Mul - unesdoc - Unesco

of cultural heritage is often seen as a barrier to
this development. Taking the example of sacred
places, tombs, or archaeological areas, these
are generally fairly static in themselves.
However, such heritage may be part of a larger
ensemble or area, which may be subject even
to drastic changes. This is the case of
archaeological layers within actively developing
urban areas, where the heritage cari be
extremely vulnerable due to changes in urban
infrastructures and constructions. Such changes
Will obviously affect the urban fabric itself; this
is particularly acute in areas where there is
a lack of proper planning control, or a lack of
indispensable resources to sustain the protection
and maintenance of the heritage. Furthermore,
the situation in traditional habitats is generally
aggravated once there is a decline in traditional
management systems, and when buildings are
abandoned or remain uninhabited. Historic
buildings or monuments with public functions,
such as government buildings, royal palaces,
religious ensembles, or fortifications, have usually
been built to a more lasting quality using selected
materials. From the technical point of view, they
cari thus be more apt for rehabilitation and new
types of uses, including even museum use.
Residential buildings instead are often more
fragile, requiring not only ordinary maintenance
but frequently also the continuation of the
traditional types of activities for which they were
intended.
As a result of the various processes of decay
and change, the establishment of the authenticity
of a place is often problematic. Therefore, it Will
be necessary first to identify the character and
the consistent parts of that particular heritage, as
well as its significance. It is then proper to verify
the present state of the heritage abject or place,
and to study the extent and implication of
changes on itself and its physical and cultural
setting. When dealing with traditional habitat, a
village, a town, a medina, with its complex fabric
of buildings, streets, alleys, public squares, and
monuments, the functions themselves become a
fundamental part of the heritage. In fact, the
UNESCO 1976 Recommendation on
Safeguarding Historic Areas affirms: “Every
historic area and its surroundings should be
considered in their totality as a coherent whole
whose balance and specific nature depend on
the fusion of the parts of which it is composed
and which include human activities as much as
the buildings, the spatial organisation and the
- 38 -
Authenticity and Integrity in an African Context
surroundings. All valid elements, including
human activities, however modest, thus have a
significance in relation to the whole which must
not be disregarded” (art. 3).
One of the major challenges for modern
conservation policies is the demand to conciliate
two extremes, maintaining a status quo and
allowing change. In fact, it may sometimes be
taken as arrogance to insist on conservation of
traditional ways of life if the population does not
appreciate this or does not have the necessary
conditions to make it feasible. If such habitat is
transformed into a museum use, it Will inevitably
lose something that has been essential, i.e. its
functions and its life. If the functions continue,
they Will also necessarily involve change. The
question then arises of how to control and guide
such modifications in life patterns and in the
physical fabric of the place? It may not be
possible to insist on continuing traditional habitat
as a ‘frozen entity’, but there may be possibilities
to identify alternative functions that would allow
the maintenance and upkeep of what is seen as
most significant. It also means that the present
community should be given every opportunity to
appreciate and respect what is being inherited
from previous generations. This is a learning
process, which may require incentives and
examples, and which is especially founded in a
close collaboration between the population and
authorities. With the help of such grassroot
movements, it may be possible to identify ways
to generate a cultural process that desires such
heritage, and therefore takes tare of its
safeguarding.
A WORD TO CONCLUDE
The Nara Document on Aufhenficify has
declared that there is a desire to apply the test of
authenticity “in ways which accord full respect to
the social and cultural values of all societies”
(art. 2). Such a respect should not be understood
as an acceptance of absolute liberty and of
whatever is done. Rather, it is an invitation to
undertake a process where the authenticity
of the heritage is gradually being revealed as
the true essence of the place. Even though
encouragement and guidance cari be received
from outside, the implications of such a cultural
process cannot be imported from elsewhere.
Instead, the value systems need to be generated
within each culture, and it is only on such a base
that heritage conservation cari become integra-