[Originally published in 2014] This is the last installment on the Robben Island Garrison Church. Just to recap. In January 2011 Robben Island Museum (RIM) had cash in and wanted to facelift the obvious visible parts of the main street before the proposed visit by World Heritage in February. As this series is about poor research this part really highlights the absolute value of good research. Good research and good observation on site is critical. The two should go hand in hand in a reiterative process.
As heritage consultant I was asked to do the documentation for the permit to SAHRA. Only problem was the tender had already been awarded and the contractor was literally on the same boat as I was wanting to start with the work. Well I’m sure some of you have been in similar circumstances. Last minute permit applications. Because of the imminent World Heritage visit SAHRA stepped in and insisted that an outside conservation architect and the heritage consultant follow the work so as not to delay. Most of the work was going to be just cosmetic with a lick of paint.
[Originally published in 2014] The restoration had proceeded reasonably to a conclusion in November 2004 ready for handover from the contractor to the Department of Public Works (DPW) and the Robben Island Museum (RIM). In July the tower and particularly the NE buttress had been partially stripped to the brick, re-plastered and painted. Six months later in early January 2005 the then Heritage Manager for Robben Island reported to SAHRA that the paint had started to blister in places on the tower. By February 2005 the paint had started peeling. Small spots of plaster had also peeled. The architect, contractor and RIM met on site in February of 2005 to determine the extent of the deterioration and its potential cause. A paint specialist was also to hand.
The paint had started to blister in places
The RIM Acting Heritage Manager reported that on their arrival they had started collecting paint and plaster samples for analysis. The samples were to be sent to the CSIR centre at the University of Stellenbosch. The results would be sent to the contractor who would forward these to DPW. The RIM Manager specifically requested a ‘Method Statement’ from the contractor outlining how and when the problem would be dealt with. In January of 2011 when RIM was again preparing for a World Heritage Committee representative on a...
[Originally published in 2014] I ask some very simple questions when doing research and writing subsequent reports for restoration, renovation, repair or, maintenance on a heritage site. What, Where, When, Who, Why and How [the golden six]. I often find that the Why and How is missing or very brief when reports are written before and afterwards. This complicates things of course so reading between the lines becomes an art. The 2004 restoration by all accounts was reasonably well documented and from what can be inferred was researched but the why and how seems to be a little thin. Most of what follows is gained from the photo’s taken at the time of the restoration and the restoration architect's final report [too thin in my opinion]. Regrettably no photos of the before could be traced if any were taken making comparisons difficult.
Planning the restoration and the survey of the Church was started in ca. 2000. By the time the actual work started 4 years later some elements had predictably deteriorated to the extent that they had to be completely replaced, like the main front doors. The what, where, when, who, why and how of this deterioration in 4 years of course has to do with the Department of Public Works but that’s for another day.
[[{"fid":"1977","view_mode":"media_adaptive","fields":{"format":"media_adaptive","field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]":"","field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]":"Robben Island Garrison Church East during the 2004 Restoration via Ron Viney"},"type":"media","link_text":null,"attributes":{"title":"Robben Island Garrison Church East during the 2004 Restoration via Ron Viney","height":640,"width":480,"style":"width: 350px; height: 467px; display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;","class":"adaptive media-element...
[Originally published in 2014] What happens when poor or no research is done when decisions are made for restoration, repair or maintenance to a heritage site is ably demonstrated by the history of the Garrison Church on Robben Island. For more than 150 years the church was and still is a landmark in the Village Precinct on the Island. In this series of articles I will track the restoration attempts over this period. To understand these it is important to look at the history of the Church, its structure and changes to the structure and associated landscape.
Garrison Church circa 1866
The Church is small in scale and represents an early form of the ‘Cape Gothic’ style. The front entrance and tower faces east with an apse at the back in the west. This is an alignment favoured by many religions and points to the east as life and the west as death. The tower has diagonal buttresses and crenellations. The main walls facing north and south have buttresses that divide these into 3 bays. The windows are round headed and small paned with semi-circular drip moulds. On the inside the balcony, altar, pulpit, pews and open ‘Tudor Style’ roof structure are made from teak. The bell and clock mechanism was added ca. 1872.
The bricks are red clay, soft and friable as the...
