Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

ANASTELOSIS: AN EVALUATION OF RE-ERECTION OF ANCIENT TEMPLE REMAINS IN THE CONTEXT OF AUTHENTICITY

Year 2023, Issue: 27, 65 - 84, 14.07.2023
https://doi.org/10.22520/tubaked.1067367

Abstract

Anastelosis, which is one of the implementations that is frequently preferred in the conservation and presentation of archaeological sites, is an implementation that is carried out by placing the scattered original parts of the structures and re-erecting them. The basic principle of the implementation is to determine the original places of the original building members and place them in their places. The implementation restores the structural integrity of the structures, provides better protection for the original members, makes the remains more meaningful for visitors in three dimensions, and provides a better presentation of the archaeological site. The aim of this study is to contribute to the conservation and presentation of the structures and to determine the basic principles to be considered during the implementation by analysing and evaluating the anastelosis implementations at temple structures in Western Anatolia, Turkey. For this purpose, the basic principles of anastelosis implementation were examined within the framework of the concept of authenticity, and the anastelosis implementations carried out in two selected ancient period temple structures were evaluated under the criteria of material authenticity, maintaining the authenticity of structural system and construction technique, and the contextual authenticity of the structure in the site after the implementation. These structures are the Temple of Trajan at Pergamon (114-129 AD, Bergama, İzmir) and the Temple of Leto at Letoon (160-130 BC, Kumluova, Seydikemer, Muğla). In the evaluation, the importance of considering the integrity of the structure to be erected with the archaeological site and the re-establishment of its importance to its original context has been revealed. In order for the structure to be erected to not create a brand new image in the site, structures or structure sections whose original materials have survived to the present day should be chosen. While re-establishing the structural integrity of the structure, the original structural system and construction technique should be maintained if possible, or a new structural system should be designed that will not damage the structure members.

