sedimentation Mesolithic landscape; 2. cultural-historical values of the Netherlands and and because of the high groundwater table. Velsen: stratified pre- a long-term and widely dispersed programme Wooden houses, food, clothing, plants, foot- and protohistoric agri- to stimulate projects at all levels of society and prints, roads, field systems and boats can be cultural landscapes from throughout the country. In addition, two found in a condition as if they had been left 2000 BC onwards; 3. the national ‘grand projects’ are under way dealing only yesterday. But how can we discover them Roman period estuary; with the late th-century defence line and value their potential – without destroying 4.Waterland: the 11th ‘Nieuwe Hollandse Waterlinie’ and the Roman them by excavation – in time to use this to 12th-century recla- period frontier defence along the Rhine. knowledge as input for the planning process? mation landscape; Architectural design and story-telling are essen- And how can we tell the stories of these 5. Golden Age map tial for making the invisible visible and stimu- invisible and unknown histories to politicians showing the waterfront lating public imagination. In this way the and the public? of Amsterdam; 6. 17th- Dutch approach explores the potential of the The standard approach follows the recom- century map showing integration of the three well-reputed traditions mendations of the CoE Valetta Convention, the reclamation plan for of environmental planning, architectural design which focuses on the prevention of destruction the Beemster, a polder and heritage management, which demands through timely participation in the planning listed as a World ‘cross-overs’ between these disciplines. process. However, a new national, inter- Heritage Site; 7. the mid- disciplinary research programme – ‘Protection 19th-century steam- Managing the invisible landscape and Development of the Dutch powered pumping Archaeological/historical Landscape’ – was station at Cruquius; 8. Archaeological heritage management in partic- developed to supplement the Belvedere Muiden: a fort belonging ular is confronted with the embarrassment of Programme and the ‘Valetta Convention’ to the late 19th-century riches of wetland landscapes. The Dutch delta approach, specifically to create an explicit circular defence line. scientific basis for the integration of archaeo- logical and historical/geographical values in environmental planning policy. This programme was initiated by the Ministry of Education and Science and the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, with the participation of the same ministries that are involved in the Belvedere Programme. It will operate between  and  and has fund- ing of about ¤ million. The research programme focuses on estab- lishing a meaningful link between scientific knowledge, archaeological/historical resource management and applied planning policy, using the central planning concepts of dynamics and quality expressed as sustainability, identity and diversity. To support this integration, the concept of ‘biography of landscape’ has been adopted to act as a metaphor that represents the life cycles of the cultural landscape as a social environment in which communities have lived through time, have influenced and to which they have given meaning. The metaphor of ‘cultural biography’ has an open-ended char- acter and focuses more on the continuing trans- formation of the environment than on the process of origin and destruction. It has the potential to link the past with the present and the future, and to integrate cultural-historical values in a meaningful way in environmental planning. As a consequence it functions as a

© Amsterdam Archaeological Centre,Amsterdam © de Monumentenzorg,Amsterdam and Rijksdienst voor University of Zeist reference for understanding, valuation and

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 7 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Understanding historic landscapes

characterisation, and as a source of story-telling. A method for the integration of scientific EUROPEAN KNOWLEDGE NETWORKS knowledge with applied cultural and environ- mental politics is offered by the concept of Participating in international work is crucial for ‘action research’. Action research, as used in the English Heritage – it informs our understanding programme, facilitates the interaction between of different approaches to the past, broadens the process of generating scientific knowledge our horizons and enriches our work. and the process of making correct political decisions about the policy problems regarding the sustainable development of the archaeol- Europæ Archaeologiæ Consilium ogical/historical landscape. It exploits the recognition that the decision-making process Europæ Archaeologiæ Consilium (ie European in environmental planning is not as rational as Archaeological Council (EAC)) is a network of it seems to be, but that the understanding of agencies legally responsible for the management of the archaeological heritage. It was founded emotions and the way people give meaning to  the transformations of their environment plays in to develop simple, effective and lasting an influential role. mechanisms for cooperation in the sphere of heritage management (to date,  nations and  separate agencies are members). Prospects for a European approach The EAC provides a forum for the exchange When I compare our Dutch approach and the of standards and best practice. The well- public response to it with approaches followed established annual Symposium and Seminar in other European countries such as Britain, series disseminates information on major issues Ireland, Scandinavia, some German states, affecting the archaeological heritage. Topics France or Spain I see fundamental similarities so far have included wetland management, amid all the obvious diversity. cultural landscapes, natural resource exploita- First, an essential change in attitude and tion, European agricultural policies, urban perception is taking place among planners development, major infrastructure projects about the importance of the archaeological/ and public archaeology. historical heritage as part of present and future The EAC is also well placed to offer life and environment, and its contribution to advice about all aspects of heritage manage- ‘quality of life’. Secondly, there is a trend ment. Working groups explore key issues and towards more interdisciplinary integration of discuss specific topics to help develop broad- knowledge and policy, which asks for a virtual based strategies for archaeological heritage management. paradigm shift and an internalisation of the Member countries The EAC provides a single voice to speak concepts and methods of other disciplines. of the Europæ out on specific issues and to influence the Finally, there is a growing interest in the idea Archaeologiæ Consilium. of local and regional communities taking responsibility for their own heritage, which corresponds well with overall tendencies for decentralisation and self-governance. Story- telling and visualisation are attractive ways to raise awareness of the characteristics of a particular environment and of giving meaning to individual or communal perceptions of identity. What we need on a European level is an interdisciplinary ‘community of practice’ to intensify the exchange and discussion of approaches, experiences and ideas. In this way the European diversity of the cultural landscape and traditions could become a rich source of intellectual and applied creativity.

Tom Bloemers University of Amsterdam

8 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Understanding historic landscapes

development of policies by European agencies. European Pathways to the Cultural It has Official Observer status at the CoE and Landscape participates in all the latter’s activities relevant to the archaeological heritage. In particular it is The landscape, in all its cultural and historical working closely with the CoE to develop diversity, is the most ubiquitous and accessible mechanisms to monitor the effectiveness of the part of the European heritage. An important CoE cultural heritage conventions and instru- example of the way in which it has been ments. explored on an international scale is the European approaches to the management of Culture  programme ‘European Pathways the archaeological heritage are highly regarded to the Cultural Landscape’ (www.pcl-eu.de), throughout the world. As we work more which comprised  projects in  countries frequently on the international stage, we need ranging from Iceland to Estonia and from to develop a transnational framework not just Finland to Italy. Linking each of these projects for the practical mechanisms of cultural- was a concern to introduce wider public audi- heritage resource management, but also for our ences to the landscape – in other words, to underlying research objectives. The EAC provide pathways to the landscape. Some path- fosters collaborative partnerships across Europe ways were virtual, using web-based and digital to spromote research as a statement of what is technology to explain the landscape and its valuable to the archaeological community. past; others were real, creating signed footpaths, trails and visitor sites. Adrian Olivier A resulting book, Pathways to Europe’s President, EAC Landscape, was published in  languages and explored the different ways in which landscapes European Association of are perceived by experts and the public. All of Archaeologists the areas were chosen because they were in one way or another marginal, almost forgotten The European Association of Archaeologists in terms of public consciousness – the ordinary, (EAA) (www.e-a-a.org) exists to provide a commonplace landscapes of Europe that form meeting place, both real and virtual, for archae- the backdrop to most people’s lives and memo- ologists studying and managing the archaeologi- ries. Alongside Historic Landscape cal resource of Europe. It was founded in the Characterisation (see Conservation Bulletin ),    early s and currently has more than , the book thus makes a major contribution to  members in countries. It is a genuinely pan- the democratic and inclusive aims of the European organisation: its annual conference European Landscape Convention. moves from country to country, its European Journal of Archaeology publishes material about Graham Fairclough any aspect of the European heritage and its Head of Characterisation, English Heritage secretariat has so far been hosted by Norway, the UK, Sweden and the Czech Republic. The public faces of the EAA are only part of the Association’s value. Equally important are the innumerable networks and collaborations that have arisen out of the informal exchange of ideas, values and information. It also works to influence heritage management across Europe, either by advice to individual countries or through its consultative status with the CoE. The EAA annual conference has become one of the highlights of the archaeological calendar. It is unique in bringing together archaeologists from every sector of the profes- sion and it is this stimulating diversity that gives EAA its strength. Graham Fairclough Head of Characterisation, English Heritage

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 9 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Understanding historic landscapes

Aerial Archaeology in Europe

Although aerial archaeologists have had links in Europe for more than  years, the ending of the Cold War provided the opportunity to expand the existing network of practitioners. In many countries (especially in the former eastern bloc), access to maps, photographs and aircraft was severely restricted, and there was little or no expertise available in aerial reconnaissance and air-photo interpretation. Initially the network grew through the work of a few individuals (most notably Otto Braasch, Rowan Whimster and Chris Musson), training seminars, the Aerial Archaeology Research Group (AARG) and conferences. The © Otto Braasch beginning of this process was a conference on  to become the most important date in Neolithic enclosure at aerial archaeology held in Potsdam in , the international aerial archaeology calendar; Ottstedt am Berge, which led to a series of aerial-survey training the  meeting was held in Munich, and the Thuringia, Germany, 25 schools in Hungary () and Poland ()  meeting took place in Belgium. July 1998. Infrared false to address the serious shortage of trained air- Robert Bewley colour slide film. photo interpreters in Europe. The real break- Regional Director, South West Region, English through, however, came when the EU’s Heritage Raphael and Culture  programmes, augmented by grants from NATO and the EUROPEAN TECHNICAL British Academy, provided substantial funding for further training schools, an international DEVELOPMENTS conference and a travelling exhibition. A wide range of exciting collaborative research English Heritage is the lead partner in projects takes place with the aid of European  the current Culture project, European funding. Most of the current projects are part of Landscapes: Past, Present and Future. Co- the Information and Communications Technol- organisers are drawn from Belgium, Germany, ogy section of the EU research programme Hungary and Italy and co-partners from the because the 6th Research Framework Pro- Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Lithuania, gramme did not include a heritage priority. A Poland and Romania; associated partners current challenge is to ensure that the right contributing without funding are from kinds of priorities are written into the EU’s 7th Bulgaria, Latvia, Portugal and Slovenia. This Framework Research Programme, currently project will deliver a range of activities: land- being developed to run from 2007 to 2013 with scape studies (focusing on the integration of a budget of approximately ¤72 billion. aerial and field archaeology), new techniques (exploring airborne laser recording (lidar), training schools, workshops, conferences, website publications and a training video) as VITRA well as several specific landscape projects. The main project began in  and already VITRA stands for Veridical Imaging of workshops and/or training schools have been Transmissive and Reflective Artefacts. The aim held in Finland, Romania, Italy and Germany. of this collaborative project is to develop prac- One proposed outcome is the creation of a tical methods for the acquisition, storage and European centre for aerial archaeology, to visualisation of high-quality digital images of ensure that the momentum of the programme decorative surfaces in historic buildings without continues, and that trained staff continue to the need for costly and time-consuming scaf- use their new skills and are not lost to other fold structures. The partners came from France, disciplines. for the robotic carrier; Germany, for digital- As a result of all these initiatives, the imaging capture and conservation issues; and European network of aerial archaeologists the UK, for colour fidelity and database has expanded rapidly. This is reflected in the development. way that the annual meeting of AARG Working closely with Bayerisches Landesamt (aarg.univie.ac.at) has grown in size and sophis- für Denkmalpflege (BLfD), the English tication since the foundation of the group in Heritage Photogrammetric Unit gave expert

10 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Understanding historic landscapes

Detail of wall painting in www.in-situ.be) is looking at the ways in the former Dominican which urban archaeological sites are displayed church at Bamberg, to the public. The aim of the research is to Germany recorded in produce guidelines for all those involved, and the course of the exper- especially those responsible for the decisions, imental VITRA project. from the original idea for enhancing a site through to its opening to the public and its routine management. The research has focused on all aspects of the process including decision-making, conser- vation, methods for displaying and presenting a site, its urban and architectural integration and its social, cultural and economic impact on the town. Several case studies, including the Rose Theatre in London, have been used to inform the research. The guidelines were presented at the inter-

Nick Beckett © English HeritageNick Beckett national conference ‘Urban Pasts and Urban Futures: bringing urban archaeology to life’, advice in photographic methods and helped held on – October  in Brussels. The produce the specifications for camera, lighting research has been carried out in partnership and the robotic carrier. They also took part in with organisations from Belgium, France, the practical tests in Germany and in the UK Spain, Italy and Hungary, and is part of the at St Mary’s Church, Studley Royal. Both EU’s th Framework Research Programme. reflective and transmissive subjects were tackled Valerie Wilson and David Miles are the English at a height of m by remote control. Heritage representatives for this project. The tests proved that the robotic system was successful in its initial objectives. High-quality Valerie Wilson imagery with metadata produces a true repre- Research Department, English Heritage sentation and documentary information for the archive. The results shown to the expert RUFUS reviewers from the European Commission were very impressive. Illustrated here is an Foundation construction and removal can be example of reflective imagery from a wall damaging to archaeological deposits and the painting. surrounding historic buildings. If urban centres are to be redeveloped, however, their new Paul Bryan buildings need foundations. By reusing existing Head of Metric Survey and Photogrammetry, English foundations, the impact on buried archaeology Heritage is minimised, and there is less chance of vibra- tion damage to adjacent properties. If today’s APPEAR foundations can be designed with a greater carrying capacity, there is a much better chance The APPEAR project (Accessibility Projects: that they can be reused for tomorrow’s replace- sustainable Preservation and Enhancement of ment buildings. Last year, English Heritage urban subsoil Archaeological Remains, became involved in an EU th-Framework- funded project on the reuse of foundations. The RUFUS project (Reuse of Foundations for Urban Sites, www.webforum.com/rufus) is led by the Building Research Establishment, and other project partners include Arup in the UK, Soletanche-Bachy in France and Stam- The Rose Theatre, atopoulos and Associates Ltd in Greece. English London.The red lights Heritage is not a project partner but is repre- show the position of the sented by Dr Jim Williams, who sits on the inner and outer walls of Project Review Panel. As well as advising on the Elizabethan theatre draft work, particularly the best-practice hand- preserved under water book, he will be inputting UK examples for in the basement of an foundation reuse in the context of archaeology, office block. Derek Kendall © English Heritage which will be a major end-user beneficiary of

