CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES (998) volume 2 pages 229-233 The context of the Venice Charter (1964) JUKKA JOKILEHTO The Venice Charter has been the benchmark for principles governing architectural conservationl restorationfor over thirty years. We asked Jukka Jokilehto to comment on the context in which it was drawn up. Now often referred to simply as the 'Venice Charter', the correctfull name of this document (of which we print the text in an appendix) is: 'The International Charterfor the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites', adopted by the lInd International Congress of Architects and Technicians of Historic Monuments, Venice, 1964. When the lInd International Congress of Archi- Lanka) declared that the charter was 'a Magna tects and Technicians of Historic Monuments met Carta for the safeguarding of the monumental in Venice from 25 to 31 May 1964, and adopted heritage of mankind for the sake of the genera- the International Charter for the Conservation tions of the present and the future' [31 and Restoration of Monuments and Sites, it hardly The invitation to the 1964 Venice meeting was anticipated the subsequent fortunes of this docu- issued by the Italian Director General of Antiqui- ment.· Over three decades later the Venice Charter ties and Fine Arts, Professor G. De Angelis d'Ossat, continues to exercise its validity. Acceptance of at the (Ist) International Congress oLArchitects the Charter has not been without criticism: imme- and Technicians of Historic Monuments, which diately ..after the 1964 meeting it was challenged took place in Paris, 6-14 May 1957. The Paris by Professor Renato Bonelli (Italy), who claimed meeting had been organized by the French asso- that it contained nothing new, and even that the ciation of restoration architects in collaboration concepts expressed in it were contradictory to with national authorities and UNESCO, and it principles promoted after the Second World War, drew particular attention to the need for training when aesthetic criteria had. gained priority over programmes for specialists, for specialized agen- historical ones [1]. cies, and for interdisciplinary collaboration [4]. In 1977, in an assessment of the Charter, Cevat There was also a motion addressed to UNESCO Erder (Turkey) identified some of its defects, calling for the establishment of an international pointing out that, as it was written mainly by association as a link between restoration archi- Europeans, there could be difficulties in its appli- tects and technicians - this was eventually to be cation in all cultures. Erder maintained, neverthe- ICOMOS. less, that the Charter had performed its task, that There were other precursors to the Venice it was worthy of the respect due to an historic Charter, including the conclusions of the interna- document and should be preserved according to tional conference organized by the International the principles proposed for the preservation of an Museums Office in Athens, 21-30 October 1931, historic monument [2]. In 1983, Roland Silva (Sri and attended by some 120 professionals from 23 ISSN 1350-5033 © 1998 JAMES & JAMES (SCIENCE PUBLISHERS) LTD 230 JUKKA JOKILEHTO countries, mainly in Europe. These conclusions Raymond Lemaire (Belgium), in collaboration usually referred to later as the 'Athens Charter', with Paul Philippot (ICCROM) and]ean Sonnier were presented to the League of Nations member (France) [7,8], The Venice Charter was adopted states. After the conference, the Italian delegate, by the congress almost unanimously - with one Gustavo Giovannoni, drafted a 'Carta del restauro', abstention. The first version contained 15 articles, which was adopted by the Italian Consiglio but was later edited in collaboration with UNESCO Superiore delle Belle Arti in December 1931 and to include Article· 8 on integrity, thus making the published in January 1932 as an official govern- current total of 16 articles (see Appendix). ment guideline. (These two documents should There had recently been other meetings with not be confused with the recommendations of recommendations on the rehabilitation of his- the ClAM meeting on modern architecture and toric cities, an issue that the Venice Charter does city planning in Athens in 1933, edited by Le not really address. It is worth noting, however, Corbusier in 1941 and published as 'The Charter that the· concept of 'historic monument' was of Athens' in 1943 [5],) extended by the Charter· to cover historic urban The 1964 Venice congress· was organized by areas and considered previous references to the General Direction of Antiquities and Fine Arts 'dead' and 'living' monuments no longer rel- of the Italian Ministry of Education. It was at- evant. Cesare Brandi had published his theory of tended by some 600 participants representing 61 restoration the previous year (1963), which· was countries, as well as UNESCO, the Council of certainly taken into account [9]. The Venice Europe, ICCROM, ICOM and the Istituto congress gave clear attention to architectural Internazionale dei Castelli (I.B.I.). The majority of integrity, but