2019: Mosul: systematic annihilation of a city’s architectural heritage, its analysis and post-crisis management

REVUE DE L’ORIENT ANCIEN A C ARCHÉOLOGIE DES CONFLITS / ARCHÉOLOGIE EN CONFLIT ARCHAEOLOGY OF CONFLICT / ARCHAEOLOGY IN CONFLICT DOCUMENTER LA DESTRUCTION AU MOYEN-ORIENT ET EN ASIE CENTRALE DOCUMENTING DESTRUCTION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE IN THE MIDDLE-EAST AND CENTRAL ASIA PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE HELD IN PARIS, INHA, 2ND & 3RD NOVEMBER 2017 ACTES DU COLLOQUE INTERNATIONAL DE PARIS, INHA, 2 & 3 NOVEMBRE 2017 ÉDITÉS PAR / EDITED BY BESSENAY-PROLONGE J., HERR J.-J., MURA M. AVEC LA COLLABORATION DE A. HAVÉ JUIN 2019 PARIS Vue satellite du site d’Aï Khanoum, Afghanistan, BingImagery, colonnes de Palmyre, mise en page JBP, JJH, MM C A rchéologie C nflits Rout de l’Orient Actes II Archéologie des Conflits / Archéologie en Conflit Archaeology of Conflict / Archaeology in Conflict Documenter la Destruction au Moyen-Orient et en Asie Centrale Documenting Destruction of Cultural Heritage in the Middle-East and Central Asia Actes du Colloque International de Paris INHA, 2 & 3 Nov. 2017 Édités par / Edited by Julie Bessenay-Prolonge, Jean-Jacques Herr, Mathilde Mura avec la collaboration de Amaury Havé Paris, juin 2019 Sommaire Section 1 Le patrimoine des pays en guerre : législations, institutions et enjeux Cultural Heritage during Armed Conflicts : Laws, Institutions, Issues Vanessa Rose La protection internationale du patrimoine archéologique de 1954 à aujourd’hui Avancées et limites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Shaker Al Shbib La préservation du patrimoine syrien pendant le conflit Les défis et les mesures d’urgence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Jérémie Schiettecatte Yémen. Un patrimoine vandalisé dans un pays en proie au chaos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Gaëlle Thevenin Archaeologists in Gaza Study an endangered heritage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Section 2 Archéologie de la destruction : approches historiographiques The Archaeology of Destruction : Historiographical Approaches Zoé Vannier L’évacuation et la gestion du département des Antiquités orientales du musée du Louvre pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Benoît Labbey & Jan Veron Archéologie de la bataille de Normandie (6 juin-29 août 1944) L’exemple du site d’Hérouvillette, RD 513 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Salvatore Garfi Archaeology and Memory, and the International Brigades, in a Battlescape of the Spanish Civil War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Johnny Samuele Baldi Picturing concrete matters an archaeography of Lebanese destroyed family homes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 10 Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 Mohamed Abdelaziz Metallaoui L’utilisation de la destruction comme instrument politico-militaire Cas de la démolition de la basse Casbah d’Alger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Section 3 La destruction au Proche-Orient et en Asie Centrale : études de cas Destructions in the Middle East and Central Asia : Case Studies Pascal Butterlin & Mathilde Mura Mari et la crise syrienne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 Ilaria Calini, Jean-Jacqu Herr, Maria Grazia Masetti-Rouault Craters at Qasr Shemamok (Kurdistan, Iraq) opportunities and problems for excavations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 Karel Novacek Mosul : systematic annihilation of a city’s architectural heritage, its analysis and post-crisis management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 Section 4 Quelle archéologie en post-conflit ? Méthodologies, technologies pour l’avenir Post-Conflict Archaeology ? Methodological and Technological Perspectives for the Future Allison E. Cuneo, Michael D. Danti Tracking Heritage Loss in the Mids of Armed Conflict The Asor Cultural Heritage Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 Mathilde Mura Documenting Military Occupation on Archaeological Sites From the Impacts on Ancient Remains to Modern Conflict Archaeology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 Lucie Robert Pour une conservation préventive de post-conflit Réflexions sur le devenir d’un patrimoine en crise, à partir des collections