World Heritage Site

for World Heritage Travellers



Forum: Start | Profile | Search |         Website: Start | The List | Community |
General discussions about WHS www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / General discussions about WHS /  
 

Shrinking the List

 
 
Page  Page 1 of 2:  1  2  Next »

Author nfmungard
Partaker
#1 | Posted: 27 Jun 2021 14:36 
Having yesterday visited another of the "great" Erzgebirge sites (Krupka) I feel our main mission should not be to find more site. It should be pruning the list from a) unwarranted sites or b) unworthy locations of serial nominations.

As my starting pitch I will offer up my feedback on Germany.

Keep
Aachen Cathedral, Upper Middle Rhine Valley, Bamberg, Museumsinsel, Cologne Cathedral, Trier, Würzburg Residence, Wartburg Castle, Maulbronn Monastery, Rammelsberg and Goslar, Pilgrimage Church of Wies, Speyer Cathedral, Völklingen Ironworks, Bergpark Wilhelmshöhe, Speicherstadt and Kontorhaus District, Wadden Sea, Fagus Factory, Garden Kingdom of Dessau-Wörlitz, Caves and Ice Age Art (not much to see but old, okay...), Berlin Modernism Housing Estates (for me the better Bauhaus site keep).

Shrink
Potsdam - Not sure you need all these palaces and stuff. For me it's about Schinkels work, Sanssouci, and the gardens.
Frontiers of the Roman Empire - Shrink to Hadrians Wall or at least key German sites.
The Architectural Work of Le Corbusier - Shrink to key works. Not Stuttgart, Buenos Aires or Tokyo.
* Zollverein - Plan is to extend, but original site perfect as it is.
Bauhaus Sites - Only keep Dessau core components. Remove Weimar and Berlin.
Lübeck, Stralsund and Wismar - Two have to go. My hunch is that while it's not the best preserved, Lübeck should be the only German Hansestadt. In addition, Visby, Bergen, ... give a good overlook of whole network.
Primeval Beech Forests - Probably the best original forests are in Eastern Europe. In Germany I found Jasmund best, simply for the scenery.
Mining Cultural Landscape Erzgebirge - I am still looking for the jewel. Would be really nice to know what the best component is. Certainly reduce to 1 or 2 sites (Uranium mining would be my choice). Possibly, eliminate.
Prehistoric Pile Dwellings - I dont think this serial nomination helps all that much. Prune it down to maybe 5 clusters?

Remove
Quedlinburg - Probably unpopular. But I like Goslar better and the region (Harz) doesn't need 3 WHS.
Classical Weimar - Only national importance.
Regensburg - Dont see what value the site adds.
Margravial Opera House - I feel this has been preserved in castles elsewhere. Too specific and small in scope for a WHS.
Muskauer Park - I love it, but not sure how influential this really was on an international level.
Castles of Augustusburg and Falkenlust - Not convinced this style coming from France and being applied in Germany needs to be covered.
Town Hall and Roland, Bremen - Hamburg and Bremen, constant battle. Still, don't think this should be on the list. Amsterdam is better.
Hildesheim Cathedral and Church - Worst of the Harz sites.
Reichenau - Not a fan. I know little remains of Carolingian times, but this is feeble.
Naumburg Cathedral - Useless addition of yet another cathedral.
Luther Memorials - Feels like this was an isncription of a historic event rather than a site. Should not be on the list.
Corvey - Same Carolingian issue again. What remais is just really meagre. Not sure anything but Aachen should be on the list for Carolingian times.
Abbey and Altenmünster of Lorsch - Probably the worst (and that's saying something) of the Carolingian German sites.
Messel Pit - This is just a big hole where stuff was found in the past.
Hedeby and Danevirke - I dont feel this should be on the list.
Water Management System of Augsburg - This is a joke.

Author Astraftis
Partaker
#2 | Posted: 28 Jun 2021 10:41 
Do you also consider restructuring of the list, as you maybe hint with regard to Hanseatic cities? That is, instead of having them each as its own site, to have only one (super)site under the same label. This could sometimes be done because of mere geographical grounds. After some 50 years, I notice that i nsome parts the List has grown disorganically (the Roman limes might be a case).

Author nfmungard
Partaker
#3 | Posted: 28 Jun 2021 10:46 
Astraftis:
Do you also consider restructuring of the list, as you maybe hint with regard to Hanseatic cities? That is, instead of having them each as its own site, to have only one (super)site under the same label. This could sometimes be done because of mere geographical grounds. After some 50 years, I notice that i nsome parts the List has grown disorganically (the Roman limes might be a case).

