Thanaheritage: an Analytical Merger Between Historic Preservation and Thanatourism

THANAHERITAGE: AN ANALYTICAL MERGER BETWEEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND THANATOURISM

KYRA NICOLE LUCAS

A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2017

To Walt Disney, for getting me through life, and Myra and Bill Doniger, for nurturing my research since I was a child

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I want to thank my mom and grandpa Charles, for constantly reminding me how proud they are, even when I was not proud of myself, and especially when they knew I needed it. I would like to thank my father, for always supporting the craziest of ideas and nurturing my belief in the impossible yet always bringing me back to reality. I would like to thank my sister, who never for a second doubted my abilities and always pushed me to do more. I would like to thank my boyfriend, Adrian, who patiently waited and understood when I was too busy with my research to talk but was always the first one to alleviate my nervous breakdowns, anxiety attacks, and panic attacks.

Of my colleagues and professors, I would like to thank Mrs. Linda Stevenson, for always being a true friend to me and helping me when I was not sure where else to turn.

Finally, to Mr. Morris Hylton III, my amazing mentor and director, even though my research was so far from yours, you always took the time to understand it to the fullest, to gently push me in the right direction, and to understand that I was not like your other students. I am so grateful for your kindness and generosity.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... 4

LIST OF TABLES ...... 7

LIST OF FIGURES ...... 8

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...... 9

ABSTRACT ...... 10

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 12

2 LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 19

Thanatourism ...... 19 Frameworks ...... 23 Motivations ...... 28 Inference ...... 31 Historic Preservation ...... 33 History and Value ...... 33 Stakeholder Engagement ...... 35 Integrity...... 37 Tangible to Intangible ...... 41 Authenticity ...... 46 Deductions ...... 49

3 RESEARCH METHODS ...... 50

Overview ...... 50 Methodology ...... 51 Case Study Development ...... 52 Content Analysis ...... 56

4 AUSCHWITZ-BIRKENAU ...... 58

Background Information ...... 58 Wartime History ...... 58 Postwar History ...... 64 Case Study Analysis ...... 70 Secondary History ...... 70 Physical Thanaheritage ...... 71 Intangible Heritage and Visitor Motivation ...... 72

Economic Sustainability...... 74 Stakeholder Engagement ...... 75 Mission and Goals ...... 76

5 BUCHENWALD ...... 79

Background Information ...... 79 Wartime History ...... 79 Postwar History ...... 84 Case Study Analysis ...... 91 Secondary History ...... 91 Physical Thanaheritage ...... 92 Intangible Heritage and Visitor Motivation ...... 93 Economic Sustainability...... 94 Stakeholder Engagement ...... 95 Mission and Goals ...... 96

6 OUTCOMES ...... 98

7 CONCLUSIONS ...... 102

LIST OF REFERENCES ...... 107

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...... 112

LIST OF TABLES

Table page

1-1 Power of the NRHP ...... 42

1-2 Responsibilities of the SHPO...... 43

4-1 List of Exhibitions at the Auschwitz National Museum ...... 74

6-1 Outcomes ...... 98

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure page

1-1 Thanatourism Categories ...... 24

4-1 Map of Auschwitz I (Main Camp)...... 59

4-2 Image of Karl Bischoff’s handwritten note to increase prisoner capacity from 550 to 774...... 60

4-3 Blueprints for the Barracks at Auschwitz II-Birkenau...... 61

4-4 Map of Auschwitz II-Birkenau ...... 63

4-5 Map of Auschwitz as of Summer 1944 ...... 64

4-6 Financial Distribution at Auschwitz ...... 75

5-1 Map of Original Buchenwald Concentration Camp ...... 80

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CDU Christian Democratic Union

GDR German Democratic Republic

ICCROM International Center for the Study of Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property

ICOMOS International Council on Monuments and Sites

KPD Kommunistiche Partei Deutschlands – Communist Party of Germany

NGO Non-governmental Organization

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NRHP National Register of Historic Places

SHPO State Historic Preservation Offices

SS Schutzstaffel – Adolf Hitler’s paramilitary

UNESCO United Nation’s Educational, Social, and Cultural Organization

USHMM United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Historic Preservation

THANAHERITAGE: AN ANALYTICAL MERGER BETWEEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND THANATOURISM

Kyra Nicole Lucas

May 2017

Chair: Morris “Marty” Hylton III Cochair: Alexakis Konstantinos Major: Historic Preservation

The purpose of this research is to promote interdisciplinary research and professionalism between historic preservation and thanatourism in order to create more sustainable thanaheritage sites. Thanaheritage sites are sites that have an association with death, war, or other historical tragedy as well as maintain a status of historical or cultural significance on a local, national, or global scale. They are vital to a collective memory of the atrocities of war, racism, and prejudice as well as to the education of society to prevent these events in the future. Thanaheritage sites are often overly managed by preservationist or tourism directors, thereby neglecting the benefits of the management from the other. The success of this research allows future and existing thanaheritage sites to develop in a sustainable and fulfilling manner.

Qualitative research methods were utilized to analyze two case studies to determine how to better develop thanaheritage sites. The two case studies are

Auschwitz-Birkenau, in Oswiecim, Poland, and Buchenwald, near Weimar, Germany.

Both sites are previous Holocaust concentration camps, among other things, and both have developed very differently and therefore enjoy various degrees of success.

Success of the sites was determined via six variables: mission and goals, physical thanaheritage, intangible heritage and visitor motivation, economic sustainability, stakeholder engagement, and secondary history. An analysis of Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald using the aforementioned indicators showed that certain actions can be taken to increase the sustainable and successful development of thanaheritage sites including early and immediate preservation, extensive documentation, thorough engagement of stakeholders, authentic historical representation and interpretation, and regular, dynamic, visitor engagement. The use of this research to create interdisciplinary conversation and professional usage between thanatourism and historic preservation will create thanaheritage sites that create and nurture empathy, recount history, remind people of the dangers of certain actions and ideologies, create knowledge and education about death, and provide a safe and structured environment for people to confront death, explore their curiosities, and create their own ideas about mortality.

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

In early 2017, Amnesty International, a globally recognized NGO dedicated to preserving human rights, released a report on Saydnaya Prison in Syria. The report detailed allegations that the Syrian government, amidst a civil war, have actively detained Syrian citizens who oppose government sanctions and ideology, and tortured them, deprived them of food, water, and medical services, and systematically murdered them. (Masi 2017) Amnesty reported an estimate that 17,700 people were murdered or died of deprivation and torture between 2011 and 2015. (BBC News 2017) Bodies of those who died were transferred to a military hospital, where their death records are falsified before they were buried in mass graves. (BBC News 2017) High ranking government officials, who act in conjunction with the president, have legally approved the death sentence in Syria, making the murders at Saydnaya technically legal in their country. (BBC News 2017) However, per the international laws set forth by the United

Nations as a result of the Holocaust, the events that are still occurring at Saydnaya amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity, the same indictments charged to the Nazis. (Masi 2017)

“Death is the one heritage that everyone shares and it has been an element of tourism longer than any other form of heritage.” (Seaton, Guided by the Dark: From

Thanatopsis to Thanatourism 1996) This research will not ask how to stop these crimes or detail any political efforts to discourage these sorts of events. While it is imperative that these kinds of events and crimes do end, entirely, there are constantly people trying to do just that; there are entire armies, NGO’s, and intergovernmental organizations dedicated to ending war crimes and crimes against humanity. This research will focus

on what happens to sites of death, war, and destruction after the damage is done; How they are preserved, used, and interpreted. Sites such as Saydnaya often develop in one of three ways was once they are deserted: 1) they are preserved for their history, 2) they become tourist destinations, or 3) they become deserted, fading into the past. In recent decades, there has been a surge in research on tourism to sites of death, darkness, and war. “Travel to a location wholly, or partially, motivated by the desire for actual or symbolic encounter with death,” or the history and heritage of the deaths at a specific location is called thanatourism. (Seaton, Guided by the Dark: From Thanatopsis to Thanatourism 1996) At the same time, many sites like this, whether thanatourism destinations or not, are being saved for posterity by historic preservationist, who understand the inherent value of the history and heritage at a site.

Unfortunately, these two areas of study and practice have not regularly, actively collaborated with each other in any lasting form. This creates thanatourism sites that are not being preserved to global standards and whose interpretation may or may not be accurate, motivated by the economic vitality of the commodity or protected historical/heritage sites that are often less advertised to the public and are less networked into society. A combination of what makes thanatourism and historical sites successful economically, socially, educationally, and more will help both areas flourish in the future. It is important to realize though that not all thanatourism destinations are worthy of historic preservation, based on accepted global, national, and local guidelines, and not all preserved sites that have experienced death, war, or dark history are important or preserved for that part of their history. This research will focus solely on sites that are, according to global standards, worthy of being preserved and recognized

almost exclusively for their dark history and maintain themselves as tourist destinations.

These sites, which have no formal designation or definition in current or past research and practice, will be referred to as thanaheritage sites.

Why bother with these sites though? What makes them so important?

“Remembrance and commemoration are the essence of the past that fashioned today

… and by our knowledge of war, its meanings ad mechanisms, we may better understand our roles in the global society.” (Dunkley, Westwood and Morgan 2005)

Thanaheritage sites provide invaluable information and services for our society. They create and nurture empathy, they recount history, and they remind people of the dangers of certain actions and ideologies; the same actions and ideologies that create thanaheritage sites. Thanaheritage sites also perform a very under researched and important purpose. They create knowledge and thoughts about death. Contemporary society is very familiar with death, in media and popular culture, yet the secularization and capitalization of individual death, compounded with societies celebration of life, youth, and beauty make it difficult for individuals to think about and evaluate death as an inevitable event. (Sharpley and Stone 2008) When they thoughts do arise, they often become fear or dread. Thanaheritage sites provide a safe and structured environment for people to confront death, explore their curiosities, and create their own ideas about mortality. Thanaheritage sites “may offer a new social institution whereby the functional value of death and mortality is acknowledged, its precariousness is appreciated, and efforts to assure ontological wellbeing and security become a source of … education and memorial.” (Sharpley and Stone 2008) Unfortunately, thanaheritage sites may also

generate negative functions as well. Tourism of these sites may lead to the excessive and detrimental exploitation, commercialization, and profanation of these sites.

This research analyzes how a merger between historic preservation and thanatourism studies and practices can improve the development and lasting success of thanaheritage sites. To do this, it is necessary to understand what the global standards of preservation are, what current best practices are viable for thanaheritage sites, what motives people have for visiting such sites, and how to best represent thanaheritage sites for historical and heritage interpretation and use. There are many answers to these questions, but they will become clear as the research evolves. The most vital question though, is why are thanaheritage sites important and how can we improve them? The basic answer is thanaheritage sites are important because of the messages and lessons that they portray and instill in future generations, which may aid in the prevention of the events that created these sites in the first place. It has been asked: could not textbooks and schooling do this just the same? No. History attaches itself to events and events can be taught, but memory attaches itself to sites, and physical memory is perhaps more lasting and influential than instruction.

Out of our memory... of the Holocaust we must forge an unshakable oath with all civilized people that never again will the world stand silent, never again will the world...fail to act in time to prevent this terrible crime of genocide.... we must harness the outrage of our own memories to stamp out oppression wherever it exists. We must understand that human rights and human dignity are indivisible. (Carter 1979)

Yet genocides have happened since the Holocaust, are continuing to occur today, and will continue in the future if we do not do our best to preserve the site and memories of these events and use them to educate the future generations.

To achieve these goals, this research will analyze two case studies, both

thanaheritage sites, that have either been in part or wholly successful and are examples of aspects of thanaheritage that should be represented in all thanaheritage sites development, use, preservation, and interpretation. The first case study analyzed is Auschwitz-Birkenau, a UNESCO World Heritage Site best known as the largest and most well preserved Holocaust concentration camp.

Auschwitz-Birkenau is located in Oswiecim, Poland and was the site of the largest concentration of murders for any of the camps. Throughout this thesis the site will be referred to as Auschwitz, Auschwitz-Birkenau, and the National

Auschwitz Museum. When called Auschwitz I, the author is referring specifically to the original portion of the camp. The name Birkenau or Auschwitz II-Birkenau, will be used when specifically referring to the Birkenau expansion of the camp.

The second case study site is Buchenwald, which lies near Weimar, Germany.

Though Buchenwald is a lesser known camp, its development history and preservation are equally important to developing a framework for future thanaheritage sites, such as Saydnaya.

The following research is organized out into four chapters: literature review, methodology, outcomes, and conclusions. The literature review contains two sections.

The first section discusses current research on thanatourism, including a history of the development of thanatourism academia and profession. Followed by a series of categorizations and frameworks developed by various authors to create a cohesive area. This research shows, though, that the area of thanatourism is far from cohesive.

Finally, this section discusses the motivations behind thanatourist, however, there has been little research done on this topic. The second section of the literature review

discusses historic preservation, beginning with the early history of preservation philosophy in Europe and the United States as well as some of the first major preservation movements, followed by the United States preservation movements and it efforts on both local and national levels to create an engaging and successful field.

Then, this section chronologically defines a series of preservation movements, organizations, and internationally recognized documents from around the world.

The methodology chapter evaluates the types of research methods the author utilizes to analyze the case studies. This chapter defines the use of qualitative research to develop a fitting research method, in this instance, case studies and archival research. This chapter will also evaluate the type of sources utilized in this research.

Finally, it will define the parameters for choosing the case studies and the indicators used to analyze them. These indicators are alternative historical, physical preservation, intangible interpretation and visitor motivation, stakeholder engagement, success, and economic viability. The outcomes chapter recounts the history of discusses and analyzes the cases studies. This chapter discusses the history of Auschwitz-Birkenau, including its pre-war history, development of the site under Nazi control, and finally its preservation and interpretation after liberation and Buchenwald, including its pre-war significance, its history under Nazi control, its use as a Soviet internment camp, its use as propaganda tool, and finally the history of its preservation beginning in 1990. The chapter then analyzes Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald based on the indicators defined in chapter 3. It details the significance and variances in development of the case studies as thanaheritage sites. The outcomes display a variety of information that show

the stark contrast and similarities between the two sites developments and how that has affected their success based on the determinant factors.

The final chapter, conclusion, answers the question of why these sites are important and how a merger of best practices from historic preservation and thanatourism can aid the development of future thanaheritage sites. These conclusions draw upon the research to define importance for future generations. The main significance of these sites is that they educate and remind people about the past and how to prevent it reoccurrence in the future. The conclusion also details these sites significance in their ability to create structured and safe environments for people to encounter death so that they may create their own ideas about mortality that do not revolve around primordial fear. Finally, the conclusion chapter outlines a series of considerations and recommendations to current and future thanaheritage sites so that they may develop successfully and sustainably to create lasting memories, memorials, and educational sites. The hope of this merger between historic preservation and thanatourism is not just to help the sites develop, but also to display the importance of these sites so that they may provide vital services and information to society.

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Thanatourism is best described by the people who partake in it as it is different for every person. It has been called grief tourism, horror tourism, death tourism, and dark tourism, amongst others. It can best be explained as touristic travel to any place associated with death, war, or any form of morbidity. The are many sites throughout the world that are thanatourism sites. This research will focus on sites that are specifically thanaheritage sites. Thanaheritage sites are sites that have an association with death, war, or other historical tragedy as well as maintain a status of historical or cultural significance on a local, national, or global scale. For example, battlefields, internment camps, and assassination sites would all be considered thanaheritage sites. As this paper is utilizing two undeniable thanaheritage site – Auschwitz-Birkenau and

Buchenwald – it will focus largely on thanaheritage sites that were originally historic or cultural sites but became thanaheritage sites due to the devastation done there, regardless of why they were built. These sites, which once held the memories and histories of their communities will now always be tainted by the destruction caused to them. The following literature review will analysis leading scholarship on thanatourism, historic preservation, Auschwitz-Birkenau, and Buchenwald in order to create a historical background and better understanding of thanaheritage sites and tourism (as they usually coexist).

Thanatourism

Accessibility to media and knowledge associated with death, war, and other macabre things is becoming increasingly prevalent. Leisurely travel to thanatourism sites seems to have increased due to the area becoming more prevalent in tourism,

however, statistics for thanatourism have yet to be determined. Travel to these sites and attractions is called thanatourism or dark tourism. Thanatourism and dark tourism are considered “visitation to any site of this kind for remembrance, education, or entertainment.” (Malcom Foley 1996) Thanatourism was first coined in 1996 by Foley and Lennon along with A.V. Seaton. When Foley and Lennon first set out to study dark tourism they found that it was difficult to open wide academic debate and scholarly discussion in this area due to the connotations associated with the term dark tourism.

They found, as many still do, that the term dark tourism aroused concern about the tourist’s motives and connotations of the immoral and taboo. Hence, Lennon and Foley coined the term thanatourism as to better access resources and audiences. (Malcom

Foley 1996)

Soon thereafter, Seaton published an article discussing the origins and history associated with thanatourism. Seaton first discusses the idea of thanatourism, pointing out that the word itself derives from the term thanatopsis. The denotation of thanatopsis is the contemplation of death; in a broader, thanatourism context, thanatopsis means

“not just the contemplation of death, but the stimuli by which such contemplations are generated and the forms of contemplative response such stimuli tend to produce.”

(Seaton, Guided by the Dark: From Thanatopsis to Thanatourism 1996) Seaton begins the history of thanatourism with a nineteenth century author named Thomas De Quincy.

