1

The Getty Conservation Institute Field Trip Report By F. LeBlanc, Head, Field Projects Archaeological Institute of America 107th Annual Meeting, Montreal, Canada January 5-8, 2006

Panoramic view of downtown Montreal from Mount Royal

With 2,300 participants, 55 sessions and over 300 papers, the American Institute of Archaeology 107th Annual Meeting was certainly a success in terms of participation. The snow, freezing rain and cold weather did cause problems for some participants to reach Montreal, but in the end everyone got there and participated to this interesting conference offering a wide variety of interesting activities. With so many simultaneous sessions, it is impossible to give a good overview of all that happened. I have chosen to focus my report on a few sessions, especially the one that Tom Roby moderated. It was entitled: Archaeology and Conservation: An interdisciplinary and Collaborative Endeavor. Kecia Fong, David Myers, Tom and I gave papers during this session, along with Alexandra Cleworth, AIA Board member and Rebecca Duggan from Parks Canada. Kent Severson, AIA Member at Large, and Neil Brady, Cambridge U. offered their comments on the session papers.

AAbboouutt tthhee AArrcchhaaeeoollooggiiccaall IInnssttiittuuttee ooff AAmmeerriiccaa ((AAIIAA)) The AIA is North America's oldest and largest organization devoted to the world of archaeology. The Institute is a nonprofit group founded in 1879 and chartered by the United States Congress in 1906. Today, the AIA has nearly 9,000 members belonging to 102 local societies in the United States, Canada, and overseas. The organization is unique because it counts among its members professional archaeologists, students, and many others from all walks of life. This diverse group is united by a shared passion for archaeology and its role in furthering human knowledge. The AIA exists to promote archaeological inquiry and public understanding of the material record of the human past worldwide. The Institute is committed to preserving the world's archaeological resources and cultural heritage for the benefit of people in the present and in the future. Believing that greater understanding of the

2

past enhances our shared sense of humanity and enriches our existence, the AIA seeks to educate people of all ages about the significance of archaeological discovery. The Institute's professional members have conducted fieldwork in Africa, Asia, Europe, Australia, and North and South America. The AIA has further promoted archaeological studies by founding research centers and schools in seven countries and maintains close relations with these institutions, including the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, the School of Classical Studies at the American Academy in Rome, the American Schools of Oriental Research, and others. AIA members are dedicated to the greater understanding of archaeology, the protection and preservation of the world's archaeological resources and the information they contain, and to the encouragement and support of archaeological research and publication. The AIA reflects these beliefs in the various products and services it offers.

AAIIAA AAnnnnuuaall MMeeeettiinngg -- MMoonnttrreeaall The AIA held its 107th Annual Meeting in Montréal, Canada, January 5-8, 2006. It was held at the Palais des congrès convention center in the heart of Montreal.

Palais des congrès in downtown Montreal, venue of the AIA 107th Annual Meeting

AIA opening reception at Palais des congrès

AIA 2006 Program

Jane C. Walbaum, AIA President

Palais des congrès Main lobby to meeting rooms

Inside Palais des congrès, a structure built over a major highway in Montreal

3

SSEESSSSIIOONN 11BB:: WWoorrkksshhoopp

SSttaattiissttiiccaall IInnddiiccaattoorrss ffoorr SSiittee MMaannaaggeemmeenntt aanndd CCoonnsseerrvvaattiioonn

MODERATORS: Simon Ellis and Lydia Deloumeaux, UNESCO Institute for Statistics PANELISTS: Simon Ellis, UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Dr. Willem Willens ICOMOS/ICAHM, Anne Lemaistre and Sophia Labadie, World Heritage Center, Michele Lita Grenfeld, World Monuments Fund, and Gabor Vereczi, World Tourism Organization. Introduction to the Workshop Simon Ellis opened this workshop by saying a few words about UNESCO’s Institute for Statistics. Based in Montreal, it is the only central UNESCO unit outside Paris. It is responsible for all domains of UNESCO activity, including cultural statistics and it concentrates on collecting internationally comparable data from all countries. It works closely with the World Heritage Center and is helping it to develop indicators to determine the state of conservation of sites on the World Heritage List. Since international organizations such as the World Heritage Center, the World Monuments Fund and national government agencies responsible for foreign aid have to make decisions as to where to invest their limited resources, they are looking for indicators that will give them some sense of priority. The level of threat to world significant heritage sites is one of them. But what are the thresholds? What are the early warnings signs that something is about to go wrong? How can indicators be used to assess the threats to sites? The workshop should address some of these questions and help us to decide how to react:

• What should we expect to happen after the archaeologists leave a site? • What is the responsibility of those who uncover the remains? • How to measure site maintenance, especially for international purposes?

Indicators and the World Heritage Convention Anne Lemaistre and Sophia Labadie briefly presented the workings of the World Heritage Convention and how sites are nominated to it. One of the Convention’s tools to foster international support for endangered sites is the List of World Heritage Sites in Danger. For example, the site of Kotor in former Yugoslavia was put on this List immediately following the major earthquake that hit the region. Concerning the properties on the World Heritage List in Danger, the Convention’s Committee asked the World Heritage Center: • To assess the impact of the threats • To adopt a program for corrective measures • To evaluate the feasibility of undertaking corrective measures (human

resources, financial resources) • To define benchmarks/performance indicators to evaluate the success of the

corrective measures It is on the basis of this information that a property will be removed from the WH List in Danger if it is no longer under threat.

