See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/360995164

Appraisal of Heritage in Mekelle City, Ethiopia

Article · April 2022

DOI: 10.15068/0002003378

CITATIONS READS

0 166

1 author:

Alula Tesfay Asfha

Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main
16 PUBLICATIONS 10 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Alula Tesfay Asfha on 01 June 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Refere as:
Asfha, A.T. Appraisal of Heritage in Mekelle City, Ethiopia.
Journal of World Heritage Studies. Vol. 8, 2022. Pages 18-39

Appraisal of Heritage in Mekelle City, Ethiopia

Alula Tesfay ASFHA 1 ) .

1) Wo rld Cultural Heritage Studies,

Gradu ate Schoo l of Co mprehen sive Human Sciences, University of Tsuk ub a, Jap an

Abstra ct: Th e rapid u rb anization o f the city of Mek elle and th e n eed to accommodate
in frastru ctu re d ev elop ment h as pu t an immense amount of pressure on heritage. Many of the
heritag e sites in Mek elle are no t reg istered and have been left out due to the heritage-making
pro cess’ top-do wn app ro ach . Reg istered heritag e sites are those that highly -centralized
ad min istration s d eem sign ifican t to th e national narrative. The urban planning process in Me kelle
ev olv ed fro m trad ition al to master plan and has now become structure planning. This trend went
from an ex p ert-o rien ted cen tralized app ro ach to a bottom-up approach. Structure planning entails
strong pub lic p articip atio n in d ecisio n making based on community priorities. However, since few
heritag e sites h av e b een research ed an d identified, many potential sites are left out of th e propo sed
stru cture p lan s. In th is p ap er, th e d ifferent types of urban plans that have been made for Mekelle
th rou ghout its h istory are d iscu ssed in relation to h eritage. This article appraises and identifies
potential h eritag e sites in Mek elle. Most of these sites were first identified by the author and
pro po sed fo r go ve rnme nt re gistration to obtain legal protection. Therefore, this research
aims to trigg er furth er research o n these elements as well as consideration of their registration
an d in clu sion in th e Mek elle stru ctu re planning process. These heritage components are clustered
in to mean in gful g roup s. The h eritag e components are placed on a map to facilitate future
co mmun ity mapp ing an d h eritag e-making within the Mekelle structure plan.

Keywo rds: Urb an Heritag e, Urb an d ev elopment, Structure plan, Mek elle.

1. Intro ductio n
Mek elle is the second largest city in Ethiop ia and th e capital of the northernmost Tig rai state.
Oral histo ry states th at Mekelle ex isted as a settlement since the 13 t h century (Tad esse, 2001 ).
Ho wev er, it b ecame a proper town after Emp eror Yoh a nn es IV (18 37–1889) decided to build his
palace there and mak e it th e capital o f Ethiopia. The emperor constructed his palace amongst the
prev io u sly existing clusters o f villag es and mon asteries. The construction of the palace was
fo llo wed by churches, mark ets, and residences. The city was sh aped when the emperor's subjects
started resid ing aro und th e p alace, which saw the construction of traditional Tigraian house
co mplex es (Hid mo s). Th ese clu stered stone masonry complexes emerged as stone cities. Much o f
th is architectu ral h eritage remains tod ay. Many historical construction trend s use d sto n e as th e
main con stru ction material, continuing the preexisting masonry tradition.
With th e relo cation o f th e cap ital to Addis Ababa following the emperor ’s death, Mekelle has
passed throug h d ifferen t p eriod s o f stagnation and development. Although Mekelle is young in
age relative to o th er to wn s in th e reg ion, it is significant due to the concentration of heritage
th ere as a resu lt o f its p ast an d p resen t political significan ce. Architectural heritage dating back

18
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

to 19 t h century Ethiopia is uniquely clu stered in th e Mekelle area. With rapid urbanization, the
city h as beco me an imp ortant cultu ral, economic, an d political center in th e no rth ern p art of th e
co un try.
Cu rren tly, Mek elle is on e o f Eth io pia’s rapidly growing cities. According to th e d emog raph ic
repo rt o f th e Stru ctu re Plan Prep aration body, Mekelle’s population grew by 9.8% between 199 1
and 199 4. Th is was fo llo wed b y 6.9 % growth between 1995 and 200 7 and 4.13 % growth for the
period 20 08–2013, ex cludin g th e an n exed village population from measures of spatial expansion
(MU, 2 016). If th e p resen t situ ation continues along th is trend, th e city’s pop ulation will double
in the ne xt e le ve n to twelve years. The city has e xpanded extensively in terms of coverage
area. Du ring th e p erio d s 19 84–1994, 1994–200 4, an d 2 004–2014, the built-up area increased by
10 %, 9 %, an d 8 %, resp ectiv ely. Th e city expanded from 531 ha in 1984 to 3,524 ha in 2014 (Fen ta
et. al, 2 017 ). This b reak-n eck sp eed h as created enormous challenges in the overa ll management
of th e city. Th e city ad min istration’s primary focus is on infrastructure projects that can
acco mmod ate th e p ub lic’s ev er-g ro wing demands. Urban heritage that maintains the city’s
ch aracter and liv ability is a big th reat to this go al.
It is ev id ent th at a city ’s uniqu e character and competitive advantage lie in its heritage.
Ho wev er, many o f th e u rb an d ev elop ment works in Mekelle have failed to acknowledge this. This
is p rimarily b ecau se Mek elle do es no t h ave a comprehensive heritage management plan. There is
no con sistent h eritag e reg istration p latform in the city or in th e Tigrai state where Mekelle is
lo cated . Th e h eritag e-making p ro cess has been highly centralized nationally, so it has thus far
fo cu sed o n majo r land mark s with n atio nal importance and left out several other heritage sites.
Th erefo re, th e h eritag e in Mek elle h as been easily targeted fo r destruction to accommodate th e
dev elop men t activities in the city. Th e urban plan is a major legal document that regulates the
dev elop men t activ ities in Mek elle. Ho wever, since many of the heritage sites are not identified
an d registered , th ey are simp ly left un recognized in the urban plans. There have been six main
urb an p lan s throughout Mekelle’s h istory, and all of th em have left out several of th e city’s
heritag e sites. Th e lo ss of h eritag e in Mekelle continues at an alarming rate. This could result in
th e lo ss o f th e city’s ch aracter in th e fu ture.
Th is article id en tifies th e majo r h eritage in Mekelle for the use of the public, urban planners,
and the city’s ad ministration. Th e id entification of heritage in Mekelle is very limited. Th e
research er attempted to id entify as many heritage sites within the city as possible by making a
ratio n al d ecisio n b ased on th e av ailable historical and cultural studies. Ho wever, very few
heritag e elemen ts in Mek elle h av e b een research ed. The decision was based on local values drawn
fro m th e h eritag e-mak ing trad ition.

