Download File - UNESCO World Heritage

Evaluation of criteria:
The site is nominated under criteria i, ii and iii:
Criterion i: The quantity, state of conservation, and early
16 th century and earlier date of the suite of rock, art as well
as its aesthetic qualities, suggest that overall this criteria
could be justified. However this criterion is not normally
used for objects that were not primarily created to be
revered for their creativity. In the case of these wallpaintings,
it seems their primary purpose was ritual rather
than decorative.
Criterion ii: At one level, this is an obvious and welljustified
criterion: the Park contains one of the areas where
Spanish incomers met indigenous people in the first years
of European/First American contact. Furthermore, part of
this contact in the Park area is documented as well as being
represented archaeologically (though the extent and nature
of this archaeology is not made explicit in the dossier).
Given what has happened in the 510 years since this
contact began, few phases in world history still resonate so
much in world affairs, not least in those fields indicated in
the second half of criterion ii: developments in architecture
or technology, monumental arts, town-planning or
landscape design.’ In that general sense, clearly ‘an
important interchange of values over a span of time [and]
within a cultural area of the world’ has occurred, with
global consequences that continue still.
The State Party puts forward the case that locally, if such
an interchange occurred, it was very much one-way, with
European ideas of conquest, application of military
technology and transport of disease resulting in the
extinction of the local population. It emphasises, quoting
the early 16 th century eye witness Father Fray Bartolomé,
‘the inhuman ways the American natives were treated.’ It
stresses, too, the existence and quality of the
archaeological evidence bearing on this phase of cultural
contact (without actually specifying any).
But neither point meets the requirement of the second half
of criterion ii that the contact itself is but the mechanism
leading to ‘developments in architecture or technology’
etc. No such developments happened locally or directly as
a result of the contact in what is now the Parque del Este.
Criterion iii: The Park contains an exceptional, in some
respects unique, testimony to the Taino cultural tradition
which has completely disappeared.
The nomination also suggests that the site can be seen as
reflecting the contact phase between Taino and Spanish
culture. Evidence for this Taino-Hispanic resource is not
referred to in the nomination except for a ship. It needs to
be established whether the archaeological evidence does
support this claim.
Criterion vi: This criteria was not suggested in the
nomination but could be considered as appropriate. The
Park area was one of the landfalls on Columbus’ first
voyage and bears remarkable witness, archaeologically,
documentarily and in well-preserved form, to the initial
interfacing in modern times of Europe and the Americas,
of Old and New World. It could be argued that the event
which took place in the years either side of 1500 CE in the
area of this nomination had far-reaching consequences of
global significance in the longer term.
18
4. ICOMOS RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation for the future
As, in cultural terms, this nomination depends almost
entirely on assessment of archaeological evidence, much of
which is lacking, it is recommended that the nomination be
deferred to the State Party to allow them to provide a
commitment to a survey programme for archaeological
remains across the whole site. This programme should
include:
•= The nature, extent and distribution of the Taino
sites, specifically of the period 1490-1520s, in order to
support the claims of the outstanding quality of the
property in relation to the first European encounter with
the Americas in modern times;
•= A scholarly appraisal of the rock art in its
regional and world context;
•= Evidence for Spanish contact;
The State Party should also provide assurances that:
•= Archaeologically trained staff will be appointed
within the National Park;
•= The National Park boundary will not be reduced
to allow property or other forms of commercial
development and that such development will not be
permitted within the present National Park;
•= The existing Management Plan will be updated
to encompass cultural issues;
•= There will be an appraisal of the need for an
archaeological museum for conservation and display;
•= The security of the rock art in all caves will be
reviewed and steps taken immediately to protect Berna
cave in particular and new rock art sites as they are
discovered.
It is also suggested that the State Party be invited to
consider increasing the Park budget in order to fund its
basic work in a fuller, more professional way, not least in
the light of these recommendations; to which end it might
consider refunding more of the income generated by the
Park, and to increase the generously-low entry fee
(2 US $ ).
Any revised nomination should not include the Buffer
Zone in its title.
Recommendation with respect to inscription
That the nomination of Parque del Este be deferred to
allow the State Party to provide the material outlined
above.
ICOMOS, March 2003