SuomenlinnaSuomenlinna ConservationConservation andand ReuseReuse GOVERNINGGOVERNING BODYBODY OFOF SUOMENLINNASUOMENLINNA SuomenlinnaSuomenlinna has has been been en- en- teredtered in in the the UNESCO UNESCO World World HeritageHeritage List List to to be be preserved preserved forfor posterity posterity as as an an example example ofof European European fortress fortress archi- archi- tecturetecture from from the the 18th 18th to to the the 20th20th century. century. Suomenlinna Conservation and Reuse Publisher: Governing Body of Suomenlinna Editorial board: Reetta Amper, Netta Böök, Heikki Lahdenmäki, Rebekka Lehtola, Synnöve Vaari Editors: Reetta Amper and Heikki Lahdenmäki Copy editor: Netta Böök Translators: Jaakko Mäntyjärvi and Diana Tullberg Graphic design: Maria Taari / Flukso Design Printers: Lönnberg Painot Oy, Helsinki 2010 ISBN 978-951- 9437-35-4 Contents Foreword 7 Village 113 The Governing Body in charge 8 Residents’ services 114 C 81 Artillery manège 116 Fortress 13 C 70 Ice cellar 118 Walls and earthworks 14 C 89 Southeast bastion line Work 121 and shore defences 18 Work space 122 A 13 Kustaanmiekka shore fortifications 20 C 33, C 34, C 36, C 37 and C 39 Varvilahti depot 124 A 12 King’s Gate 22 B 31 Bastion Hårleman 130 B 51 Bastion Polhem 24 B 43 Caponniere de Carnal 132 A 5 and A 7 Bastions Gyllenborg, C 27 Boat sheds 134 Zander and Lantingshausen 28 Shipyard 137 Experience 31 The shipyard lives 138 Nine decades of tourism 32 B 10 Dementyev sauna 142 C 74 Suomenlinna Visitor Centre 34 B 14 New plate workshop 144 Art and culture 36 B 78 New shipyard shed 146 B 47 Ravelin Hyvä Omatunto 40 Restaurants 44 Army 149 B 1 Traverse Adlerfelt 46 Naval Academy continues military traditions 150 C 1 Jetty Barracks 48 E 14 Mine classroom 152 C 8 Yläkerho restaurant 50 Other tourist services 52 Landscape 155 B 13 Marina 54 From rocky skerries to cultural landscape 156 C 9 Hostel Suomenlinna 56 Church park on Iso Mustasaari island 160 A 1 Picnic shelter 58 Casino Park and prison camp memorial 162 C 46 Public toilets 60 Piper Park 164 Conference and banquet rooms 62 Roads and squares 168 C 28 ‘Devil’s Church’ 64 Bridges and jetties 170 B 29 Powder magazine 68 Signage 172 B 17c Tenaille von Fersen 70 Tech services 177 Home 77 My home is my fortress 78 Power 181 C 71 Telegraph office building 80 C 49 Military kitchen 82 Future 187 C 52 Bastion Bielke and Curtain Building 84 B 41 Bastion Palmstierna stable 90 Appendices 191 B 17a Bastion Seth 92 E 3, E 4 and E 5 Länsi-Mustasaari island barracks 94 E 12 Bakery 98 A 5a Bastion Carpelan 100 C 58 Non-commissioned officers’ building 102 E 11 Military courthouse 104 H 7 Mine laboratory 106 C 54 ‘Noah’s Ark’ 108 Foreword Jaakko Antti-Poika Director Governing Body of Suomenlinna Named Sveaborg in Swedish when originally built (ren- supervised the project as Kekkonen’s trustee for more dered in Finnish as Viapori) and renamed Suomenlinna than two decades. in 1918, the island fortress off Helsinki has periodically been in the news in the course of its history – sometimes The repairs on Suomenlinna have followed a dynamic even worldwide. In its day, the fortress project required a pattern all their own which is easily discernable in retro- massive investment by two of the greatest military pow- spect. The flamboyant beginning of the project was more ers in Europe and as such must have been well known in about building new structures than sensitively preserving military circles. Indeed, the original fortress of Sveaborg the various historical layers of the fortress. However, the acquired a formidable reputation once it was completed Venice Charter of 1964 began to have an impact on the in the late 18th century, and its offensive potential was at work about ten years into the project, and after an inter- least as significant as its importance in the defence of the national expert seminar held in 1985, the aims and objec- realm, according to historian Matti Klinge. tives of the repairs shifted substantially. During the Crimean War (1853–1856), the name of Svea- The recession of the early 1990s effected a permanent cut borg and images from the northern front became very in the resources allocated to repairs on Suomenlinna. The familiar to the British public. Though photography was repairs and partial reconstruction of the wings of Crown- a brand-new technology at the time, there are no pho- work Ehrensvärd were cancelled after a design competi- tographs from the Baltic Sea theatre of war; the press tion had already been held, demonstrating that a sea abroad relied on high-quality engravings to illustrate the change had occurred in attitudes to restoration. However, defeat of the fearsome Gibraltar of the North. repair technologies have also become more ecological, and projects are now smaller in scale. The use of original Throughout its existence, the