Countries Forum / Countries /

Germany - World Heritage

Page  Page 3 of 8:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next »  
Author clyde
#31 | Posted: 18 Feb 2014 16:35 
I was relieved to see that my visit in May-June this year won't be effected. I'm looking forward to visiting Berlin after having visited 25 WHS in Germany!

Author hubert
#32 | Posted: 18 Feb 2014 17:26 | Edited by: hubert 
I was relieved to see that my visit in May-June this year won't be effected.

Museum Island is one of my favourite WHS in Germany, and Berlin is one of my favourite cities in Europe. The Pergamon Museum is great, not only the Pergamon altar, also the Ishtar Gate, the Market Gate of Miletus, the Aleppo room, the Islamic Art.....
And the other museums are also worth a visit, in particular the Neues Museum and the Bode Museum (at least you should have a look at the cupola hall).
I am looking forward to the end of the restoration works (planned for 2025!), when all museums and the new building will be completed.

If you like to visit parks and palaces, you'll have vast opportunities in Potsdam.

And you probably know, that there are two candidates from Berlin for the new German T-list:
- Hansaviertel and Karl-Marx-Allee
- Jewish Cemetery in Berlin-Weißensee

Author Khuft
#33 | Posted: 18 Feb 2014 17:38 
Not a WHS or candidate but also definitely worth seeing: the Jewish museum in Berlin. Architecturally interesting (by Daniel Libeskind), the way it presents its exhibitions is fresh and novative (with lots of things you can touch and play around with), and at times quite harrowing. One of my favourite museums overall, together with Pergamon museum.

Author clyde
#34 | Posted: 19 Feb 2014 04:13 
Thanks for the tips. I'll visit both WHS and both tentative sites in Berlin. Then I'll visit Potsdam and Muskauer Park as separate day trips.

Author hubert
#35 | Posted: 12 Jun 2014 17:19 
The German Kultusministerkonferenz has published the decision on the new German T-list. Nine sites have been selected:

Caves in the Swabian Jura - excavation sites of the oldest Ice Age art
Jewish cemetery in Hamburg-Altona
Augsburg water management
Art colony Mathildenhöhe Darmstadt
Jewish heritage of the SchUM cities Speyer, Worms and Mainz
Jewish heritage in Erfurt: Old synagoge and mikveh
Alpine and pre-Alpine meadows and wetland
Castles of Ludwig II: Neuschwanstein, Linderhof und Herrenchiemsee
Schwerin Castle aus-deutschland-ausgewaehlt.html

Author meltwaterfalls
#36 | Posted: 13 Jun 2014 06:07 
At first glance that looks like a fairly uninspiring batch. Though the Jewish heritage sites are of interest and Darmstadt is worthwhile.

I guess it doesn't feel that innovative, I've always felt Germany along with Sweden has taken a slightly more interesting slant on proposals, but this batch doesn't really feel like that to me. Oh well.

Author winterkjm
#37 | Posted: 13 Jun 2014 11:57 
Alpine and pre-Alpine meadows and wetland, I am pretty sure this is a natural nomination. However, it could also be a cultural landscape. The caves and castles are not particularly interesting, but I find this landscape quite beautiful, though it might not warrant UNESCO designation. I would repeat meltwatefalls sentiments about the Jewish sites and Darmstadt.

Here is a interesting website about the Alpine & Pre-Alpine wetlands in Bavaria, I assume these sites are the ones outlined here by Hubert.

Author Assif
#38 | Posted: 13 Jun 2014 17:35 | Edited by: Assif 
I find the list quite disappointing. I think Germany could have come up with much more.
Comments to some of the sites:

Jewish cemetery in Hamburg-Altona - I don't think any Jewish cemetery is worth inscription only because it is Jewish. The list already features two major European Jewish cemeteries in Cracow and in Prague. I just can't see what's that exceptional about it.

Augsburg water management - To say water management systems are underrepresented is funny. Only Germany has already inscribed both Kassel and the Goslar extension exactly under this category. Is another water management system what Germany has to offer?