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 11 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Understanding historic landscapes

this research. When the project is completed, it is hoped that more developers and engineers will be persuaded to reuse existing foundations, which will in turn help to enable long-term in-situ preservation of urban archaeological deposits. Jim Williams Regional Archaeological Science Advisor, East Midlands, English Heritage

WORLD HERITAGE SITES: ESTABLISHING VALUE

World Heritage Sites are places of outstanding universal value as defined in the UNESCO © UNESCO/Mounir Bouchenaki World Heritage Convention. They can be The Old Mostar Bridge, either cultural or natural. The World Heritage This move reflects a number of trends. destroyed in the Bosnian Committee has established  criteria ( Countries joining the Convention from all War in 1993, recon- cultural,  natural) for assessment of outstanding regions of the world have challenged traditional structed by international universal value. To be deemed of outstanding Eurocentric concepts of heritage and required efforts, and inscribed on universal value, a site must also satisfy the the examination of how places belonging to the World Heritage List in conditions of integrity and/or authenticity, one culture can be of value to all humanity. In July 2005 as ‘an exceptional and must have an adequate protection and  the World Heritage Committee recog- and universal symbol of management system to ensure its safeguarding nised cultural landscapes as a category of coexistence of communi- (Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of cultural WHS. ties from diverse cultural, the World Heritage Convention para ). The Global Strategy of  identified a ethnic and religious back- The concept of defining, attributing and number of themes and regional priorities for grounds, . . . . underlining assessing the value of a heritage place has there- consideration in preparing nominations. the unlimited efforts of fore been at the heart of the convention and its Themes included broad processes of human human solidarity for peace application for three decades and has been rais- existence, such as modes of subsistence and and powerful cooperation ing problems of application for just as long. Few technological evolution, or the movement of in the face of overwhelm- systems of values-led heritage management have peoples that has shaped and permitted the ing catastrophes’ operated for as long a period and there is much development of the vast diversity of human (UNESCO 2005). to be learnt from the experiences of the World cultures through time. The strategy also called Heritage Committee over this time. The prob- for regional and thematic studies to identify lems of practical application were addressed yet potential categories of site. again at the recent UNESCO Expert Meeting Moves such as this have resulted in a much on Outstanding Universal Value in Kazan. The greater range of nominations, particularly of latest of a series of such occasions, it came no cultural sites. We are now seeing, particularly closer to producing a formulaic solution to the from Africa, the nomination of cultural land- problems of definition of outstanding universal scapes that have values that are primarily spiri- value but did shed some valuable light on how tual and associative, as well as of sites application of the concept has developed and demonstrating technological evolution from might be applied in the future. many parts of the world, including the UK. It is clear from the background work Alongside this trend has been the recognition done for Kazan, as well as the discussions at of the wide range of values that any WHS can the meeting, that the concept of outstanding possess in addition to those for which it may be universal value was left very wide in the inscribed on the World Heritage List. These Convention itself, probably deliberately, and can be social or economic, or relate to belief that its application has changed through time, systems as well those traditionally associated particularly for cultural sites. For these, we have with heritage. Many relate to current uses of moved from self-evident icons such as the WHSs while some, such as tourism use, may pyramids or the Taj Mahal to a much broader have actually been created by inscription on the and less monumental concept of outstanding World Heritage List. universal value. To some extent this is true, These values are perceived by, and belong to too, for natural sites. a very wide range of stakeholders, international,

12 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Understanding historic landscapes

national, regional and local. All these interests local communities?’ Underlying this straight- need to be taken into account in defining a forward question are several other questions proposed WHS and in deciding how it is to be about the impact of World Heritage status that protected, managed and used in a sustainable at present are difficult to answer. way. Proof of value, evidence of the benefits of The much wider definition of WHSs to World Heritage conservation to local commu- include entire towns or rural landscapes has nities and the participation of the latter in the brought into sharp focus the wide range of process are being demanded not only in the stakeholders in such places, the legitimate need UK but also across the wider international for change, and the need to use heritage in a World Heritage community. Francesco sustainable way for the benefit of local commu- Bandarin, Director of the UNESCO World nities. This has been recognised by the World Heritage Centre, stated recently: ‘Among the Heritage Committee in the Budapest challenges facing UNESCO and the inter- Declaration (). national community is to make the national In this, as in so much else, World Heritage authorities, the private sector, and civil society reflects wide current trends in heritage manage- as a whole recognise that World Heritage ment. Increasingly there is recognition of the conservation is not only an instrument for wide scope of the historic environment, the peace and reconciliation, for enhancing range of stakeholders, the need for inclusion cultural and biological diversity, but also a and widening of access and the contribution factor of regional sustainable development. that cultural heritage can and should make to New approaches to the integrated management sustainable development and the well-being of of World Heritage have proved successful and the communities to which it belongs. This is a have promoted economic growth and benefits much more complex situation for those manag- to local communities.’ (Netherlands National ing cultural heritage. Crucial to successful Commission .) But despite this last asser- management of this complexity is an as full as tion and the generally held view that World possible understanding of a site’s values for all Heritage is ‘a good thing’, hard evidence is its stakeholders. Understanding of a place’s difficult to find. values is vital to successful sustainable manage- The ICOMOS UK Cultural Tourism ment. Committee, in conjunction with the ICOMOS UK World Heritage Committee, has taken up Christopher Young the research challenge in the knowledge that English Heritage, and rapporteur of the UNESCO the complexities of the issues are exemplified Expert Meeting at Kazan by WHSs in the UK. We will develop a conceptual framework – interrelating (where possible) existing methodologies for measuring The impact of World Heritage Sites economic, social, cultural and environmental on communities impacts – and undertake case studies of individ- ual UK WHSs to establish a suite of core Increasingly the question is asked ‘What is the indicators that show the added value of World real value of World Heritage inscription to Heritage status in the context of national policies and local plans. We will consider adverse impacts as well as positive ones. ICOMOS UK is respected internationally for setting standards and innovation: there is potential for the final suite of indicators to have an international application. A workshop to establish the scope and objectives of this project was held at the Old Ouro Preto, Brazil, a Royal Naval College, on  May historic gold-mining . The event brought together academics, town inscribed as a consultants and representatives from govern- WHS in 1980: the same ment departments and agencies across the UK market economy as as well as those who work locally in planning, the UK’s, but belonging regeneration and as WHS coordinators, and to a different local was ably facilitated by Dr Gill Chitty from the community. Council for British Archaeology. Following positive feedback from the work-

© Sue Millar shop participants, three strands to the project

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 13 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Understanding historic landscapes

have been identified, each with their own timescale. In autumn  ICOMOS UK set up a Project Steering Group. Its first task will be to review an outline research proposal for the first strand – to define a suite of core World Heritage status indicators – and to consider funding options. Second, group members will consider establishing a multi- disciplinary consortium to undertake in-depth longitudinal research. Finally, the group will be asked encourage the take-up of PhD studentships. The first appointment has been made at Glasgow Caledonian University Business School. If you are interested in becoming involved in this initiative please contact ICOMOS UK administrator: [email protected] Adam Sharpe/Cornwall County Council ©

Sue Millar The only sites that can be nominated by the Wheal Edward and Chair, ICOMOS UK Cultural Tourism Committee UK government for inscription as WHSs are Botallack mines,West those on the Tentative List. Following recent Penwith, .The  decisions by the World Heritage Committee, Cornwall and West  Netherlands National Commission . ‘Linking the UK, in effect, can nominate only one site Mining Universal and Local Values: Managing a Sustainable Landscape has been Future for World Heritage’, conference organised by the per year for consideration or reconsideration. Netherlands National Commission for UNESCO, in This has resulted in a considerable elongation chosen as the UK’s collaboration with the Netherlands Ministry of Education, of the likely timetable for those sites still on the 2005 nomination for Culture and Science, – May  Tentative List, all of which now have to inscription as a World produce detailed nomination or justification Heritage Site. The UK Tentative List documents and accompanying management plans. Nomination dossiers are themselves a further definition of the potential outstanding World Heritage Sites are about the recognition universal value of a site, based on a thorough of values. Before inscription, sites must pass understanding of all its aspects. They require through at least two evaluation processes: in-depth consideration of authenticity, integrity inclusion on a national Tentative List (the list and the ‘outstanding universal value’ of the of sites which a state party considers nominat- proposed site as well as detailed plans on how ing over a five- to ten-year period) and actual it is to be managed, respected and conserved. nomination. What a country puts on its Their preparation should involve all the rele- Tentative List reflects its perception of what it vant stakeholders, who should be committed values in terms of the World Heritage to the process and the eventual obligations of Convention. The UK has so far submitted two World Heritage status. The submitted docu- Tentative Lists – in  and . ments are carefully evaluated before a decision The  Tentative List included sites such is taken by the World Heritage Committee. as and , the Tower of In addition to the sites on the Tentative List, London, Westminster Palace and , there are others that aspire to WHS status and and but are faced with long delays as the sites on Cathedral. Many of these early sites reflect a the  list have to be put forward for very traditional monumental approach. consideration first. Their relative importance The  Tentative List shows a shift of may have changed as a result of new research values towards industrial landscapes (eg or discoveries since the  list was published. , ), sites of more scientific The government recognises that the current interest (eg Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew) and situation is unsatisfactory and is likely to insti- natural sites (the ). The proposals gate a review of the Tentative List at some for inclusion in the list were assembled by point over the next two years. experts from Scotland, and Northern Ireland; English Heritage was asked to give Sue Cole advice on English sites and those from the Senior Policy Officer,World Heritage and Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies. International Policy Team,English Heritage Twenty-five sites were published on the list in , of which eight have now been inscribed.

14 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Understanding historic landscapes

Values in conservation Canyon in New Mexico was first protected for its archaeological values, but has strong The role of values in conservation can be resonance for Pueblo and Navajo groups and, contentious, but it is an issue that is increas- more recently, ‘New Agers’. At each site, ingly difficult to ignore. In  the Getty values were contested, which in turn made Conservation Trust launched an important management difficult. How best should the project to explore the values and benefits of tragedy at Port Arthur be commemorated? conservation. The first phase of the project Why should the multiple owners care about culminated in the influential report Values and Hadrian’s Wall? What weight should be given Heritage Conservation (). to different stories at Grosse Île? How could But almost immediately the question of views of New-Age communities be reconciled whose values arises, so a follow-up project set with native American sensibilities? All these out to explore just that issues depend upon how value is defined and (www.getty.edu/conservation/field_projects/va prioritised. lues). The Getty Conservation Institute The project analysed management plans for brought the Australian Heritage Commission, each site, looking at what values were identi- English Heritage, Parks Canada and the US fied and how they influenced decisions. More National Park Service together in a pioneering than anything the project showed that all project to look at values in the management of heritage management is a matter of reconciling four controversial sites (de la Torre et al ). competing values, whether those result from Port Arthur in Tasmania was a penal colony economic pressures, political debates, different and has a difficult past; a recent tragedy there cultures or deep distress. While sites may be created another complex set of values. designated or protected for one set of values Hadrian’s Wall is a WHS with hundreds of (perhaps national or international), their day- owners, many with little or no interest in to-day management invariably involves work- heritage; Grosse Île was a Canadian quarantine ing with a much wider range of social and station that embodies both the story of emigra- community values. tion to Canada and the Irish diaspora. Chaco One of the participants described this project as ‘pedagogical gold’; it is rare that site The Grosse Île managers and management are open to scrutiny Irish Memorial in this way. Speaking as one of the people who commemorates took part in the project, I found it both a Grosse Île’s role from luxury to be able to analyse conservation in this 1832 to 1937 as a way, and a privilege to learn from the many quarantine station for people we interviewed. Yet if, as heritage the Port of Quebec, managers, we care for sites on behalf of the long the main point of public, it is vital to do this kind of work. arrival for immigrants For some, the debate around significance is coming to Canada. best left alone; for others it lies at the heart of every conservation decision, and how values are articulated is the central question for conservation. Certainly the UK government’s new interest in public value means that this argument will not go away. The Getty Conservation Institute is to be commended for a groundbreaking project.

Kate Clark Deputy Director, Policy and Research, Heritage Lottery Fund  de La Torre, M, MacLean, M G H, Mason, R and Myers, D . Heritage Values in Site Management:Four Case Studies. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute. The J Paul Getty Trust.All rights reserved Getty © The J Paul

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 15 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES

Managing the Past for the Present Our European partners Simon Thurley Chief Executive, English Heritage Alexandra Coxen International and European Policy Officer, English Heritage

A study of practices amongst our EU partners highlights the case for heritage reform in England.

