Take advantage of the search to browse through the World Heritage Centre information.

i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
x

Architectural, Residential and Cultural Complex of the Radziwill Family at Nesvizh

Belarus
Factors affecting the property in 2010*
  • Deliberate destruction of heritage
  • Management activities
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2010
Requests approved: 1 (from 2003-2003)
Total amount approved : 3,522 USD
Missions to the property until 2010**

February 2010: World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2010

Since its construction in 1582 the Nesvizh Castle complex was variously altered until the end of the 19th century. In consequence, it reflects different architectural styles from Renaissance, Baroque, and Classicism to Modern. Despite State Party assurances to the contrary, since June 2008 significant concerns have been raised regarding the different approaches to work being adopted on the property.

The State Party was requested by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session to invite a joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission to the property to review work in progress, consider the conservation approaches, and review the overall state of conservation. It was also requested to submit details of the methodology to be adopted in rebuilding the Eastern Gallery, the types of proprietary materials and technologies being used in the conservation work, and the intended degree of conservation, restoration and reconstruction work in the adopted approach to the project. On 12 October 2009, the State Party provided a report on work undertaken on the Eastern Gallery.

 

The mission took place from 20 to 24 February 2010 and reported on its main observations and recommendations as follows:

 

a) The mission was informed that efforts were being made to strengthen the capacity of national heritage organizations, professionals and their accountability, in addition to receiving an increase in their budgets, with special conservation work funding being disseminated in 2010.

b) The mission noted that the palace complex had seriously degenerated during the period it was used as a sanatorium, and that the restoration and rehabilitation, financed by the Republic of Belarus, was a significant improvement on the state of conservation.

c) The mission further noted that building repair work used traditional materials and techniques, and was organised following in-depth historical research, and a thorough analysis of condition. Stabilisation measures for foundations, walls and load-bearing systems involved necessary rehabilitation and modernisation work, and the employment of manual skilled workers ensured that the standard of conservation/restoration measures was adequate. Extensive reconstruction plans for individual rooms were based on photographs which illustrated their final-documented historic state, whilst the restoration approach for the exterior largely reflected the mid-18th century period, when the original 16th century court façade was totally remodelled.

d) The mission noted that the Eastern Gallery was taken down and rebuilt for structural reasons, as described in the Information report presented by the State Party on 12 October 2009. Initial work on rebuilding internal walls and vaults opened up what were considered to be more fundamental structural problems. The Gallery apparently collapsed for the first time in 1755 and was later stabilised with metal bonds and a buttress. It was pulled down after attempts had been made to at least preserve the outer walls. After the demolition, which in principle is regrettable, the now rebuilt Eastern gallery is an unavoidable partial reconstruction of the palace complex of Nesvizh.

e) In reviewing the adopted rebuilding methodology, the mission noted that the Eastern Gallery reconstruction used salvaged brick material from the “dismantled” historic structure; that the Gallery was surveyed prior to “dismantling”, and was re-erected with the same floor heights and fenestration, with walls set on foundations, complying with modern standards. In assessing the type of materials and technologies being used in the conservation work, the mission noted that the internal walls and vaults were plastered, with sparingly applied stucco decoration on the courtyard elevations.

f) In principle, the mission noted few difficulties in agreeing with the standards and approach adopted for the rebuilding: some parts had been repaired and safeguarded; missing parts replaced; disfiguring 20th century additions removed; and an earlier state reconstituted. In the process, it noted however that there have been conservation, restoration and renovation approaches to the work where, in some circumstances, the conservation and renewal approaches intertwined.

g) The mission also noted that it would be appropriate to remind the personnel in charge of the property of the necessary balance between repair and renewal which needs to be part of clearly set out policies and approaches for conservation, restoration and reconstruction in the Management Plan. Furthermore, projects such as this needed to be notified to the World Heritage Centre, for review by ICOMOS, in accordance with paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines.

h) Evaluating the technical stability of structures, apart from the desolate condition of the small 19th-century north-east corner tower of the arsenal wing, the mission observed that the stability of most structures has been secured, and those parts threatened by unstable foundations had been thoroughly investigated.

i) Evaluating the status of the management plan for the property, and a review of the policy of restoration and reconstruction, requested by the World Heritage Committee at its 29th session (Durban, 2005) the mission noted that the management plan conforms with the new Law of the Republic of Belarus on the Protection of Historical and Cultural Heritage, passed on 24 July 2006. The plan does not however include a policy for restoration and reconstruction, as requested by the Committee.

j) The mission considered that in view of the enormous tasks of protecting and conserving the Belarusian monuments and sites, the Department of Protection of Historical and Cultural Heritage and Restoration should increase its staff of specialists in conservation, restoration and documentation.

k) The mission noted that proposals were being drawn up for installing heating in the Corpus Christi Church and considered that an overall conservation plan would be needed before this work was undertaken. It further noted the need for greater protection to the urban setting of Nesvizh, where in the past few decades new buildings have been erected that are out of scale with the urban grain and impact adversely on the visual integrity of the setting of the property.