References

  • AHUNBAY, Z. 2010. “Arkeolojik Alanlarda Koruma Sorunları Kuramsal ve Yasal Açılardan Değerlendirme”, TÜBA-KED, 8, 103-118.
  • AKAGAWA, N. 2016. “Rethinking the Global Heritage Discourse – Overcoming ‘East’ and ‘West’?”, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 22(1): 14–25.
  • ATİK KORKMAZ, S. 2016. “Letoon”, (Eds.) N, Ertürk & Ö. Karakul, UNESCO World Heritage in Turkey 2016. Ankara: Turkish National Commission for UNESCO.
  • AUSTRALIA ICOMOS. 2013. The Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (The Burra Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://australia.icomos.org/wp-content/uploads/The-Burra-Charter-2013-Adopted-31.10.2013.pdf
  • BACHMANN, M. 2014. “Ortaya Çıkarmak ve Korumak: Pergamon’da 130 Yıllık Restorasyon Tarihçesi / Excavation and Conservation: 130 Years of Restorastion History at Pergamon”, (Eds.) F. Pirson ve A. Scholl, Pergamon: Anadolu’da Hellenistik Bir Başkent / Pergamon: A Hellenistic Capital in Anatolia, 80-101. İstanbul: YKY.
  • CHUNG, S. J. 2005. “East-Asian Values in Historic Conservation”, Journal of Architectural Conservation, Vol. 11, N. 1, 55-70.
  • DES COURTILS, J., LAROCHE, D. 1999. “Xanthos Letoon 1997 Kazı Raporu”, XX. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, II, 131-137. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Milli Kütüphane Basımevi.
  • DES COURTILS, J., LAROCHE, D. 2000. “Xanthos et le Létôon: Rapport sur la Campagne de 1999”, Anatolia Antiqua, VIII, 339-383. İstanbul: Institut Français d’Etudes Anatoliennes.
  • DES COURTILS, J., LAROCHE, D. 2002. “Xanthos et le Letoon: Rapport sur la Campagne de 2001”, Anatolia Antiqua, X, 297-333. İstanbul: Institut Français d’Etudes Anatoliennes.
  • DES COURTILS, J., LAROCHE, D. 2003. “Xanthos et le Létôon: Rapport sur la Campagne de 2002”, Anatolia Antiqua, XI, 423-456. İstanbul: Institut Français d’Etudes Anatoliennes.
  • DES COURTILS, J., LAROCHE, D. 2009. “Xanthos-Letoon”, (Ed.) G. Pulhan, World Heritage in Turkey, 317-347. İstanbul: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Culture and Tourism and The Banks Association of Turkey.
  • DIMACOPOULOS, J. 1985. “Anastylosis and Anasteloseis”, ICOMOS Information, 1, 16-25.
  • ERDER, C. 1968. ““Venedik Tüzüğü” Uluslararası Tarihi Anıtları Onarım Kuralları”, Vakıflar Dergisi, VII, 111-116.
  • ERDER, C. 1977. “Venedik Tüzüğü Tarihi Bir Anıt Gibi Korunmalıdır”, ODTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(2), 167-190.
  • FEILDEN, B. M. 1982. Conservation of Historic Buildings. Oxford: Architectural Press Butterworth-Heinemann.
  • FEILDEN, B. M., JOKILEHTO, J. 1993. Management Guidelines for World Cultural Heritage Sites. Rome: ICCROM.
  • GAO, Q., JONES, S. 2021. “Authenticity and heritage conservation: seeking common complexities beyond the ‘Eastern’ and ‘Western’ dichotomy”, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 27:1, 90-106.
  • HANSEN, E. 1991. “Le Temple de Létô au Létôon de Xanthos”, Revue Archéologique, Fasc. 2, 323-340. Fransa: Presses Universitaires de France.
  • HUEBER, F. 1991. “Arkeolojik Yapıların ve Alanların Koruma ve Restorasyon Sorunları”, Arkeolojik Sit Alanlarının Korunması ve Değerlendirilmesi 1. Ulusal Sempozyumu, 14-16 Ekim, Ankara, Türkiye.
  • HUEBER, F. 2002. “Building Research and Anastylosis”, (Eds.) K. De Jong ve K. Van Balen, Preparatory Architectural Investigation in the Restoration of Historical Buildings, 77-82. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
  • IAMANDI, C. 1997 “The Charters of Athens of 1931 and 1933: Coincidence, Controversy and Converge”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 2(1), 17-28.
  • ICCROM / UNESCO. 2000. Riga Charter on Authenticity and Historical Reconstruction in Relationship to Cultural Heritage (The Riga Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.iccrom.org/sites/default/files/publications/2020-05/convern8_07_rigacharter_ing.pdf
  • ICOMOS. 1964. International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (The Venice Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/charters/venice_e.pdf
  • ICOMOS. 1994. Nara Document on Authenticity. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/charters/nara-e.pdf
  • ICOMOS. 1996. The Declaration of San Antonio. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/en/resources/charters-and-texts/179-articles-en-francais/ressources/charters-and-standards/188-the-declaration-of-san-antonio
  • ICOMOS. 1999. International Cultural Tourism Charter Managing Tourism at Places of Heritage Significance (The Mexico Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/INTERNATIONAL_CULTURAL_TOURISM_CHARTER.pdf
  • ICOMOS. 2003. Principles for the Analysis, Conservation and Structural Restoration of Architectural Heritage (The Zimbabwe Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/structures_e.pdf
