World Heritage Site

for World Heritage Travellers



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

Connection suggestion

 
 
Page  Page 32 of 33:  « Previous  1  ...  30  31  32  33  Next »

Author Jurre
Partaker
#466 | Posted: 20 Nov 2021 04:49 | Edited by: Jurre 
Connection: WHS with enclave

Colonies of Benevolence - The Frederiksoord component excludes an area with small and medium sized buildings in the core. The Veenhuizen component excludes a modern village in the south-central part of the colony. (AB Ev + Map)

Author Jurre
Partaker
#467 | Posted: 21 Nov 2021 16:46 | Edited by: Jurre 
Connection: World Monuments Watch (past)

Colonies of Benevolence
- Wortel Colony Estate (1998) (World Monument's Fund)

Author Jurre
Partaker
#468 | Posted: 21 Nov 2021 16:54 
Jurre:
Connection: Cemeteries

Colonies of Benevolence - There is a cemetery is in the northern part of the Wortel colony. (AB Ev)

Can you correct this one? There is an "is" too many. --> There is a cemetery in the northern part of the Wortel colony. (AB Ev)

Author Jurre
Partaker
#469 | Posted: 27 Nov 2021 19:30 | Edited by: Jurre 
Connection: Steam technology

Colonies of Benevolence - The colony of Frederiksoord has a former steam tram depot on the Koningin Wilhelminalaan. (Nomination file, p. 52)

Connection: Canals

Colonies of Benevolence - The Westerbeeksloot barge canal in Wilhelminaoord (...) was originally planned as a waterway. At the intersection with the Koningin Wilhelminalaan, the Westerbeeksloot makes a right-angle left turn, requiring the construction of a turning basin to enable transport ships (keel barges) to turn. This turning basin is still visible. The Westerbeeksloot's main function these days is irrigation; due to low water levels, it can no longer accommodate shipping. (Nomination file, p. 53)

Connection: Irrigation and drainage

Colonies of Benevolence - In the Wortel component, the landscape is divided into narrow uniform plots, separated by a system of ditches and paths. (...) The early pattern of family farms disappeared during the period of abandonment, although the system of ditches and drains is still explicitly present, especially in areas that became woodlands rather than fields after 1870. (...) The drainage and dewatering system
also displays an orthogonal structure. (Nomination file, p. 58-59)

Connection: Damaged in World War II

Colonies of Benevolence - Originally, the living quarters of the farm at the Wortel component were situated at the crossroads, but after having been damaged during World War II it was rebuilt as a south wing of the existing farm complex. (Nomination file, p. 60)

Author Jurre
Partaker
#470 | Posted: 28 Nov 2021 09:16 | Edited by: Jurre 
Maybe you could cross-reference the new connection "Inscribed as CL but not identified as such by UNESCO" with the connection "Cultural landscape not recognized". They both are in the same domain, and it might be interesting/handy to provide a link in the description to the other, closely-related, connection (like we have done for the WWII connections).

Also, I think that a source in the new connection "Inscribed as CL but not identified as such by UNESCO" is necessary. What documentation gives the proof? I suppose it's not the AB Ev or the nomination file, because that would make them fall under the connection "Cultural landscape not recognized".

How do the two connections differ?

Author elsslots
Admin
#471 | Posted: 28 Nov 2021 09:35 
Jurre:
Maybe you could cross-reference the new connection "Inscribed as CL but not identified as such by UNESCO" with the connection "Cultural landscape not recognized". They both are in the same domain, and it might be interesting/handy to provide a link in the description to the other, closely-related, connection (like we have done for the WWII connections).

Done!

Author Jurre
Partaker
#472 | Posted: 28 Nov 2021 11:19 
elsslots:
Done!

Thank you!

Author Jurre
Partaker
#473 | Posted: 28 Nov 2021 19:17 | Edited by: Jurre 
Jurre:
Connection: Canals

Colonies of Benevolence - The Westerbeeksloot barge canal in Wilhelminaoord (...) was originally planned as a waterway. At the intersection with the Koningin Wilhelminalaan, the Westerbeeksloot makes a right-angle left turn, requiring the construction of a turning basin to enable transport ships (keel barges) to turn. This turning basin is still visible. The Westerbeeksloot's main function these days is irrigation; due to low water levels, it can no longer accommodate shipping. (Nomination file, p. 53)

For the Canals connection, I'd like to alter the rationale, as the Veenhuizen component also has a link.

