BEAUTY OF HISTORIC URBAN CENTRES – EVOLUTION IN CONSERVATION THEORY

Abstract

K e y w o r d s : Architectural heritage; Beauty; Conservation; Ensemble; Protection of historic city centre. 1/2019 A R C H I T E C T U R E C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G E N V I R O N M E N T 7 A R C H I T E C T U R E C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G E N V I R O N M E N T The Si les ian Univers i ty of Technology No. 1/2019 d o i : 1 0 . 2 1 3 0 7 / A C E E 2 0 1 9 0 0 1 T . B a r d z i n s k a B o n e n b e r g , M . B ą c z k o w s k a also urban experiments, the results of implementation of theoretical quests. On the other hand, the treatments received by historical buildings in subsequent decades of the 19th and 20th centuries indicate changing attitudes towards heritage. This triggered the question of the mechanisms of the observed changes. Research on heritage discussions which took place in the 19th and 20th c. was followed by studies on implementations of the new ideas, that were recorded in the first photographs, books, plans, maps and papers. As local ideas and regulations were gradually formed into legal acts in different countries, these documents were also studied. The first world war stimulated emergence and development of global institutions that has created a legislative power gradually recognized worldwide. Since then studies of different types of “protection by law” of growing number of forms covered documents edited under the League of Nations and after the second world war by UNESCO/ICOMOS Charters and Regulations. The aim of the research was to reveal a long background history of the relatively young field of science, which encompasses the pursuit for beauty, truth and care for cultural attainments for today’s and future generations. The paper conveys the idea of growing importance of the heritage idea, which now encompasses activities in all scales of landscape and urban planning and in architectural design. 2. MOTIVATIONS BEHIND CREATING AND PROTECTING BEAUTIFUL SITES IN CITIES – FROM THE OLDEST EXAMPLES TO THE 18TH CENTURY Hippodamus of Miletus created a city plan in which public spaces were shaped with the thought of convenience and displaying the most important buildings. The medieval, geometrically laid-out French cities [2], as well as the central European founded cities were initially subject to the imperative of defence, and then were gradually furnished with both beautiful and useful elements. As a result of the growth of urban organisms, the deterioration of living conditions, security and the appearance of cities, the necessity of shaping and controlling larger areas thereof surfaced [3]. For the sake of beauty, selected private and common urban spaces such as courtyards, squares, roads and streets were developed. These were single assumptions, embedded in the urban fabric and associated with prominent buildings and celebrations. Their emergence and transformation were connected with rulers, owners, patricians and their ambitions or sentiments. There are multiple examples from the ancient cities of Greece (Panathenaic Way) and Rome (Forum Romanum and Imperial Fora), through the medieval hortus conclusus, the flower garden, renaissance church and city squares, furnished with elements of street architecture. Thus, in ancient times, imperial Rome and the late antiquity period, monuments and ruins, rooted in the consciousness of local communities, were related to the religious sphere or to the commemoration of prominent individuals. Over time, the problem of their destruction and plunder intensified. As a result of impune plundering of the remains of imperial Rome, including elements of urban public spaces, the substance of the city became protected by law. In a fragment of the codex addressed to Helpidius, vice prefect of a province, Emperor Justinian orders: “if anyone, after the enactment of this law, despoils a city by carrying ornament, that is to say, marble or columns, to rural places, he shall be deprived of the property which he has ornamented in that manner” [4]. The situation of the remains of city ruins and finds changed during the early and late Middle Ages. A new phenomenon surfaced: to despoil – the removal of structural fabric elements from existing, historic buildings or urban complexes and re-using them in new facilities – hence “spolia”. An example is the partial demolition of the Roman Imperial Fora for the subsequent construction of public use buildings or Christian churches (Ravenna). In the Carolingian era, the transport of fragments over long distances partially “retained the spirit of the late antique imperial legislation” [5]. Most publications devoted to the approach to historical architectural and urban fabric emphasize the role of despoiling in the context of symbolic preservation of memory and meaning (carriers of meaning and memory) relating to statehood or victory. Meanwhile, according to Meier [6], when it comes to beauty, the process of despoiling, with the desire to re-use materials such as marble due to their beauty and usability at its core is important. The preRomanesque St. Donat church from the ninth century in the Croatian Zadar (Fig. 1–2), is one example, where the material comes from, among others, the demolition of the nearby Imperial Forum (Fig. 3–4). Renaissance theoretical plans of cities assumed their usefulness, i.e. defence and beauty by virtues of a clear, geometric layout [7]. The first baroque urban interventions constitute a reform of Rome’s communication system with the deployment of Egyptian obelisks, the creation of Piazza dell Popolo and the creation of the Spanish Steps and Piazza Navona. 