ICOMOS PERU

AUTHENTICITY AND PERUVIAN CULTURAL HERITAGE

For thousand of years in the Peruvian cultural tradition, it has been found in the pre-Hispanic civilizations, especially in the coastal area, the deep rooted custom or ritual of rebuilding in consecutive layers many of its constructions, like temples: "huacas" or pyramids; something that can also be appreciated in the Mexican pyramids.

This phenomenon is found in cultures as old as Chavín (1,000-200 BC), through the nowadays famous Moche (Sipán tombs) and Chimú (1,200-1,400 AD). The Inca Empire, lasting a short time (1,400-1,532), but covering a large geographical extension, seems to have been the exception to this custom of rebuilding or covering the old structures.

The material used in many of these buildings: earth (adobe), wood and cane/bamboo (quincha), demands a periodical renovation, forced probably, many times, by the severe earthquakes that occur periodically in our country. Many of the pre-Hispanic architectural technologies resisted the earthquakes without problems, but not the surfaces, profusely decorated with polychromed mud high reliefs, which were suitable for periodical renovations.

Therefore, it can be deduced that, in what respects to authenticity, even in sacred buildings as the pre-Columbian temples, it was not the same concept as that which we nowadays have.

At the beginning, Spaniards gave preference to their stone construction system, even in the coast, where stone could not be found easily. They also brought the Andalusian and therefore Arab tradition of brick, wood and plaster. The earthquakes soon convinced them of the advantages of these easily renewable lightweight materials. Very soon the prehispanic tradition of using wood and cane: quincha, mentioned above, was used again.

It can be seen that earthquakes have been the determining factor in the renewal of the buildings and, as a result, in changes of their "authenticity", if this is regarded as the original form and the "substance" or the materials and technology with which these buildings were built.

In Peruvian architecture, most of the time, the form has been preserved but the substance, the building materials, have been altered. The Cathedral of Lima, for example, is covered with Gothic style ribbed vaults, which should have been made of brick or stone, but they were rebuilt with wood and cane.

The desertical Peruvian coast, with almost no rainfall, permitted many times that in some architectural expressions, other materials imitated the originals: hollow cornices, as well as thick hollow walls, or classical columns which were withstood in an interior shore and have only a shell carved in wood. This is the scenographic character of the architecture of Lima and the coastal area, which disgusted so much the well-knoivn Peruvian writer, Sebastian Salazar Bondy (Lima La Horrible). He did not understand that this is precisely one of the essences of its authenticity.

The evolution of styles and fashions caused periodical renewals in the language or decoration of the buildings, especially in the form, but many times not in the "substance". That means, that it can be found the shell of a colonial house with its original structure and materials, but decorated in neoclassical style and with an eclectic facade. Each of these changes is authentic in itself and does not minimize its value as a whole; on the contrary, it enriches it.

Of course, we can not accept the excesses of the neocolonial style, which was a reaction against the European eclectical models, and was inspired by the viceroyal, and sometimes pre-hispanic, architectural language, as a way of recovering an identity or supposed cultural authenticity.

The writer García Calderón said in 1908: "In the aesthetic history of a nation, imitation is the first step in the hard and patient learning process that permits originality in the future" (in P. Belaunde: Peru, the Search for National Roots, 1994).

In the first decades of this century, it was thought that the neocolonial buildings replaced with advantage, in forms and in materials (brick and concrete), the adobe and quincha original buildings, loosing completely the concept of authenticity. For example, in 1944, the l7th century stone archways and almost all the perimeter of Lima's Main Plaza, including the l8th and l9th centuries wooden balconies, were demolished in order to build new neo-colonial buildings that would express in a "better way" the category of the old viceroyal capital, destroying in this way one of the urban essences of the city. In Cusco, at the same time, a whole block of the historic center, including the old Mint, was demolished to build a hotel in Cusco's neo-colonial style.

After the 1950 earthquake, many of the archways of the Main Square were rebuilt, changing its proportions, while the wooden balconies on the second floor were unnecessarily redone.

We had to wait in Peru until the diffusion of the Venice Charter s principles in 1965,along with the foundation of the ICOMOS Peruvian Committee, by one of the persons who signed it, Architect Victor Pimentel, to start the preservation of our cultural heritage "with all the richness of its authenticity".

This is related to the historical monuments, because in the case of the pre-Hispanic ones, many archaeologists, under the influence of the old Mexican School, insisted on rebuilding them, trying to give them authenticity by using the same materials, but falling in hypothesis to complete them. This happened in Puruchuco (Lima) and in a small area of Chan Chan (Trujillo).

As always happens, from the extreme of replacing the whole monument, it turned to an excessive conservation purism, but not in the form, which vas correct, but in the traditional technologies and materials, which of course, deserve our full respect; but because of the inevitable earthquakes and other natural disasters, need generally reinforcements or new internal structures, as it is accepted in article lO of the Venice Charter.

But even in the respectful purism of technologies and materials, in the sixties the custom of "peeling" the internal and external surfaces of monuments continued, loosing another essence of their authenticity: the mural decoration, which we know now was abundant in the interior and frequent in the exterior of the building.

On the other hand, in Cusco, many parts of monuments lightly consolidated after the great earthquake of 1950, have been damaged again or collapsed in the earthquake of 1986, of lesser intensity. Instead, some monuments with reinforcements especially designed in the seventies (COPESCO-Peru/UNESCO Plan) resisted well. The same experience happened in Trujillo after the earthquake of 1970.

For Peru, it is important to emphasize article 11 in the Nara Document on Authenticity, which recognizes that the value of authenticity may differ from culture to culture and even within the same culture.

Finally, we can state that the Peruvian cultural reality and experience, lead us to give more importance to the authenticity of forn (volume, interior space, decoration, color, etc.), and less importance to the authenticity of substance (construction materials and technologies).

ICOMOS Peruvian Committee, 1996