According to Seaton, De Quincy started an interest in thanatourism by publishing a paper about traveling to see public deaths or sites of previous public deaths. (Seaton,

Guided by the Dark: From Thanatopsis to Thanatourism 1996) However, despite being one of the earliest publications on the topic, other articles and authors have since then

discussed the history of thanatourism. There are, however, major discrepancies in the area of thanatourism. Thanatourism is, as the name suggest, an area of study within the field of tourism, therefore, many of the published scholars view thanatourism through the perspective of tourism. Because of this, the history of thanatourisms existence before thanatourism became a distinct area of scholarly study is extremely minute compared to more developed areas and fields of study.

Two authors and articles have worked hard to decrease this discrepancy. The first, Seaton’s 1996 publication of Guided by the Dark: From Thanatopsis to

Thanatourism, started by discussing De Quincy’s paper but then goes on to discuss two historical periods that aided in the popularity of thanatourism. To start, Seaton explains how thanatopsis was heavily promoted and aided by churches and other institutions during the middle ages and into the nineteenth century. (Seaton, Guided by the Dark:

From Thanatopsis to Thanatourism 1996) This promotion of thanatopsis created a desire and perhaps even a social responsibility to witness public executions as a form of thanatopsis. Seaton then goes on to explore thanatopsis and thanatourism during the

Victorian Romanticism era. Seaton acknowledges a very critical development during this time in which there occurred a shift in “contemplation of death from the public, communal sphere to the private sphere by focusing, not on the moral or religious significance of particular death, which could be shared by all, but on their significance in the realm of individual aesthetics.” (Seaton, Guided by the Dark: From Thanatopsis to

Thanatourism 1996) Basically, this means that society and death in particular became privatized and more secular. During this time, death related activities and culture became popular, including spirit photography, séances, Gothic literature, and etcetera.

Privatization and secularization was crucial for the development of thanatourism because it allowed for thanatourism and related social and cultural realms to become less taboo and more widely accepted.

Seaton’s second article discussing the history of thanatourism was published nearly a decade later but with input from his associate J.J. Lennon. The majority of this later article continues, in more depth, the discussion of thanatourism development from the Victorian Romanticism era into the modern day. Together they analyze what they consider to be one of the earliest true thanatourism attractions with the main purpose of tourism. This is Madame Marie Tussaud’s Chamber of Horrors wax museum, built in the late eighteenth century. Madame Tussaud’s wax museum was a unique instance in thanatourism history because it was, according to Seaton and Lennon, the first thanatourism attraction strictly designed for pleasure and it was one of the first thanatourism sites to be criticized by the mass media. (Seaton and Lennon,

Thanatoursim in the Early 21st Century: Moral Panics, Ulterior Motives, and Alterior

Desires 2004) During the late eighteenth century newspapers and information begins to spread much quicker with newer technology, allowing for a more collective mass audience who can be manipulated by the criticisms and praises of media authors. The beginning of mass media, networking, and globalization would become the fuel that fed the expansion of thanatourism in the past century. This suggest that thanatourism is a modern phenomenon. However, Dunkley, Westwood, and Morgan state that “tourists’ visitation of sites associated with death and depravity may be a phenomenon of contemporary western society but its antecedents can be seen in earlier fascinations

with ancient gladiatorial combats, public executions and pilgrimages – a precursor of modern tourism.” (Dunkley, Westwood and Morgan 2005)

Frameworks

On Thanatourism is very broad area with a vast array of sites. Many scholars have found it necessary to categorize thanatourism destinations to better understand and analyze them. Since the beginning of the scholarly area of thanatourism in 1996 there have been many attempts to classify thanatourism sites. To start, the first categorization thanatourism attractions was made by Seaton in which he concluded that there existed five distinct types of thanatouristic travel. These were travel to witness public enactments of death, travel to see the sites of mass or individual death, travel to internment sites of, and memorials to, the dead, travel to view the material evidence or symbolic representations of death in locations unconnected with their occurrence, and travel for reenactments of death. (Seaton, Guided by the Dark: From Thanatopsis to

Thanatourism 1996) Sites associated with public enactments of death are less common today when death has become so private, but in historical times these sites would include gladiatorial combats in coliseums or, more recently, public hangings. However, nowadays most of these types of deaths are privatized and hidden from public eye.

Travel to sites of mass or individual death is most commonly associated with famous people or events, such as the Ground Zero memorial in New York City. Travel to internments sites and memorials to these sites commonly evoke an image of Holocaust sites. Travel to view material or symbolic evidence of death in unrelated locations can be seen in museums and traveling exhibits, such as the USHMM in Washington, D.C.

Finally, travel to reenactments of death are often seen during battlefield or war reenactments but can also occur in less common settings, such as the annual

reenactment of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Seaton’s five broad categories, are not based on a supply or demand perspective. (Dunkley, Westwood and Morgan 2005) This means that they do not consider the motives of the travelers or why these attractions exist. Rather, it only considers what sites do exist and arranges them into categories.

Figure 1-1. Thanatourism Categories (Dunkley, Westwood and Morgan 2005)

A similar study was undertaken in 1998 by Graham Dann who created a five-fold model to help categorize thanatourism destinations. He stated that “since there [has] been no comprehensive attempts to categorize dark tourism … a preliminary tentative scheme has been devised.” (Graham 1998) Dann’s model included perilous places, houses of horror, fields of fatality, tours of torment, and themed thanos. Dann’s creative alliterative skills may make his model more appealing. Nevertheless, each model has its problems. Dann’s perilous places included places where horrific occurrence happened,

usually a whole town, and places that are currently dangerous today. Examples of these include Salem and Syria, respectively. Houses of horror are somewhat self-explanatory.

They are haunted houses, such as the Amityville house. Fields of fatality “encompasses tracts of land devoted to the commemoration of fear, fame, or infamy,” (Graham 1998) and include Holocaust sites, battlefields, and cemeteries. Tours of torment are simply that, tours of places where individual or many deaths occurred, such as ghost tours and

Jack the Ripper tours, though they could also include tours of concentration camps which would overlap with fields of fatality. Finally, Dann’s themed thanos, which include sites constructed for the purpose of exploiting life and death. Themed thanos could include Madame Tussaud’s Chamber of Horrors, the National Museum of Crime and

Punishment, or to a more explicit extent, Universal Studios annual Halloween Horror

Nights. From this, it can be inferred than Dan’s model considers more of demand side of thanatourism, referring to the reasons why certain sites were created as opposed to merely acknowledging their existence. Dann’s article goes on the breakdown the fivefold model into numerous subcategories and notes that some may overlap and some may have been overlooked and that more research, at the time, was needed.

Which leads to the next contribution in thanatourism categorization. Gregory

Ashworth, who was one of the first and few thanatourism authors whose perspective arises specifically from heritage tourism as opposed to dark tourism. Ashworth stated that commodified heritage sites often overlaps with dark tourism and classifies them in an adjectival form. The problems with this are that only heritage sites are being addressed while thanatourism sites not associated with heritage, such as Dann’s themed thanos, are neglected. Ashworth’s six adjectival tourisms are “war tourism,

battlefield tourism, disaster tourism and even killing-fields tourism or hot-spots tourism

(i.e. visit to currently or recently well publicized places of conflict).” (Ashworth 2004)

While Ashworth mentions these categorizations, he fails to elaborate on what each of the categories represents. However, most, apart from hot-spot tourism, has been explained before. Ashworth’s major contribution, the motivations of tourist, will be discussed in depth later. More recently, Dunkley, et al. attempted to do just the same as their successors. In doing so, they analyzed the previously mentioned classifications but noted that “the actual scholarly literature and research on thanatourism is unincorporated and minute.” (Dunkley, Westwood and Morgan 2005) They to failed to create an all-encompassing categorization of thanatourism sites and attractions.

Despite the scholarly inability so far to distinguish a uniform set of terms to identify all thanatourism sites and attractions, two unique contributions have been made to better understand the sites themselves. The first is Philip Stone and Richard

Sharpley. Stone and Sharpley agreed that thanatourism sites could not exist in specific categories and classification, but rather, that thanatourism sites existed on a continuum between light and dark. (Sharpley and Stone 2008) They proposed the shades of grey tourism. Stone and Sharpley prosed four categories within their spectrum. These categories are unlike any of the previous ones in that they do not specify what a site is based on its appearance or history. Instead, Stone and Sharpley’s spectrum theory discusses the supply and demand of thanatourism. The study is the only one to have done so yet. Stone and Sharpley break their spectrum into four categories: pale tourism, black tourism, grey tourism demand, and grey tourism supply. Pale tourism involves thanatouristic sites that were not intentionally created for tourism and attract tourist with

minimal interest in death. For example, many Holocaust sites are often considered pale tourism sites. Originally, they were designed to exploit human labor or to exterminate those opposed or incompatible to Nazi ideology. They were in no way originally designed to exploit tourism. Many whose visit Holocaust, or other pale tourism site, today, do so with education, spirituality, and heritage at the forefront of their motivation as opposed to a fascination with death. (Avital Biran 2011) On the other end of the spectrum is black tourism which consist of “pure dark tourism experiences in which fascination with death is satisfied by purposeful supply” (Dunkley, Westwood and

Morgan 2005) intentionally created to satisfy this fascination with death and profit from it. These sites are similar to Dann’s themed thanos category. In between these two ends of the spectrum exist grey tourism supply and grey tourism demand. Grey tourism demand consists of sites that were not originally created for the purpose of dark tourism but attract tourist with a fascination for death. These include sites that were built for a purpose then tainted by the death or murder of a person or people which attract crowds, such as battlefield tourism and thanatouristic tours. Whereas, grey tourism supply involves sites “initially established to exploit death, [and] attract tourist with little interest in death.” (Dunkley, Westwood and Morgan 2005) These include museums and other such exhibits with a basis in education, heritage, spirituality, etcetera. Stone and

Sharpley’s spectrum theory is unique and important to the field of thanatourism because it takes into account both the supply and demand factors surrounding thanatourism.

This aides in better understanding the phenomena, how it began, has developed, and which direction it may be heading in. A better understanding creates growth in the field.

Another contribution to the understanding of what thanatourism is comes from

William Miles, who proposed a space-time framework to help explain thanatourism.

(Miles 2002) Miles space-time framework is basically a spatial-temporal nucleus model in which the closer a site is to the space where it occurred and the time when it occurred the darker it is. Miles suggest that “to be successful, any dark touristic ‘attraction’ must also engender a degree of empathy between the sightseer and the past victim” and that

“darker tourism enjoys a locational authenticity” in which “just being there imparts to the darker tourist a uniquely empowering (if spectral) commemorative potential.” (Miles

2002) Therefore, a site or attraction that exist in its original historical context, such as most Holocaust sites, will impart a darker experience than a far off museum that attempts to impart the same information, such as the USHMM. Also, sites that deal with more recent material and matters will have a darker impact as they still exist in the memories of the visitors. Locational and material authenticity are vital to historic preservation, as discussed later. However, sites that are preserved quickly and therefore maintain high qualities of authentic locational and physical preservation will impart a deeper experience to guest, according to Mile’s framework. Mile’s space-time framework neglects the demand and supply side of tourism however it creates conversation for the experiences that tourist encounter at thanatouristic sites and the motives that draw them there.

Motivations

Understanding visitor motives is pivotal for thanatourism sites and attractions because the reasons for a visit dominates how a site will age and grow and how it will be managed and marketed. To this effect, Stone stated that “a diverse and fragmented set of dark tourism suppliers exists, so equally diverse are the motives of tourists who

visit and consume these products,” (Stone 2006) though it is not clear whether the area is supply driven, demand driven, or both. Because the drivers behind thanatourism are not clear much of the literature on the topic remains focused on the supply side rather than on why tourist visit these sites. While thanatourism scholars have acknowledged a lack of research on visitor motivation, there has yet to be an increase in its research, especially empirical research. However, many authors have contributed thoughts as to what motivation might be including Stone, Ashworth, Tarlow, and Tanas. Stone identified eight plausible motivations of tourist including:

the fear of phantoms (i.e. overcoming childlike fears); the search for novelty; nostalgia; the celebration of crime or deviance; basic bloodlust; and, at a more practical level, ‘dicing with death’ – that is, undertaking journeys or ‘holidays in hell’, that challenge tourists or heighten their sense or mortality. (Sharpley and Stone 2008)

Stone notes that the identified motivations are highly descriptive and probably more relative to specific thanatourism sites as opposed to individual motivations of tourist. (Sharpley and Stone 2008) Ashworth acknowledges many possible motives for tourist, though not in detail. He stated that motives could range from

a pilgrimage of penance and repentance for an assumed complicity (‘a mean culpa tourism’), to a quest for identity (‘roots tourism’), a less personally engaged search for knowledge, understand and enlightenment (‘edutourism’), a social mission to shape more desirable or responsible futures (‘lest we forget’ or ‘never again tourism’), to much darker and less socially accepted emotions where gratification is obtained from violence and much suffering. (Ashworth 2004)

Tarlow suggested in 2005 that there existed seven categories by which a tourist would visit a thanatouristic site or attraction: a pretext to understanding one’s own age, romanticism, barbarism, part of national identity, sign of decadence, mystical experience, and spiritual experience. (Tarlow 2005) Tarlow did not go into depth about what these all mean. Some are self-explanatory while others are antiquated. Ashworth

and Tarlow suggested actual classifications, which would greatly contribute to the study of thanatourism if the terms were backed by research and contained in depth descriptions. Tanas, on the other hand, did not suggest specific motivations but the causes for those motivations. Tanas suggested that

tourist interest in death usually comes from cultural differences, which cause different perceptions of death in terms of religion, customs (including cults and commemoration of the deceased), beliefs (folk culture, life after death, ghost, supernatural powers, phantasms, immortality, reincarnation, legends, death cults), treatment of dead bodies (burial, cremation, mummification, cannibalism, storing human remains), and ways of expressing emotion in the face of death (seriousness, sadness, fear, respect, fun). (Tarlow 2005)

Tanas’s study, though similar to the aforementioned motivation studies in that it also lacked a backing in empirical research, generated a basis of possibilities for the cause of motivations and motivation research.

Among the few studies that has researched thanatourism visitor motivation AND was based on extensive empirical research was published in 2011 by Biran, Poria, and

Oren. Biran et al. undertook a study to discover why tourist were visiting the thanatourism site of Switch-Birkenau and what their experiences they sought there as opposed what experience they actually had. (Avital Biran 2011) Biran et al. suggested, based on an extensive literature review, that there existed a range of possible motives for thanatourism. In addition to the previously mentioned motives Biran et al. included schadenfreude, a German term that loosely translates into pleasure derived from the misfortune of others. (Avital Biran 2011) In terms of motivation, the majority of thanatourism studies focus on a fascination with death as the main contributing motivation of tourist. To change this perception, Biran et al. devised a three stage approach to gathering empirical data and understanding visitor motivations. They first

interviewed, mainly via phone, people who intended on visiting Auschwitz-Birkenau and inquired about their reasons for the proposed visit as well as what Auschwitz-Birkenau met to them and what they hoped to gain from the experience. Then, Biran et al. used a quasi-random sampling technique to talk to guest as they were entering and leaving

Auschwitz-Birkenau. They used an open ended questionnaire to help gather data, and then finally, they analyzed their data. (Avital Biran 2011) The data suggested that, against popular scholarly believe, the main motive of visiting Auschwitz and other thanaheritage sites was not due to a fascination with death and that it what one of the least effect motives. (Avital Biran 2011) Instead, Biran et al. found that many tourists have multiple reason for visiting. Among these were for educational purposes, for an emotional heritage experience, because they had to see it to believe it, and because it was a must see famous site. (Avital Biran 2011) Biran, Poria, and Oren’s research may well be a revolutionary addition to the study of thanatourism and thanaheritage sites.

Inference

Current research in thanatourism focuses heavily on site interpretation as opposed to other aspects of the sites, such as motivations, preservation, sustainability, economics, and etcetera. However, from this review of thanatourism literature three main topics have emerged. The first is that thanatourism is a relatively new area of scholarship compared to the field of tourism and other scholarly areas and fields. It began in 1996 and the majority of the research was published within the last decade.

The second conclusion that can be drawn from this review is that there exist a severe fragmentation of definitions, frameworks, and categories. This lack of uniformity in the thanatourism is in part due to the young nature of the area but also due to the lack of access to information and empirical data. However, the main reason for this

fragmentation is the simple diversity of the area itself. Thirdly, there is a severe lack of in field information. As has been seen, there has been only one study found that utilizes empirical data, the rest is based on anecdotal and theoretical data. This disconnect between the professional side of thanatourism and the academic side means that the area is developing based on each individual site as opposed to the field growing based on a group of set standards created by academics and professionals together. One solution that has started to occur is using other scholarly fields as frameworks for the development of thanatourism. The largest contributor to this is the field of tourism, in which thanatourism derived and most of the authors are tourist based researchers.

More recently, thanatourism authors have begun to borrow frameworks, strategies, and policies from the field of historic preservation. This has allowed a more varied and sustainable view of thanatourism. Despite these issues within thanatourism itself, the area offers lessons to historic preservation. One such lesson is that guest visit these sites for a diverse array of reasons and therefore the sites could potentially cater to the more diverse guest as opposed to focusing on a single or few types of visitors. Another lesson includes the type and nature of these sites. Thanaheritage sites fit into multiple categories proposed by numerous authors, but might be considered its own category with the possible subcategory of thanaheritage sites without physical evidence, such as battlefields. To understand the effect of historic preservation on thanatourism, both now and in the future, it is necessary to take a closer look at what historic preservation is and how it came about.

