Edited by Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos

PRESERVING TRANSCULTURAL HERITAGE:

YOUR WAY
OR MY
WAY? Questions on Authenticity, Identity
and Patrimonial Proceedings in the
Safeguarding of Architectural Heritage
Created in the Meeting of Cultures
TITLE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Preserving Transcultural Heritage: Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos (chairman)
Your Way or My Way? Maria de Magalhães Ramalho
Questions on Authenticity, Identity and Patrimonial Inês Cristovão
Proceedings in the Safeguarding of Architectural Tiago Rodrigues
Heritage Created in the Meeting of Cultures Cátia Reis
Vera Mariz
EDITOR Luis Urbano Afonso
Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos Margarida Donas Botto
(ARTIS – Institute of Art History, School of Arts
and Humanities, University of Lisbon) The authors are responsible for their texts and the
images contained on them, including the correct
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE reference of their sources and the permissions from
Vítor Serrão (chairman) the copyright owners.
Ana Tostões
Christopher Marrion
Francisco Lopez Morales LAYOUT
Gill Chitty Fernanda Cavalheiro
Giovanni Carbonara Margarida de Almeida
Hélder Carita
Javier Rivera Blanco ISBN
Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos 978-989-658-467-2
Johannes Widodo
Jorge Correia DOI
José Delgado Rodrigues 10.30618/978-989-658-467-2
Kassim Omar
Khalid El Harrouni LEGAL DEPOSIT NUMBER
Luís Urbano Afonso 428851/17
Maria João Neto
Maria Lúcia Bressan Pinheiro ISSUE
Nobuko Inaba 07.2017
Olga Sevan
Paulo Peixoto
Rabindra Vasavada
Rosa Perez
Rui Fernandes Póvoas
Susan Jackson-Stepowski EDIÇÃO
Tamás Fejérdy CALEIDOSCÓPIO – EDIÇÃO E ARTES GRÁFICAS, SA
Virgolino Jorge Rua de Estrasburgo, 26 – r/c dto. 2605-756 Casal de
Webber Ndoro Cambra. PORTUGAL
Zhang Jie Telef.: (+351) 21 981 79 60 | Fax: (+351) 21 981 79 55
caleidoscopio@caleidoscopio.pt | www.caleidoscopio.pt

ORGANIZATION
INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT

SPONSORSHIP
CONTENTS

015 Foreword
Vitor Serrão
Maria Magalhães Ramalho

019 SOME ISSUES ON THE PRESERVATION OF TRANSCULTURAL HERITAGE

021 Why the Preservation of Transcultural Heritage?
Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos

027 Questions of authenticity concerning different cultures and preservation

Jukka Jokilehto

037 ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Shared Built Heritage:

its history, work and role in preservation and conservation of transcultural heritage
Siegfried Enders

085 “The sea was yesterday what heritage can be today, we must only beat some Adamastores”:
The ICOMOS Portugal and the World Heritage of Portuguese Origin program
Ana Paula Amendoeira, José Aguiar, Raimundo Mendes da Silva

093 The Relevance of a Charter for Transcultural Heritage

Gustavo Araoz

099 HERITAGE VALUES AND MANAGEMENT OF AFRICAN AND AMERICAN HISTORIC CITIES
AND SITES WITH EUROPEAN INFLUENCES
101 The 19th Century Architecture and Urban Planning in the Kasbah of Algiers:
A Colonial Inheritance to be Protected
Asma Hadjilah

109 Preservation of Heritage and Professionalization of Culture in Belém do Pará:

Theoretical Aspects and Ideological Divergences
Cybelle Salvador Miranda
123 Architecture Identity of the Old Town of Buenos Aires: Defense and Recovery of its
Transcultural Heritage
Jesús Rojas-Marcos González

133 Authenticity and Identity Dilemma: The Case of Mombasa Old Town and Lamu World
Heritage Site
Kassim M. Omar

141 Urban Conservation of Historical Areas: Come Back to Thirty-Five Years (1981-2016)
of Observation in Fez Medina, Morocco
Khalid El Harrouni

151 The Preservation of Maputo’s Downtown Built Heritage: Issues, Practices and Challenges
Lisandra Mendonça
161 The Construction of Cultural Heritage in Brazil: Minas Gerais and Goiás
Margarida Helena de La Féria Valla

171 Preservation of Heritage and Urban Renovation: The New Meanings of City Landscapes
Tereza Duarte Paes

177 SAFEGUARDING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE BELONGING TO ETHNIC

AND RELIGIOUS MINORITIES INSIDE COUNTRIES WITH DOMINANT CULTURES
179 Universal Rules or Community Values? Negotiative Conservation of Minority Heritage
in Turkey
Elif Keser-Kayaalp

187 Artistic Interventions as Guardians of Palestinian Minority’s Heritage

Irit Carmon Popper; Alona Nitzan-Shiftan

197 Built Together, Heritagised Together: Using Building Archaeology for Safeguarding Early
Modern Churches in China
Thomas Coomans; Yitao Xu

207 Safeguarding of Abandoned Architectural Heritage in Poland Originally Belonging

to Religious Minorities – Problems and Challenges
Tomasz Tomaszek

219 Minority Architecture as Shared Built Heritage: The Transylvanian Saxon’s Communal
Buildings in Romania
Timo Hagen

229 The Xucuru-Kariri and Their Transcultural Heritage

Suzany Marihá Ferreira Feitoza; Maria Angélica da Silva; Alícia Alves Rocha

239 A Virtuous Itinerary Between Ghetto Synagogues and Emancipation Synagogues:

The Rediscovery of North Italian Judaism
Valeria Rainoldi

251 THE “INDIAN MELTING POT” FOR RELIGIONS AND CULTURES:

CHALLENGES CONCERNING THE PRESERVATION OF THE TRANSCULTURAL HERITAGE
253 The Politics of Renovation: The Disappearing Architecture of Goa’s Brahmanical Temples
Amita Kanekar

265 “Your Church is Older than the Taj Mahal!” The Challenge of Preserving the Patrimony of the
Archdiocese of Bombay
Fleur D’Souza

275 Challenges in Preserving and Presenting Colonial French Heritage in India: The Case of
Puducherry
Helle Jørgensen

283 Cultural Idiosyncrasies and Preservation Challenges in the Indo-Portuguese

Catholic Religious Architecture of Goa (India)
Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos

295 Preservation of the Historical and Artistic Heritage of the Archdiocese of Goa:
Plan to Implementation – Early Outcome
Mónica Esteves Reis
303 Preserving the Exfoliated Weathered Fabric of Basilica of Bom Jesus, Old Goa –
Approach Conflict
Nizamuddin Taher

315 A Garden Overgrown: Panjim’s Garcia da Orta Park and the Remaking of Eco-Cultural Legacies
R. Benedito Ferrão

321 The Ruination of the Inconvenient: Eroding Goa’s Intangible Heritage

Vishvesh Kandolkar; Pithamber Polsani

329 QUESTIONS, CONTROVERSIES AND IDIOSYNCRASIES ON AUTHENTICITY BETWEEN

DIFFERENT CULTURES, WHEN FOCUSING THE SAFEGUARDING OF TRANSCULTURAL
HERITAGE
331 Preserving the Transcultural Identity of Local Shopping Streets: North Street and
Castle Street, Belfast
Agustina Martire; Anna Skoura

343 Conservation of Transcultural Heritage: Cooperation Towards Correct Interpretation and

Common Strategies – The Vice-Roys Portrait Gallery
Ana Teresa Teves Reis; António Candeias

353 Instability, Terror and Destruction of Old Cultures: Case of the Middle East and North Africa
(1991-2016)
Barış Gür

363 “The Elephant in the Room”: A Nineteenth Century Well-House Preservation in South Tel-Aviv
Braha Kunda

371 “My Culture” as a Constantly Changing Perception: Vernacular Built Traditions in Kwazulu-
Natal, South Africa
Deborah Whelan

381 Conservation, Safeguarding and Sustainability of Cultural Heritage of Galata, its Authenticity
and Integrity
Demet Ulusoy Binan; Gülce Güleycan Okyay

393 Yin Yu Tang and the Effects of Re-Contextualization on Vernacular Architecture

Mariko Azuma

403 The Church of Atarfe (Spain): From the Continuity to the Break with the Islamic Past
Mario Mata González

413 (Re)Inventing the Indians: Native American Voices in Contemporary Museum Practice
Meghan Gilbride

429 Memory, Space & Transcultural Heritage in Puerto Rico

Nadya K. Nenadich Correa

437 The Artificial Cascade Fountain of Cyrillo Volkmar Machado in Quinta de Belas:
Challenges to its Preservation
Sofia Braga

449 HUL: Shared Built Heritage in Wuhan for Sustainable Urban Development
Song Yi; Ding Yuan
459 CONTEXTUALIZING THE (UN)WANTED: TOURISM AND MANAGEMENT OF TOTALITARIAN
REGIMES IN EUROPE
461 Contextualizing the Heritage of the Communist Regime in Poland: New Narratives
Elżbieta Błotnicka-Mazur

471 Sense and Sensitivity: Krakow’s Route of Memory as a Way of Collective Trauma Management
Łucja Piekarska-Duraj

479 (Un)Wanted Heritage? Socialist Realist Architecture in Gdynia and Gdansk

Magdalena Howorus-Czajka

489 Memory of Different People in One Territory: WW2 Cemeteries in Cassino & Montecassino
Michela Cigola; Arturo Gallozzi; Marcello Zordan

499 WEST VERSUS EAST: DIFFERENCES AND DIFFICULTIES TO THE CONSERVATION OF THIS
SHARED HERITAGE (EUROPEAN COLONIES IN FAR EAST / “ASIANTOWNS” IN THE WEST)
501 Pondicherry – A Model Heritage City for India
Ashok Panda; Shubham Biswas

511 Conserving Canada’s Chinatowns: A Consideration of late 20th Century approaches

John Ward

523 Sino-Portuguese Heritage Safeguarding in Macau Between 1990 and 1999

Luís António Guizado de Gouveia Durão

533 Dalian’s “Russian-Style Street”: A “Facadist” Approach to the Preservation of Russian Heritage
in China
Valentine Nebon-Carle

543 GREEKS, ROMANS AND BYZANTINES IN THE MEDITERRANEAN REGION AND NEAR EAST:
GUARDING TRANSCULTURAL REMAININGS CONTAINING ANCIENT CLASSICAL INFLUENCES
545 Multi-Cultural Perception of the Cult Site of Hacı Bayram in Historic Center of Ankara
Açalya Alpan; Ece Kumkale Açıkgöz

555 Preserving Roman Archaeology in Northern Africa: The House of Amphitrite Curculum (Algeria)
Alessandro Pierattini

565 The Via Antiqua from Braga to Astorga: Transformation, Disruption and Permanence of a
Cultural Route
Daniel Vale

573 Viminacium: Research, Protection and Recognition

Emilija Nikolić; Jelena Anđelković Grašar; Dragana Rogić

585 Felix Romuliana as a Bird Phoenix

Ljudmila Djukic

593 Learning from the Past: The Case of Transcultural Heritage in Rural Ecclesiastical Monuments
of Cyprus
Nasso Chrysochou

601 Empire on the Borders: Fragile Structures Along the Frontiers Between the Byzantine and
Slavic Cultures
Nora Lombardini; Elena Fioretto
611 How to Plan an Ancient City Within Modern Settlement: The Case of Soli Pompeiopolis
Remzi Yağcı

619 Comparative Analysis of the Identity and Patrimonial Processes of Two Roman Archaeological
Sites in Portugal: The Roman Temple of Évora and the Schrine of Panóias, Vila Real
Rute Teixeira; Fabio Vergara Cerqueira

627 EUROPEAN HERITAGE AS AN IMPERIALIST STATEMENT IN COLONIES: (UN)DESIRABLE

MEMORIES THAT MUST BE PROTECTED, OR TO BE FORGOTTEN?
629 The Architectural Conservation Movement in Colonial Egypt (1882-1956): A Methodology
Adham Fahmy

639 Colonial Heritage in Latin America: Damnatio Memoriæ or Transcultural Dialogue?

Amélia Polónia; Cátia Miriam Costa

647 Law, Religion, Heritage: Preservation in Late Colonial India – The Problem
of the Thatta Mosque
Indra Sengupta

657 Producing Anglo-India: The Shaping of Meaning Under a British Paradigm

Javier Ors Ausin

667 A New New Delhi? Re-Examining Areas of Conflict Between Conservation and Redevelopment
of Lutyen’s Delhi
Manas Murthy; Vanicka Arora

