Conservation + Studio – EDA

A History of Architectural Conservation

CHAPTER 1
The concept of Cultural Heritage and historic monument

The Committee of UNESCO in 1992 established the definition of cultural heritage: it includes
also the intangible heritage which can be referred to the habits of a country, both cultural, both
social; it includes all the things that contribute to form a national identity. The key motives for
the modern interest in heritage are:

• New sense of historicity and a romantic nostalgia of the past;

• Esteem held for specific qualities of past achievements;
• Desire to learn from past experiences;
• Inconsiderate change in familiar places;
• Destruction of demolition of well known historic structures or pleasing works of art.

The built heritage is continuously subject to various types of deterioration, including weathering,
the ageing process, and consumption by use. Buildings can also be modified due to changes in
function, or due to changes in taste or fashion.

The term monument has two different definitions: it comes from Greek mneme (referred to
memory of the past) and from the Latin monumentum (from moneo), that encompassed political
and moralistic issues, to admonish the spectator of the power of the governors.

In the Theodosius Code (AD 483) the concept of Legatum at patria was introduced: any private
properties located in public site are Res Populi Romani, it has public usefulness, and it has to
undergo to the public property (municipalità). After the Roman Empire collapse, there was a
gradual degradation of the ancient values and architectures: during the Medieval Age, materials
of ancient buildings were used to realize new buildings.

CHAPTER 2
Rediscover of Antiquities, Renaissance Architectural Treatises

Renaissance writers were conscious of the process of historical changes, especially in art and
architecture.

• Value of an ancient object as antiquity à Issue of dialectics of restoration;

• Born of fashion regarding restoration of ancient ruins.

Leon Battista Alberti was one of the most influential writers of Renaissance period: his
theoretical masterpiece is De re aedificatoria (1443-1452), an opera divided in ten books, based on
the previous Vitruvius work, De architectura libri decem. From Vitruvius, Alberti reintroduced
the concepts of firmitas, utilitas and venustas, really important for the intervention on a building.
The most interesting points of his thought are:

1
 • He believed in the observation of nature: bulidings are like natural organisms, in which
everything has to be connected rationally and in correct proportions;
• Addition of new elements according to the organic whole (from both the aesthetical and
structural point of view);
• Architect can be considered as a physician, he has to know and understand the cause of
fault and to cure them. Decays are generally due to human negligence.
• Historic buildings are worthy (meritevoli) of protection, because of their inherent
architectural qualities, solidity, beauty and historical value.

Early practice and protection in Rome

Humanists of the period criticized those who destroyed monuments and ancient works: in fact,
popes were accused for doing nothing to protect the historic heritage of Rome. From the
beginning of the 16th century, there were some changes indeed:

• Martin IV: introducing the concept of Restauratio and reformatio; introducing the role of
Magister viarum, who has to cure streets, bridges, and public structures in the city of
Rome;
• Pius II: introducing the first official bull specifically related to preservation of ancient
ruins and remains.

During this period, Conservation was closed linked to Christianity, which provided the final
argument for protection. Repairs and improvement works dealt mainly with buildings that still
have a contemporary use, such as churches, bridges, aqueducts and, for example, the Mausoleo
of Adriano.

• Sixtus IV: known as Restaurator Urbis, he introduced the renewal and rebuilt of Ponte
Sisto on the site of an ancient Roman bridge: during this period, there was more renewal
than conservation.
• Nicolas V: intervention on Borgo Vaticano’s fortifications.

Alberti’s influences can be felt in each case, especially on St. Peter’s Basilica: in fact, it was built
on the spoils of ancient monuments, and it represented an example of the acceleration in the
destruction of ancient monuments which were quarried and used as building materials. A new ad
more attention to the protection of antique works of art and historic structures was born.

Raphael and the protection of monuments

During the 16th century, Rome was able to spend more on building activities due to new wealthy
arriving from America. This allowed different processes:

• New start for St. Peter’s Basilica with Bramante, Raphael, Michelangelo and, later,
Bernini;
• As told before, the building activities caused an acceleration in the destruction of ancient
monuments, used as building materials;
• This fact brought attention to the protection of antique works.

