Significance assessment

Following the documentation phase, the next step was to assess the value of the site; that is, to systematically list and analyze all the elements that contributed to the site having cultural value to the Chinese people and to humanity in general. Initially, participants seemed skeptical of the need to assess significance, since the value of these sites appeared to be abundantly clear, but analysis of this range of issues demonstrated (as always) that the concept of significance assessment is a very powerful tool for analyzing a site's management needs. The site's historic, scientific, aesthetic, social, and other values were considered.

Where does significance reside?

There was much discussion about the significance of different elements of the site, especially about the question of previous restoration and reconstruction. Was this part of the site's significance, or should it be removed? Was the Ming dynasty fort on top of the older site important? Where did the question of religious use today fit in? Was this a legitimate value for the site? How would it effect its management? Did participants agree with a 1970s article, which—after an excellent description of the site and survey of all these elements—stated that the outstanding significance of the site was that “each work here steeped in the blood and sweat of the artisans serves as evidence of the crimes perpetrated by the ruling clans of old” (Yungang Grottoes Custody Committee 1977:15)?

A fascinating and much-argued issue focused on previous “traditional” conservation and restoration methods. Over two millennia, devoted monks, patrons, and, in some cases, rulers had sporadically conserved, restored, and adapted the sites. Re-carving, supporting stone carvings with iron spikes, replacing decayed stonework with painted clay moldings, and rebuilding shelters has ensured that the sites have reached the late twentieth century in a relatively intact state and has also provided a myriad of technical problems and interpretive puzzles. Is this previous work significant? Can it even be called conservation? How will sites be managed now that their ongoing traditional care has ceased with the twentieth-century disappearance of their traditional guardians and has been replaced with an equally devoted but very different set of managers with a different set of aims?

The analysis of such issues led to lively discussion and disagreement between and among the work groups, and also amply demonstrated the necessity of assessing significance prior to carrying out management

Strategies, including physical conservation. For instance, if it were decided that the major significance of the site was to teach about the crimes of the ancient clans, the presentation of the site to the public would be very different than if it were decided that its artistic and religious values were of prime importance. Similarly, the participants decided that change, adaptation, and conservation of the site over sixteen hundred years was as significant as the original, or oldest, paintings and carvings. Hence, the management policy decided on was to conserve all elements and periods of the site's fabric and not, for example, to interfere with one in order to find an earlier one.

Arriving at consensus

Despite their different views, the participants were able to produce a succinct statement of significance summarizing the values of the site. Some key elements proposed in the process of significance assessment included the following:

•  a range of expertise and thorough investigation of differing views are needed to enable full investigation of all the elements of significance.

•  The significance of a site is usually multifaceted, and any management strategy must consider all the elements and resolve potential conflicts between major ones.

•  Significance of a site can change dramatically over time, and from culture to culture, and will require periodic reassessment and reanalysis.

•  The role of site managers in assessing values is very important; they must ensure that the correct expertise is brought to bear and must, because of their special and holistic knowledge, take a leading role in the assessment.

One issue that emerged during the course was the immense amount of documentary and other evidence available about Chinese grotto sites; this is in contrast to most Western sites of the same period, and certainly to Australian Aboriginal sites. This “embarrassment of riches” needed editing to ensure that key points could be distilled from it.