Having recently returned from a tour of does not consult owners on the proposal to European Heritage agencies the question of designate a building and the only one where how English heritage protection compares to there is no appeal against a decision to list. its European counterparts is fresh in my mind. Although a small number of other countries do As chief executive of English Heritage I think not have an appeals process that is because the we have much to be proud of in this country, consultation period and stages of consideration but my investigations did highlight some areas are lengthy. Almost all countries consult local in which we lag behind our European authorities on designation proposals and many neighbours. advertise the fact of consideration in the local English Heritage is not unusual in Europe paper. Almost every country also has an inde- in combining the role of regulator, designator, pendent committee that scrutinises either all research centre and property manager. The proposals or at least the controversial ones. In majority of EU heritage bodies are similarly Hungary each designation proposal is also integrated agencies. Where English Heritage is circulated to all other ministries for approval. different is that it is a non-departmental body; As a consequence the European designation every other body is either an agency or a process is relatively slow, with the average time government department. This clearly gives to confirm a listing being two years. The English Heritage an independent voice, but it English system is, on average faster, often more also distances us from both decision-making effective, but compared to other EU systems it and funding decisions. It also characterises our is unfair and undemocratic. role in heritage protection as the Secretary of Sometimes the development industry State designates on the advice of English complains that England has too high a propor- Heritage. This, however, is not the only tion of designated buildings and sites. It is diffi- difference in the process. cult to find comparable data that will indicate England is the only country in Europe1 that whether we protect more or less than other

Germany Protected Sites per million population Slovenia (Index England = 100) Wales excluding Norway and Sweden Hungary Scotland Estonia Italy England Finland Northern Ireland The Netherlands Poland France Czech Republic Portugal

0 100 200

16 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

Meeting with our Polish buildings. The local authority has no role in colleagues in Warsaw – the process. The same applies to Finland (from left to right) (where disgruntled applicants can appeal to KOBiDZ Director Jacek the ministry), to Slovenia, the Netherlands and Rulewicz, Simon Thurley, to Italy. KOBiDZ Vice Director . The second type is where the responsibility Tadeusz Morysi´nski and is shared between local politicians and the Culture Minister Ryszard national body, usually with advice from the Mikli´nski national body as compulsory. This is operated in the Czech Republic, Sweden and Hungary. . The third type is where decisions are made entirely by local officials and their elected bodies, as in Norway and Poland. In Estonia the national heritage body, Muinas, have contracted their role in the planning system to local authorities, but in practice sit by them in a joint committee. The English system is a fourth type, in reality a mixture of two and three, and is a product of our grading system. In dealing with Grade I and II* English Heritage process about , applications a year for advice. Local authorities Alexandra Coxen © English HeritageAlexandra Coxen deal with  per cent of all listed building countries; however, attempting to benchmark issues. England using land mass, population and Every country has some type of area protec- percentage of all buildings gives some insight. tion and this is generally designated and regu- Along with the Netherlands and Germany, lated on a local, usually a municipal level, as in England has the highest density of individually England. In Germany, for instance, in addition protected sites and monuments in Europe. to the . million listed sites there are a further While this is certainly the case it should be ,+ specific buildings covered by area noted that England is more densely populated protection. In Italy it is estimated that  per than most European countries and when we cent by area of the country is protected by look at the number of protected sites in terms heritage legislation. In the Netherlands, of population we get a different result. The uniquely, these areas ( listed townscapes) figures show that by population we are very are designated nationally and development much in the middle of the European range. control rests with the national heritage body, Possibly the best measure of whether we RDMZ. The Portuguese system is more hit over-designate is the percentage of protected and miss. Each listed building has a protected structures and sites as a proportion of all build- buffer zone of m. ings. On this measure England seems to have Across Europe (except in type  countries) between . and . per cent designated, the key issue is local capacity, standards and which is similar to Scotland, Northern Ireland, expertise. Only two countries other than Slovenia, Hungary and the Czech Republic, England are addressing this directly: Poland, but much more than Norway, Sweden, Finland where a series of events is held at the or the Netherlands, for instance. Voivodeship (regional) level, and in the Czech On balance then, although we are probably Republic, where there are well-established in the European upper quartile, the scale of courses in collaboration with the universities. heritage protection in this country, particularly In type  countries there is no training. This given our stable history and consequent high is unfortunate as it distances people from rate of preservation, does not seem excessive. decisions about their heritage. Almost everywhere significance is defined by The case for heritage reform in England is, heritage legislation, but protection is essentially to my mind, highlighted by a study of EU part of the planning system. Broadly speaking practice. The results of my survey will be EU countries adopt one of three arrangements presented to the government over the coming for protection in the planning system. months in the hope that it will reinforce the . The first type is the most centralised – a need for legislation soon. licensing system run by the national heritage  body. In Portugal IPPAR simply issue a licence . When I refer here to Europe I mean the UK, the twelve other EU countries I visited, and Norway. to the applicant directly for all work to listed

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 17 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES

Managing the Past for the Present International case studies

European legislation and international conventions are fostering new ways of protecting and managing the historic environment.

which can be a lengthy process. WHAT WE WORK WITH The CoE is developing a Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society (see article on Rights and European legislation and conventions Responsibilities, page ) while UNESCO is working on possible instruments dealing with Both UNESCO and the CoE produce conven- cultural diversity. tions specifically focused on protecting the Both organisations also produce recommen- historic environment. Much EU legislation, dations on specific issues from time to time. while not specifically targeted at the historic These are not legally binding and are intended environment, can have considerable impact, as recommendations of best practice to guide often unforeseen by those drawing it up. There member states. Some of these deserve to be are also other international treaties such as the better known than is currently the case. Ramsar Convention (see article on Ramsar, None of the conventions that the UK has page ) that can have repercussions. joined have been ‘domesticated’ by incorpora- The conventions produced by UNESCO tion in national legislation. It is therefore a and the CoE are international treaties. It is up matter of government policy how each of the to each state to decide whether or not to join a conventions joined by the UK is implemented. particular treaty. The table lists UNESCO and Of those to which the UK currently belongs, CoE conventions dealing with cultural heritage the World Heritage Convention has had the and whether or not the UK has ratified them, most impact since it alone deals with specific

Some examples of EU legislation impacting on the historic environment to health; however, a ban on wood tar causes Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) This aims to difficulties in Scandinavia for the repair of historic protect biodiversity but can, for instance, limit the ships and wooden churches. extraction of slate from natural parks; it can also restrict the removal of intrusive vegetation disturb- Limitation of Volatile Organic Compounds (99/13/EC) ing historic monuments. Limitations on the use of ozone-depleting VOCs could place restrictions on the use of authentic Energy Efficiency Directive (93/76/EEC) This aims paint and varnishes for historic renovation. As the to limit carbon dioxide emissions (greenhouse gas) result of lobbying, a clause has been inserted to by improving energy efficiency, but in the process reduce this threat. requires the application of ventilation in old buildings. Directive on Construction Products (89/106/EEC) Requires the standardisation of construction prod- Energy Performance in Buildings (2002/91/EC) ucts. This can pose a threat to the use of traditional Attempting to reduce the use of fuel has implica- building materials and conservation methods that tions for the replacement of windows. An exemp- do not fall within the guidelines. tion for historic buildings has been written into Article . Machinery Directive (98/37/EEC) This is a health and safety rule about the proper securing of equip- Biocidal Products Directive (98/8/EC) Aims to ban ment that can cause challenges for building conser- the production of substances potentially dangerous vation work.

18 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

places and their protection and management. Rights and responsibilities This is recognised by its incorporation into PPG  and the equivalent guidance in the The CoE, through its Steering Committee for other Home Countries. Cultural Heritage, has been working for some The EU does not legislate directly on the time on a draft ‘Framework Convention on the historic environment but its activities in other Value of Cultural Heritage for Society’. areas can have considerable impact on cultural Although still under discussion, its provisions heritage. Much of the European legislation are very relevant to thinking about heritage affecting the historic environment comes from principles in England, and deserve to be better initiatives designed to protect the environment, known. save energy, improve health and safety or At its heart is the concept not of cultural involve the public in decision-making. Some heritage, but of cultural heritages. The more technical legislation, however, can also common heritage of Europe is valued in have an important bearing on conservation different ways by different groups. The new work. There is now a European expert group definition of cultural heritage goes well monitoring EU legislation as it develops. beyond the historic environment to include a set of resources that is an expression of ‘values, Christopher Young and Anita Pollack beliefs, knowledge and traditions’. ‘Heritage English Heritage communities’ are people who value specific aspects of heritage, and such communities may cross frontiers. More importantly, the UNESCO and CoE conventions

Convention title Purpose UK position

UNESCO 1954 Convention on Protection of Cultural Property in Protection of cultural property, immovable and UK has decided to ratify but not times of conflict + First Protocol (1954) and Second movable, in times of war or internal conflict likely to happen before 2007 as Protocol (1999) primary legislation may be needed 1970 Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Prevention of illegal international trade in cultural UK ratified in 2002 Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of property Ownership of Cultural Property

1972 Convention concerning the Protection of the World Protection of world’s cultural and natural heritage UK ratified in 1984 Cultural and Natural Heritage of outstanding universal value, primarily through inscription of WHSs.Also contains general obligations to protect natural and cultural heritage

2001 Convention on Protection of Underwater Cultural Protection of archaeological sites, wrecks and other UK has not ratified Heritage cultural heritage under the sea

2003 Convention on Protection of Intangible Cultural Protection of all forms of intangible cultural heritage UK has not ratified Heritage

CoE 1969 European Convention on the Protection of the Dealt mainly with archaeological excavations and the UK ratified in 1972 but it was Archaeological Heritage –‘the London Convention’ information they provide superseded in 2002 when the Valletta Convention came into force (see below) 1985 European Convention on Offences relating to Deals with the prevention of illicit trade and restitu- UK has not ratified and nor has Cultural Property – ‘the Delphi Convention’ tion of property any other state so the Convention has never come into force 1985 Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Provides for the protection of architectural heritage, UK ratified in 1987 Heritage of Europe – ‘the Granada Convention’ adoption of integrated conservation policies, consul- tation and cooperation

1992 European Convention on the Protection of the Provides for protection of archaeological sites, regu- UK ratified in 2002, currently Archaeological Heritage (revised) – ‘the Valletta lation of excavations, integrated conservation and developing a Statement of Convention’ developer funding of excavation Principles for archaeological work 2000 European Landscape Convention – ‘the Florence Provides for the integrated protection of landscapes UK is considering whether or Convention’ not to ratify

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 19 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

convention links heritage and human rights: a published a series of charters – voluntary agree- right to benefit from heritage is matched with ments on conservation principles (www.interna- an equal obligation to respect the cultural tional.icomos.org/charters.htm). These may not heritage of others. It recognises the potential have the force of European conventions, but do for conflict, and specifically addresses the ethics represent the collective views of practitioners. of how heritage is presented, the need for a Taken together, they are a history of conserva- diversity of interpretations and conciliation in tion thinking; ideas that later emerge in more dealing with conflicting cultural heritage issues. formal conventions are often first aired here. There are other more familiar concepts: the The ICOMOS website lists  formal role of heritage in sustainable development, charters,  resolutions or declarations and the link to education, to skills, economics  charters adopted by national committees. and the information society, as well as a call to Between them they cover everything from states to accord value to heritage and recognise archaeology to vernacular buildings, including the public responsibility to care for it. landscapes, tourism, urban conservation and This is the first heritage convention to underwater heritage. They tackle issues ranging explore the rights and responsibilities that are from philosophical principles and project attached to heritage. It is certainly a long way management to legislation, cooperation and from the unexamined universal values of other training. heritage charters and principles. In many parts of Some charters have had more influence than the world, cultural-heritage sites have sparked others. ‘Athens’ remains a benchmark, despite conflict, precisely because they act as lightning our second thoughts on the use of reinforced rods for conflicting values. Yet every cultural- concrete. ‘Venice’ deals with the monument heritage site involves managing conflicting as a single architectural work and again remains values of one kind or another; what is rarely a much-quoted founding document. Urban discussed is whose values they are. conservation and its link to social and In discussion, the draft has been particularly economic development is found in the welcomed by many of the Eastern European Washington Charter, while the Australia members struggling to create new and more ICOMOS’s Burra Charter emphasises signifi- relevant heritage structures out of the ashes of cance as the basis for conservation. former centralised ones. At a time when multi- Re-reading them, it is possible to trace culturalism is being re-examined in Britain, and tensions – between, for example, unity and the role of heritage in bringing people together diversity, experts and communities, science and creating respect for diversity has become and society. While some are silent on the vital, the ideas in this document would seem social elements of conservation, ‘Washington’ to be a powerful and important statement with states that urban conservation ‘concerns their as much relevance to the UK as to the rest residents first’, while benefits to the hosts is of Europe. central to ‘Tourism’. ‘Vernacular Buildings’ sees building as a process shared by the community Kate Clark and rooted in traditional expertise; the Nara Deputy Director, Policy and Research, Heritage declaration tackles cultural and heritage diversity Lottery Fund head on, recognising that conservation is rooted in the values attributed to heritage, but then Charters: 75 years of thinking about draws back – ‘Authenticity is an essential conservation qualifying factor concerning values’. It is now almost  years since the first inter- English Heritage is currently rethinking its national congress of architects and technicians own conservation principles. It is timely, there- drafted the document now known as the fore, to go back to the original text of  years Athens Charter. Concerned by the loss of ago, which recognises in heritage ‘a certain ‘character and historical values of monuments’, right of the community in regard for private it called for a critical approach to restoration, ownership’ and anticipated then what remains a as well as for legislation to protect monuments central issue today, the problems of ‘reconciling and the areas around them. public law with the rights of individuals – It was a pioneering attempt to capture the noting that due allowance to be made for the collective thinking behind conservation prac- sacrifices which the owners of property may be tice. Since then, ICOMOS has been formed: called upon to make in the general interest’. an interdisciplinary network of conservation professionals, whose mission includes ‘collect- Kate Clark ing, evaluating and disseminating information Deputy Director, Policy and Research, Heritage about conservation principles’. They have Lottery Fund

20 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

Strategic Environmental International charters Assessments

The Athens Charter for the Restoration of The Strategic Environmental Assessment  Directive (SEA Directive //EC) came Historic Monuments   The International Charter for the into effect on July . It requires public Conservation and Restoration of authorities to assess at a strategic level the Monuments and Sites (The Venice Charter) impact of their decisions on the environment.  There are a number of exceptions to the SEA – Historic Gardens (The Florence Charter) defence and civil emergency, financial and  budget plans or those proposals which affect Charter for the Conservation of Historic ‘small areas at local level’ – but it is likely to Towns and Urban Areas (Washington have greatest impact on town and country Charter)  planning, land use and waste management, and Charter for the Protection and will also affect transport, water and energy Management of the Archaeological sectors. Heritage (Lausanne)  One of the key objectives of the directive is Charter on the Protection and Management to inform decision-making, which means the of the Underwater Cultural Heritage (Sofia) results of the SEA must be taken into account  together with other consultations before a plan International Cultural Tourism Charter: is approved or adopted. The SEA therefore Managing Tourism at Places of Heritage should take place at an early stage in strategic Significance  planning. Principles for the Preservation of Historic Although the directive has only recently  been implemented, several SEAs have been Timber Structures  Charter on the Built Vernacular Heritage undertaken. In August the DTi under-  took a sectoral SEA on offshore energy projects ICOMOS Charter – Principles for the around the British coast, in a process intended to inform ministerial decisions on environmen- Analysis, Conservation and Structural  Restoration of Architectural Heritage  tal impact. In January the Environment ICOMOS Principles for the Preservation Agency launched its consultation on river-basin and Conservation–Restoration of Wall management and several local authorities, Paintings  including Norfolk and Shropshire, have commissioned SEAs to look at transport policy. One of the pioneering SEAs in which archae- ology has had a significant contribution is the Sustainability Appraisal (incorporating SEA) of the Lower Lea Valley Regeneration Strategy Charters adopted by ICOMOS national carried out for the London Development committees Agency by Capita Symonds. The Museum of London Archaeology Service (MoLAS) and The Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Pre-Construct Archaeology (PCA) provided Conservation of Places of Cultural  the baseline data and consultation, while Significance (The Burra Charter ) English Heritage provided the opportunity to Charter for the Preservation of Quebec’s  fine tune many of the plan objectives. Heritage (ICOMOS Canada ) The Centre for Sustainability provides infor- Appleton Charter for the Protection and mation on SEAs (www.cs.info) and several Enhancement of the Built Environment  other organisations have provided guidelines (ICOMOS Canada ) for their preparation. Perhaps most useful are First Brazilian Seminar about the the Environment Agency’s good practice Preservation and Revitalisation of Historic  guidelines on strategic environmental assess- Centres (ICOMOS Brazil ) ment (http://www.environment- Charter for the Conservation of Places of agency.gov.uk/aboutus///) and Cultural Heritage Value (ICOMOS New  ODPM’s The Strategic Environmental Assessment Zealand ) Directive: Guidance for Planning Authorities (). A Preservation Charter for the Historic The implications of SEAs for archaeological Towns and Areas of the United States of  and cultural heritage practice have not been America (US/ICOMOS ) analysed and current opinion among archaeolo- gists is divided. Many fear that the SEA is at

