After the restoration of the ancient bridge, it is beyond recognition. Can the restoration of cultural relics change the original state？
□ Our reporter Han Dandong
□ Intern Yin Yushuang of this newspaper
Recently, an unrecognizable video of an ancient stone bridge after its restoration has attracted attention on the Internet. The ancient bridge, named Tieliang Bridge, is located in Xinzhou, Shanxi Province, dating back to the Jin and Yuan Dynasties. After the restoration of the stone bridge, except for the arch of the bridge, almost all the other parts were newly repaired, and some pillars and stone carvings on the bridge were also lost.
On April 22, Shanxi Provincial Bureau of Cultural Relics pointed out at the media conference that the local cultural relics authorities lacked the concept of protecting cultural relics and the supervision was not in place, and had asked Xinzhou to implement rectification as soon as possible.
The experience of the iron beam bridge once again brought the topic of cultural relics restoration into public view. How should cultural relics be restored to avoid "secondary damage"? Recently, the "Legal Daily" reporter interviewed this.
The ancient bridge lost its historical features.
Destructive repair is controversial
The iron beam bridge is located in Liansigou Village, Zhuangmo Town, Xinzhou City, Shanxi Province. In June 2007, it was listed in the first batch of municipal cultural relics protection units and intangible cultural heritage in Xinzhou City.
In order to make the bridge continue to undertake the modern traffic function, in recent years, the key parts of the bridge have been maintained to varying degrees. In 2019, Xinzhou Cultural Relics Bureau and Xinfu District Government put the maintenance of the iron beam bridge on the agenda, and successively organized and completed the preparation, demonstration, approval and engineering technical bidding of the maintenance scheme of the iron beam bridge, and started the maintenance of the iron beam bridge in early October 2019, and the main maintenance project was basically completed by the end of November.
However, the contrast video before and after the repair of the iron beam bridge caused a heated discussion on the Internet, and many cultural relics lovers thought that the bridge was "unrecognizable" and "lost its historical significance" after the repair.
On April 21, Xinzhou Cultural Relics Bureau announced that an investigation team had been set up in the local area to conduct a comprehensive investigation around the repair work of the iron beam bridge.
Professor Qi Jiahua, an expert in the restoration of ancient buildings in Xi ‘an University of Architecture and Technology, told the reporter of Legal Daily that the most important thing of an ancient building is its style and historical information. This restoration destroyed the original historical features of the ancient bridge and actually caused the depreciation of the ancient buildings. "Judging from the photos of the new bridge, it didn’t use the previous materials, so where did the previous materials go? If the whereabouts of these materials are unknown, it may also constitute a cultural relic crime. "
In recent years, it is nothing new that cultural relics are destroyed after restoration. In 2016, the wall and ground of a section of Xiaohekou Great Wall in Suizhong, Liaoning Province, which is known as the "most beautiful wild Great Wall", were directly paved with cement hardened pavement during the restoration process; An ancient building of the Republic of China named "Qiushui Villa" in Hangzhou, its mottled gatehouse and external wall were painted with a layer of yellow paint; In 2018, the painted sculptures in qinglian temple, a national key cultural relic protection unit, were painted with gold paint, which made them look brand-new, and the head of the Buddha statue was added with a ribbon that was not used before.
"Many historical sites can’t be used, but it is the symbol of that era, carrying the cultural information of that era and being unique." Qi Jiahua believes that the original intention of using historical sites to carry out tourism is good, but the local area has not done a good job in cultural relics protection. It is a very rough way to evaluate the ancients with modern technology. With new materials and new technology, there is no sense of vicissitudes and charm of history. Like Terracotta Warriors, Wild Goose Pagoda, Hanging Temple, etc., they are very old and have been repaired repeatedly, but their charm has not diminished. The main reason is that they have retained the original cultural genes.
Cultural relics should be repaired as old as before.
It is not advisable to destroy the authenticity.
In practice, what standards should be followed for the restoration of cultural relics? How can we achieve the balance between aesthetic feeling and practicality?
It is understood that the law on the protection of cultural relics stipulates that the principle of not changing the original state of cultural relics must be observed in the repair, maintenance and relocation of immovable cultural relics. The "Guidelines for the Protection of Cultural Relics and Monuments in China" stipulates that restoration should protect the original state and historical information of existing objects, and should be based on existing and valuable objects; The unique traditional technology must be preserved, and all new materials and new processes must be tested and studied in the early stage; Correctly grasp the aesthetic standards, and it is not allowed to change the original state of cultural relics by pursuing completeness and splendor.