Frankly, I find most other Hanseatic towns to be different enough: Visby, Bryggen, Riga, Tallinn, Novgorod are all distinct. The German ones plus Torun/Gdansk arent.

Author Assif
Partaker
#4 | Posted: 29 Jun 2021 17:08 
@nfmungard: Thanks for sharing your judgments on the German WHSs. I happen to agree with almost all of them.
Here are my additions:
Würzburg Residence: I am not sure what it adds to the list. It is a fine example of a Baroque palace with the Tiepolo fresco, but is it a valuable addition to let's say Versailles, Potsdam, Schönbrunn? One could say Würzburg is different, being an example of a bishopric residence, but even there we have other valuable examples like Bamberg or Salzburg. I would choose to omit it.
Speicherstadt and Kontorhausviertel: I wholeheartedly agree the Kontorhausviertel is important, although less than its Chicago equivalence. The Speicherstadt was a unique historic development, however, much of it has been destroyed and, typical of Hamburg, never reconstructed. I would probably omit Hamburg or restrict it to the Kontorhausviertel. Originally, only the Chile House attempted inscription for its architectural merits. As a single monument I would retain it.
Roman Limes: I would stick to the British components. I do not think there is anything comparable in quality in Germany.
Goslar/Quedlinburg: I personally found Goslar more appealing than Quedlinburg as well, but this is probably more related to modern history and the post DDR development in the latter. Looking at their relative historic importance Quedlinburg, with its abbey and royal palace, is probably at least as important as Goslar, although Goslar has its reconstructed moving royal palace (Kaiserpfalz) and Rammelsberg. I am not that certain which one of the two would need to give up its place.

I would be interested to follow your similar deliberation on other overrepresented countries (France, Spain, Italy).

Author jonathanfr
Partaker
#5 | Posted: 30 Jun 2021 03:19 
I think that for serial properties it might be useful to mention the most representative sites to visit (Frontiers of the Roman Empire: Saalburg, Prehistoric Pile Dwellings: Fiavé, Rock-Art of the Mediterranean Basin: Roca de los Moros, etc). There could be several locations per series, but minimum 1 and less than the maximum. This mention "Particularly representative of the series" could appear on the respective page of each property.

Author nfmungard
Partaker
#6 | Posted: 30 Jun 2021 04:00 
Assif:
@nfmungard: Thanks for sharing your judgments on the German WHSs. I happen to agree with almost all of them.

It's not my private exercise. You are free to draft your own lists and recommendations; I just wanted to start the discussion ;)

Assif:
Würzburg Residence: I am not sure what it adds to the list. It is a fine example of a Baroque palace with the Tiepolo fresco, but is it a valuable addition to let's say Versailles, Potsdam, Schönbrunn? One could say Würzburg is different, being an example of a bishopric residence, but even there we have other valuable examples like Bamberg or Salzburg. I would choose to omit it.

Salzburg I liked less than Würzburg. But get your point re Würzburg. The palace alone and disregarding the ceiling image ... Probably not.

Assif:
Speicherstadt and Kontorhausviertel: I wholeheartedly agree the Kontorhausviertel is important, although less than its Chicago equivalence. The Speicherstadt was a unique historic development, however, much of it has been destroyed and, typical of Hamburg, never reconstructed. I would probably omit Hamburg or restrict it to the Kontorhausviertel. Originally, only the Chile House attempted inscription for its architectural merits. As a single monument I would retain it.

Biased ;) But... Speicherstadt still has large original chunks. Liverpool (and other docks) are similar but on their way out of the door as they do much urban renewals. Kontorhaus not a natural fit to me, but I like Northern Backstein expressionism.

Assif:
I am not that certain which one of the two would need to give up its place.

I picked Goslar due to the mine. I think that's what sets it apart from Quedlinburg.

Assif:
I would be interested to follow your similar deliberation on other overrepresented countries (France, Spain, Italy).

You are free to make a pitch yourself ;) I was going for Bulgaria next. Bringing it down to zero :D

jonathanfr:
I think that for serial properties it might be useful to mention the most representative sites to visit (Frontiers of the Roman Empire: Saalburg, Prehistoric Pile Dwellings: Fiavé, Rock-Art of the Mediterranean Basin: Roca de los Moros, etc). There could be several locations per series, but minimum 1 and less than the maximum. This mention "Particularly representative of the series" could appear on the respective page of each property.

That was the idea. Having visited another lackluster location in Krupka.