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 21 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

Olympic Park 2012 forms a significant part of the Lower Lea Valley regeneration proposals. As part of the Sustainability Appraisal to assess these propos- als Capita Symonds, on behalf of the London Development Agency, used the archaeology and heritage baseline data collected by Museum of London Archaeology Service (MoLAS) / Pre- Construct Archaeology (PCA). © London 2012/London Development Agency © London 2012/London Development too rarified a level to have a significant impact. that the regions around the southern North Sea Others regard SEAs as a welcome opportunity share a common archaeological heritage that to address the specific effects of strategic plan- needs to be better understood and more effec- ning. Despite the disparity of views, SEAs are tively managed. The partnership has underlined an opportunity to look at the impact of strate- how, through working together, it is possible gic planning on the landscape. They provide a to develop better understanding of a transna- direct link between cultural heritage initiatives tional resource and improve approaches to its such as historic landscape characterisation, effective management through the spatial plan- intensive and extensive urban surveys, research ning process. frameworks and policy planning. Planarch , with a project value of ¤. Implicit in the SEA process is a balancing act million, is part of the Interreg IIIB programme in which competing interests, including cultural for North-West Europe. The project is led by heritage, will be assessed. More than ever the County Council and the partners are complexities of assessing significance and the County Council, the Dutch archaeo- role of cultural assets will be compressed into logical service (ROB), the Flemish institute short value-laden text that could have wide- for archaeological heritage (VIOE), Ghent ranging and perhaps unforeseen implications. University, the Ministry of the Walloon The SEA is an opportunity to think strategi- Region, the French service for development- cally about the significance of heritage issues, to led archaeology (INRAP) and the Rhineland take an overview of the relationship between archaeological service (RAB). English Heritage heritage and development and to integrate and the University of Manchester Environ- heritage and cultural assets into longer-term mental Impact Assessment Centre are associate planning. The particular importance of the SEA partners. The ODPM has contributed to the must lie in its distance from the pressures of match funding. specific development-led planning proposals. The role of Sites and Monuments Records in underpinning archaeological decision-making Mike Dawson has been recognised by all of the partners. All Associate Director, CgMs Ltd have benefited from the experience of the others and Wallonia has been able to create a Planarch major new system. Steps have been taken towards common standards and terminology EC directives and CoE conventions such as and each of the partners has contributed sites Valetta and Florence set out frameworks for the and regional summaries to the Planarch management of the historic environment. website. Individual countries, however, interpret how A major Planarch  study assessed the effec- these frameworks should be implemented. tiveness of field techniques in informing plan- Planarch (developing best practice in spatial ning-related decision-making. A key output PLANning and ARCHaeology) (www.plan- was the Evaluation of Archaeological Decision- arch.org) originated in  from a recognition making Processes and Sampling Strategies by Gill

22 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

Hey and Mark Lacey (). In Belgium and Armed conflicts and disasters the Netherlands partners have looked at augur- ing in wetland environments; this has tied in During the last  years English Heritage teams with coastal survey work in Kent, Essex and have frequently offered specialist assistance and Flanders. A review of fieldwalking in informing advice in the event of disasters to historic planning decisions is being undertaken in Essex buildings and collections in England. and Flanders and partners are examining the Increasingly, this expertise is also being sought role of air photographs. internationally as pan-European and global projects are developed in response to changing climatic conditions and fluctuating political situations. The  fire in the WHS Goethe Library in Weimar resulted in the destruction of over , rare books and musical scores. The English Heritage fire-safety officer is part of the pan-Europe project called COST Action C set up by fire-safety and heritage professionals to look at ways of promoting fire safety, minimising fire spread, and reducing the The conceptual framework that underpins Planarch, and impact of smoke and the effects of water archaeological heritage management more generally, is used to extinguish the fire (http://www.vtt.fi/ based on an iterative process with ‘understanding’ at the rte/projects/yki/cost/costc.htm). The centre. project will publish its findings in . In  floods devastated much of central Planning policy is a main focus. Kent and Europe when water levels rose by as much as Essex are developing an historic environment m in six hours. In Prague the damage was strategy for the Thames Gateway, which should particularly acute as many major cultural insti- reinforce characterisation work commissioned tutions and historic buildings are located on by English Heritage. Comparisons will be made the banks of the River Vltava. In the UK, the with the Dutch Belvedere philosophy (see British Council convened a meeting of cultural article by Tom Bloemers, pp –) and with property and heritage organisations to see how strategies elsewhere in the Planarch region. they could help. As a result, Sue Cole was A key initiative is examining the historic seconded for ½ years from English Heritage to environment component of Environmental the United Kingdom and Ireland Blue Shield Impact Asssessments (EIAs) in the Planarch (UKIRB), a branch of the International area. Guidance for best practice in dealing with Committee of the Blue Shield set up to the historic environment in EIAs and SEAs is promote emergency planning, training and being developed. ratification of the  Hague Convention on the One can highlight individual achievements Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of of Planarch partners or our collective progress Armed Conflict. To begin with, emphasis was in archaeology and spatial planning. Perhaps placed on providing information on grants for more significant is the development of under- the repair of historic buildings, collecting books standing of the common historic environment from across the UK for the Prague Archaeolog- and approaches to it. If we are to manage this ical Institute and co-ordinating the activities of transnational resource effectively, at a time when cohesion is perhaps focusing on aspira- tions of social and economic equalisation within an expanding EC, all must engage constructively to safeguard, enhance and promote the heritage around us – a key social ‘glue’ which helps provide us with our sense of place and identity. Right: Medieval statues engulfed by the River John Williams Otava at Pisek in the Head of Heritage Conservation, Kent County Czech Republic during Council and Project Leader for Planarch the catastrophic floods of 2002. TK:The Czech News Agency TK:The News Czech

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 23 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

other institutions. Later, the focus shifted to the industrial and imperial history in the UK. delivery of emergency-planning training, rais- There is still only limited guidance available ing the profile of the UKIRB and to lobbying for the preparation of WHS management plans the UK government to ratify the  Hague for complex heritage sites in the World Convention – which it eventually agreed to do Heritage Committee’s Operational Guidelines in May . (2005) and in Management Guidelines for World After the looting of the Baghdad National Cultural Sites (first published by ICCROM in Museum in April , English Heritage staff ). As UK WHSs have become more became involved in the reconstruction complex, the preparation of their management programme set in place by the Coalition plans has had to depend on learning from prac- Protection Authority and UNESCO. They tical experience rather than formal guidelines. have been working with UNESCO, the As a result, management plans for the WHSs International Council of Museums and the Iraq in the UK have increasingly put emphasis on State Board of Antiquities and Heritage to integrated site management objectives, and develop heritage data standards and to train encouraged the formation of new partnerships antiquity and heritage service staff in modern and the proactive involvement of an array of surveying techniques in Jordan. They have also stakeholders. demonstrated current practices in site and The essential principle that underlies a good object conservation, site display and archaeo- WHS management plan is that its policies and logical techniques to three Iraqi interns spon- objectives for the future must be drawn from a sored by the DCMS to visit the UK. proper understanding of the significance of the site and potential changes that might occur Sue Cole there. UK experience shows that the prepara- Senior Policy Officer,World Heritage and tion of the plan is best carried out in a series of International Policy Team,English Heritage Table 1: UK World Heritage Sites

MANAGING WORLD Early Sites Inscription Type HERITAGE SITES Giant’s Causeway & Causeway Coast 1986 N Durham Castle & Cathedral 1986 C Ironbridge Gorge 1986 C Management plans for UK World including the Ruins of 1986 C Heritage Sites Stonehenge, Avebury & Associated Sites 1986 C Castles & Town Walls of King Edward in Gwynedd 1986 C By joining the World Heritage Convention, St Kilda 1986–2005 N/C the UK has undertaken to identify, protect, 1987 C conserve, present and transmit to future gener- City of Bath 1987 C ations its WHSs. It does this through the use of Hadrian’s Wall 1987 C existing legislation and the planning system. Westminster Palace, & St Margaret’s Church 1987 C The UNESCO World Heritage Committee Henderson Island 1988 N requires all WHSs, natural or cultural, to have 1988 C outstanding universal value, authenticity and/or , St Augustine’s Abbey & St Martin’s Church 1988 C integrity, and effective legal protection and Old & New Towns of 1995 C management, normally represented by a Gough & Inaccessible Islands 1995–2004 N management plan. Since , the UK govern- ment has submitted management plans with all Recent Sites Inscription Date Site Type new WHS nominations. It is government Maritime Greenwich 1997 C policy that all UK WHSs should have manage- Heart of Neolithic 1999 C ment plans that reveal how possible conflicts Historic Town of St George and Related Fortifications, Bermuda 2000 C can be resolved and how conservation will be Blaenavon Industrial Landscape 2000 C managed, administered, and monitored in the 2001 C future. Saltaire 2001 C The  UK WHSs (see table ) include & East Devon Coast 2001 N early-inscribed iconic ‘monuments’ such as 2001 C Stonehenge, Hadrian’s Wall, the Giant’s Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew 2003 C Causeway, the Tower of London and – Maritime Mercantile City 2004 C Canterbury Cathedral, and a more recent range of increasingly complex cultural landscapes and C = Cultural N = Natural townscapes that celebrate the importance of

24 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

Table 2: Key issues arising from analysis of selected UK World Heritage Sites

Stonehenge Durham Castle & Cathedral · Impact of arable agriculture on archaeology · Lack of coherent WHS Steering Group · Impact of A303 on setting of Stonehenge · Condition and cost of restoration of fabric of the monuments · Lack of visitor awareness of wider WHS · Need for WHS boundary revision to include improved setting archaeological landscape · Poor visitor facilities

Tower of London Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City · Large visitor numbers impact on monument fabric · Large number of city centre stakeholders · Definition of buffer zone in relation to potential · Balancing heritage conservation with regeneration development high-rise development · Reuse of extensive range of historic buildings · Buffer zone and WHS boundary definition

Royal Botanic Garden Kew Giant’s Causeway · Need for site development to accommodate · Future structure of coherent WHS management body collections/improved visitor facilities · Impact of large visitor numbers on landscape/geology · Revealing and interpreting historic assets of the site. · Poor visitor facilities · Buffer zone/setting boundaries · Contribution to local economy · Visitor access to collections

stages. These include the site description, analy- clearly the core values justifying inscription, as sis of the significance of the site, assessment of well as other relevant values, and be defensible site vulnerability and opportunities for change, in guiding site changes or enhancement and a long-term vision that includes policy • choice of boundaries and buffer zones needs objectives and an action plan. rigorous and detailed testing and must be justi- In reality, of course, every WHS is different. fied in relation to the conservation of the core Whatever the core values of the site may be, OUV values the keys to a successful management plan are a • in the light of the non-statutory nature of multidisciplinary approach to its writing, the WHS management plans, time and resources effective distillation of diverse and conflicting spent on establishing consensus and ‘ownership’ issues (see table ), the facilitation of stake- of the plan by all stakeholders will greatly assist holder and community involvement, and implementation of plan policies ensuring that its recommendations are capable • the plan’s vision and policy objectives of being enabled. need to combine an inspirational view into UK WHS management plans serve as useful the future with a set of objectives that will be exemplars of this approach, including those for a long-lasting framework for delivering site Hadrian’s Wall, Stonehenge, Liverpool, the conservation, enhancement and possible Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew and the Giant’s development change. Causeway. Each site will, of course, be unique but there are a few principles or lessons that are Chris Blandford worth, reiterating and highlighting: Chris Blandford Associates Ltd • a multidisciplinary approach to site analysis  and distillation of key issues will encourage a UNESCO . Operational Guidelines for the focused and integrated plan that balances Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. heritage with other values Fielden, B and Jokilehto, J . Management Guidelines for • a comprehensive statement of Outstanding World Cultural Heritage Sites. Rome: ICCROM. Universal Value (OUV) needs to identify

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 25 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

Blaenavon Industrial Landscape Schoolchildren in World Heritage Site period costume join in the 2005 In December  UNESCO inscribed the Blaenavon World Blaenavon Industrial Landscape as a WHS. Heritage Day The World Heritage Committee considered parade. this mountain-top landscape, with its relics of industry and former mineral working, to be a ‘cultural landscape’ that testified to the leading role played by South Wales in the early forma- tive years of the Industrial Revolution through the production of iron, steel and coal.

