Strasbourg 1 August 2000

First working session
Sunday 25 June, 17.30 - 20.00, conference room of the Baia Mare Town Hall

        Mr Liviu ION offered a brief introduction of "Europe, a common heritage".

        Mrs Nuria SANZ thanked the Romanian authorities for their help in organising the meeting. Recalling the Organisation's principal goals, she stressed the importance of the first European Campaign on the architectural heritage in 1975 and made the connection with the 1999-2000 Campaign, which was focused on the human dimension of the living heritage. She explained how the transnational project "Wood-based cultures in Europe" took its present form, on the basis of various proposals from eight National Committees, stressing the richness of the wood-based cultural heritage.         

        Mrs Nuria SANZ welcomed the presence at the meeting of representatives of all the wood-related trades and professions. While recalling the objective limits of the work of the Council of Europe, which was unable to engage in restoration or conservation, she declared that the wood-based heritage was particularly well suited to sustainable development. The purpose of the present meeting was to draw up a list of priority areas: how to define the vitality of traditions, what was the situation - today - with regard to the transmission of expertise in wood, how could we define an active conservation policy, how should the wood-based heritage be managed in a post-industrial society, what was the priority of a European policy in this area, from the Nordic countries to the Balkans. The replies to all these questions could lend fresh impetus to the living cultural tradition.

        The participants then introduced themselves and made preliminary comments on the contents of the project. Each in turn took the floor to outline the administrative features of their countries and describe the latest national initiatives, which testified to the wealth and complexity of wood as an instrument of work, research and restoration.         

        Mrs Maria DARABANT talked about an initiative of the Astra de Sibiu Museum, the Olympiad of Child Artisans, which had been held annually since 1993 as a complement to the Craft Fair organised every year at Sibiu. Mrs Ildiko MITRU of Baia Mare was a member of the team which over the past decade had helped to restore 22 wooden churches in Maramures. Mr Traian MOLDOVAN emphasised the necessity, in any restoration, of a symbiosis between the team responsible for the technical project, the restorers and the craftsmen, as had been the case at Deseti, a wooden church whose paintwork had been restored at the same time as the structure.

        Mr Valentin HOSSU-LONGIN, an expert on the region and author of numerous articles in the press and a book entitled "The sun over the gate" ("Soarele din poartà" in Romanian), recalled the nickname of Maramures, the "land of ornate wood carving" ("tara lemnului înfrânghiat " in Romanian).         

        Mrs Georgeta IUGA had started a protection, development and cultural memory network on the Valley of the Cosàu, one of the region's four rivers. Mr Dumitru RUSAN recalled the two laboratory workshops organised in 1992 and 1993, which had led to the publication of a book in collaboration with François CALAME. Mrs Iuliana CIOTOIU had been involved in the project "The village house in Romania". She was writing a thesis on the development of the heritage through rural and cultural tourism.

        Mrs Aurelia COSMA was aware of the European dimension of work in this field. She recalled other projects in which she had been invited to participate, like the seminar "Sibiu, a European crossroads" and the launch of the "Europe, a common heritage" Campaign in 1999 in Bucharest and Sibiu. Mr Ioan TOSA recalled the restoration of seven wooden houses at Cluj-Napoca. Mrs Luiza BARCAN talked about the launch of the "Tradition and post-modernism" project at the Râmnicu-Vâlcea Village Museum. Mr Tiberiu GRAUR quoted Mircea ELIADE ("The sacred and the profane") on the links between wood and mysticism. Mrs Livia BUSCA had spent 25 years studying the decline in the quality of construction timber, at the Brukenthal Museum in Sibiu. In 1994, she had started a restoration firm, which had worked on some twenty wooden churches in Maramures. Mr Niels AUBNER had worked for 30 years on the restoration of historical monuments (there are 1,000 of them). He had restored more than 70 wooden churches in Romania, including 22 at Maramures. He talked about the effects of seasonal variation on the restoration of wood structures.

        Mr Ioan IGNA welcomed the choice of Maramures, which had 500,000 inhabitants and 100 wood churches, for the launch of the project. He regretted the lack of funding for the fight against the deterioration of the small-scale wood heritage and for the restoration of major monuments. He considered that steps should be taken to arouse the conscience of the community.