Art colony Mathildenhöhe Darmstadt - A great proposal that should definitely get inscribed.

Jewish heritage of the SchUM cities Speyer, Worms and Mainz - I have only been to the Speyer part (the ritual bath) of the nomination and it is only mildly impressive. In Worms there is a synagogue and in Mainz, well, a Jewish cemetery. I am personally not enthusiastic about this nomination, but representing medieval Jewish life in Europe it does at least fill a gap.

Jewish heritage in Erfurt: Old synagoge and mikveh - Well again, why is this so special? Is it because we have so many churches that we now ought to nominate every decent historical remain of the Jewish religion?

Alpine and pre-Alpine meadows and wetland - A problematic nomination. Slovakia tries it with the Tatras and failed, Austria tried it with Hohe Tauern and with Bregenz Forest and failed, why should Germany be any different? The Alpine (or Carpathian) landscape is charming and typical of Central Europe. It has been in long interaction with man, so I guess an inscription on natural criteria alone is out. A CL could be justified, but then a larger framework in the form of comparative studies and maybe a serial nomination should be the solution. As it stands, this nomination seems to have little chance.

Castles of Ludwig II: Neuschwanstein, Linderhof und Herrenchiemsee - This I think is a good nomination and certainly fills a gap (unlike what is said in the news report). It is also very iconic.

Now I would like to come to what was left out:

Spa towns - This nomination stands good chances and will be pursued. It is probably lacking here because the serial nomination is guided by the Czech Rep.

Similarly I think the extentions were left out and could still be forwarded, but maybe I am wrong here.

Marx Allee and Hansaviertel - This was an interesting proposal. I think it is a shame it wasn't forwarded.

Hellerau - I think Dresden has had its chance and lost it. I don't see why it should have a second one.

- This nomination was a good promotional idea, but I think it better belongs to the intangible heritage list, if at all.

Nuremberg Trials Room - This was discusssed here. The loss of authenticity and the intangible aspects were not favourable.

Tübingen and Marburg universities - Enought European universities. There are also much better examples such as Oxford and Cambridge that are still uninscribed.

Passau, Rothenburg - historical towns that didn't even pass the first selection. They are both nice and authentic, but their category is clearly overrepresented.

What is missing and should have been included:

Olympia Stadium and olympic park in Munich - Not proposed because of possible clashed with current use of the stadion.

Tempelhof - Was discussed and not proposed. I can't see why. I know the future of the complex is still unknown.

Nazi Ralley Grounds, Nuremberg - This was once discussed, an interesting proposal. The reason behind omitting it is probably the same for which the NPD got into the European Parliament lately.

Author winterkjm
#39 | Posted: 14 Jun 2014 23:50 | Edited by: winterkjm 
Thanks Assif for the explanation. As someone who has not yet visited Germany (but wants to), do you think this new tentative list is more a product of Germany beginning to run out of candidate nominations that can demonstrate OUV? Or perhaps a more narrowed effort to include Jewish sites and iconic castles (more national interest than "high-quality" proposals?). Comparable example: Mount Vernon or San Antonio Missions for the US?

Author Assif
#40 | Posted: 15 Jun 2014 11:11 | Edited by: Assif 
Well, mostly the first. Germany, having around 40 WHS is largely covered. I don't think it can produce many more sites of OUV, certainly nothing compared with the US which could easily nominate at least 30-40 further sites.
On the other hand, same as in most of the world, modern nominations are underrepresented in Germany too. Most of us agreed for example that Munich's Olympia would make a great nomination, but it was not even proposed. Tempelhof was shortly discussed but was left out in favour of other Berlin nominations of less OUV. I consider it a great shame since it is exactly these sites which could show that Germany can still contribute to the list.

Author winterkjm
#41 | Posted: 15 Jun 2014 12:52 | Edited by: winterkjm 
One wonders about Germany's incredible fortune or planning to (tentatively) be the host of the 39th World Heritage Conference, while also having (3) nominations up for inscription! On top of this Germany is a Committee member (2011-2015).