World Heritage inscription has proved to County Borough Council Torfaen © be a catalyst for sustainable regeneration, herald- km Iron Mountain Trail. Another is the estab- ing a revival in the town’s fortunes. WHS status lishment of a dedicated WHS warden service. has changed perceptions and restored commu- • Marketing/branding A marketing strategy, nity pride. The historic iron town of Blaenavon ‘Destination Blaenavon’, was agreed in May suffered physical, social and economic decline as  to build the Blaenavon Industrial a result of the loss of the steel and coal industries. Landscape World Heritage Site brand. The accelerating spiral of decline during the last • Community involvement The partnership century has now been halted, however, and has sought to gain increasing community there are clear signs of revival. involvement within its management arrange- WHS status does not bring with it any direct ments and in developing a calendar of events. funding but the recognition of the site as being of ‘outstanding universal value’ has helped to John Rodger,  secure some £ million (¤ million) of Blaenavon Project Director investment over the last five years. Funding has been provided by the EC, the Wales Assembly Government and the Heritage Lottery Fund as A special grant scheme for World well as the local authorities. Heritage Site farmers at Stonehenge Torfaen County Borough Council leads the and Avebury Blaenavon Partnership. The partnership’s prime aims are to protect and conserve the Blaenavon Stonehenge and Avebury became a WHS in Industrial Landscape so that future generations  for the two stunning stone circles and also may understand the contribution that South for the unique concentration of prehistoric Wales made to the Industrial Revolution, and monuments surrounding them. Most of the to assist the area’s economic regeneration by ceremonial monuments and burial mounds promoting it as a cultural tourism destination. have been eroded with time and successive There have been five strands in the strategy ploughing, and are now hardly visible. to achieve the partnership’s aims: To help protect these features, farmers at • Protection and conservation of monuments Stonehenge and Avebury are encouraged to Regarded as the ‘family silver’ these monu- return arable fields to grass in the priority areas ments include Big Pit, now the National defined by the WHS coordinators. A special Mining Museum of Wales, which won the project was set up by Defra, under the Gulbenkian prize for UK Museum of the Year Countryside Stewardship Scheme and in part- ; the Ironworks (), the best-preserved nership with the and English example of their type and period in the world; Heritage. A rate,  per cent higher than the St Peter’s Church (); and St Peter’s School norm, was agreed for the WHS. (), now being restored as the UK’s first The scheme has been very successful, and World Heritage Centre. since its launch in ,  farmers have signed • Protection and restoration of the town’s the -year agreement at Stonehenge and older housing A -year housing renewal Avebury. In total,  hectares of arable land programme has been initiated that has brought will be returned to pasture and  ancient about substantial upgrading of over  town- monuments will be protected. Look around centre properties. you next time you visit Stonehenge or • Protection and access to the historic land- Avebury: many burial mounds are no longer scape Works are under way to protect the isolated islands in a sea of crops; positive former mineral workings and to improve access change is already happening on the ground. and interpretation. A major feature is the - In March , the special grant scheme was

26 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

Stonehenge: map showing the arable areas that have been, or will be reverted to grass in the period 2000–12. © English Heritage

replaced by Defra’s new Environmental Convention (Valencia ). We contributed to Stewardship scheme, which offers an even the drafting of guiding principles on cultural higher rate for grass reversion throughout the values, and the conference passed a resolution country and new opportunities to protect encouraging the adoption of those principles by archaeological features. national parties. The Ramsar Strategic Plan and Isabelle Bedu Stonehenge World Heritage Site Coordinator, English Heritage

Ramsar The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (signed at Ramsar, Iran, in ) is the only global convention devoted to a specific ecosystem and addresses ‘wise use’ of wetlands in the context of integrated territorial and water- resource planning and management. The ‘wise use’ concept provides an ideal opportunity to extend the principles of conservation and With its Ramsar part- protection employed in the workings of the ners, the Europae Ramsar Convention to the wetland archaeolog- Archaeologiae ical resource. Consilium is initiating English Heritage has developed close links international research with the Bureau of the Ramsar Convention into the heritage of and we have worked together with it to wetlands. promote the cultural and heritage values of wetlands and ensure that those values are recognised and taken into account in the workings of the convention. We played an active part in the th Conference of Contracting Parties to the

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 27 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

operational objectives now place considerable that does not damage the special qualities of the emphasis on the cultural heritage values of place concerned. wetlands, and their incorporation in the If that place is of such outstanding universal Ramsar management process. The designa- value as to be inscribed as a WHS then the chal- tion of new Ramsar sites will in future require lenges of accommodating contemporary archi- an assessment of cultural values and the tectural intervention can be particularly acute. Ramsar framework for wetlands inventory is UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee has now expected to include appropriate cultural become increasingly exercised by the tall build- heritage documentation. New Ramsar ings issue and has taken a robust approach to Management Planning Guidelines (which new buildings that it believes damage the value were adopted by the conference) fully incor- of a WHS. In Cologne the dominant element of porate all aspects of the cultural heritage and the WHS is the cathedral, a landmark rising the new Integrated Coastal Zone from the low ground along the Rhine. On the Management Guidelines (also adopted by the axis of the cathedral across the river, plans for a conference) now recognise the importance of cluster of tall buildings, some already built, cultural values. caused dismay and an insistence from the World The protection and management of the Heritage Committee that if plans were not biodiversity and historic environment values stopped WHS status would be put at risk or of wetlands have much in common. These even withdrawn. advances (in a global context) represent a Recognising that the issue affected many significant step forward in our corporate WHSs, the UNESCO World Heritage Centre objective of developing close collaboration organised a conference, hosted by the City of with natural environment agencies, and Vienna, in May  to consider a memoran- making common ground with nature dum entitled World Heritage and conservation interests. Contemporary Architecture – Managing the Historic Urban Landscape. The memorandum, A Olivier adopted by the World Heritage Committee at Strategy Director, English Heritage its meeting in Durban in July , has much that is welcome. For example, there is recognition of the need for World heritage and contemporary ‘rehabilitation and contemporary development architecture of the historic environment based on a proper inventory and assessment of its values, as well as In recent years there has been a huge adding high quality cultural expressions’. It increase in the numbers of regeneration further notes that the central challenge of schemes in the cities of the UK and much of contemporary architecture in the historic urban the western and developing world. In partic- landscape is to achieve a balance between the ular, tall building schemes, so long out of need to facilitate socio-economic changes while favour, are now regarded by many as land- respecting the inherited townscape. The need mark symbols that characterise a go-ahead, for continuing evolution and contributions entrepreneurial spirit that declares that the from our own and future generations is thus place concerned is flourishing and open for explicitly recognised, and well rooted in a business. proper understanding of the past. High-quality buildings of real distinction The headline principles of the Vienna have emerged from this new-found confi- memorandum will be open to different inter- dence, such as the Swiss Re Building (‘the pretations when individual cases are considered. Gherkin’) in the . But even In England, local planning authorities, English beautifully designed buildings can clash with Heritage and the DCMS may take a view that the distinctive character of historic towns a tall building proposal that responds to the and cities, let alone some less elegant struc- CABE/English Heritage guidance in terms of tures that are being built. In England, this its location, context and design can be challenge was recognised when English supported without compromising the outstand- Heritage and the Commission for ing universal value of the WHS. But will the Architecture and the Built Environment World Heritage Committee take the same (CABE) published guidance in  on tall view? Some of the presentations in Vienna set buildings, clearly setting out the issues that out well-constructed philosophical arguments should be considered when planning such against tall buildings per se, rather than consid- structures. This guidance aims to ensure that ering whether or not they would have a detri- cities and their skylines can evolve in a way mental impact on our ability to appreciate the

28 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

Lime Street Gateway in Liverpool, a regenera- tion project commis- sioned by English Partnerships and Liverpool Vision.The project’s design team is made up of Urban Initiatives, Glenn Howells Architects and Martin Stockley Associates. © Liverpool Vision/English Partnerships © Liverpool

WHS in or near which they were located. authenticity of the WHS. Liverpool’s draft tall There is clearly a discordance between the buildings policy signalled another cluster at the remit of the World Heritage Committee, Lime Street ‘gateway’ into the city, adjacent which is about conservation, and the necessar- to St George’s Hall. Here the City Council is ily broader remit of the central- and local- considering amending the policy as a cluster government planning systems. There is could be detrimental to the setting of the therefore a risk that, even where the planning wonderful civic buildings on the plateau. processes are applied, the World Heritage Instead a single, elegant tower, a landmark to a Committee will take a harder line on tall build- major point of arrival, would mark a significant ings in WHSs than the UK government, carry- improvement on the existing Concourse ing with it the potential for the great House. embarrassment of some UK WHSs being put at Such schemes appear to respond to the prin- risk or even having their WHS status removed. ciples and aims of the Vienna memorandum, This must also present a dilemma for the World but it is not clear as yet whether the World Heritage Committee which, one would Heritage Committee will share this view. assume, would not want to take such a step lightly for sites with an otherwise exemplary Henry Owen-John record in conservation management. Regional Director, North West Region, English This issue is by no means unique to the UK, Heritage as the Cologne example has demonstrated, but it could apply particularly in urban WHSs such as Liverpool, where there is an emerging view that a tall buildings policy, modelled around a cluster of such structures in the commercial core of the city (part of the WHS buffer zone) and another cluster well to the south of the WHS, will help meet the city’s aspirations without compromise to the integrity and

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 29 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

the LDA as a partner with active support from BROWNFIELD REGENERATION Berkeley Homes, Greenwich Borough Council AND INDUSTRIAL HERITAGE and Oxford Archaeology. Taking former arsenal sites as the common Brownfield regeneration is a Europe-wide issue, vehicle, our other partners are the University of not only in terms of creating jobs in deprived Cadiz, Spain, The Malta Heritage Trust and areas, but also for improving quality of life in the Estonian National Academy of Arts, areas where there are derelict remains of a supported by the Estonian National Heritage former industrial age. It is not surprising, there- Board. The project launch was held in fore, that there are a number of European- December  at Woolwich, and two-day funded projects dealing with regeneration issues. seminars have now taken place in each of the Here we look at three projects taking industrial other three countries. heritage forward into a new era.Two are funded The work at the Royal Arsenal is the starting under Interreg and one from Culture 2000. point for the development of a framework approach to the regeneration of historic brownfield sites. Each partner will be able expand the key elements pertinent to their sites SHARP practice: the working of a by focusing on themes such as public/private European project partnership working, masterplanning, archaeol- ogy, education, tourism and heritage conserva- Sustainable Historic Arsenal Regeneration tion. The partners and their sites represent a Partnership (SHARP) is a two-year project to diverse mix, which will give SHARP both build upon experiences dealing with historic richness and the strength to enable it to brownfield sites in different parts of Europe produce a robust blueprint for the overall (www.sharp-europe.org). theme of ‘Regeneration through Heritage’. English Heritage’s London Region has been English Heritage is currently engaged in a involved with the regeneration of the -ha number of important regeneration issues in former Royal Arsenal site at Woolwich for response to government initiatives. European more than  years, commencing with a rapid government is also to review a range of its poli- survey of the  Listed and other buildings. cies including sustainability, but currently with- Even before the approval of the development out reference to the historic environment. masterplan in  by Greenwich Borough SHARP is therefore in the right place at the Council, the landowners, the London right time to contribute to this wider debate. Development Agency (LDA), were engaged in an extensive remediation and basic building Mark Stevenson maintenance programme. English Heritage has Archaeology Adviser, London Region, English been actively engaged in both a statutory and Heritage an advisory capacity in all aspects of the design and implementation of works on this nationally important site. SHARP delegates A seminar organised by English Heritage for visiting The Arsenal, stakeholders in  reviewed what had been No.1 Dock, achieved and identified what still needed to be Cottonera, Malta. done. Key aspects to emerge were the need to Government-backed raise the profile of the site and to share with a regeneration of wider audience the approaches and methodolo- No.1 Dock is but gies that were emerging in dealing with its one project, some historic environment. public, some private, It was clear that a European project would within the area of fulfil this aspiration. Equal financial support the Three Cities. from the LDA and the lead developer on site, Berkeley Homes (East London) Ltd, enabled the employment of a not-for-profit manage- ment company, st Century ERA Ltd, to take forward the drafted programme. The applica- tion for funding to run the project was approved last year by the Interreg managing authority at the first attempt, with English

Heritage London Region as lead partner and © English Heritage Woods Malcolm

30 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

Working Heritage: a future for of ‘specialists’, professionally concerned with historic industrial centres the assessment and statutory protection of the heritage, with those of local planning bodies. The Working Heritage project has its origins in The case studies examined by the project the coming together in the mid-s of an were the textile communities of Roubaix in informal group of specialists from many west- northern France, Colonia Guell outside ern European countries, all of whom were Barcelona and Schio in northern Italy, the sites employed by official agencies and shared a of heavy industry around Terni in Umbria and common interest in the industrial heritage. A the Birmingham Jewellery Quarter. These sites small Raphael Project, ‘Europe de l’aire’, on were each the subject of two- or three-day s airports was later undertaken by some of workshops involving lectures and site visits these specialists, reinforcing the view that regu- attended by the project partners together with lar interchange between international other locally based heritage professionals and colleagues, sharing experience and good prac- industrial archaeology students. tice, was extremely valuable. Accordingly it The project’s findings have been dissemi- was agreed that the group should collaborate in nated by means of an exhibition shown at Working Heritage, a Culture  project appropriate venues in each of the four partner examining the factors that influenced the countries, as well as on CD-ROM in the four successful regeneration of historic industrial languages. The exhibition, designed and districts. collated by the French partners, presents an The project, which was to run for only one outline of the project and gives details of the year (from September  to September protection and restoration of selected sites ), involved eight partners in four countries. within each of the historic districts. The organising partners were English Heritage The other main product of the project will (project leader) with Birmingham City be a book detailing the experience of each Council; the Direction de l’Architecture et du partner district – their successes and tribulations Patrimoine at the French Ministry of Culture – and analysing the factors influencing the vari- and Communication with the City of Roubaix ous and diverse regeneration projects. The aim in France (Nord); the Generalitat de Catalunya is to develop practical guidance for use by and the local authority of Colonia Guell repre- other organisations – whether national, regional senting Spain; and the municipalities of Schio or local – faced with the problem of regenerat- and Terni in Italy. ing historically significant industrial sites and The project was based upon the comparative communities. analysis of several key sites where the industrial heritage has come to be seen as a positive asset, John Cattell lying today at the heart of urban renewal strate- Head of Architectural Investigation, English Heritage gies and new senses of community pride. It built on the experience gained in different European countries, combining the approaches

The Spinning Mill, a historic textile-milling complex dating from 1891, at Colònia Güell, Catalonia.The photo- graph shows one of the original buildings where cotton bales were unpacked and the cotton spun into yarn. The building has recently been renovated and its large open spaces divided up to form offices.The exterior remains the same except for the addition of a new staircase. Direcció General del Patrimoni Cultural, Departament de Cultura, Generalitat de Catalunya, Spain © Photographer: Segura Pepo

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 31 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Managing the past for the present

