World Heritage Site

for World Heritage Travellers



Forum: Start | Profile | Search |         Website: Start | The List | Community |
Connections www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / Connections /  
 

Out or in doubt #26

 
 
Page  Page 1 of 9:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next »

Author elsslots
Admin
#1 | Posted: 25 Jun 2013 08:41 
Some questions regarding the 2013 inclusions:

Hill Forts of Rajasthan
>> Built in the 12th century? (Gagron and Jaisalmer seem to have started then)

Hani
>> built in the 8th century? AB ev states "Carved out of dense forest over the past 1,300 years"

University of Coimbra - Gothic
>> I don't see a reference to that

Located in a microstate - Al Zurbarah
>> Qatar is a little too large and populated (see definition in connection descr)

Cultural nominations rejected as CLs - Al Zubarah
>> a bit weird one, but I can't find any evidence that it was nominated as a CL, not in this year's documents at least

Author Assif
Partaker
#2 | Posted: 25 Jun 2013 09:08 
Re: Cultural nominations rejected as CLs:

On the Qatari t-list the name is: Archaeological site of Al-Zubarah and its cultural landscape
http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5316

Re: Rajasthan:

Yes, indeed the earliest date from this period.

Re: Hani

1300 years ago is the 8th century as we are now in the 21st. However, since I guess this estimate is not very accurate maybe we should better assume 7th century.

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#3 | Posted: 25 Jun 2013 09:51 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Assif:
On the Qatari t-list the name is: Archaeological site of Al-Zubarah and its cultural landscape

But even by the time of its first nomination for the 2012 WHC the CL aspect had been dropped -I have just checked the AB eval from that year and the site's official title has already changed to simply "Al-Zubarah Archaeological Site". It was then described as "In terms of categories of cultural property set out in Article I of the 1972 World Heritage Convention, this is A serial nomination of 2 sites". It is at this point that the comment about the site "also being a CL" is normally introduced
The name was carried forward to 2013 but, for some reason I haven't been able to establish yet, it had been converted to "In terms of categories of cultural property set out in Article I of the 1972 World Heritage Convention, this is a site." (i.e the second site has been dropped or incorporated!)
So, it looks as if the T List name was a "First thought" which got dumped during the preparation of the Nomination rather than something which was rejected by ICOMOS/WHC

By the way - the 2012 Decision asked Qatar to do some work on the under water archaeological aspects of the site but all that the AB eval for 2013 states is that the remains of a series of dhows sunk by the British in "could be underwater". Whether this is enough to justify a connection to underwater archaeology I am not quite sure - I would have thought it would as this comment related specifically to the harbour included within the boundaries -but we could await access to the Nomination file

However I note that the boundaries of the inscribed site of Tyre have been extended "to include the underwater archaeological remains located to the south of the city" so that connection should be assigned to Tyre as well

Author elsslots
Admin
#4 | Posted: 25 Jun 2013 14:54 
Fujisan - Literature
> we have a very strict definition here (literature relation has to be part of its OUV), I guess for Fujisan visual arts are more relevant (such as "early 19th-century
Ukiyo-e prints have had a significant impact on many Western works of art,")

Author elsslots
Admin
#5 | Posted: 26 Jun 2013 12:38 | Edited by: elsslots 
San Marino - Covers more than 5 percent
>> trying to calculate it, I think it's more like 1% (I am bad at maths however)

Golestan Palace
Gulistan of Sa'di
>> Literature or Poetic Quotations ? And can anyone explain the link of the story with the site?

Djenne - Minority communities
>> Songhay : I am not sure that the site's OUV is related to this minority, needs a clear source

Author Assif
Partaker
#6 | Posted: 26 Jun 2013 12:54 
Els, you are right about San Marino. The nominated area is only 0.55 km2 out of 61 km2 of the sammarinese territory.

Author Assif
Partaker
#7 | Posted: 26 Jun 2013 13:09 
Re: Djenne

Tha Songhay Empire is mentioned in the AB evaluation. The Songhay still constitute the majority in Djenne and a minority in Mali.