archéologiques de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Afghanistan (DAFA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301 Contributeurs / Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317 Quelques mots sur / About Routes de l’Orient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319 11 Mosul : systematic annihilation of a city’s architectural heritage, its analysis and post-crisis management Karel Nováček1 Résumé : Mossoul : l’annihilation systématique du patrimoine architectural d’une ville, analyse et gestion post-crise Cet article offre un bref aperçu de l’annihilation de l’architecture historique de la ville de Mossoul, à la fois délibérément perpétrée par le groupe terroriste État Islamique et causée par les combats terrestres et les bombardements durant la libération de la ville. La situation du patrimoine architectural dans la ville est surveillée, notamment depuis 2014 dans le cadre du programme Monuments of Mosul in Danger Project. Outre la présentation des principaux résultats du volet documentation du projet, cet article aborde également des questions plus théoriques telles que le contexte idéologique de la violence à l’égard des monuments, l’analyse ex post des sites détruits, et les perspectives futures de la gestion du patrimoine local. Mots-clefs : Mossoul, patrimoine culturel, organisation État Islamique, architecture d’époque islamique, violence culturelle Abstract : The paper gives a brief overview of the annihilation of Mosul‘s historical architecture, whether deliberately perpetrated by ISIS (Daesh) or caused by terrestrial combats and bombardment during the liberation of the city. The situation of the architectural heritage in the city is monitored, among others, by the Monuments of Mosul in Danger Project since 2014. In addition to the main results of the documentation part of the project, the paper also introduces more conceptual questions regarding the ideological context of the violence on monuments, an ex post analysis of destroyed sites and future outlooks of the local heritage management. Keywords : Mosul, cultural heritage, ISIS, Islamic-period architecture, cultural violence. 1. Palacký University Olomouc. 249 ‫‪Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 – K. Nováček, p. 249-260‬‬ ‫ملخص ‪ /‬پووختە ‪ /‬خلاصه‬ ‫الموصل‪ ،‬مثال على الإبادة المنهجية للتراث المعماري للمدينة‬ ‫تقدم هذه الورقة لمحة موجزة عن إبادة العمارة التار يخية للموصل‪ ،‬سواء ارتكبها تنظيم الدولة الإسلامية )داعش( عن عمد أو بسبب الاقتتال على‬ ‫الأرض والقصف أثناء تحرير المدينة‪ .‬يتم مراقبة وضع التراث المعماري في المدينة‪ ،‬من خلال عدة جهات‪ ،‬منها مشروع الآثار في الموصل في خطر الذي‬ ‫بدأ منذ عام ‪ .٢٠١٤‬بالإضافة إلى النتائج الرئيسية لجزء التوثيق من المشروع‪ ،‬تقدم الورقة أيضا ًالمزيد من الأسئلة المفاهيمية المتعلقة بالسياقات الإيديولوجية‬ ‫للعنف على المعالم الأثر ية‪ ،‬وتحليل لاحق للمواقع المدمرة والاستشرافات المستقبلية لإدارة التراث المحلي‪.‬‬ ‫الكلمات المفتاحية‪ :‬الموصل‪ ،‬التراث الثقافي‪ ،‬تنظيم الدولة الاسلامية‪ ،‬العمارة الإسلامية‪ ،‬العنف الثقافي‪.‬‬ ‫موصل‪ ،‬نموونەى خاپوركردنى نەهجى توراسى بيناسازى شارەكە‬ ‫ئەم توێژينەوەيە ئاشنايەكى كورت لە سەر خاپور كردنى بيناسازى ميژوويى موصل دەخاتەروو‪ ،‬چ لە لايەنى گروپى تيرۆرستى داعش بە ئەنقەست يا‬ ‫بە هۆكارى شەرى ئەرزىو بۆردمان لە كاتى ئازاد كردنى شارەكدا ئەنجامدرابێت‪ .‬چاودێرى بارى شوناسى بيناسازى شارەكە كرا‪ ،‬لەنێو كارەكانى تردا‪،‬لە‬ ‫پرۆژەى شوێنەوارەكانى مصل لە مەترسيدان لە ‪ 2014‬دا‪ .‬سەرەراى ئەنجامە سەرەكيەكانى بۆ بە بەڵـگەكردنى پرۆژەكە‪ ،‬ئەم توێژينەوەيە زۆر بابەتى چەمكى‬ ‫هەلوسراو بە ئايدۆلۆژ يا لە چوار چێوەى توند و تيژى لە سەر جيهانى شوێنەوار يەكان پێشكەش دەكات‪ ،‬وە شيكردنەوەى پاشكۆ يەك بۆ ناوچە وێرانبووەكان‬ ‫و پێشبينيە داهاتوو يەكان بۆ راپەراندنى توراسى ميلى‪.‬‬ ‫ووشەى تێپەر‪ :‬موصل‪ ،‬شوناسى كلتورى‪ -‬داعش‪-‬بيناسازى ئيسلامى‪-‬توندوتيژى كلتورى‪.‬‬ ‫موصل‪ :‬مثالی از نابودی سیستماتیک بقایای ساختمانی یک شهر‬ ‫چکیده‪ :‬در این مقاله مروری بر تخریب ساختمانهای تار یخی موصل میکنیم‪ ،‬ویرانیهایکه خواه بطور عمدی توسط حکومت اسلامی عراق و شام‬ ‫)داعش( و یا جنگ های زمینی و بمباردمان‪ ،‬در جر یان آزادی این شهر بر آن وارد گردیده‪ .‬از سال ‪ 2014‬میلادی بدینسو‪ ،‬وضعیت بقایای ساختمانی‬ ‫این شهر‪ ،‬در میان بقیه فعالیتها؛ توسط پروژه »آبدات در معرض خطر موصل« ارز یابی میشود‪ .‬در این مقاله سعی شدهاست تا درکنار ارائه نتایج بخش‬ ‫اسناد سازی این پروژه‪ ،‬سؤالات ذهنی بیشتری در مورد بافتار ایدئولوژ یکی در تخریب آبدات‪ ،‬تحلیل های معطوف به گذشته ساحات تخریب شده و‬ ‫چشم انداز آینده مدیریت میراث فرهنگی محلی نیز شرح گردد‪.