  • ICOMOS / ICAHM. 1990. Charter for the Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage (The Lausanne Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/arch_e.pdf
  • IOANNIDOU, M. 2007. “Principles and Methodology of Intervention for Structural Restoration”, XXI International CIPA Symposium, 1-6 October, Athens, Greece.
  • ITALIAN RESTORATION CHARTER. 1972. Italian Restoration Charter. Ministry of Education / Council for Antiquities and Fine Arts.
  • JEROME, P. 2008. “An Introduction to Authenticity in Preservation”, APT Bulletin: Journal Of Preservation Technology, 39: 2-3, 3-7.
  • JOKILEHTO, J. 1985. “Authenticity in Restoration Principles and Practice”, APT Bulletin: Journal Of Preservation Technology, 17: 3&4, 5-11.
  • JOKILEHTO, J. 1995a. ““Reconstruction of Ancient Ruins.” Review of book Wiederaufbau by H. Schmidt”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 1, 69-71.
  • JOKILEHTO, J. 1995b. “Authenticity: A General Framework”, (Ed.) K. E. Larsen, NARA Conference on Authenticity in Relation to the World Heritage Convention, 17–34. Paris: ICOMOS.
  • JOKILEHTO, J. 2006. “Considerations on Authenticity and Integrity in World Heritage Context”, City & Time, 2 (1): 1, 1-16.
  • JOKILEHTO, J. 2019. “Questions of authenticity”, Conversaciones..., Number 8, December 2019, 55-72.
  • KÄSTNER, V. 2014. “Athena Kutsal Alanı / The Sanctuary of Athena”, (Eds.) F. Pirson ve A. Scholl, Pergamon: Anadolu’da Hellenistik Bir Başkent / Pergamon: A Hellenistic Capital in Anatolia, 438-453. İstanbul: YKY.
  • KUBAN, D. 1962. “Restorasyon Kriterleri ve “Carta Del Restauro””, Vakıflar Dergisi, V, 149-152.
  • KUBAN, D. 2000. Tarihi Çevre ve Korumanın Mimarlık Boyutu Kuram ve Uygulama. İstanbul: Yem Yayın.
  • LAROCHE, D. 2007. “La Reconstruction du Temple de Létô au Létôon de Xanthos”, Revue Archéologique, Fasc. 1, 169-174. Fransa: Presses Universitaires de France.
  • LAROCHE, D., BERNARD, J. F. 1998. “Un projet de mise en valeur des sites de Xanthos et du Létôon”, Anatolia Antiqua, VI, 479-490. İstanbul: Institut Français d’Etudes Anatoliennes.
  • LEXICO POWERED BY OXFORD. (t.y.). “Authentic”. Lexico.com dictionary içinde. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.lexico.com/
  • MALLOUCHOU-TUFANO, F. 2006a. “Thirty Years of Anastelosis Works on the Athenian Acropolis, 1975-2005”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 8(1), 27-38.
  • MALLOUCHOU-TUFANO, F. 2006b. “The Restoration of Classical Monuments in Modern Greece: Historic Precedents, Modern Trends, Peculiarities”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 8(3), 154-173.
  • MATERO, F. G. 2007. “Loss, Compensation, and Authenticity: The Contribution of Cesare Brandi to Architectural Conservation in America”, Future Anterior, Volume IV, Number 1, Summer 2007, 45-57.
  • MELUCCO VACCARO, A. 1996a. “The Emerge of Modern Conservation Theory Introduction to Part III”, (Eds.) N. Stanley Price, M. Kirby Taller Jr., ve A. Melucco Vaccaro, Historical and Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage, 202- 211. USA: J. P. Getty Trust.
  • MELUCCO VACCARO, A. 1996b. “Reintegration of Losses Introduction to Part IV”, (Eds.) N. Stanley Price, M. Kirby Taller Jr., ve A. Melucco Vaccaro, Historical and Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage, 326-331. USA: J. P. Getty Trust.
  • MERRIAM-WEBSTER. (t.y.). “Authentic”. Merriam-Webster.com dictionary içinde. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authenticity
  • MERTENS, D. 1995. “Planning and Executing Anastylosis of Stone Buildings”, (Ed.) N.P. Stanley Price, Conservation on Archaeological Sites with Particular Reference to the Mediterranean Area, 113-134. Rome: ICCROM.
  • MUÑOZ VİÑAS, S. 2002. “Contemporary theory of conservation”, Studies in Conservation, 47:sup1, 25-34.
  • NOHLEN, K. 1999. “The Partial Re-erection of the Temple of Trajan at Pergamon in Turkey: A German Archaeological Institute Project”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 3(1-2), 91-102.
  • ÖZ REFERANS (Hakemlik süreci için gizlenmiştir; makale kabul durumunda eklenecektir)
  • PAPADOPOULOS, J. K. 1997. “Knossos”, (Ed.) M. De La Torre, The Conservation of Archaeological Sites in the Mediterranean Region, 93-126. USA: J. P. Getty Trust.
  • PHILIPPOT, P. 1996. “Historic Preservation: Philosophy, Criteria, Guidelines II”, (Eds.) N. P. Stanley Price, M. Kirby Taller Jr., ve A. Melucco Vaccaro, Historical and Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage, 358-363. USA: J. P. Getty Trust.
  • RADT, W. 1981. “Pergamon Ergebnisse 1979 Arbeiten und Ausgrabungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts”, II. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 69-72. Ankara.
  • RADT, W. 1982. “Pergamon Vorbericht über die Kampagne 1979”, Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi, XXVI(1) 1982, 11-36. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi.
