Degrees of Intervention

Digvijay Singh Sheoran

2018BARC023

Definitions
1.Burra Charter Australia ICOMOS ,The charter mentions the conservation interventions as
conservation processes.

a. Adaptation: Adaptation means modifying a place to suit the existing use or a proposed
use.

b. Interpretation: The cultural significance of many places is not readily apparent, and
should be explained by interpretation. Interpretation should enhance understanding and
enjoyment, and be culturally appropriate.

c. Maintenance: Maintenance means the continuous protective care of the fabric and
setting of a place, and is to be distinguished from repair. Repair involves restoration or
reconstruction.

d. Preservation: Preservation means maintaining the fabric of a place in its existing state
and retarding deterioration.

e. Restoration: Restoration means returning the existing fabric of a place to a known

earlier state by removing accretions or by reassembling existing components without the
introduction of new material.

f. Reconstruction: Reconstruction means returning a place to a known earlier state and is

distinguished from restoration by the introduction of new material into the fabric.

g. New Work: New work such as additions to the place may be acceptable where it does
not distort or obscure the cultural significance of the place, or detract from its
interpretation and appreciation.

h. Retaining associations and meanings:

● Significant associations between people and a place should be respected, retained and
not obscured. Opportunities for the interpretation, commemoration and celebration of
these associations should be investigated and implemented.
● Significant meanings, including spiritual values, of a place should be respected.
Opportunities for the continuation or revival of these meanings should be investigated
and implemented.
 i. Change:
● Change may be necessary to retain cultural significance, but is undesirable where it
reduces cultural significance. The amount of change to a place should be guided by the
cultural significance of the place and its appropriate interpretation.
● Changes which reduce cultural significance should be reversible, and be reversed when
circumstances permit.
● Demolition of significant fabric of a place is generally not acceptable. However, in some
cases minor demolition may be appropriate as part of conservation. Removed significant
fabric should be reinstated when circumstances permit.

2. National policy for conservation of the ancient monuments, archaeological sites and remains
(npc – amasr), Archaeological Survey of India, The document mentions the interventions under
Conservation of Monuments (Value-based Approach)

a. Preservation: It means maintaining the status quo of a monument including its setting
thereby not allowing any changes, either through deliberate human interventions or due
to action of natural agents of decay to its fabric or its immediate environment.

b. Restoration: It means bringing back the monument or any part thereof, as nearly as
possible, to an earlier known state or condition.

c. Reconstruction: It means to rebuild in the original form.

d. Reproduction: Reproduction of members of a monument may be undertaken for such a

monument whose original members (structural and / ornamental) have deteriorated and
lost their structural and material integrity and removing these from their original location
is the only way to safeguard those members as well as the monument itself.

e. Maintenance: It means the care of a monument as is exercised in order to prevent

damage and deterioration and to avoid an intervention as long as possible.

f. Sympathetic and Adaptive Reuse: It means modifying a lesser significant part of the
monument, or a place inside or outside it, to suit it to a compatible use involving as little
as possible loss of value (as outlined in Sub-article 1.05).

g. Transplantation or Translocation: It means removing the monument from its existing

location and relocating it at an alternate location.

h. Reassembly or Reinstatement (Anastylosis): It means putting existing but

dismembered parts back together.
 i. Retrofitting: It means to consolidate a monument’s structure by inserting new parts or
material using new technology in order to improve their safety and to make them
functional.

j. Stabilization or Consolidation: It means action to arrest processes of decay using

external agents that are “time tested and proven scientifically”.

k. Scientific clearance: It means systematic removal of historic building material, debris,

buried within or outside the monument, not necessarily at that location to retrieve any
buried architectural members or sculptures, etc., with the purpose of study, investigation
and possible reinstatement or, in case it is not feasible, to remove and preserve them in
a safer environment.

CASE STUDY1: Aslam al-Silahdar Mosque

Basatin, located on the outskirts of Maadi, in Central Cairo, Egypt

In the southern extension of Cairo is a sprawling neighborhood known as al-Darb al-Ahmar,

which contains a significant number of monuments, homes and landmarks from as far back as
the 10th century. The Aslam al-Silahdar Mosque is one of the more prominent landmarks in
al-Darb al-Ahmar, and it was the focus of a thorough and widely heralded conservation project
conducted through a partnership between the American Research Center in Egypt, the Aga
Khan Trust for Culture, the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities and the U.S. Agency for
International Development.