‬‬ ‫واژههای کلیدی‪ :‬موصل‪ ،‬میراث فرهنگی‪ ،‬حکومت اسلامی عراق و شام‪ ،‬معماری دوره اسلامی‪ ،‬خشونت فرهنگی‪.‬‬ ‫‪250‬‬ Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 – K. Nováček, p. 249-260 The Evolution of Urbicide I n the recent history of the world, the violence perpetrated against the cultural heritage of Mosul, North Iraq, by ISIS (Daesh) from June 2014 to July 2017 represents, by all known measures, one of the most serious cases of city annihilation resulting from sectarian conflict. The circumstances and evolution of the Mosul case have been extensively publicized and are well-known to the scholarly public. Consequently, it would not be necessary to repeat them in detail here.2 Nevertheless, it should be pointed out that the media view of Mosul‘s destruction is often stereotyped as involving only the loss of a number of isolated city landmarks: the Mosque al-Nuri with the Minaret al-Hadba and the Mosque of Nabi Yunus represent the most frequently cited sites. In actual fact, the eradication of Mosul‘s historical architecture has had much more of a profound impact. The destruction was accomplished in a very systematic manner and not only affected several individual structures, but whole categories of monument, including a number of lesser-known structures that had entirely escaped earlier scholarly attention. According to the verified assessment produced by the Monuments of Mosul in Danger Project, Daesh attacked and entirely or partly destroyed 47 structures in five consecutive waves, all of which, with the exception of the first one, attracted very little attention on the part of the media3 . Consequently, Mosul has lost all its major sites, all centres of communal religious life and social memory, all sites which once constituted its panorama and distinctive appearance. All buildings containing tombs, as well as monuments with strong symbolic and inter-religious meaning, were the primary targets of the destruction. The annihilation of Mosul’s old city was completed during the liberation, which took place between February and July 2017. The initial tactic employed by the coalition forces was to eliminate ISIS by ground combat, proceeding from house to house. However, in the last stages of the operation, this approach changed to a strategy of indiscriminate carpet bombing and the razing of the cityscape by recourse to the use of heavy machinery. It was also devastated by the efforts of ISIS suicide attackers. In this way, substantial parts of three historical neighbourhoods situated on the banks of the Tigris – Al-Makkawi, Ras al-Koar and Al-Maydan – were totally levelled between July 6–214 . This part of the old city cannot be restored as a whole; its complete removal is currently under way. According to a detailed comparative analysis of the satellite imagery, 16 Islamic religious buildings, five churches and 13 heritage houses were totally destroyed or suffered irreparable structural damage during the liberation (Figure 15 ). Most other damage might probably be repairable but, of course, damage to decorations, sculptures, historical inscriptions, equipment etc. cannot be compensated for in any way. 2. See, e.g.,Melčák & Beránek 2017; Turku 2018; Isakhan & Meskell 2019. 3. The first wave was realized in the second half of July 2014 (11 buildings), the second one in September 2nd, 2014 (4 monuments), the third one in late December 2014 (3 monuments). In 2015, systematic attacks to monuments continued in January (3 monuments) and March (4 monuments). Other destructive episodes either happened isolately or cannot be verifiably linked with the reported waves (Melčák & Beránek 2017, p. 391 ; Nováček et al. 2016, p. 6). 4. The comprehensive destruction has been independently confirmed (UNITAR-UNOSAT 2017). 