Colonies of Benevolence - The Westerbeeksloot barge canal in Wilhelminaoord (...) was originally planned as a waterway. The Westerbeeksloot's main function these days is irrigation; due to low water levels, it can no longer accommodate shipping. The basis of the Veenhuizen component is formed by a straight main canal, the Kolonievaart, with six 'wijken', smaller perpendicular canals, at intervals of 750 metres. (Nomination file, p. 53, 63-65)

Jurre:
Connection: Steam technology

Colonies of Benevolence - The colony of Frederiksoord has a former steam tram depot on the Koningin Wilhelminalaan. (Nomination file, p. 52)

Same for the Steam technology connection.

Colonies of Benevolence - The colony of Frederiksoord has a former steam tram depot on the Koningin Wilhelminalaan. In the Veenhuizen component, the former cotton mill Het Stoom, dating from 1839, was the first steam-powered factory in the province of Drenthe. (Nomination file, p. 52, 67)

Author Jurre
Partaker
#474 | Posted: 28 Nov 2021 19:38 | Edited by: Jurre 
Connection: Tobu World Square

Amsterdam Canal Ring - Magere Brug

Hidden Christian Sites in the Nagasaki Region - Oura Cathedral

Sites of Japan's Meiji Industrial Revolution - Glover Garden

Yungang Grottoes

Source: Wikipedia - Tobu World Square

Author Jurre
Partaker
#475 | Posted: 28 Nov 2021 19:48 | Edited by: Jurre 
Connection: Hospitals

Colonies of Benevolence - On the north side of the rectangle of the former Second Institution in Veenhuizen, a wide avenue arose lined with high trees and houses (...). These include the former homes of the pharmacist and the doctor of the hospital situated behind. The houses and the hospital now accommodate hotel Bitter en Zoet. The former quarantine building has become a hernia clinic. (Nomination file, p. 66)

Connection: Breweries

Colonies of Benevolence - The grain mill Maallust in the Veenhuizen component now accommodates a microbrewery. (Nomination file, p. 67)

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#476 | Posted: 29 Nov 2021 02:50 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Jurre:
Also, I think that a source in the new connection "Inscribed as CL but not identified as such by UNESCO" is necessary. What documentation gives the proof? I suppose it's not the AB Ev or the nomination file, because that would make them fall under the connection "Cultural landscape not recognized".
How do the two connections differ?

This is a complicated issue both to understand ..and to explain. I think Jurre may have a point regarding the overlap of the 2 Connections... but.....!!!

I can identify 5 "occasions" where a site's status as a "Cultural Landscape" can be identified

a. In what I call the "official" UNESCO list. Such a site gets returned if you do an advanced search on CL or if you go to this page covering sites having the "Activity" of CL. As I identified earlier, this list rather strangely includes the Defence Lines of Amsterdam. It is undoubtedly incomplete in not including WHS which were "clearly" inscribed as CLs. The problem is how to discover and define these.
b. The Nomination file. May or may not specifically "claim" the site to be a CL. But many WHS do not have accessible Nomination files so it is difficult to rely on this source. Some nominations (particularly earlier ones?) don't mention CL even though ICOMOS later clearly considers that they are!
c. The AB Evaluation Text . May or may not specify the site as a CL. Normally one would rely on the ICOMOS evaluation rather than IUCN since a CL needs Cultural criteria and values. It normally (but not always) appears in the section headed "Category of Property". Not all evals have this section and there is no guarantee that the AB will mention it anyway.
d. The AB Eval "Recommendation". This can specify that a site described as CL in the Evaluation Category is NOT regarded as such by ICOMOS (I don't think we have ever attempted fully to identify all of these)... or it may just leave the matter unspecified. If it is unspecified and the "Category" section described it as a CL it seems reasonable to assume that ICOMOS still regards it as such?
e. The WHC "Decision". May or may not mention that a site identified as a CL in the Category is inscribed as such. It "should" (?) mention if a site nominated as a CL has been specifically excluded from being one by both the AB and the WHC??If it doesn't metnion the CL then, unless the AB evaluation consluded that it wasn't a CL then it seems reasonable to assume that it was inscribed as such?
f. "Our" list of CLs.. Put together across many years but, possibly, not on the basis of a watertight definition of how we define a CL. Mainly it will have come from c whilst trying to make allowance for any sites excluded by d ..and probably ignoring e..

