Countries www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / Countries /

Germany - World Heritage

Page  Page 5 of 8:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next »  
Author Solivagant
Registered
#61 | Posted: 9 Mar 2016 09:09 | Edited by: Solivagant 
pikkle:
Schneeburg looks wonderful but a bit out of the way for a day trip

In 2014 we visited Schneeberg and Schwarzenberg on a day return trip by car up from Beyreuth between operas!
Schneeberg was ok but I personally wouldn't put it in the "wonderful" class. Although there are statues of miners I didn't really get much of a feel of either of these being "mining" towns despite them all being described as "Historical Mining landscapes" -nor indeed in the countryside around them (but then neither did I of Ouro Preto!!"!). The "mining" really only seems to be significant nowadays as the original source of their wealth. Some of the other proposed elements might be more "mining oriented" (I notice one titled "Uranium Mine"!) but these 2 at least are primarily "pretty pretty towns"
I have checked my photos which confirm my memory that Schwarzenberg was the more striking - up on a hill with a castle and a finely decorated church (St George) at the end of a long main street. All very "Germanic" and worth a visit if you are in the area but not outstanding to my eyes.
Worth going for that tick as well but not worth missing anything in Dresden for!!

As for the Beech Forests etc - if I had a choice I would go to such forests in Late Summer/Autumn for fungi and leaves rather than early spring.

Author pikkle
Registered
#62 | Posted: 9 Mar 2016 11:14 | Edited by: pikkle 
Thanks so much for the feedback and the link to that thread, I had forgotten that! You've been extremely helpful in terms of deciding whether or not to check out Hainach. I was planning on doing a bit of hiking if the whether permitted into the WHS zone but I think it may be too early and I'm certain I'll be back to this area rather often. (As a librarian, book fairs come with the territory and Frankfurt and Leipzig will be yearly via work.) Perhaps I'll visit Hainach before/after the Frankfurt Buchmesse in early autumn, as Solivagant recommends. The Wartburg is a definite hit on this trip. As will a return to Weimar for some preservation work and general enjoyment of the city. I have not been to Erfurt and it looks right up my alley so I am very much looking forward to that and love the recommendations.

I forgot my place for a minute and spoke in Fahrenheit. So embarrassing. :) I have been to the area in the past and have been to most of the WHS other than Dessau-Worlitz, Muskau, and some Luther sites. If I had not been to the area in the past I wouldn't even think of skimping on Dresden and would probably spend all my time there soaking up the beautiful city, museums, and the Elbe Valley. Muskauer Park and Dessau-Worlitz (easier from Leipzig) seem to run into the same problem as Hainach with the flora being integral to the experience. I would probably want to rent a car for either of those, although Worlitz and its components seem accessible almost any way (bus, bike, train, car, even hiking), but again it just might be too early in the year, unless the schlosser at either are that impressive and they don't seem to be.

Anyway, I have been using http://www.montanregion-erzgebirge.de/en/world-heritage-discover/elements/the-saxon-c omponent-parts.html to check out the Erzgebirge components, so my impressions of this area are purely through photographs and it's a bit difficult to get a sense of all the different components! The pretty pictures of Schneeberg/Schneeberg Mining Landscape may have misled me. I do see the Uranium sites, which look like a fascinating peek into the GDR's past outside of the touristic "DDR" museums. I too am more interested in urban ensembles (hence my interest in the structures, ecclesiastical and secular, that were built with the wealth from ore mining), although a bit of medieval or early modern industry will often be a standout for me (Royal Saltworks, Rammelsberg, Plantin-Moretus). So I will perhaps check out Freiberg at the very least and continue to look into the rest of these sites. Schwarzenberg (per rec) and the nearby Erlahammer Ironworks are also an option.

Author hubert
Registered
#63 | Posted: 25 May 2016 10:20 
For those who want to deepen their knowledge of prehistoric pile dwellings, there is a good opportunity in Southern Germany: a special exhibition of the state of Baden-Württemberg in the Monastery Bad Schussenried and the Federsee Museum in Bad Buchau.
The best part is probably the opportunity to visit an archeological dig at the Olzreute-Enzisholz site (one of the inscribed sites).

http://pfahlbauten2016.de/en/archaeological-dig.html

Author winterkjm
Registered
#64 | Posted: 25 May 2016 21:51 | Edited by: winterkjm 
- Architecture of Le Corbusier (Argentina, France, Germany, Switzerland, India, Japan)

- Mining Cultural Landscape Erzgebirge/Krusnohoři (Germany, Czech Rep)

- Francke Foundation Buildings (Germany)

From the information gathered so far, Germany will be successful with only 1 of 3 nominations for 2016.

2015 Deferrals
Viking Monuments and Sites / Danevirke and Hedeby
Naumburg Cathedral and the landscape of the Rivers Saale and Unstrut

Nominations for 2017
- Caves with the Oldest Ice Age art
- Naumburg Cathedral

Germany is processing through their old tentative list and moving toward submitting dossiers for their updated tentative list. This may partially explain the recent string of failed nominations. Being the weakest of Germany's previous tentative list.

