REPORT ON THE JOINT
WORLD HERITAGE CENTRE/ICOMOS REACTIVE MONITORING MISSION
MISSION REPORT
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
GEORGIA
FROM 22 TO 28 APRIL 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS
1. BACKGROUND TO THE MISSION
1.1. Justification of the mission
1.2. Background information (provided in Annex II)
2
Inscription history
Inscription criteria and World Heritage values
Examination of the State of Conservation by the World Heritage Committee
NATIONAL POLICY FOR THE PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE
WORLD HERITAGE PROPERTY
2.1 Protected Area legislation
2.2 Boundary issues
2.3 Management structure
2.4 Institutional framework
3
ASSESSMENT OF THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF THE PROPERTY
-
Urban development pressure
Long-term consolidation, conservation and monitoring measures:
• THE CHURCH OF THE HOLY CROSS AT JVARI
• SVETITSKHOVELI
• THE CHURCH AND MONASTERY OF SAMTAVRO
• THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREA OF SAMTAVRO
• MTSKHETA CITY
• ARMAZTSIKHE – BAGINETI ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE
4
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5
ANNEXES
I. Terms of reference
II. Background documents
III. Examination of the State of Conservation by the World Heritage Committee
2/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The members of the mission are extremely grateful to the authorities of Georgia for their
hospitality, support, availability and assistance, and would like to convey their gratitude
especially to Dr Nikoloz Vacheishvili, Director General, National Agency for Cultural
Heritage Preservation, Ministry of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sport of Georgia,
who provided valuable information on the current situation of the World Heritage property
during the meetings and assisted in clarifying many of the complex issues.
The members of the mission would like to express their thanks to all members of the
Centre for Architecture, Restoration and Arts of the Patriarchy of Georgia, for their active
participation in the meetings and presentations.
Special thanks go to all staff of the National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation, in
particular to Ms Rusudan Mirzikashvili, Head of the UNESCO and International Relations
Unit, and Mr Peter Kankava, who assisted with the organization of the mission and
facilitated the meetings with various experts, local officials and stakeholders interested in
the conservation and protection of the World Heritage properties in Georgia.
Particular thanks go to the Georgian National Commission for UNESCO and its SecretaryGeneral Ms Ketevan Kandelaki, who continuously supported and accompanied the
mission team to the World Heritage properties.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
As requested by the Committee at its 35th session, a joint World Heritage
Centre/ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission visited the property from 22 to 28 April 2012
to review the overall situation of the World Heritage property of the Historical Monuments
of Mtskheta, inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1994, including new developments
and any impacts on its Outstanding Universal Value.
The summary conclusions and key recommendations of the mission are as follows:
•
•
•
•
The mission expresses its serious concern about the major urban development
and construction works, on the river bank surrounding the areas comprising
historical monuments, which it considers has a negative impact
on the
Outstanding Universal Value of the property.
The mission reiterates the Committee’s decision requesting the State Party to
declare a moratorium on any new construction of any kind and to stop all
developments before the legal approval of an Urban Master Plan of the Mtskheta
City. This Master Plan should include the World Heritage property’s strict protected
areas and its buffer zones with all necessary restrictive regulations.
The mission recommends that any development projects (including a project for
the recreation area) should be submitted to the World Heritage Centre, in
conformity with paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, for review by the
World Heritage Centre and Advisory Bodies, before any commitment has been
made.
The mission notes that the State Party clarified the boundaries of all component
parts of the property and its buffer zones within the framework of the Retrospective
inventories. The members of the mission recommend that the State Party develop
a proposal for minor boundary modification in order to create a buffer zone which
will include the landscape surrounding all components, in particular the panorama
3/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
along the rivers and the mountain setting, as previously requested by the
Committee.
•
•
•
•
•
•
1
1.1
The mission assessed the progress of the development of the management plan
of the property within the framework of the international assistance received by the
Georgian authorities, as well as the progress in the establishment of a clear
institutional coordination mechanism within the framework of the State Programme
for Cultural Heritage in Georgia, involving all stakeholders concerned;
The mission notes that although considerable efforts have been undertaken on all
historical monuments, no attempt has been made to prevent inappropriate
construction and development projects in its surroundings, nor to preserve the
panorama along the rivers;
The mission underlines that it is essential to maintain the dominating presence of
the historical monuments over Mtskheta City, and to ensure that its connection
with the natural environment and setting remains unspoiled in the future. This
should be taken into consideration regarding the volumes, the heights and the
views of any new town buildings.
The mission concluded that while the State Party has made significant progress in
implementing the corrective measures regarding the historical monuments, the
recommendations of the 2010 mission and the Committee’s decision were ignored
regarding the surrounding areas.
The mission discussed with the State Party the possibility to consider the
development of a national law for all World Heritage properties in Georgia, as well
as of a “5C strategic World Heritage country programme” proposal, based on the
State Programme for the protection of Georgian cultural heritage, to serve as a
consolidated basis for cooperation within the State Party to enhance the
implementation of its commitments within the framework of the World Heritage
Convention;
The mission recommends to the World Heritage Committee to retain the
Historical Monuments of Mtskheta (Georgia) on the List of World Heritage in
Danger.
BACKGROUND TO THE MISSION
Justification of the mission
At its 33rd session (Seville, 2009), the World Heritage Committee decided to inscribe the
Historical Monuments of Mtskheta on the List of World Heritage in Danger (Decision
33COM 8C.1).
At its 34th session (Brasilia, 2010), the World Heritage Committee decided to retain the
Historical Monuments of Mtskheta (Georgia) on the List of World Heritage in Danger,
adopted the Desired State of Conservation for the property for its future removal from the
List of World Heritage in Danger, as well as the corrective measures and the timeframe for
their implementation.
At its 35th session (UNESCO, 2011), the World Heritage Committee decided to retain the
Historical Monuments of Mtskheta (Georgia) on the List of World Heritage in Danger and
requested the State Party to invite a joint reactive monitoring mission to the property to
assess the progress in the implementation of the corrective measures.
4/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
On 31 January 2012 the State Party submitted a detailed state of conservation report that
addresses progress with the implementation of the corrective measures, including
conservation work at the Jvari Monastery, surveys of the Svctitskhoveli Cathedral,
clarification of boundaries, and progress with the Management Plan. Details are also
provided regarding a proposed visitor centre at the Jvari Monastery.
A joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission to the property was
undertaken from 22 to 28 April 2012.
The mission conducted by Ms Anna Sidorenko, Programme Specialist in charge of
Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe, UNESCO World Heritage Centre, Professor
Dr. Alkiviades Prepis, ICOMOS representative, met with the representatives of the
Ministry of Culture, the Georgian Apostolic Autocefaly Orthodox Church, Mtskheta City
and the site managers.
1.2
Background information (provided in the ANNEX I)
2
NATIONAL POLICY FOR THE PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE
WORLD HERITAGE PROPERTY (from the previous mission report of March
2010)
2.1. Protected area legislation
At the time of inscription, both properties were protected by the 1947 Law for the
protection of the Monuments of GSSR.
Five years after the inscription, the protection of the monuments was based on the 1999
Georgian Law on Cultural Heritage Protection (with amendments in 2002 and 2004).
The national protection zones of Mtskheta approved, by the joint Order of Minister of
Culture and the Minister of Economic Development, “On the definition of the Cultural
Heritage Protection Zones in Mtskheta” on 27 October 2006.
The new “Law of Georgia on Cultural Heritage Protection” was adopted in 2007. Two
types of protection zones were defined by this legal instrument:
- Individual protected areas are composed of a zone of physical protection and a zone
of visual protection (1000 m for the World Heritage properties). This area is applied
automatically with the attribution of the status of monument and could be extended by
Ministerial Decree. The zone of physical protection is defined around the monuments (no
less then 50 m) in order to protect against any threats. All construction is forbidden which
is not beneficial for the monument’s protection or its landscape.
- General protected areas comprise a protection zone for immovable monuments, a
construction regulation zone, an historic landscape protection zone and an archaeological
protection zone.
The historic landscape protection zone is meant to be free of any constructions and
objects which do not have any historical value. In this area, the following activities may be
carried out:
- research;
- rehabilitation works of historically valuable buildings
- new authorized constructions which respond to the public interest;
5/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
- horizontal constructions which do not modify the sense of the historic fabric and
space, and do not disturb the visual appreciation of the historic monuments.
In accordance with the Cultural Heritage Law and the Urban Planning Law, protected area
Plans and Historic-Cultural Plans constitute the base for all urban planning
documentation, including Land Use Plans and the General Plans.
2.2. Boundary issues
As previously recommended, the State Party submitted to the World Heritage Centre,
within the framework of the Retrospective Inventory, boundary clarification of the three
components of the serial property, that is the Sveti Tskhoveli Church, the Samtavro
Church and Monastery, and the Mtskhetis Jvari (The Church of the Holy Cross-Mtskheta),
and its buffer zones.
The mission reiterates its previous recommendation that the State Party should consider
establishing a common buffer zone
to include the landscape surrounding the
components, in particular the panorama along the rivers and the mountain setting, and
provide the buffer zone with appropriate protection. The buffer zone would need to be
submitted to the World Heritage Committee as a minor boundary modification.
2.3. Management structure
Urban Master Plan of the City of Mtskheta, including land-use regulations
The mission took note that at the initiative of the local authorities, work has begun on a
systematic data collection of the urban topology, related developments and other studies.
The authorities underlined that this data will form the basis for an Urban Master Plan of
the town which is currently being prepared and is due to be completed by the end of the
year.
As already mentioned in previous mission reports, the “Heritage and Tourism Master
Plan”, has been elaborated in 2003 as a UNESCO & UNDP-SPPD Pilot Project, with the
collaboration of Georgian authorities and specialists. This project has not been accepted
so far as an official document. The mission reminded that it is essential that the “Heritage
and Tourism Master Plan” be reviewed, integrated in the Urban Master Plan and officially
approved as soon as possible by the State Party, and its conclusions be integrated within
the management plan of the property.
Management Plan
The mission noted that the management plan of the property is still under elaboration in
coordination with Dr. Jukka Jokilehto within the framework of an approved International
Assistance Request and with the support of the National Agency for Cultural Heritage
Preservation. This project will also consider the management system for the property and
the possibility of establishing working groups to allow for the participation of
representatives of the church authorities, NGOs and the Mtskheta civil society. The
mission stressed the need for the Management Plan to acknowledge that the property is
an ensemble of religious monuments within a very sensitive historical environment and
thus needs to be managed as a cultural landscape.
State Programme for Cultural Heritage in Georgia - towards a strategic World
Heritage country programming
6/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
The mission was informed by the World Heritage Centre that the World Bank prepared a
“Regional Development Program: An Integrated Approach to Urban Regeneration,
Cultural and Natural Heritage for Economic Growth and Job Creation” which is under
implementation in Georgia. On 23 April 2012, the Minister of Finance of Georgia
presented an “Innovative Approach to Regional Development” during a meeting organised
by the Cultural Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Thematic Group, the Europe and
Central Asia (ECA) Sustainable Development Department and the South Caucasus
Regional Management Unit at the World Bank Headquarters.