        Mr Dominik MACZYNSKY talked about the richness of the wood-based heritage in Poland, stressing the priority currently being given to wooden churches. While noting the usefulness of North-South co-operation in this area, he felt that the group might think about a Europe-wide plan for safeguarding wooden architecture.

        Mrs Dale PUODZIVKIENE recalled the history of vernacular wood building in her country. Today, since the second world war, the situation had changed, because of collectivisation and industrialisation. During the Soviet occupation, popular art, including wood, represented a form of resistance. A cosmopolitan culture had then developed. Following the loss of jobs in industry, men had turned back to traditional trades. One of the project's aims might be to make people aware of the value of the wood-based heritage. It was a culture that belonged to the whole of Europe. That heritage could boost territorial and economic development through tourism, crafts and small-scale industry.

        Mr François CALAME noted that even if most of the heritage was wood-based, it was brick and stone that were most highly valued. He recalled the stereotype (which had even found its way into cartoons) that presented straw or wood houses as ephemeral and houses built of harder materials as solid and longer-lasting. In France, too much value was attached to the inorganic heritage, which was perhaps why too little was made of the wood heritage. There was no coherent policy in that field, only one-off initiatives, and no forum for consultation at national level.

        Mr Goran ANDERSSON noted that in Sweden, it was an excess of administration and a shortage of experts rather than underfunding that were the main problem in this field. The building techniques and the types of houses were familiar to him. But the structure of the Romanian village was something new. The traditional way in which this subject was discussed was practised only in the academic world, above all for the establishment of categories and very rigid specialisations. There was no broader socio-economic discussion on this question.

Second working session
Monday 26 June, 19.00 - 21.00, conference room of the Baia Mare Town Hall.

        Mrs Nuria SANZ suggested that there should be a dialogue between the need for conservation of the heritage and the needs of the social agents concerned, who wanted houses built of hard materials, adapted to the requirements of modern times. She invited the group to think about ways and means of facilitating economic and social progress, because for us the heritage was a way of life, a way of breathing life into citizenship. The aim must be to assure a quality transmission of traditions in general and of the wood heritage in particular, which should not be confined to museums, but put to use. How we went about recycling the heritage would be important for its redefinition; bearing in mind what had been seen during the day's visits, it was clearly impossible to freeze a landscape, which had a life of its own. She suggested that in future thought should be given to ways of co-ordinating preservation policies and forms of habitation. The landscape always provided a holistic approach to the heritage. Any heritage policy had to be balanced against the ideals and goals of human beings, while at the same time facilitating economic and social progress. She stressed that the handing on of tradition was a two-stage process. The first was institutional (quality of management, restoration) and the second was cultural (quality of life).

        Mr Dominik MACZYNSKY said that he had much appreciated the wooden churches, restored in situ, which were the high point of the cultural landscape they had visited. A comparison of the similar experiences of different countries might be worth considering. He recalled the situation of a village in the south of Poland which had some very fine wooden houses, next door to modern houses, all within the same cultural landscape. They had already had some success with certain forms of agrotourism. He thought it should be possible to preserve the historic cultural landscape while building new houses behind. He emphasised the importance of the continuing use of houses and churches, which would keep them alive.

        Mrs Dale PUODZIVKIENE noted that the problems of Poland, Lithuania and Romania were similar as concerns the wood-based culture. She believed it was necessary to clarify what was important for the wood heritage and to safeguard it. She was also in favour of reintegrating villages into the cultural landscape, which was often destroyed because of agriculture. Finally, she favoured the adoption of legislation that would oblige communities and the social agents to build well and in good conditions, taking account of good construction and use practices.

        Mr Ramazan OZEN described a Turkish experiment with wooden houses. In order to avoid the gradual deterioration of protected vacant houses, the authorities had decided to move people into them. The new tenants had then done a good job of restoring and maintaining them. That was the best example of the living heritage and of how to keep it alive, by regarding houses as living museums. What they needed was not visitors, but a live tenant complete with family.

        Mr Goran ANDERSSON supported the idea of an exchange of knowledge among craftspeople, carpenters and other professionals, because practical experience transmitted better than through books. Thought should be given to ways of involving the entire community. Know-how did not arise only in the course of training, it was a process of research, of social communication.