The Canadiens is Montreal’s internatio-nally reknown hockey team

Simon Ellis, Head of Section, UNESCO’s Institute for Statistics

Anne Lemaistre from the World Heritage Center in Paris

Sophia Labadie from the World Heritage Center in Paris

4

With over 800 properties on the World Heritage List, the question of indicators of their state of conservation has become important for the Center that has to decide where to allocate its resources and efforts. For this purpose, the WHC in collaboration with ICOMOS published a small report in 2001 on indicators for world heritage cities. The WHC is preparing a report on the State of World Heritage and it should be available in 2006. The States Parties to the Convention must produce a periodic report (every five years) on the condition of the properties located on their territory. These reports tend to focus on threats to the properties as indicators of the condition of their conservation. Regrettably, threats are not systematically reported and this tends to lead to a reactive approach as opposed to a pro-active one for conservation. The WHC has developed an extensive database of threats to world heritage sites on the basis of the information contained in these reports and other sources and is working closely with the UNESCO Institute for Statistics to develop a scientific approach to indicators that will determine what data to collect and how it will be interpreted. One important lesson drawn from this collaboration is that it is crucial for a user to be very clear about what he will do with the information gathered from a specific indicator. If he can’t say exactly and clearly how this information will be used and how it will help to better manage a property, then no effort should be spent to gather this data. Some of the indicators that the WHC is looking at are: • Number of sites that have been the subject of a periodic report and that have a

Management Plan • Number / percentage of professionals working at a WH site that have received

training in conservation • Level of democratic participation of local populations in the selection of sites for

inclusion on Tentative Lists and in the nomination of sites for inclusion on the World Heritage List

Other indicators include: Authenticity • How many reconstructions of archaeological remains in the inscribed area? • How many anastylosis of archaeological remains? • How much destruction of archaeological remains? Integrity • Area of encroachment • Ratio area of encroachment/inscribed area Management • Size of core and buffer zones • Date of Management Plan (or system) • Number of times the Management Plan (or system) was revised Human resources • Ratio staff/size of site • Number of staff dedicated to conservation • Permanent, temporary, voluntary staff • Number of workshops to train staff

Eritrea –Massawa historic town on WMF’s 100 Watch List

Italy – Civita di Bagnoregio on WMF’s 100 Watch List

Anastylosis (stones are put back in more or less their original position)

Italy – Temple Portunus on WMF’s 100 Watch List

5

Financial • Annual budget, running costs, capital expenditures • Amount of national and international financial assistance • Number of conservation/restoration projects Maintenance/threats • Quality of water, air • Level of water table • Frequency of archaeological area cleaning • Frequency of vegetation clearing • Products used for cleaning • Number of visitors • Number of monitoring missions • Crime rates, graffiti etc. Socio-economic • Number of resident population in core area, buffer zone • Number of indigenous people • Average amount of income per capita per year • Number of residents involved in conservation work • Number of residents generating income from tourism activities Research • Number of national, international research projects • Number of publications concerning the archaeological site To assess progress in management effectiveness for natural sites, the World Bank uses a “score card” system. A. Lemaistre described the system and suggested that it could be useful to examine if such a system could be used for heritage sites. The presentation concluded with the following questions:

1. How to articulate qualitative indicators and quantitative indicators? 2. Should statistical indicators be attached to:

a. Nomination dossiers b. State of conservation reports (every 5 years)

3. Who collects the data? Indicators to Monitor the State of Conservation of World Heritage Sites: A Discussion

Dr. W. Willems, C. Rivet and D. Comer prepared the discussion paper. Dr. Willems reviewed briefly the steps for nominating cultural properties to the World Heritage List. He discussed the various categories of archaeological sites that appear on the WHL and proposed the outline of a model for indicators. Categories of archaeological sites that appear on the WHL

1. Archaeological sites that are of outstanding universal value 2. As components of a site of outstanding universal value 3. As a series of sites that together constitute a site of outstanding universal

value Based on the concepts detailed in the WH Committee Operational Guidelines and on archaeological professional principles, four factors can be identified to determine the state of conservation:

Mauritania – Chinguetti mosque on WMF’s 100 Watch List

USA – Columbus circle on WMF’s 100 Watch List

Prof. Dr. Willem J.H. Willems, State Inspectorate for Cultural Heritage & Archaeology, The Hague, The Netherlands and V.P. of ICOMOS Committee on Archaeological Heritage Management (ICAHM)

6

• Physical integrity - because the wholeness and intactness of the WHS is essential to maintain integrity;

• Knowledge (scientific value) - because sources of information is key for authenticity. These include records and access for further research;

• Consciousness (social and cultural value) - because awareness of the outstanding universal value is key in maintaining the site’s value, its authenticity, and its integrity;

• Visibility (aesthetic and symbolic value) - because it is key in determining value and raising awareness, in situ preservation and presentation.