The mission has been informed that the Governor of Mtskheta discussed with the World
Bank representative the possibility to extend this project to Mtskheta. The mission
recommended to the authorities to establish, in coordination with the World Heritage
Centre and the Advisory Bodies, a global approach for all projects and activities which
could be developed for the World Heritage properties in Georgia.
During the meeting with the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Georgia and the National
Commission of Georgia for UNESCO, the mission underlined the urgency to develop this
global approach towards a strategic World Heritage country programming in coherence
and alignment with the State Programme for the protection of Georgian cultural heritage
prepared by the National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation.
The mission recommended that the State Party consider a possibility to organize, in
coordination with the World Heritage Centre, a seminar or a round-table in order to define
this country-based approach using the 5C World Heritage Strategic Objectives in order to
achieve greater coherence, efficiency and effectiveness at country level of all activities
related to the protection, management and use of the World Heritage properties, and to
avoid fragmentation and duplication of projects and activities.
2.4 Institutional framework
A clear institutional coordination mechanism, ensuring that the conservation of the
Historical Monuments of Mtskheta receives priority consideration within relevant
governmental decision-making processes, has been established.
The mission noted some disagreements between the stakeholders concerned regarding
the consultation process on projects. The mission recommended that a continued
collaboration should be enhanced between the Patriarchate Technical office and the
National Agency for Cultural Heritage Protection.
3.
ASSESSMENT OF THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF THE PROPERTY
Urban development pressure
The 2010 mission report highlighted the need for special care to be given to the sensitive
area extending along the river Mtkvari bank, between the Svetitskhoveli Cathedral and
Jvari church. It recommended that the area where the rivers converge should not be
developed and that the historic landscape be restored. However, the 2012 mission noted
that the State departments, in cooperation with the local authorities have proceeded with
the construction of new administrative buildings (Police and Court buildings and a
Conference Hall) in this area. The 2012 mission was also informed that a new Museum
building is to be erected on the same area, the plans of which have already been
approved, as well as a hotel complex. The mission also saw a new tourist information
building in front of the entrance of the Svetitskhoveli Cathedral, constructed in an
inappropriate style without any respect of the property’s value.
7/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
The 2012 mission noted that these considerable developments have been undertaken
within one of the most sensitive areas of the property, in the visual corridor between the
Svetitskhoveli Cathedral and the Jvari hill. This is currently being assessed independently
of the directions that may be developed by the Urban Master Plan and the Management
Plan that are both under preparation. The mission further noted that although all these
interventions have an immediate impact on the property, they have not been notified to
the World Heritage Centre, in line with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines.
The mission noted that the aforementioned projects, under realization, are not followingup the Urban Master Plan (which is still under preparation process). It is inconsistent that
all of these constructions are decided upon and realized outside of the frames of any
Management Plan, which, once elaborated, will face a situation already formatted
independently. The mission pointed out that all interventions of that scale that have an
immediate impact on the World Heritage property should have been under serious
consideration and in open dialogue with the World Heritage Centre.
The 2012 mission underlined that by all means and to all stakeholders and official
authorities, Mtskheta is not only composed of religious monuments, but also a
multicultural complex of archaeological sites, and traditional architectural arrangement,
within a very sensitive historical natural environment. All these factors should been taken
under consideration within the frames of the Management Plan.
Long-term consolidation, conservation and monitoring measures
The mission assessed the state of conservation of the property and noted that the State
Party has made significant progress in implementing the requested corrective measures
regarding all historical monuments - components of the property.
A comprehensive conservation assessment of archaeological components of the property
was undertaken by the State Party. Conservation work was carried out on the roof, walls
and stone plaques of the Jvari Monastery, with the participation of an ICCROM expert,
and of the wall paintings in the southern part of the Svetitskhoveli Cathedral.
At the Cathedral, another capacity-training project, headed by an international expert,
addressed the production of up to date measured drawings during 2010-2011. This
resulted in a full set of measured drawings for the Cathedral that will form the basis for
developing a comprehensive conservation plan.
At the Samtavro nunnery, a project is being prepared to strengthen the southern support
wall, taking into account the 2010 mission recommendations.
In addition, a special project was implemented for monitoring the groundwater fluctuations
around Svetitskhoveli Cathedral. It is anticipated that by the end of 2012, additional
monitoring mechanisms will be proposed for all elements of the property.
The mission proposes its recommendations, related to conservation, management and
presentation of the property and its buffer zone, as described in detail below.
8/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
THE CHURCH OF THE HOLY CROSS AT JVARI
Description
The Jvari (Mtskheta Holy Cross) Monastery stands on the rocky mountaintop at the
confluence of the Mtkvari and the Aragvi rivers. The existing church was built upon a large
cross, between 586 and 605.
The Large Church of the Holy Cross is one of the best examples of Georgian earlyChristian architecture. It is a tetra conch, i.e. a four-apse domed building. The corner
chambers communicate with the central space by means of ¾ circular niches. The
transition from the square bay to the dome circle is effected through three rows of
pendentives. The church was rebuilt and extended a number of times over the centuries
and has suffered from exposure and warfare, having also been burnt at least once
(probably by Tamburlaine). There was, at one point, a small monastic complex near the
Church which now consists of some fragmentary ruins.
Conservation History
In the 1980s an extremely heavy handed restoration intervention was begun on the small
Chapel to the North of the Main Church which involved the replacement of a substantial
amount of original material with new stone bedded on Portland cement. This intervention
was halted by the authorities but not before a great deal of damage had been done. There
is now a proposal to roof this building with a wooden structure and to consolidate the
heavily decayed constituent sandstone. The apse of the Church was subject to a survey
carried out within the framework of an ICCROM Training Programme in 2005 during which
a protective scaffolding was built and all stone surfaces were mapped and included in a
documentation system. The three carved panels are in a particularly dangerous situation
and are subject to severe exfoliation and detachment. The scaffolding is still in good
condition but conservation work
on these panels and the protective cornices needs to be carried out as soon as possible.
Current conservation issues
•
Project for a Visitor Centre at the Jvari Monastery
The mission noted that the State Party revised plans for the visitor centre at the Jvari
Monastery, as recommended by the 2010 mission. The basic idea is not to leave the
building above the ground level, but to be embedded into the ground. The ICOMOS
suggestions are already taken into account and incorporated into the design. These plans
will now be reviewed by ICOMOS and comments sent to the State Party.
•
Conservation work (all works were carried out with the participation of an ICCROM
expert)
Positive achievements:
-
The chapel located on the north side of the church received a new roof covering of
excellent wood construction, and an aside closure with discreet reversible woodwork.
Fixing of functional wooden doors and a good drainage system.
Maintenance of the chapel and the side entrance on the south side of the church.
Maintenance of the perimeter wall remains (together with the towers) of the
Monastery, removal of the plants and mounting - completion of building stones.
Dangerous parts on the perimeter wall to the cliff are supplemented with additional
distinctive masonry and / or with appropriate metal fencing.
Improving the pavement of the trail leading to the monument.
9/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
-
Placement of new, modern luminaries for the night lighting of the monument.
Demolition of the incompatible building, raised by the religious community next to the
entrance of the site.
A negative remark is that some maintenance work was undertaken hastily, and made with
visible, widespread use of cement into the joints.
Recommendations:
-
-
-
The maintenance of the other stone reliefs that are placed on the external surfaces of
the church to proceed by the same exemplary achievements;
A detailed diagnostic report on the situation of the stone building blocks on the outer
surfaces of the church to be submitted to the WH Centre and, if necessary,
accompanied by a study for their (selective) maintenance in places.
The demolished building had been used to meet the needs of the religious community
(living in another place about 2 km far away from the site), since Jvari is a living
religious monument, functioning for the Sunday liturgies, weddings, christenings etc.
The new architectural plan for the infrastructure of the site has not provided any similar
space. We propose to expand the space provided, in order to give approximately 30
m2 for the above needs (after collaboration with the religious community).
A metal barrier to be placed in the maintained side chapel at the south entrance of the
church to prevent people from entering.
General remarks:
-
The mission noted that a constructive collaboration has been established between the
Jvari monastic community and the National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation
of Georgia. Monks are ready to cooperate for the improvement of the arrangement of
the monument site and express their needs and willingness in an atmosphere of good,
mutual understanding. The mission noted that an inappropriate building was
demolished, as recommended by the 2010 mission. In presence of the mission
experts, the representative of the monastic community requested the national
authorities to allocate a proper space within the (new) visitor center in order to get out
of the church the small shop for candles etc. The mission noted that to date the small
shop is installed directly in the church and recommends that a sufficient space be
allocated to the religious community within the future visitor centre.
-
The mission underlined that due to the effects of the hard atmospheric conditions, the
monument does need some further stone conservation work, especially regarding its
facades.
SVETITSKHOVELI Monastery and Cathedral Church
Monastery Katholikon (main church) – exterior
Description
Svetitskhoveli (“life-giving pillar”) has been the Cathedral of the Archbishop of Georgia,
even at early times when it was built of wood. In the year 420, the wooden church was
destroyed. A new, stone church was constructed in 480, a large three-nave basilica with
four pairs of cruciform pillars and a projecting apse. In the year 914, the Arab general Abul
Qassim burned the cathedral down. It was soon restored, although by the early 11th
century, it was destroyed again. The existing Cathedral church was built between 1010
and 1029 by the architect Arsukisdze on the initiative of Catholikos Melchisedec I. It is the
10/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
largest church in Georgia and one of the best examples of medieval Georgian
architecture, an inscribed cross- type building.
The exterior appearance of the gigantic dimensions of the monument continues to be
outstanding - in spite of its partial destruction, alteration and reconstruction, all of which
present a harmonic amalgam of living building history through the ages: the perfect
analogies, the wise gradation of the volumes, the fine lines and the elaborated
construction details, the impressive decoration with the sensitive mix of building stones
with grey-red and green colours, as well as the coloured bas-reliefs, walled during the
different historic periods – are the constant architectural values which continue to
underline the authenticity of the building. However, careful inspection of the building
shows that it faces serious maintenance and conservation problems.
2010 conservation issues
•
•
•
•
•
Partial restoration of the damaged cornices in some places.
Placement of the guttering system seems to function, though in some places the rain
waters are channelled straight to the base of the monument.
The religious paraphernalia on the altar are well organised and arranged. There is no
use of candles.
The glass panels placed in the floor at the base of the main columns that allow the
visitor to view the different phases of construction of the church have been well
designed and executed.
In 2004 – some parts of the mural paintings were cleaned.
Current conservation issues
•
•
•
•
The old gutters were replaced with new ones, in a better and correct position.
