311
8 Conclusion
First, I have presented some early observatories from the time of Renaissance,
Baroque, Neoclassicism, up to the modern observatories of the twentieth century,
which should be studied in more detail. Many are no longer used for astronomical
purposes or the buildings no longer exist. Nevertheless, they were very important in
their time and carried out innovative and cutting-edge research, so they are included
in the “Outstanding Astronomical Heritage” (OAH).
In this contribution, I discussed only ‘tangible immoveable’ heritage, observatory buildings and fixed instruments. I have not included heritage sites of archaeoastronomy, archaeological monuments, ‘tangible moveable’ and ‘intangible’
heritage of astronomy and heritage in danger, or the Dark Skies initiative.
Modern observatories offer good potential for serial transnational applications
to UNESCO and to select partner observatories, which form a consistent group, due
to the date of their construction, to their architectural features, instrumentation
(same instrument makers), or their scientific programmes (e.g. international cooperation projects). One example which I have presented is the shift from classical
astronomy to modern astrophysics, which can be easily recorded in several observatories of around 1900, especially in Hamburg, Kazan and La Plata. These examples
may concern the choice of instruments, the architecture and the idea of the astronomy park. All this is important cultural heritage connected with observatories of
that time.
The observatory buildings and their architecture including their layout (e.g. in a
Botanical Garden or astronomy park), the quality of instruments, the scientific
archives (collections of photographic plates, observation journals, correspondence,
star charts, catalogues, etc.), as well as the scientific/intellectual achievements,
inventions and discoveries made by scholars related to the individual observatory,
are all to be understood as categories of the cultural heritage (also in terms of scientific heritage). This corresponds to the main categories according to which the
“Outstanding Universal Value” (OUV) of the observatories will have to be evaluated (UNESCO criteria ii, iv and vi): historic, scientific, and aesthetic. These observatories contributed remarkably to the cultural heritage of mankind, to astronomical
science, and thus to modern worldviews. As such, they should be present in the
UNESCO list.
References
Abalakin, V. K. (2009). The pulkovo observatory on the centuries ‘Borderline’. In G. Wolfschmidt
(Ed.), Cultural heritage: Astronomical observatories—From classical astronomy to modern
astrophysics (pp. 60–75). Berlin: Hendrik Bäßler.
Benoist, C., Le Guet Tully, F., & Davoigneau, J. (2016). A survey of large meridian instruments
across continents & time. In M. M. Ya (Ed.), Astronomy and world heritage: Across time and
continents (pp. 164–171). Kazan: Publishing House of Kazan University.
Cultural Heritage of Observatories in Context with the IAU–UNESCO Initiative…
8 Conclusion
First, I have presented some early observatories from the time of Renaissance,
Baroque, Neoclassicism, up to the modern observatories of the twentieth century,
which should be studied in more detail. Many are no longer used for astronomical
purposes or the buildings no longer exist. Nevertheless, they were very important in
their time and carried out innovative and cutting-edge research, so they are included
in the “Outstanding Astronomical Heritage” (OAH).
In this contribution, I discussed only ‘tangible immoveable’ heritage, observatory buildings and fixed instruments. I have not included heritage sites of archaeoastronomy, archaeological monuments, ‘tangible moveable’ and ‘intangible’
heritage of astronomy and heritage in danger, or the Dark Skies initiative.
Modern observatories offer good potential for serial transnational applications
to UNESCO and to select partner observatories, which form a consistent group, due
to the date of their construction, to their architectural features, instrumentation
(same instrument makers), or their scientific programmes (e.g. international cooperation projects). One example which I have presented is the shift from classical
astronomy to modern astrophysics, which can be easily recorded in several observatories of around 1900, especially in Hamburg, Kazan and La Plata. These examples
may concern the choice of instruments, the architecture and the idea of the astronomy park. All this is important cultural heritage connected with observatories of
that time.
The observatory buildings and their architecture including their layout (e.g. in a
Botanical Garden or astronomy park), the quality of instruments, the scientific
archives (collections of photographic plates, observation journals, correspondence,
star charts, catalogues, etc.), as well as the scientific/intellectual achievements,
inventions and discoveries made by scholars related to the individual observatory,
are all to be understood as categories of the cultural heritage (also in terms of scientific heritage). This corresponds to the main categories according to which the
“Outstanding Universal Value” (OUV) of the observatories will have to be evaluated (UNESCO criteria ii, iv and vi): historic, scientific, and aesthetic. These observatories contributed remarkably to the cultural heritage of mankind, to astronomical
science, and thus to modern worldviews. As such, they should be present in the
UNESCO list.
References
Abalakin, V. K. (2009). The pulkovo observatory on the centuries ‘Borderline’. In G. Wolfschmidt
(Ed.), Cultural heritage: Astronomical observatories—From classical astronomy to modern
astrophysics (pp. 60–75). Berlin: Hendrik Bäßler.
Benoist, C., Le Guet Tully, F., & Davoigneau, J. (2016). A survey of large meridian instruments
across continents & time. In M. M. Ya (Ed.), Astronomy and world heritage: Across time and
continents (pp. 164–171). Kazan: Publishing House of Kazan University.
Cultural Heritage of Observatories in Context with the IAU–UNESCO Initiative…