https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1543-7451
![Sample our Built Environment journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5926/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Built-Environment.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Because of their crucial role in interpreting histories, museums and the artefacts they display create a space for stories essential to cultural heritage. The destruction of museums causes irreversible losses in the cultural identity and memory of the local and global communities. Yet, despite international attempts to prevent them from being targeted, museums were extensively damaged (directly or collaterally) in almost all contemporary international, regional, and local armed conflicts. Different heritage philosophies have been adopted in the post-conflict periods to reconstruct the damaged museum buildings. However, the shaping of intervention strategies has received little scrutiny in the conservation literature. Examining the interventions in various war-damaged museums in Europe and the Middle East, this article aims to reveal insights into the architectural and political concerns and approaches adopted in different temporal and geographical contexts.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1. Several museums were ruined in conflicts from Sarajevo and Mostar to Baghdad, Beirut, Kabul, Palmyra, Taiz and elsewhere. For museums damaged during the destructive Wars of Yugoslav Succession, see Walasek, Bosnia and the Destruction, 69–72; and Walasek, ‘Culture Wars in Bosnia.’ For museums damaged by the war in Yemen, see Steinbeiser, ‘Heritage in the Crosshairs,’ 29; for Syria see Kanjou, ‘The Role of the Local Community’ 376; and Abdulkarim, ‘Palmyra’115–19; for Iraq see Petersen, ‘Cultural Apocalypse,’ 163.
2. Takala, ‘The Destruction of the Museums,’ 5.
3. Petzet, ‘Principles of Preservation,’ 19.
4. Kelley et al., ‘The Paradox and Dilemma of Reconstruction,’ 50; Moshenska, ‘Curated Ruins,’ 83.
5. Bădescu, ‘Traces of Empire,’ 373–77.
6. Viejo-Rose, ‘Reconstructing Heritage,’ 126.
7. Bold, ‘Introduction: Reconstruction,’ 3–5.
8. See, e.g. Bădescu, ‘War Ruins and Facing the Past’; Bădescu, ‘Traces of Empire’; and Charlesworth, Architects without Frontiers.
9. See, e.g. Scarbrough, ‘Ruins of War.’.
10. See, e.g. Nagoka, The Future of the Bamiyan Buddha Statues; and Joel, ‘Reconstruction over Ruins.’.
11. Exell and Rico, ‘There is No Heritage in Qatar,’ 672; and Littlefield, ‘Authentic Reconstruction,’ 222.
12. ICOMOS, ‘The Venice Charter.’.
13. Bold, ‘Introduction: Reconstruction,’ 4.
14. ICOMOS, ‘Declaration of Dresden on the Reconstruction of Monuments Destroyed by War.’.
15. ICOMOS, ‘The Charter of Krakow.’.
16. ICCROM, ‘Riga Charter on Authenticity and Historical Reconstruction.’.
17. The Warsaw Recommendation on Recovery and Reconstruction of Cultural Heritage has recognised reconstruction as a post-conflict mitigation tool as ‘the legitimate aspiration of concerned communities to overcome the trauma of conflicts, war and disasters by reconstructing as soon as possible […] particularly their affected cultural heritage – as a means to reaffirm their identity, restore their dignity and lay the conditions for a sustainable social and economic recovery’ (UNESCO, ‘The Warsaw Recommendation,’ 2, article 6).
18. Bold and Pickard, ‘Reconstructing Europe,’ 110; Jokilehto, ‘Reconstruction in the World Heritage Context,’ 11.
19. For an overview of the reconstruction literature and international guidelines, see Bold, Larkham and Pickard, Authentic Reconstruction; Bold and Pickard, ‘Reconstructing Europe’; Jokilehto, ‘Reconstruction in the World Heritage Context.’.