Model Example: Petra, Jordan

• Monitor representative tomb facades for spalling, cracking, crumbling, graffiti; and changes in color or texture through a variety of instruments

• Monitor landscape for encroachment. To be formulated with stakeholders:

• Monitoring protocols, including indicators, instruments, and standards for monitoring;

• Monitoring locales sufficient to detect unacceptable changes to key resources, visitor experiences, satisfaction of human populations, and visitor experiences

• Reporting procedures; and • Recommended management actions to be taken when indicators exceed

specific standards. In concluding, Dr. Willems suggested that indicators for the state of conservation be case specific, and not generic or “international”. But the ensuing discussion concluded differently. There is a case for developing international indicators because they are needed for international organizations (UNESCO, World Bank, WMF etc.) and for government agencies that contribute aid internationally to conservation efforts. An example for such an indicator could be the global impact of environmental changes on archaeological sites. Are there regions in the world that are more threatened than others by this phenomenon? The discussion concluded that there might be a need for two exercises: one for international requirements and one that is more sites specific. Indicators of Sustainable Tourism and Congestion Management at Cultural Sites Gabor Vereczi of the World Tourism Organization, began by presenting the following graph (please excuse the fuzziness) that demonstrates the impressive growth of tourism over the past fifty years and projections for the next fifteen years. In a nutshell, tourism is going to continue to grow, especially at historic sites and we in the conservation community will not be able to stop it. Therefore, we must understand it much better than we do at this time and try to mitigate its impact on our resources.

Petra in Jordan

Petra – Indicators could be stone changes in color or texture measured through a variety of instruments

Christophe Rivet from Parks Canada

Gabor Vereczi, Sustainable Development of Tourism, World Tourism Organization, Madrid, Spain

7

From the point of view of the WTO, the fact that tourism is a threat or an opportunity depends essentially on management. Managers need to know many things about tourism at their sites:

1. How many tourists come, when do they come in most numbers, where are they from, how do they reach the site, are they satisfied with their visit?

2. Is there enough capacity to handle them (staff, services, facilities?)? 3. What are the damages caused by tourists, how serious are they, where and

how do they occur exactly? 4. How much revenue is generated from tourism and from what sources? 5. To what extent do local communities benefit from tourism to the site, how

many local persons, or families are involved in tourism-related activities? 6. Is there an adequate tourism management plan for the site? 7. How about cooperation with local and state authorities, private

stakeholders? Good indicators must be linked to management issues. Heritage sites cannot and should not be managed in isolation. The authorities responsible must adopt a “destination” and regional approach to tourism management. To do this properly, they need sustainability indicators that are basic tools for tourism planning, management and monitoring. To identify and measure the entire range of impacts (environmental, social and economic) that tourism can have in a particular area or society accurate information is needed. Sustainability indicators are information sets that are formally selected for a regular use to measure changes in key assets and issues of tourism destinations and sites. Here are some examples of sustainability indicators for natural sites:

• Early warning indicators (species disappearance) • Indicators of stresses on the system (crime rates) • Measures of current state of tourism (occupancy, satisfaction) • Measures of tourism impacts (rate of degradation, change in property

prices) • Measures of management efforts (cleanup costs, repairs) • Measures of management effect and performance (changed pollution levels,

more returning tourists)

Tourism congestion management - So many tourists crowd major historic sites that the quality of their experien-ce is compromised

Norway – Sandviken Bay on WMF’s 100 Watch List

Peru – Cajamarquila on WMF’s 100 Watch List

Syria – Tell Mozan on WMF’s 100 Watch List

8

One must look at two types of measurements for indicators: Quantitative measurements:

• Raw data (number of tourists visiting a site/year/month, volume of waste generated)

• Ratios (ratio of the number of tourists to local residents, nationals/internationals)

• Percentages (% of trained staff, % change in visitor numbers, expenditures) Qualitative or normative measurements:

• Category indices (level of protection) • Normative indicators (existence of tourism management plan, yes/no) • Nominal indicators (e.g. eco-labels, certifications) • Option-based indicators (level of satisfaction of tourists, or local residents

The key issues to monitor on tourism at cultural heritage sites are:

• Level of protection (legislations, designations) • Use levels and intensity • Visitor management and infrastructure (congestion management) • Damages, deterioration (caused by tourism) • Tourism’s support for site conservation (revenue generation) • Visitor’s profile, satisfaction and perception • Benefits to local communities (satisfaction of locals)

A logical process to follow could be:

1. Determine the goals and objectives of both management and stakeholders 2. Formulate a set of performance indicators based on the goals and

objectives 3. Develop a plan of implementation 4. Implement the plan 5. Monitor the site to determine if these standards are being met 6. Mitigate problems if the standards are not being met

Gabor Vereczi went on to share information on congestion management, congestion control at archaeological sites, described indicators for tourism support for site conservation and for assessing damages or deterioration caused by tourists, for assessing issues related to visitor infrastructure, for controlling use intensity and for influencing tourism demand. He also offered suggestions to monitor visitors profile and experience satisfaction, and the benefits to local communities, He offered WTO’s suggestion to develop an indicators program for heritage sites:

1. Define an indicators framework (baseline and supplementary indicators) 2. Develop pilot projects at selected heritage sites, by adapting the WTO

indicators workshop methodology a. Detailed case studies (demonstrating good practices) b. Test the indicators c. Train site managers on monitoring evaluation and congestion

management practices 3. Consolidate the framework, produce guidelines and manuals 4. Upscale the indicators application (replication), exchange of experiences,

periodic revision.