• Speicherstadt and Kontorhaus District with Chilehaus
• The Naumburg Cathedral and the landscape of the rivers Saale and Unstrut
• Viking Age Sites in Northern Europe

As we already know Germany is extremely active in 2015 and 2016. Following the 2016 WHC much of Germany's tentative list (not including new sites) will be exhausted.

Munich's Olympia would make a great nomination, but it was not even proposed. Tempelhof was shortly discussed but was left out

Germany has indicated another potential update between 2017 and 2019. I would be surprised if these (2) nominations you mention are not considered.

Germany having around 40 WHS is largely covered. I don't think it can produce many more sites of OUV

I would never expect German nominations to cease entirely, but what I somewhat expect is a eventual pace of world heritage activity that mirrors the UK (perhaps before 2020).

Author Durian
#42 | Posted: 16 Jun 2014 22:45 
I think that there are many interesting sites in Germany that can be WHS but these sites maybe too controversial to nominate, for example, former line and remain of berlin wall or Peenemunde Research site.

Author winterkjm
#43 | Posted: 16 Jun 2014 23:12 | Edited by: winterkjm 
I had never heard of the Peenemunde Research Site. Very interesting, but how much is really left? A quick search on Wikipedia states,

"75 percent wreckage (1945)"

"All of the research buildings and rocket test stands had been demolished (by 1945)."

"Only the power station, the airport, and the railroad link to Zinnowitz remained functional. The gas plant for the production of liquid oxygen still lies in ruins at the entrance to Peenemünde. Very little remains of most of the other Nazi German facilities there."

Concerning, the Berlin Wall would you be proposing the East Side Gallery portion as a nomination? URL

Author Durian
#44 | Posted: 17 Jun 2014 02:51 | Edited by: Durian 
would you be proposing the East Side Gallery portion as a nomination?

It is a part of Berlin Wall, yes! I will support if Germany decide to propose it and other wall remains as well as its old line that still can be seen in central Berlin. The site is very iconic for cold war history.

For Peenamunde, it was V2 research site, the birthplace of rocket and missiles. Also here where German scientists split into 2 groups, one to US and one to USSR and start the Space Race. Agree, few original remains left except power plant and nearby area that German called Monument Landscape.

For more information

Author hubert
#45 | Posted: 17 Jun 2014 14:51 
Peenemunde Research site

Actually, Peenemünde has been suggested at a early stage, but the government of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern rejected it in favour of the less controversial proposal of the Schwerin Castle. As mentioned by Durian it would make sense as part of a serial nomination with Baikonur and Cape Canaveral, but such a proposal is rather unlikely at present.

Concerning, the Berlin Wall would you be proposing the East Side Gallery portion as a nomination? URL

As described in the Wiki article the East Side Gallery was part of the "hinterland wall" at a section where the Spree river actually was the border. A more typical section of the wall has been preserved at the Berlin Wall Memorial:

However, there are only little remains of the Berlin Wall and the Inner German Border. A series of memorials representing the "Iron Curtain" has been inscribed as "European Heritage Label" (where the criteria of integrity and authenticity are less important). I think a double entry as WHS is unlikely.

Germany has indicated another potential update between 2017 and 2019. I would be surprised if these (2) nominations you mention are not considered.

I don't think so. I suppose this second update mainly aims at those proposals, where the expert committee recommended further research and a more detailed justification. As already mentioned by Assif, the major problem of a nomination of Tempelhof or Olympiapark Munich is the current or future commercial use of these sites. Unfortunately, the potential OUV is not the only and not the crucial criterion for a proposal as WHS.

Page  Page 3 of 8:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next » 
Countries Forum / Countries / Germany - World Heritage Top

Your Reply Click this icon to move up to the quoted message


Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please, enter your username/password details upon posting a message, or register first. Forum Powered by Chat Forum Software miniBB ®