2. Methods
In o rd er to d efin e Mek elle’s u rb an h eritage, the author used a heritage appraisal m ethod based on
primary an d secon d ary sou rces. Th e au thor conducted two field visits to Mekelle in Octo ber 201 8
an d Febru ary 20 20 as p art of d o ctoral research at the University of Tsukuba, funded by a MEXT
sch olarsh ip fro m th e Jap an ese go v ern ment. Data were collected using observation, photography,
an d interv iews with stak eh o ld ers. In addition, the researcher worked at Mekelle University, wh ere
he h ad a ch an ce to p articipate in th e early phases of the 2015 Mekelle structure plan preparations
an d oth er acad emic activities.
Secon dary sou rces were co llected based on the research conducted on the identification of
Mek elle’s u rb an h eritag e an d h isto ry. The most important resource was Tadesse Sequar ’s Amh aric-
lang u ag e b ook Mekelle City’s Estab lish ment and Development (የመቐለ ከተማ ኣመሰራረትና እድገት). Oth er
importan t sou rces are Keio Un iv ersity’s Rumi Okazaki’s MSc. and Ph D research outputs, which
pro vid ed impo rtan t d ata o n the id entification of heritage in the inner quarter of Mekelle. Nobuhiro
Shimizu, Keita Ao sh ima, and Richii Miy ak e’s study on the vernacular of city making and built
heritag e in Mek elle and th e surrounding area was also helpful. Richard Pankhurst’s Histo ry o f

19
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Ethio pian To wn s fro m th e Mid -Nineteen th Century to 193 5 was anoth er important source for
und erstanding th e n atu re of towns in Ethio pia, specifically Mekelle. An Ethio-Swedish Institute
(wh ich later b ecame th e Ethio pian In stitute of Architecture and Building Construction (EiABC)
und er Ad dis Ababa University) study on vernacular architecture in Mekelle, cond ucted in 1 967
an d pub lish ed in 1 971 , was also an impo rtant resou rce.

2.1 Da ta Ana ly sis

Th e h eritag e elemen ts were co llected and placed on a map based on their cluster to produce a
heritag e map o f Mek elle. Many o f th e heritage elements in this article are not registered and d o
not h av e leg al p rotectio n. All th e elements were loca ted on the map of Mekelle using Arc GIS.
Heritag e sites were g rou p ed into a meaningful cluster to simplify future management. In particular,
clo se elements were groupe d through GIS to p ropo se a conservation area in the city. The lack of
qu ality d ata mak es it ch allen ging to p rovide accurate georeferenced data. The author identified
sev eral n ew h eritag e sites an d o rg anized documents on the properties to facilitate the initiation
of registration through community map ping.

3. Defining Mekelle’s Herita ge

Th e p ro cess o f d efin ing Mek elle’s h eritage b eg an with an attemp t to un d erstand th e city ’s
urb anization trend an d ho w it d ev eloped through history. Since the city is predominantly
popu lated by Orthodox Christians of the Tig raian ethn ic group, the major landmarks and civic
sp aces are related to th e Eth iop ian Orth odox Church . Ortho dox Christianity was introdu ced in the
area sin ce th e 4 t h century as a state religion and has a stronghold represented through space
allo catio n and mu ch o f th e intang ib le heritag e. Muslim minorities in the city are historically
activ e in th e co mmerce are a, wh ich g av e rise to notable neighborhoods.
Th e abu nd an ce o f ston e in th e area created a long tradition of masonry construction. The
vern acu lar co n stru ction techniqu es o f Hidmo are very common to most of the built heritage in the
city. Th e city is main ly ch aracterized as an imperial town that was a favorite destination among
nob les an d later, in the 19 t h century, as the capital of Ethiopia.

3.1 . Urban Dev elo pment Trends in Mekelle City

Urb an d ev elop ment in Mek elle h as followed six major trends since the 19 t h century. Heritag e
man ag emen t at these d ev elop men tal stages also differed . During the imp erial period, up until
1974, th e Ethiopian Orthodox Church was the official gov ern ment religion. As a resu lt, many o f
th e majo r lan d mark s in th e city were either chu rch es or no bles’ residences. After 1974, modern
civ ic and co mmercial b uild ings emerg ed on Mekelle’s urban landscape.
In b rief, sin ce its establish ment, Mekelle has seen the fo llowing five differen t major urban
plan typ es.
(a ) Th e early “asso ciated Hid mo ” plan: an ind ig en ou s urb an p lan b ased o n hou se co mpou nds (th e
1860 s to the 1880s) fo llo wing th e construction of Yohannes IV’s palace (186 4–1876) after the
emp eror allo cated land arou nd th e palace to his sub jects. Plan ning is usually characterized by
larg e co mpou nd s of trad ition al masonry residences (Hidmos), each of which had walls and
sev eral ho u ses in sid e. Path s and alleys between these compounds served as roads. Hund red s
of co mpounds and their co n necting paths were arrang ed radially arou nd the palace. Th is urban
plan ning con cep t is ch aracterized as “associated Hid mo,” which is different fro m the
“Cartesian grid sy stem in Europ e and [the] self-dividing system in [th e] Middle East”
(Ok azaki, 2009).

Land in Mek elle was allo ca ted acco rding to rank. The Emperor allocated a large portion of the
land to th e ch urch es and th e no bility, who allocated or sold some of the land to the public. This

20
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Figure1 . Ma jo r Ev ents in Urban Development of Mekelle. (By Auth o r)

was u su ally don e by a trad ition al p ro fessional with special skills in me asuring and allocating
land s. Th e div id ed land s were u su ally fenced in b y a stone wall called a hatsur (ሓጹር) using a
techn iq u e called qhuana (ዃና), which refers to th e con stru ction of a simpler wall made by layering
ston e an d req uiring little skill. In so me cases, the elevation o f the lands wo uld be sep arated to
create sp ace d efinition called deret (ደረት). Deret can also b e accomplished using natural features,
su ch as trees an d ro ck s. It is impo rtant for people to plant trees to allocate o n their land properties.
Land d iv ision was done on larg e p reexisting compounds, as demonstrated below.

Figure 2. Quana Fences and Hidmo walls illustratio n. (By Author)

(b) Th e Italian Occup ation Master Plan (1935–19 36 ): Piano Regolatore

Th e Italian fascist army invaded Eth io pia in 193 5. During the 5-year occupation, the Italians
tried to tran sfo rm th e majo r Ethiopian cities into European -style colonial cities. Consequently,
Mek elle u nd erwen t n ew city p lan ning. Land was allocated for a new town that was p lann ed
with an iron grid sy stem, wid e streets, and land u se. The intro du ction o f zo ning for histo rical
places was an opportunity for h eritage development. Major landmarks were connected and
emph asized th roug h streets, sp ecifically avenues. Although this plan was not fully
implemen ted g iv e th e Italian army’s 1 941 defeat, it left a p erman en t mark on Mek elle’s
dev elop men t, sin ce the government elected to follo w a similar trend.