Historic Preservation

History and Value

Understanding historic preservation will aide in understanding how it can affect thanatourism as both a rising area in academic study and global tourism. Historic preservation deals with the preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, and occasionally reconstruction of objects, places, and phenomena that are important aspects of a peoples, or the worlds, heritage, and culture. (National Park Service 1979) Heritage can be defined as “the traditions, achievements, and beliefs that are part of the history of a group of people” (Merriam-Webster 2017) while culture is “the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group.” (Merrian-Webster 2017)

It can be deferred that culture is more holistic than heritage though both are similar and play vital roles in understanding history, people, and current trends and issues. While much of historic preservation deals with physical objects and places it also preserves intangible heritage, such as dances, rituals, and festivals that are critical to a cultures identity. Historic preservation has always existed on some level; without it our ideas and knowledge would be limited to what was accidently left behind from the past as opposed to what was purposely secured for the future. Many scholars and students of historic preservation have begged the question: when did historic preservation begin? For the purposes of this research, it will begin with the birth of modern preservation in the

1850s.

During the mid-nineteenth century, two very prominent historic preservation philosophers emerged: Eugene Emmanuel Viollet-Le-Duc (1814-1879) and John Ruskin

(1819-1900). (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009) Though they both advocated for historic preservation, they did so at opposing ends of the preservation spectrum. Viollet-Le-Duc

was a master architect and one of the very first to fret about the preservation of important structures. (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009) He was dedicated to a form of preservation called restoration, through which he restored numerous buildings to their former glory including Notre-Dame de Paris (1844), Amiens Cathedral (1849), and the church of Saint-Sernin at Toulouse (1862), among many others. (Encyclopaedia

Britannica 1999) Viollet-Le-Duc also wrote multiple books discussing his beliefs and practices in regards to architecture and restoration, including a ten-volume dictionary of architecture, from which much of the early modernist designs were created nearly a century later. (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009) Viollet-Le-Duc’s philosophy was that buildings of great significance should remain in their original splendor, even if that meant replacing the authenticity of the building by rebuilding it or retrofitting materials into it. He once noted that “to restore a building is not only to preserve it, to repair it, or to rebuild it, but to bring it back to a completion such as may never have existed at any given moment.” (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009) However, Viollet-Le-Duc had a tendency to enhance restorations and, in some cases, add new elements altogether when restoring a building without regard for historical or architectural accuracy. Due to this, his methods and philosophes are heavily discredited, “but his contributions are significant nonetheless because of the recognition he gave to the need for restoration of significant historic structures.” (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009)

In comparison to Eugene Emmanuel Viollet-Le-Duc, John Ruskin (1819-1900), an English art historian and writer, vehemently opposed restoration as a form of historic preservation. (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009) Ruskin believed that each significant structure was unique and that the best and only way to honor them was to leave them

untouched. As Ruskin stated in his book The Seven Lamps of Architecture, “it is impossible, as impossible as to raise the dead, to restore anything that has ever been great or beautiful in architecture … [for] the greatest glory of a building is not in its stones, or in its gold. Its glory is in its age.” (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009) Despite his distaste for restoration efforts, Ruskin did believe that if a structure was in severe danger it should be preserved so long as no alterations or additions were made to the structure. These two early preservationist represent two opposing perspectives within historic preservation. Today, most preservation perspectives lie somewhere in between the two extremes. However, their early efforts in historic preservation have paved the way for thinking and valuing of historic sites and properties.

Stakeholder Engagement

While historic preservation is indeed an international effort and much of it began in Europe, the United States had its own unique movement that would later effect the efforts and guidelines of other nations and international organizations. Many preservation scholars agree that the United States historic preservation movement began with a woman named Ann Pamela Cunningham (1816-1875) in the 1850’s,

(Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009) the same time as Ruskin and Viollet-Le-Duc were advocating their ideas across the ocean. In 1853, Ann Pamela Cunningham discovered that Mount Vernon, the home of the nation’s first president, had fallen into disrepair. In order to save the homestead of George and Martha Washington, Ann Pamela

Cunningham organized the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association of the Union. (Tyler,

Ligibel and Tyler 2009) The group was created directly by stakeholders, people with a specific interest in the sites future and past. The group originally petitioned the government to buy and protect the property for its historical importance to the nations

development. When the government denied the petition, Ann Pamela Cunningham chartered the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association and bought and protected the property herself. (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009) “The association served as an early model for organizations involved in saving landmark structures ... [and] helped form some of the early trends of the preservation movement in the United States.” (Tyler, Ligibel and

Tyler 2009) One such trend was that private individuals, stakeholders, organized most of the early preservation movements, such as William Sumner Appleton, who created the Society for the Protection of New England Antiquities (SPNEA) in 1910; now known as Historic New England. (Historic New England 2016)

Appleton, like many preservationists to come, was deeply moved by the knowledge that a historically important building was in danger of destruction due to development. As more citizens became aware of the historically significant buildings and areas in their cities, more efforts to save those buildings and areas arose. The early twentieth century saw a large growth in historic districts. These districts all served preservation in their own ways, paving the way for proper techniques through trial and error. Though these districts are of vital importance to our nation, they were, as aforementioned, the products of a minute handful of private stakeholders who yearned for their protection. Their growth in numbers, continued interest, and investment also caught the attention of the government, which in 1949 formed the National Trust to promote preservation efforts in the federal government as well as to act as a link between the government and the stakeholders. The National Trust was established with the following goals in mind:

1. Identify and act on important national preservation issues. 2. Support, broaden, and strengthen organized preservation efforts. 3. Target communications to those who affect the future of historic resources. 4. Expand private and public financial resources for preservation activities. (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009)

The National Trust worked with the people to better the country, but it continued to be dominated by a small portion of stakeholders. It was not until the mid-twentieth century that historic preservation took the entire nation by storm. During the early 1960s news spread that Pennsylvania Station in New York City was going to be demolished. The building was not only architecturally significant, resembling roman baths and Doric temples, but also culturally important to the people of the nation. Penn station was considered a local landmark and was a vital part of the ambiance and character of the city. People came from all over the country to protest the demolition of Penn Station, arguing for its importance. Unfortunately, without the support of the government, the people’s voice was not enough and the ornate edifice was destroyed in 1963. Yale architectural historian Vincent Scully once said in response to Penn Station demolition:

“one entered the city like a god; one scuttles in now like a rat.” (Kimmelman 2012) The power of stakeholders can be momentous, such as the Mount Vernon Ladies’

Association of the Union, but without support, the voice of stakeholders can go unheard, like what happed with Penn Station. This is in part why stakeholder engagement is crucial to historic sites and artifacts, because stakeholders can change the development of the site.

Integrity

The severe loss in city character created by the demolition of Penn Station, in part, made it clear to the federal government that the National Trust was not going to be

enough. They needed a way to directly interject when an important site or building was in danger to protect its integrity. In 1966, the United States Conference of Mayors formed the Special Committee on Historic Preservation and published a book called

With Heritage So Rich. The anthology was a report on the importance of historic preservation written by state representatives, senators, governors, experts, and professionals. With Heritage So Rich directly led to the passing of the National Historic

Preservation Act of 1966, just months after it was published. (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler

2009) Nearly every suggestion the report made was passed into legislation. The

National Historic Preservation Act established many institutions including the National

Preservation Fund, Section 106 review process, the National Register of Historic

Places, State Historic Preservation Offices, and the Advisory Council on Historic

Preservation. (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009) The National Register of Historic Places is vital to the protection of sites that would otherwise not receive it, such as the

Pennsylvania Station. It outlined a set of four criterions for evaluation and seven exceptions. Assuming that the sites listed for nomination retains full integrity (which will be discussed at the end of the chapter), any site displaying national significance that are associated with (1) significant events, (2) significant persons, (3) significant architectural or technological characteristics, or (4) significant historical or prehistorical information, can be nominated and designated in the National Register of Historic Places. (Advisory

Council on Historic Preservation 2015) The NRHP criteria also states that

ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, or graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the National Register. However, such properties will

qualify if they are integral parts of districts that do meet the criteria or if they fall within the following categories: (a) A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or historical importance; or (b) A building or structure removed from its original location but which is significant primarily for architectural value, or which is the surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person or event; or (c) A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building directly associated with his productive life. (d) A cemetery which derives its primary significance from graves of persons of transcendent importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or from association with historic events; or (e) A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same association has survived; or (f) A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance; or (g) A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance. (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 2015)

The importance of the NHPA cannot be overstated. Its programs would become porotypes and guidelines for other countries and international organizations; each changed and tweaked to meet that country’s or organizations specific needs. The NHPA also served as a monument to the need for integrity in the sites. The programs set forth by the NHPA helped to keep stakeholders and developers honest about the work done to a site or artifact by keeping strict guidelines on the preservation of the site.

Similarly, in 1945 the United Nations created the United Nation’s Educational,

Social, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). One of the many jobs tasked to UNESCO was to designate and aid in the protection, preservation, and knowledge of internationally important cultural and historical sites, called World Heritage Sites. The

World Heritage Committee, which oversees World Heritage Sites, created ten

Outstanding Universal Values which are used as criterion for site designation. The

Outstanding Universal Values are:

i. to represent a masterpiece of human creative genius; ii. to exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning, or landscape design; iii. to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared; iv. to be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history; v. to be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land- use, or sea-use which is representative of a culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change; vi. to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance. (The Committee considers that this criterion should preferably be used in conjunction with other criteria); vii. to contain superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance; viii. to be outstanding examples representing major stages of earth's history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features; ix. to be outstanding examples representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems and communities of plants and animals; x. to contain the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation. (UNESCO 199-2017)

The Outstanding Universal Values are the basis for many preservation legislation in countries around the world. The World Heritage Sites program, along with UNESCO, have become the leader in preservation and conservation in the world. Much of what the World Heritage Convention did was to reach out to communities and sites that need support to preserve historical, cultural, and natural resources. To do this, the World

Heritage Convention began by encouraging states to recommend sites to the World

Heritage List, which would in turn protect the site, perhaps more fully than the state

could do on its own. Should a state partake in the World Heritage List they are expected to maintain plans and protocols regarding conservation, site tourism, economic sustainability, and disaster preparedness as well as engaging the local community in the upcharge of World Heritage Sites. (Hylton III, Policies and Standards 2015) In return, the World Heritage Convention aids states by providing technical assistance and professional training to the states World Heritage sites as well as providing emergency aid to sites in explicit danger. (Hylton III, Policies and Standards 2015) The World

Heritage Site program and UNESCO, like the NHPA, sets standards and guidelines for the integrity of a site. This time though, on an international scale. However, thanaheritage sites, such as Holocaust sites do not necessarily fit into any of these categories, yet should be preserved. While Auschwitz-Birkenau was listed as a World

Heritage site under criterion vi – to be associated with traditions, ideas, or beliefs – not all thanaheritage site can fall into this category.

Tangible to Intangible

One aspect of historic preservation seems to remain consistent: it is very much a grassroots movement; building momentum slowly at a local level to save a place until it flourishes. As stated, many organizations utilized the example the United States set, but there were many examples of international recognition and action regarding historic preservation before and after the United States NHPA. Amongst these are the Athens

Charter, UNESCO, the Hague convention, ICCROM, Europa Nostra, the Venice

Charter, ICOMOS, the Burra Charter, and finally the World Heritage Convention.

One of the first international documents regarding historic preservation and cultural conservation was the Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments.

The Athens Charter was created in 1931, largely by a group of architects. The Athens

Charter strove to:

• Establish organizations and advisory groups; • Subject projects to expert criticism; • Encourage legislation at national levels; • Rebury excavated archaeological sites that are not be conserved; • Use modern materials and techniques in conservation; • Give sites strict custodial protection; • Give attention to areas around historic sites; and • Advocate international collaboration, especially regarding documentation and education. (Hylton III, Policies and Standards 2015)

Table 1-1. Power of the NRHP Identify historically significant buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts per the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Encourage the preservation of historic properties by documenting their significance and by lending support to local preservation activities. Enable federal, state, and local agencies to consider historic properties in the early stage of planning projects. Provide a list identifying historic sites that might be affected by new development for review by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Provide for review of federally funded, licensed, or sponsored projects that may affect historic properties. Make owners of historic properties eligible to apply for federal grants-in-aid for preservation activities. Encourage the rehabilitation of income-producing historic properties that meet preservation standards through tax incentives; discourage the demolition of income- producing properties through general income tax disincentives. (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009)

It is often considered the first widely distributed document advocating the idea of international heritage, meaning heritage that is not only important to a specific city or country, but so important that it merits international designation and protection. (Hylton

III, Cultural Heritage Conservation 2015) The Athens Charter was largely focused on the physical, tangible aspects of history, buildings, artifacts, and such.

Table 1-2. Responsibilities of the SHPO Conduct systematic surveys of historic properties and sites throughout its state with the purpose of identifying historical structures, objects, or districts and to indicate which properties needed designation due to threat. Process nominations for the National Register of Historic Places. The SHPO sends approved and edited nominations to the National Park Service, where it is reviewed and either granted or denied. Administer grants to individual projects throughout the state, serving as the funding conduit for the national to the local. Advise and assist in the efforts of local agencies, though it cannot regulate local agencies. Provide consultation of Section 106 Review. Review applications for federal investment tax credits and makes recommendations to the NPS. Administer the Certified Local Government (CLG) process. (Tyler, Ligibel and Tyler 2009)

In the wake of destruction left behind by World War II, leaders across the world struggled with how to rebuild not just their homes, but the structures that had been taken for granted and that had so silently exuded the characteristics and history that make this world home. World War II is considered, by Western history, one of the first total wars, meaning, it was fought not on battlefields but in the streets and in people’s homes. The levels of destruction caused to places and artifacts was unprecedented and little regard had been given to historical and cultural sites. Some groups, like the

Monuments, Fine Arts, and Archives division of the Roberts Commission, an international group of scholars, artisans, and military personal, fought to save art and cultural heritage sites during World War II. (Robert Edsel 2010) However, it was not enough. In 1954, the United Nations called for a Convention for the Protection of

Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. Known as The Hague Convention, it brought the world’s leaders together to lament the destruction that had been caused

and devise a plan for future incidents. The participants agreed to several decisions.

Firstly, they agreed that the safeguarding of historical and cultural sites and artifacts was of the utmost importance, regardless of which side of a war their nations fought with. Secondly, they agreed that, in the event of war or the possibility of war, objects that were movable should be moved for safekeeping. Thirdly, everyone agreed that documents of such sites and artifacts should be kept up to date because it would better aide the recovery and repair of sites and artifacts in the event of war. Finally, if one force should occupy another state it is their responsibility to safeguard that state’s important sites and artifacts and make emergency repairs or reinforcements should they be necessary. (UNESDOC 1954) The Hague Convention is of great value to this research as it details how not to prevent thanaheritage sites. Unfortunately, when the protocols of The Hague Convention were created wars were mainly fought between state actors whereas today, individual disgruntled groups and organizations are fighting them, and they are not bound by the Hague Protocols.

Then in 1964 and 1965 the Second International Congress of Architects and

Specialist of Historic Buildings created the Venice Charter (ICOMOS 2004) and the

International Council on Monuments and Sites (Hylton III, Cultural Heritage

Conservation 2015), respectively. The Venice Charter for the Restoration of Historic

Monuments set out to unify international standards of preservation and restoration of architectural sites as historical evidence of the past. (The Getty Conservation Institute

2017) While the Venice Charter recognized the need for international conformity concerning preservation standards and techniques it also noted other important aspects including the need to conserve recent past in addition to great masterpieces of the past,

the need for preserved building to be used by society and not simply as monuments or museums, the need to authentically conserve the context of the building, as well as the need for proper documentation, publication, and dispersal of those publications.

(ICOMOS 2004) However, there are two notable aspects of preservation that the

Venice Charter vehemently ignored including the concept of reversibility in restorations of buildings, meaning restorations that cannot be done authentically must maintain the ability to be reversed, and the concept of social and financial issues relating to their preservation. (ICOMOS 2004) A year later, ICOMOS was created with the direct intent to uphold the duties of the Venice Charter and act as an international leader of preservation standards and documentation. From the Athens Charter to the Hauge

Convention to the Venice Charter preservation began moving from the tangible aspects of preservation to the intangible.

In 1979, the World Heritage Convention, along with other international and state specific efforts, inspired the Australian government to create the Burra Charter for the

Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance. (Hylton III, Cultural Heritage

Conservation 2015) The Burra Charter is unlike any previous document or convention regarding preservation. The Burra Charter was very much like others regarding physical technique and restoration protocol, however it focused on more on holistic innovations that other efforts before it, including:

• Fully understanding a sites cultural significance, especially related to its meaning to the community as opposed to just history; • Involving the local community in totality with the site, as well as communities associated with the site; • Considering all significant aspects of a sites history and significance, as opposed to just ‘the’ most important aspect of a sites history; and

• Caring for sites settings and the context it sites in, making sure that it retains not just its own character but the character of its place. (Department of Environment, Cultural and Natural Resources 2014)

The Burra Charter is significant in that it is pioneered the understanding that cultural heritage goes beyond the preservation of the built environment and extends into its significance to the people it associates with and is associated with as well as that all of the sites history is significant, not just the one moment of its history that many consider most significant. (Gilmour 2007) This notion will be highlighted in the history of

Buchenwald. These documents and conventions are critical to develop of historic preservation and cultural conservation around the globe. The Burra Charter marked the true movement from pure physical preservation to intangible preservation on a global scale. One aspect that was critically lacking at this point, despite the protocols, has been authenticity

Authenticity

Authenticity is the key to preserving the past and cultures to their fullest.

