Historic fortifications may include a range of architectural forms from earthworks to complex structures designed for offensive and defensive purposes. The.
7 pages

146 KB – 7 Pages

PAGE – 1 ============
General Assembly 2020 /12 Final Draft ICOFORT Charter on Fortifications and Military Heritage; G uidelines for Protection, Conservation and Interpretation. (version: July 15, 2020) By: ICOFORT ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Fortifications and Military Heritage Preamble Humans have constructed fortifications and military heritage using a variety of complex designs for thousands of years. The fortifications and military heritage extant from the distant past to recent days have served as a major link to the history of the establishment and development of human settlements, nations and even entire regions. From prehistory to modern times, fortifications have been a necessity for human communities to defend themselves. Fortifications have also been integrated into the surrounding cultural landscapes and terrain, and their respective communities and settlements in a variety of ways. How thi s integration has been achieved provides important information about the diverse ways that societies developed fortifications. Historic fortifications may include a range of architectural forms from earthworks to complex structures designed for offensive and defensive purposes. The original functions of these fortification system may continue to exist or could have become obsolete. interpretation provides guidance for an integrated conservation of fortifications and military heritage within the context of the surrounding cul tural landscape. Fortifications and military heritage comprise of any structure built with either natural (i.e. botanical or geological) or artificial materials, by a human community to protect themselves from assailant, such as: works of military engine ering, arsenals, harbors and naval battlefields, barracks, military bases, testing fields, and other enclaves and constructions built or used for military, offensive and defensive purposes. Military cultural landscapes include but not limited to battlefie lds, territorial or coastal defense installations and earth works and have values similar to other heritage buildings and sites, but also possess unique values that need to be carefully studied, analyzed and preserved. Fortifications more than any other type of architecture have an integral relationship with the surrounding cultural landscapes. They exhibit some main principles which are present in all regions of the world and are manifest in every period of human history. The following terms define some of the main characteristics of strategies used in conjunction with fortifications and military heritage: Barrier and protection: The primary attribute to protect human activity and settlement against any external threats with the ability to resist to att acks. Command: the ability to monitor the surrounding area around the enclosure as far as possible and prevent the attacker from approaching the structure. Depth: a military strategy that seeks to delay rather than prevent the advance of an attacker by y ielding space to buy time; this tactic – allows for the construction of successive defensive lines. Flanking: A strategy that aims to delete blind spots, commonly applied with above – ground structures (e.g. rampart, towers or bastions. Deterrence : a defensive strategy used to deter the enemy from attacking by instilling doubt or fear of the consequences. This strategy can include a range of tactics including, the construction of a – majestic enclosure and its defensive attributes. (e.g., multiple openings for shooting, the dimensions of the gates and towers, the decoration of walls and entrance). Both; structures and cultural landscapes may also contain archaeological information which is important to their understanding and can provide information about the past use of these places not available from historical sources. The recognition of such intrinsic values of fortifications and defensive heritage determines the extent to which these aspects condition their conservation, rehabilitation, and general value .