21
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

(c) Th e Raesi Meng esh a Ma ster Plan (19 66 )

Follo win g th e Italian s’ retreat, a municipality was established: Mek elle’s urban development
pro gressed d urin g Prin ce Raesi Mengesha’s ru le with th e establish ment of th e first fo rmal
mu nicipality of Mekelle in 1934 EC. So me basic infrastru cture was b egin ning to b e realized,
although p rog ress was v ery slo w. In the 1960s, the prince, as the governor of Tigrai,
co mmissioned an oth er master p lan to Italian architect Arturo Mezzedimi (1922 –2010). Hav ing
trav elled to Eu rop e at a y o ung ag e, Raesi Mengesha had a keen interest and unique skill in
urb an works, and he planned many parts of the town. Th e 1960 master p lan in clud ed
ex p an sion to th e no rth ern p art o f th e city. This plan fo cused on the city’s phy sical aspects an d
emph asized connecting the governmental office bu ildin g, majo r monu ments, and allocation of
land to d ifferen t services. Th is plan shaped Mekelle’s futu re significantly. There were two
en gin eers workin g in th e municip ality during the early period : Grazmach Asoli Ayano and the
Itallian Signo r Mask aro measu red and allocated land in th e city (Tad esse, 2001 ).

Du ring th e estab lish men t o f th e mu nicipality, Mekelle’s population was around 12,000, and it
occup ied 6 g ash a o f land (1 gasha is 80 to 100 acres) An aerial p hoto fro m the 1 950 s sho ws that
both th e trad ition al Hid mo clu ster an d the iro n grid were used in the city ’s development.
All th e sp aces b etween th e new and old town , according to the Italian plan, were settled. Iron
grid planning persisted, overtaking traditional planning in all new developments.

(d) Mu nicip ality Action Plan (1991)

Mek elle’s action p lan was p rep ared immediately after the end of the Socialist Military Derg u e
reg ime in 19 91. After the fall of th e emp ire by military cou p in 197 4, th e city suffered
dev elop men tal stag n atio n b ecau se it was a stronghold in the opposition insurgencies against
th e cen tral gov ern men t. The no rthern part of the country was liberated from the military
regime in 1991, which is around the time the city municipality prepared the action plan. Th is
plan ex ten d ed th e Italian master plan’s grid pattern. Altho ugh th e action plan introduced
natu ral an d ag ricultu ral reserv es, it did not consider the h istorical aspects. There are no
do cu men ts th at record the action plan; however, the city’s cond ition can b e seen on th e map
th at th e Natio n al Urban Planning In stitute (NUPI) prepared as part of the development plan.

Land u se is d iv id ed in to residential, administrative, commerce and trade, service,

manu facturin g and sto rage, tran spo rtation, recreation, agriculture, forest, and special fun ction s.
Althoug h there are special functions, such as restricte d, reserved , an d con serv ation areas, most
of th e h istorical areas and th e n ational monuments were included in administration and
co mmercial areas du e to th eir reu se as offices an d h otels, etc. Th is also included natural heritage
in p ro tected forests, env iro nmental p rotected zones, waterbodies, and marshland. However, there
was no follo w-u p o r in stitu tion al cap acity to protect the ex isting land uses.

(e) NUPI’s Dev elop ment Plan (1993)

Follo win g th e fall o f th e military government in 1991, a develop ment plan was prepared by
the state agency NUPI in 1993. Th e plan main ly fo cu sed on th e ou tward expansion of the city
area rath er th an in terv en tio n in th e city. Specifically, the focus was on accommodating th e
popu lation boom, wh ich was a d irect result of soldiers retu rning fro m th e armed strug gle. Site
ex p an sion ex tend ed in to th e less fertile agricultural lands on the periphery.

Th e d ev elop men t p lan ’s majo r intervention was the relocation of the St. George Church from
Ad i Hak i for th e co n stru ction of a memorial center to hono r th e 60 ,00 0 p eop le who died du ring
th e strugg le ag ain st th e so cialist gov ernment. This complex includes a 51-meter-high statue,
meeting h alls, and larg e museums. A radial axial street runs fro m this co mpou n d into different

22
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

parts o f th e city. Th is h as b eco me on e o f Mekelle’s most important cultural elements and sites of
memorial celeb ration .

(f) Stru ctu re Plan (2005, revised 2015)

Th e stru ctu re p lan is a co mp lex so cio-economic and spatial plan fo rmu lated through pu blic
particip ation . As th e d ev elo pment o f Mekelle started to expand, the administration n eed ed to
meet public d emand . Leg ally, th e planning team needed to consist of urban planners,
geog raph ers, econo mists, so cio log ies, historians, GIS experts, and other experts. The structure
plan s are later d etailed in the lo cal development plans.

In 2 006, th e Mek elle City Plan Prep aration Project Office (MCCPPO) p rep ared a stru ctu re
plan th at emphasized so cial and eco nomic issues in line with the spatial conditions (MCPPPO,
2005 ). Heritag e, h isto ry, and culture were studied separately, and the planning team produced
related rep orts. Howev er, this d id no t have a significant impact on the plan because the content
was no t prio ritized fo r action. In add ition, few heritage elements were identified for inclusion.
Exp erts fro m Mek elle Univ ersity rev ised th e stru ctu re plan in 2015.

Ta ble 1 . Planning Development trends of Mekelle

Urb an Dev elop men t Discu ssion
Stag es
(a) The development of associated Hidmo
The early ‘associated traditional planning system (Okazaki,
Hidmo’ plan 2 0 0 9 ). A n a r i a l i m a g e ( U n k n o w n s o u r c e )
from 1920 shows Areal Picture of Mekelle
in the 1920s. Here the demarcation of the
compounds can be visible. The Emperor
Yohannes IV palace and Teklehaimano t
Church show settlements that have bee n
densified by in compound split. While
other areas that hasn’t been divided yet.
A d i I s l a m i s a l s o o n e o f t h e e x i s t i n g a re a s
from this time. Almost all of the buildings
are vernacular Hidmo architecture.

(b ) Piano Regolatore (Master Plan) of

The Italian Occupation Mekelle, 1937, (Gli Annali dell’Africa
Master Plan (1935-36) Italiana, Numero 4, 1939) .
Piano Regulatore The illustration from a magazine is the
only existing document of the Italian
planning in Mekelle. The plan introduced
a new expansion of Mekelle in an iron
grid shape that later dominated the
planning style in Mekelle. Kedam ay
Woyane Market, St. Mary Catholic
Church, Italian Administration Building
a r e o n e o f t h e re m a i n s o f t h i s
development. This building continued the
masonry construction of the Hidmo
v e r n a c u l a r w i t h a b l e n d o f c o n c re t e .