Author nfmungard
Partaker
#7 | Posted: 30 Jun 2021 05:22 
On to Bulgaria...

Keep: Frankly, I am not sure I would keep any. Issue is with a horse archer people you don't great ancient stuff.
Rila? Boyana?

Shrink: Primeval Beech Forests - Could even be the case that Bulgaria has one of the nicer locations...

Remove:
Nessebar: Preservation is too bad. There are better Byzantine towns in nearby Greece and Turkey.
Thracian tomb of Sveshtari: Too tiny. Maybe keep for horse nomad people.
Rock-hewn Churches of Ivanovo: Not much rock hewn there. It's no Petra.
Pirin National Park. Preservation endangered by skiing. Nothing spectacular.
Thracian tomb of Kazanlak. Not seen, but why?
Madara Rider. If it was 1000 years older (pre Roman) maybe.
Srebarna Nature Reserve. Why was this ever inscribed?

Author Assif
Partaker
#8 | Posted: 30 Jun 2021 10:51 | Edited by: Assif 
jonathanfr:
Frontiers of the Roman Empire: Saalburg

I would not say this is the main location. The Wall of Hadrian is much more significant and survived in a very good shape. The Saalburg is heavily reconstructed and I would say its main merit is as an educative site.

Let me continue with Austria, Israel and Uruguay.

Austria:

Keep: Vienna, Schönbrunn, Hallstatt-Dachstein (although as a mixed site), Simmering (but add the original touristic facilities at the internal buffer zone), Salzburg.

Shrink: Primeval Beech Forests (as agreed before, I do not know the Austrian component)
Prehistoric Pile Dwelling (others like in France or Italy are more significant)
Wachau (the Upper Rhine Valley is enough in the European vineyard CL category and is historically more significant)

Remove: Neusiedlersee - of only local importance

Israel:

Keep: Jerusalem, Masada, Biblical Tels (the selection of sites is good), Beth Guvrin, Beth Shearim, Nahal Mearot

In doubt:
Acre - The site is mostly about the remnants of the Crusader city. They are certainly well represented by this site, but considering the fact that the Crusaders did not stay in Israel for long and had little impact on its history I am not convinced this historical anecdote should be represented.
Tel Aviv - The international style is important, but the sites in Tel Aviv are often very poorly maintained. Numerous visual changes, including the addition of further floors in a completely different style, are commonplace. I actually wonder why it is not put on the In danger-list.

Remove:
Incense Route - only of local importance and much better represented by Petra
Bahai Temples - I don't think every religion needs to be represented. The sites are of purely religious importance.

Uruguay:

Keep: Fray Bentos

Remove: Colonia (of only local importance)

Author nfmungard
Partaker
#9 | Posted: 30 Jun 2021 17:22 
Assif:
Austria:

Keep: Vienna, Schönbrunn, Wachau, Hallstatt-Dachstein (although as a mixed site), Simmering (but add the original touristic facilities at the internal buffer zone), Salzburg.
more significant)

Keep
Graz - Really liked the place. Better than Salzburg.
Hallstatt-Dachstein

Merge
Schönbrunn/Wien - Both should be on the list, but essentially Schönbrunn is part of Vienna.

Shrink
Prehistoric Pile Dwellings All of Austria.
Primeval Beech Forests All of Austria.

Remove
Fertö/Neusiedlersee
Semmering Railway Not sold of importance of railway.
Wachau Cultural Landscape Nothing sticks in my mind what makes this special.
Salzburg Found Graz better.

Uruguay fully agree.

Israel cant comment.

Author Assif
Partaker
#10 | Posted: 30 Jun 2021 17:42 
nfmungard:
Semmering Railway Not sold of importance of railway.

It is not only the engineering achievement, but one of the first examples of modern tourism.

nfmungard:
Salzburg Found Graz better.

I haven't been to Graz, but Salzburg has a very scenic topography in addition to its historical significance.

nfmungard:
Merge
Schönbrunn/Wien

I could certainly live with that, but then why not similarly merge Paris with Versailles?

nfmungard:
Wachau Cultural Landscape Nothing sticks in my mind what makes this special.

It's basically a vineyard CL with some pretty historic villages. After giving it a second thought I agree with you the Upper Rhine Valley is more significant in this category and would suffice. Melk Abbey or Krems are worth a visit, but do not stand out as having OUV.

Author Assif
Partaker
#11 | Posted: 30 Jun 2021 17:56 
Unlike some forum members, there are barely any countries I have completed WHS-wise. Therefore, I will stick to sites I know without attempting to be comprehensive.