677 The Saint Sebastian Fortress on the Island of Mozambique: The Conservation
of a Foreign Heritage
Maurizio Berti

689 The Attitudes Towards the Built Heritage of Lahore

Saba Samee

701 Luís Benavente: A Key Player in Portugal’s Strategy for the Safeguarding
of Colonial Architectural Heritage
Vera Mariz

711 BETWEEN FAR EAST AND THE INDIAN SEA: INDOCHINESE AND INSULINDIAN CULTURES
(INFLUENCES, FUSIONS AND HERITAGE SAFEGUARDING)
713 Inhabitants’ Awareness of Shared Architectural Heritage: A Case Study of the Darmo
Conservation Area, Surabaya, Indonesia
Erika Yuni Astuti

723 World Heritage for Whom? Sustainable Heritage Tourism and Community Development
of Luang Prabang
Lui Tam

733 Saigon’s Colonial Architecture: Conservation in the Face of Rapid Development and New
Identity Construction
Phi Nguyen

745 The Virgin Mary in the Meeting of Cultures: Safeguarding the Transcultural Heritage in the
Immaculate Conception Community, Bangkok
Saraphun Wongngernyuang
755 GLOBALISATION AS GENERATOR OF NEW TRANSCULTURAL HERITAGES: PRESERVING
MIGRANTS’ ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE
757 Questions About the Authenticity of the Brazilian World Heritage
Gabrielle Cifelli

765 Franciscan Friars in the Tropics: An Uneasy Cultural Meeting Between Brazil and Germany
Maria Angélica da Silva; Taciana Santiago de Melo; Ana Luiza Cavalcanti Mendonça; Náiade Alves

775 Australian Shared Built Heritage

Susan Jackson-Stepowski

785 Matter of Life and Death: Reasons to Remember in St. Mary’s Cemetery, Chennai
William Pettigrew; Emily Mann

797 PRESERVING SHARED HERITAGE ALONG THE SILK ROAD, A MAJOR CREATOR OF
CULTURAL ENCOUNTERS
799 Some Remarks Regarding the Preservation of Ilkhanid Architectural Heritage in Iran:
History, Challenges and Perspectives
Ana Marija Grbanovic

811 The Silk Road: How Maritime Routes can Promote Cultural Connections – Macau as
Case-Study
Maria José do Carmo Freitas

821 Chinoiserie: An Exploration of Cultural Heritage Along the Maritime Silk Roads
Mei Qing

831 A Century of Archaeological Research and Restorations at Ani: Preserving

an Armenian-Orthodox vs. Turkish-Islamic Past
Zeynep Aktüre; Fahriye Bayram

841 MEMORIES TO REMEMBER AND (NOT) FORGET: SLAVES’ HERITAGE OUTSIDE THEIR
HOMELANDS
843 Preserving Indonesia’s Slavery Inheritance Culture Through an Intuitive Approach in Creating
Spatial Experience in a Slave Memorial
Doni Fireza

857 The Architecture of Creole Cosmopolitanism: Strategies for Preserving the Landscapes of
Slavery in Mauritius
Dwight Carey

865 When Orishas Visit the Earth: Survivals at Terreiros of the Afro Matrix Religions in Alagoas,
Brazil
Louise Maria Martins Cerqueira; Maria Angélica da Silva; Arlindo da Silva Cardoso; Karina Mendonça Tenório
de Magalhães Oliveira; Lucas Cardoso Ramos; Paula Louise Fernandes Silva

877 THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE IN THE CROSSROAD BETWEEN EUROPE, ASIA AND AFRICA:
FUSION OF CULTURES AND HERITAGES TO PRESERVE
879 Heritage or Property: Preserving the Churches of Aintab
Gül Cephanecigil
889 Visitor Management at Historical Monuments and Sites: A Proposal for Topkapi Palace
Museum
H. İlke Tandoğdu; Gülsün Tanyeli

899 Highlights on the Restoration of the Ottoman’s Al – Qushlah Building (1987-1989)

Nawar Sami Mehdi Al-Ali

911 A Carmelite Father and an Ottoman Water Mill in Palestine: Cultural Interaction at the Monk’s
Mill
Ruth Liberty-Shalev; Adi Har-Noy

921 SHOULD BE FOLLOWED OR IGNORED? RECEPTION OF EUROPEAN HERITAGE THEORIES

WITHIN NON-WESTERN CULTURES
923 Jean-Philippe Lauer, Athens Conference and the Introduction of Anastylosis to Saqqara
Adham Fahmy

933 Transferring Urban Theories to Iranian Context

Azadeh Arjomand Kermani

943 The Role of European Professors in Historic Preservation in Turkey: The Case of Paolo Verzone
Mesut Dinler

953 Against the Reception of Eurocentric Heritage Theories on Non-Western Cultures:

A Case of Pre/Post Colonisation in Nigeria
Olukoya Obafemi

965 OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS

967 Unwanted Heritage as Asset, Position of Memorial Architecture of Communist Yugoslavia
in Contemporary Bosnia and Herzegovina
Aida Bičakčić

968 Enhancement and Digitization of Ecclesiastical Relics

Athanasios T. Stogiannos

969 Preserving Transcultural Heritage in a Unique Land Where the Continents & Cultures Meet:
Istanbul Case
Ebru Yıldız; Elmas Erdoğan

970 Archeological Landscapes, it’s Survival and Sustainability: Antalya, Perge Case
Ebru Yıldız; Elmas Erdoğan

971 Preservation of the Basilica of Bom Jesus in Goa: An Illusion of Immanence

Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos

972 The Apprehended Rebellion Against Modern Catholic Church Architecture and Iconography
in a Small Philippine City
Liliane Rejante Manahan

973 Portuguese-Brazilian Landscape: An Urban Heritage Network

Roseline Vanessa Oliveira Machado; Flávia Cerullo; Bianca Machado

974 Clerical House and Museum: Trajectories of Architectural Heritage in Brazil

Silveli Maria de Toledo Russo
VIMINACIUM
RESEARCH, PROTECTION AND RECOGNITION

Emilija Nikolić
Institute of Archaeology Belgrade

Jelena Anđelković Grašar

Institute of Archaeology Belgrade

Dragana Rogić
Institute of Archaeology Belgrade

https://doi.org/10.30618/978-989-658-467-2_52

ABSTRACT
From 2015, the former capital of the Roman province of Moesia Superior, Viminacium, in pres-
ent day Serbia, has been a part of the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative list within the multi-
national and single largest cultural heritage monument in Europe, ‘Frontiers of the Roman Em-
pire – WHS FRE’. Will the possible future inscription to the World Heritage List bring recogni-
tion of Viminacium’s true significance? The hope of the Viminacium research team is for a bet-
ter understanding of this site by international bodies, as well as scientists, state institutions, the
local community and visitors.

