Colvin:
elsslots:
China-Egypt cooperation of Baiheliang and Rawda Island Nilometer
Not a fan of this at all. Yes, they have similar purposes, but these were constructed by different civilizations.
Agree entirely!
Have just had a look the Operational guidelines on "Serial properties" (my Bolds")
"
137. Nominated serial property includes two or more component parts related by clearly defined links:
a) Component parts should reflect cultural, social or functional links over time that provide, where relevant, landscape, ecological, evolutionary or habitat connectivity.
b) Each component part should contribute to the Outstanding Universal Value of the nominated property as a whole in a substantial, scientific, readily defined and discernible way, and may include, inter alia, intangible attributes. The resulting Outstanding Universal Value should be easily understood and communicated.
c) Consistently, and in order to avoid an excessive fragmentation of component parts, the process of nomination of the property, including the selection of the component parts, should take fully into account the overall manageability and coherence of the nominated property (see Paragraph 114).
and provided the series as a whole – and not necessarily its individual component parts – is of Outstanding Universal Value."Para 114 states
"In the case of serial properties, whether national or transnational, a management system or mechanisms for ensuring the coordinated management of the separate components are essential and should be documented in the nomination"I don't think the "Bolded" requirements of par 137 are really met and, by submitting a combined Nomination, China and Egypt should, as per para 114, set up "coordinated management" of the 2!!! Seems unnecessary and unrealistic.
The first question is who is gaining what from this dual submission given all the extra complexity it creates?
a. All of us from the "added OUV" which a joint nomination creates from having demonstrated a common technology/purpose spread across different civilisations and eras?
b. One or other (or both?) of China and Egypt who gain extra strength for a site whose OUV by itself wasn't strong enough?
There is plenty of information about each on the Web so I won't go into details but I would judge that any additional "OUV" from combining them is specious, even misleading. It creates a false linkage which potentially hides massive differences in almost every aspect beyond the fact that they both measured water levels. A bit like linking Stonehenge and El Castillo because they both measured the Equinoxes!
The Baiheliang rock is a "fortuitous" natural feature utilised in China only at that location for water measurement and prediction, whereas the Nilometer is a type of construction developed across the centuries in Egypt with a number of existing examples in various states of preservation. China has of course spent large amounts on creating the underwater museum to show off its now submerged rock. One would have thought that is was strong enough for an individual nomination - or does China not think so and thus looks elesewhere for extra OUV? On the other hand, a problem for the Roda Nilometer is that
the List ALREADY has TWO inscribed Nilometers - those on Elephantine island (location 088-007 of the Nubian monuments) Though they are NOT specifically mentioned in either the AB evaluation or the UNESCO description which merely states
"the town of Elephantine yields an overwhelming quantity of interesting finds". We do not have a Nomination File to be 100% certain that they are within the inscribed boundaries but see
Wiki for confirmation. Why should the example at Roda Island in Cairo be the one to be linked with the Baiheliang rock - other than to give Cairo another WHS?? It is possibly the case that both China and Egypt see some mutual benefit in working together to strengthen the cases for their respective sites - as well gaining "diplomatic" beneifts ? One might have thought that a better approach for Egypt would be to develop a nomination for several of its Nilometers identifying various aspects, periods etc etc
I copy below the entire text of Gemini's response to my question
"Do the Nilometers at Roda, Elephantine, Kom Ombo, Rosetta and Thmouis bring out different aspects of the history of the Nilometer". Gemini, like all AI tools, isn't always entirely correct of course but its initial and unexplored response provides an insight into the sorts of aspects which could be covered across a multiple Egyptian nomination - connections which cease to be possible with the linkage of Roda to Baiheliang.
"The nilometers at Roda, Elephantine, Kom Ombo, Rosetta, and Thmouis each offer unique insights into the history of nilometers and their role in ancient Egyptian society. Here's a breakdown of the distinctive aspects they highlight:
Roda Nilometer:
Earliest surviving nilometer: Believed to be the oldest surviving nilometer, dating back to the 7th century CE.
Mamluk Period construction: Built during the Mamluk dynasty, reflecting their interest in maintaining water control and agricultural productivity.
Well-preserved structure: The Roda Nilometer remains in relatively good condition, providing a clear picture of its original design and function.
Elephantine Nilometer:
Roman Period origin: Constructed during the Roman era, showcasing the continuity of nilometer use across different periods of Egyptian history.
Island location: Situated on Elephantine Island, near the First Cataract of the Nile, highlighting the importance of water management in this key region.
Integration with temple complex: The nilometer was likely integrated with the nearby temple complex, suggesting a close connection between religious practices and water control.
Kom Ombo Nilometer:
Double-temple association: Located near the Kom Ombo Temple, which was dedicated to both Sobek (the crocodile god) and Horus (the sky god), emphasizing the link between water, agriculture, and religious beliefs.
Integrated design: The Kom Ombo nilometer was likely integrated into the temple complex, functioning as a vital part of the religious and community infrastructure.
Local adaptation: The design of the Kom Ombo nilometer may have been adapted to suit the specific needs and conditions of the local region.
Rosetta Nilometer:
Mamluk Period construction: Like the Roda Nilometer, the Rosetta nilometer was built during the Mamluk dynasty, reflecting their focus on water management.
Coastal location: Situated near the Mediterranean Sea, highlighting the importance of water control in both agricultural and maritime contexts.
Well-preserved remains: The Rosetta nilometer is relatively well-preserved, offering valuable information about its construction techniques and operational methods.
Thmouis Nilometer:
Graeco-Roman heritage: Discovered at the Graeco-Roman city of Thmouis, showcasing the shared interest in water management between Egyptian and Greek cultures.
Early dating: Dating back to the 3rd century BCE, the Thmouis nilometer is one of the earliest known examples of nilometer technology.
New insights: The discovery of the Thmouis nilometer has provided valuable new insights into ancient Egyptian and Greek hydrological practices.
By examining these different nilometers, historians and archaeologists can piece together a more comprehensive picture of the history of nilometers, their role in ancient Egyptian society, and their evolution over time. Each nilometer offers unique insights into the cultural, religious, and technological aspects of water management in ancient Egypt."
Page 1 of 4: 1 2 3 4 Next »