The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies express concern at the demolition of the Eastern Gallery for structural reasons in the light of the fact that details of this project were not notified to the World Heritage Centre, for review by ICOMOS, in accordance with the Operational Guidelines, in order to allow discussion on whether further advice on structural engineering might have been provided. They nevertheless consider that the approaches to its rebuilding were adequate.

They note that the mission was generally satisfied at the approaches to restoration in terms of research, materials, techniques and documentation but that restoration and renewal seem to be inextricably intertwined without a clear rationale for their differing justifications. Although a Management Plan has been prepared for the property and accords with national law, this does not set out a clear approach for restoration, conservation and renewal as requested by the World Heritage Committee. Such a clear approach needs to be put in place before work projects are undertaken such as for the installation of heating in Corpus Christi Church.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2010
34 COM 7B.78
Architectural, Residential and Cultural Complex of the Radziwill Family at Nesvizh (Belarus) (C 1196)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined document WHC-10/34.COM/7B.Add,

2. Recalling Decision 33 COM 7B.93 adopted at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009),

3. Acknowledges the results of the joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission of February 2010;

4. Deeply regrets the demolition of the Eastern Gallery and its rebuilding without prior information being submitted to the World Heritage Centre, for review by the Advisory Bodies, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines,

5. Requests the State Party to update the Management Plan clearly setting out approaches to conservation, restoration and renewal, in particular concerning rehabilitation and modernization works;

6. Urges the State Party to develop an overall conservation approach for the restoration of Corpus Christi Church and the installation of heating, including the advice of experts on wall painting and heating, and to submit this to the World Heritage Centre, for review by ICOMOS, before any commitments to the work are made;

7. Encourages the State Party to explore the possibility of reinstating, documented original furnishings for the former residence of the Radziwill, and also original paintings from Nesvizh, currently held in the National Art Museum to support the authenticity of the property;

8. Also encourages the Department of Protection of Historical and Cultural Heritage and Restoration to increase its staff of specialists in conservation, restoration and documentation in view of the enormous tasks of protecting and conserving the Belarusian monuments and sites;

9. Further encourages the State Party to adopt other planning measures, in order to protect the urban landscape of the town of Nesvizh where a number of new buildings erected in past decades impact on the historic centre and the visual integrity of the property;

10. Also requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2011, a report on the state of conservation of the property, including all above-mentioned points, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session in 2011.

Draft Decision 34 COM 7B.78

The World Heritage Committee

1. Having examined document WHC-10/34.COM/7B.Add,

2. Recalling Decision 33 COM 7B.93 adopted at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009)

3. Acknowledges the results of the joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission of February 2010;

4. Deeply regrets the demolition of the Eastern Gallery and its rebuilding without prior information being submitted to the World Heritage Centre, for review by ICOMOS, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines,

5. Requests the State Party to update the Management Plan clearly setting out approaches to conservation, restoration and renewal, in particular concerning rehabilitation and modernisation works;

6. Urges the State Party to develop an overall conservation approach for the restoration of Corpus Christi Church and the installation of heating, including the advice of experts on wall painting and heating, and to submit this to the World Heritage Centre, for review by ICOMOS, before any commitments to the work are made;

7. Encourages the State Party to explore the possibility of reinstating, documented original furnishings for the former residence of the Radziwill, and also original paintings from Nesvizh, currently held in the National Art Museum to support the authenticity of the property;

8. Also encourages the Department of Protection of Historical and Cultural Heritage and Restoration to increase its staff of specialists in conservation, restoration and documentation in view of the enormous tasks of protecting and conserving the Belarusian monuments and sites;

9. Further encourages the State Party to adopt other planning measures, in order to protect the urban landscape of the town of Nesvizh where a number of new buildings erected in past decades impact on the historic centre and the visual integrity of the property;

10. Also requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2011, a report on the state of conservation of the property, including all above-mentioned points, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session in 2011.

 

Report year: 2010
Belarus
Date of Inscription: 2005
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (ii)(iv)(vi)
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 34COM (2010)
Exports

* : The threats indicated are listed in alphabetical order; their order does not constitute a classification according to the importance of their impact on the property.
Furthermore, they are presented irrespective of the type of threat faced by the property, i.e. with specific and proven imminent danger (“ascertained danger”) or with threats which could have deleterious effects on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (“potential danger”).

** : All mission reports are not always available electronically.


top