23
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Areal from 1960s (Picture collection of

The Raesi Mengesha Abreha Castle Hotel)
Master plan (1966) This shows that the Italian plan was
implemented by the local planning an d
extended in the Raesi Mengesha master
plan. The old area in the top of the pictur e
maintained the associated Hidmo trend.
Many modern buildings were developed
during this a re a including Market,
municipality and a Hidmos residence of the
Raesi Mengesh.
Blue Print of Existing Land use pla n
Action Plan by from National Institute of Urban Planning.
Municipality (1991) 1993 Shows the Action plan of
Municipality in 1991 with an expansion of
territory following similar planning tren d
f o r r e s i d e n t i a l a re a s .

Blue Print of Proposed Land use of

Development plan by development plan by NUPI 1993. This
NUPI (1993) mainly focused on the expansion of the city
territory outward areas. The main
intervention is the inclusion of pr ovision of
lands for Hawelti Semaetat memor ial center
which later become the Major landmark of
Mekelle.

Proposed Land use of Mekelle by Structure

Structure Plan (2006): Plan Preparation Project 2006. In this
Revised in 2016 proposal major sites are zoned as historical
place. These include Yohannes IV palace
and Abreha Castle. Many of the old sites
are put in the religious institution zoning
as they belong to the churches. The green
area is expanded widely to incorporate
forests, parks and botanic gardens. Th e
proposed plan is to interconnect all the
greenery to create one large network o f
natural environment.

3.2 Appra isal of Heritag e in Mekelle

Th e h eritag e-mak ing pro cess in Mek elle was challenging because of the centralized approach to

24
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

heritag e-mak ing in Ethiop ia th at was taken in the past. This appro ach has left several important
heritag e sites o ff th e reg istratio n list b ecause of their importance to the national narrative. This
pap er lists p otential h eritage sites for public and administrative u se in the heritage-making
pro cess.
The und erstanding o f h eritag e h as been widening in scope in the last half century, n otably
ex p and in g fro m mon u men ts and sing le structure site s to the wide environment and landscape
affected by hu man in teraction (United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultu ral Org an ization
[UNESCO] et al., 2013). On e o f th e earliest documents that provide definitions and guidelines on
heritag e co n serv atio n is the 196 4 Venice Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of
Monu men ts and Sites (In ternation al Co uncil on Monuments and Sites [ICOMOS], 1 965 ). As stated
in th e n ame, th e Ven ice Ch arter fo cused on monuments and sites. Urban heritage has been
sq u eezed into this framew ork . Urb an h eritage can incorporate a wide range of disciplines and
activities. Althoug h it is d ifficult to find an agreed upon global definition of urban heritage,
heritag e p ro fession als h av e co ntin u ed to structure urban heritage conservation. Th e 1 987
ICOMOS Washington Ch arter for th e Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban Areas provides
a d efin ition and con serv ation gu id elin es for the historic urban areas that complement the Venice
Charter.
Th e 2011 Reco mmend ation on th e Historic Urban Landscape is also an important document
co ntain in g a set o f con cep ts fo r urb an heritage. The historic urban landscape is defined as “an
urb an area resulting from historic layering of cu ltura l an d n atu ral v alu es and attrib utes.” This
defin itio n h as extend ed b ey ond th e con finement of the “historic center,” in clud in g the wid er urb an
area. Th e id en tification , assessment, conservatio n, an d management of urban heritage is put in
th e con tex t of wid er urb an dev elop ment (UNESCO, 2011).
Th e Ethiopian law Proclam ation to Prov id e fo r th e Research and Con serv ation of Cu ltu ral
Heritag e (Pro clamation No . 209 /2 000 ) defines cultu ral heritage as:

An yth ing tan gib le o r in tan g ib le which is the product of creativity and labor of man
in th e pre-h isto ry a nd h isto ry times, that describes and witnesses to the evolution
of nature and which has a ma jo r scientific, h isto rical, a rtistic and ha ndicraft
co ntent.

In th e Ethiopian context, although th e laws have changed to accommodate current thoughts on

heritag e p ro tection, research and co n servation activities still focus on grand mo n uments, while
the con serv ation of u rb an heritag e in cities like Mekelle is still in n eed of more work. This
research fills th is g ap by d efining Mek elle’s urban heritage to encourage further heritage research
an d con servation. Sp ecifically, new elements are identified for registration and further research.

Ta ble 2 . List o f ex isting a nd po tentia l heritage in Mekelle city, conditions and stakeholders.
a) Ta ngible heritag e
N Name Year of Origi Cu Registrati Own Major Stakeholders H e r i t a g e C l us t e r
o Constr nal rre on er recommended
uction Use nt
Use
1 Hatsey App. Palace Mus Federal Natio Tigrai State, Kedamay Yohannes IV imperial town
Yohan 1864-76 eum Heritage nal Weyane area residents, (1867-89)
nes IV Palac
Palace es
Admi
nistr
ation
2 Dejat App Castle Hot Regional Sur Tigrai State, Sur Dejat Abreha’s Alternative
Abreh 1910 el Heritage Cons construction, Local castle city center
a (Reconst truct area administration and (app. 1900s-1914)
Castle ructed in ion. residents
Hotel 1960s

25
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

3 Hawelt 1992 Memo Me Regional Tigra Tigrai State, Mekelle city Heritage from the Dergue
i rial mor Heritage i administration, TPLF head Regime and Tigrai Struggle
Semae center ial state quarters (1974-91)
tat compl cent
ex er
com
ple
x
4 Enda App 13th Churc Chu Not EOT EOT C, Mekelle Univer sity, E stablishment of Mekelle and
Eyesus C. h rch registered C Local r esidents earlier settlements (13th c-
Churc (Main 1867);
h building Kedamay Woayane (1943)
Under
reconstr
uction)
5 Adi App Mosqu Mos Not Tigra Tigrai Islam Council, Yohannes IV imperial town
I slam 1860s- e que Registered i Local Adi Islam area (1867-89)
Mosqu I slam residents
e coun
cil
6 Medha App Churc Chu Not EOT EOT C, Local ar eas Yohannes IV imperial town
ni 1864- h rch registered C residents and (1867-89)
Alem 1876 administration
Churc
h
7 Kidane App Churc Chu Not EOT EOT C, Local ar eas Yohannes IV imperial town
Mihret 1864- h rch registered C residents and (1867-89)
Churc 1876 administration
h
8 Tekleh App Churc Chu Not EOT EOT C, Local ar eas Yohannes IV imperial town
aiman 1864- h rch registered C residents and (1867-89)
ot 1876 administration
church
9 Enda App 13th Churc Chu Not EOT EOT C, Local ar eas E stablishment of Mekelle and
Gebre C h rch registered C residents and earlier settlements (13th c-
menfes Main administration 1867);
kidus church
Chuch reconstr
ucted in
1950s
1 Sewhi - Grazin Tim Not EOT EOT C, Local ar eas E stablishment of Mekelle and
0 Nigus g, ket registered C residents and earlier settlements (13th c-
Field Timke fest administration 1867);
t ival Yohannes IV imperial town
festiv (1867-89;
al, Intangible Heritage
Meske
l
festiv
al
1 Chome - Meske Mes Not Publi EOT C, Local ar eas E stablishment of Mekelle and
1 a l kel registered c residents and earlier settlements (13th c-
celebr cee administration, Mahiber 1867);
ation brat Chomea (Association) Yohannes IV imperial town
ion (1867-89);
Intangible Heritage