Preparation for the forthcoming cooperation:
- with the stone conservator Simon Warrack, regarding the checking of the existing
condition and maintenance of the building stones of the church, and
- with Prof. A. Crocci for checking the cracks on the structural elements of the
interior of the church and for any possible gaps inside the masonry.
Partial restoration of the wall-paintings on the southern church wall.
A new shop for liturgical objects is placed in the Cathedral courtyard.
THE CHURCH AND MONASTERY OF SAMTAVRO
Description
The cathedral of the Saviour was built between 1030 and 1050 and is one of the best
examples of 11th century Georgian architecture. It is an inscribed-cross-type building, with
the dome resting on the projections of the apse walls and two free standing pillars. The
Catholicon church is built out of similar materials to the Cathedral at Svetitskhoveli though
sandstone is more predominant and there are less decorative coloured stones.
The wall-paintings in the interior of the church (mainly on sanctuary and on the cupola
surfaces) date from the mid-17th century, and are evidently related to the name of Queen
Mariam.
The frescoes in the sanctuary are among the most interesting examples of Georgian
mural painting of those times, and reflect the common features of Post-Byzantine painting.
The dome frescoes are the handiwork of Russian painters invited by the Georgian kings.
The altar screen (templon) is an excellent example of the stone–carved iconostases of the
11/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
15th century.
2010 Conservation Issues
•
•
•
The new roof covering has been installed with care and attention, and has effectively
protected the monument from the penetration of rain water, which was a problem
before. However, its galvanised iron sheeting is in strong contrast with the appearance
of the medieval churches in Georgia, and should be replaced with the traditional stone
slab roofing.
A general cleaning and conservation work has been done concerning the interior walls
(which were covered with plaster) and the remaining wall-paintings (mainly on
sanctuary and the cupola surface) in the interior of the church.
Bearing in mind that the monument is a functional church, the arrangement of the altar
is sufficient.
Current conservation issues
•
•
In the western part of the Cathedral courtyard the permission to proceed with the
construction of an underground space and of a retaining wall was given. The mission
realized that in that very place an old brick pipeline was discovered, together with a
masonry wall. Therefore, it is necessary that these new findings be maintained and the
proposed plan be adapted accordingly.
The problem of controlling the rising humidity on the church’s external walls, which
destroys the stone basement – remains unsolved.
THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREA OF SAMTAVRO
Description
This is the largest ancient burial ground in the Caucasus, situated in a field stretching from
the Samtavro Nunnery to the medieval Bebristsikhe Castle, in the west outskirts of the
town. Archaeological excavations of the burial ground started in 1874 and the last
archaeological research ended two years before. More than 4,000 burials of various types
and various periods have been discovered, lying on several strata. The oldest of these are
Bronze Age tumuli dating from early 2nd millennium BC. The latest cists of the cemetery
date back to the 8th and 9th centuries. Fragments of 2nd and 1st century BC buildings
have been excavated on the territory of the burial ground as well as 8th to 7th BC houses,
on the neighbouring hills. The precious archaeological findings uncovered in the tombs
are kept at the Janashia State Museum of Georgia and the Great Mtskheta Museum
Reserve.
2010 Conservation Issues
• The archaeological area has been thoroughly cleaned. The old ugly constructions and
the abandoned bus have been removed from the area.
• Installation of a metallic net fence has begun along the boundaries of the site. The
entrance is protected with gates, beside which a new guard–house with toilets has
been built.
• The half-destroyed old metallic roofing over the excavated area has been replaced
with new iron constructions.
• New visitor’s paths to the excavations have been organised.
• Explanatory labels have been installed at various points in the archaeological site.
12/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
Current conservation issues
•
•
In accordance with the recommendations of the 2010 mission, an archaeological
education program aimed to school children of the region was prepared, which was
attended by the members of the mission. During the last 1,5 year of operation, about
5,000 pupils have been involved within this program, which has received wide
response by the schools.
Information signs were placed in front of the archaeological findings.
Remarks
•
•
No indicative archaeological excavations have been made within the surrounding
buffer zone of 50 meters (according to the laws of the country). Therefore, the limits of
the area with archaeological interest are not yet fully clarified, and the determination of
the boundaries of the site to be protected from any future reconstruction cannot be
fixed.
The proper maintenance and presentation of the graves area still remains a challenge.
It has been suggested that an educational representation of the prehistoric way of life
(in those houses) be developed in an adjacent area.
MTSKHETA CITY
Current conservation issues
•
•
•
•
The replacement of roofs, the re-construction of houses and the renovation of fences
in the area around the Cathedral is extended, within the not-yet specified buffer zone.
Although one can maintain some reservations (this kind of “facade-and-volume
beautification” should have undergone a thorough study of the typologies and
morphologies as well as an analysis of traditional materials used within this area of
traditional architecture), though the interventions have obviously improved the
previously difficult living conditions of the citizens, as well as improving the internal
and external image of the town.
The pedestrian and car circulation have been normalized inside the town core. A car
and coach parking lot has been organized in an appropriate location near the
Cathedral, which during the 2010 mission was in a poor condition, full of useless
material. A proper network of walkways leading to the Cathedral has been created.
The road pavement has been improved with appropriate small stone blocks, sidewalks
are constructed and street lights have been placed.
The ex-degraded area around the (partly ruined) historic "Old House" has been
regenerated and transformed into an attractive recreational area (according to the
recommendations of the 2010 mission), with parking, restaurant, etc. The “Old House”
building has been restored and converted into an attractive restaurant (partially
preserving the function of residence). There are electric cars for group visitors within
the pedestrian areas of the town.
The area in front of the Cathedral is transformed appropriately into a square.
Remarks
•
The gas pipelines have not been placed underground yet, remaining over ground. The
TV trays have not been removed nor replaced with cable TV.
13/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
•
The formulation of the new, tourist information buildings in front of the entrance of the
Cathedral, with big columns out of scale, recalls Egyptian cenotaph. Who introduces
and who approves these buildings - remained unclear.
ARMAZTSIKHE – BAGINETI ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE
Current conservation issues
It should be emphasized strongly that within this very important archaeological site great
and exemplary work has been made.
The mission noted the following positive measures:
• The archaeological finds are consistently maintained and protective covers have been
placed over them, as well as railings around them.
• Earthly paths have been organized and wooden ladders are placed so as to provide
easy access to visitors.
• Touristic routes on wooden corridors allow unobstructed viewing of the buildings.
• Signs with appropriate virtual and written information (maps, photographs,
reproductions, explanatory texts) are placed.
• Places for viewing the historic village of Mtskheta and Jvari church are organized,
together with rest places for visitors, with appropriate signs and explanations.
4
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
On the initiative of the local authorities a solid start has been made on a systematic
collection of all data relating to recording the current situation in the town (built and unbuilt areas, ownership status, underground geology, planning system of neighbouring
settlements, historical maps, historic photographs, old development studies etc.). A copy
has been given to the mission members. This data will form the basis for the Urban
Master Plan of the town, which is under preparation, and should be finished by the end of
the year.
The existing pressure on the formation of the state of management and on the exploitation
of the areas around the monuments according to projects (already accepted)
and
decisions, already taken, by the Local and Central Government (Ministries of Culture,
Development, Transportation, Tourism, etc.), is strong. These projects are elaborated
independently of the directions that may be developed, secondly, by the Urban Master
Plan and the Management Plan – both now under preparation.
The mission report of 2010 had highlighted the need for special care to be undertaken on
the sensitive area extending along the river Mtkvari bank, and located between the
Cathedral church and the hill where Jvari church is raised up. In particular, strict
suggestions were given that the area where the rivers converge should be vacant from
any construction and the historic landscape to be restored. Already the State Central
Departments, in cooperation with the Local Authorities decided and proceeded with the
construction of new administration buildings (Police and Court buildings and a Conference
Hall ) in the immediately adjacent area (being the owners of that area alongside the river).
Also, we were informed that the New Museum Building is to be erected on the same area,
the plans of which have already been approved (among 10 candidates). In the future,
also, a hotel complex is to be built there, in order to meet the needs of the touristic
development of the town - probably on the basis of the earlier project "Touristic-recreation
and sports-sanitation complex on the right bank of the r. Mtkvari ".
14/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
The 2012 mission expressed its concern that despite the 2010 mission recommendation
regarding the sensitive area extending along the river Mtkvari bank, between the
Svetitskhoveli Cathedral and Jvari church, the State Party authorised new constructions in
this area and plans new developments which will impact on the Outstanding Universal
Value of the property, without any submission of these projects to the World Heritage
Centre, in conformity with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, for review and
comments prior to any approval.
While the State Party has made significant progress in implementing the corrective
measures regarding the historical monuments, the mission considers that the new
constructions work undertaken in one of the most sensitive areas of Mtskheta’s landscape
does not respect the Corrective Measures developed by the 2010 mission jointly with the
State Party authorities and agreed by the Committee nor will contribute towards achieving
the Desired State of Conservation.
The mission underlines the fact that Mtskheta is an ensemble of religious monuments
within a very sensitive historical environment. Taking into account that this sensitive area
of Mtskheta’s landscape are being compromised by new buildings, the mission
recommends that the World Heritage Committee retains the Historical Monuments of
Mtskheta (Georgia) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
The mission recommends to the Committee to urge the State Party to halt developments
within the property and in the vicinity of the property within the area of the river Mtkvari
bank, between the Svctitskhoveli Cathedral and Jvari church until details of proposed
developments, together with Heritage Impact Assessments, have been submitted to the
World Heritage Centre, in conformity with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines,
for review and comments by the Advisory Bodies before any irreversible decisions have
been made.
The mission discussed with the State Party the possibility to develop a national law for all
World Heritage properties in Georgia, as well as initiate a “5C strategic World Heritage
country programme” proposal. This could serve as a consolidated basis for cooperation
within the country to enhance the implementation of its commitments within the framework
of the World Heritage Convention and take into account the need for a more sustainable
longer-term approach. It could be developed on the basis of the analysis of the
challenges, corrective measures and the national priorities and strategies as set out in the
Periodic Report.
The mission took note that the State Party clarified the boundaries of all components of
the World Heritage property. The mission recommends to the State Party to define the
buffer zone of the property to allow a clear understanding of the archaeological and
visually sensitive areas around the property and to submit this proposal as a minor
boundary modification of the property.