PAGE – 2 ============
General Assembly 2020 /12 ICOFORT, through its role as the advisory ICOMOS committee related to fortifications and military heritage understands that guidelines are needed to fill existing gaps and to support best practices for the protection, conservation, restoration, structur al consolidation, enhancement, interpretation, appropriate reusage, integration into the community, management and risk preparation for safeguarding of fortifications and military heritage as well as in the interpretations of their significance as part of the Memory of the World Fortifications. Reference is made to existing ICOMOS and other charters and doctrinal documents that apply to the research, documentation, protection, conservation, restoration, structural consolidation, enhancement, appropriate re usage, interpretation and integration into the community, and the need for their management and risk preparation for safeguarding for their future. There is a continued need for guidelines to understand the significance of fortifications and military heri tage. Introduction The current state of fortifications which have been preserved varies greatly from examples of well – preserved buildings, structures and defense systems, to others which manifest a lack of appropriate usage, integration and authenticity which has been dimini shed through inappropriate interventions, modifications, conjectural reconstructions. Perhaps more than other categories and types of heritage, and understanding of the meaning, history and strategic rationales for the design and location of fortificati ons indispensable for proper conservation and protection. Given the considerable number of unsuccessful interventions which have come to the attention of ICOFORT these present guidelines are essential as an international reference document to benefit of all who work with fortifications and military heritage. formations of a specialized committee for fortifications and military heritage. Fortifications and their military heritage have specific problems which are wholly or partly distinct from other types of heritage. Fortifications and their military heritage assets have specific values that are totally or partially different from those r ecognized in other types of assets. Objectives of the Charter The objectives of the Charter on Fortifications and Military Heritage are to establish basic principles for interventions and methods of research that are specific to the conservation, prote ction and value of fortifications and their surrounding cultural landscapes. The Charter aims to bring clarity and ensure authenticity and integrity in the forms, setting and functionality of the fortifications and military heritage which is essential for the conservation of all attributes including the protection and enhancement of their tangible and intangible values. The Charter also contributes to the safeguarding of the tangible and intangible values of fortifications and military 1) Theoretical and methodological issues: 1. Historical Constructive Evolution, Stratigraphic and spatial complexity of the structure. Objectives: To preserve the multiple layers of structurally strati graphical information, spatial relationship and contemporary elements through the development of comprehensive preservation and maintenance guidelines specific to the needs of the fortifications and th eir cultural landscapes. To promote research needed to provide for the proper management, interpretation, and protection of fortifications and respective cultural landscapes into which they are integrated. Methodology: To promote studies and innovative methodologies to guarantee the comprehension of the fortifications and their cultural landscapes prior to any intervention.

PAGE – 3 ============
General Assembly 2020 /12 2. The fortification has an external functional scope beyond its physical boundaries, which is established according to the needs of its defense and the military technology of each epoch, as well other purposes of territorial or commercial expansion or both . Objectives: To understand the fortification from the view of its operation zone. Methodology: To develop appropriate inter pretation which must include, but not limited to, their collections, archaeology, built fabric and design as well as the cultural landscape ensembles, including space, panoramas, dominant views, and territories they were meant to defend and protect. 3. The lack of knowledge of the formal and functional characteristics of the fortification can be much greater than for other types of heritage structures. Therefore, fortifications and military heritage need to be researched and documented by using the re levant skills and expertise. Objectives: To promote excellence in the conservation of the historic fabric, archaeological remains and the setting of a fortification and its cultural landscapes. Methodology: custodians and responsible stakeholders. To develop appropriate scientific conservation treatments and maintenance plans. 4. Fortifications and Communities. Fortifications play an important role in the cultural identity or traditions of communities, countries and regions. Caution should be exercised when interpreting sensitive subjects as not to promote dominating or excluding values. Obje ctives: To develop appropriate interpretation with emphasis on facilitating the creation of an accurate history and relationship to the changing cultural, social and political contexts, including the relationships between contemporary elements and their ef fectiveness in the territorial defense. To reinforce the visitors and local community appreciation of the site through interpretation of transnational values as a common heritage. To reinforce the visitors and local community appreciation of the site by d eveloping effective tools that foster and agreed and consensual interpretation of identity values. Methodology: To apply a holistic integration of heritage values to achieve a positive impact on visitors and the community, promoting a reconciliation of the military past with its subsequent reuse. (i.e., fortifications reused as prisons, etc.). To prepare guidance documents, policies, implementation strategies to safeguard the heritage values of the site. To promote initiatives for recognition of ident ity and values communication. To improve studies and analysis about community perception. 5. Fortifications use and re – use. The fortification was designed to hinder entry and today it presents obvious problems of accessibility for current use and requirements. The changing nature of warfare often means that fortifications cannot be reused for the specific purpose for which w ere originally built. Objectives: To promote interventions on fortifications and military heritage only for a sustainable and appropriate reuse. To establish a balanced reuse to avoid destroying integrity and authenticity.