8 A R C H I T E C T U R E C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G E N V I R O N M E N T 1/2019 B E A U T Y O F H I S T O R I C U R B A N C E N T R E S – E V O L U T I O N I N C O N S E R V A T I O N T H E O R Y Efforts to emphasise façades and spatial forms of temples include the arrangement of area in front of the façade of the Santa Maria della Pace in Rome, carried out by Pietro da Cortona, square in front of the Basilica of St. Peter and many more. In the Baroque and Classicism periods, the desire to create space reflecting the aspirations of the monarchs (Versailles, Dresden, and Potsdam). Half way through the 18th century, a new term “monument” appears in European languages, which refers to structures that were not erected as monuments, nor were monumental [8]. Derived from the Latin verb monēre – to remind monumentum [9] means “a sign of remembrance”, in practice a statue, an obelisk commemorating an event or person. The etymology of the word was similar for French, Spanish and Norwegian languages. Analogously, the German word Denkmal comes from the word denken – to think. The term monument determined an emotional relation – the appreciation of the historical or cultural significance of an old building or place by contemporary people. Slowly, the reasons for the protection of these, usually national or ancestral, monuments, changed from romantic-emotional to the rational, and protection was institutionalized [10]. This was due to archaeological discoveries; Herculaneum in 1709 and Pompeii in 1748, descriptions and illustrations by Vivant Denon from the time of the Napoleonic campaign in 1798 of the pyramids and monuments of ancient Egypt. In the 18th and 19th centuries, there were increasingly more “monumental” works from the heritage of Mesopotamia, the Incas, the Mayas, the Aztecs and the Greek archaeological sites. The Apollo Sanctuary in Delphi was first, studied from 1860, then Olimpia and Peloponnese, and between 1870 and 1874 Troja, Mycenae and Tiryns discovered by Heinrich Schliemann [11]. The rank of these monuments in the eyes of scientists was elevated by measurements, descriptions and images. From 1749 excavations in Herculaneum were documented by means of plans and drawings by engineer Karl Weber. The Herculaneum Academy was established in 1755, supporting research, describing and publishing discoveries in Herculaneum. Amongst others it published Winckelmann s work from 1762 [12]. Antique monuments required a scientific approach. This opened the way for similar treatment of “younger” monuments. Drawings albums appealed to the aristocracy, potential patrons of modernization and reconstruction of their own residences. Works by Piranesi – Rome 1743 and 1745; Robert Adam s: Split Diocletian’s palace 1764; G.P.M. Dumont: Paestum ruins of temples 1764; Jan Potocki: Voyage en Turquie et en Egypte in 1788, (in Polish translation by Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz) in 1789, a book that was a “bestseller” at the time it was published. [13] The result of these works was, among others, a turn towards neoclassical forms in art and architecture of A R C H I T E C T U R E 1 /2019 A R C H I T E C T U R E C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G E N V I R O N M E N T 9 Figure 4. Ruins of the Forum near St. Donatus church in Zadar, Croatia. Photo: M. Bączkowska Figure 1. Interior of the Church of St. Donatus in Zadar, Croatia. Photo: M. Bączkowska Figure 2. Detail. Church of St. Donatus in Zadar, Croatia. Photo: M. Bączkowska Figure 3. Detail. Ruins of the Forum near St. Donatus church in Zadar, Croatia. Photo: M. Bączkowska a T . B a r d z i n s k a B o n e n b e r g , M . B ą c z k o w s k a the 18th and 19th centuries and the extension of the concept of “monument”. The phenomenon of collecting cultivated by the aristocracy, rulers and institutions developed [14]. Beauty became the subject of deliberations and dissertations. The romantic beauty of old architecture, sometimes ruins, became a desirable element in the surroundings of palaces [15]. 3. BEAUTY OF A CITY – DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY FABRIC PROTECTION ISSUE FROM THE 19TH CENTURY TO THE FIRST WORLD WAR In Europe, the necessity to maintain ancient, magnificent and still used buildings: cathedrals, churches, castles required targeted actions. Following archaeological research, attempts were made to analyse ancient architecture and to periodize monuments, to introduce historical period nomenclature [16].