5. Nováček & Starková 2018 251 Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 – K. Nováček, p. 249-260 Figure 1: Old Mosul with architectural monuments destroyed during the ISIS (Daesh) occupation (June 2014 – July 2017; white) and during the liberation of the city (February to July 2017; red), marked by religious denomination. Hatched area was completely destroyed in June-July 2017. Identification codes of the monuments are in brackets. Satellite image: WorldView-2© DigitalGlobe, Inc., distributed by European Space Imaging GmbH/ARCDATA PRAHA, s.r.o. List of monuments on next page. 252 Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 – K. Nováček, p. 249-260 1. Shrine of al-Imam Yahya ibn al-Qasim (I04) – razed, 2. Shrine of al-Imam ʿAwn al-Din (known as Ibn al-Hasan) (I05) – ruined, 37. Al-Tahra Syriac Ortodox Church (al-Tahra al-Fawqaniyya) (C14) – razed, 38. Mar Hudeni (Ahudemmeh) (C09) – ruined, 3. Mosque of al-Khidr (alternatively al-Jamiʿ al-Ahmar, alJamiʿ al-Mujahidi) (I06) – razed, 39. Mar Kurkis (St. George) Monastery (C23) – ruined, out of the map, 4. Tomb and mosque of al-Nabi Yunus (I07) – razed, 40. English War Cemetery (C27) – ruined, 5. Mosque of Nabi Jirjis (I08) – razed, 41. Al-Sanaye School or Al-Hadba Police Centre (P16) – razed, 6. Mosque and tomb of Qadib al-Ban al-Mawsili (I10) – ruined, 7. Mosque of Hamu al-Qadu (I11) – ruined, 42. Great Mosque of al-Nuri and Minaret al-Hadba (I02–I03) – ruined, 8. Mosque of Nabi Shith (I12) – razed, 43. Mosque and madrasa of al-Ridwani (I48) – probably ruined, 9. Mosque and husayniyya in the al-Faysaliyya Neighbourhood (I14) – razed, 44. Mosque of al-Abariqi (I51) – ruined, 10. Tomb of Ibn al-Athir (Qabr al-Bint), d. 640/1242-43 (I15) – razed, 45. Mosque al-Shahidin (I70) – ruined, 46. Mosque of Mahmud ´Abd al-Jalil al-Khidri (I71) – razed, 11. Masjid of Imam Ibrahim (I16) – ruined, 47. Shatt al-Jawma Mosque – Tomb of Shaykh Ibrahim alNaqshbandi (I73) – ruined, 12. Mosque and tomb of Shaykh Fathi (I18) – razed, 48. Mosque Rabi’yya Khatun (I59) – partly ruined, 13. Mosque of Abu al-ʿAla (I19) – ruined, 49. Mosque al-Khazam (I27) – partly ruined, 14. Mosque and shrine of Nabi Daniyal (I21) – ruined, 50. Mosque of Shaykh al-Shatt (I22) – ruined, 15. Tomb of Shaykh al-Shatt (I22) – razed, 51. Masjid al-Shaykh Abu al-Ulla – ruined, 16. Shrine of ʿAli al-Asghar (Ibn al-Hanafiyya) (I28) – ruined, 52. Mosque Bab al-Jadid (al-Bashir Mosque) – ruined, 17. Mosque (and shrine) of Sultan Uways with cemetery (I29) – ruined, 53. Masjid al-Sha´uri – razed 18. Shrine of Imam ʿAbd al-Rahman (I34) – ruined, 54. Mosque of al-Kawazin – razed, 55. Al-Khallal Mosque – ruined, 19. Mosque and shrine of Imam al-Bahir (I35) – razed, 56. Al-Muta´afi Mosque – razed ? , 20. Mosque and tomb of Imam Muhsin (I37) – ruined, 57. Mosque of ´Uthman al-Khatib – ruined, 21. Shrine and cemetery of ʿIsa Dadah (I44) – ruined, 58. Mosque of Shaykh Muhammad – ruined, 22. Mosque of ʿAjil al-Yawar (I47) – ruined, 23. Hammam al-Saray Mosque, tomb of Shaykh Yunus, and Shrine of al-Sitt Nafisa (I50) – ruined, 24. Hammam al-Umariyya (I69) – razed, 25. Mosque of al-ʿAbbas (I54) – ruined, 59. Mar Guorguis Chaldean Church – ruined, 60. Mar Isha´ya Chaldean Church (C1) – ruined, 61. Church al-Azrá Ancient (Old Church of the Virgin Mary) – ruined, 62. Syriac Catholic Church – ruined, 26. Shrine of Imam Zayd ibn ʿAli (I55) – ruined, 27. Mosque/Shrine of Shah Zanan (called Umm al-Tisʿa) and adjacent cemetery (I57) – ruined, 63. haref Al-Dabakh House – razed, 64. Hana Jerjes House – ruined, 65. Basher Munir House – razed, 28. Madrasa of the ʿAbdal Mosque (I58) – razed, 29. Shrine of Imamayn Hamid wa Mahmud? (adjacent to Mosque of al-Mahmudin/al-Hamidin) (I68) – razed, 66. Hana Michel Hana House – razed, 67. Dawoud Ishak House – razed, 30. Shrine of Imam ʿAli al-Hadi (I36) – ruined, 68. Abdul Rahman House – ruined, 31. Tomb of Shaykh Mansur (I61) – ruined, 69. Bahnam Raban House – razed, 32. Abu al-Hawawin Shrine (I62) – ruined, 70. Anes Kamas House – razed, 33. Mosque/Shrine of Awlad al-Hasan (I63) – razed, 71. Ziyada House – ruined, 34. Mosque of al-Sab´awi (I64) – ruined, 72. Al-Sharabi House – ruined, 35. Mosque al-Bayt al-Tikriti (I 30) – ruined, 73. Al-Tutunji House – ruined, 36. Tomb of Shaykh Rashid Lolan (I67) – razed, 74. An unknown heritage house – razed. 