  • RADT, W. 1984. “1982 Yılı Bergama Çalışmaları”, V. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 241-245. İstanbul.
  • RADT, W. 1986. “Bergama 1984 Yılı Çalışma Dönemi Ön Raporu”, VII. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 343-356. Ankara.
  • RADT, W. 1987. “Bergama 1985 Kampanyası Ön Raporu”, IIX. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, II, 215-232. Ankara.
  • RADT, W. 1988. “Pergamon Vorbericht über die Kampagne 1986 von Wolfgang Radt”, Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi, XXVII 1988, 29-68. Ankara: Başbakanlık Basımevi.
  • RADT, W. 1989a. “Pergamon Vorbericht über die Kampagne 1988 / 1988 Bergama Çalışmaları Özet Raporu”, Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi, XXVIII 1989, 225-262. Ankara: Başbakanlık Basımevi.
  • RADT, W. 1989b. “Bergama Kazısı 1987 Yılı Özet Raporu / Zusammenfassender Bericht über die Kampagne 1987”, X. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, II, 67-88. Ankara.
  • RADT, W. 1990. “Pergamon 1988 Kampanyası Raporu / Zusammenfassender Bericht über dir Kampagne 1988 von Wolfgang Radt”, XI. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, II, 135-154. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi.
  • RADT, W. 1993. “Pergamon 1991 / Pergamon 1991”, XIV. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, I, 515-536. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi.
  • RADT, W. 2002. Pergamon Antik bir Kentin Tarihi ve Yapıları. İstanbul: YKY.
  • RADT, W. 2003. “Pergamon 2001 / Pergamon 2001”, 24. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, I, 113-126. Ankara: DÖSİMM Basımevi.
  • SANPAOLESI, P. 1972a. “Conservation and Restoration: Operational Techniques”, Preserving and Restoring Monuments and Historic Buildings, xiv, 149-186. Paris: UNESCO.
  • SANPAOLESI, P. 1972b. “General Principles”, Preserving and Restoring Monuments and Historic Buildings, xiv, 49-62. Paris: UNESCO.
  • SCHMIDT, H. 1993. Wiederaufbau. Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss Verlag.
  • SCHMIDT, H. 1997. “Reconstruction of Ancient Buildings”, (Ed.) M. De La Torre, The Conservation of Archaeological Sites in the Mediterranean Region, 41-50. USA: J. P. Getty Trust.
  • SCOTT, D. A. 2015. “Conservation and authenticity: Interactions and enquiries”, Studies in Conservation, 60:5, 291-30.
  • STAROSTA, U. 1999. “Structural Consepts of Anastylosis”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 3(1-2), 83-90.
  • STOVEL, H. 2004. “Authenticity in conservation decision-making: the World Heritage perspective”, Journal of Research in Architecture and Planning (3): 1-8.
  • STOVEL, H. 2007. “Effective use of authenticity and integrity as world heritage qualiifying conditions”, City & Time, 2 (3): 3, 21-26.
  • STOVEL, H. 2008. “Origins and influence of the Nara document on authenticity”, APT Bulletin, 39 (2/3): 9-17.
  • THE ATHENS CHARTER. 1931. The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/en/resources/charters-and-texts/179-articles-en-francais/ressources/charters-and-standards/167-the-athens-charter-for-the-restoration-of-historic-monuments
  • TORUN, E., ERCAN, S. 2013. “Two Decades of Anastylosis Experince at Sagalassos”, (Ed.) J. Poblome, Exempli Gratia: Sagalassos, Marc Waelkens and Interdisciplinary Archaeology, 27- 41. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
  • UNESCO. 1972. Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://whc.unesco.org/archive/convention-en.pdf
  • UNESCO. 1980. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Paris: UNESCO. WHC/2 Revised (October 1980). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide80.pdf
  • UNESCO. 2005. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Paris: UNESCO. 6 EXTCOM 5.1. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide05-en.pdf
  • UNESCO. 2021a. “Pergamon and its Multi-Layered Cultural Landscape”, Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021. https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1457
  • UNESCO. 2021b. “Xanthos-Letoon”, Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021. https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/484/
  • VAN BALEN, K. E. P., ERCAN, S., PATRICIO, T. C. 1999. “Compatibility and Retreatability versus Reversibility: A Case Study at the Late Hellenistic Nymphaeum of Sagalassos Turkey”, (Ed.) L. B. Sickels Taves, The Use of and Need for Preservation Standards in Architectural Conservation, 105-118. USA: STP1355.
  • WOOLFITT, C. 2007. “Preventive Conservation of Ruins: Reconstruction, Reburial and Enclosure”, (Ed.) J. Ashurst, Conservation of Ruins, 146-193. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
  • YAKA ÇETİN, F., İPEKOĞLU, B., LAROCHE, D. 2012. “Reconstruction of Archaeological Sites: Principles Practice and Evaluation”, International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 6:5, 579-603.