15/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
ANNEX I
TERMS OF REFERENCE
for the joint UNESCO World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS / ICCROM reactive
monitoring mission
to the Historical Monuments of Mtskheta
Georgia
23 – 28 April 2012
Carry out a joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS / ICCROM reactive monitoring mission,
as requested by the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session (Decision 35 COM
7A.30, Paris, 2011) to review the state of conservation of the World Heritage property of
the Historical Monuments of Mtskheta, inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1994;
1) Review the overall situation of the property, including new developments and any
impacts on its Outstanding Universal Value;
2) Evaluate the progress of the implementation of corrective measures adopted at its
34th session (Decision 34 COM 7A.27, Brasilia, 2010) as follows:
a) Review the boundary issue, including adequate maps clarifying clear limits of
all components of the property and its buffer zone;
b) Review progrsss in achieving long-term consolidation and conservation of the
historical monuments in Mtskheta;
c) Review the status of the Urban Land-Use Master Plan of the City of Mtskheta,
including:
-
complete cadastral information (land ownership), in publicly available and
easily accessible format, for all land within the World Heritage property and
its buffer zone,
-
clear operating plans and strict limits to development rights and
management regulations within the property and its buffer zone, to ensure
the long-term protection and conservation of the World Heritage property,
-
conservation master plan;
-
clearly defined and strictly controlled development rights on existing private
or leased lands within the property;
-
infrastructure rehabilitation, zoning regulations with particular emphasis on
the establishment of no-construction zones, the institutional reform and
capacity building, community relations, and tourism development,
-
publicly available information on land-use for all lands within the property
and its buffer zone, in easily accessible format, to ensure transparency in
land use and allocations;
d)
Review the status of development and implementation of a management
system, including:
-
progress in adoption of legislation that assures the protection and
maintenance of the Outstanding Universal Value of the whole of the World
Heritage property and its component parts,
-
progress in defining and prioritizing the long-term conservation and
consolidation measures within the World Heritage property;
16/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
-
progress in setting up a 5-year training programme in conservation and
management for the staff in charge of the preservation of the property,
-
progress in elaboration of an Integrated Management Plan for the World
Heritage property and its buffer zone, including:
•
•
•
•
•
a tourism strategy,
strategic guidelines for the integrated multi-stakeholder approach to
the conservation, rehabilitation and restoration of historic buildings,
design guidelines for new constructions and the street furniture,
clear guidelines for the type of management, religious or visitor
infrastructure that can be built within the World Heritage property,
Monitoring mechanisms
-
progress in establishment of a clear institutional coordination mechanism
ensuring that the conservation of the property receives priority
consideration within relevant governmental decision-making processes,
-
progress in development of a State Programme for the protection of World
Heritage religious properties in Georgia, as a legal framework for comanagement under which the respective responsibilities of the State Party
and the Georgian Patriarchate are effectively established, monitored and
evaluated in relation to the protection and conservation of the property;
3) Review the status of development of strategies to enhance awareness of World
Heritage among stakeholders and developers;
4) Evaluate the implementation by the State Party of the decision of the World Heritage
Committee encouraging the State Party to continue implementation of the integrated
multi-stakeholder approach to the conservation of Jvari Monastery and urging the
State Party in collaboration with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies to
develop similar work programmes over the next ten years for the other monument
complexes of the property;
5) Evaluate the implementation by the State Party of the decision of the World Heritage
Committee encouraging the State Party to prepare, in consultation with the World
Heritage Centre and ICOMOS/ICCROM a 5 year work programme designed to
address the major problems identified.
6) Prepare a detailed report for review by the 36th session of the World Heritage
Committee including, in conformity with the Operational Guidelines:
a) an indication of threats or significant improvement in the conservation of the
property since the last report to the World Heritage Committee;
b) any follow-up to previous decisions of the World Heritage Committee to the state
of conservation of the property; and
c) information on any threat or damage to or loss of outstanding universal value,
integrity and authenticity for which the property was inscribed on the World
Heritage List,
as well as considering Operational Guidelines paragraphs 190-199 (review of the state of
conservation of properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger); 192-198 (procedure
for the eventual deletion of properties from the List of World Heritage in Danger), and
submit the joint report to the World Heritage Centre in electronic form (according to the
enclosed format).
17/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
ANNEX II
BACKGROUND TO THE MISSION / THE HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Inscription history
The outstanding universal value of the Historical Monuments of Mtskheta is defined by the
following:
Justification provided by the State Party :
City-museum, architectural reserve, Mtskheta is a multi-layered monument, testifying to
the great scope of building activity and high culture of the country. Preserved architectural
monuments and unearthed archaeological material testify to the high artistic value of
building and minor arts in various epochs, beginning from the 2nd mill. B.C. to today.
The architectural monuments of Mtskheta, being stagemaking in the development of
Georgian architecture are at the same time extremely significant for the study of the
medieval architecture of the whole Christendom. Besides they are striking examples of the
unity of architecture with the surrounding landscape.
Of special value from the artistic and historical points of view are the monuments of
monumental painting (mosaic floor in "Dionysius Maison" in Szalisa, 2nd c. A.D.) and
metalwork (goldsmithery) discovered in Mtskheta. Special place in semitic epigraphics is
occupied by Armagi inscriptions, giving vast valuable data for the study of the written
language in general and making it possible to deal with the origin of Georgian written
language anew.
ADVISORY BODY STATEMENT:
The nomination dossier submitted by the Republic of Georgia was accompanied by a
number of books and other documents. Most of these are written in Russian or Georgian,
neither of which is a working language of the World Heritage Convention. The most useful
book, Georgien: Wehrbauten und Kirchen, is in German, another non-working language.
More importantly, the only map provided showing the “Protective Zones of Mtskheta”, was
a very small-scale photographic print of a much larger map; the barely decipherable
legends were, in any case, all in Georgian. However, new maps showing the areas
proposed for inscription on the World Heritage List, together with buffer zones, were
supplied to the mission, together with a summary of the Georgian protection legislation, as
required by the Operational Guidelines.
Recommendation: That this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis
of criteria iii and iv.
Inscription criteria and World Heritage values
The nominated property of the Historical Monuments of Mtskheta correspond to criteria
(iii), (iv).
Criterion iii: The group of churches at Mtskheta bear testimony to the high level and art
and culture of the vanished Kingdom of Georgia, which played an outstanding role in the
medieval history of its region.
Criterion iv: The historic churches of Mtskheta are outstanding examples of medieval
ecclesiastical architecture in the Caucasus region.
18/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
Bureau (July 1994): The Bureau recommended the inscription of this property on the
World Heritage List and suggested to the State Party to change the name to "Historic
Churches of Mtskheta".
Examination of the State of Conservation by the World Heritage Committee and its
Bureau (refer to previous State of Conservation reports etc.)
THE HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
35th session of the World Heritage Committee, UNESCO, 2011
Extract of the Decisions adopted the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session
(UNESCO, 2011)
Historical Monuments of Mtskheta (Georgia) (C 708)
Decision: 35 COM 7A.30
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-11/35.COM/7A,
2. Recalling Decision 34 COM 7B.27 adopted at its 34th session (Brasilia, 2010),
3. Notes the efforts made by the State Party in the implementation of the World
Heritage Committee’s decisions with regard to the corrective measures aimed at
future removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger;
4. Urges the State Party to submit proposals for a buffer zone as a minor
boundary modification, as well as to develop and finalize the Urban Land-Use Master
Plan of the City of Mtskheta;
5. Also urges the State Party to adopt legislation that ensures adequate protection of
the property and of any defined buffer zone and wider setting so as to sustain its
Outstanding Universal Value;
6. Encourages the State Party to continue developing strategies to enhance awareness
of World Heritage among stakeholders and developers;
7. Requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS/ICCROM
reactive monitoring mission to the property to assess the progress in the
implementation of the corrective measures;
8. Also requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1
February 2012, a detailed state of conservation report, including a progress report
on the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage
Committee at its 36th session in 2012;
9. Decides to retain the Historical Monuments of Mtskheta (Georgia) on the List
of World Heritage in Danger.
19/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
34th session of the World Heritage Committee, Brasilia, 2010
Extract of the Decisions adopted the World Heritage Committee at its 34th session
(Brasília, 2010)
Historical Monuments of Mtskheta (Georgia) (C 708)
Decision:
34 COM 7A.27
The World Heritage Committee,
1.
Having examined Document WHC-10/34.COM/7A.Add,
2.
Recalling Decision 33 COM 7B.102, adopted at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009),
3.
Notes the establishment of an Inter-Ministerial Commission to ensure co-ordination
of all World Heritage matters;
4.
the
recommendations
of
the
joint
World
Heritage
Also
notes
Centre/ICOMOS/ICCROM reactive monitoring mission to the property in March
2010;
5.
Reiterates its serious concern about the state of conservation of the different
components of the property, and the slow rate of progress made by the State Party
in addressing urgent issues;
6.
Adopts the following Desired State of Conservation for the property, for its future
removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger:
a)
The World Heritage property with clearly marked boundaries and buffer zone
precisely identified,
7.
b)
The Urban Master Plan of the City of Mtskheta, including land-use regulations
and conservation master plan approved,
c)
A comprehensive management system, including an Integrated Management
Plan of the World Heritage property and its buffer zone, approved,
d)
Long-term consolidation and conservation of the historical monuments in
Mtskheta ensured;
Adopts the following corrective measures and the timeframe for their
implementation:
a)
Changes to be effected within one year - Precise identification of the World
Heritage property and clearly marked boundaries and buffer zones by the
following actions:
-
Prepare adequate maps showing clear limits of all components of the
property,
-
Undertake topographic and archaeological surface surveys including the
archaeological remains, important historical monuments and landscapes,
-
Define the boundaries of the World Heritage property according to the
results of the relevant surveys,
-
Develop a 5-year training programme for the conservation and
management of the site, possibly with participation at sub-regional/regional
level,
20/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
-
Develop a monitoring mechanism for the physical conservation of the
buildings and archaeological sites,
-
Define and prioritize the long-term conservation and consolidation
measures within the World Heritage property;
b)
Changes to be effected within one/two years –
Implementation of the Urban Land-Use Master Plan of the City of Mtskheta,
including operating plans and conservation master plan by the following
actions:
-
Establish complete cadastral information (land ownership), in publicly
available and easily accessible format, for all land within the World
Heritage property and its buffer zone,
-
Establish clear operating plans and strict limits to development rights and
management regulations within the property and its buffer zone, to ensure
the long-term protection and conservation of the World Heritage property,
-
Ensure that development rights on existing private or leased lands within
the property are clearly defined and strictly controlled,
-
Adopt and implement the Urban Land-Use Master Plan of the City of
Mtskheta, including all aspects of infrastructure rehabilitation, zoning
regulations with particular emphasis on the establishment of noconstruction zones, the institutional reform and capacity building,
community relations, and tourism development,
-
Make publicly available the information on land-use for all lands within the
property and its buffer zone, in easily accessible format, to ensure
transparency in land use and allocations;
c)
Changes to be effected within two/three years - Ensured site management by
the following actions:
-
Adopt legislation that assures the protection and maintenance of the
Outstanding Universal Value of the whole of the World Heritage property
and its component parts,
-
Adopt the necessary priority for the conservation of the property in national
policy, planning and budgets, and take pro-active measures to solicit donor
support for property management and conservation,
-
Develop and implement an Integrated Management Plan for the World
Heritage property and its buffer zone, including:
•
•
•
•
a tourism strategy,
strategic guidelines for the integrated multi-stakeholder approach to
the conservation, rehabilitation and restoration of historic buildings,
design guidelines for new constructions and the street furniture,
clear guidelines for the type of management, religious or visitor
infrastructure that can be built within the World Heritage property,
-
Develop and implement a management system,
Undertake appropriate training in conservation and management for the
staff in charge of the preservation of the property,
-
Establish a clear institutional coordination mechanism ensuring that the
conservation of the property receives priority consideration within relevant
governmental decision-making processes,
21/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
-
d)
Develop a state programme for the protection of World Heritage religious
properties in Georgia, as a legal framework for co-management under
which the respective responsibilities of the State Party and the Georgian
Patriarchate are effectively established, monitored and evaluated in relation
to the protection and conservation of the property,
Changes to be effected within five years (after possible removal from the List
of World Heritage in Danger in 2 - 3 years) - Long-term protection and
conservation of the historical monuments and the archaeological remains in
Mtskheta by the following actions:
-
-
Complete the documentation and recording of all historical monuments and
archaeological remains in a digitized information database for
management, conservation and planning purposes,
Establish a full inventory of paintings including digitalization and reference
system for all historical monuments in Mtskheta,
Implement restoration of the paintings,
Develop a special programme on the protection of all archaeological
components of the City of Mtskheta;
8.