ERIH: creating a network of UK from the ODPM. It is timely, given the industrial heritage across Europe growing recognition of industrial heritage and interest in the individuals and workers who The European Route to Industrial Heritage contributed so significantly to industrial society. (ERIH) network (www.erih.net) will, by , Organisations and sites in several other extend from Ironbridge Gorge in the UK, the European countries have expressed an interest birthplace of the Industrial Revolution, through in joining ERIH and the current partners are to the Ruhr, the industrial powerhouse of considering how best to integrate them into the North Rhine-Westphalia in Germany, and route in the future. beyond. Designed to open up industrial land- scapes in all their variety to both local people David Buckley and tourists, sites on the route will each carry ERIH UK Co-ordinator the ERIH logo. The network will comprise two tiers. ‘Anchor Point’ sites of particular national or international importance form the main route. Examples include industrial WHSs such as Volkingen Iron Works in Saarland; the Zollverein Colliery and Coking Plant at Essen in the Ruhr; the Big Pit at Blaenavon in South Wales; and the Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage site, in Shropshire. In the UK,  identified Anchor Point sites have joined the network. The second tier comprises regional Ironbridge Gorge, routes with sites of all sizes and types that will Telford,World Heritage amplify the main Anchor Point route. These Site and ERIH Anchor significant civil engineering monuments and Point. structures, known as ‘Key Sites’, will demon- strate specific aspects of technology and inno- vation and offer good visitor and educational facilities. Pilot routes based on the regions of the four ERIH UK project partners are being created in South Wales, the East of England, the West Midlands and the North West of England. The Ruhr Route of Industrial Heritage, opened in , is the model for the ERIH route and North Rhine-Westphalia is the proj- ect lead partner. The Volkingen Iron Works, Saarland, is the other German partner. The UK partners comprise Torfaen County Borough, the Borough of Telford and Wrekin, the Wrekin and Telford © Borough of University of Manchester Field Archaeology Centre and Essex County Council. The Dutch partners are the Foundation for Industrial Heritage for the Netherlands and the Province of North Holland. Ironbridge Gorge hosted the official launch of the ERIH transnational route on  September , which included a speech by Sir Neil Cossons, the Chairman of English Heritage. Partners were joined at the event by representatives from other ERIH sites, heritage specialists and media representatives, and the first ERIH plaque was unveiled at the Museum of Iron. The ERIH project is receiving European Regional Development funding through the Interreg IIIB Community Initiative and in the

32 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES

Sharing the Past with Everyone Engaging with England’s Heritage

Loyd Grossman OBE Chairman National Museums Liverpool and former English Heritage Commissioner

In a cosmopolitan world, we should celebrate the contribu- tion that the heritage makes to contemporary society.

The details of my own odyssey from student England in , I was of course overwhelmed arriving in London to the Commission of by the variety and ubiquity of what people English Heritage some  years later are of little were just beginning to call ‘heritage’. My early public interest but a few recollections from excursions took in sites as different as those years may be useful. I was born and Stonehenge, Hadrian’s Wall, the Tower of raised in New England, an American region London, Manchester Town Hall and King’s that has a great sense (detractors would say too College Chapel. In the s standards of inter- great) of the past. My father and most of his pretation and presentation to the public were family were very involved in the work of not what they have become, but it is worth museums and galleries and one of my most remembering that the England of the mid- important mentors was Abbott Lowell s was a much poorer country wrestling Cummings, Director of the Society for the with grave political and economic problems. Preservation of New England Antiquities, the I was particularly interested in what I soon New England equivalent of the National Trust. learned were called ‘unroofed attractions’ So a love of history and a sense of the pleasure (previously I just thought they were ruins), of engaging with the past was part of both my and I confess that I very much enjoyed the nature and my nurture. When I arrived in primitive-looking but scholarly pamphlets that I believe the Ministry of Works published to Hadrian’s Wall, guide visitors around them. I certainly appreci- near Haltwhistle, ated not just the academic underpinning of the Northumberland. At heritage business, but also the commitment Cawfields Crags a fine to wide public access. Coming from a much consolidated stretch of more free market economy I was also amazed the wall runs westwards by the generosity with which the public purse past Milecastle 42. supported the historic environment. The dark side of the picture was a general shabbiness symptomatic of a culture of dependency, a desire to court the public without engaging them and, as is so often the case when the creaky machinery of big state institutions is involved, an inability to get things done. In the past  years much in that picture has changed and much has remained the same. ‘How are we doing?’ is an important question to ask because large amounts of public money, as well as substantial private funds, are devoted to the heritage, and also because many of us believe that the way we manage the heritage is a vital sign of the health of our soci-

Skyscan Balloon Photography © English Heritage ety. International comparisons are entertaining

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 33 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Sharing the past with everyone

Tyntesfield, near Bristol. This great Victorian house has been saved by the National Trust with the support of the Heritage Lottery Fund. © NTPL/Andrew Butler but not always valuable, as even in the age of heritage extremely well taking all things into globalisation national conditions remain so account. specific. England has a very large amount of I am acutely aware, though, of very signifi- heritage (however you may wish to define it) cant challenges and difficulties that not just the in a relatively small, very densely populated heritage bodies but the country as a whole must area. We can legitimately regard England as address. There is of course the constant pressure the birthplace of the modern conservation to somehow value the contribution that heritage movement, and as a result there is a large makes to society, and while it is possible to amount of academic and practical knowledge quantify the role heritage plays in economic about conservation and a strong cultural bias regeneration (the most obvious examples can be towards its value. Equally it is important to seen in the revival of our great regional cities), it recognise that England has been, and to a is difficult, if not downright impossible, to say certain extent remains a strongly hierarchical what the exact worth of heritage is in terms of society as well as an increasingly cosmopolitan building citizenship, spiritual values or a sense of one, with many competing ideas about what meaning and belonging. Although spending on heritage is and indeed to whom it belongs. heritage is relatively trivial in terms of overall Judged solely by our own standards the public finances, a number of external factors heritage record is, I think, bright if rather (including but not limited to the pensions crisis, patchy. The inability to solve the problem of the soaring medical costs of servicing the aging Stonehenge – in spite of the fact that three population, the expenses of the war on terror) successive chairmen of English Heritage have mean that every penny of public spending will invested a great deal of intellect, time and be bitterly contested for many years to come. As prestige – is puzzling and shameful. The a result heritage bodies will be forced to gener- saving of Tyntesfield by the National Trust ate more income and, I believe, more savagely (www.nationaltrust.org.uk) is probably prioritise their operations. There could be a something that could only have happened temptation to prune what might be thought of in England, as was the long and ultimately as ‘below the line’ academic activities. In my successful battle to save the terraced housing of view this would be fatal: scholarship and Nelson, Lancashire. The educational work of research provide the absolutely sacrosanct foun- the National Trust and English Heritage is dations upon which the whole edifice of our inspiring and the role that the private sector heritage rests. A more creative path would, I plays largely through the Historic Houses hope, inspire us to find new ways of reaching Association is, I am pleased to say, increasingly the many who feel that heritage is either not well recognised. As someone who travels for them or for special occasions only. If we can frequently (so far this year to the United States, enthusiastically, cogently and joyfully commu- China, India, Italy, Greece, Denmark, nicate the contribution that heritage makes to Lithuania, Germany, France and Switzerland), society, we can indeed secure its future. my instinctive feel is that we manage our built

34 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES

Sharing the Past with Everyone Case studies in site presentation

An emphasis on popular enjoyment of the heritage is leading to exciting new approaches to presenting the past.

PROVIDING THE BEST DAYS OUT properties, and reasons to come back. We need IN HISTORY to do this because every year those people are being presented with more and more choices, English Heritage cares for more than  prop- whether they are other heritage destinations or erties,  of which are staffed and charge for any of the myriad ways in which people can entry. In the last financial year income from the now use up their leisure time. operation of these staffed properties totalled over However, while we seek to respond to the £ million – a significant contribution to the needs of our customers, we are also careful to running cost of the organisation. listen to the needs of the one thing that does Over the next  years we have ambitious not have a voice – the building itself. targets for income growth, and that means Any investment in a property must be done ensuring our properties continue to stand out in sensitively. English Heritage is, first and fore- an increasingly competitive environment. We most, a custodian of the historic environment. have to ensure that our customers – whether a Our properties are not theme parks, they are visitor looking for an inspirational afternoon, a the real thing and that must be reflected in the company looking for a unique backdrop for a way we present them to the public. Nothing product launch or a couple seeking a memorable we do at our own properties should contradict venue for their wedding – think of English advice we give to others, or undermine the Heritage properties first, have a great experience intellectual integrity of the organisation. It is while they are with us and tell others about it. this integrity – the trust that people have in Achieving these objectives depends upon two English Heritage to look after these treasures things: that we effectively communicate the appropriately – that in turn makes them want experiences that visiting English Heritage prop- to visit, support or sponsor us. Departments erties will provide, and – critically – that we within English Heritage therefore work collab- continue to invest in those experiences. We oratively to ensure that a balanced approach is need to give people new reasons for visiting our taken to development. Sir Neil Cossons, The principal mechanism for investment in Chairman of English our sites is the Property Development Heritage, and the local Programme (PDP). PDP is one part of a long- MP Julia Goldsworthy term investment strategy and aims to ensure take a tour of the that developments take place at properties improved visitor facilities where the returns – in the form of admissions, in the refurbished Royal retail, catering or hospitality income – are Artillery barrack block likely to be the greatest. at in Projects are initially identified on the basis Cornwall, part-funded of commercial potential. Project boards are by the EU Structural then established whose composition include funds. representatives of English Heritage’s Marketing Department – to ensure that developments are based on an understanding of the needs and expectations of our visitors – and Property

Guy Newman © Apex News & Pictures Guy Newman © Presentation Department – to ensure that any

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 35 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Sharing the past with everyone

interpretative elements are of the highest the criteria for prioritising ASPP projects are quality, and that the scheme as a whole does based wholly on the need to appropriately pres- not compromise the understanding, character ent and interpret a site, without reference to or significance of the building. the direct commercial return. Throughout the project the team work The benefit of this two-tiered approach is closely with the local English Heritage that it ensures that there is a minimum consis- inspectors to ensure that the fabric or setting tent standard of presentation across the port- of the building is not compromised. Where folio as a whole. This means not only that appropriate, any plans are also presented for English Heritage is fulfilling its obligations to all approval to the English Heritage Advisory the buildings in its care, but also that wherever Committee. you see an English Heritage sign you can be Significant recent PDP projects include: guaranteed a level of quality that is matched by • Helmsley Castle – a new visitor centre few other destinations. Recent ASPP projects (incorporating the town’s Tourist Information include new interpretation schemes at: Centre) and interpretation scheme • • Pendennis Castle – conversion of the Barrack • The Jewel Tower, Westminster Block into corporate hospitality facilities, new • Haughmond Abbey visitor interpretation scheme and education • Prudhoe Castle facilities • Wharram Percy Deserted Medieval • Scarborough Castle – conversion of the Village. Master Gunner’s House into new interpretation The proof of the success of this approach to and catering facilities product investment can be seen in the results. • Osborne House – creation of corporate Investments at Helmsley Castle have resulted in hospitality facilities and a new restaurant in the a  per cent increase in income; Osborne former Orangery. House has seen a  per cent increase in hospi- An investment strategy that focused solely on tality income; Pendennis Castle, two months obtaining the greatest direct commercial return, after completion of the project, had exceeded its however, would soon result in English hospitality income target for the year; Heritage operating a portfolio of sites where Scarborough Castle has seen a £, year- the most visited  or  were presented and on-year increase in catering income. Many of operated in an exemplary way while the these projects have benefited from EU funding. remainder were left neglected. Therefore, Overall, the contribution to the organisation alongside PDP there runs the Annual Site from commercial activities has increased every Presentation Programme (ASPP). Unlike PDP, year for the last three years. And this growth

Helmsley Castle, North . English Heritage’s new visitor centre, part-funded by Objective 2 of the EU’s ERDF fund, is also the home of the town’s Tourist Information Centre. © English Heritage

36 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Sharing the past with everyone

in income is not at the expense of customer The project’s objective is to convert sacred satisfaction. Over the same period our average spaces in a way that respects the origins of the visitor-satisfaction score grew to . out of , religious structure. It aims to give funding that the highest it has ever been. will assist with future plans either to maintain Through the sensible, sensitive, application the original function of each religious site as of commercial principles English Heritage is a place of peaceful reflection, meditation or as demonstrating that it is possible to create a a green lung in an urban environment, or financially sustainable future for our properties provide new functions by opening sites up to while remaining an exemplary steward of the public as tourist attractions, museums, art the past. performances or educational facilities. At Fountains Abbey the project will fund Dan Wolfe both conservation work and new interpretation Marketing Director, English Heritage facilities, including repair work to the water- ways and high altar in the abbey; creating an interpretation base in the abbey gatehouse and ENHANCING THE VISITOR producing an audio tour based on the history EXPERIENCE of the abbey. As part of the project each partner country In the past, millions of European euros have is involved in the planning and production of assisted the development of historic sites in the a European touring exhibition and conference. UK and other countries. Repairs to historic This will focus on religious heritage, looking monuments, new and innovative interpretation, at the role of abbeys and convents over , visitor centres and car parks have all received years and their relationship with the physical inputs from the European Structural Funds (also landscape and people at all levels of society. known as European Regional Development There has never been an exhibition on Funds) in Objective 1 and 2 areas. The main religious heritage undertaken by more than target for this funding has been job creation,and two partners, which makes this project an the historic environment has benefited enor- exciting challenge. mously. The touring exhibition and conference will Since enlargement of the EU to 25 countries take place at Fountains Abbey and Studley in May 2004,all of which are substantially poorer Royal from July . The conference will than the UK, it is inevitable that this source of illustrate the changing use of monastic spaces, funding will be reduced in future.In its place,new collaboration partnerships are being developed, based on the idea of a shared European heritage. These are about exchanging ideas, conservation guidelines and broadening popular interest in the historic environment across Europe. EU funding on such projects will continue into the next decade, opening up many new possibilities for fruitful work. Here we outline case studies from the Interreg fund, the EU research programme and the Structural funds.