Montreal History museum, Place Youville – formerly a fire station

Montreal – St-Amable café in the old town

Montreal – Notre-Dame Basilica

Montreal – Notre-Dame Basilica interior

9

He concluded with the following slide that describes two recent publications prepared by WTO on these issues: Indicators of Sustainable Development for Tourism Destinations and Gestión de la saturación turistica en sitios de interés natural y cultural.

Michele Lita Berenfeld, Program Manager from the World Monuments Fund briefly described the organization. World Monuments Fund (WMF) is the foremost private, non-profit organization dedicated to the preservation of historic art and architecture worldwide. Since it’s founding in 1965, the New York-based WMF has worked with local communities and partners to stem the loss of more than 430 irreplaceable sites in more than 80 countries. In addition to preserving individual endangered sites, WMF carries out its work through an array of regional and global programs. Prominent among these is the World Monuments Watch, with its biennial list of 100 most endangered sites. Assembled by an international panel of experts, the list identifies 100 of the world’s most imperiled historic architectural and cultural sites, bringing them to international attention and helping to raise funds for their rescue. For many of these threatened cultural treasures, inclusion on the Watch list offers the only hope for survival. How sites are selected The list of 100 Most Endangered Sites is prepared every two years from the hundreds of sites nominated. When RFAs are received, they are first reviewed by WMF staff and special advisors who are experienced, leading professionals in the field. WMF then convenes an international selection panel of nine experts to evaluate the nominations and select the 100 sites. Panel members represent areas of expertise based on the types of nominations received. Previous panels have included architects, historians, conservationists, and archaeologists, with experience spanning every continent and historic epoch and representing institutions such as UNESCO, ICOMOS, ICCROM, the Getty Conservation Institute, Harvard University, University College London, Europa Nostra, Patrimoine sans Frontières, and the Asia Society.

Afghanistan - Haji Piyada mosque on WMF 100 Watch List

Bangladesh - Sonargaon Panam City on WMF 100 Watch List

Michelle Lita Berenfeld, World Monuments Fund, New York, USA

Brazil - Convent San Francisco in Olinda on WMF 100 Watch List

Cameroon – Bafut Palace Shrine on WMF 100 Watch List

10

Criteria for selection: On the basis of... • Highest architectural and/or historical significance • National-level significance; good example of type or style • Lesser architectural and/or historical significance, Local only

Significance (3 pts); Urgency (3 pts); Viability (3 pts). Additional considerations (1 pt)

• Contribution to larger conservation field, addresses key issue(s) • Geographic area, culture or theme under-represented in Watch • Furthers key aspects WMF institutional goals & mission

To create this list of endangered sites, WMF must assess threat in relation to significance. This will vary according to whom makes the assessment. To illustrate the difficulty of making these judgments, Michele used three examples from Turkey: Ephesus gets the highest points for significance

Ephesus is the best-preserved classical city on the Mediterranean, and perhaps the best place in the world to get the feeling for what life was like in Roman times. As a strategic coastal gateway to the Eastern World, this Ionian refuge grew to be the second largest city in the Roman Empire, the site of a Christian shrine, and one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. It has suffered a great deal of loss and

most of the funds generated by visitors to the site go to a central government fund and are not reinvested in the site’s conservation. Aphrodisias gets the highest points for urgency

Famous in antiquity for the sanctuary of its patron goddess Aphrodite, Aphrodisias enjoyed a long and prosperous existence from the first century B.C. until the Middle Ages. Ironically, the remarkable level of preservation at this magnificent Greco-Roman site — where mosaic floors, painting, and finely carved marble decoration are common — leaves it especially vulnerable.

Zeugma gets the highest points for visibility

The twin cities of Zeugma, Seleucia and Apamea, straddled the Euphrates River, the former located on the Syrian side of the river, and the latter on the eastern, or Mesopotamian shore. Founded by Seleucus I around 300 BC and named for himself and his Persian wife, they were united by a bridge, the only permanent crossing of the Euphrates between the Taurus Mountains and Babylonia. The Turkish government in the late 1990s built a

major dam project. The site will be flooded. Because of this, it received a great deal

Ephesus is the best place in the world to get the feeling for what life was like in Roman times

Aphrodisias enjoyed a long and prosperous existence from the first century B.C. until the Middle Ages

Rescue archaeology at the site of Zeugma before it is flooded

11

of media publicity and rescue archaeology was begun. The archaeological information on this site is far less significant than the two previous sites. But when it is flooded, it will become inaccessible. If you have limited funds to donate, to which one of these three sites will you donate them? For what reasons? Which one takes priority? Do we need two different sets of indicators? One for significance and one for threats? How do we explain our choices to the public to ensure its continued support for this cause?