ICOMOS created the Nara document of Authenticity in 1994 in order to address these issues. (Hylton III, Cultural Heritage Conservation 2015) The Nara document stems from the Venice Charter and was intended to build upon the concerns of authenticity in the field of preservation. Authenticity is important to preservation because inauthenticity creates errors in historical accuracy which in turn can diminishes the understanding of history and the practices that create a cultural identity. As the world becomes both more interconnected and separated by globalization, interstate actors, and other factors, delineating between individual cultures and history is becoming increasingly difficult and diluted. The Nara document noted this when it said,

In a world that is increasingly subject to the forces of globalization and homogenization, and in a world in which the search for cultural identity is sometimes pursued through aggressive nationalism and the suppression of cultures of minorities, the essential contribution made by the consideration of authenticity in conservation practice is to clarify and illuminate the collective memory of humanity. (ICOMOS 1994)

The Nara document discusses aggressive nationalism and the suppression of minorities cultures. That is what happens in the creation of many thanaheritage sites. While some thanatourism sites are created from celebrity or historical deaths many thanaheritage sites are created when an individuals, groups, or nations cultural and historical identity are suppressed and/or destroyed by those who believe they are superior. The damage left behind needs to be preserved authentically not just for those suppressed, but for their identity to be remembered and so that everyone else is reminded of the result of hatred. Authenticity is critical to this notion. Without authenticity in the preservation of these sites, there is little way for the suppressed identity to be represented and to know what the site represents. If the site is not represented authentically, it runs the risk of losing favor in the hearts of the people and being publicly seen as unworthy of preservation, eventually disappearing into history, along with the cultural identities of the suppressed and the history it represents. If history disappears, people cannot learn from it and become destined to repeat it. As the Nara document on authenticity states:

Conservation of cultural heritage in all its forms and historical periods is rooted in the values attributed to the heritage. Our ability to understand these values depends, in part, on the degree to which information sources about these values may be understood as credible or truthful. (ICOMOS 1994)

Therefore, it is critical that each site or form of heritage within each and every nation is preserved to its fullest authenticity regarding not only its physical exterior, but the context of the site, the way in which it is documented and preserved, and finally, the

intangible heritage and communities associated with the site. The Nara document was one of the first to distinctly differentiate between tangible heritage, or physical heritage, and intangible heritage, or heritage found only in its practice. However, it was not the last. In 1989 UNESCO made a Recommendation on the Safeguarding of Traditional

Culture and Folklore and in 2001 UNESCO made a Universal Declaration on Cultural

Diversity. (UNESCO 2003) Neither of these two UNESCO products were fully realized until the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage. (Hylton

III, Cultural Heritage Conservation 2015) The 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of

Intangible Cultural Heritage recognized “the importance of intangible cultural heritage as a mainspring of cultural diversity and a guarantee of sustainable development.”

(UNESCO 2003) The Convention maintained four purposes: to preserve intangible heritage, to preserve respect for intangible heritage in the face of adversaries, to raise awareness on all scales for intangible heritage and its importance, and to mediate international cooperation and assistance. (UNESCO 2003) The ideas expressed in the

2003 Convention and the Nara document, together, are, in the authors opinion, the best way to ensure the future of thanaheritage sites because they express the underlying values of these sites as opposed to the morbid view much of the public has towards these sites.

It is clear from this review of historic preservation that there have been many strides in the types and techniques of preservation that best preserves thanaheritage sites. Many thanaheritage sites are contested in part because the history of the sites, the physical remains of history are presented, but the facts of history are tangled up in myths and fictitious facts. Thanks to the efforts of documents like the Nara document,

the Burra Charter, and the Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural

Heritage, sites, such as Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald, act as a mediator between historical events and the emotions and connotations they create. The rest of this chapter will discuss the history of Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald to better understand how they became thanaheritage sites.

Deductions

Thanatourism, having emerged as a new area of research within the field of tourism in the recent decades, has limited research and even less diversity within the research. While the both Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald have ample research on preservation, many thanaheritage sites do not. Due to the limited nature of both side, there has been almost no interdisciplinary research between the two fields. The correlations between thanatourism and historic preservation could not only enlighten both fields by providing a fresh view but also create discourse about the preservation of historically and architecturally important site that happen to attract tourist and have a dark and uncomfortable past. Thanatourism is a vast subfield of tourism that could benefit from preservationist perspectives while historic preservation has seldom considered criterion for the preservation of sites that generate heritage tourism due to its thanatourism nature. Thanaheritage preservation is the new combination of this type of research and it is the hope of this project to establish a movement towards the combination of the two areas of research and promote an interdisciplinary approach to professionals in the thanaheritage line of work.

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODS

Overview

The primary goal of this research is to illuminate the need for interdisciplinary research between thanatourism and historic preservation to formulate a more integrated approach to managing cultural or historic sites that maintain a prominent thanatouristic status. To do this, it is important to have a well-rounded view of historic preservation as well as an understanding of how thanatourism sites develop, why they are important, and how people interact with them. This paper utilizes qualitative research. Qualitative research is defined as an approach in which

the inquirer often makes knowledge claims based primarily on constructivist perspectives (i.e., the multiple meanings of individual experiences, meanings socially and historically constructed, with an intent of developing a theory or pattern) or advocacy/participatory perspectives (i.e., political, issue-orientated, collaborative, or change orientated) or both. It also uses strategies of inquiry such as narratives, phenomenologies, ethnographies, grounded theory studies, or case studies. The research collects open-ended, emerging data with the primary intent of developing themes form the data. (Creswell 2003)

The specific methods of qualitative research used in this research is case study analyzation and archival research. A case study is “an in-depth exploration from multiple perspectives of the complexity and uniqueness of a particular project, policy, institution, program or system in a 'real life' context.” (Thomas 2016) Books, journals, and new articles have been analyzed to compare specific contextual determinants, such as political, economic, ethical, ecological, and stakeholders, that create thanaheritage tourism destinations and impact their development and preservation. This chapter looks at the methods and development utilized in this research. Starting with qualitative

research and how it is used for case study analysis. Followed by the development and definitions of analysis criterion elements.

Methodology

The methodology applied to this paper is qualitative research. In broadest terms, qualitative research is “research that seeks to provide understanding of human experience, perceptions, motivations, intentions, and behaviours [sic] based on description and observation and utilizing a naturalistic interpretative approach to a subject and its contextual setting.” (A Dictionary of Nursing 2017) Qualitative research methods are critical to any research that seeks to understand people, how and why people do things. For this reason, the author chose qualitative research as opposed to quantitative. Numbers alone cannot account for human actions. Qualitative research allows a wider view of a topic; it allows for a more in-depth understanding of human thoughts and actions in a manner that is adaptable, whereas numbers are not flexible.

Thanaheritage tourism destinations are in constant flux between thanatourism and historic preservation and therefore require a method of research that is equally fluid. In other words, qualitative research methods allow scholars and scientist to fully analyze the complexities of cultural and social phenomena such as thanaheritage preservation and tourism. For these type of phenomena, the importance comes not only from the site itself, but its importance to those who interact with it and the context in which this occurs. Besides this, qualitative research was chosen for two specific reasons. One being that there are very limited amounts of statistical information regarding thanatourism. The other is, as previously stated, the complexity of the phenomena, which cannot be fully realized in numbers.

Case Study Development

The specific form of methods enacted for this research is archival analysis and case studies. Case studies are in depth analysis of a specific, definable, places, people, or phenomena. Case studies are often used to create a broad, generalized database of a type of phenomena in order to form connections and correlations. These generalizations and connections can be used to formulate best practices, or examples for which other places or things experiencing similar phenomena can employ. For cultural and social phenomena, such as the one analyzed in this paper, case studies also create thorough, holistic narratives, the same narratives that give the phenomena meaning, without which they would, probably, not exist. These narratives triangulate data to create meaningful context and content to the phenomena. Case study analysis are strongest in this context, of analyzing phenomena and creating narratives. The generalizations crafted from case study analysis give the data reliability, validity, and depth. This paper examines two case studies: Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald.

Auschwitz, located in Oswiecim, Poland, is well known as the Holocaust site with the most deaths recorded. Auschwitz became a national historic site two years after liberation from Nazi control and has maintained itself as a thanaheritage tourist destination and leader in conservation ever since. Buchenwald, located near Weimar,

Germany, is a lesser known camp, yet equally important. Buchenwald was responsible for showing the world what really happened in concentration camps, in fact, the first globally distributed photos of any camp where of Buchenwald. (Hackett 1995) For a few years after liberation the site was used as a Soviet internment camp for Nazi perpetrators until it was disbanded in 1950 and turned into a memorial site used for

Soviet propaganda. Finally, in 1990, the site began preservation efforts of its true

history. Unfortunately, these case study analyses are hindered by a lack of documentation on camp construction and history as well as a lack of empirical data related to the motivations of thanatourist, for which there was only one scholarly article.

I choose this method for its strengths as well as for the temporal expansion of this phenomena and its connections to similar phenomena occurring today. It was also chosen due the inability to travel to the sites in question and collect quantitative date first hand. For these reasons, data on the sites and phenomena was collected through examination of documentation, records, and reports, which showed prominent observable causalities.

Six indicators were used to choose specific sites for case study analysis. These indicators are:

1. Physical Thanaheritage: the site must have experienced and have become notable for an it’s association to death, war, morbidity, crime, etcetera. It must also be preserving the physical, tangible, history that portrays the site;

2. Intangible Heritage and Visitor Motivation: A sites tangible heritage must portray the intangible aspects of the site via exhibitions, tours, seminars, and etcetera. For thanaheritage sites, motivations, unlike strictly thanatourism sites, cannot be strictly derived from a desire to confront death or morbidity. Intangible heritage gives access to a diverse range of motivations;

3. Mission and Goals: the site must retain a degree of success. Site success is in part gauged by whether the site has accomplished what it set out to do in its mission statement. Success is also determined by the degree of preservation and interpretation of the strictly thanaheritage aspects of the site. This is important as a thanaheritage site may be so without knowing or acting like one;

4. Secondary History: the site must have important history of heritage unrelated to its dark history, regardless if the site is known for its dark history of its alternative history. While not all thanaheritage sites require, or have, alternative history, it is important to this study because the author intends to point out that all of a sites history is important;

5. Economic Sustainability: the site must maintain itself economically through a variety of income factors; and

6. Stakeholder Engagement: the site must engage stakeholders and promote active participation in the development of the site. This allows the site a degree of accountability and transparency.

These indicators may, in practice, decrease certain economic and tourist attraction aspects of a site that prefers the designation thanatouristic destination, but for sites that are developing themselves as thanaheritage sites, these indicators may aid the site in becoming a well-known attraction by following the examples set forth by predecessors.

The differences in development of the two sites provides a more comprehensive analysis of thanaheritage tourism destinations and was a major reason these sites were chosen. Auschwitz-Birkenau was chosen mainly for its success as thanaheritage tourism destination as well as for its preexisting historical value. Before World War II it maintained a historical importance as a booming trade town and a heritage status for the hundreds of immigrant workers and refugees, though it is most commonly known as the most recognizable symbol of Nazi brutality, racial terrorism, and fascist murder.

Despite this, or because of it, more than two million people visited the Auschwitz-

Birkenau site within its first decade alone; since 2007, at least a million people visit the site annually, and in 2014, the site reached record numbers with over a million and a half visitors. (National Auschitz-Birkenau Museum 2015) It is one of the most visited

Nazi concentration camp, or among any concentration/internment camp. One study suggests that there are numerous motivations for visitors including heritage connection, historical value, mourning, remembrance, education, associations with mortality, and finally, because it is a tourism hot-spot. (Avital Biran 2011)

Buchenwald, on the other hand, was chosen in part for the exact opposite reason. Buchenwald, like Auschwitz-Birkenau, has a preexisting historical and heritage value. However, Buchenwald has had a more difficult history of preservation and

development than Auschwitz has had. Buchenwald resides on the slopes of Ettersberg near Weimar. It was, historically, the birthplace of a famous German author, but for many more people, it is a place of national heritage and identity, the birthplace of democracy in Germany, beginning with the Weimar Republic. Unlike Auschwitz, which almost immediately after liberation, became a protected site of importance and pilgrimage, Buchenwald was used as a political tool until the fall of the Soviet Union in

1989. The first few years after liberation from the Nazis by the Allied forces,

Buchenwald was used as an internment camp for Nazi perpetrators by the Soviet

Union. Then, after the camps dissolution in the early 1950s, the site was used as a form of propaganda by the Soviet Union to promote anti-fascism and communism until 1989.

It was not until the early 1990s that the Buchenwald site was turned into a proper memorial and museum, acknowledging all important aspects of the sites history, and attempting to preserving the historical evidence there.

These two main reasons, preexisting value and physical preservation, are only some of the reasons these sites were chosen, but among the most important. While a preexisting cultural or historical value of a thanaheritage site is not necessary, as a site could be important specifically because of the death or morbid related events that occurred there, it is important to recognize that sites have history before and after the moment they are recognized for. Therefore, Buchenwald and Auschwitz are qualifying sites of preexisting importance. Physical thanaheritage, the second main reason

Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald were chosen, is an important determinant to realizing the full worth of interdisciplinary research and procedural frameworks between thanatourism and historic preservation because the physical evidence at a site is what it

gives to the world. It determines how the sites is used and received, which means that their physical preservation is important to the success of the site. Auschwitz has been preserved in its entirety since its liberation whereas Buchenwald was never fully preserved and preservation of its entirety was only established in the 1990s. Auschwitz has been used as a memorial site to those who died and the heritage they left behind as well as a historical site of World War II, whereas Buchenwald was used as a secondary concentration camp, a propaganda tool, and finally for the same reasons as Auschwitz.

Finally, while Buchenwald and Auschwitz-Birkenau both maintain regular visitors, it is clear that Auschwitz has a larger and better reception rate than Buchenwald. Both sites have sustained economic viability and stakeholder engagement.

Content Analysis

This research examines four types of sources: books written by historians and preservation professionals, journal articles written by thanatourism professionals and site specific professionals, verified web sources, and prevalent news article. The sources were each verified as valid and reliable sources, through an analysis of author or site credentials, however, to increase validity and reliability a variety of sources on the same topics were analyzed. Due to the analytical nature of this research all sources are equally public and easily accessed because knowledge, both that which has created this paper and that which this paper creates, should be accessible to everyone.

The most valuable resources have been the most elusive ones, those regarding the unknown preexisting history of the sites and those that have created a base knowledge of thanatourism. Other invaluable sources include the official, nationally sponsored, websites of Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald which have relayed the most knowledge of the sites history and preservation, including preservation reports

downloaded from the web sources. News resources, published online, have been vital to relating the importance of preserving thanaheritage sites to events occurring around the world today, that will likely forge tomorrows thanaheritage sites. The remaining sources have created an extensive network of knowledge regarding the phenomena in question, allowing for in-depth, holistic analysis of general bodies of data. Some sources, such as the limited sources (three, to be precise) regarding thanatourism motivation and concentration camp construction, despite a lack of information have been critical in recognizing the gaps in information and research, gaps that cannot be filled by this research alone but are necessary for further development beyond this, or any thanaheritage academia and professionalism. Through all sources, case studies were created and evaluated from criteria formed from indicators pulled from various resources to illuminate the need for interdisciplinary research between thanatourism and historic preservation.

CHAPTER 4 AUSCHWITZ-BIRKENAU

Background Information

Wartime History

To begin, the history of Auschwitz as a thanaheritage site actually begins long before Auschwitz became a concentration camp for Nazi Germany. The town in which

Auschwitz sits is called Oswiecim. Throughout its pre-war history, Oswiecim was a border town under constant conflict for control. (Steinbacher 2005) However, in 1900,

Oswiecim grew as a trade location and railway junction owing to its location between mines and industrial cities. (Steinbacher 2005) Oswiecim’s population grew as seasonal immigrant workers flooded the town. In 1916, the town built a special emigrant camp at the edge of town; it consisted of twenty-two brick barracks. (Steinbacher 2005) After

World War I the immigrant camp became a refugee camp for Polish minorities. The refugees built a miniature city within the camp consisting of a schoolhouse, a theatre, a hotel, and other buildings. (Steinbacher 2005) Oswiecim is important for its history of emigration and trade. The use and development of the area where Auschwitz-Birkenau exist in Oswiecim is important because of the Holocaust.

Unlike other areas to be Germanized, Upper Silesia, where Oswiecim is located, was a heavily industrialized area unsuitable for much settlement but great for industry and thus, the area was thought to be a perfect spot for a concentration camp for the purpose of subduing the local population as a slave force. (Rees 2005) As Nazi’s began grasping control of areas, Oswiecim became a key Nazi hold due to its being a railway junction with many lines. In January 1940, the SS decided to renovate the immigrant camp at Oswiecim. (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.) The hotel

mentioned earlier became the SS officers home-base until the camp was renovated for better accommodation. (Rees 2005) As soon as the camp was even remotely finished the SS transferred prisoners in to the camp. Even from the beginning, the conditions at

Auschwitz were dehumanizing. In May 1941, Reichsfuehrer SS (head of the SS)

Figure 4-1. Map of Auschwitz I (Main Camp). (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.) Most buildings here were originally built prior to Nazi control.