ANASTİLOSİS: ANTİK TAPINAK KALINTILARININ AYAĞA KALDIRILMASININ ÖZGÜNLÜK BAĞLAMINDA DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Year 2023, Issue: 27, 65 - 84, 14.07.2023
https://doi.org/10.22520/tubaked.1067367

Abstract

Arkeolojik alanların korunması ve sunumunda sıklıkla tercih edilen uygulamalardan biri olan anastilosis, yapıların dağılmış özgün parçalarının yerlerine yerleştirilerek ayağa kaldırılmasıyla gerçekleştirilen bir uygulamadır. Uygulamanın temel ilkesi, özgün yapı elemanlarının özgün yerlerine yerleştirilmesidir. Uygulama sayesinde yapıların strüktürel bütünlüğü geri kazandırılır, özgün elemanlar için daha iyi koruma sağlanır, kalıntılar ziyaretçiler için daha anlamlı üç boyutlu hale getirilir ve arkeolojik alanın daha iyi bir sunumu sağlanır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Batı Anadolu’daki tapınak yapılarındaki anastilosis uygulamalarını analiz ederek ve değerlendirerek arkeolojik alanlardaki yapıların korunmasına ve sunumuna katkıda bulunmaktır. Bu amaçla, anastilosis uygulamasının ilkeleri özgünlük kavramı çerçevesinde incelenerek seçilen iki antik dönem tapınak yapısında gerçekleştirilen anastilosis uygulamaları, uygulamadan sonra yapıların arkeolojik alanın bütünü içinde özgünlüğü, malzeme özgünlüğü, strüktür sistemi ve yapım tekniği özgünlüğünün sürdürülmesi ölçütleri çerçevesinde değerlendirilmiştir. Bu yapılar; Pergamon Traian Tapınağı (MS 114-129, Bergama, İzmir) ve Letoon Leto Tapınağı’dır (MÖ 160-130, Kumluova, Seydikemer, Muğla). Yapılan değerlendirmede, ayağa kaldırılacak olan yapının arkeolojik alanla bütünlüğünün ve yapının özgün durumundaki konumuna geri kavuşturulmasının önemine dikkat çekilmiştir. Ayağa kaldırılacak yapının alanda yepyeni bir görüntü oluşturmaması için özgün malzemesi fazla oranda günümüze ulaşmış yapılar ya da yapı bölümleri seçilmelidir. Yapının strüktürel bütünlüğü geri kazandırılırken, özgün strüktür sistemi ve yapım tekniği sürdürülmeli ya da yapı elemanlarına zarar vermeyecek yeni strüktür sistemi tasarlanmalıdır.