KEYWORDS
Viminacium; UNESCO; recognition; protection
Introduction1

When speaking about cultural or natural heritage property, an analysis of the fulfilment
of the conditions in order to be on the UNESCO World Heritage List is often carried out. In-
scription to the List for most people connected to heritage protection represents the ultimate
achievement in their career. After several years of joint work between the Institute of Archae-
ology2, the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments of Serbia and the responsible
institutions from other European countries, in 2015, the international monument called ‘The
Frontiers of the Roman Empire – WHS FRE’, was included on the UNESCO World Heritage
Tentative list3. Along with the other Roman cities and fortifications along the former Danube
limes, which stretched from present day Germany to Bulgaria, Viminacium, an ancient Ro-
man site in the fields of the village of Kostolac in Serbia, took its first step towards being in-
scribed on the World Heritage List.
In order to be inscribed onto the World Heritage List, according to The Operational Guide-
lines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, a property must possess outstand-
ing universal value (OUV) in the form of ‘cultural and/or natural significance which is so excep-
tional as to transcend national boundaries and to be of common importance for the present and
future generations of all humanity’, while also fulfilling the conditions of integrity (‘measure of
the wholeness and intactness of the natural and/or cultural heritage and its attributes’) and/or au-
thenticity (‘if the cultural values are truthfully and credibly expressed through a variety of attrib-
utes’), having ‘adequate long-term legislative, regulatory, institutional and/or traditional protec-
tion and management to ensure its safeguarding’, including ‘adequately delineated boundaries’4
When trying to explore the possibility of fulfilling the previous conditions for Viminaci-
um, it seems the chances – as previously defined by the Guidelines, are relatively low. Open
pit coal mining in the area during the last three decades has resulted in the permanent dis-
appearance of a number of ancient buildings and the relocation of some of them to the safe
confines of the archaeological park5. Fortunately, we are reminded of the reconstructed and
restored sites inscribed on the World Heritage List6, but also of the relocation of some build-
ing complexes and their later inscription7.
According to the Guidelines, it seems that the possession of value is undisputable for Vimi-
nacium, considering its cultural and historical importance. However, is this outstanding uni-
versal value the only one needed for Viminacium’s true recognition? As Jukka Jokilehto, to-
day the Special Advisor to the Director General of ICCROM, said; ‘in relation to cultural her-
itage, we can understand value as a social association of qualities to things’, where ‘values are
produced through cultural-social processes, learning and maturing of awareness’8. Thus, the
valorisation of Viminacium can be achieved not only with regard to its cultural and histori-
cal context, but also to its social and historical one. With this last thesis, a final question has
arisen. Is it crucial for Viminacium’s future development to have a ‘secure’ place on the World
Heritage List if the recognition of its values with regard to all the contexts is not achieved?

Scientific importance

Viminacium was the capital city of the Roman province of Moesia Superior, its administra-
tive, trade and artistic centre and an important legionary camp, established in the first century

574
AD9. During its existence it was repeatedly destroyed, but also rebuilt on previous foundations,
until it finally fell to the Slav invasion in the seventh century. After an extended period of Otto-
man rule, the wider area of ancient Viminacium and the nearby medieval hill town of Braniče-
vo was given new life by the establishment of an important underground coal mine in 187010.
Archaeological excavations of Viminacium began in 1882, but large protective excavations were
conducted only from 1977 to 1992, when the extensive open pit mining started, situated on the
territory of the Viminacium necropolis and its city periphery. From 2000 to the present, research
on an area covering 450 ha has been ongoing, with the permanent protection and presentation
of the site, all conducted by the Institute of Archaeology and led by Dr Miomir Korać. A large
number of graves together with the Mausoleum (Image 1), a peripheral settlement and villas,
baths, an amphitheatre (Image 2), the northern gate of the legionary camp and aqueducts with
other water supply facilities have been excavated so far, with more than 30,000 artefacts found11.
Viminacium, as a city at the geographical crossroads of the East and West and the Ro-
man Empire border, represented a fertile field for trans-cultural communication among peo-
ple of different origins, coming from all parts of the Empire. Its architecture bears the gen-
eral characteristics of Roman architecture, but with the use of variants present in the eastern
part of the Empire. It used local materials for the large majority of buildings, but also difficult
to transport and expensive materials for the most important buildings of this capital of a Ro-
man province12. A large number of excavated tombs, dated mostly to the period of the third
and the fourth century, illuminate the everyday life of the city residents, their origins and be-
liefs13. The development of Christianity and its spread through all segments of life within the
Empire were reflected in Viminacium art. The many painted tombs found, with wall paint-
ings (Image 3) representing some of the most important of late antiquity14, indicates that in
this period, a skilled artistic workshop could have been located here15.
Being a partner in international projects16, the Institute of Archaeology gained interna-
tional research experience, and built capacity for communication in science, significantly
contributing to the recognition of Viminacium. In 2018, Viminacium will host the 24th In-
ternational Limes Congress17, with more than 500 researchers of Roman archaeology partic-
ipating. Future research of Viminacium will bring new data important for the history of life
in the Roman provinces, also providing precious answers to questions regarding the Empire’s
organisation18, whose destiny was often dependent on the territory of present day Serbia and
the emperors born here19.