I did my comparison the other day by comparing our list f. (as it then existed) with the UNESCO list a. and identifying discrepancies in both directions. I didn't look at the existing Connection for "CL not recognised" and concentrated only on sites in f but not in a. It would appear that we had already excluded some sites from f. which were not in a. even though they had a "claim" to be CLs from their status in b, c or d and that the 3 "new" ones could/should be added to the existing Connection rather than introducing a new one whilst changing its definition to be clearer?
Most (all?) combinations of a- e can be found somewhere I suspect!!! I have just looked at Kromeriz and Grand Pre – both sites NOT in a. but present in our f when I did the survey.
Their status overall (K/G) is
a. No/No
b. No/Yes
c. Yes/Yes
d. No/No (ie not "rejected" as CL by ICOMOS)
e. No/Yes

Clear??!!!
In conclusion -
"a." is fixed at whatever UNESCO says,]
"f," Our list of inscribed CLs will always have an element of judgement involved in interpeting Nom files, AB evals and decisions,
Excluding sites on "a." which shouldn't be there (Amst Lines only?), the difference between the 2 constitutes our "Connection" for sites inscribed as CL but not recognised by UNESCO - and we only need 1 such list.
If we could identify 3 such sites from the AB Evaluations/WHC decisions then we could also have a Connection for "Sites Nominate/Evaluated as CL but rejected as such and inscribed for other reasons". At the moment we only have " "ICOMOS considers that Hedeby & Danevirke is not a CL".??

Author Jurre
Partaker
#477 | Posted: 29 Nov 2021 14:42 | Edited by: Jurre 
Connection: Ideal City

Colonies of Benevolence - Engineers (...) such as Johannes van den Bosch, the initiator of the Colonies of Benevolence, (...) were familiar with the ideas of the città ideale (...). In the Netherlands, the ideas of Flemish engineer Simon Stevin on settlements had played a significant role, in particular his 'Ideal Plan for a City' (...). Form follows function was a basic principles in land reclamation since the middle ages, resulting in straight lines and standard plots. The Colonies can be seen in light of this tradition of landscape planning in the Netherlands, supplemented by contemporary ideas on creating new settlements. (Nomination file, p. 75)

Connection: Textiles

Colonies of Benevolence - At its inception, the Colonies project was essentially agricultural, but soon introduced a variety of supplementary industries, such as cotton weaving, to generate income. By 1841, it was the second largest exporter of cotton cloth to the Dutch East Indies colony. (Nomination file, p. 84)

Connection: Innovations in Agriculture

Colonies of Benevolence - In a certain sense, the Colonies were an "agricultural testing ground". Scientifically substantiated methods were to ensure increased productivity in areas with intrinsically infertile soil and not very productive farmers (...). All practical experiments were systematically registered and documented. (...) A "best practice" culture was created: successful methods from other regions (with different soil or climatic conditions) and new theoretical insights were introduced through systematic practice tests. (Nomination file, p. 92)

Author Zoe
Partaker
#478 | Posted: Yesterday 00:47 
I feel like I've asked this before: are coins considered as a connection or are there just too many to track?
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces1816.html

Author elsslots
Admin
#479 | Posted: Yesterday 01:22 
Zoe:
are there just too many to track?

On Banknotes now has 137 entries. I guess coins would be similar? Or would there be more? Maybe limit it in time, so issued from 2000 or so?
There is a connection already for Euro coins (37).

Author Jurre
Partaker
#480 | Posted: Yesterday 06:40 | Edited by: Jurre 
Solivagant:
Excluding sites on "a." which shouldn't be there (Amst Lines only?), the difference between the 2 constitutes our "Connection" for sites inscribed as CL but not recognised by UNESCO - and we only need 1 such list.

Personally, I'd also be in favour of just 1 connection pertaining to this. The difference between the two now might be too difficult to discern, too ambiguous or too open for interpretation.

Page  Page 32 of 33:  « Previous  1  ...  30  31  32  33  Next » 
Connections www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / Connections /
 Connection suggestion

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 ®
 ⇑