2
Raphael Sanzio had close contacts with humanistic circles in the papal court, especially with
Giuliano da Sangallo and Antonio da Sangallo the Younger; he was introduced to the study of
ancient work by Bramante and he generally can be considered the father of modern state
protection of monuments.

• In an important letter addressed to Pope Leo X, Raphael said that the current destruction
of ancient buildings recalls their greatness and the values they represent.
• In 1515, Raphael’s nomination as Prefect of Marbles and Stones, under Pope Leo X; in
the same time, he succeeded Bramante as architect in St. Peter’s Fabric. He selected in an
accurate way the reuse of ancient building materials for St. Peter’s construction.
• In fact, Raphael was the first chief of the register office in Rome: asses and document
existing buildings and works of art, especially the engraved stones. Inscriptions required
protection, important for the knowledge of Latin;
• In 1521, Epigrammata Antiquae Urbis was published: it was the first list of protected
monuments in Rome, like temples, forums, arches, bridges, town gates, Pyramid of
Cestius, the Obelisk of Vatican and Castel Sant’Angelo.
• During this period, he was in charge to prepare a map of ancient Rome, and he employed
artists to prepare measured drawings. Introducing how to survey buildings in a scientific
way: plans, sections and elevations.

All these activities introduced restorations under the papal administration until 18th century: the
value of the ruins as a witness of history, the touristic importance and the political significance
were understood by the popes in the next years.

Reformation and Counter-Reformation

After the publishing of 95 theses on indulgences at Wittemberg by Martin Luther in 1517, there
was a strong reaction in Italy in the form of the Counter-Reformation, which started in 1530. This
meant new requirements for religious services and it introduced some changes:

• There were introduced changes in existing churches according to the guidelines of the
Council of Trent of 1563: Medieval churches were generally renewed.
o Interiors were opened up, rood screens and other obstacles were removed and the
chapels rearranged.
o Examples: renovation of Santa Croce and Santa Maria Novella in Florence by
Giorgio Vasari.
• Gothic was definitely condemned as monstrous: the monstrosities were not necessarily
destroyed, but fashioned anew, like Tempio Malatestiano in Rimini by Leon Battista
Alberti.
• For the sake of conformità, buildings could be completed with respect to the original
style, as in the case of Milan Cathedral; in fact, Vasari accepted this relativity in his
judgement, he applied conservation the works of medieval masters like Giotto and Pisano.
• San Carlo Borromeo: Maintenance is better than restoration, prevention is better than
cure.
• During the Counter Reform Age, San Carlo Borromeo introduced the idea of the
maintenance of historical building: instead of making a complete refurbishment, it’s better
to have a process of maintenance. Style means the harmony of decoration and structures
according to the time that explains an idea over the time. It’s an intellectual modification.

3
CHAPTER 3
Winckelmann and the restoration of antiquities

Up to the half of 18th century, there was a cultural continuity with the past: artists were able to
add, modify and restore any object of art, including buildings. The additions are mimetic or
dialoguing with the style of time.

• Compatibility: it is not exacly to reply a style, but to use the ancient tecniques and
typologies which remain at present (up to ‘700). It is a renewal of the past;
• Respect of the past: especially related to old temples.

Johann Joachim Winckelmann is generally known as the father of modern archaeology, but he
contributed a lot also in Conservation and Restoration. He had the possibility to be in contact
with artistic an literary circles in Dresden and he published a lot on the Greek art. Soon after this,
he travelled to Rome.

• In 1763, he was nominated as the Chief Commissioner of Antiquities in Rome with

responsibility for the care of all works of art.
• He was soon recognized as the foremost scholar of his day in the knowledge of classical
antiquity. His praise of Greek antiquity as the period in history that had reached the
highest perfection in art, induced him to develop a method of systemathic and critical
survey of all objects concerned. He made the first steps towards using scientific methods
to the study and definition of ancient objects.
• Regarding his contribution in Conservation: the fact he distinguished the original form
from later additions was significant, because it focused attention on safeguarding the
original.
• Winckelmann did not disapproved restoration in itself, but he insisted that this can be
done without falsifying the artistic concept of the original work.