Unbreakable ties with local community

After the cessation of life at ancient Viminacium, the buildings were demolished and me-
dieval buildings in the vicinity, as well as villages, were built using this material. War in the
former SFR of Yugoslavia in the last decade of the twentieth century led to an increase of ille-
gal archaeological excavations in Serbia and the transfer of cultural property out of the coun-
try, including that of Viminacium. In the past, the excavation and looting of ancient Vimi-
nacium was commonplace by residents of the surrounding villages. Gold and other valuables
were sold outside the borders of Serbia and buildings were torn down20. In 2006, due to the
efforts of the Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade, the Archaeological Park of Viminacium was
officially opened to visitors, giving them the opportunity to visit the protected and presented

575
Viminacium buildings for the first time21. More than 50,000 tourists visited the site in 2007
and many people from the nearby town and villages (Image 4) were employed in the archae-
ological park, the first of its kind in Serbia22. At the same time, the Institute started inten-
sively participating in conferences, as well as using the media and exhibitions to present and
promote the results of the research being carried out at the site23. The looting stopped and
large numbers of public visits to the park became commonplace. In the jubilee year of 2013,
on 18 May, the national exhibition ‘Constantine the Great and the Edict of Milan 313: The
birth of Christianity and the Roman provinces in the territory of Serbia’, was opened in Vimi-
nacium. On the same day, Verdi’s ‘Aida’ was performed in the Roman amphitheatre (Image
5)24. A feeling of pride existed among the local people, as 2000 spectators gathered from Ser-
bia and abroad in their small village, to once again appreciated Viminacium as it was when
it was a large Roman city.
Researchers and local communities have different perceptions of culture. However, by
working together this can be changed, and common methods for its maintenance and pres-
ervation can be created. One of the biggest benefits that archaeology can bring to commu-
nities is the sharing of experience and ideas25. A property depends mostly on local commu-
nities and their awareness of the need for its preservation26. Although they live on land that
was once inhabited by other people who are not their ancestors, these properties are also part
of their history that they should accept with pride and interest27. In the planning and imple-
mentation of decisions in a place, the participation of the local community is very important,
which can, in that way, assume responsibility for future processes28. After decades of neglect-
ing Viminacium, the involvement of the local community in the archaeological park’s devel-
opment made an important difference. Its members no longer view it as a site for illegal ex-
cavations, rather as a piece of ‘their own cultural heritage’29.

Conflict between priorities or their essential interdependence?

In 1949, previously excavated sites within Viminacium were officialy protected, and in
1979, they were established as an immovable cultural property of exceptional importance30.
However, real protection of the ancient remains was not provided with these decisions. In
1987, a strip coal mine in the village of Kostolac was opened, with a newly built power plant
starting to operate in 198831. The necropolis, the largest one researched in the territory of the
former Roman Empire, with more than 14,000 graves32, was excavated as part of the archae-
ological campaign, at the very location designated for the plant.
After decades of destruction by the mine of the agricultural fields containing the ancient
remains, and three years after the opening of the archaeological park and its rise in popular-
ity, a narrow city zone and legionary camp were finally established as an official archaeolog-
ical site in 2009, with fixed boundaries next to the mine and a series of protection regimes33
However, being in the most important part of the mining area, the peripheral buildings of
Viminacium and its necropolises are still not protected and it will probably remain that way.
These unprotected objects are slowly disappearing due to the mine’s activities and the only
way to save them is their relocation (Image 6 and 7).
The Venice Charter of 1964 emphasises that a monument is inseparable from the history it
is witness to, as well as from its setting, and that removing all or part of a monument cannot

576
be allowed except in cases where preservation requires it or it is ‘justified by national or in-
ternational interest of paramount importance’34. Currently, coal exploitation is the most im-
portant process in the functioning of the Serbian energy system35. Considering it a national
interest of paramount importance, appears to provide justification for the destruction of areas
of Viminacium. Can this kind of justification really ever be made? Thankfully, however, ac-
cording to the Spatial Plan of the Republic of Serbia from 2010 to 2020, Viminacium is given
priority in the field of tourism, environmental, natural and cultural heritage protection and
sustainable development of cultural heritage36.
Uncertainty and risk were a part of everyday life for the legionaries that protected the Ro-
man Empire on the Danube border in places such as Viminacium. The contemporary Vimi-
nacium site border was established in 2009, determining its protected area37. However, can
the protected area ever be an entity independent of the additional unprotected area, which is
still endangered by the mine? After the cessation of the mining activity, the agricultural fields,
the archaeological site of Viminacium and the industrial facilities will certainly be joined into
one landscape as examples of human development, abolishing the artificial border established
by the protection regimes introduced in 2009. Although its physical form cannot be deter-
mined or the level of exploitation by future generations cannot yet be anticipated, it is im-
portant to recognise and preserve the importance of this place now. This will involve erasing
the borders between the good and bad actors, between the positive and negative contribu-
tions, and between acceptable and unacceptable actions and influences, recognising them all
as equal constituents in the formation of the landscape. Viminacium was located on a border
through many historic periods, with a mix of, but also conflicts between, many different cul-
tures and aspirations. Considering this historical fact, can we accept the present-day irrec-
oncilable fight between conflicting priorities as a specific of the authenticity and integrity of
this area, and a kind of precious immaterial heritage?

UNESCO stamp
The choice of sites for a tentative list made by a state looks like a kind of selection, a sep-
aration of the important from the unimportant. This appears similar to the work of an ar-
chaeologist with found fragments of pottery. The typologically different and their best pre-
served specimens are placed on a shelf and kept as individually significant examples ​​that will
be studied, while the others are put into storage. However, during the process of valorisation,
can heritage be divided into the ‘important’ and ‘unimportant’? As the creator of a film about
the tradition of a nation reveals what he recorded as well as much about himself, so the lists
of material heritage depend on those who propose them much more than on the property it-
self38. Viminacium found itself in a somewhat fortunate situation. Although not particular-
ly well preserved, the research community supported it, recognising its specific importance.
Observing its state recognition phases – from the first site protection in 1949, the recognition
of its exceptional importance in 1979, and the establishment of an archaeological site defined
by borders in 2009, one can note that three decades were needed for each step. The process of
becoming a part of the UNESCO Tentative list took a much shorter amount of time, largely
due to the effort of the researchers.