253 Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 – K. Nováček, p. 249-260 Documentation Several institutions and initiatives, both worldwide6 and even biased data obtained in this way are corroborated by an local7 , have been engaged in monitoring Mosul‘s destruction. analysis of a regularly updated set of satellite images. Apart from the extent of the devastation, other information, including the The Monuments of Mosul in Danger Project8 originated as exact date of the incidents as well as any visual material that is a spontaneous activity of a team investigating medieval urban- available, are recorded. The purpose of this is to support possiism in Iraqi Kurdistan since 2006 and it only gradually evolved ble future investigations and the identification of perpetrators. to handle the issue in a complex way and to pose more concep- All data are saved and prepared in the form of an information tual questions than simply document and assess the damages. bank that will form the basis for the future restoration or conNevertheless, the documentation exercise is a core aspect of servation of the monuments. the project and focuses on the gathering of information about The vast majority of the buildings destroyed deliberately the devastation of Mosul‘s heritage through reference to open sources (media reports, social networks, personal witness state- by ISIS (42 of 47) represented Islamic religious structures ments of local informants). Diverse, imprecise and sometimes (mosques, mausoleums, tombs and graves, and one madrasa; Profane; 1 Shi´ite; 1 Cemeteries; 1 Christian; 3 Sunni; 41 Figure 2: Heritage sites destroyed by ISIS in Mosul according to purpose and religious denomination. 6. Particularly Safeguarding the Heritage of the Near East Initiative (ASOR), issuing regular weekly and monthly reports monitoring the situation of the Near Eastern archaeological heritage, or Rashid International, e. V., which considers the Mosul’s case in context of the Iraqi archaeological heritage and cultural human rights. 7. Gilgamesh Center for Antiquities and Heritage Protection, Mosul. 8. The project has been realized since 2015 under the auspices of the Oriental Institute, the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, and is supported by a Strategy AV21 Grant. The team consists of an archaeologist-historian of architecture (Karel Nováček, Palacký University Olomouc), an archaeologist-specialist in remote sensing and GIS (Lenka Starková, University of West Bohemia Plzeň), a historian-specialist in medieval Arabic sources (Miroslav Melčák, Oriental Institute Prague) and a historian focused on radical Islamic movements (Ondřej Beránek, Oriental Institute Prague). 254 Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 – K. Nováček, p. 249-260 Figure 3: Shrine of al-Imam Yahya ibn al-Qasim (I04), 3D digital model (realization by Petr Vavrečka and Monuments of Mosul in Danger Project). To see the 3D Model under Adobe Reader, please click on the image then accept the ”trust this document” conditions. Figure 2). Although they were, in the context of contemporary Mosul, Sunni buildings, many of them, for example the tombs of the Prophet’s family members, used to be venerated by both Sunnis and Shi‘is. Three destroyed monuments were Christian churches; all the remaining churches and monasteries, however, were looted and/or set on fire. One self-standing cemetery (the English war cemetery besides many other cemeteries, associated with religious buildings) was levelled, as well as the Ottoman-period Al-Sanaye School, used until recent as a police centre. Considering the architectural value of the disappeared structures, the most serious loss is represented by a group of 255 Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 – K. Nováček, p. 249-260 fourteen shrines (mashhads) – cenotaphs, considered by Ernst Herzfeld (1879-1948) to be the purest representation of the Mosul Architectural School defined by him and attributed to the reign of the Mosul governor Badr al-Din Lu’lu’ (616/1219– 657/1259)9 . This ‘‘school” 10 represents a distinctive synthesis of Syrian and Iranian formal influences with the local tradition of Christian architecture, which sought to express the political and religious attitudes of Lu’lu’. Only a tiny fraction of this distinctive group has been the subject of an architectural analysis11 (Figures 3 and 4). Two Zengid-period congregational mosques, built in the 560–570s/1170s period – Mosque al-Nuri with its 44 metre high leaning minaret called al-Hadba’12 , and Mosque al-Mujahidi – constitute another invaluable loss. Albeit that they had been rebuilt many times in the Ottoman period and during the 20th century, both structures were the last representatives of the earliest preserved layer of Mosul’s architecture and important foci of local religious life and social memory. The latter statement applies to a group of five mosques dedicated to the