World Heritage Site

for World Heritage Travellers

Forum: Start | Profile | Search |         Website: Start | The List | Community |
Connections Forum / Connections /  

Out or in doubt #9

Author elsslots
#1 | Posted: 31 Jul 2009 01:14 
Some more suggestions for Connections, that I couldn't verify.
Please clarify if you know more about them:

(1794) Sacred Mountains
Nara's Mt. Kasugayama >> I think this is a sacred forest, not a sacred mountain

1792) Early Christianity
Masada – basilica >> Please be more specific, I could only find the remnants of a Byzantine church dating from the 5th and 6th centuries?? (and that's too late for this connection)

(1772) Large squares
Teotihuacan - Plaza de la Luna >> doubt about size, is it > 10.000 m2??

(1721) Piracy
Melaka and George Town >> nothing mentioned in AB evaluation

(1732) Modelled after
Thailand's Sukhothai is modelled after Sri Lanka's Polonnaruwa >> please name source

(1687) Not open to tourists
Lascaux (Vézère Valley) Only open to scientists >> Lascaux is, but this WHS consists of other caves that are open to the general public

(1665) Baths
Soleyman Too - Hamam >> please name source

(1654) Cathedrals
Cidade Velha >> please name specifics, I couldn't find one

Triumphal Arches
Luang Prabang >> there's one in Vientiane, but in Luang Prabang??

(1526) Cemeteries
Tarraco's Necropolis Paleochristian (old cemetery) >> it's already in under Necropolis

Author Solivagant
#2 | Posted: 31 Jul 2009 05:27 
I wonder whether the Necropolis at Tarraco should be "admitted" under Early Christianity (i.e pre 325)?
It was certainly a very early Christian centre. "Legend" places St Paul there and Bishop (later St) Fructuosus and his 2 deacons were martyred in the Amphitheatre in 259AD so it would seem perfectly possible that there are Christian remains from this period. "Paleochristian" seems to be interchangeable with the definition of "Early Christianity" adopted for this Connection os the fact that the Necropolis in Tarraco is called the "PaleoChristian Necropolis" would seem relevant!

The trouble is that the Necropolis was in use for a long time both before and after this period. Articles on the Web talk about remains from various centuries without being specific. some of the sarcophogi appear to have been removed to the Tarraco museum - but again there is very little on the Web about the exhibits.

Perhaps it is best just to cite the AB review which states for the Paleo Christian Cemetary
" In the 3rd century AD, however, it became converted into a cemetery, associated
with the cult of the three martyrs, over whose tomb a basilica was built (destroyed in the 8th century)."
(Some of the Basilica remains are visible apparently but it was built outside this period)

I believe that there might also be some Paleo--Christian remains at Carthage - which was another important early Christian community(and has a Paleo Christian museum also) but Ii can't find anything pre-Nicean in situ (a requirement for this Connection). Can anyone else?

Author Assif
#3 | Posted: 31 Jul 2009 11:51 | Edited by: Assif 
Cidade Velha has the remains of a cethedral - Se Catedral:,_Cidade_Velha, _Cape_Verde.jpg

The Hamam in Soleyman-Too is mentioned in Unesco's description of the site.

Author Solivagant
#4 | Posted: 1 Aug 2009 04:15 | Edited by: Solivagant 
"(1732) Modelled after
Thailand's Sukhothai is modelled after Sri Lanka's Polonnaruwa >> please name source"

The "Connection" appears to be one of general influence on artistic style rather than one of direct "modelled after".

See generally re influences on Sukhothai from outside Thailand 2
and specifically on Polonnaruwa

and a paragraph from elsewhere
"Wat Tra Phang Thong Lang. This ancient monument is well known for stuccoes relief decorated on three sides of the wall of its mondop. These reliefs. made by local craftsmen of Sukhothai under the influence of Ceylonese style during the period of Polonnaruwa. depict the story of Lord Buddha. "

Author Assif
#5 | Posted: 1 Aug 2009 05:12 
According to the AB evaluation Soleyman-Too should be connected with Mithraism rather than with Zoroastanism.
Shushtar's connection with Nabathean Culture seems to be very weak.

Author Solivagant
#6 | Posted: 1 Aug 2009 06:25 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Re "Plaza de la Luna" and "Large Squares"
I was having great problems Googling its size - then remembered I had a guide book from a visit there in the 1980s!
Panorama Guidebooks :- "Teotihuacan - City of the Gods". ISBN 968 38 0059-9 (English)
This states "The Plaza is basically rectangular in shape measuring 130m. from west to east and 200m. from north to south" = 26000sq metres.

Re Melaka - Piracy
Suggestion presumably relates to the present day pirates operating in the Straits of Malacca - therefore not "connected" to the inscribed site.