Converting Sacred Spaces

Converting Sacred Spaces (CSS), a ¤. million European Interreg project, brings together the five Member States of Belgium, the UK, Germany, France and Ireland, with England represented by Fountains Abbey. The National Trust, owners of Fountains Abbey and Studley Royal, a WHS in , is delighted to be working in partnership with English Fountains Abbey, North Heritage on a project which will bring both Yorkshire: the surprise considerable funding to the abbey and an excel- view of the abbey from lent opportunity to learn from the experiences

Anne Boleyn’s Seat. of organisations elsewhere in Europe. Trust Harris/National© Paul

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 37 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Sharing the past with everyone

their evolution of meaning to different sections The project was initiated in ; European of society over time and how they can be posi- Regional Development Fund (Objective ) tively managed in the present for the benefit of funding was confirmed in October  and all. Themes relating to Fountains Abbey will was completed at the end of June . The include Cistercian use of space, post-medieval project has provided a welcome opportunity to adaptation of sacred space, tourism and the develop understanding and cooperation designed landscape, the role of the state and between English Heritage and local partners, the creation of ‘national assets’, and managing which has assisted in the execution of the proj- sacred space in the present. ect and should also be beneficial in the future. CSS will raise the profile of Fountains Abbey The partnership funding has also allowed in Europe. For hundred of years the ruined English Heritage to invest in work that it may abbeys of England have been separated from not otherwise have been able to justify on its the mainstream of European monastic tradition. own account, most notably the reinstatement This exciting project will create strong links of the beach access steps. Overall, the physical across the abbeys of Europe in the st century environment in Tintagel village and the and an opportunity to share experiences and commercial opportunities for the castle and the knowledge with the present-day managers and village have all been improved. carers of abbeys from Belgium, France, the Alongside the regeneration work, English Netherlands and Ireland. They will learn from Heritage took the opportunity to develop an us, and we will learn from them. educational outreach partnership project with For further information visit www.nweu- Arts Council England SW. This was success- rope.org, then follow the Projects link. fully integrated into a local Living Legends Project, which was part of the last stage of the Sasha Jackson village regeneration scheme. Marketing and Communications Officer, National Alongside the management of the project, a Trust, Fountains Abbey Tintagel Forum, consisting of local traders and businesses and attended by English Heritage’s local Visitor Operations Manager, was estab- The Tintagel Regeneration Project lished to provide an opportunity for discussion of the project’s aims and progress. The Tintagel Regeneration Project was aimed at regenerating the local tourist economy of Loraine Knowles Tintagel village and was carried out in partner- Visitor Operations Director (West), English Heritage ship with third parties under the overall management of a team within Cornwall Tintagel Castle, County Council. It was part-funded by the Cornwall: view of the European Regional Development Fund new beach steps (Objective ) and the South West Regional installed in 2003 to Development Agency. improve visitor access. The objectives of the project, which was The work was carried managed and part-funded by English Heritage, out as part of a wider included: Tintagel Regeneration • reinstatement of the beach steps (completed Project part-funded by April ) the European Regional • improvements to the English Heritage visitor Development Fund facilities (completed April ) (Objective 1) and in • purchase of land to improve the access track partnership with from the village (purchase completed March Cornwall County ; works to be completed in –) Council. • improvements to the mainland steps (completed March  – difficulties in purchasing the land significantly delayed the original schedule). Objectives of a parallel project managed by Cornwall County Council included improve- ments to the village ‘streetscape’, new public toilets, a shop-front enhancement scheme, archaeology and wildlife trails and better inter- pretation and marketing. Civil Engineering Moore/Mowlem © Steve

38 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Sharing the past with everyone

PICTURE and negative effects of tourism in urban areas • an analysis of collaborative management styles The PICTURE project (Pro-active manage- that can benefit small and medium-sized towns ment of the Impact of Cultural Tourism upon in the sustainable management of cultural Urban Resources and Economies) examines tourism issues relating to the impact of cultural tourism • a survey of the impact on conservation of the on small and medium-sized European towns. It built heritage aims to develop a framework for the creation • the development of methods to measure the and management of local tourism policies that impact on the quality of life, to be tested in will maximise the benefits of sustainable Belfast (Northern Ireland) and Liège and Mons tourism, at the same time promoting the (Belgium) conservation and protection of the built • an analysis of the impact on local economies heritage (www.pictureproject.net). at the European level, based on European Four main objectives are being pursued: statistics and information relating to the devel- • evaluating the dynamics of the effects of opment of tourism in towns. tourism Further work is currently under way on the • identifying and benchmarking innovative following: urban governance strategies • the development of a typology of attracters • providing a method for facilitating the assess- (ie places and events of interest to visitors) ment of the impact of tourism • an analysis of the impact of European Capitals • disseminating existing knowledge and good of Culture mobilising local partnerships practices. between towns and private actors The research is nearing the halfway stage, • a first draft of an impact assessment method- with the three-year project due for completion ology based on the SUIT Project (Sustainable in February . The work to date includes development of Urban historical areas through various studies on the impact of tourism in the an active Integration within Towns, EU th following areas: Framework Programme, completed in ), • a preliminary identification of likely positive including the development of methods for measuring public perception of tourism The Victorian elegance development. of the Crown Liquor Fifteen towns throughout Europe have been Saloon, Belfast. selected as case studies including Cambridge and Chester in England, and Belfast and Derry in Northern Ireland. The research is being carried out in partnership with organisa- tions from Belgium, France, Germany, the Czech Republic, Northern Ireland, Spain, Luxembourg, Norway and Italy and is part of the EU’s th Framework Programme; English Heritage’s representative on the project is David Miles.

Valerie Wilson Research Officer,Archaeology Department, English Heritage

Crossing the Lines

English Heritage and Essex County Council have joined forces with the municipalities of Mortsel (Belgium) and Utrecht (The Netherlands) in a project which aims to develop restoration techniques, enhance tourism and improve the integration of historic defence lines in terms of spatial planning (www.crossingthe- lines.com). Project work is taking place at the four locations described below.

© Belfast City Council • At Tilbury Fort, Thurrock, the project has

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 39 EUROPEAN AND WORLD PERSPECTIVES: Sharing the past with everyone

helped to finance a series of improvements to for the people using the ground floor as a the interpretation and display of this English tearoom. Computer simulations have showed Heritage property. One initiative is an oral- that extra insulation between the two environ- history project to record the memories of ments is needed. Existing channels will be used people who lived and worked in the fort, the for ventilation/heating, probably using gas-fired docks and along the riverside settlements of heaters and perhaps a heat-recovery system. the Thames during the Second World War. When the restoration and landscaping of the Their recollections will be collected by local fort is complete, it will re-open as a campsite, volunteers and made accessible to the visiting inn, teahouse and information centre. public via a touch-screen kiosk. A second • Fort IV, Mortsel (near Antwerp), is already a initiative is the fitting-out of the underground centre for culture and events. Here, experts gunpowder magazines of the north-east have turned their attention to restoring the to restore them to their appearance during the fort’s once impressive brick façade. Studies to Victorian era. A survey of the fort also funded match and replace the original bricks and by the project will help formulate its future mortar (dating to  and of poor quality) management and interpretation. have been successful and the restoration is well • On the Essex coast at Jaywick, an early under way. The project also seeks to restore the th-century Martello Tower is being restored historic layout of the site by the removal of and converted for joint use as an arts facility and intrusive buildings and then to establish a coastal watchtower. This site has been chosen multifunctional visitor centre. as the pilot for an innovative heating and venti- It is anticipated that the lessons learned on lation system, using and adapting the original these four sites will have a wider application on ventilation channels. A further option is solar- redundant fortifications across Europe. The heat collectors to supply additional sustainable Crossing the Lines Project receives European heating. Regional Development funding through the • In Utrecht the restoration of Fort Aan de Interreg IIIB Community Initiative. Klop is addressing the problem of how to maintain two different environments within Sue Tyler one structure (the guardhouse dating from UK Regional Co-ordinator, Crossing the Lines, ). One should be suitable for the inhabi- Essex County Council tants of the cellar (bats) and one comfortable

Interior of Fort 4, Mortsel, Belgium, built between 1860 and 1865, as one of a line of forts defending Antwerp.The Crossing the Lines Project has restored and replaced damaged brickwork. © Cesart, Kontich, Belgium

40 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  News from English Heritage

Heritage Counts 2005 Conservation Principles

Heritage Counts is the annual state of the historic English Heritage is developing Conservation environment report, produced by English Principles, Policy and Guidance to inform and Heritage on behalf of the wider historic envi- advise all those involved with the sustainable ronment sector. Heritage Counts  will be the management of England’s historic environ- fourth report in the series, which began in  ment. The Principles are intended primarily for with the original State of the Historic Environment use by English Heritage, in guiding both the Report. management of its own estate and its advice to This year’s edition, which is published on  others. It is hoped, however, that they will also November , has a special focus on rural be helpful to all those concerned with manag- heritage issues. The way in which the country- ing the historic environment, not least local side is managed has changed in recent years, planning authorities. They will amplify the with public subsidy now often directed specifi- well-established guidance set out in the cally towards the maintenance of historic land- government’s Planning Policy Guidance notes scape features, and with the establishment of  and , Planning and the Historic Environment two new government agencies now responsible and Archaeology and Planning (DOE & DNH for advising on rural matters and delivering  and DOE ), but we hope that support to rural communities (Natural England through further developing rather than merely and the Commission for Rural Communities). synthesising current thinking, they will be The evidence in Heritage Counts  sets out helpful to government in preparing the forth- a clear rationale for why the historic dimension coming Planning Policy Statement (PPS). to the rural landscape needs to be taken into We wish to produce something that is account in the development of rural policy. owned and endorsed by the conservation New research outlined in the report includes: community and the public and we are there- • quantification and analysis of the loss of fore setting up a consultation programme to historic parkland since  ensure the quality of the work. We hope that • assessment of the distribution of historic assets the conservation professions and government – (listed buildings, scheduled monuments etc) both local and national – will contribute to it, across rural and urban parts of the country understand and support it. • analysis of the present stock of farm buildings: For further details and a copy of the consul- their condition, adaptation, and likely future tation document, please visit our website at trends www.english-heritage.org.uk/conservation- • new evidence of the economic and social principles or email us at impact of the repair of traditional farm buildings [email protected] • the importance of agri-environment funding in preserving historic landscape features. The main national report is accompanied by Heritage Works a suite of nine regional reports, each highlight- ing the particular pressures and opportunities English Heritage, the Royal Institution of for the rural historic environment in each Chartered Surveyors and the British Property region. Federation are producing a practical step-by- For more information, please contact Ben step guide for use by the development industry Cowell, tel:   ; email: and practitioners on the role of historic build- [email protected]. Previous ings in regeneration. To be called Heritage editions of the report can be viewed at the Works, it will prove that heritage assets act as a Heritage Counts website, catalyst for successful regeneration schemes, www.heritagecounts.org.uk identify successes, failures, common problems and solutions, report on the wider regeneration benefits and offer best guidance on practice at all stages of a heritage-based regeneration

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 41 scheme. The study, which is being carried out Heritage and sector capacity to provide by Drivers Jonas, is due to be published international post-disaster support. We will towards the end of . For further informa- work with others to identify funding sources tion contact David Tomback FRICS, and develop mechanisms for support of heritage Development Economics Director, tel:  overseas.  ; email: david.tomback@english-  Consider commercial activity overseas, heritage.org.uk beginning with an examination of the potential for exploitation of EH intellectual property rights and the possibility of consultancy work. The Association of Gardens Trusts  Raise awareness of English Heritage interna- tionally, thereby strengthening our ability to Over the last century many of our historic achieve other objectives. houses, and their surrounding parks and gardens,  Continue to improve English Heritage’s have been adapted for use in education. On  internal coordination of international activity. April  the Association of Garden Trusts annual conservation conference will look at  how the educational needs of the st century Policy guidance can be achieved while retaining the historic and cultural value of the grounds of these schools. In  English Heritage launched a new To be held at the Michael Tippet Centre at series of policy leaflets as part of its wider Bath Spa University and sponsored by English HELM (Historic Environment Local Heritage, this major national conference will be Management) programme. The titles listed of interest to all those involved in education, here are available from English Heritage planning, conservation and the historic envi- Customer Services, tel:   ; email: ronment, including owners, trustees, governors [email protected]. They can and bursars. For further information and a also be downloaded in PDF format from the booking form please contact Kate Harwood HELM website: www.helm.org.uk at  Cowcross Street, London  ; tel and fax:   ; e-mail: agt@gardens- trusts.org.uk Planning and Development in the Historic Environment: March 2004 A Charter for English Heritage Advisory Services (2nd ed Apr 2005) International strategy Transport and the Historic Environment March 2004 Farming and the Historic Landscape: Caring for Archaeological English Heritage Commissioners have agreed Sites on Arable Land May 2004 five priorities for our international work Farming and the Historic Landscape: Caring for Archaeological derived from English Heritage’s Strategic Sites in Grassland May 2004 Plan ‒ within the wider context of Farming and the Historic Landscape: Caring for Farm Buildings May 2004 government priorities. A Guidance Note on Historic Environment Champions (2nd ed Oct 2005)  Use our international involvement to better Streets for All September 2004 meet priority objectives within England. Farming the Historic Landscape: An Introduction for Farm Advisers January 2005 Principal goals are to ensure international Low Demand Housing and the Historic Environment January 2005 regulatory regimes favourable to the UK, to Regeneration and the Historic Environment: Heritage as a maximise available funding streams, and to Catalyst for Better Social and Economic Regeneration January 2005 learn from best practice elsewhere. Major activities will include a symposium next year Listing is Changing January 2005 of national heritage agencies in the EU, Farming the Historic Landscape: Caring for Sites in Parkland March 2005 continued support to DCMS (particularly Local Strategic Partnerships and the Historic Environment March 2005 with UNESCO), providing UK representation Farming the Historic Landscape: Entry Level Stewardship April 2005 at ICCROM, continuing to promote the inter- Outstanding Beauty: Outstanding Heritage – AONBs and ests of the historic environment within the EU, the Historic Environment May 2005 and Cooperation Protocols with five selected The Future of Historic School Buildings May 2005 countries. Environmental Quality in Spatial Planning June 2005  Support government (including DCMS) Conservation Area Appraisals November 2005 international objectives within our resource constraints. Principal goals are to influence Conservation Area Management November 2005 government towards greater recognition of Climate Change October 2005 cultural heritage as part of UK international Wind Energy and the Historic Environment October 2005 cultural strategy, and to develop English