Heinrich Himmler, one of Hitler’s right hand men, inspected Auschwitz. Upon seeing the prisoners used for forced labor and analyzing the overcapacity in the camp, Himmler ordered an expansion of the camp, from its original twenty-two barracks and supporting buildings. (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.) The expansion would include Birkenau, called Auschwitz II-Birkenau, and Monowitz, designated Auschwitz III-

Monowitz.. A document from the Auschwitz Construction Office dated September 12,

1941, and titled Explanatory Report regarding the Preliminary Draft for the Construction and Expansion of Auschwitz Concentration Camp contains detailed descriptions of both the existing state and future expansion of Auschwitz I – the main camp – to the capacity of 30,000 prisoners. (Rees 2005)

The task of designing and building the new camp fell to SS Hauptsturmfuhrer (Captain) Karl Bischoff, newly appointed chief of the Auschwitz construction office, and the architect, SS Rottenfuhrer (Corporal) Fritz Ertl. A study of their plans reveals that, from the onset, they intended the accommodations to be unable to sustain human life. Their initial plan was for one barrack block to contain 550 prisoners, which meant that each inmate would have only a third of the total space allocated to a prisoner at ‘Old Reich’ concentration camps like Dachau. But the plans show that even that level of density turned out to be too low for the needs of the SS planners: in a handwritten alteration, the number 550 was crossed out and replaced with a final figure of 744. Each prisoner at Birkenau would therefore now be excepted to exist in a quarter of the total space allocated per inmate in a German concentration camp. (Rees 2005)

Figure 4-2. Image of Karl Bischoff’s handwritten note to increase prisoner capacity from 550 to 774.

Figure 4-3. Blueprints for the Barracks at Auschwitz II-Birkenau. (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.)

The model city that Himmler envisioned was never fully realized, but the

Birkenau and Monowitz expansions were. The Birkenau expansion covered more than four hundred acres of land, compared to the original Auschwitz site which covered only fifty acres. (Curry 2010) The Birkenau site consisted of thirty, one-story, brick buildings and twenty wooden barracks, depicted above. (Curry 2010) Birkenau was also the site of the four gas chamber-crematoriums, which will be discussed shortly. The site continued to expand beyond this first construction, however, accurate records of subsequent expansions could not be located. Monowitz was built on a much smaller scale than Birkenau. Monowitz consisted of a series of buildings, all workshops and factories, designed to utilize the slave labor available at Auschwitz. (Museum 2017)

Once the extension of the physical camp was completed, the SS began ideas for new construction based on their needs. An existing structure, Block 11 – also known as the Little Red House – was, at the time, converted for use as an infirmary, and to experiment on prisoners not just for medical purposes, but also for murder techniques.

(Rees 2005) The first gassing using Zyklon-B at Auschwitz were perpetrated in

September 1941. (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.) In October of the same year, the Auschwitz architects, inspired by the success of the experiments at the

Little Red House, began designing a new crematorium at the main camp. “Recent research suggests that an addition in the plans of a ventilation system that forced out old air and pushed in fresh air, and the recessing of the ventilation ducts, meant that the new crematorium was also designed with the potential to be a gas chamber.” (Rees

2005) The new combination crematorium-gas chamber design was so successful in the eyes of the SS that by the summer of 1943, Auschwitz-Birkenau contained four operating crematorium-gas chambers. (Rees 2005) Auschwitz-Birkenau had one of the highest death rates for concentration/extermination camps during the Holocaust, with a record of more than 1.1 million people having died or been executed there. (United

States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.)

There was so much death that the SS had to create a special labor detail of

Jewish prisoner called the Sonderkommando, which was in charge of removing bodies from the gas chambers and operating the crematoriums. (United States Holocaust

Memorial Museum n.d.) Nearing the end of the war, on October 7th, 1944, the

Sonderkommando, alongside the underground resistance network at Auschwitz-

Birkenau, organized an uprising, successfully blowing up crematorium IV and killing several guards in the process. (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.) It is one of the more well-known Holocaust uprising. Despite the failure for the prisoners, the uprising proved to be good for the SS agenda, as a month later Reichsfuehrer Heinrich

Himmler ordered the destruction of all the gas chambers and crematoriums to keep

them out of the hands of the approaching Allied forces. (United States Holocaust

Memorial Museum n.d.) With nowhere to murder the prisoners, the SS began evacuating Auschwitz-Birkenau in January 1945, forcing the prisoners on brutal death marches in treacherous conditions; the few who survived were transported to other concentration camps. (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.) On January

Figure 4-4 . Map of Auschwitz II-Birkenau (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.)

27th, 1945, Soviet troops finally liberated Auschwitz-Birkenau and the remaining, approximately, 7,000 prisoners who were thought to be too weak to survive the march or had been hidden by the resistance. (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.)

Unfortunately, the discovery of Auschwitz-Birkenau by the Red Army proved to be a

problem as many began to question whether or not the alliance that was to win the war would survive to see its victory. (Rees 2005)

Postwar History

Auschwitz, unlike the other case study in this paper, remained under a single political agenda post-war. Less than a year after the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau, former prisoner Alfred Fiderkiewicz proposed a law at the Peoples’ National Council to establish Auschwitz-Birkenau as a museum and protected area. (National Auschwitz-

Birkenau Museum 2017) Unfortunately, this would take nearly another two years to be realized. The Polish parliament formed the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum in the

Figure 4-5. Map of Auschwitz as of Summer 1944 (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.) summer of 1947, covering 191 hectares of land. (National Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum

2017) The first decade of the museums establishment was marked by decisions concerning how to run the museum, what to promote, and how to sustain itself for the future. One of the largest issues revolving around the museum was its boundaries.

Many people at the museum argued that the museum boundaries needed to be expanded to promote a greenbelt around the entire dimensions to preserve the nature and feeling of isolation at the site. In 1957 “parliament passed a law fixing the boundaries of the Museum,” (National Auschwitiz-Birkenau Museum 2017) allowing for total solitary. During the sixties, the Museum began promoting numerous new installations and exhibits. 1962 witnessed the installation of an International Auschwitz

Monument, sponsored by the Polish National Committee. (National Auschwitz-Birkenau

Museum 2017) The enhancement of exhibitions was only one aspect of the museum.

The first major maintenance and restoration program was undertaken in 1963 to preserve the ruins of crematorium II in the Birkenau portion of the site as well as maintaining the roads, fences, grounds, and plant population, which had grown widely out of proportion. (National Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum 2017)

Both activities continued. In 1967, an international Monument to the Victims of

Fascism was constructed between crematoria II and crematoria III with approximately

200,000 people in attendance for its unveiling. (Young 1994) The same year, the visitors center opened to the public. (National Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum 2017) Then in 1968 an exceptional preservation effort was undertaken to clean victims’ hair, removing “approximately 100 kg. of dust, restoring the natural color of the hair.”

(National Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum 2017) These hairs were preserved to create a story of the victims, the indignity of their shaven hair, and the use of their hair once shaven. It would serve as an example of diligence for the forthcoming preservation projects at Auschwitz-Birkenau. So much so, that a year later the most intensive restoration work to date commenced upon “the ruins of Crematoria II and III and their

gas chambers, the barracks in Sector BL, the roofs of the barracks in the quarantine camp and of the guard towers,” as well as on “35,000 brushes, 642 suitcases, 119 striped camp uniforms, 500 various other objects, … [and] on the railroad platform in

Birkenau.” (National Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum 2017) The preservation efforts at the

National Museum of Auschwitz-Birkenau was so commendable that in 1971 it received the Peace Council’s Frederic Joliot-Curie Gold Medal. (National Auschwitz-Birkenau

Museum 2017)

However, receiving the peace medal only confirmed for the stakeholders at

Auschwitz that they needed to do more. Between 1973 and 1974 a group of experts convened to decide the future of the Museum: how the park would be used for and by future generations, including how to better connect the two sections, Auschwitz I and

Auschwitz II-Birkenau, and how to preserve and evolve the site. (National Auschwitz-

Birkenau Museum 2017) The management plan allowed, among other things and reasons, for Auschwitz-Birkenau to be entered in the UNESCO list of World Heritage

Sites. (National Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum 2017) The management plan worked well until funding became an issue. In 1990, representatives of the Ronald Lauder

Foundation meet to establish a plan for future funding, preservation, and maintenance, which resulted in the establishment of the International Council of the Museum, for which former inmate Wladyslaw Bartoszewski was unanimously elected leader.

(National Aushwitz-Birkenau Museum 2017) The meeting also led to the creation of the

Auschwitz-Birkenau Death Camp Victims Memorial Foundation, which raises funds for all aspects of the museum. (National Aushwitz-Birkenau Museum 2017)

As funding stabilized, the need for a more comprehensive, long term preservation plan was needed. Sometime during the early 21st century, the Auschwitz-

Birkenau Foundation, in agreement with the International Council of the Museum, created the Master Plan for Preservation (MPP). (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum

2017)

Master Plan for Preservation (MPP) is a complex and multiannual program of preservation works funded by the Auschwitz-Birkenau Foundation with the aim of preserving the remains of the German Nazi concentration and extermination camp. The plan is implemented through preservation projects covering specific objects or via a comprehensive approach to conservation problems. The conservation plans include: sites of the former camps of Auschwitz I and Auschwitz II-Birkenau (along with the remaining buildings, the ruins of the gas chambers and crematoria, the remains of the barracks and other facilities, sewage systems and drainage ditches, roads, fences, railway infrastructure), as well as thousands of post-camp items, and documents on exposition or stored in the warehouse. (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017)

The first phase of the MPP included six specific task to be completed by 2015. The first included preservation of dilapidated roof structures visible to visitors on tour, including the roofs themselves, the roof frames, the roofs lath, the roofs tiles, the rafters, and the roofing supports. (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) While it is the goal to eventually preserve all roofs, only the one directly visible to visitors were a part of this project. The second was the Mess Hall Painting, conserved at the new conservation studios at Auschwitz, which is one of the most modern and up-to-date conservation research facilities in the world. (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) The third project involved the SS-Hygiene Institute archival collections. The goal of this project was tri-fold: 1) to “enhance the longevity of these highly acidic, and sometimes crumbling or torn archival materials;” (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) 2) to digitize the records for prosperity; and, 3) to protect the archives by reinforcing the

ceiling and floor slabs and installing a fire suppressant system (SUG) in the archive building. (National Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum 2017) The SUG was installed in all archival storage areas. Fourth, the chimneys of the Birkenau barracks were to be preserved. (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) Most of the chimneys were in ruins among vestiges of wooden barracks and could not be preserved to perfection.

However, the goal of this task was to maintain them as they were, supporting and protecting them where possible, to preserve the desolate landscape and scale of the concentration-turned-death camp. Due to the inevitable nature of the collapse of the barracks and chimneys, they were extensively documented using photography and photogrammetry. (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) The fifth project involved the conservation of a plethora of shoes which remain on display at the museum. The project conserved 80,000 shoes, cleaning, treating, and reinforcing them, to gain each shoes story as well as the overall magnitude of the atrocities committed at Auschwitz-

Birkenau. (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) The final project in the first phase of the MPP was to preserve the ruins of gas chambers II and III at Birkenau. The attached crematoriums had previously been preserved, however, due to the underground nature of the gas chambers, they were at severe risk from the surrounding soil pressure, atmospheric conditions, and high ground water levels. (National

Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) In short, they were eroding. This was one of the most important projects as the crematoriums and gas chambers are some of the most important evidence regarding the Holocaust.

The second phase included five more preservation projects. The first project was to preserve two wooden barracks, inventory numbers B-154, a prisoner barrack, and B-

159, a sanitation barrack. (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) They are the only two surviving barracks in the quarantine section. (National Auschwitz Birkenau

Museum 2017) The second project was to modernize the suitcase storage areas to protect them as they are among the most recognizable objects of Auschwitz-Birkenau.

(National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) Thirdly, the server-matrix of the digital archives was expanded and optimized to promote the full digitalization of all archival and supporting materials. (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) The fourth project was to replace the glass display cases with reinforced glass to preserve the deteriorating contents and deter theft and vandalism; mainly the Jewish prayer shawls and the suitcases. (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) The fifth and final project of phase II was to conduct research for further preservation activities, mainly geological research on the soil conditions, which play a key role in complex conservation planning. (National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017)

Three extensive post-phase projects were also undertaken. The first, to conserve five wooden barracks in Birkenau, two of which were hospital barracks, two were an extension of the work done on the two barracks in the quarantine section, and one was a sanitary barrack. (Jolanta Banas-Maciaszcyk, To Preserve Authenticity: The

Conservation of Five Wooden Barracks at the Former Auschwitz II-Birkenau

Concentration Camp 2012) The second was the preservation of two brick barracks, visible to visitors. These two projects utilized the most professional, up-to-date, and technological analysis and preservation techniques, making them examples for other projects around the world. It is important to remember though that Auschwitz was a city, not just a camp, and that pre-existing structures deserve recognition too. (Jolanta

Banas-Maciaszcyk, To Preserve Authenticity: The Conservation of Two Blocks at the

Former Kl Auschwitz I 2012) The old theatre, which predated the existence of the concentration camp and was originally a part of the emigrant camp, was to be preserved and adapted into the International Centre for Education about Auschwitz.

(National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) In total, the conservation group at

Auschwitz is responsible for 155 historical buildings, over 300 ruins, and thousands of artifacts. (Curry 2010)

It is clear from the above information that Auschwitz-Birkenau has maintained some of the highest levels of preservation due to its infamous status and dedicated stakeholders. Auschwitz-Birkenau is a strong example of a historical site, a thanaheritage site, and a tourism destination. Its efforts in preservation and maintenance of education, artifacts, and intangible heritage (through events and exhibitions) should serve as an example to other thanaheritage sites. It is an important case because of its high profile as well as its success. However, not all thanaheritage sites have had such success. The rest of this chapter will explore the thanaheritage site of Buchenwald, which stands, for this research, in stark contradiction to Auschwitz and as an example of what can occur if thanaheritage sites are not managed and preserved in an authentic manner.

Case Study Analysis

Secondary History

Firstly, not all thanaheritage sites need alternative history. Many sites, such as

Auschwitz are successful for their dark history alone. However, it is important to understand that many sites have alternative history and that that history can be just as important as what a site is known for. The value of the alternative history, while difficult

to extrapolate, should determine its interpretation at the site. Auschwitz’s alternative history is the immigrant worker camp that existed on the site before the site was developed into a concentration camp. Some of the preexisting structures, such as the old theatre, are still there and are preserved. However, there is very little, if any, interpretation of those structures and what they were used for before the war. As stated, the value of alternative history is hard to calculate, but most history is given value by those who use or connect with it. Therefore, it is possible to say that Auschwitz’s alternative history is either unimportant to people or it has no use to anyone. Though it is more likely that the magnitude of Auschwitz-Birkenau’s history simply overshadows its alternative history.

Physical Thanaheritage

Dark history and its’ historical and heritage value is what makes a thanaheritage site a thanaheritage site as opposed to just a historical site or a thanatouristic destination. Auschwitz-Birkenau’s dark history is related to it being a concentration/death camp. This is unique as most sites were either specifically a concentration camp, mainly used for labor, or a death camp. Whereas Auschwitz-

Birkenau, which was created early in the Nazi regime, was originally established as a concentration camp, and developed into a death camp. Auschwitz is considered the most recognizable and the largest of the Nazi camps, then and now. Auschwitz is also well known for having had the most deaths of any Nazi camp, with over 1.1 million people having died or been murdered there. (United States Holocaust Memorial

Museum n.d.)

Without evidence of these atrocities though, the site would likely be less significant than some other notorious Holocaust sites. However, because Auschwitz-

Birkenau has preserved the camp so extensively, it remains prominent. It is important to note that the preservation of Auschwitz began almost immediately after the camps liberation. Two years after liberation the site was designated a national heritage site and established as a museum. Preservation and conservation efforts of the physical buildings on the site, as well as the belongings and artifacts found at the site (e.g., shoes, hair, medical records, photographs, etcetera) have been maintained throughout its postwar history. Auschwitz has one of the most up-to-date conservation labs in the world and uses it, with a team of experts, to preserve everything they possibly can.

(National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum 2017) The preservation efforts at Auschwitz have ranged from digitizing records to restoring and conserving whole buildings to preserving individual strains of hair. These efforts, elaborated on in chapter 2, are a successful account of preservation efforts. What may be more important are the preservation ethics maintained at Auschwitz. The team there believes that buildings that are still standing should remain standing while ruins should be maintained as ruins instead of being rebuilt. (Curry 2010) This is important as ruins can be just as moving, if not more so, that remaining structures. For example, the chimneys of a series of barracks have been fortified and preserved however they rest in a field of vestiges.

They signify the desolate nature of the site, creating an image of emptiness and despair immanent to the camp.

Intangible Heritage and Visitor Motivation

Auschwitz-Birkenau’s notoriety makes it prominent to all thanaheritage sites.

Other sites can learn from the value people have placed on the history of Auschwitz and establish their history as similarly important. Especially now, “at a moment when the last former prisoners are passing away, preserving … the Auschwitz site has become the

highest priority,” because its “original space is not only unique, material evidence of

Nazi German crimes, but also a symbol of the brutality of war, terror, the Shoah, and genocidal, racist policies.” (Bartoszewski 2010) Auschwitz reminds people of what happens when racism, political and religious extremist, and terror tactics are permitted to occur, and what could happen again, if we ignore history and forget. The physical remains at Auschwitz are the vehicle through which the intangible is portrayed. Through the conservation efforts of artifacts, stories and lives can be shared to visitors. While there have been almost no studies on visitor motivations to thanaheritage sites, the site itself can tell us what demographic Auschwitz is attempting to reach. The Museum offers a variety of guided tours catering to the amount of time a visitor desires to spend at the site. All tours include the permanent exhibitions at Auschwitz I, the barracks at

Auschwitz II-Birkenau, the ramp, and crematorium II and III. Extended tours may also include crematorium IV and V, the national exhibitions, and other facilities. Auschwitz also provides an extensive virtual tour available free of charge online. (National

Auschitz-Birkenau Museum 2015)

Along with tours and exhibitions, Auschwitz also runs a series of seminars including genocide prevention seminars, collective memory seminars, how to teach the

Holocaust seminars, penitentiary inmate rehabilitation seminars, Jewish history and culture seminars, and conservation seminars. (National Auschitz-Birkenau Museum

2015)

It is clear that the site is trying to reach an audience that wants to learn from the sites history and remember what happened. The museum as strict rules regarding behavior, lending to an environment of solidarity for remembrance and education. It is

because of these reasons that the site draws many visitors who motives are for educational and remembrance purposes. However, empirical studies need to be undertaken to further gauge visitor motivations.

