Features of the Geotechnical Practice of Constructing a Four-Story Brick Building Near a Cultural Heritage Object

2021 ◽  
pp. 18-22
Author(s):  
N.S. SOKOLOV
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Cultural Heritage Object

Mound of the Bronze Age at the Ak-Monai Isthmus in the Eastern Crimea: Stereoscopy of Archaeological Time and Space 

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Д.В. Бейлин ◽  
А.Е. Кислый ◽  
И.В. Рукавишникова
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Bronze Age ◽  
Late Stage ◽  
Road Construction ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Early Bronze Age ◽  
Burial Mound ◽  
Cultural Heritage Object ◽  
Eastern Crimea ◽  
The Bronze Age

The article represents the results of archaeological digs of a Barrow № 2 (a cultural heritage object) belonging to the «Ak-Monai 1» Barrow Group situated in the Tavrida road construction area. A research area was 1534 square meters. Exploration revealed 13 simple ditch graves, mostly supplied with slab ceilings. 12 graves were initially covered with a burial mound; only one grave was placed inside a burial mound in antiquity. It was noticed that a burial mound had not been formed with a very first grave, but had been constructed by adding new graves to the cemetery, which was a common practice in Early Bronze Age. After completing of several burials a territory was leveled out to the extent possible, in some places it was windrowed. Digs of a Barrow № 2 enabled us to trace and analyze some funeral rite’s peculiarities, especially concerning children’s burials, and to give a cultural and chronological characteristic to the whole Barrow Group, attributing it to the late stage of a Pit Grave Culture. 

scholarly journals GEDUNG MERDEKA SEBAGAI OBJEK WISATA DI KOTA BANDUNG

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 127
Author(s):  
Nandang Firman Nurgiansyah ◽  
Miftahul Falah
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Visual Space ◽  
Tourist Attraction ◽  
Coffee Shop ◽  
Cultural Heritage Object ◽  
Complex Functions

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan upaya yang diperlukan bagi pengembangan fungsi Gedung Merdeka sebagai objek wisata. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode sejarah, yang terdiri dari tahapan heuristik, kritik, interpretasi, dan historiografi. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian, Gedung Merdeka belum dimanfaatkan secara optimal sebagai daya tarik wisata dan kurangnya fasilitas wisata di gedung tersebut. Gedung Merdeka memiliki daya tarik sebagai benda cagar budaya yang bernilai historis dan terdapat Museum KAA di salah satu bagian gedungnya. Museum tersebut mengoleksi dan memamerkan benda dan foto yang berkaitan dengan Konferensi Asia Afrika. Selain itu, sarana wisata yang perlu ditambah seperti cafetaria, coffee shop, tempat duduk dan bersantai untuk wisatawan dan ruangan audio visual yang lebih menarik. Oleh sebab itu, perlu optimalisasi fungsi komplek Gedung Merdeka sebagai daya tarik wisata. The thesis It aims to explain the efforts need for the development function of Gedung Merdeka as tourist attraction. The thesis uses the history research methods, which of heuristic, critic, interpretation, and historiography. Based on theresearch results, problems encountered the building that is not used optimally as a tourist attraction, the lack of tourist facilities in the building. Gedung Merdeka has an attraction as a cultural heritage object of historical value and there is KAA Museum in one part of the building. The museum collects and exhibits objects and photos related to the Asian African Conference. In addition, tourist facilities that need to be added such as cafeteria, coffee shop, seating and relax for tourists and audio visual space more attractive. Therefore, it needs to optimize complex functions the Gedung Merdeka as a tourist attraction.

C-10 Invited—Going Beyond XRF: Use of Micro-Fluorescence and Diffraction to Understand How a Cultural Heritage Object Was Made and How It Ages and Degrades

2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-219
Author(s):  
M. Walton ◽  
E. J. Schofield ◽  
R. Sarangi ◽  
S. Webb ◽  
A. Mehta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Cultural Heritage Object

scholarly journals Monitoring of Immovable Cultural Heritage Implementing 3D and Artificial Intelligence Technologies

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 151-166
Author(s):  
Rimvydas Laužikas ◽  
Albinas Kuncevičius ◽  
Darius Amilevičius ◽  
Tadas Žižiūnas ◽  
Ramūnas Šmigelskas
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Research Council ◽  
Point Clouds ◽  
Accurate Method ◽  
Heritage Management ◽  
Contemporary Society ◽  
Heritage Preservation ◽  
Cultural Heritage Object ◽  
3D Point Clouds ◽  
First Results

Preservation of immovable cultural heritage is one of the main challenges for contemporary society. Nowadays very often organizations responsible for heritage management constantly have to deal with lack of resources, which are crucial for proper heritage preservation, maintaining and protection.The possible solution of these problems could be automated heritage monitoring, based on the 3D and AI technologies. 3D scanning technology is the most accurate method to capture the situation of an evolving cultural heritage object or complex at a given time. As a cultural heritage object or complex is evolving continuously, AI based comparison of two 3D point clouds created at different time allow to reliably trace potential changes. Proposed solution is realized by project financed by Research Council of Lithuania „Automated monitoring of urban heritage implementing 3D technologies”. The first results of the project are presented at this article.

The potential of 3D techniques for cultural heritage object documentation

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Bitelli ◽  
Valentina A. Girelli ◽  
Fabio Remondino ◽  
Luca Vittuari
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Cultural Heritage Object

scholarly journals Age as a criterion of value for tangible cultural heritage objects under Russian law

Pravovedenie ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 176-183
Author(s):  
Maria A. Aleksandrova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Cultural Heritage Object ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
World Heritage List ◽  
The Status ◽  
Tangible Object ◽  
The One ◽  
Cultural Heritage Objects

UNESCO’s activities are dedicated to the conservation of both intangible and tangible cultural heritage. One of the most difficult issues in constructing a system for the protection of tangible cultural heritage objects is the criteria for identifying objects as cultural heritage. Obviously, it takes time to assess the cultural or historical value and significance of a tangible object. In most cases, granting the status of a cultural heritage object is assigned much later than its creation. However, international acts also do not contain specific requirements for how old a particular object should be in order to qualify it as an object of cultural heritage. UNESCO’s practice is known for several cases of adding to the World Heritage List relatively young sites. The Russian Cultural Heritage Object Act (2002), along with the laws of some other countries, establishes a specific age (40 years) that any object must reach in order to become a cultural heritage object. An exception is made only for memorial apartments and buildings (they can be attributed as objects of cultural heritage immediately after the death of famous personalities) and for objects of archeology (they must be at least 100 years old). This rule of law is mandatory, which means that it does not make other exceptions to the rule of 40 years. Such a rule of law significantly distinguishes the Russian approach from foreign legislation. On the one hand, such regulation may negatively affect the possibility of protecting outstanding objects from the late Soviet and early new Russian period. On the other hand, the approach of granting the status of cultural heritage objects to many relatively new objects can negatively affect urban development. The author proposes to evaluate and review this provision of law in order to find the optimal balance of public and private interests.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document