Urges the State Party to develop, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and
the Advisory Bodies, a draft retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value
of the property for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session
in 2011;
9.
Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February
2011, a detailed state of conservation report, including a progress report relevant to
the implementation of the corrective measures, for examination by the World
Heritage Committee at its 35th session in 2011;
10.
Decides to retain the Historical Monuments of Mtskheta (Georgia) on the List
of World Heritage in Danger.
33rd session of the World Heritage Committee, Seville, Spain / 22-30 June 2009
The World Heritage Committee, at its 32nd session (Quebec City, July 2008), expressed
its serious concern about the privatization processes of land situated in the vicinity of the
property, and urged the State Party to immediately halt these before the boundary
clarification and the preparation of a "Special Statement on protection of World Heritage
properties in Georgia" are completed. The World Heritage Committee reiterated its
request to give highest priority to development of an integrated management plan for the
property, and invited the State Party to establish a Special State Commission on World
Heritage. Expressing its serious concern about the state of conservation of the
archaeological components of the property, the World Heritage Committee urged the
State Party to develop a special programme on protection of all archaeological
components and indicated that, in the absence of substantial progress, it would consider
the inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger. The State Party
state of conservation report was received on 29 January 2009 and covered: a)
Conservation The main Church, the northern small Church, parekklession and southern
building of the Jvari Monastery: Damaging impact of aggressive natural conditions on
stones is still a problem during 2008. Parts of the bas-reliefs have completely
disappeared. Construction issues are still the same: the damaged cupola pillars, threshold
stress and cracks in the carrier structures. Some building stones around the eastern
arches and around the foundation of the main church are damaged - mould, sooty walls,
22/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
and cracked building stones are reported. The tiles of cupola’s roofing needs immediate
renovation. The small Church remains without roofing. The report underlines that the
small Church has partially lost its authenticity due to the use of inappropriate materials
during the “restoration” works. The conservation project for the small Jvari Church has
been prepared. These existing damages are only planned to be addressed in 2009. The
joint ICCROM project on conservation of the Saint Cross Monastery is still under
implementation. In 2008, the Small Jvari Church Site Development Plan was completed
and works were started to develop a conservation plan. Svetitskhoveli Cathedral, the Bell
Tower, Catholicos-Patriarch Melchisedec Palace, Catholicos-Patriarch Antony Palace,
The Defence Wall: The report noted that parts of the Cathedral walls are disintegrating
and in a wrecking state, some building stones of the northern façade are partially
demolished, the tiles of roof are partially cracked, the increased humidity damaged the
frescoes. The state of conservation of wall paintings should be studied. The XVIIth century
Bell Tower was demolished; the gates of Catholicos- Patriarch Melchisedec Palace
urgently need rehabilitation works. The State Party is monitoring Svetitskhoveli Cathedral
to assess its structural state and develop a detailed plan to ensure conservation of the
frescos. The report states that the Palace of Catholicos - Patriarch Anton II in the SouthEastern part of a courtyard, reconstructed between 2001 – 2004 has partially lost its
authenticity.
Samtavro Nunnery: The report informed that the problem of roofing of the Cathedral still
remains unresolved. The original tiled roofing should be restored. In the Cathedral,
archaeological research has not been completed. The northern and southern annexes of
the Cathedral need archaeological research, as well as the territory inside the defence
wall. The Bell tower significantly bended to the Cathedral needs comprehensive research
and conservation works should be implemented on the remains of the King Mirian Palace.
In 2008, the restoration works were concluded, which aimed at restoring the bearing wall
adjacent to the Tower of Gabriel the Monk and damaged by natural conditions. As the
project design had stipulated, a cobble-stone wall with regular sandstone quartz was
constructed in front of the concrete wall. In order to prevent accumulation of water in the
rear of the wall, drainage of plastic pipe work was arranged in the wall. In order to prepare
for conservation of the Samtavro St. Nino Church existing damages were studied and
assessed, which led to a plan to construct a new roof to the church. Armaztsikhe-Bagineti,
The roman-type bathes, the “Column Hall”, Fortification system: The report also noted that
the six-Apse Church has lost its authenticity due to the reconstruction works conducted
with unacceptable methods. The roman-type bathes and the ”Column Hall“ need
conservation. There is a risk of destruction of the building due to the aggressive influence
of climatic conditions. Conservation works on the Fortification system should include
different construction periods and layers and a conservation and rehabilitation plan should
be developed. In September 2008 a competition was announced, aiming at drafting a
development concept of Armaztsikhe-Bagineti. Its results are to be announced in spring
2009. Recommendations have been prepared on issues comprising site development,
monument conservation and planning of tourist infrastructure. b) Boundaries Concerning
the boundary issues, the State Party underlined that the Law of Georgia on Cultural
Heritage has defined a special protection area for all components of the property of a 1
km radius and that the protection zones such as Construction Regulation Zone,
Archaeological Heritage Zone, Landscape Protection Zone are currently being adjusted
and expanded based on the requirements. The protection zones also regulate new
constructions. As a result, there were no incompliant buildings constructed during 2008. In
2008, the development plan process aiming at restoring the geographic and historical
connection between the Jvari Church and Svetitskhoveli Cathedral started, including the
rehabilitation of historic routes. c) Inventories The State Party also mentioned that the
Ministry of Culture, established a regular monitoring exercise for all World Heritage
properties, as well as recorded a full inventory of archaeological and architectural
monuments in Mtskheta. The creation of the data base of the Historical Monuments of
Mtskheta was initiated by the National Agency. Monitoring missions are regularly visiting
23/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
all properties and are producing summary state of conservation report every year. d)
Management The State Party created in 2008 an ad-hoc “Committee of World Cultural
Heritage” established under the National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation to be
in charge to define functions and liabilities of state agencies, regulate national, local and
religious rights in order to ensure a protection and management of the World Heritage
properties. This ad-hoc Committee shall deal with issues existing in the usage of
monuments between private owners, the state and the Patriarchate as well as with
privatization-related problems. The Mtskheta Museum-Reserve was reorganized and
transformed into the Greater Mtskheta State Archaeological Museum-Reserve and
affiliated, in 2008, with the aforementioned National Agency.
The State Party informed that the Mtskheta Heritage and Tourism Master Plan developed
in collaboration with UNESCO and UNDP is under examination for formal approval by the
Ministry of Culture. The World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS remain greatly concerned by
the state of conservation of this property and that some monuments may no longer be
authentic. The report provides very limited information concerning the preparation of a
legal and technical basis to address the threats. The State Party did not provided any
detailed responses to the World Heritage Committee’s key requests such as the land
privatization issues, development of an integrated management plan for the property,
establishment of a Special State Commission on World Heritage issues, development of a
special programme on protection of all archaeological components, monitoring of
Svetiskhoveli Cathedral. No document clarifying the exact boundaries of protected areas
of the property and its buffer zones, or any boundary modification proposal, has been
provided by the State Party. The State Party did not provide any comments concerning
the eventual inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger. The World
Heritage Centre and ICOMOS consider that the State Party has been unable to take into
account the World Heritage Committee’s decisions or to carry out the necessary
preparatory activities to address existing and any new potential threats. Considering
Paragraphs 177 – 179 of the Operational Guidelines, the World Heritage Centre and
ICOMOS note the absence of substantial progress, which could lead to the possible
inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger. They furthermore consider that the
progress, if exist, cannot be evaluated on the basis of the report submitted by the State
Party, and therefore suggest a reactive monitoring mission to the property.
Decision 33COM 7B.102
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-09/33.COM/7B,
2. Recalling Decision 32 COM 7B.90, adopted at its 32nd session (Quebec City, 2008),
3. Expresses its serious concern about the state of conservation of the different
components of the property;
4. Regrets that the State Party report did not adequately address the preparation of legal
and technical provisions to address the various threats, the aspect of land privatization,
the development of an integrated management plan and the development of a special
programme on the protection of all archaeological components;
5. Further regrets that the State Party did not submit documents clarifying the exact
boundaries of the protected area of the property and its buffer zone;
6. Notes with regrets that some components have lost their authenticity due to restoration
works conducted with unacceptable methods;
7. Decides to inscribe the Historic Monuments of Mtskheta (Georgia) on the List of
the World Heritage in Danger;
8. Urges the State Party to develop, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and
the Advisory Bodies, a draft Statement of Outstanding Universal Value a proposed
desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of the World
24/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
Heritage in Danger, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 34th session
in 2010;
9. Requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS mission to
the property in early 2010 to assess the state of conservation of the property;
10. Also requests to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2010, a report
on the progress made in the implementation of the recommendation contained in Decision
32 COM 7B.90, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 34th session in
2010.
32nd session of the World Heritage Committee, Quebec City, Canada / 2 - 10 July
2008
The Ministry of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sport of Georgia submitted a state of
conservation report dated 25 January 2008, confirming, in one page, that no significant
progress has been made since the last session of the World Heritage Committee.
A joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission to the Historic
Monuments of Mstkheta and to the Bagrati Cathedral and Gelati Complex invited by the
State Party, with some delay due to political factors, took place from 2 to 10 June 2008,
met all relevant Georgian representatives, and discussed the following issues:
Legal framework
The new Georgian Law on Cultural Heritage was adopted in June 2007. Different
protection zones were defined in this legal instrument. In accordance with this Cultural
Heritage Law and the Urban Planning Law, the Protected Areas Plans and HistoricCultural Plans constitute the base for all urban planning documentation, including the
Land Use Plans and General Plans.
The mission evaluated the national protection zones of Mtskheta approved by the joint
Order of the Minister of Culture and the Minister of Economic Development "On the
definition of the Cultural Heritage Protection Zones in Mtskheta" of 27 October 2006. The
areas approved at the national level by this Order do not correspond to the boundaries of
the protection areas of Mtskheta or its monuments, as inscribed on the World Heritage
List, and which constitute the legal reference within the framework of the World Heritage
Convention. This situation illustrates that the above-mentioned Order was prepared
without any link with the World Heritage Convention, its Operational Guidelines and
previous decisions of the World Heritage Committee.