1 Kedam Open Open Co Not Trad Tigrai state, Trade Kedamay Woyane (1943)
2 ay market market mm registered e cooperative, Kedamay
Woyan since erci Coop Woyane area residents and
e 1860s al erati administration
Market Difeo cent ves
part in er
1960s
Commer
cial
Center
1999
1 Djibro - Salt Co Not Priva Local r esidents and Remains of the Salt trade route
3 uk Storag mm registered te administration
Area e, erci
Servic al
es cent

26
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

er
1 Blata 1920s Reside Res Not Priva Local r esidents and Raesi Gugsa Period
4 Welde nce ide Registered te administration (1918-33)
mikae nce
l
Resid
ence
(Old
hospit
al
Quarte
r)
1 Liquor 1920s Liquor Cin Not Priva Local r esidents and Raesi Gugsa Period
5 factor factor ema registered te administration (1918-33)
y/cine y
ma
Adwa
1 Menen 1930s Reside Co Not Priva Local r esidents and Raesi Gugsa Period
6 house nce mm registered te administration (1918-33)
erci
al
1 St. 1930s Churc Chu Not EOT EOT C, Local ar eas Raesi Gugsa Period
7 Mary h rch registered C residents and (1918-33)
Gugsa administration
Churc
h
1 St. 13th C Churc Chu Not EOT EOT C, Local ar eas E stablishment of Mekelle and
8 Gebrie Reconst. h rch registered C residents and earlier settlements (13th c-
l 1950s administration 1867);
Churc
h
1 Balam 1880s Reside Res Not Priva Local r esidents and Yohannes IV imperial town
9 baras nce ide registered te administration (1867-89)
Getahu nce
n
Hailu
Reside
nce
2 St. 1910s Reside Chu Not EOT EOT C, Local ar eas Not specified
0 Mikael nce rch registered C residents and
Churc administration
h
2 Old 1960s Munic Offi Not Meke Raesi Mengesa Period
1 Munici ipality ces Registered lle (1960-74)
pality hall and city
Buildi hall admi
ng nistr
ation
2 Raesi 1920s Reside Hot Regional Tigra Raesi Gugsa Period
2 Gugsa nce el Heritage i (1918-33)
Leisur state
e gove
Reside rnme
nce nt
2 St. 1930s Churc Chu Not Ethio EOT C, Local ar eas Italian Invasion (1894-96) and
3 Mary h rch registered pian residents and Occupation (1936-41)
Cathol Cath administration
ic olic
Churc churc
h h
2 Major 1894 Milita Ope Not Publi Tigrai State, Italian Italian Invasion (1894-96) and
4 Gallia ry n registered c embassy in Ethiopia, Local Occupation (1936-41)
no fortifi mus residents
Fort cation eum
2 Italian 1930s Admin Cou Not Tigra Tigrai state, Tigrai Italian Invasion (1894-96) and
5 Fascist istrati rt registered i supreme court, local Occupation (1936-41)
Admin on hall state residents and
istrati office administration
on
Buildi
ng
2 Italian 1930s Cemet Ce Regional Publi Tigrai state, Italian Italian Invasion (1894-96) and
6 Cemet ery met heritage c embassy, Mekelle Occupation (1936-41)

27
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

ery ery University, local residents

and administration
2 Menge 1960s Reside Art Regional Tigra Tigrai state, Tigrai Raesi Mengesa Period
7 sha nce gall heritage i Women’s association, (1960-74)
Leisur ery Wom descendants of the family,
e en’s local residents and
House assoc administration
iatio
n
2 Edaga - Marke Mar Not Publi Tigrai state, business Dejat Abreha’s Alternative
8 Kedam t ket registered c associations, local people city center (app. 1900s-1914)
and administration
2 Enda 1900s Churc Chu Not EOT EOT C, Local ar eas Dejat Abreha’s Alternative
9 Selassi h rch registered C residents and city center (app. 1900s-1914)
e administration
Churc
h
3 Raesi 1910s Reside Offi Not Meke Tigrai state, Mekelle Raesi Siyoum Period (1914-
0 Siyou nce ce registered lle Instituute of Technology, 1919)
m Instit Aynalem area residents and
Leisur ute administration
e of
Reside Tech
nce nolo
gy
3 Assefa 1914- Reside Res Not Priva Tigrai state, local Raesi Siyoum Period (1914-
1 ’s 1919 nce ide registered te administration and 1919), Remains of Salt Route
House nce residents
3 St. 13 C Churc Chu Not EOT EOT C, Local ar eas E stablishment of Mekelle and
2 Mary Reconst. h rch registered C residents and earlier settlements (13th c-
Churc 2014 administration 1867);
h
Quiha
3 Cherq 5th C Churc Chu Federal EOT EOT C, Local ar eas E stablishment of Mekelle and
3 os h, rch, heritage C residents and earlier settlements (13th c-
Churc Archa Arc administration 1867);
h and eologi hae
Archae cal olo
ologic site gica
al site l
site
3 Enda - Reside Res Not Priva Tigrai state, Local E stablishment of Mekelle and
4 Meske ntial ide registered te residents and earlier settlements (13th c-
l Neigh ntia administration 1867);
Hidmo borho l Groups of traditional houses
Vernac od Nei
ular ghb
Cluste orh
r ood
3 Debri - Reside Res Not Priva Tigrai state, Local E stablishment of Mekelle and
5 Hidmo ntial ide registered te residents and earlier settlements (13th c-
Vernac Neigh ntia administration 1867);
ular borho l Groups of traditional houses
Cluste od Nei
r ghb
orh
ood
3 Feleg - Reside Res Not Priva Tigrai state, Local E stablishment of Mekelle and
6 Daero ntial ide registered te residents and earlier settlements (13th c-
Hidmo Neigh ntia administration 1867);
Vernac borho l Groups of traditional houses
ular od Nei
cluster ghb
orh
ood
3 Roman - Reside Res Not Priva Tigrai state, Local E stablishment of Mekelle and
7 at ntial ide registered te residents and earlier settlements(13th c-
Hidmo Neigh ntia administration 1867);
Vernac borho l Groups of traditional houses
ular od Nei
cluster ghb
orh
ood