Influences on practice

Winckelmann’s approach had tangible consequences, especially in some interventions in the

centre of Rome. The restoration of Montecitorio Obelisk by Giovanni Antinori can be considered
the first attempt to apply this new policy in restoration and to distinguish clearly modern addition
from the original structure of the monument.
• The obelisk was broken in five pieces and much of its surface was damaged by fire. In
1790–92 it was restored and re-erected in the centre of the Piazza of Montecitorio by
architect Giovanni Antinori.
• Instead of reintegrating hieroglyphs as Bernini did in Piazza Navona some years before,
Antinori respected the historical and cultural value of the Egyptian inscriptions: missing
part were added but without attempting to falsify them by adding decoration.

CHAPTER 4
Restoration of classical antiquities in Rome

In Italy, the home of classical antiquity, the legislation regarding protection of ancient buildings
was born during the Renaissance with Raphael, as seen before. In 1800, when Pius VII took the
Papal See, one of the first concerns was to see to the protection, restoration and excavations, in

4
order to fill the missing part of the ancient buildings.

Most of the restoration of 19th century follow the Chirografo of Leo XII, 1825, the criteria of
rebuilding San Paolo Church fuori le Mura: No addition, restoration of the original building,
accomplishment of the stilistic unit.

• In 1801-1802, Carlo Fea was named as Commissario delle Antichità and Antonio Canova
as Ispettore delle Belle arti.
o Canova followed especially Winckelmann’s approach and he remained influential
in Rome as Inspector and ad the President of Accademia di San Luca. With Fea,
he influenced a lot the concept of conservation both in legislation and in practical
execution. Work has to be limited to the minimum necessary to conserve a
monument.
o In the case of Coliseum, restoration was not the general aim, but conservation of
all the fragments related to the original building.
• Interventions on Coliseum: ideated by Vespasian and completed by Titus in AD 80, in
brick and travertine in the form of ellipse, this monument needed a great repair and
consolidation operations during the 19th century.
o The structure was at least three palmi out of plumb and the last pillar had serious
cracks that were constantly widening. It was necessary to find a quick and
economic solution to the structural damages, that can respect the architectural and
historical value of the ancient monument.
o The final solution was found in 1806, after a serious earthquake in the city:
Giuseppe Camporesi and Raffaele Stern proposed to built a plain brick buttress
with a base of travertine to stop the lateral movement ant to guarantee static safety.
The arches were walled in to consolidate them internally ant it was built a cross
wall in order to provide further lateral support and to link the new consolidating
structure to the existing one.
o The second intervention on Coliseum was dated to 1820, when Carlo Fea
proposed to remove the infesting roots and to consolidate the structure with iron
straps. In 1820, the façade direct to the forum showed alarming signs of structural
damages: Giuseppe Valadier was the architect in charge to find a permanent
solution to the problem. In fact, he proposed to rebuild a part of the missing
structure, thus forming a buttress: the arches were designed identically to the
original ones, but made of bricks, considering an important distinction between
the new and the old.
o The third intervention on Coliseum (1844) was made by Luigi Canina: the
southern section was partially rebuilt using eight brick arches similar to the
original ones, following Valadier’s approach to Conservation.
• Intervention on the Arch of Titus: this monument was erected after AD 81 by Domitian,
originally made of white marble installed on a travertine core. During the Medieval Age, it
lost much of its materials, including the bronze cramps holding the marbles. In 19th
century, the structural condition of the building was really bad, due to the demolition of
the adjacent convent.
o Stern, Valadier and Camporesi were in charge to restore the monument to his
antique sprendour: due to the structural problems, it was necessary to dismantle
the vault and to re-erect it with the required support. Instead of just consolidating
the building, it was decided to complete the missing parts in a simplified way: the
mass can give the idea of the original dimension of the monument.
o Valadier completed the work in 1823: the arch was totally dismantled an rebuilt,
reassembling the original elements on a new brick core and using travertine to fill

5
 the lacunas in the façade.
o This kind of restoration received mixed criticism.