Author pikkle
Registered
#65 | Posted: 25 May 2016 23:04 
Still think Naumburg Cathedral should be on there - despite the number of Romanesque and Gothic cathedrals already on the list, I think we can make an exception (though in my case I might make an exception for a few others such as Lincoln, Wells, Orvieto ;)

While in Naumburg in March, I picked up the little booklet that they had for the 2015 Cultural Landscape deferral and they definitely overreached with that nomination. On this trip to the area, I took particular time to take note of the region as a unified landscape of "the High Middle Ages." It's a beautiful landscape - but just as Trier did not try to nominate the whole Moselle/Mosel, which is IMO one of the most beautiful stretches of vineyards/castles in a river landscape, because it simply doesn't have the OUV, the same goes for the "landscape of the Saale and Unstrut" which do not have the same coherence or depth of monuments as the Wachau or Rhine (or the Elbe, if we can still talk about that).

However, I think that Naumburg Cathedral is one of the most spectacular cathedrals in terms of the quality of sculpture. There is no doubt that it represents a "masterpiece of human creative genius." The rood screens, the "founders sculptures," the bitingly realistic foliage sculpture (similar to some of the sculpture at Southwell Minster's chapter house and other English Decorated-style foliage) and more attest to this. The move towards realism seen at Chartres, Reims, etc. is equalled by the Naumburg Master.

Author winterkjm
Registered
#66 | Posted: 25 May 2016 23:10 | Edited by: winterkjm 
Being the weakest of Germany's previous tentative list.

For clarification, I might add that Naumburg could be considered a weak nomination primarily for its over-representation on the list, not its individual merits overall. From your description it sounds a worthwhile site to visit.

Author pikkle
Registered
#67 | Posted: 25 May 2016 23:36 
winterkjm

Right, I thought as much. I didn't so much mean that post as a rebuttal. Yours reminded me of the impending re-submission for 2017 with a trimmed down dossier. I do think the 2015 submission was weak because it overreached to the point that it diluted the importance of the cathedral.

Author nfmungard
Registered
#68 | Posted: 26 May 2016 15:10 
winterkjm:
Germany is processing through their old tentative list and moving toward submitting dossiers for their updated tentative list. This may partially explain the recent string of failed nominations. Being the weakest of Germany's previous tentative list.

I think there is a saturation point with inscriptions and I think most western European countries have reached it. Germany, Denmark, Benelux, France, Spain, Portugal ... I would argue that the number of inscriptions covers the countries rather well.

For Germany I feel really certain that this is the case. Of the proposed sites I think the only globally exciting one would be Neuschwanenstein. And the Jewish sites are important due to German history. But the rest? Ice Age Art, Water Management, a cathedral, a Jugendstil exhibition ground, another mining area, bathing culture, Le Corbusier ... Not enthusiastic.

In addition Germans have a different view of the process. We are "allowed" to submit two sites per year, so we do. Wouldn't be very efficient if we didn't, would it? Every Land (state) gets to submit sites and to not offend any single state most of the sites are submitted to Unesco. There is no central authority reviewing the sites or making a judgement what should really be inscribed. It's all committees and consensus.

And in the end it's up to Unesco to say NO! Which they regularly do now. Good for Unesco. Bad for the locals. When I went to Naumburg there were huge signs announcing the bid. Nobody had given them the feedback that theirs was not the strongest submission.

Author Assif
Registered
#69 | Posted: 26 May 2016 15:36 
nfmungard:
Every Land (state) gets to submit sites and to not offend any single state most of the sites are submitted to Unesco. There is no central authority reviewing the sites or making a judgement what should really be inscribed. It's all committees and consensus.

This is not what happened with the last T-list. Most of the sites submitted by the member states were rejected. Some of the states did not get any sites into the new T-list (Saarland, Lower Saxony, Northrhine-Westphalia).

Author nfmungard
Registered
#70 | Posted: 26 May 2016 16:19 | Edited by: nfmungard 
Assif:
This is not what happened with the last T-list. Most of the sites submitted by the member states were rejected. Some of the states did not get any sites into the new T-list (Saarland, Lower Saxony, Northrhine-Westphalia).

Okay, details on the German constitution. Culture (Kultusministerium) is in the domain of the states (Länder). The federal government has little to no say in these topics. This includes education and UNESCO submissions.

In the case of education, you won't find a federal German curriculum for e.g. math. There also isn't a federal education secretary. Instead we have the KMK (Kultusministerkonferenz = conference of culture secretaries). It aligns all education topics, emphasis on aligns. Each state has still plenty of leeway. Not as much as they used to, but still. Each state has one vote and a majority for core topics requires 13 of 16 ayes. At least that's what I could research with 10min efforts.

The same forum is also responsible for the Welterbe. So you can see that this allows some wheeling and dealing. My hunch is, though, that several states weren't as passionate about their submissions as previously.