Zhou Rong, director of the Institute of History, Culture and Tourism of Xi ‘an Academy of Social Sciences, pointed out that in the past practice, there were two different ideas about the restoration of cultural relics at home and abroad: "Repairing the old as the old" and "Different from the old". The first is a common idea in China at present, that is, to restore cultural relics in their original state, and the materials and techniques of restoration should be the same as those of cultural relics in their original state. The cultural relics thus restored are integrated, and generally no traces of restoration can be seen. However, some scholars have put forward different views on this. They think that since it has been repaired, we should distinguish the original things from the newly repaired things. This is the method of "the old is different from the new", that is, on the basis of not affecting the appearance, the repaired part is deliberately differentiated in color.
"No matter what kind of restoration concept, authenticity should be the first principle of cultural relics restoration. The restoration of cultural relics should conform to the era of cultural relics and its origin, and must be consistent with the original cultural features, and cannot be arbitrarily modified. In the process of restoration, aesthetic feeling and practicality must be balanced on the basis of maintaining authenticity, and the authenticity cannot be destroyed because the cultural relics are inconsistent with the current aesthetics. " Zhou Rong said.
Qi Jiahua believes that the restoration of cultural relics should adhere to the principle of "repairing the old as the old" in form, that is, to maintain the authenticity of history and reflect the technological level of that era; We should adhere to the "cultural gene" in content, that is, adhere to the aesthetic orientation and style of that era. For example, the Tang Dynasty preferred fullness, while the Song Dynasty preferred delicacy and thinness. "In the process of design and construction, experts should be invited to make suggestions and study what the style of the era in which cultural relics are located and what the corresponding technology is."
In the interview, Liu Rui, an associate researcher at the Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said: "The standard of restoring cultural relics has been developing, and China’s traditional thought likes to be completely new, but now the recognized principle in the West is ‘ Repair the old as before ’ . Restoration is a process of continuous discussion, which is an academic problem and should be cautious scientifically. I personally feel that it is enough to continue the local ecology and tradition and conform to the local aesthetics. "
Build a multi-party participation mechanism
Establish a system of accountability
The "destructive restoration" of cultural relics has occurred in many places. At present, China attaches great importance to cultural construction, and the protection and restoration of cultural relics are also paid more and more attention.
According to Article 66 of the Law on the Protection of Cultural Relics, if one of the following acts does not constitute a crime, the cultural relics department of the people’s government at or above the county level shall order it to make corrections, and if serious consequences are caused, it shall be fined between 50,000 yuan and 500,000 yuan; If the circumstances are serious, the qualification certificate shall be revoked by the original issuing authority: (1) carrying out construction projects or blasting, drilling, excavation and other operations within the protection scope of cultural relics protection units without authorization; (two) in the construction control zone of cultural relics protection units, the engineering design scheme has not been approved by the administrative department of cultural relics and submitted to the urban and rural construction planning department for approval, which has caused damage to the historical features of cultural relics protection units; (three) unauthorized removal, removal of immovable cultural relics; (four) unauthorized repair of immovable cultural relics, obviously changing the original state of cultural relics; (five) unauthorized reconstruction of immovable cultural relics that have been completely destroyed in the original site, resulting in the destruction of cultural relics; (six) the construction unit engaged in the repair, relocation and reconstruction of cultural relics without obtaining the qualification certificate of cultural relics protection project.
In the interview, Zhou Rong believed that cultural relics at all levels should be examined and approved by the corresponding cultural relics authorities according to their different grades. According to some previous cases, the corresponding administrative review procedures should be started for the situation of iron beam bridges. First of all, we must check the scientificity and rationality of the repair scheme. Secondly, the cultural relics management departments and responsible persons who do not meet the requirements should be held accountable.
"In the process of cultural relics protection and restoration, we must adhere to such a mechanism that the competent departments of cultural relics take the lead and cultural relics experts and scientific research institutions participate. In addition to the administrative departments of cultural relics, cultural relics experts should also actively participate in the proposal and implementation of cultural relics restoration programs. At the same time, a corresponding accountability system should be established. For some so-called protection schemes and practices that do not meet the requirements of cultural relics protection and wantonly destroy cultural relics, the decision makers, departments and evaluation experts who make decisions should be held accountable. " Zhou Rong said.
Qi Jiahua believes: "The iron beam bridge is a municipal-level cultural relics protection unit. According to the existing regulations, the ancient bridge needs to be submitted for approval in advance before it is repaired, and a site restoration plan must be proposed. Who put forward the current plan and how it was passed should be investigated. In addition, when local governments want to use local resources to do something, they should do it professionally, rather than relying solely on enthusiasm and slapping their heads. The government should use the relevant institutions of higher learning and research institutes to give full play to the strength of professionals, so that it can get twice the result with half the effort. "
Zhou Rong suggested that in the process of cultural relics protection, due to the financial constraints of local governments, there may be a funding gap. The state should consider setting up corresponding funds or special funds to increase support for local cultural relics protection and make up for the funding gap.