SSEESSSSIIOONN 22GG:: CCoollllooqquuiiuumm

AArrcchhaaeeoollooggyy aanndd CCoonnsseerrvvaattiioonn:: AAnn IInntteerrddiisscciipplliinnaarryy aanndd CCoollllaabboorraattiivvee EEnnddeeaavvoorr ORGANIZERS: Alexandra Cleworth, Khiid Survey Project, and Thomas Roby, Getty Conservation Institute. DISCUSSANT: Kent Severson, AIA Member at Large, Neil Brady, Cambridge U. Planning for Archaeological Site Conservation at Ba Dinh, Hanoi Kecia L. Fong presented this paper prepared in collaboration with Jeffrey W. Cody. Kecia presented the key questions from Ba Dinh, the site context, the key issues at Ba Dinh, recent developments and implications and conclusions. Ba Dinh is located in the center of Hanoi, the capital of Vietnam. It is an archaeological site recently unearthed that was a former administrative center, occupied since the 7th century. Why is it posing a challenge? Essentially, because it calls into question traditional chronology of Hanoi; the location is at the heart of the ancient Citadel; it faces strong urban development pressures and it is a very large site. The key issues fall into the following categories:

• Contemporary politics Many political issues concerned the site’s discovery in 2002 because it was the designated location of the new Parliament building and its discovery called into question the 2010 celebrations and the 2020 master plan; its management and how it all fits in the upcoming Party Congress scheduled for 2006 also raise serious political issues.

• Archaeological excavation and research Issues concerning the speed of excavation and inventorying and analysis of thousands of artifacts need to be addressed. The site is 48,000 sq. m. of which only 19,000 sq. m. were excavated at Aug. 2004.

• Site Stabilization • Conservation • Tourism & economic development • Interpretation & presentation • Competing values

The implications of the discovery and presentation of this very important site for the Vietnamese are:

United States – Ennis Brown House on WMF Watch List

Egypt – Tarabay al Sharify on WMF Watch List

Ephesus

Aphrodisias - Temple of Aphrodite

Excavations at Zeugma

Kecia L. Fong, Education Group, GCI

Cleaning of artifacts at Ba Dihn

Site excavation at Ba Dihn

Drainage is a major issue at Ba Dihn

Ba Dinh site border in 2005

12

How can archaeologists effectively integrate conservation methodologies into their work? Ba Dinh suggests the following:

• Assess site conditions and contexts (e.g. physical, historical, management) with consideration towards future conservation needs

• Collaborate with conservation professionals and other decisions makers to identify, develop and refine those needs.

How can professionals best negotiate a diverse range of objectives at high profile archaeological sites? Ba Dinh suggests the following:

• Initially, create an interdisciplinary and collaborative team • Clarify the aims, purpose and terms of the collaboration and define the

methodology for the planning process • Identify stakeholders and multiple values of a site • Determine conservation problems and priorities for immediate mid and long

term strategies for the site before large scale excavation begins • Periodically review those strategies in light of changing variables

If we consider that site conservation is something new to Vietnam the fact that the local authorities have sought the input of conservators for this site at such an early stage of its development is a major achievement. The process of negotiation has begun and could lead to a model opportunity for conservation and archaeology in Vietnam. Planning for Protection: Collaborative Strategies at Baldan Baraivan in Mongolia Alexandra Cleworth, Khiid Survey Project, presented the site at Baldan Baraivan in Mongolia. It was built in the early 1700s. It was destroyed in 1937 during the Chinese revolution and the monks were all killed. Understanding and conserving this site poses a series of complex issues for archaeologists as well as conservators. First, the criteria to select what should be conserved were determined through a detailed survey. During the process of this survey, the local inhabitants brought various artifacts to the archaeologists. They had hid these during the past seventy years. Unfortunately, the artifacts were now totally out of context and that made it very difficult for the professionals to understand their importance and meaning. Also, the locals repainted many sacred historic figures or statues. Original ancient manuscripts from the site are being sold on E-Bay on the Internet. Fortunately, many are still available on site and have been scanned; the scans are sold as reproductions as opposed to the originals. The funds raised are used for the restoration of the original manuscripts. To complicate things, the landscape surrounding the site contains precious prehistoric artifacts that need to be conserved in situ. This case illustrated the complexities of conserving such a site. The authorities need to enable legislation that will protect the site and the artifacts. Planning for tourism that is increasing every year needs to be combined with archaeology and conservation. The key to conservation in this case is to educate and involve the local population. This is not an easy task considering that there are only 1.5 person per square kilometer in this area and that each person is outnumbered 12:1 by animals!