Author elsslots
Admin
#8 | Posted: 28 Jun 2013 00:18 | Edited by: elsslots 
Natural sites with indigenous population - Tajik NP (Kyrgyz)
Natural sites with indigenous population - Tian Shan (Kyrgyz and Kazakh)
>> I don't think these etnic groups fit "indigenous" (marginalized groups of Original inhabitants)

Rock islands - cover more than 5 percent
>> the connection is about the land area, and this is mostly a marine site; it doesn't look sufficiently large on a map, but I cannot find the right numbers

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#9 | Posted: 28 Jun 2013 01:12 | Edited by: Solivagant 
elsslots:
the connection is about the land area, and this is mostly a marine site; it doesn't look sufficiently large on a map, but I cannot find the right numbers


When this connection came up again the other day I thought of this site (Rock Islands) and checked it. Unfortunately I didn't keep the numbers.

The Nomination File includes some tables with a column for the land area of each of the groups of islands. While it comes quite close to 5% of the land area of the entire country given on Wiki (mainly on the basis of just one of the groups) it didn't quite make it - if someone wants to check then the information is there on the Nom File!

Author Assif
Partaker
#10 | Posted: 28 Jun 2013 01:18 | Edited by: Assif 
Re: Natural sites with indigenous population
In both Tajik NP and Tian Shan the native population is of semi nomadic Kyrgyz (and Kazakh) tribes that are certainly marginalised in both countries (more so in China). Even the photo representing the Tajik NP on the Unesco website is of Kyrgyz tents...

Author meltwaterfalls
Partaker
#11 | Posted: 28 Jun 2013 08:01 
Solivagant:
if someone wants to check then the information is there on the Nom File!

I couldn't find the tables, however taking the info from the maps this is what we end up with.

Property Size: 1,002 km˛
Breakdown of Property: 95% Marine (952 km˛) 5% Land (50km˛)
Size of Country: 459km˛
Percentage of country inscribed: 50km˛/459km˛ = 11%
So it seems it could be included.

NB: if someone wants to check my sums feel free, my focus is a little off at the moment.
It does show that the whole inscribed property is 218% of the country's area, which is a little odd, but explained by marine claims.

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#12 | Posted: 28 Jun 2013 08:54 
OK - so let's do a re-check from the Nom File!

Page 28 - Table 1 Ulong Complex - 6 islands, land area 1.19 sq km
Page 34 - Table 2 Islands of the Ngemelis complex - 23 Islands, land area 1.41 sq km
(Page 35 - Table 3 Marine Shell species - not relevant!)
Page 39 - Table 4 Islands of the Ngeruktabel Complex - 156 Islands, land area 18.62 sq km
Page 46 - Table 5 Nganges Island - 1 island, land area 0.117 sq kms

= 21.337 sq kms . Not quite enough to reach 5%!!

BUT I now notice that some inscribed Islands don't seem to have been given a table in the Nomination file !!!
Mecherechar Island - Wki gives the area of this island as 19sq km
Ngerekewid Islands (also known as 70 islands) - Frecnh wiki gives this as 0.9 sq kms
Kmekumer Group - ????
Babelomekang Group - ????

It is also stated that there are 7 "groups" of islands - the 4 without tables and those with table apart from Nganges (whose size is very small anyway)

So we are up to 41.237 sq kms without knowing the areas of Kmekumer and Babelmekang.

i.e more than enough to meet the 5%

Author elsslots
Admin
#13 | Posted: 28 Jun 2013 12:27 
Assif:
semi nomadic Kyrgyz (and Kazakh) tribes

I think we should name the tribes in that case. This is a different connection from the broader "minority communities". I can't find any named indigenous "tribes" in this region.

Author Assif
Partaker
#14 | Posted: 28 Jun 2013 12:43 
I can't find the names of the specific tribes. Isn't the emphasis in this connection on naming indigenous people living within the boundaries of a national WHS?
In this case I think both Tian Shan and Tajik NP should be in. We could add that these are no urban Kyrgyz but traditional semi-nomadic ones (for Tajik NP). Tian Shan has a mixed Kazakh-Kyrgyz native population.

Author kkanekahn
Partaker
#15 | Posted: 30 Jun 2013 10:45 | Edited by: kkanekahn 
Rice cultivation

Wulingyuan
Qadisha Valley
Bassari Country
Koutammakou

Magic square
Sagrada Família

Page  Page 1 of 9:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next » 
Connections www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / Connections /
 Out or in doubt #26

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 ®
 ⇑