Table 4-1. List of Exhibitions at the Auschwitz National Museum Permanent • Commemoration Signs • Evidence of Crime Exhibitions • Death Blocks • Life of Prisoners • Death Wall • Gas Chamber I • Central Camp Baths • Living Conditions • Extermination

National • Roma and Sinti • Czech Lands Exhibitions • Russia • Austria • Poland • Hungary • Slovakia • Belgium • France • Shoah • Netherlands On-line • Sonderkommando • German Plans for Expansion Exhibitions • Evacuation and Liberation • Auschwitz, Memory, World • Tragic Love • Let Us Build a Memory • Before They Vanished • (National Auschitz-Birkenau Museum 2015)

Economic Sustainability

It would be nice if thanaheritage, and all historical, sites were valued enough that they were always economically viable. Unfortunately, many sites struggle to accumulate enough money to even keep running. Like many historical sites, Auschwitz operates from donations, event fees, local, national, and private grants, and a gift shop. The

International Council of the Auschwitz Museum, with leadership from Wladslaw

Bartoszewski, developed the perpetual fund which regularly shows the world the worth of Auschwitz and promotes pledges for grant donors. The perpetual fund pulls endowments from all around the world, but mainly from central and Eastern European countries. These donations have, and continue, to fund the majority of preservation projects at Auschwitz. Clearly, the National Auschwitz Museum maintains economic

viability. Regrettably, any major shift in political power, religious ideology, global economics, and etcetera, could throw Auschwitz out of favor, decreasing endowments and forcing the museum to downgrade, or even shut down. It is especially important for thanaheritage sites, as they are among the most likely historic sites to help resolve any of the given major shifts and restore humanity, to make sure that their site always has funding, preferably self-perpetuating funding. While Auschwitz-Birkenau is currently, successfully, economically viable, it could evolve further.

Figure 4-6. Financial Distribution at Auschwitz (National Auschitz-Birkenau Museum 2015)

Stakeholder Engagement

One of the most vital aspects of any historical site is stakeholder engagement.

Stakeholder engagement is a form of transparency through which a site or organization discusses plans, developments, events, etcetera with people who have specific interest in the site or organization. The International Auschwitz Council has, throughout its history, regularly involved museum, financial, and heritage stakeholders in important decisions. Auschwitz stakeholders include the Ministry of Cultural and National

Heritage, the European Union, Holocaust survivors, the International Auschwitz Council, educators from collaborating universities, among many others. Stakeholder

engagement is critical to producing a successful site because it produces transparency and involvement, which in turn generates interest and trust. This engagement also creates a collective memory which allows thanaheritage sites in particular to engage the public in a site where their memory can thrive without prejudice. So long as collective memory is nourished and endures at sites like Auschwitz-Birkenau, it becomes possible to reduce the probability of such events reoccurring. Stakeholder engagement also helps to produce funds through its transparency. If stakeholders are aware and involved in decisions they are more likely to fund new forms of interpretation and memorialization, so long as they agree with them.

Mission and Goals

A sites success is determined by a variety of influences including those discuss above and their ability to accomplish what they have set out to do in their mission statement. Auschwitz’s mission statement is:

From the moment when the Polish State established the Auschwitz Memorial on the site of the former camp, it committed itself to preserve the memory of the crimes committed in that Nazi German Auschwitz concentration and extermination camp … Our main goal is to protect and conserve camp relics or in other words to keep the authenticity and the thrust of the biggest concentration camp and the only extermination center that the SS did not manage to raze to the ground … Education, understood in a broader sense, is an equally important task. One can teach about Auschwitz and the Holocaust anywhere. Only at the Auschwitz Memorial, however, is it possible not only to get to know the history of the camp operation and gain direct access to the first-hand accounts of witnesses, but also to see the evidence of the Extermination with our own eyes: the ruins of the gas chambers, crematoria and other leftover camp remains … Auschwitz lies at the very heart of the European experience. It is the biggest Extermination site, a symbol of its monstrous entirety. It is a constant point of reference in the post-war history of the Old Continent, fully justifying all the efforts aimed at creating a unified, different, new, more humane and sensitive Europe. Taking care of the site is not only an obligation towards the past generations, victims and survivors; to a great extent, it is also an obligation towards the generations to come. It will be their responsibility to carry on our post-war endeavors

for a better, united, sensible, supporting and safe world. It is our children and grandchildren who will build the future of our civilization. We owe them the truth about Auschwitz. (National Auschitz-Birkenau Museum 2015)

Auschwitz’s mission statement clearly states that its main goals are physical preservation, education, and preserving memory. The previous analysis of these indicators have shown that Auschwitz is successful in accomplishing its mission statement and continues to improve. Another major influence is the number of visitors a site accommodates regularly. Auschwitz-Birkenau is the most visited Holocaust sites, with over 1.3 million visitors annually. The site is also successful among other determinants, such as preservation. Auschwitz-Birkenau’s Master Preservation Plan has successful demanded and categorized preservation projects on site with priority influences. The site also has a high turnover rate for preservation projects development and success, meaning that projects are well structured, allowing it to go from conception to completion in a relatively short period. Auschwitz is also successful economically, regularly replenishing its perpetual capital via site investment. As a thanaheritage site

Auschwitz-Birkenau has been successful in recognizing, preserving, interpreting, and sharing the dark history of the site. However, the true measure of a thanaheritage site is not just its ability to share the dark history but its ability to use that history to create a safe space to mourn and reflect as well as to promote the contemplation of a hopeful future, as stated in its mission statement. Pain is easy to depict, but to use ones suffering to portray the joys and magnificent little moments in life, very few sites have that transformative ability to leave their audience with a sense of hopeful awe. Sites like

Auschwitz which are successful in doing this for their visitors play a crucial role in the future of how death is perceived and interacted with in society, where it has largely been

privatized and secularized. Such a unique space, probably the most important determent of success, draws a plethora of visitor types which in turn generate interest in the site, replenishing its other determinant factors of success.

CHAPTER 5 BUCHENWALD

Background Information

Wartime History

The Buchenwald concentration camp rest on the slopes of Ettersberg, five miles northwest of Weimar. (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.) Ettersberg was once a place of tranquility, where one could be free and at peace. (Monteath 1994) As far as pre-thana history is concerned, Weimar was a hotspot for visitors paying respect to the famous author Johann Wolfgang von Goethe; Moreover, Weimar was, ironically, the birthplace of democracy in Germany, when the Weimar Republic was created in

1919. (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.) Unfortunately, the area became exclusively associated with Buchenwald and its numerous sub-camps.

Buchenwald began construction in the Summer of 1937, built exclusively by the first 149 inmates who arrived there. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation

2017) Buchenwald was mainly a men’s camp; it did not receive female inmates until nearly the end of the war. The camp consisted of three main areas: the prisoners camp, the SS barracks and administration buildings, and a factory area for labor. The prisoners camp contained approximately 50 barracks, some of which were strictly for

Soviet prisoners of war and children, along with camp facilities, barns, and a zoo, though the zoo was not for prisoner use. (Museum 2017) The SS barrack and administration section compromised of 17 SS officer barracks arranged in a semicircle around an arced drive way. (Museum 2017) 10 elaborate and decadent villas were scattered to the South of the SS barracks and set aside specifically for SS commander and the highest-ranking officials, including the first camp commander Karl Koch and his

sadistic wife, Isle Koch. (Museum 2017) This section also included a series of administration buildings. The final section was a series of warehouses and work buildings. Unfortunately, much of these buildings do not remain today.

Figure 5-1. Map of Original Buchenwald Concentration Camp (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum n.d.)

Buchenwald is infamous for its brutality, just as Auschwitz is infamous for the sheer amount of murders committed there. Even from the beginning, decisions were made to increase the turnover rate of prisoners. In August 1937, the creation of a crematorium was approved and built. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials

Foundation 2017) A year later, on June 4th, 1938 the first public execution occurred at

Buchenwald when a laborer was hung for injuring a guard in an escape attempt.

(Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) Then, in November of

1939, the SS executed 31 prisoners in retaliation to an unrelated assassination attempt on Adolf Hitler and deprived the entire camp of food and water for three days, which in turn adversely affected the already rampant outbreaks of typhus and dysentery.

(Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) Within months, hundreds of inmates died from exposure, exhaustion, starvation, and disease, in part causing the

SS to begin lethal injection experiments on near-death patients. (Buchenwald and

Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) Though still inexcusably and unforgivably murder, it can be said that lethal injection was a relief to those suffering so horribly. As a result of the severe dysentery and typhus outbreaks, doctors at Buchenwald begin experimenting on inmates with prototypical vaccines for both in barracks 44 and 49.

(Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) It is one example in a long line of inhuman acts. Another occurred in May of 1940 when Catholic priest Otto

Neururer was tortured and then murdered simply for baptizing a fellow inmate.

(Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) By 1941, there were so many executions at Buchenwald that the SS established a stable adjacent to the camp to be used as a firing squad establishment; some 80,000 prisoners were murdered there. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) Further, by 1944,

SS data showed that at least 81% of inmates were malnourished and at least one in ten suffered from tuberculosis. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation

2017)

Buchenwald was not all death and dying though. It was also one of the highest profile labor camps. In 1942, the municipal administration of Weimar ordered the reproduction of furniture from the study Friedrich Schuller, a famous, German poet.

(Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) At the same time, the

Central SS Economic and Administrative Office ordered the camp to supply human hair and then produce it into textiles for the war effort. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora

Memorials Foundation 2017) Everyone was promptly shaven. Then, in early 1943, the inmates at Buchenwald were forced to construct a brand-new railway line from

Buchenwald to Weimar; they were forced to build the line within a three-month window, resulting in numerous deaths. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation

2017) Later in the year, the Mount Dora sub-camp of Buchwald, began building a rocket production facility. The tunnel construction alone killed nearly 3,000 inmates.

(Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) The project was never fully realized due to the changing tide of the war towards the beginning of 1944.

By August of 1944, the Soviet Red army was quickly advancing upon the Eastern front. Camps in the East, such as Auschwitz, were being dissolved as thousands of prisoners were forced to march over barren and desolate landscapes. Due to these marches, the population of Buchenwald quickly rose to over 31,000 inmates.

(Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) Thousands had died on the trip to Buchenwald, left on roadsides. Without the infrastructure to support the new influx, thousands of inmates slept in makeshift tents or simply on the ground, with nothing to protect them but the rags plastered to their skin. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-

Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) Allied troops also grew ever closer. In August of

1944, bombers attacked the armament shops located in the factory section

Buchenwald, killing nearly 400 of the 2,000 prisoners locked in the factory at the time of the air raid. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) The

bombings desolated nearly all the buildings in the factory section of the camp. (Museum

2017)

As victory for Germany seemed increasingly unachievable, the SS increased the amount of deaths by injection. Starting with the sub-camps, several thousand inmates were murdered in January of 1945 alone. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials

Foundation 2017) Despite this, in February of 1945, Buchenwald was the largest concentration camp still in existence, with approximately 112,000 people still alive of which a third were Jewish. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation

2017) Unlike in the East, the homeland concentration camps, like Buchenwald, kept their forced labor programs in effect until the very end, in many cases they even increased production. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017)

Not until the Allied troops were directly at the heels of the gates did the SS abandon the camps. Anyone that could not walk was shot, the rest, nearly 28,000, were forced to march to other relatively nearby camps in mid-April 1945. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-

Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) However, as the SS scurried to retreat, many prisoners hid, and some even engaged with active rebellion until the SS were gone.

On April 11th, 1945, the 37th tank battalion of the 4th U.S. Armored Division liberated Buchenwald; more than 21,000 inmates remained to see freedom.

(Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) Unfortunately, in the wake of liberation, hundreds died from malnourishment and disease. (Buchenwald and

Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) At its largest, Buchenwald was said to have 120,000 inmates. (Chanter 2017) Within the week, 1,000 Weimar citizens were forced to tour the camp, to face responsibility for what they had actively or subsequently

participated in creating. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017)

Buchenwald became a publicity hotspot. Politicians, journalist, investigators, and world leaders bore witness to Buchenwald and millions more saw its atrocity through photos, videos, and articles spread across the world. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora

Memorials Foundation 2017)

Postwar History

Soon after the war, Germany was split into four sections under control by the

United States in the South, France in the Southwest, England in North, and the Soviet

Union in the East. Buchenwald fell under the authority of the German Democratic

Republic (GDR), controlled by the Soviet Union. Shortly after the formation of the GDR,

Buchenwald secretly became the Soviet Special Camp No. 2, a detention camp for Nazi conspirators, held without trial. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation

2017) “The Soviet Security Service took charge of the still-existing structural facilities of

Buchenwald Concentration Camp beginning from August 1945 and … in the winter of

1946-47 more than 7,000 of the 28,000 inmates died as a result of hunger-related diseases.” (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) The camp was dissolved in early 1950. Except for a graveyard commemorating those who died at the Soviet Special Camp No. 2, no physical evidence is left at Buchenwald to remember it by. Much of the remaining structures in the camp were demolished or left to the forces of nature, though not with the intent of destroying evidence. In fact, soon after destruction, the camp was covered in a series of plaques acknowledging the

“Communist resistance and international solidarity under the leadership of members of the KPD.” (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017)

On September 14th, 1958, the Nationale Mahn und Gedenstatte Buchenwald, or

National Buchenwald Memorial, was established under the control of the Soviet Union.

(Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017)

A monumental memorial complex had been constructed on the southern slope of the Ettersberg. It adhered to the hero cult of Socialist Realism, while there were also clearly recognizable formal references to the nationalist-conservative memorial architecture … An archaistic gate provided access to a stairway leading down the slope. Accompanied by relief steles arranged according to the … motto "triumph through death and struggle", the visitor proceeded downward to the burial places of the dead. Passing mass graves surrounded by Roman-style ring walls, he then walked along the pylon-lined "Avenue of the Nations". The descent and the graves were intended to symbolize the "Night of Fascism", while the "Avenue of the Nations" represented militant international solidarity. Once he had crossed the third ring grave, the visitor ascended the "Stairway of Freedom" to the sculpture of the liberated inmates and the "Tower of Freedom". Here he was to become aware of the inmates’ "self- liberation" and of the "liberated part of Germany", i.e. the GDR, as his native country and his antifascist fatherland. He was to emerge convinced of the historical necessity of the triumph of Communism and conscious of the fact that this form of government had not yet taken hold everywhere and he must therefore remain alert and militant. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017)

From the excerpt above it is clear that, under Soviet Control, the National Buchenwald

Memorial was not about commemorating the Nazi past nor its millions of victims, but rather specifically it focused on the conversion of and strengthening of allegiance to the

Soviet cause. In September 1958, Buchenwald was designated a National

Commemorative Site and Memorial and in 1964 one of the original camp structures was converted into a museum. (Monteath 1994) Despite this achievement, little was changed at the Buchenwald site throughout its duration under Soviet command, saving modernization efforts.

One aspect that had been entirely denied during the Soviet control of the

Buchenwald site was the existence of the Soviet Special Camp No. 2. "At Buchenwald,

it’s as if the monuments erected by the Communist party overwhelm the actual size of the concentration camp” as to promote their ideology and no others. (Young 1994) The same thinking is what kept the Soviet Special Camp No. 2 such a secret. For the Soviet regime, “the moral of Buchenwald was not ‘never again’ to racism, genocide, and political terror as much as ‘never forget’ the destructive power of international Fascist capitalism. There was no room for the Holocaust in this memory.” (Young 1994)

However, as the iron curtain fell in 1989, along with the Soviet Union’s dissolution, the people of Germany were now allowed to question things again and it lead to a deep concern about how to handle their Nazi past, though generations had passed in- between. (Monteath 1994) In 1991, members of a local Christian Democratic Union

(CDU) faction contended to transform the Buchenwald site into a memorial for all injustice and all victims, not just victims of fascism. (Monteath 1994) They, among other stakeholders, also argued that Buchenwald should be listed under UNESCO because

“such a site … should not be exposed to the whims of any one country, especially not the whims of the Germans.” (Monteath 1994) Though the site was not placed under

UNESCO authority, it was granted the designation of Kulturstatte von gesamtstaatlicher

Bedeutung, or Cultural Site of National Significance, which was necessary to guarantee continuous funding. (Monteath 1994) At the time when stakeholders came together to freely discuss the future of Buchenwald, the only remaining structures were the canteen, the crematorium, some barracks, the storehouse, a handful of SS administrative buildings, and two of the original twenty-two guard towers. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017)

With perpetual funding, a committee of historians was then able to congregate to discuss the future of the Buchenwald site. They met three times between September

1991 and February 1992 and formulated a plan that would commemorate both the

Holocaust and the Soviet Special Camp No. 2, though they were to be memorialized distinctly from one another. (Monteath 1994) Another, very important, recommendation from the committee was to create a protective buffer zone around the Buchenwald site to prevent further development like what had occurred at the Ravensbruck memorial, which nearly had a supermarket, café, and car sales lot built on its premises. (Monteath

1994) The Buchenwald site had to be completely redesigned and reoriented. The guidelines from the historians’ committee read:

Both the Nazi concentration camp and Soviet Special Camp No. 2 are to be commemorated. The concentration camp is to be the primary focus. The commemoration of Special Camp No. 2 is to be subordinate. The commemoration sites are to be distinctly separated spatially. [...] The permanent exhibition, strongly influenced by the partiality of GDR historiography, must be newly conceived and designed on the basis of the present state of research. [...] Further elucidation and long-term research work is required for the planning of a memorial to Special Camp No. 2, as well as for an exhibition on and documentation of that camp. [...] The commission recommends the elucidation of the political background and history of the National Buchenwald Memorial of 1950–1990, its conception by the GDR, its exploitation for the purposes of state propaganda and its political instrumentalization [sic] in a larger context. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017)

It was also recommended that the name be changed from Nationale Mahn und

Gedenkstatte Buchenwald to Gedenkstatte Buchenwald, or simply Buchenwald

Memorial. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017)

From 1990 onward, thanks to the recommendations of the historians’ committee,

Buchenwald began to transform. In early 1990, when the public learned the truth about the Soviet Special Camp No. 2, the Buchenwald Memorial placed a wooden cross on

the site in commemoration. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation

2017) In July of 1990, a rudimentary young adults center was established and youth from around the world began archaeological excavations of previously neglected areas of Buchenwald. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) In

September, a temporary exhibit commenced to display the Soviet Special Camp No. 2 until a full facility could be built or renovated. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora

Memorials Foundation 2017) In 1991, the memorial created exhibitions, publications, and events, as well as a new tour, commemorating the previously ignored Holocaust history of the site, especially covering the topics of the Jewish people, homosexual inmates, asocials, the Sinti and Romani, and the SS, though the history of the gruesome experimentations were overlooked. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora

Memorials Foundation 2017) Then in November of 1993, a proper memorial to the

Jewish victims of Buchenwald and the Shoah was erected. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-

Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) The memorial is located at the site of block 22 and olive wood from Israel was embedded into the wall along with the inscription Psalm

78:6, “So that generations to come might know, the children, yet to be born, that they too may rise and declare to their children,” in English, Hebrew, and German. (Monteath

1994) The inscription spoke to the horrors of the Holocaust and the need to bear witness, but also to the future atmosphere of the Buchenwald Memorial.