Baldan Baraivan, Mongolia

Baldan Baraivan

Yellow Temple facade

Deer stones are prehistoric artifacts that are part of the landscape

Deer Stones

13

The Iraq Cultural Heritage Conservation Initiative: Collaboration of the Getty Conservation Institute and the World Monuments Fund with the State Board of Antiquities and Heritage of Iraq David Myers presented this paper prepared in collaboration with Mary Hardy, and Neville Agnew, from the Getty Conservation Institute, and Gaetano Palumbo, of the World Monuments Fund. Known as the Cradle of Civilization, Iraq contains more than ten thousand recorded archaeological sites and monuments. In addition, many thousands of sites have not been excavated. Following the 1991 Persian Gulf War, widespread looting decimated hundreds of these sites. Postwar sanctions prohibited Iraq from receiving international assistance, leaving the country's cultural patrimony in the hands of a severely depleted antiquities staff hampered by inadequate expertise and funding. Following the 2003 war, the principal focus of media attention has been on the looting and destruction of museums and archives in Baghdad and other cities. Less attention has been given to the destruction and endangerment of an untold number of archaeological sites, among them the ancient sites of Babylon, Nineveh, Ctesiphon, and the World Heritage Site of Hatra. In addition to the loss of artifacts, looting has resulted in the destruction of the region's archaeological record — a significant loss to the world's cultural heritage. A number of Iraq's important historic architectural structures and complexes have been damaged or are endangered. These include the minaret of al-Nuri Mosque in Mosul, the spiral minaret of al-Mutawakkil's Mosque in Samarra, and the Qushla Administrative Complex — a group of Ottoman buildings in central Baghdad that served as the seat of government agencies, including ministries and courts. This complex and others were looted in the civil unrest following the 2003 conflict. In response to this situation, the GCI and the World Monuments Fund (WMF) signed an agreement in March of 2004 with the Iraq Ministry of Culture and the Iraq State Board of Antiquities and Heritage (SBAH) to establish the GCI-WMF Iraq Cultural Heritage Conservation Initiative. In its work, the Initiative is collaborating with Iraqi officials and colleagues and is coordinating its efforts with those of UNESCO and other cultural institutions. This long-term initiative aims to mitigate threats to and repair damage sustained by Iraq's cultural heritage, and to rebuild the country's professional conservation and heritage management capacity. Last fall the GCI and the World Monuments Fund (WMF) completed the second training course in the compilation of site data and the inventory and rapid assessment of archaeological and historic sites. The course, attended by 23 participants, two-thirds of whom were repeat participants from last year’s course, was very well received. Fieldwork was conducted at the Amman Citadel, the Umm er-Rasas World Heritage Site, and at other historic and archaeological sites in the Amman area, thanks to the generous assistance of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. In the face of the continued looting of Iraqi archaeological sites, the training focused on techniques, methodologies, and tools for accurately locating sites and recording their condition, and on developing a national computer-based inventory of sites. David went on to describe the scope and type of data being captured in this database and how it will be used.

David Myers, Getty Conservation Institute

Iraq – Samarra

The Minaret was used for target practice

Widespread looting has decimated hundreds of archaeological sites in Iraq

14

Lessons Learned in Mosaic Conservation: A Report on the 9th Conference of the International Committee for the Conservation of Mosaics (ICCM) Thomas Roby presented this paper prepared in collaboration with Martha Demas and Elsa Bourguignon, Getty Conservation Institute. The International Committee for the Conservation of Mosaics (ICCM) held its ninth triennial conference November 29–December 3, 2005, in Hammamet, Tunisia. The conference explored various aspects of the practice. Evaluating Mosaic Practice The evaluation of past interventions and practices is essential to improving current and future practices but it is largely depending on accurate and accessible documentation. The practice of mosaic conservation has evolved as a field from one of ...

• Limited options (detachment) • Materials (cement) • Values (aesthetic) • Stakeholders (professionals)

To one involving ...

• Complex decision-making and planning with a range of viable in situ options (both temporary and long term)

• The use of scientific methods and compatible materials • The recognition of multiple values and varied stakeholders

Conservation interventions are sustainable only when there is a clear vision, an effective management structure and planning process in place, trained personnel, and regular maintenance and monitoring. Decisions about how to treat a mosaic must be made on a case-by-case basis (there is no single formula that can be applied to all mosaics on a site) and are the result of thorough condition assessment and are based on defined criteria and guidelines. An understanding of causes of deterioration to in situ mosaics requires recognition of unsolved problems, implementation of long-term and in-depth investigations, and wide dissemination of their results. Documenting and Assessing Sites at Risk Mosaic corpora that include conservation information, and risk assessment strategies undertaken at national or regional levels can be significant tools for the conservation and management of the mosaic heritage. It is important to establish systematic documentation standards and protocols to facilitate decision-making and improve practice. Attention should be given to the development of documentation strategies that permit improved sharing of information, especially through more effective use of digital technologies and the web. Archaeologists and conservators must work together effectively on rescue excavations to ensure that decisions taken are those that are best for the heritage at risk. Managing Sites with Mosaics There is a clear trend emerging to look at sites holistically and to undertake more systematic assessment and planning before arriving at decisions regarding conservation and management of sites. Stakeholder participation is crucial in gaining support for in situ preservation and in the prevention of looting. Techniques

Tom Roby, Getty Conservation Institute

There were 2,300 participans, 55 sessions and 300 papers during the AIA Annual Meeting

Technicians cleaning an ancient mosaic during ICCM conference in Hammamet, Tunisia

One of the early means to conserve mosaics was to lift them and embed them in reinfor-ced concrete slabs