        Mrs Nuria SANZ stressed the role of the local community in developing the heritage. She recalled the Council of Europe's Recommendation on cultural tourism and its implications for sustainable development. The Council, particularly for the purposes of the present campaign, was concerned with society, with the way in which society took responsibility for preservation and the selection of long-term sites. The proposal to produce an atlas of the European wood heritage was important, but we should take the opportunity offered by the present project to institute a dialogue with all the social agents involved in the wood heritage. She recalled the usefulness of the Council of Europe's normative or standard-setting work. The Code of Good Practice, already in use by the Council's Department of urban archaeology, was suggested as one element for a practical discussion of ways of coordinating the efforts of all those involved in the wood-based heritage: engineers, restorers, architects, museum specialists, researchers, carpenters, communicators, heritage institutions and members of the local community. Regarding what had been said by other participants, it would clearly be useful to establish a European frame of reference for the industry, the owners and the professionals. Closer relations among these players in the wood-based heritage were of interest to our project.

        Mr Dominik MACZYNSKY thought it was imperative that there should be co-operation among the States of Europe in this field. He appreciated Romania's efforts in drawing up an inventory of wooden monuments, something that was lacking in Poland. He regretted the fact that the universities in his country did not teach wood-based architecture or traditional methods of working with wood. He described the situation where engineers were supervising carpenters but knew less than they did, because they had taken no specialist courses. He believed young people could be made aware of the subject and that the Council of Europe's work could be very useful here.

        Mrs Sandra LARIONESCU recalled the proposal to create an ecomuseum in Romania, at Câmpulung Moldovenesc, following the French model, but which had come to nothing for want of funding. She went on to wonder about the maintenance of the carpenter's trade to meet the needs of modern life. The journeyman system mentioned by Mr François CALAME might also work in Romania. She regretted the trend towards a degradation of tradition, as exemplified by the kitschy elements to be seen in some recent wood-carved gates.

        Mrs Georgeta IUGA expatiated on the philosophy behind the protection, development and cultural memory network which had linked the villages of Budesti, Sârbi, Càlinesti, Vàleni, Cosesti et Firesti. An initiative of an NGO working with children, local authorities, priests, headteachers and opinion leaders in the region, it had three dimensions: well-being and faith, well-being and health, and mens sana in corpore sano, which underpinned the material and spiritual values of those places.

        Mrs Ioan IGNA emphasised the importance of using modern techniques and work methods in the former countries of the East. The advanced technologies of other countries would be essential for the adequate restoration and upkeep of the heritage.

        Mr Niels AUBNER regretted the lack of interest among young graduates in trades associated with the wood-based heritage. They did study practices and methods, but spent little time on site. Schools of architecture could place greater emphasis on architectural techniques, alongside the history of the discipline. He also called for greater involvement on the part of the Church, which in fact benefited from the restoration of its wooden churches, which attracted tourists as well as the faithful.

        Mrs Nuria SANZ talked about the role the Luxembourg-based European Institute of Cultural Routes could play in the project. She recalled the usefulness of the HEREIN project in the exchange of information among heritage professionals, developed by the European Foundation for Heritage Skills.

        Mrs Aurelia COSMA believed that the Code of Good Practice could be a means of making wood a common language, like music, through which we would understand one another spiritually. We needed to think whether the 21st century would still belong to the wood-based civilisation. Museums as preserves of memory could play an important role in the transmission of that civilisation to the young people of the next century.

Third working session
Tuesday 27 June, 15.00 - 17.00, open-air Village Museum of Sighetul Marmatiei

        Mrs Nuria SANZ summed up the first two days of work. The wood-based heritage was an expression of the European identity. It must participate in the improvement of the framework and the quality of life of citizens. All those involved in the European heritage could henceforth co-operate to ensure that the project had a future. At the Safranbolu meeting, it would be useful to produce a Declaration on concerted Europe-wide action to preserve the wood-based heritage. The agenda for that meeting would be prepared in the course of the summer.

        Mr François CALAME emphasised the importance of the European example for local authorities. If the Council of Europe were to adopt such a Declaration, capitals would be alerted to the issue and encouraged to act. The exchange of know-how (with a view to setting up a European Know-how Exchange), the drafting of legislation, and communication would be three priority areas for future action to promote the wood-based heritage. A seminar on the normative dimension of the wood-based heritage might be organised by the Council.

