What makes this sight eligable for UNESCO's support?
According to UNESCO, Troy "is of immense significance in the understanding of the development of European civilization at a critical stage in its early development". The organization then goes on to say that this site has immense cultural importance because of the influence the Iliad had over the creative arts.
How does UNESCO protect this site?
All sites on UNESCO's World Heritage List are given different measures of protection and are preserved as close to their original state as possible.
How does UNESCO promote this site?
The inclusion of Troy on UNESCO's World Heritage List makes it a major tourist destination, even though there is not much to do besides view the ruins. However, there is a replication of the Trojan Horse to entertain viewers and help them connect with the past.
The main question that we need to ask is, Does Troy really deserve to be on the World Heritage List? It is important to preserve this site because of its importance to history and the creative arts, but tourism takes away from its historical significance. Tourists visit this site and are upset that there is nothing to see except ruins of partially destroyed walls and a fake Trojan Horse. Maybe UNESCO should create two lists: one dedicated to historical sites that deserve to be preserved, and another for sites that are good tourist destinations. UNESCO's partnership with TripAdvisor, a travel website, is further evidence of the corruption of this system. While this organization has seemingly good intentions, it has turned into a money making, tourist attracting business.
http://www.lonelyplanet.com/travelblogs/922/91335/Visiting+Ancient+Troy+%E2%80%93+Trojan+Horse+and+All?destId=360870
I like that you bring up these sticky ethical questions with regards to the "great excavations" in archaeological history. In the future, I would also like to see a little more historical information on what made any of the excavations you mention "Great".
ReplyDeleteVery thorough and thought provoking. The pictures are a nice touch
ReplyDeleteYou suggest that two lists would be better; I would argue that the current list is already both of those lists together. Separating the two might make sense, but some sites are both historically important and interesting tourist destinations. I think Troy falls into the category that is both. While there are some artifacts and structures, the replica horse is clearly a tourist attraction, which continues to make me believe that today, history is simply used to make money.
ReplyDeleteWould you say that Troy deserves to be on the UNESCO list? I think the city has significance and deserves to be on the list; however, I agree when you say that UNESCO has turned into a money making business.
ReplyDelete