15

such as GIS may be useful in documenting, monitoring and managing the mosaic heritage. There are multiple options for mosaic conservation that include conservation in situ, detachment and replacement in situ, detachment and display in a museum, and reburial. These choices should be made through a systematic study of the entire site considering the condition of each mosaic and its treatment history, the environment, the desirability of presentation to public and cost. Better and more comparable information is needed regarding the relative costs of various types of treatment in order to make informed decisions regarding site conservation. Further research may be required regarding reburial methods and the nature of the reburial environment. Sheltering Mosaics The assessment of existing shelters (regarding, for example, protection, cost and maintenance) can lead to a better understanding of the criteria that affect shelter performance and provide valuable information for the design of new shelters. Shelter evaluation should be based on a study of the nature and rate of deterioration in relationship to the environmental conditions in the sheltered space. Various types of monitoring strategies may be used to better understand conditions and to assess risks in the sheltered environment. Decisions making regarding the design of a shelter must be informed by a number of factors including performance criteria, stakeholder concerns, interpretation and presentation issues, and cost. The real cost of a shelter includes not just the initial cost but that of “cost in use”, i.e. the cost over the life of a shelter to maintain it in good condition. Too often, the need to maintain a shelter is overlooked. Shelters cannot be considered in isolation. A shelter affects the entire site, in terms of condition, appearance and use. Long-term planning can prevent unintended consequences. Training of Conservation Practitioners Training is needed at all levels, from that of mosaic technician to conservator and site manager. The sustainability of a training initiative will be based on a number of factors. These include:

• The use of tools, materials and techniques appropriate to the resources and skills in the local environment.

• A training effort that is not confirmed to a single experience, but involves a continuous effort over time.

• The existence of a management context in which those trained will find employment and support once their training is complete.

Regional, international and institutional partnerships can be of great value in training initiatives. Partnering can take many forms including collaboration in national or regional training initiatives as well as the exchange of personnel or periods of supervised work in centers of expertise. The coordination of training activity regarding mosaics conservation and the larger issues of site management is increasingly important. This will allow for the better use of resources, will prevent duplication of effort, and will facilitate the sharing of didactic materials and strategies. 2005 ICCM Recommendations Taking into consideration the great need for maintenance of mosaics left in situ in the open air or under shelters, the ICCM encourages the various managers of

The assessment of existing shelters can lead to a better understanding of the criteria that affect shelter performance and provide valuable information for the design of new shelters

Training is needed at all levels, from that of mosaic technician to conservator and site manager

Mosaics can be preserved in situ if they are maintained; right: before cleaning; left: after cleaning

Dinu Bumbaru, ICOMOS Secretary General

16

archaeological sites to systematically measure during the next three years the cost to maintain them in good condition while presenting them to the public. Recognizing that numerous training programs, without any connection between them, have been launched in various countries during the last years, the ICCM encourages the undertaking of a needs assessment for training in the Mediterranean countries in order to eventually launch a coordinated effort to improve the level of knowledge and intervention of the professional staff of these countries. Values Based Heritage Management: Four Case Studies that Illustrate the Need for Professionals to Understand and Manage Values Francois LeBlanc, Getty Conservation Institute I presented a paper on the four case studies that the GCI prepared to demonstrate the importance and the impact of “values” on site management and conservation of historic sites. Since 1987, the Getty Conservation Institute has been involved with values-based site management planning through research efforts, professional training courses, symposia, and field projects. As an extension of this commitment, and associated with a related research and publication effort on values and heritage conservation, the Institute has led an effort to produce a series of case studies that demonstrate how values-driven site management has been interpreted, employed, and evaluated by four key organizations. In this project, the GCI has collaborated with the Australian Heritage Commission, English Heritage, Parks Canada, and U.S. National Park Service. The case studies in this series focus on values and their protection by examining these agencies’ roles in management. By looking at one site and the management context in which it exists, they provide detailed descriptions and analyses of the processes that connect theoretical management guidelines with management planning and its practical application. The analysis of the management of values in each site has been structured around the following questions: • How are the values associated with the site understood and articulated? • How are these values taken into account in the site’s management policies and

strategies? • How do management decisions and actions on site affect the values? The four sites presented during the session were: 1. Grosse Île and the Irish Memorial National Historic Site in Canada

Immigrants arriving at Grosse Ile in the 1840s

Francois LeBlanc, Head, Field Projects, Getty Conservation Institute

Bakery on Grosse Ile, one of many buildings remaining from the quarantine period

The name of each Irish person who died on Grosse Ile is engraved in the glass panels of the Irish Memorial

Equipment and artifacts from the quarantine period at Grosse Ile are still there

17

2. Port Arthur Historic Site in Australia

Penitentiary ruins at Port Arthur site

3. Chaco Culture National Historical Park in the U. S.

Artist drawing of a Greathouse at Chaco Culture National Historical Park

4. Hadrian’s Wall World Heritage Site in the United Kingdom.

The picturesque landscape is as much a tourism attraction as is Hadrian's Wall

The studies do not attempt to measure the success of a given management model against some arbitrary standard. Rather, they illustrate and explain how four different groups have dealt with the protection of values in their management efforts, and how they are helped or hindered in these efforts by legislation, regulations and other policies. Each case study highlighted the original set of values that were defined by management for development of the site, and a new set of values that clashed with these at one point. A complete report is available on the GCI web site.