42 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  The National Monuments Record News and events

home of the Spencer family, in St James’s The National Monuments Record (NMR) Place. The prints are in excellent condition and is the public archive of English Heritage. It were taken by Bedford Lemere and Company includes over  million archive items (photo- in June . The NMR holds the original graphs, drawings, reports and digital data) glass negatives for these prints, and the acquisi- relating to England’s historic environment. tion of this portfolio of original prints adds to The following information gives details of web this nationally important collection. resources, new collections (catalogues are avail- While one print shows the Palladian west able in the NMR search room in Swindon) and façade of the house (designed by John Vardy, outreach programmes. a pupil of William Kent), nine depict the Contact the NMR at: exquisite interiors of the State Rooms designed NMR Enquiry & Research Services, National by Vardy, James ‘Athenian’ Stuart and Henry Monuments Record, Kemble Drive, Swindon Holland, including the Painted Room, one of  ; the most famous th-century interiors in tel:  ; fax:  ; England, designed by Stuart between  email: [email protected]; and. web: www.english-heritage.org.uk/nmr Established in , Bedford Lemere was architectural photographer to Queen Victoria. NMR cataloguing The company’s work covered the whole of England, with an emphasis placed on Greater Spencer House,Westminster London. The coverage is extensive, ranging from remarkable views of country houses and A bound portfolio (Ref AL) contains  their recently refurbished, often lavish, interi- platinum prints of Spencer House, the London ors, to more humble domestic dwellings, as The ballroom in well as civic structures, ships, ecclesiastical Spencer House, buildings, industrial premises, shops and Westminster, commercial buildings including hotels. photographed in 1895 by Bedford Lemere. From , Hampshire to St Peter’s Basilica, Rome

Although the NMR may not be the first port of call for images of foreign locations, it does hold a number of collections with stunning early photographs of such destinations taken or collected as mementos of holidays or as comparative material for research into English architecture. An excellent example is a recently catalogued album of late Victorian photographs, thought to have been taken between  and . Most of its coverage is distinctly ‘tourist’ in nature, ranging from Alpine scenes and villages in Germany, Switzerland and France, to many well known attractions in Italy, particularly Rome, Florence and Siena. There are also

BL 13188 Reproduced by permissionBL 13188 Reproduced by of English Heritage.NMR views of Netley Abbey, Hampshire, taken in

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 43 , Worcester Cathedral, extensive amounts of gunpowder to supply and a house in Slough, Berkshire. Some of the Tilbury’s large artillery. Other notable drawings images are attributed to professional photogra- include plans depicting the fort in its original phers, others might have been taken by the place amongst four other on the unknown compiler of the album. Thames estuary, providing key defence for The NMR has at least  similar albums London as late as the Second World War. covering Afghanistan, Africa, Algeria, Belgium, Egypt, Eire, France, Germany, India, Italy, Henry W Taunt’s Illustrated Map of the Madeira, Morocco, Norway, Scotland, Thames Singapore, South America, Switzerland and Wales. Taunt’s Illustrated Map of the Thames describes in words, maps and photographs the route taken by the river from its source at Thames Head Tilbury Fort, Essex near Cirencester, to London. This third-edition As part of the NMR’s continuing programme linen-bound book is illustrated by  miniature to catalogue historic plans, the  drawings of photographs taken by Taunt in the lateth Tilbury Fort have now been catalogued. Built century. Taunt (–) was an Oxford- on the site of an earlier , the current based professional photographer whose charm- fort was begun in , designed by chief engi- ing photographs recorded people and places in neer to Charles II Sir Bernard de Gomme, and Oxfordshire and the surrounding counties. is now the most intact example of its kind in Several images appear to be unique to the England. The site offers a great variety of book and are not duplicated either within the archive material, beginning with attractive surviving Taunt glass-plate negatives held by colour copies of plans of the fort from the early the NMR or the original prints held by the to mid-th century. The drawings are mostly Centre for Oxfordshire Studies. Digital images from the th century but some are from the from both of these collections can be seen on early st century, including rectified photo- the ViewFinder database (www.english- graphy taken in  of the grand Water heritage.org.uk/viewfinder). Taunt and his Gate entrance and the magazines that stored boat feature in a few of these images.

Left: A measured sketch elevation of the Gate House of Tilbury Fort, drawn in August 1914 for HM Office of Works.

Right: Henry Taunt and an assistant on his float- ing studio on the near Oxford, 1895. CC71/00066 Reproduced by permissionCC71/00066 Reproduced by of English Heritage.NMR

For further information on NMR Cataloguing please contact Michael Russell on   or e-mail [email protected] © Crown copyright.NMR © Crown

44 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  PastScape Course A – Archaeology Thursday  March  PastScape is the publicly accessible online This workshop will look at how to use the version of the database of monuments (archae- resources of the NMR to research the known ological sites and historic buildings) recorded in archaeology, and to assess the archaeological the NMR and as such is one of the NMR’s potential of a site or landscape. It will interest main display windows to the wider world. Its both heritage professionals working on desktop audience includes interested members of the studies and anyone seeking to use the NMR to general public, students and landowners partici- assess their local archaeology. pating in the pioneering environmental stew- ardship project the Entry Level Stewardship Course B – Local History (ELS) scheme, administered by DEFRA, which Thursday  March  seeks to reward farmers for preserving the This workshop will concentrate on the sources heritage. New features to the PastScape site and information from the NMR that can include an FAQ guide to help expedite ELS provide an understanding of people and place customers searching for information about within local, family, and community history. archaeological monuments on their land. Time: both workshops start at . and PastScape is periodically refreshed with new finish by .. data, often resulting from desk-based enhance- Cost: £ including a sandwich lunch ment projects by Heritage Data staff. Some   For further information, please contact , recently added records include improved Elaine Davis, tel:  ; email: coverage for round-tower churches; military [email protected] airfields from the Second World War; and  new maritime records that include rare early references to medieval and th-century wrecks from the previously under-represented north- eastern coastal waters, and, at the other end of the time scale, German aircraft wrecks from the Second World War. The full dataset for the Defence of Britain project has also been trans- Legal Developments: a correction ferred to the NMR and will be meshed with existing NMR data and standards requirements. In order to reflect the dynamic quality of In my column in the Spring  issue of PastScape, a ‘What’s New’ page has been added Conservation Bulletin on the subject of the to flag up new datasets. protection afforded to ‘objects or structures’ PastScape can be accessed at: in the curtilage of a listed building I suggested http://pastscape.english-heritage.org.uk that the legislation was anomalous in that For further information contact Robin Page, machinery attached to a curtilage building is tel:  ; email: robin.page@english- protected whereas similar machinery in the heritage.org.uk principal building is not. Several readers have written to me to argue that this is incorrect and that an object affixed to the building such machinery in, for example, a principal NMR Outreach listed windmill or watermill is protected under s.() of the Listed Buildings Act. On A varied programme of workshops, tours, further reflection I am happy to accept that lectures, weekly classes, and events is designed such machinery clearly enjoys protection. I to help participants make the best use of apologise for my earlier error. What one can NMR resources for work, research or personal say is that while a machine or other ‘object’ interest. Short introductory tours to the NMR that is not attached to a building or structure Centre are available, and for those wishing to cannot be listed in its own right, if it is explore the resources in more detail, study in the curtilage of a listed building it enjoys days are organised on a number of different protection under s.(). themes. Nigel Hewitson Programme Spring  Two workshops are offered to explain how to access our records and how they may be used by different interest groups.

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 45 Legal Developments Protecting World Heritage Sites

World Heritage Sites are inscribed by Controls over development could be further the inter-governmental World Heritage strengthened by making WHSs Article () Committee for their ‘outstanding universal land in the General Permitted Development value’. They fall into two types: natural sites Order. This would mean that many permitted and works of humanity. The UK currently has development rights would not apply in them.  WHSs,  of which are in England. These But how effective is planning protection range from Stonehenge and Avebury to the alone – even if the suggestions above are City of Bath. adopted? What about works or activities that As a signatory to the UNESCO  do not constitute development and are there- Convention concerning the Protection of fore not caught by planning legislation? the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (the The government is, of course, reviewing the World Heritage Convention) the UK govern- various legal mechanisms for protecting the ment has made a commitment binding in built heritage and we are promised a White International Law to ensure that the WHSs Paper in  with possible legislation in . in the UK are properly protected. But no The main proposal is that all heritage assets specific controls flow from designation as a (listed buildings, scheduled monuments, regis- WHS. There is no ‘World Heritage Site tered parks, gardens and battlefields, conserva- consent’ in the way that one requires Listed tion areas and WHSs) should be brought Building Consent to carry out specified works together in a single unified List of Historic to a Listed Building. Sites of England. Work is currently under way The government has protected WHSs in looking at what consent procedures should three ways through the provisions of PPG: flow from inclusion on this new unified list. • Local authorities are requested to formulate This will prove difficult, not least because at policies to protect their WHSs and include the present, for some assets on the list – such these policies in their development plans. Such as parks, gardens, battlefields and WHSs – no policies should place great weight on the need specific consents flow from the designation of to protect them for the benefit of future gener- assets as such. I do not believe the government ations as well as our own. will be keen to introduce additional regulation • The fact of designation as a WHS is expressly where it currently does not exist. But I fear the a material consideration which the local plan- public would be confused about the signifi- ning authority should take into account in cance of inclusion on the list if consents were considering any planning application which only needed in respect of some assets but not might affect the site. others. Some WHSs are, of course, already • Management plans are recommended for all protected by other controls – for example, WHSs and now exist for  out of  English Stonehenge and Avebury contain many sites, with work in hand on the remaining four. scheduled monuments. But in my view what Most local authorities with WHSs already have is needed is a requirement for ‘heritage policies in their current local plans. It is essen- consent’ to be obtained in respect of any asset tial that such policies continue to be drawn up on the list. The works caught by such consent and adopted as part of their Local Development might well vary according to the type of asset – Framework policies to protect the particular building, monument or landscape. Only then special interest of any WHS(s) in their area. will we have adequate protection for these This has the advantage that planning decisions internationally important sites. would then have to be made in accordance with those policies unless material circum- Nigel Hewitson stances indicated otherwise (s.() Planning Legal Director, English Heritage and Compulsory Purchase Act ). [email protected]

46 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn  NEW PUBLICATIONS from English Heritage

Heritage Postcards:Views of Old London This evocative book, containing  sepia-toned postcards, gives a glimpse of how Londoners lived, worked and played more than  years ago. The photographs show a rich variety of Victorian London street scenes. From flower sellers in front of St Paul’s Cathedral to a Leicester Square crowded with horse-drawn carriages, from crowds thronging the streets for a glimpse of Queen Victoria’s Golden Jubilee procession to barrow boys in Borough Market, they present a poignant snapshot of a London barely recognisable as the metropolis it is today. Each postcard is perforated, so it can be pulled out and sent. PRICE £6.99 + £2.50 P&P ISBN 1 85074 9574 / PRODUCT CODE 51128 Perforated postcard book with 24 cards

wellington boots, taking us out into the fields and scurrying along the hedgerows to dig out the curious and to tell us the stories that placed them there. In his inimitable style, Peter Ashley gives us an alternative view of the vaguely familiar, an idiosyncratic account in words and beautifully atmospheric photographs of the blips in the measured pulse of the English countryside. PRICE £14.99 + £2.50 P&P ISBN 1 85074 9604 / PRODUCT CODE 51059 Pastoral Peculiars: Curiosities in the Paperback, 126 pages Countryside by Peter Ashley The Portsmouth Block Mills. Bentham, Brunel and the Start of the They could be off-beat water towers, singular ’s Industrial Revolution obelisks or jackdawed hilltop follies. These are the curios of the English countryside – the by Jonathan Coad landmarks that tick-off our rural progressions, The Block Mills in Portsmouth Naval Base oddities out of the corner of the eye that have long been known to students of naval and always raise a query, a need for an answer. Are industrial history. They contain a remarkable those really army badges scoured from that set of machine tools designed by Marc Brunel downland chalk? Why do those stout brick to manufacture ships’ blocks that laid the foun- castles have no doors or windows? Was that a dations for the subsequent world-wide devel- towering gibbet or a sinister trick of the light? opment of industrial production-lines. The Pastoral Peculiars puts us into metaphorical modern world of factory mass-production using

Issue : Autumn  | Conservation bulletin | 47 machine tools thus had its origins in this Publications may be Georgian building overlooking the heart of the ordered from English dockyard. The importance of the pioneering Heritage Postal Sales, work in the Block Mills was recognised by c/o Gillards, Trident discerning contemporaries and the building Works, March Lane, swiftly became an object of pilgrimage. Block- Temple Cloud,  making ceased here in , but several of the Bristol BS AZ; machines still survive, in Portsmouth and in the tel:   ; Science Museum, while the Block Mills still fax   ; remain much as completed in the first years of email: the th century, the interiors little altered. [email protected] This book covers the construction and use of Please make all the building and its machinery and aims to set cheques payable the Block Mills in the wider context of late in sterling to Georgian dockyard modernisation. English Heritage. PRICE £25.00 + £2.50 P&P Publications ISBN 1 873592 876 PRODUCT CODE 51035 may also be ordered Hardback, 128 pages from www.english- heritage.org.uk

Charlie Watson here pulls together the varied evidence and summarises the story with a wealth of illustrations and reconstruction drawings by Judith Dobie. He narrates the events leading to the decision to excavate and lift the timbers and explains the techniques used to study them, showing how this unique monument fits into, and has changed, our knowledge of ancient Bronze Age culture. PRICE £14.99 + £2.50 P&P ISBN 1 85074 896 9 / PRODUCT CODE 50887 Paperback, 240 pages

Conservation Bulletin appears three times a year. It is printed on paper made from chlorine-free pulp sourced from sustainable managed forests. Seahenge: An Archaeological    Conundrum – Product Code:  by Charlie Watson Subscription enquiries: tel:   ; In  the shifting sands at Holme-next- email: [email protected] the-Sea in Norfolk revealed a unique Bronze Additional copies: [email protected] Age monument, a ring of upright timbers Guest editors: Adrian Olivier, Anita Pollack and Christopher Young and central upturned oak stump, christened Editorial and project management: Whimster Associates Ltd; ‘Seahenge’ by the media. Once exposed to the tel:  ; email: [email protected] elements, the waterlogged timbers would soon Original design: Boag Associates Ltd have been lost to erosion, so they were care- Layout: Libanus Press Ltd fully excavated and removed for preservation. Printed by: Hawthornes Ltd Accurate records taken during the excavations Web version: www.english-heritage.org.uk and the latest scientific analytical and dating © English Heritage  techniques have since assisted scholars in inter- English Heritage is the Government’s lead body for the historic envi- preting the monument and in explaining its use ronment. and significance in the broader context of English Heritage,  Savile Row, London WS ET Bronze Age society.

48 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Autumn 