28
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

b) Inta ng ible heritag e

No Nam Year Orig Cur Registration Owner Major Heritage
e of inal rent Stakeholders Cluster
Con Use Use recommende
s tr u d
ctio
n
1 Mesk - Relig Relig Federal heritage EOTC and public EOTC and Intangible
el ious/ ious/ (UNESCO Intangible follower s, Mahber heritage
celeb Cultu Cultu Representative list) Chomea
ratio ral ral association, local
ns festiv festiv residents and
al al administration
2 Timk - Relig Relig Federal heritage EOTC and public EOTC and Intangible
et ious/ ious/ (UNESCO Intangible follower s, local heritage
Festi Cultu Cultu Representative list) residents and
val ral ral administration
festiv festiv
al al
3 Ashe - Relig Relig Federal Heritage EOTC and public EOTC and Intangible
nda ious/ ious/ follower s, heritage
Cultu Cultu Women’s
ral ral association, local
festiv festiv residents and
al al administration
4 Lekat - Politi Politi Regional Heritage Tigrai State/TPLF Tigrai state, Intangible
it 11 cal cal/c office/ Public Several heritage;
ultur associations of Heritage from
al veter ans, youth the Dergue
and women, local Regime and
residents and Tigrai Struggle
administration (1974-91)

As sho wn in Tab le 2, many of th e heritage sites related to the Orthodox Church were
main tain ed in good condition and in their original use because the religion has active followers.
Ho wev er, man y of th ese sites h av e also recently undergone major reconstruction. Since th ese sites
are no t registered as h eritag e, th eir reconstruction is subject to the will of the local church
ad min istration .
Th ese ch urch es were not reg istered as h eritag e sites because they were not considered
ind ep end ently impo rtan t given th e long history of church construction in the Tig rai region and
th e n ational po licy, wh erein th e cen tralized heritage registration system only registered sites with
nation al sig nifican ce. Th e Tig rai reg ion and the administration of Mekelle did not have a heritage
reg istration system before 1991. The id ea of pu tting these chu rch es in a cluster commun icates
th at th ey b elong to a wid er con tex t in the city’s urban fabric. Heritage registration also means
fin an cial respon sib ility fo r th e g ov ern ment; hence, majo r elements are prioritized. Effective
heritag e man ag ement requires a p artn ership among the stakeholders, who are key in creating
pub lic–p riv ate p artn ersh ip s in h eritag e man agemen t.
Althoug h mo st h eritag e sites maintain their original use, some sites’ change of function
sev ered th eir connection with the n eighb orhoo d. For example, Yohannes IV’s palace was
co nn ected to th e n eig hbo rin g Tek leh aimano t chu rch ; h owever, this connection was severed when
th e p alace was converted to a mu seu m under the federal government. In ad dition, th e lack of
co ordin atio n b etween th e man ag ing bodies of ad jacent heritage elements po ses a challen g e. In
so me cases, ad ap tiv e reu se resu lted in the commercialization of heritage sites, to the detriment
of th e orig in al u se. Many o f th e area’s rulers’ second residences are now adapted to other functions.
So me o f these stru ctures h ave b een affected by the auxiliary structures built around them to serve
new fun ctions, for ex amp le, th e Raesi Gugsa residence is now a hotel, at th e exp en se of the
orig in al b uild ing and g ard en . Similarly, Abreha Castle Hotel is also being developed (2020),
fo llo wing p riv atization by the Tigrai gov ern ment. Major ownership shifts in heritage properties

29
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

occu rred after 1974 wh en the so cialist admin istration ex prop riated all ex cess lan ds, hou ses, and
oth er p rop erties, including many nobles’ and wealth y p eo ple’s residences in Mekelle. Mo st were
retu rn ed to th e o rigin al o wners, but their fun ction s were conv erted , mostly to hotels.
Th e con sisten cy of material and th e local construction tradition can be ob serv ed ov er several
of Mek elle’s d ev elop men t stag es. Mo st residences, in cluding Yoh ann es IV’s palace, Dejar Abreha
Castle, Raesi Men g esh a’s resid en ce, Reasi Siyoum, an d Raesi Gugsa are vernacular Hidmo stone
arch itecture stru ctu res. Although there has been extensive reconstruction of the churches using
co n crete, the old er stru ctu res are Hid mo vernacular. The Italian structures built during the
occup ation also followed this fashion o f u sing stone. Giv en the introduction of cobbled stone
pav emen ts all o v er th e city, th e masonry tradition is a unifying characteristic o f Mek elle as a
ston e city. The author hopes th at listing these heritage elements will trigg er a d eep er stud y on
each o n e to ack no wledg e h eritag e v alu e and develop management tools.
Th e h eritag e elemen ts id en tified abo v e are shown on th e map below (Fig. 3) with th e go al of
sp ecify ing in tang ib le h eritag e elements. The schematic map is useful for further community
mapping , urban planning, and th e h eritage-mak ing pro cess. This is an especially important inp ut
fo r th e stru ctu re p lann in g pro cess. Th e structure plan team has sub-research p ertaining to th e
heritag e sites, so th at th ey can b e in cluded in th e u rban plan p ro po sal; however, this mo stly
dep ends on seco nd ary sou rces.

3.3 Heritag e Clusters in Mekelle

Heritag e clu sters are u sefu l fo r sy stematic research and the management and development of
heritag e in Mek elle. Th ese are th e urb an lay ers in Mek elle. Th e h eritage elements were identified
sep arately in the previous section . Man aging these elements will be a daunting process if they are
not clu stered . Th e main ch alleng e with management in light of the lack of heritage registration
in Mek elle is th e ab sen ce o f a meaning ful h eritag e arrang ement. Heritage elements are arranged
by ag e o f estab lish men t, ch aracter, an d value. Additional elements can be added to these clusters,
simplify in g future research . Heritag e management with pub lic participatio n can be initiated usin g
th ese elemen ts. Th e au tho r pro po ses th at the heritage elements be grouped into 12 clusters:
a) Estab lish men t o f Mek elle and earlier settlements (13 t h c.– 186 7) — The elements in this cluster
are related to th e p re-imp erial to wn ship of Mekelle. In clud ed elements are Enda Eyesus, Enda
Mesk el, Gon ay Daero, Mai Deg en e, Mai Liham, Chomea, Enda Gabir, Enda Aba Anenia, Adi
Gafu f, Mai Gifaf, Ayn alem, and Quih a. Detailed traces of these settlements need fu rth er
inv estig atio n.