In 1995 a new permanent exhibit was opened at the former depot to commemorate the full history of the holocaust as opposed to the Soviet version, complete with artifacts from the camp. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials

Foundation 2017) That April, a memorial plaque was dedicated to all the victims of

Buchenwald. A simple plaque, designed by Horst Hoheisel and Andreas Knitz, was engraved with the acronym K.L.B. and more than fifty victims’ names with the middle of the plaque being continuously kept at thirty-seven degrees Celsius, the same temperature as the human body, while the rest of the plaque was left to the elements, just like the people of Buchenwald. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials

Foundation 2017) In 1996 one of the mass graves, containing more than 400 bodies of those who died in the weeks just after liberation, received name plaques while the graveyard of Soviet Special Camp No. 2 was landscaped into a forest cemetery and furnished with steel steles. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation

2017) The former SS staff building was rehabilitated as the memorials administration building, complete with two conference rooms, offices, archives, and a library. While the former administration building was rehabilitated to serve as a modern youths’ center.

(Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) In 1997, while restoring the crematoria, 701 urns containing human ashes with names were found and reburied in a separate cemetery with a proper ceremony. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora

Memorials Foundation 2017) In May, after seven years, the final, official, permanent exhibit of the Soviet Special Camp No. 2 opened in a newly constructed building.

(Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) In February 1998, the former disinfection building was restored and rehabilitated to exhibit art from prisoners of the camp. Finally, in 1999, the permanent and full exhibition on the history of the

Buchenwald Memorial opened. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation

2017) At last, every aspect of history at Buchenwald has been established, leaving no secrets unturned.

Though Buchenwald has, in the recent past, began achieving success as an authentic thanaheritage site, not all thanaheritage sites are addressed the same.

Buchenwald stands an example of what can happen when a thanaheritage site is treated as a tool for politics and without regard to authenticity. For decades, the history and preservation of Buchenwald was actively ignored, destroyed, and kept secret to promote the Soviet cause. Because of this, the site is in part an example of inappropriate ways to develop a thanaheritage site. However, all history is important and should be portrayed. Since the Soviet development of the site did occurred, it becomes important to portray that part of the sites history as well as its history during and before the Holocaust because society can learn from that history, even if it is unpleasant. That is the legacy of thanaheritage sites. No matter how destitute and gruesome the history, it is vital to recognize, preserve, and learn from such history.

“How, after all, are we to guarantee the survival of memory if our culture does not provide memorial spaces that help construct and nurture collective memory?” (Young

1994) Anti-Semitism and other forms of racism and domination are still rampart in the world. Sites that represent the history, culture, and identity of the people suppressed by racism and domination are now constantly under attack. If people change history, if people destroy the past, society cannot break its repetition. For the cycle of violence and destruction to end, it is paramount that these sites remain preserved and that they maintain of level of interest and emotion to the people of visit them. In today’s world, the enduring legacy of the thanaheritage site “must be to serve as a warning against all forms of political terror and racial hatred.” (Young 1994)

This chapter presents the outcomes of the case study analysis of Auschwitz-

Birkenau and Buchenwald. The sites are evaluated on their prevalence as a thanaheritage tourism destination, their alternative history, the economic viability, their stakeholder engagement, and their overall success which will in turn reveal how these sites developed, why they are important, and how people interact with them. Each site will be evaluated individually based on the six indicators defined in the previous chapter.

These evaluations will serve as a basis of understanding for thanaheritage destinations.

Case Study Analysis

Secondary History

As previously mentioned, a thanaheritage site does not necessarily need alternative history to define it as its dark history may be defining enough. Auschwitz is renown strictly for its dark history. However, Buchenwald’s alternative history is just as important as its Holocaust history. Buchenwald has three instances of alternative history. The first is that Weimar, where Buchenwald is relatively located, is the birthplace of democracy in Germany. The Weimar Republic, Germanys first democratic republic was built in Weimar. This is the least valued and represented of Buchenwald’s alternative history, probably because this history can be represented in the city itself as opposed to Buchenwald, which lies just Northwest of the city. Buchenwald’s other two instance of alternative history are both post-Holocaust history. These two alternative histories are very important to the both the site and to history and they can both be considered alternative dark histories. Firstly, between the liberation of Buchenwald in

1945 and the beginning of 1950 the site was upheld as a concentration camp called the

Soviet Special Camp No. 2. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation

2017) This time though the Soviet Union used the camp for incarceration, interrogation,

and punishment of Nazi perpetrators and affiliates. The Soviet Special Camp No. 2 was highly secret and there is no physical evidence of this use of the camp. However, it is important that this piece of history be noted as the Soviets did almost exactly what the

Nazi’s had done, but with much more secrecy. The final part of Buchenwald’s alternative history is its history under management of the GDR. The GDR controlled the site as the Buchenwald memorial from 1950 until 1989. (Hackett 1995) Under control of the GDR, the Buchenwald memorial was rigorously developed. Unfortunately, it was developed to memorialize the entirety of the sites history. Instead, the GDR created memorials and preserved buildings that would help promote the idea that Soviet prisoners of war were victims of fascism and capitalism. Soviet prisoners of war were the only people represented during this time. While much of this has been rectified since the museum was redirected towards authenticity by the German State 1990 onward, this piece of alternative history, displays the dangers of radical ideology and propaganda. Along with the other alternative histories of this site, it shows that authenticity and transparency are key to site development.

Physical Thanaheritage

Much of the physical evidence of Buchenwald does not remain today. A few prisoner barracks, SS barracks, crematoriums, two guard towers, the clock tower, and a handful of other buildings are all that remain of the original site. While some buildings have been reconstructed and a few new ones have been erected as exhibition buildings, most of Buchenwald is empty field. What was once existed on the site is now marked by stones, foundations, and plaques. However, since 1990, what physical evidence remains has been extensively preserved to the best ability of the administration and even though there are few buildings left, there are artifacts, medical

records, Nazi and Soviet documents, prisoner artworks, and so on. While there is very little physical thanaheritage left at Buchenwald, the vestiges and fields that remain are a somber reminder of atrocities of war, terror tactics, political and religious extremism, propaganda, and racism. The lack of physical evidence relies the importance of remembering what happened because sometimes there is nothing left to remember it by. Much of what is known about the physical aspects of Buchenwald are known due to meticulous documentation by the Nazi’s, reconsent missions by the Allied forces, and memoirs. Buchenwald stands as an example of the power and importance of proper documentation. Much of Buchenwald’s thanaheritage is in how what happened there, during and after the Holocaust, has been interpreted for the masses by the museum, which will be discussed in the next section. Despite its lack of physical thanaheritage,

Buchenwald is a reminder of the power of politically driven propaganda as opposed to preservation, which is something that is unique to Buchenwald as it was one of the few used for such propaganda purposes.

Intangible Heritage and Visitor Motivation

As aforementioned, the is almost no research on visitor motivation to thanaheritage sites. However, by reverse engineering the types of programs set forth by the Buchenwald memorial it is possible to determine what type of visitors the site is attempting and tends to attract. During the Soviet control of the site, young people were the direct targets of the state. They were brought to the site to propagate them into

Soviet ideology. Now, as a memorial for history, the site attracts many of the same types of visitors as Auschwitz by promoting a series of exhibitions and tours.

Buchenwald tours are mainly directed at youth groups and young adults for educational purposes. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) Tours with

specific topics can be arranged at special request, however general tours bring visitors through the entire site. For those who prefer to be alone at the site, there are multimedia guides that can be bought or rented for individual tours. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-

Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) There are four permanent exhibitions that are available to tourist including an exhibit on the history of the camp under Nazi control, an art exhibition, an exhibit on the Soviet Special Camp No. 2, and finally the Buchenwald memorial exhibition, detailing the history of the memorial under Soviet control through present day. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) Each exhibition is separated in their own buildings. The memorial also promotes a series of educational seminars, like Auschwitz, but on a much smaller scale. Unlike Auschwitz though, Buchenwald recently established the International Young Peoples Centre, which allows young academics to live for a short duration on-site and learn from seminars and experts about the history of the site, how to curate a site, and how to preserve history. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017) From this, it is clear that Buchenwald intends to draw young crowds to educate them in order to preserve the memory of the site and instill the importance of remembrance and preservation in future generations.

Economic Sustainability

Economic sustainability is a vital aspect of any successful organization. Without funding preservation projects cannot be funded nor history interpreted. Under Soviet control, Buchenwald received all its money from the state with the direct agenda of antifascism propaganda. Once the USSR fell, stakeholders were involved and allowed to decide the future of the site, which in turn promoted funding as stakeholders wanted to change the site. Much of its funding still comes from national, international, and

private grants as well as event fees. The political turmoil and turnover at Buchenwald owes to its lack of perpetual funding. Despite this, Buchenwald can still serve as example to other developing thanaheritage sites. Whereas Auschwitz-Birkenau immediately became a national heritage site and museum accountable to the sites history after the war, Buchenwald did not develop this way until the early 1990’s. It shows the importance of developing a thanaheritage site early on so that it is preserved in its entirety, draws more attention, and with that, more sustainable funding.

Stakeholder Engagement

Stakeholder engagement is one of the most important parts of any successful organization as it provides a level of interest, transparency, and accountability that helps to better preserve and develop a site. Stakeholders of Buchenwald include historians, members of governmental departments associated with historical and cultural resources, advisory councils, and Holocaust survivors, amongst others. Under Soviet control there was no stakeholder engagement. Once the Soviet Union fell in 1989, members of the local CDU gathered to decide the future of the site. (Monteath 1994)

This is unique in that most sites have an established hierarchy of control. Due to the fall of the Soviet Union and the sudden shift in power the site was left without guidance. It is one of a rare instance in which the site was left to be developed by the stakeholders themselves. The CDU brought historians to come in, evaluate the site, and develop a report about what needed to be done to preserve and develop the sites history. While there has been little documented engagement since then, it is important that the site continue to engage stakeholders, for prosperity, funding, and transparency and all that that brings with it.

Mission and Goals

For this research success is defined as meeting or exceeding the qualification of the six determinants indicated in chapter 3 and discussed above as well as meeting its mission statement. Buchenwald’s mission statement reads as follows:

The foundation's purpose is to preserve the sites of the crimes as sites of mourning and commemoration, to provide these sites with a scientifically founded form and outward appearance and to make them accessible to the public in an appropriate manner, as well as to promote education through the research of the respective historical occurrences and their conveyance to the public. At the Buchenwald Memorial, the history of the Nazi concentration camp is to receive priority within this context. The history of the Soviet internment camp is to be integrated into the scientific and museum work to an appropriate degree … The foundation's obligations include the organization and realization of permanent and temporary exhibitions, scientific colloquia and cultural events on the national and international level, the educational guidance of the visitors with a special focus on young people, and scientific documentation, research and publication in connection with the work of the memorial. (Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation 2017)

This mission statement was issued in the early 1990’s with the redevelopment of

Buchenwald. Since then, the site has efficiently preserved what is left there, physically and through interpretation and documentation. Its tours, seminars, and International

Young Peoples Centre have met the memorials goals in education, though not to the level of Auschwitz. However, Buchenwald targets a different demographic than

Auschwitz (young adults) and in that they do so efficiently. Since the start of

Buchenwald’s redevelopment, it has created its four permanent exhibitions on art, the history of the Holocaust, the history of the memorial, and the history of the Soviet

Special Camp No. 2, which it specifically set out to do in its mission statement. In total, the site has been successful to itself. However, just because a site has done what it set out to do does not mean that it is a successful thanaheritage site because it may not meet the other determinant. Fortunately, Buchenwald does not fall into this category.

Buchenwald was unsuccessful until the dissolution of the Soviet Union due to it not being preserved or acknowledged as a thanaheritage site and used specifically for propaganda. Since the early nineties, the site has grown in success. It represents the full history of the site, including its alternative history, preserves its physical thanaheritage, interprets its intangible heritage, has engaged stakeholders, and is financially responsible for itself.

CHAPTER 6 OUTCOMES

The chart below displays the differences and similarities discovered between the two case study sites based on the analysis undertaken in chapters 4 and 5. It is clear from this analysis that a major aspect of the development and success of Auschwitz-

Birkenau is how quickly the preservation of the site was undertaken and the value placed on the preservation of the site very early on. Whereas Buchenwald had to wait forty-five years before seeing the same preservation standards as Auschwitz and because of this there is much fewer physical remains of the site. This time gap shows that the more immediate the preservation of a site is undertaken the more it will provide to people, making it more successful. Another important factor has been that, since the beginning, the development of Auschwitz has been discussed with victims of the

Holocaust and other stakeholders. This engagement of stakeholders has been regular and consistent creating a uniform organization that is accountable and transparent.

Whereas Buchenwald was not allowed to engage its stakeholders until, much like its physical preservation, forty-five years after its liberation. These stakeholders are different for each site though based on the countries in which they reside. In Germany, where Buchenwald is, the people under Soviet control, and to a degree even those under the other three allied powers, pushed aside thoughts of the Holocaust. It was not until the reunification of Germany in 1989, after two generations had passed, that the citizens of Germany were free to confront their Nazi past. Whereas in Poland, where

Auschwitz is, the people faced their history immediately. These are national characteristics that could not be as easily controlled as other variables. Different sites engage different audiences. One aspect that is common among organizations that

engage their stakeholders is that they may often receive larger amounts or more regular funding. Auschwitz-Birkenau receives most of its funding from profits generated by the museum itself. But it, along with Buchenwald, also rely on national and private grants and these grants often require engaging stakeholders and other audiences to prove the site or project is worth funding. Both sites do this well enough that they are maintaining themselves financially, a very important aspect to a sites success.

Table 6-1. Outcomes Indicators Auschwitz-Birkenau Buchenwald Physical • Immediate • Began 45 years late Thanaheritage • Some of the most • No much remains extensive efforts • Some aspects were irreversibly altered by the GDR campaign Intangible • Guided tours and • GDR control targeted youth Heritage and permanent for propaganda. Visitor Motivation exhibitions. • Directed at young adults • Seminars for education. • Directed at • Guided tours, permanent educational and exhibitions, international remembrance values young people’s center Economic • Perpetual fund • Museum income Sustainability • Museum income • Federal funding • Grants • Grants • Federal funding Stakeholder • Regular, consistent • GDR control – none Engagement engagement • Site developed by stakeholders • Not much recorded engagement since. Secondary • Immigrant and • Birthplace of German History refugee camp Democracy • Publicity hotspot • Soviet Special Camp No. 2 • GDR propaganda Mission and • Authentic preservation • Youth education Goals of the site and its • Preservation memory. • Interpretation • Education

This analysis also revealed two interesting points regarding the value of memory and intangible heritage at these sites, and the importance of secondary history. The analysis of Auschwitz displayed that the various physical preservation efforts, such as that of the shawls, hair, books, suitcases, shoes, and more in turn told the stories of the individuals and groups; stories that may have been lost otherwise. This intangible history in turn creates a more dynamic story of the site. Whereas at Buchenwald, there are less vehicles through which to engage the intangible history and heritage of the site.

These histories are interpreted via exhibitions, galleries, seminars, and so on. What sort of interpretations are available at any given site often revolves around the goal of the museum of the types of visitors it attracts. Unfortunately, the lack of visitor motivation data may make it difficult for sites to determine what interpretation would be best suitable for the attracted visitors. However, it was possible to figure out which types of the visitors the museum is trying to attract by reverse engineering their types of interpretation models. Both sites focus heavily on education through interpretation, however Buchenwald focuses more on youth education as opposed to any other demographic, whereas Auschwitz is much more varied. Auschwitz has very little secondary history and therefore focuses heavily on interpreting the history of the

Holocaust and it victims and perpetrators. Whereas, Buchenwald has five unique historical stories: the story of the Holocaust, the story of Buchenwald as a publicity stunt immediately following liberation, the story of the site as a Soviet internment camp, and the story of the site a propaganda tool. Each story has its own historical significance.