        Mr Ramazan OZEN said that the issues to be tackled could be grouped in two main categories: technical and socio-economic; a list of all the problems could be drawn up. The Council could also start a debate on how to improve the life of communities living in permanent contact with and managing the forests.

        Mr Sergiu NISTOR recalled that the wood-based heritage was an integral part of the European heritage. There should not be, in the minds of politicians or of specialists, a scale on which the wood heritage was set lower than stone buildings such as cathedrals. The Council of Europe was the Europe-wide forum for discussion of statutory measures for the preservation of the wood heritage, which was directly vulnerable, in terms of the physical deterioration of the object, and indirectly as well, over time, with the loss of traditional techniques. There was also an economic dimension to the wood heritage and there the Council of Europe and the European Union could launch a necessary and useful action. As far as traditional housing was concerned, it was important to avoid the "Macdonaldisation" of wood building resulting from a certain type of construction imported into Europe from the American Middle West.

        Mr Dominik MACZYNSKY stressed the need for international information and proposed the creation of a historical network for the wood-based heritage, which would be enriched by the exchange of knowledge. It would comprise open-air museums, significant monuments, wooden churches of heritage value, etc. This network could function as a tool for coordination and communication.

        Mr Goran ANDERSSON stressed the particular features of timber, which was a living material, which did not die after being cut down. Wood was a living material which had been killed. This particular philosophy must be borne in mind in work on the project.

        Mrs Livia BUCSA welcomed the exchange of views made possible by the present meeting, which gave the participants an opportunity to compare notes. In order to safeguard the enormous wealth of the wood-based heritage, measures must be taken, starting with a careful inventory in all countries.

         Mr Niels AUBNER suggested that there should be projects involving wood experts from different countries. We might identify one or two deteriorated wood-built monuments in Romania, organise a seminar and invite restoration proposals from each expert, drawing on the techniques used in his or her country. A project would thus be chosen and the Romanian Ministry of Culture would finance the restoration.

        Mr Mihai DANCUS regretted the situation of Romania monuments belonging to museums for which impecunious local authorities were responsible, compared with the situation of monuments that benefited from the centralised budget of the Ministry of Culture. There was a lamentable lack of interest in the wood-based heritage on the part of local deputies, who were more sensitive to electoral deadlines than to the long-term problems of the heritage. As for professional co-operation, he proposed that encouragement should be given to interdisciplinary research, mentioning the example of ethno-archaeology. He appealed to European organisations to develop a multiple research effort in the field of preservation of the heritage.

        Mrs Luiza BARCAN proposed that a plaque should be placed on wooden houses that had been outstandingly well preserved, to draw attention to them as a model to be followed.

        Mr Valentin HOSSU-LONGIN recalled the Austrian tradition whereby every old house was marked and thus protected both by the State and by tourists. That example could also be extended to the countries of the East. Local authorities should establish the historic and ethnographic value of those houses. We could not move into the 21st century without our traditions, and Maramures was a paragon of traditional excellence.

        Mr Sergiu NISTOR dwelt on the social and civilising role played by the wood-based heritage in safeguarding identity. The rapidity of social change and the perishable nature of wood made it a fragile construction material, which should benefit from the attention of the authorities, who were responsible for defining the public interest. Because we were engaged in a campaign, we should propose practical measures for developing a European awareness of the value of the wood-based heritage. Itineraries were a good idea, as were the establishment of inventories and on-site training. To mark progress in this area, the Council of Europe could organise in Strasbourg an exhibition of studies on the wood civilisation in Europe.

        Mrs NUR SANZ thanked the participants for the richness of their contributions. The report of the meeting would be distributed to participants. The documents for the Safranbolu meeting would be prepared during the summer. She also thanked those countries that had replied to the questionnaire, and the Romanian local authorities who had made the present meeting possible. She recognised the usefulness of the project for the "Europe, a common heritage" campaign. Given the recurrent nature of the problems and the current lack of coordination on a European level, the campaign could provide a platform and a framework of co-operation necessary for that type of building material, which magnificently illustrated a common cultural identity. The coordination of heritage efforts should be scrutinised, so as to guarantee the quality of those efforts, the quality of the transmission of know-how, and the quality of a common European message.

Appendix 1

Friday 23 June

Saturday 24 June

Sunday 25 June

Monday 26 June

Tuesday 27 June

Wednesday 28 June

home