References

  • AHUNBAY, Z. 2010. “Arkeolojik Alanlarda Koruma Sorunları Kuramsal ve Yasal Açılardan Değerlendirme”, TÜBA-KED, 8, 103-118.
  • AKAGAWA, N. 2016. “Rethinking the Global Heritage Discourse – Overcoming ‘East’ and ‘West’?”, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 22(1): 14–25.
  • ATİK KORKMAZ, S. 2016. “Letoon”, (Eds.) N, Ertürk & Ö. Karakul, UNESCO World Heritage in Turkey 2016. Ankara: Turkish National Commission for UNESCO.
  • AUSTRALIA ICOMOS. 2013. The Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (The Burra Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://australia.icomos.org/wp-content/uploads/The-Burra-Charter-2013-Adopted-31.10.2013.pdf
  • BACHMANN, M. 2014. “Ortaya Çıkarmak ve Korumak: Pergamon’da 130 Yıllık Restorasyon Tarihçesi / Excavation and Conservation: 130 Years of Restorastion History at Pergamon”, (Eds.) F. Pirson ve A. Scholl, Pergamon: Anadolu’da Hellenistik Bir Başkent / Pergamon: A Hellenistic Capital in Anatolia, 80-101. İstanbul: YKY.
  • CHUNG, S. J. 2005. “East-Asian Values in Historic Conservation”, Journal of Architectural Conservation, Vol. 11, N. 1, 55-70.
  • DES COURTILS, J., LAROCHE, D. 1999. “Xanthos Letoon 1997 Kazı Raporu”, XX. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, II, 131-137. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Milli Kütüphane Basımevi.
  • DES COURTILS, J., LAROCHE, D. 2000. “Xanthos et le Létôon: Rapport sur la Campagne de 1999”, Anatolia Antiqua, VIII, 339-383. İstanbul: Institut Français d’Etudes Anatoliennes.
  • DES COURTILS, J., LAROCHE, D. 2002. “Xanthos et le Letoon: Rapport sur la Campagne de 2001”, Anatolia Antiqua, X, 297-333. İstanbul: Institut Français d’Etudes Anatoliennes.
  • DES COURTILS, J., LAROCHE, D. 2003. “Xanthos et le Létôon: Rapport sur la Campagne de 2002”, Anatolia Antiqua, XI, 423-456. İstanbul: Institut Français d’Etudes Anatoliennes.
  • DES COURTILS, J., LAROCHE, D. 2009. “Xanthos-Letoon”, (Ed.) G. Pulhan, World Heritage in Turkey, 317-347. İstanbul: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Culture and Tourism and The Banks Association of Turkey.
  • DIMACOPOULOS, J. 1985. “Anastylosis and Anasteloseis”, ICOMOS Information, 1, 16-25.
  • ERDER, C. 1968. ““Venedik Tüzüğü” Uluslararası Tarihi Anıtları Onarım Kuralları”, Vakıflar Dergisi, VII, 111-116.
  • ERDER, C. 1977. “Venedik Tüzüğü Tarihi Bir Anıt Gibi Korunmalıdır”, ODTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(2), 167-190.
  • FEILDEN, B. M. 1982. Conservation of Historic Buildings. Oxford: Architectural Press Butterworth-Heinemann.
  • FEILDEN, B. M., JOKILEHTO, J. 1993. Management Guidelines for World Cultural Heritage Sites. Rome: ICCROM.
  • GAO, Q., JONES, S. 2021. “Authenticity and heritage conservation: seeking common complexities beyond the ‘Eastern’ and ‘Western’ dichotomy”, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 27:1, 90-106.
  • HANSEN, E. 1991. “Le Temple de Létô au Létôon de Xanthos”, Revue Archéologique, Fasc. 2, 323-340. Fransa: Presses Universitaires de France.
  • HUEBER, F. 1991. “Arkeolojik Yapıların ve Alanların Koruma ve Restorasyon Sorunları”, Arkeolojik Sit Alanlarının Korunması ve Değerlendirilmesi 1. Ulusal Sempozyumu, 14-16 Ekim, Ankara, Türkiye.
  • HUEBER, F. 2002. “Building Research and Anastylosis”, (Eds.) K. De Jong ve K. Van Balen, Preparatory Architectural Investigation in the Restoration of Historical Buildings, 77-82. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
  • IAMANDI, C. 1997 “The Charters of Athens of 1931 and 1933: Coincidence, Controversy and Converge”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 2(1), 17-28.
  • ICCROM / UNESCO. 2000. Riga Charter on Authenticity and Historical Reconstruction in Relationship to Cultural Heritage (The Riga Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.iccrom.org/sites/default/files/publications/2020-05/convern8_07_rigacharter_ing.pdf
  • ICOMOS. 1964. International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (The Venice Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/charters/venice_e.pdf
  • ICOMOS. 1994. Nara Document on Authenticity. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/charters/nara-e.pdf
  • ICOMOS. 1996. The Declaration of San Antonio. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/en/resources/charters-and-texts/179-articles-en-francais/ressources/charters-and-standards/188-the-declaration-of-san-antonio
  • ICOMOS. 1999. International Cultural Tourism Charter Managing Tourism at Places of Heritage Significance (The Mexico Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/INTERNATIONAL_CULTURAL_TOURISM_CHARTER.pdf
  • ICOMOS. 2003. Principles for the Analysis, Conservation and Structural Restoration of Architectural Heritage (The Zimbabwe Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/structures_e.pdf
  • ICOMOS / ICAHM. 1990. Charter for the Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage (The Lausanne Charter). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/arch_e.pdf
  • IOANNIDOU, M. 2007. “Principles and Methodology of Intervention for Structural Restoration”, XXI International CIPA Symposium, 1-6 October, Athens, Greece.