prophets Yunus, Jirjis, Khidr, Danyal and Shith, which led to Mosul acquiring the honorific epithet madinat al-anbiya’ (the City of the Prophets). With the exception of Prophet Danyal’s tomb, which was only ‘discovered’ during the first half of the 19th century, all other sites have held a strong inter-religious meaning and a long, rich tradition of local veneration, reaching back to the medieval period or even, in the case of Prophet Yunus, to the pre-Islamic period13 . All these mosques were razed, mostly during the first wave of attacks. Within the group of buildings targeted by ISIS iconoclasm, there are differences in the state of preservation. Some buildings were razed to the ground and their sites were either given over to a new, different use (Jami Nabi Jirjis, Jami Nabi Šith) or have been built up again (Mosque al-Khidr). In such cases, from the archaeological point of view, is their reconstruction impossible. Some sites, however, have been preserved either as ruins (the Minaret al-Hadba, Imam Awn al-Din) or their subterranean parts have been infilled with debris (Imam Yahya, Imam Bahir, Imam Muhsin, Mosque Qatib al-Ban etc.). In these cases it is still possible to see some potential for their careful excavation and conservation. The liberation of the city brought about other serious losses, most notably the fatal damage sustained by the Shaykh al-Shatt Mosque, which was – after the demolition of the alNuri and al-Mujahidi mosques – the oldest preserved architectural monument still standing in the city. Coalition airstrikes led to the collapse of the northern façade of al-Khazam Mosque, the destruction of the lateral wing of the Rabi’yya Khatun Mosque. A distinctive group of decorated minarets between the medieval and Jalili periods (14th-18th centuries) was heavily damaged by terrestrial combat. The extensive damage suffered by Mosul’s heritage houses includes, most significantly, examples such as the al-Tutunji House (conservated as a result of German cooperation between 2005–2010), the Ziyada House, the Sharef al-Dabakh House and many others. At least five late Ottoman riverside palatial houses, which had previously created a distinctive Mosul river-bank panorama, were lost as part of the total razing of the area during the final phase of the battle. On the other hand, several valuable Islamic religious structures survived the aerial bombardment during the battle. Many Ottoman-period mosques in the southern half of the city (the mosques of al-Basha, Shaykh Abdal, al-Juwayjati, al-Umariyya, Umar al-Aswad, al-Umawi, Dawsat Ali and Umm al-Tis’a) stand out as examples of religious buildings unharmed by aerial strikes, even though they stood in urban neighbourhoods that were otherwise totally levelled. This situation also applies to the majority of churches, most of them suffering only light structural damage. This fact can probably be explained by the practice of deliberately avoiding conspicuous religious monuments in the city on the part of those who were engaged in planning the aerial bombardment. Some of the aforementioned sites, as for example Mosques al-Juwayjati and al-Basha, are being the subject of rapid renovation, funded and organized by religious endowments14 . 9. Sarre & Herzfeld 1920, p. 238-239. 10. Much of what is usually attributed to the Badr period comes, in fact, from the later Ilkhanid and Jala’irid revitalisation of the city. 11. Sarre & Herzfeld 1920, p. 249-88; al-Janabi 1982; Uluçam 1989; McClary 2017. 12. Tabbaa 2002. 13. Melčák & Beránek 2017, p. 393-396. 14. Monuments of Mosul in Danger Facebook page, posted in June 4, 2018. 256 Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 – K. Nováček, p. 249-260 Other Objectives of the Project The project has also paid attention to the rationale and ideological background behind the cultural violence. Iconoclasm, in line with the radical Salafi doctrine of the ‘levelling of graves’ (taswiyat al-qubur), has been recognized as one of the leading motivating forces behind the disappearance of Mosul’s historical structures15 , particularly Islamic funeral monuments, cemeteries and some of the mosques containing graves or which were strongly associated with the veneration of saints. Any interpretation of events can never be completely straightforward since individual incidents have their own specific agency16 . example, Mosque al-Mujahidi (al-Khidr) most probably contained, at least until its demolition, an original and not fully recognized nucleus from the late 12th century, which corresponded to a large hypostyle mosque, formally standing very close to Mosque al-Nuri, its slightly earlier counterpart. Another site, the lesser-known shrine of Imam al-Bahir, situated in the northwestern part of the city, was apparently misdated by previous research and cannot be ascribed to Badr al-Din Lu’lu’s building activity. Instead, it seems to represent a unique example of the mashhad building tradition, which continued into the Ilkhanid Given the generally low level of knowledge about Mosul‘s period (the early 14th century). architectural legacy, it is worth taking this final opportunity to The construction of 3D digital models represents an iminitiate an ex post analysis and interpretation of individual sites. portant enhancement of the interpretation potential in relation In several cases, the quality of collected data (the published de- to the destroyed structures. In isolated cases, where the visual scriptions of structures, plans, photographs and movies) has fa- and planimetric data are sufficient, we have succeeded in concilitated a re-evaluation of the monuments, as well as a revi- structing models with the help of intersection photogrammesion of their chronology and/or formal development. Thus, for try and the digital transformation of overlapping terrestrial im- Figure 4: Shrine of al-Imam ʿAwn al-Din (I05), 3D nontextured digital reconstruction model, a view in the northwestern corner (realization by Lucie Pospíšilová and Monuments of Mosul in Danger Project, work in progress). 15. Melčák & Beránek 2017, p. 399-401. 16. Harmanşah 2015, p. 175-176. 257 Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 – K. Nováček, p. 249-260 agery. The precision and accuracy of models depends on the amount and quality of the available imagery, which is generally rather low. Even in the case of the best documented structures (the minaret al-Hadba – Figure 5 or the shrine of Imam Yahya – Figure 3) we were forced to resign on a digital reconstruction of the interiors due to a critical lack of data. Mashhad Imam Awn al-Din represents an exception – Figure 4, though some parts of its reconstruction remain hypothetical. Despite this, we view the creation and improvement of digital photogrammetric models as being the best solution in our quest to re-create Mosul’s historical cityscape, in no small measure due to its iterativity. Updating the models by reference to additional data will hopefully render them more and more precise and accurate, theoretically up to a level where a reconstruction project can be implemented. Animated digital models are, in addition to their scientific value, the best means by which to facilitate the public presentation and promotion of Mosul’s lost heritage, which remains an integral part of the project. Apart from undertaking countless interviews, lectures and media entries worldwide, the project team was responsible for preparing an exhibition (presented in 2017, consecutively in Prague, Academy of Science and in Taipei, Taiwan, Central Library) and for publishing a booklet about the architectural heritage of Mosul17 . In collaboration with NGO Rashid international, which supports initiatives concerned with the safeguarding of Iraqi archaeological heritage, we were able to submit a report to a special rapporteur from the UN about the intentional destruction of cultural heritage in Northern Iraq18 . Figure 5: Minaret al-Hadba (I03), 3D digital model (realization by Petr Vavrečka and Monuments of Mosul in Danger Project). The Future Outlook During the Kuwait International Conference for the Reconstruction of Iraq (Kuwait City, Kuwait 12-14 February 2018), the renovation of Mosul was stated as being one of the priorities in the post-war reconstruction plan for Iraq, both by the Iraqi government and by the international community19 . On this occasion, the UNESCO Director-General launched an initiative entitled ‘‘Reviving the Mosul Spirit: the Recovery of the City of Mosul through Culture and Education‘‘20 . At the beginning of May 2018, UNESCO, together with the UAE’s Minister of Culture, announced a five year project aimed at rebuilding the Mosque al-Nuri and the Minaret al-Hadba, the paramount symbolic landmarks of the city21 . However, the destiny of other, less conspicuous structures, as well as authentic urban neighbourhoods, remains precarious as it depends on many unpre- 17. Nováček et al. 2017. 