Author Assif
Registered
#71 | Posted: 26 May 2016 18:32 
In general you are right, nfmungard, but last time there was a real attempt to do things differently. The decision was handed over to an external expert committee taking into account the gap analysis. Each member state was allowed to propose up to two sites (although Bavaria proposed four and Saxony three and all sites were evaluated). The list was trimmed down considerably. Of the three Saxonian proposals (Görlitz, Leipzig and Dresden-Hellerau), 2 proposals by Berlin (architecture of divided Berlin and Weißensee Jewish cemetery), 2 proposals by Lower Saxony (Altes Land and Rundlingsdörfer) and single proposals by Saarland (extension to Völkingen) and Northrhine-Westphalen (extension to Zeche) all were rejected. This stands in contrast to the way previous updates to the tentative list were made, whereby each member state had its proposals included automatically.

Author pikkle
Registered
#72 | Posted: 27 May 2016 00:31 
Are there really saturation points? If UNESCO said that they were going to cap the list someday, then perhaps, but until then, I have no problem with Germany and other countries continuing to nominate sites. They have been pretty good in withdrawing sites that get a negative response from ICOMOS. I think Naumburg Cathedral is at least as important as many other cathedrals on the list. As are several English cathedrals and Orvieto. I think Benelux has plenty left - especially the Netherlands - which has focused almost solely on its "Man and the Water" theme. If they ever moved away from that, I think there are several worthy sites on the architecture/city centre front and a mixed Kroller-Muller/Hoge Veluwe nomination would be right up my alley. But I wouldn't mind it if these countries "toned it down" for a little while as other countries catch up. I understand that the tourism factor won't let this happen, but I would definitely support a "moratorium" on multiple nominations per year/every year. Perhaps a more quality over quantity approach should be recommended.

The only way I see this as a problem is if its preventing smaller and less-developed countries and lesser known sites from being nominated and inscribed. The more cultural preservation and protection the better, IMO. That is not to say that locally and regionally important sites should be on a "World" Heritage List, but I do not think the well is completely dry in Western Europe.

Author nfmungard
Registered
#73 | Posted: 6 Jun 2016 08:21 
Assif:
Of the three Saxonian proposals (Görlitz, Leipzig and Dresden-Hellerau), 2 proposals by Berlin (architecture of divided Berlin and Weißensee Jewish cemetery), 2 proposals by Lower Saxony (Altes Land and Rundlingsdörfer) and single proposals by Saarland (extension to Völkingen) and Northrhine-Westphalen (extension to Zeche) all were rejected. This stands in contrast to the way previous updates to the tentative list were made, whereby each member state had its proposals included automatically.

Like I said, the process may have been less political because so many sites are already inscribed. If there were multiple states left without a WHS, I am pretty sure the situation would look differently. We can also only judge the quality of the "expert" commission when we see the actual inscriptions. Erfurt doesn't sound all that convincing. Altona is nice but really a niche nomination with little general appeal.

pikkle:
Are there really saturation points?

Important question, but not sure this belongs in the Germany thread.

Having seen all German WHS and some THWS I feel that we are pretty close to saturation. Some odd sites are missing, but visiting all WHS in Germany will give you a very good overview of German history and culture.

Author Assif
Registered
#74 | Posted: 6 Jun 2016 09:44 
nfmungard:
f there were multiple states left without a WHS, I am pretty sure the situation would look differently.

Agreed.
nfmungard:
Erfurt doesn't sound all that convincing. Altona is nice but really a niche nomination with little general appeal.

Agreed again, although one has to consider the quality of the proposals brought forward too. Maybe there wasn't too much to pick from.

Author Assif
Registered
#75 | Posted: 6 Nov 2016 16:10 
Current nomination plan:

2017:
Caves with oldes Ica Age art
Naumburg
Luther extension
Bauhaus extension

2018:
Jewish Cemetery of Altona (with Suriname!)
Limes extension

2019:
Great spas
Augsburg

2020:
Darmstadt Mathildenhöhe

2021:
Schum cities
http://www.zeit.de/news/2016-08/16/denkmaeler-jerusalem-am-rhein-auf-dem-weg-zum-welt erbe-16105407

2022:
Erfurt synagogue
http://www.tlz.de/web/zgt/kultur/detail/-/specific/Erfurt-will-bis-2022-mit-juedische m-Erbe-auf-Unesco-Welterbeliste-stehen-83980280

Erzgebirge and Viking sites may be submitted together with these nominations being counted for another member state.

Francke Foundation will not try another attempt.

Alpine meadows, Ludwig II's castles and Schwerin will attempt an inscription between 2023 and 2025, whereby a common nomination of both latter TWHS is possible.

From the sites which failed to reach the tentative list last time the following will probably try again next time:
Berlin Cold War architecture (possible transnational nomination), Altes Land (next time with Poland), Grundlingsdörfer and Görlitz.
Possible other candidates might be the Mosel Valley (extension Rhine Valley?) and Olympia Park in Munich.

Page  Page 5 of 8:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next » 
Countries www.worldheritagesite.org 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.
 
 
  www.worldheritagesite.org Forum Powered by Chat Forum Software miniBB ®