it also emphasized the need to participants were European, while more than half respect historical integrity - considering that after of the countries represented were from other the war there had been an overemphasis on continents. The congress adopted 13 resolutions, stylistic reconstruction. Several speakers stressed the first· of which was the 'international charter' the specificity of each cultural heritage site, and (Venice Charter). Another concerned the crea- the fact that any charter could only provide tion of ICOMOS, founded in Poland the follow- guidance - it could not be a rule to be applied ing year, which came to recognize the Venice uncritically. Charter as its fundamental doctrinal document - Over the years, there have been several at- consequently the Charter has often (incorrectly) tempts to revise the Venice Charter, but without been published under the ICOMOS name. The success, and the Charter has become a major Venice meeting also recommended the organiza- reference both for national administrations and at tion of an international architectural conserva- the international level. This is proven by the tion course at ICCROM, the publication of an translations of the Charter into at least 28 different international magazine on the theory, techniques languages, and the fact that its principles have and legislation relating to the restoration of found expression in dozens of national and monuments (ICOMOS's Monumentum),\ as well international recommendations, guidelines and as proper attention to the protection and rehabili- charters [10], Perhaps the best known of these are tation of historic city centres [6]. the Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitation In view of the ravages of the Second World in the USA (first published in 1978 [11]) and the War on cultural monuments, the organizers of the Burra Charter in Australia (drawn up in 1979 [12]). Venice meeting, Piero Gazzola, De Angelis d'Ossat, The principles of the Venice Charter have also Carlo Ceschi and Roberto Pane, decided to pro- been recognized as the basic .policy guidelines vide an updated reference document for the for the assessment of cultural heritage sites on international debate on safeguarding the archi- UNESCO's World Heritage List. tectural heritage. The idea of a revised charter was presented to the congress by Gazzola and Pane, who took Giovannoni's 'Carta del restauro' Jukka Jokilehto is Head of· the Architectural as a reference. The first draft was written by Conservation programme at ICCROM. THE CONTEXT OF THE VENICE CHARTER 231 Contact address: ICCROM, via di San Michele APPENDIX 13, 1-00153 Roma RM, Italy. Tel: +39 6 585531. Fax: +39 6 58553349. E-mail: [email protected] THE VENICE CHARTER (1964); INIERNATIONAL CHARTER FOR THE CONSERVATION AND REFERENCES RESTORATION OF MONUMENTS AND SITES 1 Bonelli, R. La 'carta di Venezia' per il restauro Imbued with a message from the past, the historic architettonico. Italia Nostra, May-June (964) 1-6. monuments of generations of people remain to the 2 Erder, C. The Venice Charter under review. In: ICOMOS present day as living witnesses of their age-old Scientific Journal, The Venice Charter - La Charte de traditions. People are becoming more and more Venise 1964-1994. Paris (994), 24-31 (article written conscious of the unity of human values and regard in 1977). ancient monuments as a common heritage. The 3 Silva, R. The signific~nce of the Venice International common responsibility to safeguard them for future Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of generations is recognized. It is our duty to hand Monuments and Sites, with special reference to eastern them on in the full richness of their authenticity. countries. In: ICOMOS Scientific Journal, The Venice Charter - La Charte de Venise 1964-1994. Paris (1994), 40-44. It is essential that the principles guiding the 4 Verrier, J. Le congres international des architectes et preservation and restoration of ancient lJuildings techniciens des monuments historiques. Les monuments should be agreed and be laid down on an historiques de la France ill (1957) 65-88. international basis, with each country being re- 5 On this confusion, see Iamandi, C. The Charters of sponsible for applying the plan within the frame- Athens of 1931 and 1933. Coincidence, controversy work of its own culture and traditions. and convergence. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 2 (1997) 17-28. By defining these basic principles for the .first 6 ICOMOS.'llmonumento per l'uomo '.Atti delII congresso time, the Athens Charter of 1931 contributed internazionale del restauro, Venezia, 2~ 31 maggio towards the development of an extensive inter- 1964. Marsilio Editore, Padua (971). national movement which has assumed concrete 7 Gazzola, P. and Pane, R. Proposte per una carta form in national documents, in the work of ICOM internazionale del restauro. In: ICOMOS. 'Ilmonumento and UNESCO and in the establishment by the per l 'uomo '. Atti del II congresso internazionale del latter of the International Centre for the Study of restauro, Venezia, 25-31 maggio 1964.