CHAPTER 6
Restoration principles in France

During the following years, an increasing number of European countries identified themselves
with historic monuments and buildings: these were restored in the most appropriate style as a
witness of the achievements of the nation. In the first part of 19th century, architects were still
ignorant about medieval and gothic building systems: the restoration of Saint-Germain
l’Auxerrois Church in Paris was the first school for restoration architects, under the patronage of
Godde.

• In France, it was possible to assist to a gradual transition from a conservative-minimum

intervention (referred to Winckelmann’s approach), to a more drastic complete
restoration towards the middle of the century. Thus, Didron and Mèrimèe prepared the
background for the Stylistic Restoration definitely introduced by Viollet-le Duc. Jean-
Baptiste Lassus, who worked with Viollet-le Duc, introduced also a more scientific and
positivistic approach to restoration.
• The Gothic Revival movement and the Eclecticism of that period contributed a lot on
Restoration.

Viollet-le-Duc and Stylistic Restoration

Eugene Viollet-le-Duc was the most discussed character of that period: he was an architect and
chief inspector for monuments. His influence soon has been felt abroad France. Viollet-Le-Duc
thinks that the restoration is a well-done and scientific interpretation at present of the object:
the style is a typical feature of a specific time and site and architecture is the complete integration
of science and art. The two criteria of restoration are:

• Replacing the missing parts of the building by copying other similar parts or details;
• If there are not elements to copy directly findable on the building, replacing the missing
parts can be do by copying similar details of the same age, located in the same area;
• Restoration is never considered as an invention, but a scientific interpretation at the
present of the object.
• The main aim of Stylistic Restoration is to bring back an historic building to its stylistic
unity, giving it a form that cannot necessarily be the same of the past.

The main interventions of Viollet-le-Duc were:

• La Madeleine de Vézelay Church: included on the UNESCO World Heritage, this

religious building can be considered as a great example of the combination of
Romanesque tradition (nave’s vaults) and Gothic (choir with its light, ribbed vaults and
pointed arches). The intervention were paid by French Government.
o At the beginning of the 19th century, the church was in a pity condition and it
presented lots of structural damaged. The final approval to its restoration was
given in 1840, after Viollet-le-Duc prepared a report and drafted the project.

6
 o The work first concentrated on the nave, in which there were the most important
structural damages. There were made new foundations below the pillars of the
central nave and below the towers on the façade.
o By the end of 1841, some vaults and flying buttress of the nave were strengthened
and totally rebuilt;
o To give the nave an aesthetical coherence, Viollet-le-Duc proposed the complete
reconstruction of the vaults in a Romanesque Style; by this way, the Gothic vaults
were destroyed and rebuilt in the original style. Gothic was seen as an interference
in the church.
o The reconstruction works regarded also the capitals and the statues located
externally.

• Notre Dame: the original structure was dated to the 12th century and it was heavily
transformed during the following years introducing new adds. During the French
Revolution, it was damaged and it suffered from vandalism, many of the statues were
destroyed and some building materials were reused.
o Lassus and Viollet-le-Duc did a deep historic research about the building and
wrote a long historic essay about it: a complete restoration could damage the
historic interest of the building. The authors were against the removal of later
additions.
o The main aim of the intervention was to consolidate and restore every single
addition in their own style, giving back to the monument richness and splendour.
o He did not accomplish the towers in the façade, due to the lack of documentation;
o Rebuilding of the spear of the cross vault because it is a strong and fundamental
sign of the unity of the building.
o He accomplished the statues on the facade and rebuilds the central pillar of the
portal. He demolishes the decoration of the choir (18th century) and he plans to
increase the elevation of some bays as it was in the 12° century, using the
contemporary style.

