O POCZĄTKACH KLASYFIKACJI ZABYTKÓW.O WADACH I ZALETACH POLSKICH SYSTEMÓW WARTOŚCIOWANIA ZABYTKÓW

This article discusses practices of classification of historic monuments and sites which have been adopted in Poland so far. The author of this article presents criteria pertaining to categorising and making inventory of historic monuments and sites developed in the first half of the twentieth centu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Jakub Lewicki
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Lublin University of Technology 2016-11-01
Series:Ochrona Dziedzictwa Kulturowego
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ph.pollub.pl/index.php/odk/article/view/154
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850056883929350144
author Jakub Lewicki
author_facet Jakub Lewicki
author_sort Jakub Lewicki
collection DOAJ
description This article discusses practices of classification of historic monuments and sites which have been adopted in Poland so far. The author of this article presents criteria pertaining to categorising and making inventory of historic monuments and sites developed in the first half of the twentieth century by Jan Zachwatowicz, Zdzisław Bieniecki, and Michał Witwicki. Furthermore, what is also presented is classification of materials that are relevant by their use or invention, classification of modernism monuments, and classification of historic monuments and sites which was carried out in the years 19590–1962, at the time when classes 0 and 1–4 were introduced. In future, historic monuments and sites should be classified by members of different expert teams cooperating with each other on different levels (regional and supralocal). The lists must be verified by academic authorities from various communities (art and architecture historians, conservators, etc.) and all works must be carried out in compliance with currently binding regulations. The criteria should be developed in accordance with the regulations set forth in the Polish Act on Protection and Guardianship of Monuments and Sites of 23 July 2003, unless major amendments are made to it. The author of this article suggests the following criteria, compliant with the legal regulations in force: – artistic merit (art. 3.1): the form of a property or a group of properties (quality and scope of their influence – European, supraregional, and local) – scientific and academic merit (art. 3.1): authenticity of the idea, material, function as well as construction, material, and innovation on local and supraregional scale. – historical merit (art. 3.1): the value and significance of the site, people and events - European, supraregional, and local scale It is necessary to define the significance and value of historic monuments and sites of European (supranational), regional, and local importance. Classification of both single historic monuments and sites and their groups should be clear, simple, and include the smallest possible number of valuing criteria. Furthermore, it should be compliant with Polish laws in force. When applied, the classification should result in factual selection of properties and sites - not on creating new groups of properties and sites of great historical importance and new categories of values being difficult to define. It is not possible to have standardised cirtieria matching all requirements and assigning high rank to each historic monument and site.
format Article
id doaj-art-bfca8886064141109ec64956d41578ee
institution DOAJ
issn 2543-6422
language English
publishDate 2016-11-01
publisher Lublin University of Technology
record_format Article
series Ochrona Dziedzictwa Kulturowego
spelling doaj-art-bfca8886064141109ec64956d41578ee2025-08-20T02:51:35ZengLublin University of TechnologyOchrona Dziedzictwa Kulturowego2543-64222016-11-01210.24358/ODK_2016_02_08154O POCZĄTKACH KLASYFIKACJI ZABYTKÓW.O WADACH I ZALETACH POLSKICH SYSTEMÓW WARTOŚCIOWANIA ZABYTKÓWJakub Lewicki0Zakład Konserwacji Zabytków i Ochrony Krajobrazu UKSWThis article discusses practices of classification of historic monuments and sites which have been adopted in Poland so far. The author of this article presents criteria pertaining to categorising and making inventory of historic monuments and sites developed in the first half of the twentieth century by Jan Zachwatowicz, Zdzisław Bieniecki, and Michał Witwicki. Furthermore, what is also presented is classification of materials that are relevant by their use or invention, classification of modernism monuments, and classification of historic monuments and sites which was carried out in the years 19590–1962, at the time when classes 0 and 1–4 were introduced. In future, historic monuments and sites should be classified by members of different expert teams cooperating with each other on different levels (regional and supralocal). The lists must be verified by academic authorities from various communities (art and architecture historians, conservators, etc.) and all works must be carried out in compliance with currently binding regulations. The criteria should be developed in accordance with the regulations set forth in the Polish Act on Protection and Guardianship of Monuments and Sites of 23 July 2003, unless major amendments are made to it. The author of this article suggests the following criteria, compliant with the legal regulations in force: – artistic merit (art. 3.1): the form of a property or a group of properties (quality and scope of their influence – European, supraregional, and local) – scientific and academic merit (art. 3.1): authenticity of the idea, material, function as well as construction, material, and innovation on local and supraregional scale. – historical merit (art. 3.1): the value and significance of the site, people and events - European, supraregional, and local scale It is necessary to define the significance and value of historic monuments and sites of European (supranational), regional, and local importance. Classification of both single historic monuments and sites and their groups should be clear, simple, and include the smallest possible number of valuing criteria. Furthermore, it should be compliant with Polish laws in force. When applied, the classification should result in factual selection of properties and sites - not on creating new groups of properties and sites of great historical importance and new categories of values being difficult to define. It is not possible to have standardised cirtieria matching all requirements and assigning high rank to each historic monument and site.https://ph.pollub.pl/index.php/odk/article/view/154Classificationhistoric monuments and sites in Polandhistoric preservationheritage management
spellingShingle Jakub Lewicki
O POCZĄTKACH KLASYFIKACJI ZABYTKÓW.O WADACH I ZALETACH POLSKICH SYSTEMÓW WARTOŚCIOWANIA ZABYTKÓW
Ochrona Dziedzictwa Kulturowego
Classification
historic monuments and sites in Poland
historic preservation
heritage management
title O POCZĄTKACH KLASYFIKACJI ZABYTKÓW.O WADACH I ZALETACH POLSKICH SYSTEMÓW WARTOŚCIOWANIA ZABYTKÓW
title_full O POCZĄTKACH KLASYFIKACJI ZABYTKÓW.O WADACH I ZALETACH POLSKICH SYSTEMÓW WARTOŚCIOWANIA ZABYTKÓW
title_fullStr O POCZĄTKACH KLASYFIKACJI ZABYTKÓW.O WADACH I ZALETACH POLSKICH SYSTEMÓW WARTOŚCIOWANIA ZABYTKÓW
title_full_unstemmed O POCZĄTKACH KLASYFIKACJI ZABYTKÓW.O WADACH I ZALETACH POLSKICH SYSTEMÓW WARTOŚCIOWANIA ZABYTKÓW
title_short O POCZĄTKACH KLASYFIKACJI ZABYTKÓW.O WADACH I ZALETACH POLSKICH SYSTEMÓW WARTOŚCIOWANIA ZABYTKÓW
title_sort o poczatkach klasyfikacji zabytkow o wadach i zaletach polskich systemow wartosciowania zabytkow
topic Classification
historic monuments and sites in Poland
historic preservation
heritage management
url https://ph.pollub.pl/index.php/odk/article/view/154
work_keys_str_mv AT jakublewicki opoczatkachklasyfikacjizabytkowowadachizaletachpolskichsystemowwartosciowaniazabytkow