30
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Figure 3. Lo ca tion o f po tential and actual heritage sites in Mekelle.

(R): Registered Heritag e, (NR): Non registered Heritage. (By author)

31
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Figure 4. Map o f Ea rly Se ttlement of Mekelle pre-Imperial township. (By Author).

b) Emp ero r Yo h ann es IV’s imp erial capital of Ethiopia (18 67–1889 ) – These heritage elements
are related to th e late 19 t h cen tu ry imperial era. Included elements are Emperor Yohannes IV’s
palace compound, Tek leHaimanot Church, Medhane Alem Church, Kidane Mehret Church,
Balamb aras Getahun Hailu ’s resid en ce, Adi Islam, Sewhi Negus, Mai Liham River, and End a
Mesk el resid en ces (Imal Ho use an d Gebrehiwot House).

Figure 5. Map of potential heritag e Emperor Yohannes IV’s Imperial Capital cluster.
(By author)

c) Dejar Abreha’s altern ativ e city center (app rox . 1 900 s–1 914 )— Th is is a n ew city ward
estab lish ed on th e sou th ern sid e o f Yohannes IV’s town during the early 20 t h century. The
heritage in clu d ed in th is cluster are Dejar Abreha Castle, Sillasie Church, Edaga Kedam, and

32
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Figure 6. Map o f po tentia l heritag e sites from the Dejat Abreha’s alternative city center.
(By autho r)

Mai Tsaed a Eg am Riv er.

d) Raesi Siy ou m p eriod (1 9 14–19 19)— Th is is th e era of another early 20 t h century administrator.
Heritage in clud ed in th is cluster are Siyoum Aynalem Leisure Residence, Abune Gebremenfes
Kidu s, Mek elle Ho spital, Ayn alem Farmer House, and Sewuhi Raesi.

Figure 7. Map o f po tentia l heritage sites fo r Raesi Siyoum Period cluster.

(By Auth o r)

e) Raesi Gugsa p eriod (1918–193 3 ) – Raesi Gug sa is a third early 20 t h century leader, and this
clu ster en co mp asses h eritag e fro m that era. Included elements are Raesi Gugsa Leisure
Resid en ce, St. Mary Gu g sa Ch urch, th e liquo r factory, Melk am Hou se, Kegnazma ch Mekonen
Tseg ay Resid en ce, an d Old Ho spital (Blata Weldemikael Residence).

33
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Figure 8. Map o f po tentia l heritage sites for Raesi Gugsa Period cluster.
(By Auth o r)

f) Italian inv asion (–1894–1896) and o ccupation (1936–1941) — This cluster contains heritage
sites related to th e Italian army, wh ich occupied Mekelle on two occasions, in the late 19 t h century
and ag ain in th e 1 930 s. Th e elemen ts included in this cluster are Major Galliano Fort,
Ad min istration Bu ild in g, Catho lic Church, th e hospital expansion, and the Italian cemetery.

Figure 9. Map o f po tential heritage sites for Italian invasion and

Occupatio n Periods cluster in Mekelle.
(By Auth o r)

g) Ked amay Wo y an e (1943) – – Th is cluster contains heritage related to the Kedamay Woyane
reb ellio n; a farmers’ resistan ce ag ainst the imp erial government, the conflict has historical
sign ifican ce in Mek elle. Th e elemen ts included in this cluster are Ked amay Weyane Market and

34
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Figure 10 . Ma p of po tentia l herita ge sites fo r Keda may Woy ane cluster in Mekelle.
(By Auth o r)
End a Ey esu s.
h) Raesi Meng esh a p eriod (1960–1974 ) – This cluster refers to the later period of the imp erial
regime, sho rtly after WWII up to 1974. The heritage elements in this cluster include
Meng esh a’s resid en ce and mu nicip ality hall.

Figure 11. Map o f po tential heritag e sites for Raesi Mengesha Period cluster in Mekelle.
(By Auth o r)

i) Heritage fro m th e Derg reg ime an d the Tigrai Strug gle (197 4–1991 ) –– This cluster contains
heritag e related to th e Tigrai p eo ple’s struggle against the military administration; this conflict
has h istorical sig nificance in Tigrai. Some of the heritage elements in this cluster include
Wetad erawi Co mmisarat Building , Ageazi Operation Site (Mek elle Prison), and Hawelti
Semaetat.

35
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Figure 12. Map of potential heritag e sites fo r Derg ue Reg ime and
Tig ra i Struggle cluster in Mekelle.
(By Auth o r)

j) Remain s o f th e salt rou te — This cluster contains heritage related to the ancient trade routes
th at conn ected salt min es and facilitated the transport of salt and other goo d s th rough Mek elle.
Th is clu ster in cludes Djib rouk Mark ets Storage. Further research is necessary to identify the
potential co n stitu en ts o f th is impo rtant heritage cluster.

k) Natu ral h eritag e –– Th is clu ster con tains riv ers, fo rests, moun tain s, and other important natural
heritag e sites in Mek elle. Furth er inv estigation by spec ialized professionals is needed with regard
to th ese sites. Th e map sho ws major p otential natural heritage components in Mekelle.

Figure 13. Map of potential na tura l heritag e in Mekelle city. By autho r

l) In tan gible h eritag e an d sites — This cluster contains intangible heritage in Mekelle and
asso ciated sites. In tang ib le heritag e event sites are not registered and protected. The map shows
th e major sites fo r th e Ash end a, Timk et, and Meskel celebrations.

36
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Figure 14. Map showing place of events for Intangible heritage in Mekelle. By Au tho r

Essen tially, th e abo v e 12 h eritag e clu sters encompass possible heritage sites in Mekelle. Although
th e au tho r tried to ex h au st all th e h eritage elements in Mekelle, heritage making is a con tinuo u s
pro cess to b e co ndu cted in co n su ltation with the public. Therefore, the purpose of these clusters
is to facilitate th e p articip ato ry h eritage-making and management process in Mekelle.