Italy:

Keep:
Naples, Pompeii (good choice of sites), Amalfi, Pisa (good choice of sites), Florence, Siena, Venice, Verona, Vicenza

Merge:
Rome and Vatican

Shrink:
Paestum (the Greek site is enough), Medici Villas (to the most influential ones)

Remove:
Genoa (not special enough)
Last Supper (not sure a single painting should be included, regardless of how significant it is)

Undecided:
Verona - a beautiful Italian historical city for sure, but what does it contribute to the list exactly?

Author nfmungard
Partaker
#12 | Posted: 1 Jul 2021 11:15 | Edited by: nfmungard 
On to Italy it is.

Keep:
Venice and its Lagoon, Pompei, Dolomites, Siena, Ravenna, Portovenere, Cinque Terre, and the Islands, Piazza del Duomo (Pisa), Villa Romana del Casale, Agrigento, Arab-Norman Palermo, Matera, Isole Eolie, San Gimignano, Etruscan Necropolises, The trulli of Alberobello,Naples, Rock Drawings in Valcamonica, Vicenza, Villa d'Este, Rhaetian Railway, Castel del Monte, Villa Adriana (Tivoli)

Merge
Rome Vatican- Agreed. For a long time I thought it's one.
Florence, Medici Villas and Gardens - Pick the villas in Florence and that's it.
Val d'Orcia, Pienza - It's a really nice area, but no need for two WHS.

Shrink
Longobards in Italy - All over Italy. Pick the best.
Primeval Beech Forests - Repeat offenders. Italy really not the place for forests.
Prehistoric Pile Dwellings - Repeat offenders

Remove
Assisi - Just a church town.
Costiera Amalfitana - Very nice area, but don't feel this needs to be a WHS.
Cilento and Vallo di Diano - Agrigento is enough.
Verona - Not sure either what this is.
Syracuse - Not sure what it adds over Agrigento. Amphitheatres are plentiful in Greece.
Val di Noto - Nice, but not sure these need to be on the list.
Mount Etna - Just a volcano. Eolian islands are enough.
Santa Maria delle Grazie - In the end they inscribed a single painting. Stunning, but a painting.
Urbino - I am not a renaissance man. It seems it was important in that context, but... I would eliminate it nonetheless.
Venetian Works of Defence - Fortresses... I would take it out. Would have to be reduced in any case.
Modena - Some stonework.
Residences of the Royal House of Savoy - Boring palaces. Turin is nice, though.
Genoa - More boring palaces.
Royal Palace at Caserta - Boring but huge.
Botanical Garden, Padua - Understand the idea, but not much left or to see.
Vineyard Landscape of Piedmont - So they have vine?
Monte San Giorgio - Not much tangible stuff to see.
Crespi d'Adda - Better industrialist towns elsewhere (UK).
The Prosecco Hills - A joke.
Ivrea - Not deserved.
Ferrara - Not cultured enough myself.
Mantua and Sabbioneta - Dont know what is different here from other Italian towns.
Sacri Monti of Piedmont and Lombardy - The sites themselves are pretty lackluster. It's the surrounding.
Aquileia[b] - A roman port town with nice mosaics. Nice.

Cant judge.
[b]Su Nuraxi di Barumini

Author jonathanfr
Partaker
#13 | Posted: 2 Jul 2021 05:20 
This whole exercise comes down to getting a Top List that we already have:
https://www.worldheritagesite.org/ranking/community

Author Assif
Partaker
#14 | Posted: 2 Jul 2021 05:56 
jonathanfr:
This whole exercise comes down to getting a Top List that we already have:
https://www.worldheritagesite.org/ranking/community

I am not that sure about that. Some sites wouldn't make it to my top list, but I still recognise their significance for the WHS list (Carmel Caves for example).
Others, like Verona, I would rate high, but I still do not think they should be on the list.

Author Astraftis
Partaker
#15 | Posted: 3 Jul 2021 12:41 | Edited by: Astraftis 
nfmungard:
Astraftis:
Do you also consider restructuring of the list, as you maybe hint with regard to Hanseatic cities? That is, instead of having them each as its own site, to have only one (super)site under the same label. This could sometimes be done because of mere geographical grounds. After some 50 years, I notice that i nsome parts the List has grown disorganically (the Roman limes might be a case).

Frankly, I find most other Hanseatic towns to be different enough: Visby, Bryggen, Riga, Tallinn, Novgorod are all distinct. The German ones plus Torun/Gdansk arent.