• Carcassone: It can be identified as a fortification of Roman origin, substantially modified

during the 13th century. The entire structure was heavily damaged and some building
materials were reused.
o The most important intervention in Carcassone was related to the cathedral of
Saint-Nazaire: the interior of the building was in good condition, the exterior parts
had been completely lost due to weathering.
o Restoration consisted in a full reconstruction of external surfaces including most
sculptural details.

• Pierrefonds: In this period, the ruined Castle of Pierrefonds, near Paris, was chosen as the
new summer residence of the Empereor. The main aim of the intervention is to apply a
complete reconstruction, including sculptural ornaments, painted decoration and
furniture.
o There were used materials similar to the original ones, accepting the use of modern
materials such as steel instead of timber in the roof structures, not increasing the
weight.

Stylistic Restoration in Italy

Legislation in Italy had mainly concerned classical monuments, as seen before: in the 19th century,
7
due to the diffusion of Stylistic Restoration abroad, the situation changed, according to the new
ideas of Gothic Revival.

• Generally, restoration has to be done according the style that belongs to the building, but
the additions have the same historical relevance.
• An important example can be identified with Basilica di San Paolo fuori le Mura (1823):
after being seriously damaged in a fire, Valadier proposed the complete reconstruction of
the church in a modern fashion, maintaining just the apse and transept as surviving parts
of the original structure.
o The Chirografo of Leo XII established to rebuild the lost parts in their earlier
form.
• Important study cases are the unfinished fronts of Santa Croce and Santa Maria del Fiore
in Florence:
o For Santa Maria del Fiore, Emilio de Fabris won the competition to finish the
façade: the project consists in a Gothic-style façade, characterized by red marble
and by integrations.

CHAPTER 7
John Ruskin and Conservation principles

In the mid 19th century, there were a lot of criticism against the Restoration approach introduced
by Viollet-le-Duc, regarding the arbitrary renewal and reconstructions of historic buildings. The
Anti-Restoration approach, better known as Conservation, was gradually accepted as the modern
approach to care of historic monuments.

The anti-restoration movement criticized a lot architects for the destruction of the historical
authenticity of buildings: John Ruskin in the main character of this movement. The word
restoration came to indicate something negative and it was replaced by conservation.
• Ruskin did not wrote a theory of conservation, but he was able to identify the main
concepts of Conservation in his written works: the most important of these is The Seven
Lamps of Architecture, in which we can see the foundation for modern philosophies of
conservation. The seven lamps are the seven cardinal laws that an architect has to respect
while operating on a building.
o The most important lamp is Memory: it’s the culmination of Ruskin’s thinking in
terms of historic architecture. We need memory and something to which to attach
our memories.
o The Medieval Age and Gothic are seen as a mythic era, in which architecture was
completely free from the concept of style and closed linked to Nature. Beauty was
the essence of Ruskin’s life and, in architecture, can be identified with the forms
directly based on Nature.
o The asymmetry and the absence of a unique style in Gothic are the most tangible
signs of man activity in architecture.
o By this way, Ruskin promoted a kind of architecture which is completely against
the industrialization of buildings.

• Restoration is a lie and a complete falsification of the historical memory of a building. It is

necessary to apply prevention instead of repair (very modern conception).

8
Anti-Restoration

The thoughts of Ruskin were gradually accepted also abroad; in 1877, Sidney Colvin tried to
summarize the main principles of Conservation in his written work, Restoration and Anti-
Restoration:

• Buildings may exhibit the action of many modifying forces; the more they are, the greater
is the historical value of the building in itself. It is madness to destroy later structures for
the sake of archaeological research or with the excuse of repair.

John James Stevenson followed the same thought line of Colvin: he was against the restoration of
lost parts in such a way that the new and original parts cannot be distinguished.

William Morris and SPAB

Morris was the founder of the Society of Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB) in 1877: the
society had an important role in fighting restoration principles and promoted maintenance and
conservative treatment. It is considered the formal basis for modern Conservation.