20. Stanley-Price, ‘The Reconstruction of Ruins,’ 41.
21. Charlesworth, Architects without Frontiers, 28.
22. Ibid., 27.
23. Piazzoni, ‘What’s Wrong with Fakes?’ 239–52.
24. Bold, ‘Introduction: Reconstruction,’ 5.
25. Ibid., 3.
26. Joel, ‘Reconstruction over Ruins,’ 216.
27. Higueras, ‘Aid and Reconstruction of Heritage,’ 94.
28. Petzet, ‘Principles of Preservation,’ 21.
29. Jokilehto, ‘Reconstruction in the World Heritage Context,’ 2.
30. Piazzoni, ‘What’s Wrong with Fakes?’ 239.
31. Bold and Pickard, ‘Reconstructing Europe,’ 108.
32. Bădescu, ‘War Ruins and Facing the Past,’ 4.
33. Barakat, ‘Necessary Conditions for Integrated Approaches,’ 438.
34. Bartetzky, ‘Architecture Makes History: Reconstruction,’ 26.
35. Moshenska, ‘Curated Ruins,’ 83.
36. Matravers, ‘The Reconstruction of Damaged or Destroyed Cultural Heritage,’ 195.
37. Khalaf, ‘World Heritage Policy on Reconstruction,’ 873.
38. Kalman, ‘Destruction, Mitigation, and Reconciliation,’ 540.
39. Higueras, ‘Aid and Reconstruction of Heritage,’ 96.
40. Piazzoni, ‘What’s Wrong with Fakes?’ 239.
41. Bartetzky, ‘Architecture Makes History: Reconstruction,’ 26.
42. Bold and Pickard, ‘Reconstructing Europe,’ 110.
43. Brian Ladd (2005: 131) quoted in Bold and Pickard, ‘Reconstructing Europe,’ 110.
44. Bartetzky ‘Architecture Makes History: Reconstruction,’ 29; Stanley-Price, ‘The Reconstruction of Ruins,’ 35.
45. Holtorf, ‘The Past People Want,’ 67.
46. Korsmeyer, Things: In Touch with the Past, 49; Matravers, ‘The Reconstruction of Damaged or Destroyed Cultural Heritage,’ 195.
47. Kalman, ‘Destruction, Mitigation, and Reconciliation,’ 538.
48. Avrami, ‘Creative Destruction and the Social (Re) Construction of Heritage,’ 231.
49. Janowski (2011: 56) cited in Bülow and Thomas, ‘On the Ethics of Reconstructing Destroyed Cultural Heritage,’ 487.
50. Bülow and Thomas, ‘On the Ethics of Reconstructing Destroyed Cultural Heritage,’ 483; Stanley-Price, ‘The Reconstruction of Ruins,’ 35.
51. Holtorf, ‘The Past People Want,’ 67.
52. For a theoretical exploration, see Woods, Radical Reconstruction.
53. Giebelhausen, ‘Museum Architecture,’ 224, 232–34.
54. James-Chakraborty, Modernism as Memory, 85.
55. Giebelhausen, ‘Museum Architecture,’ 225–28.
56. Ibid., 230–31.
57. Walasek, ‘Culture Wars in Bosnia,’ 2.
58. Barndt, ‘Working through Ruins,’ 295.
59. Ibid., 299.
60. Vidler, ‘Air War and Architecture,’ 30.
61. Joel, ‘Reconstruction over Ruins,’ 204.
62. Wik, ‘Restoring War-Damaged Built Cultural Heritage,’ 300.
63. Ibid., 300–301.
64. Bold and Pickard, ‘Reconstructing Europe,’ 112.
65. Wik, ‘Restoring War-Damaged Built Cultural Heritage,’ 301.
66. Ibid., 302.
67. Ibid., 303.
68. Ibid., 303.
69. Note that, as in the West, museum has a crucial role in shaping national/cultural identities in the Middle East. See, e.g. Qassar, ‘Politics, Identity and the Social Role of Museums in Syria.’.
70. Pharès, ‘The National Museum of Lebanon,’ 39.
71. Ibid., 38.
72. Abou-Eleivi and Linenfelser, ‘Post-Trauma Aesthetics,’ 92.
73. History: Beirut National Museum.
74. Viner, ‘Rubble Rousers.’.
75. Pharès, ‘The National Museum of Lebanon,’ 41–42.
76. Abou-Eleivi and Linenfelser, ‘Post-Trauma Aesthetics,’ 99.
77. Steinbeiser, ‘Heritage in the Crosshairs,’ 30.
78. Elie plus, 2008, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Beirut_Museum.jpg.
79. Al-Ragam, ‘The Politics of Representation,’ 671.
80. Al-Rashid, ‘Examining Kuwait’s National Museum,’ 9.
81. NCCAL, ‘Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Project,’ 11.
82. Ibid., 12–13.
83. Sabri et al., ‘Heritage Reconstruction Planning,’ 4.
84. Gabriel Moshenska observed elsewhere that the States chose either totally removing or reconstructing the ruins to prevent their turning into ‘political capitals’ (Moshenska, ‘Curated Ruins,’ 88).
85. Sabri et al., ‘Heritage Reconstruction Planning,’ 6.
86. NCCAL, ‘Restoration of the Khaz’al Palaces,’ section entitled ‘Restoration Strategy’.
87. NCCAL, ‘Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Project,’ 28.
88. Historicist reconstruction is commonly practiced in the region, as seen in Al Bader House-Museum in Kuwait, Sheikh Saeed Al Maktoum House-Museum in Dubai, and Bait al Naboodah Museum in Sharjah (UAE).
89. Sabri et al., ‘Heritage Reconstruction Planning,’ 6.
90. Note that building was made of coral stone, which was pulverised when the building collapsed. While some pieces are salvaged and possibly will pass compression testing, others are likely structurally weak, and not possible to incorporate in the reconstruction.
91. Scarbrough, ‘Ruins of War,’ 229.
92. Sabri et al., ‘Heritage Reconstruction Planning,’ 7.
93. Ibid., 7.
94. We spoke with sixteen young Kuwaiti architects (coded in the text with prefix Pa) employed in public sector, seven Arab architect-academics (coded in the text with prefix Paa), five non-Arab architect-academics (coded in the text with prefix Pna) who have worked in the Gulf, and four conservation experts for their perspectives on dealing with the ruined SAAP. The conversations were held during April-May 2022.