They are different, but if the reasons for their inscription are similar, i.e. come down to being good representatives of medieval, Hanseatic towns, I can well envision them to represent just different facets of a same supersite like "Hanseatic towns of the Baltic (and beyond)"!

nfmungard:
On to Italy it is.

nfmungard:
Mount Etna - Just a volcano. Eolian islands are enough.

nfmungard:
Mantua and Sabbioneta - Dont know what is different here from other Italian towns.
Sacri Monti of Piedmont and Lombardy - The sites themselves are pretty lackluster. It's the surrounding.

nfmungard:
Modena - Some stonework.

Oh, I have to say that I am at the same time a little bit shocked by but also appreciative of your terseness about some of the probably less brilliant WHSs! :-D

And since you have undertaken this kind of brainstorming and already dealing with Italy, let me try the shrinking of the list. Unfortunately I am stil la long shot from visiting all, so I'll try to stick to those I know or for which I feel quite confident.
So, te list at hand, let's begin: Italy

- Keep (= convincing):
Agrigento - Palermo - Dolomiti - Etruscan Necropolises (Cerveteri & Tarquinia) - Firenze - Isole Eolie - Mantova & Sabbioneta - Matera - Modena - Etna - Pisa - Pompei - Rhaetian Railway - Valcamonica - Roma (and Vatican, it's just the same were it not for diplomatic reasons, I suspect) - Siena - Trulli di Alberobello - Venezia - Verona - Vicenza and Palladian architecture - Villa Adriana

About Verona: it is a wonderful city (and the aesthetic criterium alone is important) which truly showcases all stages of its development, as per the official description. Its medieval city center is a gem. I think it's a deserved inscription, even if one might discuss about the exact criterium.
About Modena: the cathedral is one of the most outstanding example of the Romanic style, if not the best (but I might be biased or ignorant o nthe subject). This alone can make the inscription.
About Mantova & Sabbioneta: I could agree on Mantua regarding its OUV, but I think the main part is Sabbioneta here, the attempt at building a "perfect city", an interesting fruit of that crazy century the '500 was.

- Remove (= perplexing):
Aquileia - Assisi - Genoa (it should rather include the whole historical town) - Santa Maria delle Grazie (the more I reason about it, the less reason there is to have a painting, how famous it may be, on the List. I was musing of writing a short review about that) - Prosecco (don't know why it happened. But good places for a marriage) - Urbino - Cinque terre (again very charming, but, in nfmungard's style, I would say "just some more picturesque villages" :-) ) - Vineyards of Piedmont

- Shrink (= refocus):
Pile Dwellings - I have to admit I am a fan. I am ready to defend those ol' pile dwellings with drawn sword. But it is true that there is a big gap between those sites that can be enjoyed by the simple visitor, and those that, even if of capital improtance, are nearly invisibile (or inaccessible). So, more than shrinking the series, I would just say a ranking in different (A, B, C...) categories is needed. My "research" is still ongoing, but I think the one on the Isolino Virginia, near Varese, might be an A, alongside Fiavé (which however I am missing, so only on hearsay).
Sacri monti - Some of them are spectacular, others aren't. I understand the inscription, but maybe only 2-3 should be kept. But again, I understand the choice of having them all on board, it helps highlighting their different facets.
Venetian works of defence - It seems to me that the most interesting sites are outside of Italy, so a shrinking would actually remove this WHS from Italy. But Bergamo might be discussed as an inscription on its own without needing to cling on its walls. But now that I think of it, Palmanova could als ostay alone.

- Uncertain:
Castel del Monte - Aenigmatic and architectonically striking, but what is its OUV?
Giardini botanici di Padova - It's probably more history than site
Crespi d'Adda - It has its charm and I found it significant, but maybe I am missing other similar sites
Langobards in Italy - Significant, but maybe too sparse: it represents an important turn in Italian history, but it is not so clear how. Anyway, it would be either everything or nothing
Villa d'Este - Wonderful garden, wonderful position, "normal" palace. But is it enough? Probably a reformulation as Tivoli, with both Villas and the historical center combined, would be a solid WHS.

I am not confident enough about the ones I have not mentioned.

----

All in all, I would keep at least 21 + partially 2.5 + maybe 5 sites out of 55.

Agreement with Assif: at least 8; with nfmungard: at least 16.

Page  Page 1 of 2:  1  2  Next » 
General discussions about WHS www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / General discussions about WHS /
 Shrinking the List

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 ®
 ⇑