The house of reclusive artist Helen Martins, graves of 20th century political activists, the hilltop kingdom of Mapungubwe, fossil sites associated with human evolution and the emergence of modern man, Robben Island and historic wine farms. These are but some of the nearly seventy sites that mirror South Africa as a nation. The sites constitute the apex of the national estate – heritage sites that are so exceptional that they are of special national significance.
Prior to 2000, the National Monuments Council was responsible for the identification and declaration of national monuments. By 1994 South Africa had an estimated 4,000 national monuments of which 98% represented colonial and settler history. The National Heritage Resources Act changed this significantly by creating a three-tier system whereby all former monuments were automatically included on provincial and local heritage registers (some have since been regraded). In addition, the South African Heritage Resources Agency (which replaced the National Monuments Council) was tasked with the identification, grading and declaration of grade I heritage sites. (With Provincial Heritage Resources Authorities and local authorities being tasked with the identification, grading and declaration of grade II (provincial) and grade III (local) sites).
An example of an old National Monuments Council plaque (The Heritage Portal)
2017 has not been a good year for heritage in South Africa. From fires in the Western Cape that claimed the 1792 Du Toit Manor House in Paarl, among others, to the theft of the Thulamela gold collection at the Kruger National Park in December 2016 (only made public knowledge in June this year), the losses have been significant.
Then there was the untold damage to major landmark buildings, including but not limited to the city halls of Pretoria and Bloemfontein, and temporary closures at the Johannesburg Art Gallery and Hector Pieterson Museum in Johannesburg. Fires, floods and negligence have taken their toll.
Bloemfontein City Hall (Christoff Steyn)
Not even prominent liberation names such as Robert Sobukwe and Winnie Mandela could protect sites. The saga of the proposed Winnie Mandela House Museum in Brandfort and the law offices of Sobukwe in Galeshewe are telling examples of official neglect.
In July, the Heritage Monitoring Project called on the public to nominate threatened heritage sites that did not make headlines nor receive much public attention.
In response, thirty-seven submissions were received by the Project, covering endangered and threatened heritage sites across eight of the nine provinces. The nominations include...
In September 2016, the Heritage Monitoring Project ran a campaign to draw attention to endangered heritage sites across South Africa. The result was a top ten list as well a long list that could be tracked over time. We recently put out a call for updates and have updated the relevant tracking threads hosted on The Heritage Portal (click here to view). Below is a quick overview of how a few sites are looking half a year on from the campaign.
Western Cape
There has been a lot of positive action in the Province. The Swellendam Heritage Association has reported that officials from Heritage Western Cape have shown keen interest in the Sugar Bridge (click here to view thread). A number of meetings and site visits have occurred in recent months and it appears as though there is all round commitment for restoration. This is certainly a step in the right direction.
The Sugar Bridge (Marcus Holmes)
The Hout Bay and Llandudno Heritage Association has revealed that the exposure for East Fort (click here to view thread) led to a meeting with the Western Cape Minister of Cultural Affairs and Sport. The Minister asked the CEO of Heritage Western Cape to continue the conversation and a solid meeting was held in November 2016 where the issues and opportunites facing the site were discussed (the Association is...
Every time South Africa loses a heritage site, a part of our history and our culture is lost, as well as the possibility of understanding something new about our past. South Africa’s top ten most endangered sites speak of the fragility of our shared national heritage. Whether they are precious archaeological sites, living cultural landscapes, early commercial industrial sites, colonial edifices or working class residential areas, the tenuousness of their survival is palpable in the submissions that were evaluated. The Most Endangered Cultural Heritage Sites campaign is an annual initiative of the Heritage Monitoring Project (HMP) and the Heritage Association of South Africa to identify and raise awareness of cultural heritage sites that are at significant risk from natural or manmade forces.
This year was the first time that the HMP issued a call to the public to nominate sites of concern. Between June and August, more than 46 heritage sites across a range of categories were submitted. The longlist of submissions included cultural landscapes, archaeological and palaeontological sites, built heritage, industrial heritage, burial sites, military sites, public open space and even South Africa’s oldest nature reserve (click here to view).
Over the past few weeks an expert panel of judges has been evaluating the submissions against a set of criteria:
The significance or importance of the site (most importantly, to the local community)
The urgency and extent of risks or threats faced
Feasibility of finding a solution or the feasibility of a proposed solution
Last week The Monitoring Project broke the news that six sites have been removed from South Africa’s tentative world heritage list. In follow up we spoke to a number of people involved in the preparation of tentative lists and site nominations regarding the changes and what they mean for site conservation. We also received feedback from a variety of stakeholders working on site nominations at a local level. We provide a summary of responses received. [Originally published 1 August 2015]
Geographic distribution of sites
Need for a national review
According to Albi Modise, spokesperson for the Department of Environmental Affairs, the changes were not out of the ordinary as state parties conduct reviews periodically in line with both UNESCO and country-specific guidelines. According to UNESCO, states need to review these lists every five to ten years as a means of reaffirming which sites they intend to nominate in the short to medium term. A comprehensive national review was therefore required as some listings dated as far back as 2004 (as in the case of Kimberley and Pilgrim’s Rest).
As Modise confirms:
“The Department in the last two years embarked on [a] process to review the Tentative List. This process included most stakeholders and a call was also made through National Papers for South Africans to comment and nominate new sites...
In what has come as a complete shock to many in the local heritage community, six local sites have quietly been removed from the country’s tentative World Heritage Site list. Jacques Stoltz from the Heritage Monitoring Project investigates. [Originally published 24 July 2015]
The sites in question are:
the legendary “copper mountains” of Namaqualand that obsessed and often eluded early Dutch explorers (while inspiring one of South Africa’s greatest botanical works of art, the “Codex Witsenii”, c. 1692),
Africa’s first gold industrial plant and arguably the best preserved Central Reduction Works in the world,
early industrial scale diamond mining operations (which indelibly altered much of Central, Eastern and Southern Africa as a result of a voracious labour system),
18th and 19th century sites associated with Abbé Nicolas Louis de La Caille’s measurements of the Arc of Meridian at the Cape,
pristine coastal dunefields,
and an island group described as “one of the most important and well-conserved examples of sub-Antarctic islands…”.
According to UNESCO “A Tentative List is an inventory of those properties situated on its territory which each State Party considers suitable for inscription on the World Heritage List. States Parties should therefore include… the names of those properties which they consider to be cultural and/or natural heritage of Outstanding Universal Value and which they intend to nominate during the following years” (our emphasis). Without inclusion on the tentative list, a site cannot be nominated for inscription on the world heritage list.
The sites that have been removed are:
Pilgrim's Rest Reduction Works Industrial Heritage Site (added in...