• The Manifesto of SPAB gives a strong reaction to Restoration, considered as arbitrary

method of intervention. The main aims are:
o An historical building has to be preserved as a whole, with all its integration and
additions: the main aim is to conserve it materially as it is , making it instructive for
future generations;
o Protection has to be extended to all the parts of the building;
o Historical value is in material conservation of the authentic part, in situ;
o Restoration is considered the creation of a fake.

The mottos of SPAB are: conservative repair and stave off decay by daily care. The influence of
SPAB abroad was important, because it leaned to the foundation of similar associations in other
countries.

The conservation movement in Italy

It took a long time before deeper interest was shown in the protection and conservation of
medieval buildings: the Italians were able to draw on the experience of Anti-Restoration
principles which were born in England. This fact allowed the formation of an all-new Italian
approach, based partly on the early concepts of Restoration, and partly on Ruskin and SPAB’s
thoughts.

In the same time, the political changes in Italy after the unification (1860-1871) brought some
initiatives for national legislation and protection of ancient buildings. In 1889-1895, the
Government decided to establish the Uffici regionali per la conservazione dei monumenti
storici, which became Soprintendenze, offices responsible for historic buildings, art galleries,
excavations and museums. The main aim is the protection of Cultural Heritage.

• From 1830, the critical economic conditions of Italy began to improve, causing urban
renewal programmes in large cities as Milan: the destroy of the poor historical urban
fabric was a critical point during these years.

9
 o There were local critics from Carlo Cattaneo and Carlo Tenca: the historic borghi
in the city centres are witnesses of the municipal organization of Middle Ages
(Comuni) and of Italian civilization. For that reasons, they were against the
widening of the streets, the construction of new buildings and the construction of
the new Cathedral square.

• Another important voice was Alvise Zorzi, about the intervention on the San Marco
Basilica in Venice: he distinguished between restoration and conservation.
o Restoration presupposes innovations according to needs; it is applicable to
anything that has not archaeological importance.
o Conservation excludes them all, safeguarding from future decays.
o He recommended consolidation instead of demolition and renewal.

• Another important character in Venice was Giacomo Boni: he was a strong follower of
Morris and Ruskin; he was completely against the restoration of the city centre, the
widening of the streets and the restoration intervention applied to San Marco Basilica.

Restauro filologico

The academic circles in Milan were another important pole of development, especially in relation
to historians: an historical approach, called philological, was born. A monument is able to carry a
message, a document, that has to be understood by historical knowledge.

The father of Restauro filologico was Camillo Boito, who soon became the most important
character of the Italian conservation movement of the end of 19th century.

• Boito’s formation was strictly connected to the Stylistic Restoration and Gothic Revival:
he maintained that approach until 1879. He was important for the development of
conservation in Italy by two different ways:
o His role in the public administration allowed him to renew and build up normative
state for the protection of Cultural Heritage;
o He promoted a respectful policy for conservation and restoration of historic
buildings.

• The main aim is to promote a methodology of restoration based on a better knowledge of

historic monuments avoiding unnecessary destructions and errors.

• Another important aim is to distinguish between the original state of the building and the
actual state: restoration can be accepted only in the way that new parts are clearly
different from the original ones, even if justified by he need of structural stability.

• The first document on methods and aim of restoration of this approach brought by Boito
at the Third Congress of Engineers and Architects (1883). This document showed that
Boito used Stylistic Restoration and Conservation in a balanced way, allowing the birth of
the Italian school of restoration.
o Monuments should be strengthened than repaired, repaired than restored and It’s
necessary to avoid additions;
o Additions and innovations must be done in a modern way;
o In case of missing parts, they can be filled by same and simplified forms (see Arch

10
 of Titus by Valadier), but in different materials;
o The approach did not exclude restoration, but establish the criteria for
intervention according to the individual monument.

• Boito was also critical with Ruskin’s pure conservation approach, which could lean to the
complete loss of the historical memory of a monument. He divided restoration in three
ways:
o Archaeological restoration: referred to ancient monuments;
o Pictorial restoration: applied to medieval buildings, the additions and
interventions have to be the less as possible;
o Architecture restoration: applied to buildings from Renaissance to present; any
manner of additions are allowed.