At this time, the main threat to the property is the distribution or sale of lands situated
within the protected area of the property, as part of a privatization process without any
detailed legal regulations approved in conformity with the expectations of the World
Heritage Committee. Numerous proposals submitted by the municipality were already
approved by the Ministry of Economic Development without any knowledge of the
nomination dossier submitted by Georgia during the inscription of property.
The mission recommended:
a) To inventory all lands already distributed within the protected areas of Mtskheta, and to
halt any construction permits and works within the existing protected areas of the World
Heritage property as inscribed ;
b) To immediately halt any land distribution or sale, as well as any construction within the
protected area of Mtskheta as inscribed in 1994, the preparation and approval in
conformity with the World Heritage Convention, its Operational Guidelines, the World
Heritage Committee’s decisions of the following documents:
- "Special Statement on protection of World Heritage properties in Georgia" defining the
World Heritage property's status, the World Heritage properties' strict protected areas and
its buffer zones with all necessary restrictive regulations,
25/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
- Boundary clarification document to be submitted to the World Heritage Centre, and if
relevant, the boundaries modification proposal in order to clarify exact boundaries of
protected areas of the World Heritage property and its buffer zones,
- Plan of the protected areas ("Historic-Cultural General Plan"), Land Use Plan ("Plan of
Regulation") and Master Plan ("General Urban Plan") of Mtskheta.
The mission also recommended the establishment of a “Special State Board on World
Heritage” in order to officially share the responsibilities between all relevant State
institutions and national, local and religious authorities in ensuring an appropriate legal
protection and management of the important and outstanding heritage of Georgia.
Management plan
No management plan exists for the property. The mission noted that the concept of the
management plan is not known by the authorities; as such plan does not correspond to
the existing documents or rules. The Cultural Heritage Programme prepared each year by
the Ministry of Culture is a unique framework for any activity concerning the cultural
properties in Georgia, including the World Heritage properties.
The mission recommended that the preparation of a management plan for the World
Heritage properties in Georgia should be added, as priority, to the Cultural Heritage
Programme.
Management system and institutional framework
The management, monitoring and survey of the property are under the supervision of the
Cultural Heritage Department, Ministry of Culture. The Georgian World Heritage
Committee, created in 2006, assumes the role of coordinator of World Heritage issues.
The Greater Mtskheta State Archaeological Museum-Reserve, under the Cultural Heritage
Department, Ministry of Culture, acts as the local site manager. However, the mission
noted that this institution does not fulfill its role as World Heritage site manager as the
function has not been clearly defined by the authorities.
A special Commission on Cultural Heritage was also created by the Patriarch of the
Georgian Church but its function is still unclear. The responsibility for cultural heritage,
management, protected areas, rules of maintenance and use of religious monuments is
determined by the relevant State authorities, in accordance with the 2007 Law on Cultural
Heritage, and with the 2002 Constitutional Agreement.
Physical conditions of the major components of the nominated property
a) Jvari Church
The mission underlined the serious problems at the Jvari Church. The general state of
conservation of the monument is very critical due to the negative influence of natural
conditions and climatic change. The conservation works of the Jvari Church should be
started immediately involving international experts on stone conservation, as a follow up
to the ICCROM training course organized in 2005.
The mission noted that new construction within the vicinity of the Jvari Church had been
stopped, and recommended the removal of this inappropriate construction.
b) Svetitskhoveli Cathedral
The mission commented on structural problems at Svetitskhoveli Cathedral due to factors
affecting the monument. The mission noted that no progress has been achieved in order
to improve the global monitoring of the structures of the Cathedral. The mission
recommended undertaking a global monitoring for the structural stability of the Cathedral
and also undertaking special interventions for conservation of the important mural
paintings of different periods in the interior of the Cathedral.
26/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
c) Samtavro Monastery
The authorities reported that stabilization works were completed between 2002 and 2003.
The archaeological remains discovered during the reparation works were recovered by
the new floor. The structure of the associated belfry outside of the church, which was in
serious danger of collapse, was reinforced.
Within the direct vicinity of the church new monastic cells were recently built but did not
affect the functional integrity of the property. However, taking into account the necessity to
continue scientific investigation of the area, the lands around the walls should be reserved
for relevant archaeological excavations and research studies.
Furthermore, the mission noted serious damage to the archaeological sites of the World
Heritage property, which have been completely abandoned by the authorities. There are
no conservation, protection and promotion activities in place and nothing has been
suggested for the future. The mission confirmed that this part of the World Heritage
property has completely lost its authenticity due to vandalism and absence of
management.
In general, the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS remain greatly concerned by the
scope of the problems described even if the mission noted the progress accomplished by
the State Party in attempting to prepare a legal and technical basis to address these
problems.
Decision 32COM 7B.90
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-08/32.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decision 31 COM 7B.96, adopted at its 31st session (Christchurch, 2007),
3. Notes the substantive efforts of the State Party in defining and establishing the Cultural
Heritage Programme, including legal assessments and relevant conservation, protection
measures;
4. Expresses its serious concern about the privatization processes of land situated in the
vicinity of the World Heritage property, and strongly urges the State Party to immediately
halt these processes before the boundary clarification and the preparation of a "Special
Statement on protection of World Heritage properties in Georgia" defining the World
Heritage property's status and its buffer zones are completed;
5. Recalls its request to the State Party to give highest priority to development of an
integrated management plan for the property;
6. Invites the State Party to establish a Special State Commission on World Heritage in
order to officially share the responsibilities between all relevant State institutions and
national, local and religious authorities in ensuring an appropriate legal protection and
management of this property;
7. Urges the State Party to immediately start the implementation of an integrated
multistakeholder approach to the conservation of Jvari Church in coordination with
ICCROM and relevant international experts on stone conservation;
8. Also expresses its serious concern about the state of conservation of the
archaeological components of the World Heritage property, their progressive deterioration
and the abandonment of conservation efforts by the State Party, noting that this loss has a
major impact on the Outstanding Universal Value, authenticity and integrity of the property
and further urges the State Party to develop a special programme on protection of all
archaeological components;
9. Encourages the State Party to undertake global monitoring of the structural stability of
the Svetiskhoveli Cathedral and implement special interventions for the conservation of
the paintings;
10. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2009,
a progress report including all above mentioned documents, as well as the boundaries
clarification document, and if relevant, the boundaries modification proposal, for
27/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session in 2009, with a view to
considering, in the absence of substantial progress, the inscription of the property
on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
31st session of the World Heritage Committee,
Christchurch, New Zealand, 23 June – 2 July 2007
Document WHC- 07/31.COM/7B
Main threats identified in previous reports
a) Lack of a management mechanism;
b) Insufficient coordination between the Georgian Church and the national authorities;
c) Need to re-define core and buffer zones;
d) Loss of authenticity in recent works carried out by the Church.
Current conservation issues
The World Heritage Committee, at its 29th session (Durban, 2005), expressed “serious
concern over the state of conservation of this property” and urged the State Party to take
urgent and appropriate measures, including implementing the Master Plan developed by
UNESCO and UNDP in 2003, defining appropriate core and buffer zones of the property,
and addressing the problem of the illegal and inappropriate additions to the old Catholicos
Palace that affect Mtskheta's outstanding universal value.
The Ministry of Cultural Affairs of Georgia submitted on 12 March 2007 a state of
conservation report dated January 2007 which covers a wide range of areas of concern:
The State Party recalls the justification supplied in the nomination document at the time of
inscription, however does not provide a Statement of Outstanding Universal Value. The
State Party also attempts to articulate a Statement of Authenticity/ Integrity but not fully in
accordance with the Operational Guidelines. In this regard, the State Party notes a
significant number of losses of authenticity, including: The Palace of Catholicos-Patriarch
Anton II, inappropriate interventions by local clergy at the Svetitskhoveli Complex;
erroneous “restoration” works (suspended in 2004), executed at the church of the Jvari
Monastery; inappropriate reconstruction works at the six-apse Church in ArmaztsikheBagineti.
The State Party also notes a number of monuments which have been “completely
destroyed” as a result of the recent work:
a) some bas-reliefs of the Jvari monastery;
b) the belfry of Svetitskhoveli Cathedral;
c) a part of the fortification system in Armaztsikhe-Bagineti.
ICOMOS finds these reports very worrying as in the circumstances the reported loss of
authenticity implies a significant potential loss of outstanding universal value.
The State Party reports that in December 2005, the President of Georgia issued a Decree
which reorganized the Mtskheta Museum-Reserve (1968) into the Greater Mtskheta State
Archaeological Museum-Reserve (2007). The State Party notes that in January 2007, the
Mtskheta Heritage Integrated Management Commission was instituted within the
Municipality to better coordinate at local level the “sustainable and integrated conservation
and management of the cultural heritage located on the territory of Mtskheta”. However
the State Party notes that no progress has been made in development of a management
28/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
plan for the property and that the 2003 Mtskheta Heritage and Tourism Master Plan was
being used to guide short and long term decision making for the site.
The World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS are very concerned that the State Party has not
been able to pursue implementation of the Master Plan developed by UNESCO and
UNDP in 2003. ICOMOS believes strongly, given evident different views about
development between Church and State, and the already strong reported material losses
of authenticity that it is of paramount importance that a management plan involving all
stakeholders be developed urgently.
Furthermore, the State Party report provides a detailed monitoring overview of physical
conditions of the four major components of the nominated property:
a) Jvari Church: Apart from discussing difficult moisture management situations
which threaten the survival of important frescoes, bas reliefs and materials,
comments also concern unauthorized construction activities undertaken by the
Georgian Church on site. The report notes that though damaging efforts to
reconstruct the northern small church have been halted, the church and the
parekklesion remain without roofing.
b) Svetitskhoveli Cathedral: The report comments on structural problems at
Svetitskhoveli Cathedral. The seventeenth century Bell Tower has been
demolished, and that “absolutely erroneous “reconstruction” works” carried out on
the recently discovered 11th century Melchisedec Palace have been very
damaging. The State Party repeats comments of 2005 that “it is of paramount
importance for the future of the monument that stratigraphic investigations,
systematic archaeological excavations, and conservation should be initiated all
over the churchyard…”.
c) Samtavro Monastery: The report notes that while stabilisation works were
completed in 2003, a permanent solution to roofing the Cathedral has not been
found and archaeological research had not been completed before the beginning
of the “restoration” works inside the Cathedral. The report also notes that the
associated belfry is in serious danger of collapse.
d) Armaztsikhe-Bagineti: The report notes that the six-apse church of the second
and third centuries AD, excavated in the 1990s is in an alarming state, and that it
has completely lost its authenticity due to priority given reconstruction over
conservation of the discovered monument. The report also documents threats to
monuments excavated in the 1940s, the roman-type baths, and the fortification
system, the major part of which has been irretrievably lost.