  • ITALIAN RESTORATION CHARTER. 1972. Italian Restoration Charter. Ministry of Education / Council for Antiquities and Fine Arts.
  • JEROME, P. 2008. “An Introduction to Authenticity in Preservation”, APT Bulletin: Journal Of Preservation Technology, 39: 2-3, 3-7.
  • JOKILEHTO, J. 1985. “Authenticity in Restoration Principles and Practice”, APT Bulletin: Journal Of Preservation Technology, 17: 3&4, 5-11.
  • JOKILEHTO, J. 1995a. ““Reconstruction of Ancient Ruins.” Review of book Wiederaufbau by H. Schmidt”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 1, 69-71.
  • JOKILEHTO, J. 1995b. “Authenticity: A General Framework”, (Ed.) K. E. Larsen, NARA Conference on Authenticity in Relation to the World Heritage Convention, 17–34. Paris: ICOMOS.
  • JOKILEHTO, J. 2006. “Considerations on Authenticity and Integrity in World Heritage Context”, City & Time, 2 (1): 1, 1-16.
  • JOKILEHTO, J. 2019. “Questions of authenticity”, Conversaciones..., Number 8, December 2019, 55-72.
  • KÄSTNER, V. 2014. “Athena Kutsal Alanı / The Sanctuary of Athena”, (Eds.) F. Pirson ve A. Scholl, Pergamon: Anadolu’da Hellenistik Bir Başkent / Pergamon: A Hellenistic Capital in Anatolia, 438-453. İstanbul: YKY.
  • KUBAN, D. 1962. “Restorasyon Kriterleri ve “Carta Del Restauro””, Vakıflar Dergisi, V, 149-152.
  • KUBAN, D. 2000. Tarihi Çevre ve Korumanın Mimarlık Boyutu Kuram ve Uygulama. İstanbul: Yem Yayın.
  • LAROCHE, D. 2007. “La Reconstruction du Temple de Létô au Létôon de Xanthos”, Revue Archéologique, Fasc. 1, 169-174. Fransa: Presses Universitaires de France.
  • LAROCHE, D., BERNARD, J. F. 1998. “Un projet de mise en valeur des sites de Xanthos et du Létôon”, Anatolia Antiqua, VI, 479-490. İstanbul: Institut Français d’Etudes Anatoliennes.
  • LEXICO POWERED BY OXFORD. (t.y.). “Authentic”. Lexico.com dictionary içinde. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.lexico.com/
  • MALLOUCHOU-TUFANO, F. 2006a. “Thirty Years of Anastelosis Works on the Athenian Acropolis, 1975-2005”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 8(1), 27-38.
  • MALLOUCHOU-TUFANO, F. 2006b. “The Restoration of Classical Monuments in Modern Greece: Historic Precedents, Modern Trends, Peculiarities”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 8(3), 154-173.
  • MATERO, F. G. 2007. “Loss, Compensation, and Authenticity: The Contribution of Cesare Brandi to Architectural Conservation in America”, Future Anterior, Volume IV, Number 1, Summer 2007, 45-57.
  • MELUCCO VACCARO, A. 1996a. “The Emerge of Modern Conservation Theory Introduction to Part III”, (Eds.) N. Stanley Price, M. Kirby Taller Jr., ve A. Melucco Vaccaro, Historical and Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage, 202- 211. USA: J. P. Getty Trust.
  • MELUCCO VACCARO, A. 1996b. “Reintegration of Losses Introduction to Part IV”, (Eds.) N. Stanley Price, M. Kirby Taller Jr., ve A. Melucco Vaccaro, Historical and Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage, 326-331. USA: J. P. Getty Trust.
  • MERRIAM-WEBSTER. (t.y.). “Authentic”. Merriam-Webster.com dictionary içinde. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authenticity
  • MERTENS, D. 1995. “Planning and Executing Anastylosis of Stone Buildings”, (Ed.) N.P. Stanley Price, Conservation on Archaeological Sites with Particular Reference to the Mediterranean Area, 113-134. Rome: ICCROM.
  • MUÑOZ VİÑAS, S. 2002. “Contemporary theory of conservation”, Studies in Conservation, 47:sup1, 25-34.
  • NOHLEN, K. 1999. “The Partial Re-erection of the Temple of Trajan at Pergamon in Turkey: A German Archaeological Institute Project”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 3(1-2), 91-102.
  • ÖZ REFERANS (Hakemlik süreci için gizlenmiştir; makale kabul durumunda eklenecektir)
  • PAPADOPOULOS, J. K. 1997. “Knossos”, (Ed.) M. De La Torre, The Conservation of Archaeological Sites in the Mediterranean Region, 93-126. USA: J. P. Getty Trust.
  • PHILIPPOT, P. 1996. “Historic Preservation: Philosophy, Criteria, Guidelines II”, (Eds.) N. P. Stanley Price, M. Kirby Taller Jr., ve A. Melucco Vaccaro, Historical and Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage, 358-363. USA: J. P. Getty Trust.
  • RADT, W. 1981. “Pergamon Ergebnisse 1979 Arbeiten und Ausgrabungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts”, II. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 69-72. Ankara.
  • RADT, W. 1982. “Pergamon Vorbericht über die Kampagne 1979”, Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi, XXVI(1) 1982, 11-36. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi.
  • RADT, W. 1984. “1982 Yılı Bergama Çalışmaları”, V. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 241-245. İstanbul.
  • RADT, W. 1986. “Bergama 1984 Yılı Çalışma Dönemi Ön Raporu”, VII. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 343-356. Ankara.
  • RADT, W. 1987. “Bergama 1985 Kampanyası Ön Raporu”, IIX. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, II, 215-232. Ankara.
  • RADT, W. 1988. “Pergamon Vorbericht über die Kampagne 1986 von Wolfgang Radt”, Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi, XXVII 1988, 29-68. Ankara: Başbakanlık Basımevi.