4. Conclusio n
Mek elle’s urban planning and developmen t have shifted throug hou t the city’s history, mainly after
it was establish ed as a proper town in th e late 19 t h cen tury. The last decade has been characterized
by an eco no mic boo m an d fast d ev elopment, end ang ering heritage. The immense p ressu re on
heritag e is no w b ein g felt b y th e pub lic and the administration, and it has been discussed in urban
plan repo rts. However, no concrete solutio n has been p rovided regarding heritage protection. Th e
majo r ch alleng e is th e failu re to assess heritage values. Furthermore, mo st of the heritage
elemen ts are no t reg istered. Th erefo re, they are subsumed in urban plans’ land use delineations,
su ch as religio u s, co mmer cial, and ad ministrative. Land zon ing is also problematic in that it
de te rmine s functio n and dictates management.
Con sid ering th at th e u rb an p lan ning process in Mekelle has shifted dramatically from
cen tralized to p articip ato ry, th e h eritage-making process has stagnated in the traditional highly-
cen tralized app ro ach. Th erefo re, Mek elle’s reg istered heritage sites are major monu men ts with
nation al impo rtan ce. Th e h eritage of Mekelle’s people has been left out, and little related research
has b een do n e. Th is p ap er co uld p av e the way by providing basic information abou t potential
heritag e sites in Mek elle. Mekelle no w fo llows a stru cture plan that places major emphasis on th e
co mp ressiv e app ro ach to so cio-eco no mic and spatial issues. There is an opportunity for heritage
to b e in clu d ed in th is typ e of p lann ing. However, this can only be done with expert support to
sh o w ho w th e heritag e in Mek elle can b e u tilized as an en abler and d riv er o f urb an dev elop men t.
Many o f th e h eritag e co mpo nents id entified in this paper could be registered imminently. Th e
lo cal ad ministration sho uld initiate heritage management through the coordination of the
stak eh old ers id en tified in this p ap er. A public–private partnership can be initiated b y in vo lving
impo rtan t stak eho ld ers. When it is time to prepare for the next structure plan, these heritage
co mpon ents can b e reg ularized u sing the provided map. The map can also be used as a prototype
fo r co mmun ity mapp ing . Au xiliary o r p hysically proximate sites can be grouped into conservation
areas.

37
論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Th e elemen ts id entified in this research need further research to be reg istered as heritage sites.
Th e 12 clu sters discussed con stitute Mekelle’s urban layers. Since new lay ers are added with each
new d ev elopment, th e o ld er lay ers n eed to be considered an d strengthened in the interest of rich
urb an ch aracter.

6. Ackno wledg ements

My sin cere g ratitud e go es to professor Nobuko Inaba and Professor Yasufumi Uekita. I worked
my d o ctoral stu dy und er th eir labo rato ry. I would like to thank Japanese Government-MEXT for
fun ding my doctoral study in Japan.

7. Litera ture Cited

Alu la T.A., Shimizu, N. 20 19. Tran sfo rmation of Urba n Landscape of Mek elle City in relation to
Yoh an n es IV`s Palace and Abreh a`s Castle. Fortification and Defensive City: Conference
Pap ers fo r ICOFORT In tern ation al Conference in Hikone. ARCHI-DEPOT Co rporation . ASIN :
B07 RW4SPRJ.
Fenta, A., Yasud a, H., Haregeweyn , N., Belay, A., Sib hat, Z., Gebremedhin, M. and Meko nn en,
G. 2017. Th e dy n amics o f u rb an expansion and land use/land cover changes using remote
sen sing an d sp atial metrics: th e case of Mekelle City of northern Ethiopia. International
Jo urn al of Remote Sensing. 38. 4107–41 29. 1 0.1 080 /01 4311 61.201 7.1317 936 .
FDRE. 2000. Pro clamatio n No . 20 9/2000 Research and Conservation of Cultural Heritage
Pro clamation . Neg arit Gaze tte.
ICOMOS. 1 965 . In tern atio nal Ch arter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and
Sites. (Th e Venice Charter1964) Accessed from
[h ttp s://www.ico mo s.o rg /ch arters/v enice_e.pdf]
ICOMOS. 1987. Th e Washington Ch arter: Charter on the Conservation of Historic Towns and
Urb an Areas (1 987 ). Accessed fro m: [https://www.icomos.org/charters/towns_e.pdf]
MCPPPO. 2005. (Mek elle City Plan Preparation Project Office). Executive summary for city
dev elop men t p lan Mek elle (2005 -2 015). Mekelle, Tig rai, Ethiopia.
MU. 201 6. Mek elle City Stru ctu re Plan Revision: Final Framework Plan Report, Mekelle
Un iv ersity.
MU. 201 6. Mek elle City Structu re Plan Revision, Mekelle University.
Niall F. (201 3) Lu cy to La lib ela: h eritage and identity in Ethiopia in the twenty-first centu ry.
In tern atio n al Jo urn al of Heritage Studies, 19:1, 41-61
[h ttp s://www.tandfonline.com/doi/fu ll/10 .1 080 /13 527 258.20 11.633 540 ?scro ll=to p&n eed Acc
ess=true]
Ok azaki, R. 2009. Stu dy on th e Urb an Formation and Activity of the Central District in Mekelle,
Ethio pia: App raisal of Histo rical Quarters and Inner-City Problems. Master`s th esis. Keio
Un iv ersity.
Pankh u rst, R. 19 82 . History o f Ethiop ian Towns: From Middle Ages to the Early Nineteenth
Cen tu ry. Wiesb ad en : Stein er.
Pankh u rst, R. 198 5. Histo ry of Eth iop ian Towns: From Mid-Nineteenth Century to 1935. Stuttgart:
Stein er.
Tad ese S. Mek elle City’s Estab lish men t and Development. (የመቐለ ከተማ ኣመሰራረትና እድገት) (Amharic
Lang u ag e)
Shimizu, N., Ephrem T.W., Alula T.A., Miy ak e, R. 2019 “Trad ition al” Techn iqu e and Lo cal
Kn o wledg e on HÏDMO HOUSE Construction in Tig rai, Ethiopia. A retrospective study on
build ing co n stru ction p ro cess fro m the perspective of tools and materials. Journal of
Arch itecture and Planning (Transaction of AIJ) Volume 84 Issu e 75 8 Pag es 1017-1 027
http s://doi.org/10.3130/aija.84.1017
Shimizu, N., Alula T.A., Okazaki, R. Eph rem T.W., Miy ak e R.201 9 How Has a Local Settlement

38
 論説/ Original Article 世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)

Urbanized in Mek elle, Eth iopia? Case o f Ïnda Mesqel’s Development as One of the Aspects
of Urb an izatio n Pro cess. Annales d ’Éthio pie No .32 . ISBN : 978-2-7018-0 571-9
Solo mon G. B. 2010. A Histo ry o f Cultural Heritage management in Ethiopia (1944-197 4).
Pub lished by VDM Verlag. ISBN 10: 363 9310 497
UNESCO. 20 11 . Reco mmend atio n o n the Historic Urban Landscape. Accessed from:
[h ttp s://wh c.un esco .o rg /up load s/activities/documents/activity-6 38-98 .pd f]
UNESCO, ICCROM, ICOMOS, IUCN.2013. Managing Cultural World Heritage. World Heritage
Manual. ISBN 978-92 -3 -001223-6

(Co rresponding Author)

Name: Alula Tesfay Asfha
Ad dress: 305-0006 Tennodai1-1 -1 , Ichinoya37-107, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
Email： alu latesfay @mu.ed u.et

（ 2020. 09. 30.）

39

View publication stats