As noted in earlier reports, the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS remain greatly
concerned by the severity and scope of the problems described, and the inability of the
State Party to address these.
The State Party report further notes that on 27 October 2006, the Minister of Culture,
Monuments Protection and Sport and the Minister of Economic Development issued a
joint Order n° 3/471 – 1-1/1243 “ On the Definition of the Cultural Heritage Protection
Zones in Mtskheta”. This joint Order provides for the establishment of a series of zones to
better focus protection in the territory of Mtskheta, including:
a) The Immovable Monuments Protection Zone (IMPZ) to protect both physically
and visually the monuments existing in the Mtskheta urban fabric: Svetitskhoveli
Cathedral, Samtavro Nunnery, Antiochia and Gethsimania Churches;
29/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
b) The Construction Regulation Zone (CRZ), a buffer zone, aimed at protecting the
integrity of the Mtskheta Historic Centre and its historical landscape;
c) The Archaeological Heritage Protection Zone (AHPZ) including the major
archaeological complexes located on the territory of Mtskheta and its
surroundings;
d) The Landscape Protection Zone (LPZ) to protect the “historically formed
landscape as an indissoluble natural and cultural phenomenon”.
Following reports in earlier years of serious problems at the Javari Monastery it is noted
that the Ministry of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sport of Georgia and ICCROM
had launched a joint project (2005) aimed at monitoring, documentation and conservation
of Jvari Monastery. The report also notes that a second phase of ICCROM’s project will
address development of a conservation plan for the site, and continue the training of
Georgian specialists. Efforts to develop cooperation with the Council of Europe within the
framework of the Kyiv Initiative Regional Programme, to assist Jvari are also mentioned.
Finally, the report a documentation project planned for 2007, with the support of the
Society and Heritage Association (Georgia) and the World Monuments Fund is indicated.
Such an integrated and multi-stakeholder approach to resolve the problems of Jvari
Monastery is to be commended.
Decision: 31 COM 7B.96
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-07/31.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decision 29 COM 7B.64, adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),
3. Regrets the late submission of the state of conservation report by the State Party but
notes substantive efforts in defining and establishing clear zones of protection;
4. Encourages the State Party to continue implementation of the integrated
multistakeholder approach to the conservation of Jvari Monastery and urges the State
Party in collaboration with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies to develop
similar work programmes over the next ten years for the other monument complexes the
property;
5. Strongly urges the State Party to give highest priority to development of an integrated
management plan for the site to be built with the full involvement and collaboration all
stakeholders based on the 2003 Masterplan;
6. Requests that the State Party invite a joint UNESCO-ICOMOS mission to assess the
state of conservation of the property, including reconstructions, new developments and
any impacts on the Outstanding Universal Value, authenticity and integrity of the property;
7. Also requests the State Party to provide a progress report to the World Heritage Centre
on 1 February 2008 for examination by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008.
30/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
29 session of the World Heritage Committee,
Durban, South Africa
10-17 July 2005
Main threat(s) identified in previous report(s):
Lack of a management mechanism; insufficient coordination between the Georgian
Church and the national authorities; need to re-define core and buffer zones.
Current conservation issues:
Following the decision by the Committee, the State Party requested on 17 March 2005 to
change the name of the property to the "Historical Monuments of Mtskheta".
The State Party submitted a detailed state of conservation report on 13 February 2005.
Following the elaboration in 2003 of the "Mtskheta Heritage and Tourism Master Plan"
with the assistance of UNESCO/UNDP, the State Party recognised the urgent need to
prepare a Management Plan for the property. According to the State Party, factors
affecting the property include (1) lack of funding, (2) climatic conditions, (3) inappropriate
interventions by the Church authorities and (4) absence of an effective management
system.
ICOMOS' detailed comments and recommendations on the preparation of the
wellstructured and detailed report were transmitted to the State Party on 25 April 2005.
Concerning the Javari Monastery, ICOMOS fully shared the concerns expressed in the
State Party report on the state of conservation of both the interior and exterior of the main
Church. There are serious problems of stonework maintenance and bas-relief protection.
In addition, scaffolding from the earlier restoration work should be removed and a buffer
zone must be defined. Therefore, ICOMOS recommended that (1) conservation and
partial restoration is needed for the seriously damaged limestone blocks of the external
facades. Soot, mildew, and parasites must be removed from certain building stones and
capitals; (2) the carved building stones must be carefully removed without delay and taken
to a special centre for stone conservation so that the crumbling parts can be
strengthened. Thereafter, they should be on display in the Regional Museum. They should
be replaced by replicas in accordance with Article 8 of the 1964 Venice Charter. The
replicas should be distinguishable from the authentic building stones.
The attempts, now halted, to restore the Northern Church and Parekklesion also pose a
significant problem. ICOMOS recommends that (1) specialized cleaning and treatment
using herbicide, of the surrounding wall to remove plant growth, (2) repair work to the
walling, including careful repair of the construction joints and restoration work in some
sections. A protective layer should be put on the upper level, as protection against
inclement weather conditions, (3) removal of later, minor constructions or their
replacement where necessary (e.g. small wooden gates).
Concerning Svetitskhoveli Cathedral, the State Party reported on the continued and
alarming state of the roofing, the bas-reliefs and ornaments of the cupola, and the facades
of the monument. Unfortunately, no conservation work has been carried out on the wall
paintings inside the Church, which are of exceptional historical and artistic value. They are
at grave risk of further damage and eventual disappearance.
ICOMOS considered that it is of paramount importance for the future of the monument
that stratigraphical investigations, systematic archaeological excavations and
conservation should be initiated throughout the entire churchyard in advance of ‘Territory
31/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
Maintenance'. Illicit underground construction inside and outside the Monastery grounds
and unsupervised excavations carried out by local Church authorities should be
prohibited. It is regrettable that the State Party provided no information on new building
activities in the buffer zone of the monument, including the surrounding urban architectural
ensemble. According to ICOMOS, the illegal and inappropriate additions to the old
Catholicos Palace continue to constitute one of the most difficult problems in preserving
Mtskheta’s outstanding universal value, since this building continues to be the residence
of the Catholicos– Patriarch of Georgia.
ICOMOS regretted that the State Party report made no comment on the condition of the
wall paintings inside the Samtavro Nunnery Church, which had been seriously damaged
by plastering during the Soviet period (see A Heritage & Tourism Master Plan for
Mtskheta, Georgia (UNESCO & UNDP-SPPD Pilot Project, March 2003, p.51). The State
Party report made no comment on the present condition of the Samtavro burial ground,
the largest and one of the most important cemeteries in the Caucasus region. Shortmedium- and long-term recommendations were made in A Heritage & Tourism Master
Plan for Mtskheta, Georgia (UNESCO & UNDP-SPPD Pilot Project, March 2003, p.37–
40).
ICOMOS shared the views on the existing condition and work carried out at the important
Armaztsikhe- Bagineti archaeological property. The proposals in A Heritage & Tourism
Master Plan for Mtskheta, Georgia (UNESCO & UNDP-SPPD Pilot Project, March 2003)
have not been acted upon in the face of the very serious problems of excavation,
conservation, protection and adaptation of this property in the city of Mtskheta. Some
‘conservation’ methods on the unfired brick walls are open to serious challenge as regards
the protection and the underlying layout of the buildings.
Decision 29COM 7B.64
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-05/29.COM/7B.Rev,
2. Recalling its Decision 28 COM 15B.69, adopted at its 28th session (Suzhou, 2004),
3. Urges the State Party of Georgia to define core and buffer zones of the property;
4. Expresses its serious concern over the state of conservation of this property and urges
the State Party to take urgent and appropriate measures;
5. Encourages the State Party to implement the Master Plan developed by UNESCO and
UNDP in 2003;
6. Recalls the importance of cooperation between the State Party and stakeholders for the
conservation of the property.
7. Requests the State Party to solve the problem of the illegal and inappropriate additions
to the old Catholicos Palace that strongly affects Mtskheta's outstanding universal value.
8. Requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with an updated report
by 1 February 2007 for examination by the Committee at its 31st session (2007).
32/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
29COM 8B.1 - Changes to Names of Properties (Historical Monuments of Mtskheta)
At the request of the Georgian authorities the Committee is asked to approve a change to
the English and French names of the City-Museum Reserve of Mtskheta, inscribed on the
World Heritage List in 1994.
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-05/29.COM/8B,
2. Approves the proposed name change to the City-Museum Reserve of Mtskheta
(Georgia) as proposed by the Georgian authorities. The name of the property becomes
Historical Monuments of Mtskheta in English and Monuments historiques de Mtskheta in
French.
28 session of the World Heritage Committee,
Durban, South Africa
10-17 July 2005
Conservation issues:
At the request of the 27th session of the World Heritage Committee, a joint UNESCOICOMOS reactive monitoring mission was undertaken from 8 to 16 November 2003.
Despite the political situation in Georgia at that time, which made it difficult to organise
meetings with the relevant authorities, the mission evaluated the state of conservation of
the property, the management of the World Heritage site and consulted local stakeholders
on how best to implement the Master Plan developed by UNESCO and UNDP in 2003.
Subsequently, the Georgian authorities provided a state of conservation report on 25
February 2004, which addresses a number of conservation issues.
The Church of Georgia has constructed new buildings in the vicinity of the Cathedral of
Sveti Tskhoveli, which in the opinion of the mission affects the character of the World
Heritage site. While the basilica of the Cathedral is in a good condition, the inappropriate
method used for the restoration of mural paintings is of particular concern as the mission
observed surface abrasion and general deterioration. The mission noted further
conservation problems that include damages on the defence wall and uneven ground
level as well as an underground concrete structure outside the defence wall of the
Cathedral. The Georgian Church constructed a bishop palace within the ground, in view to
demolish it later when another building is constructed outside the wall of the Cathedral.
The State Party further mentioned in its report that the Church has made some
inappropriate interventions for the conservation of the property. The exterior of the
Samtavro Monastic Complex is in a good condition but the mission could not obtain
permission to examine the interior of the building. The state of conservation of Jvari is
favourable, except it is necessary to remove the scaffolding from the earlier restoration
work and to define a buffer zone for the property. The State Party stated in its report that
inappropriate material was used to restore the small church of the Jvari Monastery.
The mission considers that the Master Plan for the World Heritage property needs to be
implemented with a more active involvement of the local, regional and national authorities
as well as the Church. The translation of the Master Plan into Georgian would further
facilitate this process. Moreover, future developments should take into account the vision
provided in the Master Plan and to keep the integrity of the World Heritage property by, for
example, respecting the existing architectural styles and using local material. The mission
33/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
explored different ways in which the Master Plan could be supported by different
international and national organisations including the World Bank, Soros Foundation and
UNDP.