577
 Protection of world heritage by UNESCO officially started with the signing of The World
Heritage Convention in 1972, which claims that there are some parts of the world natural and
cultural heritage that are so unique and scientifically important for the world that their pres-
ervation for the present and future is not the concern of individual nations, but also of the
international community39. However, increased rejection of the recommendations given by
Advisory Bodies40, by the World Heritage Committee in the last period, and the absence of a
sufficient number of experts in the field of heritage protection within national delegations41,
brought into question the validity of the evaluations, but also the decisions of the Commit-
tee. Today, the inclusion of a site depends much on the presence of a state in the Committee
and the support of its neighbours. The protection of sites has become less important42. UNE-
SCO still has not developed mechanisms to protect inscribed properties which are complete-
ly endangered by looting or war, a fact which has been most visible during the wars in the
Near East43. One gets the impression that with the development of aspirations towards sup-
porting cultural diversities and common heritage, the list has become a random collection of
all those who wanted to enter the list for political reasons and, in order to remain on it, made
available enough funds to maintain the properties.
The Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention set
a framework for identifying, assessing and inscribing properties on the World Heritage List
and do not prescribe the details related to the further management of them44. These details
are left to states, cities and local communities and all those who live and work in these plac-
es. Researchers often wonder what happens when the site is promoted from national to the
world league? Does it gain more significance or just become standardised through conserva-
tion and mass tourism?45 ‘If the site was famous before it attained World Heritage designa-
tion, it will become more famous’, says Bob McKercher, a professor at the Hong Kong School
of Hotel and Tourism Management. However, ‘if the site was unknown, the designation is re-
ally not going to mean much to visitor numbers’46. A conservator in charge of the work on a
British World Heritage site said that the site for which there is no interest to obtain a tourist
character does not have priority in obtaining UNESCO status. ‘UNESCO wants people to go
there. They call it public education. We call it tourism’47.
After the preceding discussion it is clear that the recognition of Viminacium as a genuine-
ly valuable site, which must be followed by its proper protection, needs to come from many
levels. The first level is the professional community who teaches its historical, artistic, scien-
tific or social importance. The second represents the local community whose attitude is often
crucial for the life of the place. The third is the state, which needs to take administrative and
physical care of it. The last level is recognition by international bodies whose contribution is
a place on the UNESCO World Heritage List.

Conclusion

The Venice Charter stated that it was our duty to hand historic monuments ‘in the full
richness of their authenticity’48. However, in any conservation procedure, even a basic one
trying to preserve the existing state of a building, there are always some original character-
istics that are hidden or lost and some parts of history that are deleted49 The specifics of the
ever changing and destructive context to which Viminacium belongs, inevitably lead to the

578
concept of protection which, consequently, cannot strictly or steadily follow international
heritage protection guidelines. Those specifics can be a part of its authenticity and integri-
ty and must be taken into account in its valorisation. The impairment of the authenticity of
buildings endangered by the development of industry, does not lead inevitably to the impair-
ment of the authenticity of the place. Viminacium importance consists not only of the phys-
ical remains of buildings, but also of the meanings resulting
​​ from the impact of all contexts
through its evolution. As David Lowenthal, emeritus professor at University College London,
wrote: ‘Increasingly, authenticity inheres in processes of change, mutabilities of time and his-
tory, continuities enlivened by alteration as much as constancy. There may be future authen-
ticities, as yet unknown’50.
Irina Bokova, Director General of UNESCO, said in her address during the 9th Summit
of the Heads of State of South-East Europe, entitled ‘Contemporary Art and Reconciliation
in South-East Europe’, held in Viminacium in 2011: ‘Vision of culture as a bridge for recon-
ciliation and development is ever more important today… The beautiful surroundings for our
meeting – Viminacium – embody this vision. Viminacium is one of those places where the
encounter of cultures from East and West has always been vibrant…, a place for exchange, for
communication and for trade’51. The Archaeological Park of Viminacium, closely involved in
the site protection, the local community and industrial development, has already become the
initiator of a similar cosmopolitan attitude. As the centre of a Roman province and an impor-
tant legionary camp, Viminacium was the destination of people from all over the Empire. This
attitude presents precious immaterial heritage of the area, which was initially formed by an-
cient soldiers, artists and merchants who were travelling thousands of miles to come to Vimi-
nacium, many of whom never left, making it their new home. After this, it seems quite logi-
cal that social factors have to play a crucial role in the recognition of Viminacium. At the be-
ginning of the twenty-first century, after centuries of looting and almost six decades on from
the first official site protection, the arrival of visitors to the revived area brought with them
true site protection. Researchers who started to dig every day during the year while working
on the presentation of the site in the media, visitors who were attracted by the presented sites,
and part of the local community who saw the possibility for income from the honest work,
together brought new life to this place.
What will the possible future inscription to UNESCO World Heritage List bring to Vimi-
nacium? Will this site, as an important historical place of encounters, clashes and reencoun-
ters between different cultures, be better recognised? A UNESCO stamp can be important
only if a place is recognised at all three of the aforementioned levels. It seems that the scien-
tific, local and state levels have been successfully passed, although further development of
the relationships between science, management, the local community and visitors is need-
ed. However, we must remember that human minds do not change quickly. Access to these
minds requires time, but also assistance, confidence and patience, and ‘the amount [sic] of
time required may be a little longer than we in our impatience are prepared to give it’52. When
it happens, the UNESCO stamp for Viminacium will probably already be gained, but will ac-
tually not be needed anymore.