Author Durian
#7 | Posted: 2 Aug 2009 11:12 
(1794) Sacred Mountains
Nara's Mt. Kasugayama >> I think this is a sacred forest, not a sacred mountain

- I just look at nomination document by Japanese government, Kusugayama is considered sacred mountain since ancient time.

Author Solivagant
#8 | Posted: 3 Aug 2009 12:19 
Can the Arch + Tomb of Galerius in Thessalonika be assigned to the connection "Early Christianity"? They were indeed constructed between 298-311 but, as I understand the Rotunda did not become "Christian" until Theodosius the Great ordered it to be converted into the Church of Agios Giorgios. Thodosius was the Emperor later in the 4th century who made Nicene Christinaity the orthodox religion of Rome and was therefore "post-nicean" so the conversion of the church must be outside the definition of this connection . Galerius on the other hand was the perpetrator of the last persecutions against the Christians in Rome

But can we find a third connection for the Emperor Galerius 260-311
a. Thessalonika -arch and tomb
b. Gamizrad-Romuliana -his palace (and burial place??)
c. ???? Anything in Rome??

Author elsslots
#9 | Posted: 3 Aug 2009 13:09 | Edited by: elsslots 
Can the Arch + Tomb of Galerius in Thessalonika be assigned to the connection "Early Christianity"?

It is tricky indeed, but I have a couple of arguments in favour:
- The WHS is named "Paleochristian and Byzantine Monuments of Thessalonika"; as mentioned above, Paleochristian seems to be interchangeable with Early Christian
- According to Wiki, the Rotunda (= Tomb of Galerius) "stood empty until the Emperor Constantine I ordered it converted into a Christian church in the 4th century. "; Emperor Constantine died in 337. He was the one to organize the First Council of Nicaea. So the conversion into a church must have taken place at least very close to 325.
- The ICOMOS evaluation calls it "the church, despite having been ravaged by fire in 1917, remains one of the most notable monuments of the Early Christian era."

Author Solivagant
#10 | Posted: 3 Aug 2009 14:34 | Edited by: Solivagant 
I think there are 2 separate issues
a. From when do the Christian remains in Thessalonika (The Rotunda) date?
b. How do we define "early Christian" for the purposes of our "connection ?

Re the Thessalonikan remains
Wiki is the only source I have found which suggests that conversion of the church was "by" Constantine. Whereas several other sources indicate a later conversion e.g
a. Thessalonika Guide "converted into a Church during the reign of Theodosius the Great "
b. Journals of Early Christian Studies - Late 4th/Early 5th asrallah.pdf
c. Architecture of Alexandria and Egypt c300BC to AD700 - "converted ... in the 5th Century" tunda+Church+of+Hagios+Georgios&source=bl&ots=7ww3XrtG2s&sig=cGWls9MO425e38BUdEjpBkuk ft0&hl=en&ei=uyd3Su-hAeDKjAexmOSnBg&sa=X&oi=book_res

The other issue is from when the remains inside the original Rotunda date -again the quotations seem to indicate that what remains are Byzantine mosaics from 6th Century. so, on both counts the Christian aspects of the site are post-Nicean.

re The Definition of "Early Christianity"
When I suggested the Connection I took the definition from Wiki!! It seemed to have nice factual start and end dates viz Death of Christ c 30 AD/Council of Nicea 325AD. UNESCO on the other hand seems to like using the phrase "Paleo-Christian". Are they interchangeable then? Definitions of PaleoChristian which i have found include
a. OED etc just say "related to early Christianity" which isn't much help!
b. Britannica - "Early Christian art , also called Paleo-Christian art or primitive Christian art (is) architecture, painting, and sculpture from the beginnings of Christianity until about the early 6th century, particularly the art of Italy and the western Mediterranean. (Early Christian art in the eastern part of the Roman Empire is usually considered to be part of Byzantine art.)". Which is somewhat muddling as we already have "Byzantine" as a "connection"!!

I think my preference would be to stick with "Early Christian" as the title and the "Council of Nicea" as the end point - The Tarraco cemetary remains from the 3rd century are still pre Nicean even though they are described in this case as Paleochristian.

An alternative would be to alter the definition to include anything called "paleochristian" by UNESCO - but then we have to "solve" the issue of the "Byzantine overlap" for sites in the East!! And also what do we do with sites whose "era" is not described by UNESCO?

Author elsslots
#11 | Posted: 4 Aug 2009 04:08 
I think my preference would be to stick with "Early Christian" as the title and the "Council of Nicea" as the end point

I agree. I have deleted Thessalonika

Connections Forum / Connections /
 Out or in doubt #9

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 ®