For example, the publicity of Buchenwald after the war allowed the world to see the atrocities of the war and the Holocaust and aided the allies in anti-Nazi propaganda and

100

criminal tribunals. Secondary history is also important in that it engages different stakeholders for each of its different histories. It is clear from this analysis that the core values of a site rest on time, use, preservation, and interpretation, which can all be seen via the determinants used to analyze the sites.

101

CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this research was to discover how a merger of best practices and knowledge between historic preservation and thanatourism may better aid the development and longevity of thanaheritage sites, which are inherently a mix of the two, yet are usually treated dominantly by one or the other as opposed to equally both. This study found that thanatouristic sites can benefit from historic preservation by utilizing the accepted standards of preservation, authenticity, and interpretation which should in turn increase interest of the site. Increased interest regularly increases revenue, and revenue can be used to invest in new or improved development of the site. “At most

[thanatourism] sites, the boundaries between the message (educational, political) and their commercialization as tourist produces has become increasingly blurred and thus de-differentiated.” (Stone 2006) Historic preservation can aid in the creation of more definitive boundaries and authentication of the messages and purposes of the site, so that it is not used for degenerate purposes like Buchenwald was under Soviet control.

The merger of these two areas of study and practice is called thanaheritage.

Thanaheritage sites are sites that are, per accepted standards, worthy of being preserved and recognized almost exclusively for their dark history and maintain themselves as tourist destinations.

Antisemitism is still rampant in the world. More so, racism and domination are also even more rampant as antisemitism is only a portion of this. If we are to stop the cycle of historical repetition, then it is paramount that thanaheritage sites not only remain in good form but also maintain a level of interest and appeal to draw people to them to learn about and mourn the atrocities of war, hate, racism, and etcetera. “In the

102

post-postwar world, the enduring legacy of the camp,” and of most thanaheritage sites,

“must be to serve as warning against all forms of political terror and racial hatred.”

(Young 1994) These sites must stand to teach our children, and our children’s children, and all generations to come, that these actions against human rights and dignity must not stand, to show them what crimes people are capable of committing, and teach tolerance and peace. For the reasons stated it is critical to the future of a peaceful society that thanaheritage sites be preserved and draw visitors.

How is it then that we may develop thanaheritage sites properly so that they are dominated by neither preservation or tourism but rather become a balance of the two?

The character, history, and interpretation of a site are vital to its development.

Preservation allows this to become clear. As seen at Auschwitz, immediate preservation of the physical aspects of a site and its authenticity create a site with well-developed character and interpretation techniques, which in turn provide access to the intangible heritage of the site. Whereas at Buchenwald, authentic preservation did not occur until nearly fifty years after the camps liberation and has resulted in a site with little physical evidence left and therefore less to interpret and give to the people. Thanaheritage sites must also consider the motivations and needs of guests. While there has been almost no research undertaken in regards to motivation to thanaheritage sites, it is clear that they attract a diverse range of guests. Auschwitz clearly caters to educators, students, mourners, tourists, and survivors the most, while Buchenwald focuses much of its attention on younger generations and their education at the site. Both have been successful in their educational value and continuously search for new areas to develop education at their sites. Therefore, without further motivation research, education should

103

be a main goal of all thanaheritage sites. For some sites, such as Buchenwald, there may be more than one event, or history, to preserve, interpret, and educate guest about. Sites that has important secondary history should preserve and interpret it just as they would the history which dominates the site.

For any site that may become a thanaheritage site, such as the Saydnaya prison in Syria, I would recommend four important suggestions for stages of development.

Time is a critical factor of these sites, so as soon as possible, preserve every aspect of a site. For what cannot be preserved, extensive documentation of the site or artifacts for future reference and interpretation should be undertaken. Stakeholders are important to all sites or organizations that rely on outside funding. Therefore, before making any decisions, other than to preserve the site, discussion about future development ideas

(i.e. whether the site becomes a memorial, a museum, a functional facility, etc.) should be done with all stakeholders, which may include historians, investors, government officials, survivors, and witness, among others. Intangible heritage and history are often discovered through the interpretation of physical evidence of a site and are important for the educational goals of most sites as well as engaging guest. Thus, once a plan has been established with involvement of stakeholders, development of the site must be true to its history and interpretation of the site, through whichever vehicles chosen, should be inclusive, dynamic, engaging, educational, objective, and not frightening. The goal is not to incriminate or punish perpetrators but to educate guest and preserve history. The future success of a developed site depends on the site maintaining itself as a prominent place to visit and protect. Sites that become stagnant lose funding and visitors. Hence, it is important to regularly engage guest by producing publications,

104

hosting events and/or seminars, providing dynamic and engaging tours, creating traveling exhibitions, renewing on-site exhibitions, to name a few possibilities. Each site is different and must engage guest accordingly. But constant interest in the site will increase the longevity of it. Finally, it is important to realize that the site is preserved for its history or heritage but tourist come for more reasons than that, including the attraction and/or thrill of the darkness of the site. Site directors must understand that a balance between dark tourism and preservation is vital to these sites; too much of one or the other throws the site off balance. This research shows this through the case study analysis and union of thanatourism and historic preservation

However, if I were to develop this research further, or do it again, there are three things that would have been changed. First, I would have travelled to the sites themselves, to better understand, interpret, and analyze the sites. Unfortunately, that was not possible for the duration of this research. Secondly, I would have included a more diverse range of thanaheritage site that were not strictly Holocaust related. These might have included, battlefield parks, infamous murder sites, assassination memorials, etcetera. Finally, I would establish a survey for each site analyzed involving structured and open-ended questions to develop a basis for visitor motivations at these sites.

These three changes would allow for a more holistic and dynamic research. Due to the physical and temporal constraints of this research though, these changes could not be enacted.

It is hope of this research that my recommendations aid the successful development and management of dark cultural resources. That sites like Saydnaya be preserved for future prosperity, because it is important to remember. People tend not to

105

want to be reminded of dark history and the death, horror, and pain that these events cause, but it is nonetheless important to remember these histories and memorialize the victims. Also, that this research create discourse between preservationist and thanatourism scholars and professionals so that the development of thanaheritage sites be authentic and prosperous, to provide education, memory, and a safe place for the contemplation of what death is and how to deal with. Finally, it is the hope that this research aids thanaheritage sites so that events like genocide and internment and more, whether committed by state actors or non-state actors, come to end and promote peace and prosperity throughout the world.

106

LIST OF REFERENCES

A Dictionary of Nursing . 2017. "Qualitative Research." Encyclopedia.com. Accessed February 3, 2017. http://www.encyclopedia.com/medicine/anatomy-and- physiology/anatomy-and-physiology/qualitativeresearch#1O62qualitativeresearch.

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. 2015. "Advisory Council on Historic Preservation." National Register Evaluation Criteria. June 12. Accessed February 4, 2017. http://www.achp.gov/nrcriteria.html.

Ashworth, Gregory. 2004. "Tourism and the Heritage of Atrocity: Managing the Heritage of South African Apartheid for Entertainment." In New Horizons and Stranger Practices , by Center for Tourism Research and Development, 95-108. Cambridge: CABI Publishing.

Avital Biran, Yaniv Poria, Gila Oren. 2011. "Sought Experiences at Dark Heritage Sites." Annals of Tourism 38 (3): 820-841.

Bartoszewski, Wladslaw. 2010. To Preserve Authenticity: Our Responsibility for Future Generations. The Auschwitz-Birkenau Foundation.

BBC News. 2017. Syria Conflict: Thousands Hanged at Saydnaya Prison Amnesty Says. February 7. Accessed February 20, 2017. http://www.bbc.com/news/world- middle-east-38885901.

Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation. 2017. Buchenwald Memorial Timeline. Accessed February 2, 2017. www.buchenwald.de/en/455.

Carter, Jimmy. 1979. Presentation of the Report of the Presendent's on the Holocaust. Washington, 27 September. Accessed February 3, 2017. https://www.ushmm.org/research/ask-a-research-question/frequently-asked- questions#1.

Chanter, Alan. 2017. "Buchenwald Concentration Camp." World War II Database. Accessed February 2, 2017. ww2db.com/facility/Buchenwald_Concentration_Camp/.

Creswell, John. 2003. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches. 2. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.

Curry, Andrew. 2010. "Smithsonian Magazine." Can Auschwitz Be Saved? February. Accessed February 16, 2017. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/can- auschwitz-be-saved-4650863/.

107

Department of Environment, Cultural and Natural Resources. 2014. "Conserving Our Heritage." Burra Charter. Accessed February 4, 2017. https://www.environment.sa.gov.au/our-places/Heritage/conserving-our- heritage/Burra_Charter.

Dunkley, Ria, Sheena Westwood, and Nigel Morgan. 2005. "A Shot in the Dark? Developing a New Conceptual Framework for Thaatourism." Asian Journal of Tourism Hospitality Research 1 (1): 54-73.

Encyclopaedia Britannica. 1999. Eugene-Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc. September 1. Accessed February 2, 2017. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Eugene- Emmanuel-Viollet-le-Duc.

Europa Nostra. 2017. Europa Nostra. Accessed February 5, 2017. http://www.europanostra.org.

Gilmour, Tony. 2007. Sustianing Heritage: Giving the Past a Future. Sydney: Sydney University Press.

Graham, Dann. 1998. "The Dark Side of Tourism." Etudes et Rapports 14 (42).

Hackett, David. 1995. The Buchenwald Report. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Historic New England. 2016. About Us. - -. Accessed February 4, 2017. https://www.historicnewengland.org/about-us/founder-and-history-1.

Hylton III, Morris. 2015. "Cultural Heritage Conservation." DCP 6710 History and Theory of Historic Preservation. Gainesville: University of Florida. 1-44.

—. 2015. "Policies and Standards." DCP 6710 History and Theory of Historic Preservation. Gainesville: University of Florida. 1-37.

—. 2015. "Stakeholders and Values." DCP 6710 History and Theory of Historic Preservation. Gainesville: University of Florida. 1-33.

ICOMOS. 2004. History of the Venice Charter. intergovernmental, ICOMOS.

—. 1964. "International Chater for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (The Venice Charter 1964)." ICOMOS. Accessed February 3, 2017. http://www.icomos.org/charters/venice_e.pdg.

—. 1994. "The Nara Document on Authenticity." ICOMOS. Accessed February 3, 2017. https://www.icomos.org/charters/nara-e.pdf.

108

Jolanta Banas-Maciaszcyk, Zofia Drabczyk, Anna Lopuska, Agnieszka Paluch, Ewelina Pawlak, Alicja Rybitwa, Monika Warzecha, and Piotr Setkiewic. 2012. To Preserve Authenticity: The Conservation of Five Wooden Barracks at the Former Auschwitz II-Birkenau Concentration Camp. Preservation Report, Panstwowe Muzeum.

Jolanta Banas-Maciaszcyk, Zofia Drabczyk, Anna Lopuska, Agnieszka Paluch, Ewelina Pawlak, Alicja Rybitwa, Monika Warzecha, and Piotr Setkiewic. 2012. To Preserve Authenticity: The Conservation of Two Blocks at the Former Kl Auschwitz I. Preservation Report, Panstwowe Muzeum.

Kimmelman, Michael. 2012. Restore a Gateway to Dignity. The New York Times. February 8. Accessed February 5, 2017. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/arts/design/a-proposal-for-penn-station-and- madison-square-garden.html.

Malcom Foley, John Lennon. 1996. "Heart of Darkness." International Journal of Heritage Studies 2 (4): 195-197.

Masi, Allessandria. 2017. How Amnesty Uncovered 'A Universe of Degredation at Saydnaya Prison'. February 17. Accessed February 20, 2017. https://www.newsdeeply.com/syria/articles/2017/02/17/how-amnesty-uncovered- a-universe-of-degradation-at-saydnaya-prison .

Merriam-Webster. 2017. Heritage. February 5. Accessed February 5, 2017. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heritage.

Merrian-Webster. 2017. Culture. February 5. Accessed February 5, 2017. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture.

Miles, W. 2002. "Auschwitz: Museum Interpretation and Darker Tourism." Annals of Tourism Research 2 (4): 1175-1178.

Monteath, Peter. 1994. "Buchenwald Revisited: Rewriting the History of a Concentration Camp." The International History Review (Taylor & Francis, Ltd.) 16 (2): 267-283.

Museum, United States Holocaust Memorial. 2017. Holocasut Encylcepedia - Auschwitz Animated Map. Accessed February 14, 2017. https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/gallery.php?ModuleId=10005189&MediaType=n m.

National Auschitz-Birkenau Museum. 2015. Visitors to the Auschwitz Site. Accessed February 8, 2017. http://70.auschwitz.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=82&Item id=173&lang=en.

109

National Auschwitiz-Birkenau Museum. 2017. Memorial Timeline 1950-1959. Accessed February 3, 2017. http://www.auschwitz.org/en/museum/history-of-the- memorial/memorial-timeline/years-1950-1959.

National Auschwitz Birkenau Museum. 2017. Master Plan for Preservation. Accessed February 3, 2017. http://auschwitz.org/en/museum/preservation/master-plan-for- preservation/.

—. 2017. Preservation Projects. Accessed Febrary 2, 2017. http://auschwitz.org/en/museum/preservation/projects/.

National Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum. 2017. Conservation Lab. Accessed February 2, 2017. http://www.auschwitz.org/en/museum/preservation/conservation-lab/.

—. 2017. Memorial History. Accessed February 2, 2017. http://www.auschwitz.org/en/museum/history-of-the-memorial/memorial-timeline.

—. 2017. Memorial Timeline 1945-1949. Accessed February 2, 2017. http://www.auschwitz.org/en/museum/history-of-the-memorial/memorial- timeline/years-1945-1949.

—. 2017. Memorial Timeline 1960-1969. Accessed february 5, 2017. http://www.auschwitz.org/en/museum/history-of-the-memorial/memorial- timeline/years-1960-1969.

—. 2017. Memorial Timeline 1970-1979. Accessed February 3, 2017. http://www.auschwitz.org/en/museum/history-of-the-memorial/memorial- timeline/years-1970-1979.

National Aushwitz-Birkenau Museum. 2017. Memorial Timeline 1990-1999. Accessed February 2, 2017. http://www.auschwitz.org/en/museum/history-of-the- memorial/memorial-timeline/years-1990-1999.

Rees, Laurence. 2005. Auschwitz: A New History. MJF Books.

Robert Edsel, Bret Witter. 2010. The Monuments Men: Allied Heroes, Nazi Thieves, and the Greatest Treasure Hunt in History. Center Street.

Seaton, A.V. 1996. "Guided by the Dark: From Thanatopsis to Thanatourism." International Journal of Heritage Studies 29 (4): 234-244.

Seaton, A.V., and J.J. Lennon. 2004. "Thanatoursim in the Early 21st Century: Moral Panics, Ulterior Motives, and Alterior Desires." In New Horizons and Stranger Practices, by Center for Toursim Research and Development, 63-82. Cambridge: CABI Publishing.

110

Sharpley, Richard, and P.R. Stone. 2008. "Consuming Dark Tourism: A Thanalogical perspective." Annals of Tourism Research 35 (2): 574-595.

Steinbacher, Sybille. 2005. Auschwitz A History. New York: ECCO.

Stone, P.R. 2006. "A Dark Tourism Spectrum: Towards a Typology of Death and Macabre Related Tourist Sites, Attractions, and Exhibitions." Tourism: An Interdisciplinary International Journal 54 (2): 145-160.

Tanas, Slawoj. 2014. "Tourism Death Space and Thanatourism in Poland." Current Issues of Toursim Research 22-27.

Tarlow, P. 2005. "Dark Toursim - The Apealing Dark Side of Tourism and More." In Niche Tourism: Contemporary Issues, Trends, and Cases, by Marianna Novelli, 47-58. London: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

The Getty Conservation Institute. 2017. Cultural Heritage Policy Documents. Accessed February 4, 2017. http://www.getty.edu/conservation/publications_resources/research_resources/ch arters/charter12.html.

Thomas, Gary. 2016. "Progress in Social and Educational Inquiry Through Case Study: Generalization or Explanation?" SpringerLink. July 23. Accessed February 14, 2017. doi:10.1007/s10615-016-0597-y.

Tyler, Norman, Ted Ligibel, and Ilene Tyler. 2009. Historic Preservation: An Introduction to Its History, Principles, and Practice. 2. New York: Norton & Company.

UNESCO. 199-2017. Criteria for Selection. - -. Accessed February 5, 2017. http://www.unesco.org/en/criteria/.

—. 2003. Text of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Accessed February 3, 2017. http://www.unesco.org/cultur/ich/en/convention.

UNESDOC. 1954. "Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with Regulations for the Execution of the Convention 1954." Legal Instruments. Accessed February 4, 2017. portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php- URL_ID=13637&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html.

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. n.d. Holocaust Encylopedia: Introduction to the Holocaust. Accessed February 5, 2017. https://www.ushmm.org/lear/introduction-to-the-holocaust.

Young, James. 1994. The Art of Memory: Holocaust Memorials in History. Munich: Prestel-Verlag.

111

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Kyra Lucas grew up in South Florida and graduated from high school in 2012. In

2013, she graduated from the University of North Florida with an Associate of Arts, where she majored in secondary education. In 2015, Ms. Lucas graduated from Florida

Atlantic University with a bachelor’s in history. In 2017, Ms. Lucas graduated from the

University of Florida with as a Master of Historic Preservation. Much of her work has focused on historic preservation, tourism, history, genocide, and construction.

112