95. Sternberg, ‘Hans Döllgast, Post-war Reconstruction,’ 272.
96. Ibid., 284–89.
97. James-Chakraborty, Modernism as Memory, 88.
98. Von Buttlar, Leo von Klenze, 265.
99. Rufus46, 2012, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alte_Pinakothek_Suedseite_Muenchen-1.jpg.
100. For examples from 1957–2019, see the ‘ruin recovery list’ presented in: Tichenor, ‘Ruin Recovery,’ 179–180.
101. Architects Niv, Schwartz and Schwartz cited by Skarf, Citation2011 ‘Ruin Preservation and the Etzel Museum.’.
102. Mollard, ‘Spent Shell: Museum of Beit Beirut.’.
103. Quoted by Wright, Citation2016 ‘Beirut’s Museums of War and Memories.’.
104. Eisele and Seiler, ‘Reconstruction of the Neues Museum,’ 221.
105. Radoi, ‘The Gap is in the Eye of the Beholder,’ 217.
106. Barndt, ‘Working through Ruins,’ 295.
107. Eisele and Seiler, ‘Reconstruction of the Neues Museum,’ 221.
108. Dehn, ‘Wrecked! Ruined! Defaced!’; Richter, ‘Old vs. New.’.
109. Barndt, ‘Working through Ruins,’ 300.
110. James-Chakraborty, Modernism as Memory, 171.
111. Taylor, ‘The Neues Museum.’.
112. Richter, ‘Old vs. New.’.
113. Chipperfield, ‘What is the Future of the Past?’.
114. James-Chakraborty, Modernism as Memory, 176; Sternberg, ‘Hans Döllgast, Post-war Reconstruction,’ 290.
115. Radoi, ‘The Gap is in the Eye of the Beholder,’ 218.
116. Janericloebe, 2009, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Berlin_Neues_Museum_001.JPG.
117. Nadia Nadienka, 2019, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Neues_Museum_interior.jpg.
118. Chipperfield, ‘What is the Future of the Past?’.
119. Ibid.
120. Ibid.
121. Barndt, ‘Working through Ruins,’ 302.
122. James-Chakraborty, Modernism as Memory, 139.
123. Richter, ‘Old vs. New.’.
124. Rykwert, ‘David Chipperfield Brings Understated Glory,’ 22.
125. Souto, ‘Neues Museum Berlin,’ 152–54.
126. Glancey, ‘A Rebirth in Berlin.’; Taylor, ‘The Neues Museum.’.
127. Kimmelman, ‘For Berlin Museum, A Modern Makeover.’.
128. Taylor, ‘The Neues Museum.’.
129. Radoi, ‘The Gap is in the Eye of the Beholder,’ 217.
130. Pearman, ‘From Prussia with Love,’ 36–37.
131. Glancey, ‘A Rebirth in Berlin.’.
132. Richter, ‘Old vs. New.’.
133. Ibid.
134. Millais, ‘Incoherent Renovation in Berlin,’ 66–72.
135. Dehn, ‘Wrecked! Ruined! Defaced!’.
136. Kimmelman, ‘For Berlin Museum, A Modern Makeover.’.
137. Radoi, ‘The Gap is in the Eye of the Beholder,’ 218.
138. Quoted by Taylor, ‘The Neues Museum.’.
139. Elżanowski, ‘Manufacturing Ruins,’ 749.
140. Bartetzky, ‘Architecture Makes History: Reconstruction,’ 26.
141. Barakat, ‘Necessary Conditions for Integrated Approaches,’ 438.
142. Piazzoni, ‘What’s Wrong with Fakes?’ 239–52.
143. Richter, ‘Old vs. New.’.
144. Wik, ‘Restoring War-Damaged Built Cultural Heritage,’ 300.
145. Sabri et al., ‘Heritage Reconstruction Planning,’.
146. Piazzoni, ‘What’s Wrong with Fakes?’ 246.
147. Holtorf, ‘The Past People Want,’ 69.
148. Ibid., 64.
149. Wollentz, Landscapes of Difficult Heritage, 34–43.
150. Kalman, ‘Destruction, Mitigation, and Reconciliation,’ 540.
151. Lostal and Cunliffe, ‘Cultural Heritage That Heals,’ 255.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Reyhan Sabri
Dr. Reyhan Sabri is currently an Associate Professor of Architectural Engineering at the University of Sharjah (UAE), where she teaches courses in history and theory of architecture. She has a Ph.D. in Architecture from the University of Manchester (UK), and her current research interests are related to architectural conservation philosophy and practice in post-colonial and post-conflict environments. Dr. Sabri has published extensively in heritage and conservation journals and is the author of The Imperial Politics of Architectural Conservation: The Case of Waqf in Cyprus.
Danah AlGhareeb
Dana AlGhareeb has a Bachelor of Science Degree in Architectural Engineering from the University of Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates. She currently works at the Ministry of Public Works in Kuwait. Her research interests are related to contemporary uses of architectural heritage.
Noora Alkhaja
Noora Alkhaja has a Bachelor of Science Degree in Architectural Engineering from the University of Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates. Her research interests are related to architectural heritage in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).