fortress has had a substan- materials or materials similar to the original ones has tial impact on its surroundings. Its cultural importance resulted in the creation of a databank on restoration on during the Swedish era (1748–1808) has long been known Suomenlinna that is unique in Finland. and acknowledged. During the Russian era (1808–1918), it was kept up to date with cutting-edge European military The inclusion of Suomenlinna in UNESCO’s World Herit- technology, as witness the introduction of sea mines and age List in 1991 caused a major change in attitudes to the telegraph. During the Finnish era (from 1918), techno- repairs. Reconstruction was abandoned, and this together logical advancements included a dock for servicing battle- with the reduced level of available financial resources ships, a submarine base and the demagnetizing station shifted the focus of repairs to preservation and upkeep. on Lonna islands. The World Heritage Convention rather challengingly The most distressing phase in the history of Suomen- requires the site to be preserved while still making it avail- linna was the establishment of a major prison camp in able to visitors, even in large crowds. Now, 35 years after 1918–1919, following Finland’s Civil War. This was eventu- methodical renovation and repairs began on Suomen- ally closed down, partly because of massive criticism in linna, the fortress has 650,000 visitors annually, all of the Nordic press, and Suomenlinna was given over to them needing basic services and easily available infor- the Finnish military. The Defence Forces mainly used the mation on the history of the fortress and its repairs. At existing facilities as they were, without embarking on any the same time, visitors create new stress factors such as significant new construction. On the other hand, devel- wear and tear on the structures and the islands’ natural opments in armaments had rendered the old greystone environment. fortress largely obsolete in terms of its defence function. The repair work continues, still with the grand objective The idea of rescuing Suomenlinna from its stagnation set decades ago: to preserve the fortress for future gener- emerged in the late 1960s and was taken up as a personal ations, to maintain a record of all the phases of its history, project by President Urho Kekkonen at the beginning of and to maintain a lively community. the following decade. A major design competition was organized, and the thorough preparatory stage follow- ing this competition set the scene for an effort on which HERITAGE initially no expense was spared. Many individual repair projects even had a separate allocation in the central gov- ernment budget. Permanent Secretary Jaakko Numminen 7 The Governing Body in charge Heikki Lahdenmäki Head of Planning Governing Body of Suomenlinna The military use of Suomenlinna ended in 1973 when perspectives”. These two clauses from 35 years ago cap- the garrison moved out and the Defence Forces gave the ture the essence of repairs on Suomenlinna in a nutshell. islands over to civilian administration. The fortress had From the general plan level down to the tiniest detail, the been receiving tourists since the 1920s, and some tourist aim is to create a balance between preserving the char- services had been set up by the Archaeological Commis- acter of the premises and the materials used, on the one sion (now the National Board of Antiquities), the Ehren- hand, and the demands of new uses, on the other. Project svärd Society and the Finnish Tourist Association. Repairs priorities have been determined by the condition of the on the fortifications had been carried out as unemploy- structures and their purpose. ment relief work, particularly in the 1930s. In the late 1960s, the Archaeological Commission and the Suomen- Suomenlinna is an exceptional site with regard to build- linna labour colony – an open prison unit located on the ing protection. To this day, Suomenlinna has no local plan, islands – engaged in a systematic joint effort to convert and no buildings have been protected under the Act on buildings no longer used by the military for residential the Protection of Buildings. The assumption, sometimes use. Some of the facilities involved were administered by questioned, is that the entire site is covered by the Antiq- the Uusimaa Regional Building Administration and others uities Act, and it is generally considered that the Act and still by the Defence Forces. Authority and responsibilities Decree on the Governing Body of Suomenlinna guarantee were not always clear because of the number of bodies sufficient protection. Under this legislation, the National involved, and this hindered the maintenance and repair Board of Antiquities has a permanent representative on work. The fortress thus had no single master. the Board of the Governing Body.