579
NOTES

1 The article results from the project: IRS – Viminacium, Roman city and military legion camp – research of the material and
non-material culture of inhabitants, using the modern technologies of remote detection, geophysics, GIS, digitalization and 3D
visualization (no. 47018), funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia.
2 Dr Miomir Korać, Dr Snežana Golubović and Dr Nemanja Mrđić led the team from the Institute of Archaeology.
3 UNESCO Frontiers 2015; Mrđić, Golubović 2014, 105.
4 UNESCO Guidelines 2015, par. 49, 78, 87, 82, 88, 97.
5 Nikolić, Anđelković, Rogić 2013, 205-211.
6 Sites such as Warsaw, Rila Monastery, Carcassone and medieval Rhodes (Cameron, Inaba 2015, 31).
7 The case of the Nubian monuments, resulting from the construction of the Aswan Dam (Kadry 1983, 207-09).
8 Jokilehto 2006, 2.
9 Спасић Ђурић 2015, 22-8.
10 Vučetić 2010, 12, 18.
11 Golubović, Korać 2013, 65-71.
12 Nikolić 2013, 44.
13 Golubović, Mrđić 2011, 119-22.
14 Korać 2007, 147; Anđelković Grašar 2015, 271.
15 Rogić, Anđelković Grašar 2015, 209.
16 Projects financed by European Union were “T-Pas”, “OpenArch” and “Danube Limes Brand” (Golubović, Mrđić 2013, 101-
112; Tapavički-Ilić, Anđelković Grašar 2013, 97-100; Mrđić, Golubović 2014, 101-18).
17 Limes 2016.
18 Korać, Golubović 2009, 13.
19 Korać, Golubović, Mrđić 2009, V-VI.
20 Korać, Nikolić, Tapavički-Ilić 2016, 113-14.
21 Andjelković Grašar, Rogić, Nikolić 2013, 10-13; Golubović, Korać 2013, 66-71.
22 Anđelković Grašar, Tapavički-Ilić 2014, 193; Korać, Nikolić, Tapavički-Ilić 2016, 110.
23 The exhibition ‘Journey to the Past – Itinerarium Romanum Serbiae – Viminacium’ has been held in many cities in Europe,
USA and Latin America during the period from 2013 to 2017, presenting the cultural and touristic route conceived to
connect the Roman sites in Serbia where eighteen emperors were born (Korać 2014; Viminacium 2017).
24 Ilić, Nikolić 2015, 231-33.
25 Parker Pearson, Ramilisonina 2004, 236-37.
26 Korać, Nikolić, Tapavički-Ilić 2016.
27 Parker Pearson, Ramilisonina 2004, 236-37.
28 Palmer 2008, 9-10.
29 Korać, Nikolić, Tapavički-Ilić 2016, 109-10.
30 Одлука 2009.
31 Ogranak TE-KO Kostolac.
32 Korać 2014, 17.
33 Одлука 2009.
34 ICOMOS 1964, art.7.
35 Влада 2015.
36 Закон 2010.
37 Одлука 2009.
38 Sherman 2008, 234.
39 Slatyer 1983, 138.
40 They are the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property – ICCROM, the
International Council on Monuments and Sites – ICOMOS and the International Union for Conservation of Nature –
IUCN (UNESCO Guidelines 2015, par. 30).
41 Meskell 2014, 226.
42 Meskell et al 2015, 427, 432-33.
43 Lababidi, Qassar 2016, 355, 358-59.
44 Brown 2012, 99.
45 Sherman 2008, 231-32.
46 CNN 2013.
47 Independent 2009.
48 ICOMOS 1964.
49 Muñoz Viñas 2009, 52.
50 Lowenthal 1995, 132.
51 Preis, Tinio – Le Douarin 2012.
52 Klineberg 1953, 65.

580
REFERENCES

Anđelković Grašar, Jelena, “Funerary images of women in tomb frescoes of the late antique and early Byzantine period from the
Central Balkans,” in Tsetsakhladze, R. G., Avramand A., Hargrave, J. (eds.), Danubian lands between the Black, Aegean and
Adriatic Seas (7th century BC – 10th century AD). Proceedings of the Fifth international congress on Black Sea Antiquities
(Belgrade – 17-21 September 2013). Oxford: Archaeopress Publishing Ltd, 2015, 269-75.
Anđelković Grašar, Jelena, and Tapavički – Ilić, Milica. “Senior visitors, junior enthuiasm: analysis of visitors’ questionnaire,”
Archaeology and Science 9/2013 (2014), 191-204.
Andjelković Grašar, Jelena, Rogić, Dragana, and Nikolić, Emilija. “Viminacium archaeological park – modern code for re-read-
ing the past of the Roman city and legionary camp,” in Popielska-Grzybowska, J. and Iwaszczuk, J. (eds.), Studies on dsasters,
catastrophes and the ends of the world in sources. Pułtusk: The Pultusk Academy of Humanities, 2013, 267-72.
Brown, Steve. “Applying a cultural landscape approach in park management: an Australian scheme,” PARKS (Gland) 18.1 (2012),
99-110.
Cameron, Christina, and Inaba, Nobuko. “The making of the Nara Document on Authenticity,” APT Bulletin 46/4 (2015), 30-7.
CNN. “What’s the big deal about having a UNESCO World Heritage site?,” CNN Travel (2013). http://travel.cnn.com/hong-kong-
world-heritage-site-020521 (accessed on 15 December 2016)
Golubović, Snežana, and Korać, Miomir, “Bringing to life the ancient city of Viminacium on the Danube,” in Mills, N. (ed.),
Presenting the Romans: interpreting the Frontiers of the Roman Empire World Heritage Site Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2013,
65-73.
Golubović, Snežana, and Mrđić, Nemanja. “T-Pas – project on tourist promotion of the archaeological sites along the route
Aquileia, Emona, Viminacium,” Archaeology and Science 8/2012 (2013), 101-12.
Golubović, Snežana, and Mrđić, Nemanja. “Territory of Roman Viminacium from Celtic to Slavic tribes,” Anodos – Studies of the
ancient world 10/2010 (2011), 117-25.
ICOMOS. “The Venice Charter,” Charters and other doctrinal texts (1964). http://www.icomos.org/en/charters-and-other-doc-
trinal-texts (accessed on 15 December 2016)
Ilić, Olivera, and Nikolić, Emilija. “Archaeological park Viminacium – cultural historical heritage in the jubilee year of christian-
ity,” Archaeology and Science 10/2014 (2015), 231-44.
Independent. “Is Unesco damaging the world’s treasures?,” News and advice (2009). http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-
and-advice/is-unesco-damaging-the-worlds-treasures-1675637.html (accessed on 15 December 2016)
Jokilehto, Jukka, “Considerations on authenticity and integrity in world heritage context,” City & Time 2/2 (2006), 1-16, http://
www.ct.ceci-br.org (accessed on 20 December 2016)
Kadry, Ahmed. “Salvaging Egypt’s Nubian monuments,” Ambio 12 – 3/4 (1983), 206-09.
Klineberg, Otto. “UNESCO and the cultural basis for peace.” Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science 25/2 (1953), 55-66.
Korać, Miomir, Nikolić, Emilija, and Tapavički – Ilić, Milica. “Archaeological park of Viminacium: Beautifying a community
with cultural heritage,” Archaeology and Science 11 (2016), 109-25.
Korać, Miomir. “Pre-Feasibility study Itinerarium Romanum Serbiae,” Archaeology and Science 9/2013 (2014), 9-35.
Korać, Miomir, Golubović, Snežana, and Mrđić, Nemanja. Itinerarium Romanum Serbiae. Belgrade: Centre for New Technology
Viminacium, 2009
Korać, Miomir, and Golubović, Snežana. Viminacium: Više grobalja 2. Beograd: Arheološki institut, 2009
Korać, Miomir. Slikarstvo Viminacijuma. Beograd: Centar za nove tehnologije – Viminacium, 2007
Lababidi, Rim, and Qassar, Hiba. “Did they really forget how to do it? Iraq, Syria, and the international response to protect a
shared heritage,” Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology & Heritage Studies 4/4 (2016), 341-62.
Limes. “Home.” 24th International limes congress (2016). http://limes2018.org/ (accessed on 30 December 2016)
Lowenthal, David. “Changing criteria of authenticity,” in Larsen, E. K. (ed.), Nara conference on Authenticity: proceedings, Nara,
Japan, 1-6 November 1994. Paris: UNESCO WHC, 1995, 121-35.
Meskell, Lynn, Liuzza, Claudia, Bertacchini, Enrico, and Saccone, Donatella. “Multilateralism and UNESCO world heritage:
decision-making, states parties and political processes”, International Journal of Heritage Studies 21/5 (2015), 423-440.
Meskell, Lynn. “States of conservation, protection, politics, and pacting within UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee,”
Anthropological Quarterly, january (2014), 217-43.
Mrđić, Nemanja, and Golubović, Snežana. “Danube limes as UNESCO world heritage Site,” Archaeology and Science 9/2013
(2014), 101-18.
Muñoz Viñas, Salvador, “Minimal intervention revisited,” in Richmond, A. and Bracker, A. (eds.), Conservation principles, dilem-
mas and uncomfortable truths. London: Elsevier Ltd, 2009, 47-59.
Nikolić, Emilija. “Contribution to the study of Roman architecture in Viminacium: construction naterials and building tech-
niques,” Archaeology and Science 8/2012 (2013), 19-46.
Nikolić, Emilija, Rogić, Dragana, and Andjelković Grašar, Jelena, “Catastrophes as an inevitable result of civilisations flow:
relocation and dislocation of historical physical structures at the archaeological site of Viminacium, Serbia,” in Popielska-
Grzybowska, J. and Iwaszczuk, J. (eds.), Studies on disasters, catastrophes and the ends of the world in sources. Pułtusk: The
Pultusk Academy of Humanities, 2013, 205-14.