Restoration of the stucco decoration inside the dome

The project ran from 2005 to 2009 and took a multifaceted approach that addressed structural
and aesthetic improvements to the monument and hired skilled laborers and craftsmen from the
surrounding neighborhood. In this respect, the conservation of Aslam al-Silahdar Mosque
engaged the community of al-Darb al-Ahmar with their heritage and encouraged certain skills
and knowledge to pass down from one generation of craftsmen to the next.

Aslam al-Silahdar Mosque is not only notable for its location in a historic neighborhood but is
also an important legacy of Cairo’s medieval past. Built in 1344 by Baha al-Din Aslam - a
Mamluk prince with considerable political and social standing in the Mamluk royal court who
rose to the rank of Silahdar, meaning sword-bearer - the mosque was originally part of a
complex that contained horse stables, tenement housing and a small palace or private home.
The mosque is the only piece of the complex still standing, but its architecture and decor
suggest that al-Baha’i was a connoisseur of fine design and materials. Stone-cut mosaic floors
are in perfect harmony with wooden vaulted ceilings and marble columns. Stucco ornamented
walls are finished with glittering colored glass mosaics. And the mihrab, or prayer niche, is
defined by finely cut and inlaid marble in jewel tones. The exterior of the mosque is also lavishly
appointed with inlaid marble mosaic and decorative stonework and inscriptions on all four
façades.

Unfortunately, while this exquisite craftsmanship was still discernible, much of it had deteriorated
prior to the work that began in 2005. Conservators had their work cut out for them. Repairs first
began on the exterior of the mosque and the interior was used as a workspace to clean and
conserve smaller movable components like doors, wooden paneling, metal grilles and windows.
A geotechnical survey assessed the mosque’s structural stability and cleaning and
documentation work began on the exterior façades, roof, dome and minaret. A new ablution was
also constructed to replace the original one, which had posed a conservation risk to the mosque
due to water leakage.

Detail of restored decoration Restored courtyard facade and its stucco decoration inside the mosque
The team removed and replaced decayed stones and cleaned the minaret and dome with micro
sandblasting. They replaced the wooden roofing and then carefully insulated against the
weather and moisture, which had previously caused damage to the mosque’s interior.
Additionally, community shops located in the western wall of the mosque were emptied, repaired
and then returned to their owners.

Meanwhile, in the mosque interior, the project plastered and repainted walls, installed new
windows and conserved and reinstalled original inlaid doors and wooden paneling. Cracks in the
walls were consolidated and new brickwork fitted where necessary to reinforce the walls and fill
gaps. Finally, conservators cleaned and fully restored all of the mosque’s stunning gypsum and
stucco decorations to their original vibrancy.

CASE STUDY 2: Red Monastery church

located in Sohag, Egypt

For decades, visitors to the famous but deteriorating Red Monastery church in Sohag
encountered only blackened, gloomy hints of what once was among Byzantine Egypt’s most
glorious painted sanctuaries. Today, the bright wonders of those ancient wall paintings have
been restored at this important center for worship.

Since 2003, much of the work at the Coptic Orthodox monastery has been supported by the
U.S. Agency for International Development through the American Research Center in Egypt.
Because the central basilica has been in ruins for periods of its 1400-year history, the
conservation efforts have presented challenges as complex as the site’s mysterious,
complicated life. Workers had to address problems of previous, faulty restoration and replace
and repave floors in ways to keep the ancient walls from collapsing. From lighting to stonework,
from a new altar to re-used columns, the multinational preservation team worked with the
Egyptian Ministry of Antiquities to deal with everything from termite and bird damage to leaky
roofs and replacement doors customized to fit ancient imperfections in design.

When painting restoration finished in 2010-11, work began on architectural conservation,

restoration and presentation. It was the first serious conservation effort at the monastery since
the Comite de Conservation des Monuments de l'Art Arabe completed its work more than a
century ago in 1909-12. The project had to deal with the complications of an active place of
worship. The church was supposed to be re-consecrated, but Coptic Orthodox services don’t
allow laity into the sanctuary where most of the paintings are located. At the same time,
conservators wanted to ensure maximum visibility and protection of the artwork. In some ways,
these efforts proved more complex than the painting conservation because the goal was to
re-consecrate the Coptic Orthodox church for services. Clergy, conservators, art historians and
Ministry of Antiquities representatives collaborated on these complex decisions.
 Interior of the Red Monastery

The ancient floor presented an unusual challenge. In 2013, representatives of the church
removed a poor-quality, uneven concrete slab that had been installed more than 15 years
earlier. The new floor had to be engineered with more care, and dense to counteract pressure
from the weight of building that forced the ground beneath the church upward. The conservation
team installed a heavy limestone floor on sand, with mortar used only for jointing. The slabs that
pave the three sanctuary recesses – the triconch – and the adjoining platform were brought
from a quarry in Tura and finished by hand using an axe-like adze tool on site.