PAGE – 4 ============
General Assembly 2020 /12 To promote a reuse that tran sforms fortifications and military heritage into a place of witness and aggregation of endogenous and exogenous communities. To promote reuse that transforms fortifications and military heritage into places of knowledge (i.e. places for the interpretation of military heritage which includes topics such as history, science, technology, etc.). To promote reuse that transforms fortifications and military heritage into places where there it of transmission of a message of peace , inclusiveness and acceptance. M ethodology: To prevent all arbitrary alterations, restorations, reconstructions, or the elimination of the historical material that make up the structures and settlements through assessments, development and implementation of the master plan to be overvie wed by professional specialized team. To prepare protection regulations / laws compatible with the preservation of the integrity of the fortification. To promote the use of technology to provide alternative accessibility. 6. Fortification and urban landscape and territorial dimensions. To address the need to better integrate conservation strategies of urban heritage represented by the fortification system, the singular elements or the network as a whole, within the broader objectives of general susta inable development, in order to support public and private actions with the aim of protecting and improving the quality of the human environment. Objectives: To foster greater awareness about the need to understand and interpret fortifications and mili tary heritage as a component of international or transnational systems, territories, settlements of urban ensembles and not as soli tary and isolated structures. Methodology: Employ a cultural landscape approach for the identification, conservation and ma nagement of historical areas within their wider urban contexts. To consider the inter – relationship of their physical forms, their spatial organization and connection, their natural characteristics and setting, and their social, cultural and economic value s. 7. Fortifications are not typical buildings. Fortifications can range from single structures to complex multi – structure defensive systems developed over long time scales. However, there may be a lack of comprehensive understanding of the site that identifies important phases of development and inter connects all the significant physical elements of the place (i.e. structures, cultural landscapes, views, etc.). Objectives: To improve methodological tools for research and the multidisciplinary understanding Methodology: To implementation of planning documents. To continue holistic research and assessment To reinforce networks and partnerships. 2) The identification of values that pertain to fortifications and military heritage: The fortifications as a monument have documentary value as a built structure. They represent architectural, technological, artistic and historical values related to the events that led to its construction and the connotations that the building acquired over the time. There is also the val ue of the fortifications seen as a system, as an organizer of the territory. The recognition of these values is what determines the degree to which the fortifications, as part of our heritage, have unique aspects that affect their conservation, rehabilitat ion and general value. 1. Architectural/Technical value. The specific typology of the fortifications responds to a specific war technology. The assessment of the technical value requires a deep understanding of the evolution of weapons and warfare so th at innovative advances in response to changes in military science and engineering can be identified and tested.

PAGE – 5 ============
General Assembly 2020 /12 2. Territorial/Geographical. The value of fortifications as a territorial organization is an important component of the significance of defense systems. While some fortified structures may be independently standing isolated elements, others may form part of a larger system of non – adja cent components that shape the surrounding cultural landscapes and requires evaluation in broader context. In these cases, the value of the system is greater than the specific value of each of its parts, all of which require the same protection regardless of how modest they may seem. The identification of these values may also take into consideration inter alia, the strategic advantages of location, and how the design responds to the spatial distribution of weaponry, the type of siege or attack envisaged , the reach of the defensive range, and the topography and ecosystems of the territory to be defended. 3. Cultural Landscape Value. The value of the cultural landscape represents the relationship between the fortification and human activity that requires defense. The value of the cultural landscape also provides a contextual understanding of the building materials and the role of fortifications with respect to their enclave, with the role of the military structure with respect to defense, and visual or physical dominance over the surrounding territory, among others. It can incorporate significant associative value with respect to the identity and community attachment to a place, region, or nation. 4. Strategic Value. The Fortification is a symbol of the fusion of multiple knowledge. Fortification is the external physical envelope, the entity whose images we celebrate by keeping it like this. But it is interesting to note that this entity is more of an external protective layer that embodies the strategi c defense decision. Therefore, the strategic value is greater than a territorial or geographical value. It reflects the power of decision and the depth of knowledge, as well as the social cohesion of the leading group. 5.Human/Anthropological. The fortifi cations were built to protect one human group from another. Therefore, they can be associated with conflict sites. Fortifications are sometimes associative to cruel and devastating battles and wars that resulted in one group being victorious over one defea ted. They can also be associated with their role in the performance of nation – building, and they can be associated to play a role in nation – building. 6. Memory/Identity/Educational Value. Fortification can play an important role in the memory of society. The fortifications reflect and illustrate the conflict in the first person, allowing for an intense, even personal, learning experience from events that play a role in the history of communities. They belong to the collective imagination in relation to th e own urban landscape. Fortifications have educational value because they can provide a stimulating and nurturing environment related to the cultural experience of military heritage. 7. Historic value. Fortifications and military heritage embody attitude s and world views specific to the periods of their development and use. These attitudes may be comprehended through the study and interpretation of the military sites and the relationships with the contemporary societies. 8. Social/Economic Value. The recognition of their social value, through an appropriate enhancement action, must activate a stimulus effect for the economic growth of the communities and activate the recognition of new values and new knowledge. 3) Principles for Intervention in Fortifications and military heritage: material or intangible aspects. Therefore, the recognition of these values by a research team work ing with the local community, assumes crucial importance and consists of the first methodological step in an intervention. This team should be multidisciplinary and be composed, at least, of specialists in military history, architecture, art – history, cons truction materials and technology, archaeology, and landscape interpretation. These specialists should work with community leaders to ensure that any intervention is acceptable with the local community. The guidelines produced by these preliminary works a re to be observed in any intervention projects, and this team should accompany the monitoring, development, and implementation of the intervention in process . Additionally, the intervention in fortifications must be complemented considering the following:

PAGE – 6 ============
General Assembly 2020 /12 a) All intervention should be based on a Master Conservation Plan. This Master Plan should include at a minimum: Historical study of the site and all periods of its development and use, study of morphological development, topographic / planimetric surv eys, evaluation of archaeological studies, structural evaluation, structural analysis, diagnosis and monitoring of preservation, study of cultural landscape, interpretive study, analysis of reuse feasibility, utility analysis, criteria and recommendation a nalysis, risk assessment / disaster plan, business or operations plan, visitor surveys / visitor management study, protection plan, management plan. The entire Master Plan must be developed by an interdisciplinary team of appropriately qualified profession als with specific knowledge and experience in similar fortifications and military heritage. b) All interventions should be based on the holistic integration of the values of the site in relation to the defensive systems and surroundings. Interpretation w ill be common in the implementation of all related fortifications. c) All interventions must be compatible with the elements and characteristics of the fortifications and military heritage in accordance with the Zimbabwe Charter and in relation to the Vi truvian Triad: “Firmitas, Venustas et Utilitas”. – by – case basis and preference given to those that are least invasive and most compatible with heritage values, consid ering safety and durability requirements. (ICOMOS Charter – Principles for the Analysis, Conservation and Structural Restoration of Architectural Heritage, 2003). The nature of military functions needs to be considered particularly with a view to any previo historic event that should be conserved instead of repaired. historical materials and materials used for structural restoration – original structure and setting. However, it must guarantee the permanence of the stratigraphic reading prior to the intervention and the stratigraphic legibility of the intervention itself. point of view of its function, its routes and accesses. References and Related Documents: International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites. (The Venice Charter. 1964). Charter for the Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban Areas. (Washington Charter. 1987). International Cultural Tourism Charter. Managing Tourism at Places of Heritage Significance, (1999). ICOMOS Charter – Principles for the Analysis, Conservation and Structural Restoration of Architectural Heritage (2003). Ratified by the ICOMOS 14th General Assembly in Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe, (2003). The ICOMOS Charter on Cultural Routes. (2008). The ICOMOS Charter for the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites. (2008). “Baños de la Encina” charter for the conservation of the defensive architecture in Spain (2006). Charter for th e Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage, (1990). ICOMOS Charter on the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites, (2008). The Valletta Principles for the Safeguarding and Management of Historic Cities, Towns and Urban Areas, (2011). The Nara Document on Authenticity, (1994). The Quebec Declaration on the Preservation of the Spirit of the Place, (2008).

146 KB – 7 Pages