581
“Одлука о утврђивању локалитета Виминациум у атару села Стари Костолац за археолошко налазиште,” Службени
гласник РС 102 (2009)
Ogranak TE-KO Kostolac. “Istorija".O nama (2014). http://www.te-ko.rs/o-nama/istorija (accessed on 20 April 2017)
Palmer, Ela. The social impacts of heritage-led regeneration. London: Ela Palmer Heritage, 2008
Parker Pearson, Mike, and Ramilisonina. “Public archaeology and indigenous communities,” in Merriman, Nick (ed.), Public
Archaeology. London: Routledge, 2004, 224-39.
Preis, Ann-Belinda, and Tinio – Le Douarin, Maria Linda, eds. Dialogue among civilizations: Summit of the heads of state of
South-East Europe – contemporary art and reconciliation in South-East Europe, Republic of Serbia, 1-2 September 2011. Paris:
Unesco, 2012
Rogić, Dragana, and Anđelković Grašar, Jelena. “Traveling motif: Viminacium artistic officina as a paradigm of late antique
painting fashion,” Tibiscvm 5 (2015), 201-210.
Sherman, Sharon R. “Who owns culture and who decides? Ethics, film methodology, and intangible cultural heritage protection,”
Western Folklore 67-2/3 (2008), 223-236.
Slatyer, Ralph O. “The origin and evolution of the World Heritage Convention,” Ambio 12-3/4 (1983), 138-40. 
Спасић-Ђурић, Драгана. Град Виминацијум. Пожаревац: Народни музеј Пожаревац, 2015
Tapavički-Ilić, Milica, and Anđelković Grašar, Jelena. “OpenArch, European Project of Popularizing Archaeology,” Archaeology
and Sciences 8/2012 (2013), 97-100.
UNESCO. “Frontiers of the Roman Empire (WHS FRE),” WHC. Unesco (2015). http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/6060/
(accessed on 10 December 2016)
UNESCO. “Operational guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention,” WHC. Unesco (2015). http://
whc.unesco.org/en/guidelines/ (accessed on 10 December 2016)
Viminacium. “Journey to the past – Itinerarium Romanum Serbiae – Viminacium.” Exhibition presented around the world
(2017). http://viminacium.org.rs/en/izlozbe/izlozbe-u-inostranstvu/ (accessed on 21 April 2017)
Влада Републике Србије. “Нацрт стратегије развоја енергетике републике србије до 2025. године са пројекцијама до 2030.
године". Стратегије (2015). http://www.srbija.gov.rs/vesti/dokumenti_sekcija.php?id=45678 (accessed on 21 April 2017)
Вучетић, Мајовски. Из историје српских угљенокопа: Јаме костолачког мајдана. Београд: ЈП Електропривреда Србије,
2010
“Закон о Просторном плану Републике Србије од 2012. до 2020. године,” Службени гласник РС 88 (2010)

582
Image 1 – Viminacium Image 2 – Viminacium amphitheatre (source: Image 3 – a fresco with a Roman
Mausoleum Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade) lady, from a Viminacium tomb
(source: Institute of (source: Institute of Archaeology,
Archaeology, Belgrade) Belgrade)

Image 4 – women and girls from the local community Image 5 – the amphitheatre hosting ‘Aida’, in 2013
during the promotion of Viminacium (source: Institute of (source: Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade)
Archaeology, Belgrade)

Image 6 – excavations at the edge of the open pit mine Image 7 – aqueduct channel cut
(source: Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade) and relocated (source: Institute of
Archaeology, Belgrade)

583