Removing the floor revealed archaeological secrets and additional problems. Workers found an
area of original limestone paving in the north section of the nave, the original steps leading to
the platform in front of the sanctuary and traces of mudbrick walls that once protected the
paintings.The size, location and appearance of a new altar for the church engendered
considerable debate. Ultimately, an altar installed in the 1909-12 Comite restoration in the east
lobe of the triconch was replaced by one in a new, central position below the dome. The new
altar is a simple plastered cube topped by a slab of Italian Carrara marble. Two stone column
emplacements from the 1912 altar remained in the east lobe, and a large limestone block
carved with a cross – reused in the masonry of the 1912 altar – is displayed in the north side
room of the church.
Workers also had to contend with a jumble of architectural debris that had gathered in the
church’s nave. Some of the most significant stone fragments were rescued and displayed during
the restoration work. Principal among these was a large, carved, limestone column topper, likely
from the colonnades that divided the nave aisles. The topper had been reused as a pestle for
grinding and the resulting damage required major restoration work before it could be installed on
an existing granite column shaft on the south side of the nave. This column now mirrors a
surviving black granite shaft on the north side of the nave in front of the Comite-period wall
enclosing the sanctuary.

Workmen working in the Nave erecting a column

Other rescued items include four small limestone cornice blocks carved with slit modillions,
foliage and star patterns. These are displayed in a recess on the south wall in front of the
sanctuary facade. They share this space with another, more modern, relic of the history of the
church: a wooden screen separating the nave from the sanctuary. The 19th-century partition
moved to the south wall, with its central window converted into a cupboard where the faithful
can leave written prayers.

Workers also faced natural foes. Encouraged by increased activity at the site and the
re-cultivation of the surrounding desert, pigeons covered some architectural features of the
church under thick layers of guano. To block the birds from the interior, the team installed metal
mesh in many small light apertures around the perimeter and added mesh screens to larger
modern windows.
Termites were another plague, attracted by ground moisture from agricultural irrigation or water
seeping from adjacent new buildings. Treatments varied by location. Before the new stone floor
was installed, workers covered the area with dry lime. The project thwarted damage in three
separate areas of woodwork inside the church and throughout planking in the roof, where
proper drainage had to be restored.

One aspect of recent work is often overlooked by visitors: lighting to highlight the radical
transformation of the wall paintings from dull black to vivid polychrome. Philips Lighting Egypt
developed a strategy reliant on warm spectrum LED fixtures and discreet installation. Such
lights have no UV or heat emissions and an extremely long life span, and the team managed to
install all the lighting without a single nail or screw in any of the original architectural features.
Outside, a single spotlight is trained on the new wooden cross mounted on the dome. All of
these structural and architectural improvements enhance and showcase the powerful
restoration and conservation efforts at one of the world’s best-preserved Byzantine structures.

CONCLUSION

Different degrees of intervention are used based on the type of building condition and grading
of the built heritage, critical knowledge about the context matters for the conservation of the
heritage structure only then the value of the structure can be restored to its original value. In the
case of Aslam al-Silahdar Mosque which has incorporated a multifaceted approach that
addressed structural and aesthetic improvements to the monument and hired skilled laborers
and craftsmen from the surrounding neighborhood. In this respect, the conservation of Aslam
al-Silahdar Mosque engaged the community of al-Darb al-Ahmar with their heritage and
encouraged certain skills and knowledge to pass down from one generation of craftsmen to the
next. The conservation process should be taken care of very critically to preserve the heritage
value of these structures, and also the knowledge of the type of intervention required by the
structure is also a necessary aspect of conservation.

Refrences:

https://asi.nic.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/national-conservation-policy-final-April-2014.pdf

https://australia.icomos.org/publications/burra-charter-practice-notes/#uacs

https://www.arce.org/project/reviving-historic-jewish-cemetery-basatin-0

https://www.arce.org/project/red-monastery-architectural-conservation