Convicts at Port Arthur wore masks to isolate them from one another

Fajada Butte in Chaco is a sacred place for Native Americans and is off limit for visitors

Native Americans insisted that Chaco be recognized and managed not only for its archaeological and historical values

90% of Hadrian’s Wall belongs to private indivi-duals or communities

18

Cultural Resource Management in the Face of Coastal Erosion Rebecca Duggan, Parks Canada Agency Rebecca Duggan, Site Archaeologist at the Fortress of Louisbourg in Nova Scotia, explained that there is documented proof that the level of the sea is increasing while the site is sinking. The difference recorded during the past 200 years exceeds two feet and another increase of the same magnitude is expected during the next one hundred years. What can be done from a conservation standpoint to mitigate this situation? There is not only one answer. The best defense against this major problem of site erosion is knowledge. The use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has enabled archaeologists to better understand the location of the original site boundaries and compare them with their current configuration. Rescue archaeology is one of the tools used at the site to ensure that disappearing traces and information concerning the original fortifications is not lost. It is easy to loose archaeological information and archival documentation will not necessarily convey all the information needed to understand the site. The sea is a very rough opponent and can do a lot of damage to the site. Documentation is definitely one of the tools at the disposal of archaeologists to conserve the knowledge and information associated with sites that are threatened by global changes in the environment. Discussants Neil Brady, Cambridge U. For a long time in this profession, conservation was not integrated into the archaeological practice. The mentality was that archaeologists do research while others do the conservation. One of the reasons invoked was that conservation is expensive and it takes financial resources away from research. This of course was just an excuse and the real reason was probably laziness. This split between research and conservation is artificial. Now, these two activities are part of the professional ethic and sustainability is a concept that is widely accepted by the profession though it has not quite yet filtered into academia. All research projects should have a conservation plan at the onset. It should be considered standard that research involves conservation. Kent Severson, Conservator, AIA Member at Large In circumstances such as this Annual Meeting, it may appear that there is a great deal of cooperation going on between archaeologists and conservators, but in reality, there is not. There is still room for a great deal of improvement on this front. Conservators are taught to treat everything with equal attention, from the smallest object to the largest site. This is a problem because when one has to deal with large sites that need to be excavated in a short period of time such as Ba Dinh, compromises have to be made for a project to be viable. On the other hand, this case demonstrates that it is possible to involve conservators in the early planning stages of a project as opposed to most situations where conservators are asked to intervene in a crisis situation. Other presentations during this session demonstrated the importance of examination and documentation, the need to consider the long term sustainability of our conservation work, the huge impact on conservation that values and context play,

Rebecca Duggan, Site Archaeologist at the Fortress of Louisbourg in Nova Scotia

Green line is 18c high water while blue line is 20c

1758 Map of Fortress of Louisbourg

Neil Brady, Cambridge Univ.

Kent Severson, Conser-vator, AIA Member at Large

19

and that there seems to still be an important disconnect between site managers and conservators. There as yet to be an official statement made by the AIA and its membership that archaeological programs necessitate conservation.

BBrriieeff hhiissttoorryy ooff MMoonnttrreeaall Asides from being a city, Montreal is also an island located in the Saint Lawrence River. Approximately 50 kilometers long, 16 kilometers in width, with a mountain occupying its center, it was originally inhabited by the Iroquois who had lived in Quebec for thousands of years. The island was called Tiohtiake Tsi or Ka-we-no-te in the Iroquois language. In 1535, French explorer Jacques Cartier was amongst the first Europeans to set foot on the island. He and his men climbed up the mountain to place a cross and claim the land in the name of France. Cartier named the mountain "Mont-Royal".

In the early 1600's, the French colonized the island and the city of Montreal (originally named Ville Marie) was founded in 1642 by Paul de Chomedey Maisonneuve. The name "Montreal" was derived from the French name Mont Royal.

After the defeat of the French colonists by the British in battle of the Plains of Abraham in Quebec City in 1759, Montreal was later occupied and administered by Great Britain. The British did not expel the French from the island but allowed them to continue to live there as subjects of the British Empire. Colonists from England, Scotland and Ireland subsequently arrived afterwards to live alongside the French.

Despite being conquered by the British, French Montrealers continued to flourish and exist as the majority living on the island over the subsequent decades. English, Scots and Irish settlers intermarried with the French. Many French Montrealers on the island today still have the last name of a British ancestor (i.e.: Blackburn, Richard, O'Brien....). Some of these last names have also been frenchized (ex: O'Briens are now mostly called Brien and have dropped the O). A large number of English speaking Montrealers also have French last names.

Over the 3 centuries since Montreal's original foundation, settlements and towns were established in many different areas of the island. Immigrants from many other parts of the world also moved onto the island. These towns and their populations had continued to grow right up to the present day. Their borders had expanded and connected to adjacent towns, eventually connecting to Montreal City itself. As of 2001, the island was home to 27 towns plus the city itself. The city population stood at 1.4 million and the entire island at 3.9 million.

In order to reduce city deficits, balance budgets and evenly distribute town wealth, the government of Quebec passed legislation in 2001 to merge a number of cities and towns in the province of Quebec. As a result, on January 1st, 2002 the suburb towns on the island of Montreal were forced to become boroughs and merge with the city of Montreal.

Montreal’s historic district is unique in North America because of a high concentration of 19th c. architecture

Montreal hosted the Olympics in 1976

The charm of Old Montreal

Place Jacques Cartier in Old Montreal with City Hall in the background