Session
Architecture and Spatial Planning
Description
It is well known that cultural heritage is said to have never reached to now its source state. Over time they have undergone changes depending on the circumstances of the time. Changes and modifications that affect the monuments can be divided into two main groups. The first group comprises mainly privately owned buildings, especially residential buildings where the owners have made various arbitrary modifications depending on their needs. The second group includes state-owned public buildings or various religious-social communities that have served the general public.
Interventions in this group (second) were mainly carried out by the competent institutions that were obliged to preserve and promote cultural heritage. So there are times when monuments, ensembles or entire complexes have been demolished to pave the way for new urban planning with new buildings "for the general good of the population". Monuments that have survived new urban adjustments, conflicts and wars, and natural disasters, some of them have been abandoned at the mercy of time while the rest have been reused for different cultural, tourist and commercial needs.
During the reuse process the “restoration” interventions were different depending on the ultimate purpose planned for the monument. In general the preservation of the originality and the identity of the monument was the criterion that was least important during restoration-conservation and revitalization interventions. The main focus was on the new function of the monument, thus "mutilating" the original parts and elements of the monument. These modifications were made in order to change the source identity of the monument, to adopt the monument as a legacy of their culture, and to make the monument adopted for a new function as functional as possible. Of course these changes have often not been the proposals of heritage specialists and they have usually been opposed by them, but the social system and various national and commercial interests have ignored their suggestions.
In this study we will analyze some of the buildings of various public and private typologies in Prizren that have been restored and revitalized in the XX and XXI century. A brief analysis of the interventions will be made for: Archaeological Museum, Church of St. Spas, Gazi Mehmed Pasha's Hammam, Church of St. Friday, Complex of Prizren League, City Fortress, Beledije Building, Shehzada House, Complex Arasta, Shadervan Square, etc.
Keywords:
Restoration, revitalization, reconstruction, transformation, museum, complex, mosque, church, dwelling, square, hammam, fortress, shops, urban silhouette, etc.
Session Chair
Caroline Jaeger-Klein
Session Co-Chair
Bekim Ceko
Proceedings Editor
Edmond Hajrizi
ISBN
978-9951-550-19-2
First Page
173
Last Page
192
Location
Pristina, Kosovo
Start Date
26-10-2019 3:30 PM
End Date
26-10-2019 5:00 PM
DOI
10.33107/ubt-ic.2019.247
Recommended Citation
Ceko, Bekim and Xhibo, Jusuf, "Transformation and revitalization approach of cultural heritage in Prizren in the 20th century" (2019). UBT International Conference. 247.
https://knowledgecenter.ubt-uni.net/conference/2019/events/247
Included in
Transformation and revitalization approach of cultural heritage in Prizren in the 20th century
Pristina, Kosovo
It is well known that cultural heritage is said to have never reached to now its source state. Over time they have undergone changes depending on the circumstances of the time. Changes and modifications that affect the monuments can be divided into two main groups. The first group comprises mainly privately owned buildings, especially residential buildings where the owners have made various arbitrary modifications depending on their needs. The second group includes state-owned public buildings or various religious-social communities that have served the general public.
Interventions in this group (second) were mainly carried out by the competent institutions that were obliged to preserve and promote cultural heritage. So there are times when monuments, ensembles or entire complexes have been demolished to pave the way for new urban planning with new buildings "for the general good of the population". Monuments that have survived new urban adjustments, conflicts and wars, and natural disasters, some of them have been abandoned at the mercy of time while the rest have been reused for different cultural, tourist and commercial needs.
During the reuse process the “restoration” interventions were different depending on the ultimate purpose planned for the monument. In general the preservation of the originality and the identity of the monument was the criterion that was least important during restoration-conservation and revitalization interventions. The main focus was on the new function of the monument, thus "mutilating" the original parts and elements of the monument. These modifications were made in order to change the source identity of the monument, to adopt the monument as a legacy of their culture, and to make the monument adopted for a new function as functional as possible. Of course these changes have often not been the proposals of heritage specialists and they have usually been opposed by them, but the social system and various national and commercial interests have ignored their suggestions.
In this study we will analyze some of the buildings of various public and private typologies in Prizren that have been restored and revitalized in the XX and XXI century. A brief analysis of the interventions will be made for: Archaeological Museum, Church of St. Spas, Gazi Mehmed Pasha's Hammam, Church of St. Friday, Complex of Prizren League, City Fortress, Beledije Building, Shehzada House, Complex Arasta, Shadervan Square, etc.