The ICOMOS-UNESCO mission highlights an urgent need to clarify the extent of a core
zone and to define buffer zones as appropriate. At the time of the inscription in 1994,
ICOMOS evaluated the outstanding universal value of only three churches. The World
Heritage Committee at its 18th session in 1994, therefore, suggested to the State Party to
change the name of the property to the "Historic Churches of Mtskheta" but this has never
been taken up. The Georgian authorities stated in their state of conservation report that
they wish to extend the core zone of the property to include an area as defined by a
triangle of the churches of Jvari, Samtavro and Armatsikhe. The mission of November
2003 supports the view taken by the State Party in order to ensure landscape integrity,
while recognising potential problems in controlling future developments in the enlarged
area. In accordance with the Constitutional Agreement with the State, the Georgian
Orthodox Church owns all ecclesiastic buildings in Georgia. The report by the State Party
confirmed the view of the mission that the interventions made by the Georgian Church for
the conservation of the property are often inappropriate and the country lacks an overall
process to manage urban development and other conservation issues at the national and
local level.
Decision 28 COM 15B.69
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Noting the outcome of the joint UNESCO-ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission to the
property,
2. Expresses its serious concerns for the lack of management mechanism for the property
as well as insufficient coordination between the Georgian Church and the national
authorities in safeguarding the outstanding universal value of the property;
3. Urges the State Party to change the name of the property to "Historic Churches of
Mtskheta" as suggested by the World Heritage Committee at its 19th session in 1994,
following the original ICOMOS evaluation at the time of the inscription that refers to the
Churches of Jvari, Samtavro and Armatsikhe as the components of the property, and to
prepare a detailed map indicating their core and buffer zones;
4. Encourages the State Party to implement the Master Plan developed by UNESCO and
UNDP in 2003;
5. Requests the State Party to provide to the World Heritage Centre an updated report by
1 February 2005 so that the World Heritage Committee could examine the state of
conservation of the property at its 29th session in 2005.
27 session of the World Heritage Committee,
Paris, UNESCO Headquarters, Room XII
30 June – 5 July 2003
The World Heritage Committee strongly urged the State Party of Georgia to provide,
before 1 September 2002, a report on the on-going constructions and degradations at the
site and requested that the authorities invite a UNESCO-ICOMOS mission to the site. To
date no report has been received and pending the official invitation by the authorities, the
experts identified by ICOMOS and the Centre were not able to undertake this mission.
34/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
Decision 27 COM 7 (b) 62
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Recalling the decision taken at the 26th session of the Committee in 2002 (26 COM 21
(b) 46), to carry out a mission to the property and for a report to be provided by the State
Party,
2. Reminds the State Party of its responsibilities as described in Article 6 of the World
Heritage Convention to ensure the preservation and conservation of World Heritage
properties;
3. Urgently requests the World Heritage Centre, the Advisory Bodies and the State Party
to work closely together to ensure timely organisation of a joint mission and for a detailed
report to be completed in order that the World Heritage Committee can examine the state
of conservation of the property at its 28th session in 2004.
26 session of the World Heritage Committee,
Budapest, Hungary, 24 - 29 June 2002
Main issues: The degradation and construction projects at Svetitskhoveli Cathedral are a
cause for concern. The Bureau requested a report on the state of conservation and uptodate information on all the restoration and construction projects at the site.
New information:
At the time of the preparation of this document no report from the authorities had been
received.
Decision 26 COM 21 (b) 46
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Strongly urges the State Party of Georgia to provide before the 1 September 2002, a
report on the on-going constructions and degradations at the site;
2. Requests the Government authorities to ensure that all these works are halted and that
no further restoration works or constructions in close proximity to the Cathedral be
undertaken;
3. Requests that the authorities invite an UNESCO-ICOMOS mission to the site in the
near future and that a report be presented for examination at its 27th session in June/July
2003.
23rd session of the World Heritage Committee,
Marrakesh, Morocco, 29 November - 4 December 1999
City-Museum Reserve of Mtskheta (Georgia)
From 1996 to 1999 an amount of US$ 36,800 was made available under technical
cooperation for expert services on a management and tourism policy. A preliminary study
for a Master Plan for the heritage and tourist policy for the World Heritage site was
prepared.
35/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
In September 1999, the major elements of this study were presented during a World
Heritage Centre mission to potential donor institutions in the form of "Terms of Reference
for 9 Actions". As a result, a project is being prepared with UNDP (to be financed by
UNDP and the World Heritage Fund) for the development of a Heritage and Tourism
Master Plan.
The mission team particularly noted the critical conditions of two archaeological sites: the
Armaztsikhe and the Samtavros Veli sites. Furthermore, the mission took note of a plan to
build a new bell tower within the enclosure of the cathedral.
The Observer of Germany inquired about the results of the previous assistance and
pointed out that urgent interventions and rehabilitation works are needed in the site.
These issues should be taken into account by the Committee when examining a request
for technical co-operation for the preparation of the Master Plan.
The Bureau decided to transmit the report to the Committee for examination and
recommended the following for adoption:
"The Committee welcomes the initiative of the Government of Georgia and the
Mtskheta Foundation to develop a Heritage and Tourism Master Plan for the CityMuseum Reserve of Mtskheta. It expresses its full support for this initiative that will
provide the appropriate framework for a coherent set of actions to be financed by
different sources and donor institutions. The Committee recognizes that on the
middle and long-term major investments will be required for the actual
implementation of the Master Plan and calls upon States Parties, international
institutions and organizations to collaborate in this effort.
The Committee urges the Government of Georgia to take immediate measures for
the protection of the Armaztsikhe archaeological site and for the recuperation of
the total area of the Samtavros Veli Necropolis site. It requests the Georgian
authorities to provide the plans for the bell tower at the cathedral for further study
by ICOMOS."
World Heritage Committee
XVIII session / Phuket, Thailand / December 1994
The City-Museum Reserve of Mtskheta : The Committee, in inscribing this property on the
World Heritage List, suggested to the State Party to change the name to "Historic
Churches of Mtskheta".
36/36
Joint mission report
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF MTSKHETA
Georgia
PHOTOGRAPHIC and TOPOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION
THE CHURCH OF THE HOLY CROSS AT JVARI
01
02
03
04
05
06
01
Jvari church ensemble with the surrounding walls, as in 2010 (view from east).
02
Jvari church ensemble with the surrounding walls, aſter the conservation works (view from east).
03
Jvari church as in 2010 (view from S-E).
04
Jvari church as in 2012 (view from S-E).
05
Jvari church: Condition of the chapel aside to the southern entrance, as in 2010.
06
Jvari church: Chapel aside to the southern entrance, aſter the conservation / restoration interventions.
38
07
08
09
10
11
12
07
Jvari church: Chapels attached to the north side, with the old interventions, as in 2010.
08
Jvari church: Chapels attached to the north side aſter the new protective interventions.
09
Jvari church: Condition of the remains of the defense wall tower, as in 2010.
10
Jvari church: The remains of the defense wall tower, aſter the recent conservation works.
11
Jvari church: Condition of the bas-relief on the southern entrance lintel.
12
Jvari church: Condition of the bas-relief over the southern entrance.
39
14
13
15
16
17
13
Jvari church: Condition of the bas-relief and of the window over the southern façade.
14
Jvari church: Condition of the interior religious small shop.
15
Jvari church: Metallic information label on the path side to the monument.
16
Jvari church: Information label on the wooden covering of the monument eastern façade.
17
Demolition of the incompatible building, raised by the religious community next to the entrance of the site.
40
MTSKHETA CITY
18
18
19
20
21
22
Mtskheta pedestrian area at the entrance of the city.
19 - 20
Mtskheta pedestrian area: Condition of houses before (2010) and aſter rehabilitation works (2012).
21- 22
Mtskheta pedestrian area: Condition of houses before (2010) and aſter rehabilitation works (2012).
41
23
24
25
26
27
28
23 - 24
Mtskheta pedestrian area: Condition of houses before (2010) and aſter rehabilitation works (2012).
25 - 26
Mtskheta pedestrian area: Existing condition of houses and future rehabilitation plan.
27
Mtskheta: The oldest traditional house of the town, as in 2000 (south façade).
28
Mtskheta: The oldest traditional house of the town, as in 2012 (south façade).
42
29
30
SVETITSKHOVELI MONASTERY ENSEMBLE
31
32
33
34
29
Mtskheta - Old house area as in 2010
30
Mtskheta recreation area around old house.
31
Mtskheta central place before Svetitskhoveli Cathedral.
32
Mtskheta: Tourist Information Office new building in “neo-traditional” style.
33
Svetitskhoveli Cathedral with new gutters
34
Svetitskhoveli Cathedral grounds new religious bookstore.
43
HISTORIC PANORAMA OF THE CITY
FROM JVARI CHURCH HILL
35
36
37
38
39
40
35
Mtskheta riverside area from Jvari church hill, as in 2010 - A
36
Mtskheta riverside area from Jvari church hill, as in 2010 – B (zoom)
37
Mtskheta riverside area as from Jvari church hill, in 2012 – A
38
Mtskheta riverside area from Jvari church hill, as in 2012 – B (zoom)
39
Mtskheta: Model of one of the new buildings under construction along river side.
40
Mtskheta: Gas pipe lines still visible.
44
SAMTAVRO ARCHAEOLOGICAL GROUND
41
42
43
44
SAMTAVRO NUNNERY CHURCH
45
41
Samtavro archaeological ground – existing condition.
42
Samtavro archaeological ground – existing condition.
43
Samtavro archaeological ground – existing condition.
44
Samtavro archaeological ground school programme.
45
Samtavro Nunnery new findings during construction of the supporting wall.
46
Samtavro church rising damp.
46
45
ARMAZTSIKHE – BAGINETI ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE
47
48
49
50
51
52
47
View from Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site to river Mtkvari and Svetitskhoveli Cathedral.
48
View from Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site to river Mtkvari and Jvari church.
49
Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site: The stairway up to the hill top.
50
Armatzikhe – Bagineti archaeological site: Information label.
51
Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site: Conservation, protection and presentation works.
52
Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site: Protective metallic covering over king’s bath.
46
53
54
55
56
57
58
53
Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site: king’s bath (III-IV c. AD).
54
Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site: The remains of the six-apse pagan temple (I c. AD) as in 2010.
55
Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site: Protected remains of the six-apse pagan temple (I c. AD), as in 2012.
56
Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site: Protected adobe wall remains of the six-apse pagan temple (I c. AD).
57
Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site: Two-cell structure (late Hellenistic period).
58
Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site: Remains of the six-column hall (II-I c. BC).
47
59
60
61
62
63
64
59
Armatzikhe– Bagineti archaeological site: Protective wooden covering.
60
Meeting with the Local Governor of Mtskheta (24/4/2012).
61
Meeting with the Local Governor of Mtskheta (24/4/2012).
62
Dinner in the traditional tavern, in the yard of the rehabilitated old house.
63
Tbilisi: Meeting with the team of Georgian Patriarchate Technical Office (25/4/2012).
64
Tbilisi: Dinner with the vice-Minister of External Affairs of the Republic of Georgia.
48
49