  • RADT, W. 1989a. “Pergamon Vorbericht über die Kampagne 1988 / 1988 Bergama Çalışmaları Özet Raporu”, Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi, XXVIII 1989, 225-262. Ankara: Başbakanlık Basımevi.
  • RADT, W. 1989b. “Bergama Kazısı 1987 Yılı Özet Raporu / Zusammenfassender Bericht über die Kampagne 1987”, X. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, II, 67-88. Ankara.
  • RADT, W. 1990. “Pergamon 1988 Kampanyası Raporu / Zusammenfassender Bericht über dir Kampagne 1988 von Wolfgang Radt”, XI. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, II, 135-154. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi.
  • RADT, W. 1993. “Pergamon 1991 / Pergamon 1991”, XIV. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, I, 515-536. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi.
  • RADT, W. 2002. Pergamon Antik bir Kentin Tarihi ve Yapıları. İstanbul: YKY.
  • RADT, W. 2003. “Pergamon 2001 / Pergamon 2001”, 24. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, I, 113-126. Ankara: DÖSİMM Basımevi.
  • SANPAOLESI, P. 1972a. “Conservation and Restoration: Operational Techniques”, Preserving and Restoring Monuments and Historic Buildings, xiv, 149-186. Paris: UNESCO.
  • SANPAOLESI, P. 1972b. “General Principles”, Preserving and Restoring Monuments and Historic Buildings, xiv, 49-62. Paris: UNESCO.
  • SCHMIDT, H. 1993. Wiederaufbau. Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss Verlag.
  • SCHMIDT, H. 1997. “Reconstruction of Ancient Buildings”, (Ed.) M. De La Torre, The Conservation of Archaeological Sites in the Mediterranean Region, 41-50. USA: J. P. Getty Trust.
  • SCOTT, D. A. 2015. “Conservation and authenticity: Interactions and enquiries”, Studies in Conservation, 60:5, 291-30.
  • STAROSTA, U. 1999. “Structural Consepts of Anastylosis”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 3(1-2), 83-90.
  • STOVEL, H. 2004. “Authenticity in conservation decision-making: the World Heritage perspective”, Journal of Research in Architecture and Planning (3): 1-8.
  • STOVEL, H. 2007. “Effective use of authenticity and integrity as world heritage qualiifying conditions”, City & Time, 2 (3): 3, 21-26.
  • STOVEL, H. 2008. “Origins and influence of the Nara document on authenticity”, APT Bulletin, 39 (2/3): 9-17.
  • THE ATHENS CHARTER. 1931. The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://www.icomos.org/en/resources/charters-and-texts/179-articles-en-francais/ressources/charters-and-standards/167-the-athens-charter-for-the-restoration-of-historic-monuments
  • TORUN, E., ERCAN, S. 2013. “Two Decades of Anastylosis Experince at Sagalassos”, (Ed.) J. Poblome, Exempli Gratia: Sagalassos, Marc Waelkens and Interdisciplinary Archaeology, 27- 41. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
  • UNESCO. 1972. Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://whc.unesco.org/archive/convention-en.pdf
  • UNESCO. 1980. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Paris: UNESCO. WHC/2 Revised (October 1980). Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide80.pdf
  • UNESCO. 2005. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Paris: UNESCO. 6 EXTCOM 5.1. Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021, https://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide05-en.pdf
  • UNESCO. 2021a. “Pergamon and its Multi-Layered Cultural Landscape”, Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021. https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1457
  • UNESCO. 2021b. “Xanthos-Letoon”, Erişim: 13 Eylül 2021. https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/484/
  • VAN BALEN, K. E. P., ERCAN, S., PATRICIO, T. C. 1999. “Compatibility and Retreatability versus Reversibility: A Case Study at the Late Hellenistic Nymphaeum of Sagalassos Turkey”, (Ed.) L. B. Sickels Taves, The Use of and Need for Preservation Standards in Architectural Conservation, 105-118. USA: STP1355.
  • WOOLFITT, C. 2007. “Preventive Conservation of Ruins: Reconstruction, Reburial and Enclosure”, (Ed.) J. Ashurst, Conservation of Ruins, 146-193. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
  • YAKA ÇETİN, F., İPEKOĞLU, B., LAROCHE, D. 2012. “Reconstruction of Archaeological Sites: Principles Practice and Evaluation”, International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 6:5, 579-603.
There are 85 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Cultural Studies
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Özge Deniz Toköz 0000-0002-2150-5468

Başak İpekoğlu 0000-0001-7747-6670

Early Pub Date July 14, 2023
Publication Date July 14, 2023
Submission Date February 2, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2023 Issue: 27

Cite

APA Toköz, Ö. D., & İpekoğlu, B. (2023). ANASTİLOSİS: ANTİK TAPINAK KALINTILARININ AYAĞA KALDIRILMASININ ÖZGÜNLÜK BAĞLAMINDA DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ. TÜBA-KED Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Kültür Envanteri Dergisi(27), 65-84. https://doi.org/10.22520/tubaked.1067367

The contents of this system and all articles published in Journal of TÜBA-AR are licenced under the "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0".

by-nc-nd.png