• He accepted the Stylistic Restoration of the Campanile of San Marco in Venice and of the
façade of Palazzo Marino in Milan by Luca Beltrami, because they were based on an
accurate original documentation of the original state of buildings.

Restauro storico

Luca Beltrami can be considered the father of this important approach to conservation, between
the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th. He was a pupil of Boito and he
recognized a lot the importance of documentation as a basis for any restoration. For that reason,
his approach was called Restauro storico: he can be considered the first modern restoration
architect in Italy.

• The differences between this approach and the Stylistic Restoration are not easy to
identify. Like Boito, he distinguished between different cases according to the type of
monument that has to be restored.

• Regarding medieval buildings, they require precise documentation: this is the case of
Sforza Castle in Milan (1893-1895) where the historic documentation helped Beltrami to
reconstruct entirely the front tower (Torre del Filarete, destroyed in 15th century).

• Together with Boni, he contributed to the restoration of Campanile of San Marco in

Venice after his collapse in 1902; he proposed the entire rebuild of the monument in its
old form, based on the original drawings. It was made it again as it was, where it was.
The tower was completed in 1910 in reinforced concrete and it helped to reconstruct
Venice original urban landscape.

CHAPTER 8
Restauro scientifico

During the 1930’s, Gustavo Giovannoni can be identified as the main character of the
Conservation School in Italy: he was the director of the school of architecture in Rome: trough his
teaching, he had the possibility to consolidate the modern Italian conservation principles,
underlining the critical and scientific approach, and thus providing a basis for Restauro
scientifico. This policy was applied not only to monuments, but also to historic buildings in
general, initiated a new approach to historic urban areas.

11
 • Giovannoni was against Rome’s masterplan dated 1908, which would provide a
development of the city above the historical context; by this way, it is possible to
guarantee modern standards of life, damaging the history of the city.

• He stood alone in the defence of historic towns: in order to find a compromise, he formed
a theory for the respectful modernization of historic areas, called diradamento edilizio.
o The main aim of this program are keeping out major traffic from these areas,
avoiding new streets breaking the unity of the urban fabrics, improving hygienic
conditions and conserving historic buildings.
o To reach this, he suggested as well the demolition of less important buildings, in
order to create space for public services.

All these theories were widely in contrast with Fascist propaganda: Mussolini wanted to demolish
the medieval slums, in order to have a better visibility of the ancient ruins and of monuments of
Rome. Antonio Muñoz was the Soprintendente in charge for excavations and restorations during
Fascist Era in Rome: during his mandatory, there were some important intervention, both
archaeological (Largo Argentina, Via dei Fori Imperiali) and architectural (Via della Conciliazione,
demolition of the ancient Borgo Vaticano).

Giovannoni was also a member of Consiglio Superiore delle Belle Arti and distinguished himself
from his predecessors in his approach to restoration as a cultural problem of evaluation, and the
rehabilitation of historic buildings with respect to all significant periods. He was totally against
Stylistic Restoration, related to Viollet-le-Duc.

• The forms of modern architecture cannot be used successfully in historic buildings, due to
the lack of a proper modern style.

• Giovannoni underlined the importance of maintenance, repair and consolidation in

conservation intervention: in the last case, if necessary, he could also accept the use of
modern technologies. The aim was to preserve the authenticity of the structure and
respect the whole artistic life of the monument.

• All these principles were presented at Athens CIAM in 1931, contributing on the
formulation of Athens Charter. In the same time, he prepared an Italian charter, Norme
per il restauro dei monumenti, in 1932.

• Compared to Boito, who thought that the monument is firstly an historic document,
Giovannoni offered a broader approach on conservation: in fact, he included architectural
aspects, the historical context, the environment and the use of the building as important
data to collect in order to have a scientific approach on restoration.

• Giovannoni identified four types of restoration:

o Restoration by consolidation;
o Restoration by recomposition;
o Restoration by liberation;
o Restoration by renovation.

12