18. Nováček et al. 2016. 19. Khalil 2018; Anonym. 2018a. 20. UNESCO Executive Board 204 EX/32 2018; a critical reflection by Isakhan & Meskell 2019. 21. Anonym. 2018b. 258 Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 – K. Nováček, p. 249-260 dictable economic and political factors. No protection measures for the old city have been taken so far, and the lack of medium and long-term planning is apparent22 . Even a solution to completely replace the old city with a modern city centre is currently being considered: this opinion has strong support across all social levels and professional groups in Mosul and is strongly promoted by mayor of Mosul and the Governorate of Ninawa23 . The on-going removal of debris from the old city represents a serious threat to many of the surviving monuments: several of heritage structures flanking the main streets have been removed along with the rubble. This was the fate of substantial part of the late Ottoman khan (karavanserai) Hamu al-Qadu – the last preserved khan of the old city, situated in its southeastern commercial sector – which was demolished shortly before 11th February 201824 . These acts are a consequence of the current non-functional heritage management in Mosul, as well as, in all likelihood, the implementation of new planning principles in the preparation of ‘dubaization’, a radical architectural transformation of the old city, aimed at the development of a modern commercial centre. The key role of the international scholarly community is to help their Iraqi colleagues to register, promote and defend the value of what remains of Mosul’s old city, which is still facing a number of dangers.25 22. The necessity for emergency measures regarding the damaged cultural heritage remains on a general, proclamative level (UNESCO Executive Board 204 EX/32 2018). 23. al-Ta´i 2018. 24. Monuments of Mosul in Danger Facebook page, posted in February 11, 2018. 25. I am indebted to anonymous reviewer for comments and to Steven Patten for proof reading of this paper: all mistakes are, nevertheless, mine. 259 Rout de l’Orient, Actes II – 2019 – K. Nováček, p. 249-260 References Anonym., 2018a, «Kuwait conference pledges $30 billion for Iraq reconstruction», The Bagdad Post [14/02/2018] URL http: //www.thebaghdadpost.com/en/story/23746/Kuwait-conference-pledges-30-billion-for-Iraq-reconstruction. Anonym., 2018b, «UNESCO announces five year plan to rebuild Al-Nouri Mosque», Al-Shahid [04/05/2018] URL https:// alshahidwitness.com/unesco-rebuild-al-nouri-mosque/. Harmanşah O ̈ ., 2015, «ISIS, Heritage, and the Spectacles of Destructions in the Global Media», Near Eartern Archaeolo 78, 3, p. 170–177. Isakhan B. & Meskell L., 2019, «UNESCO’s project to ‘Revive the Spirit of Mosul’: Iraqi and Syrian opinion on heritage reconstruction after the Islamic State», International Journal of Heritage Studi 25. doi:10.1080/13527258.2019.1578988. al-Janabi T. J., 1982, Studi in Medieval Iraqi Architecture, Republic of Iraq, Ministry of Culture and Information, State Organization of Antiquities and Heritage, Baghdad. Khalil S., 2018, «Kuwait to host donors’ conference on Iraq reconstruction», Rawabet Center for Research and Strategic Studi [01/02/2018] URL https://rawabetcenter.com/en/?p=5172. McClary R. P., 2017, «Remembering the Imām Yaḥyā Ibn al-Qāsim Mashhad in Mosul», Iraq 79, p. 129–154. Melčák M. & Beránek O., 2017, «ISIS’s Destruction of Mosul’s Historical Monuments: Between Media Spectacle and Religious Doctrine», International ournal of Islamic Architecture 6, p. 389–415. Nováček K., Melčák M., Starková L. & Beránek O., 2017, Monuments of Mosul in Danger, Center of Administration and Operation CAS, Praha. Nováček K., Mühl S., Fobbe S., Matthews R., Koliński R. & Nieuwenhuijse O., 2016, «The Intentional Destruction of Cultural Heritage in Iraq as a Violation of Human Rights», Submission for the United Nations Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights, URL http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/CulturalRights/DestructionHeritage/NGOS/RASHID. pdf. Nováček K. & Starková L., 2018, «Mosul Liberation: Architectural Heritage Damage Assessment, A Preliminary Report», Unpublished MS. Sarre F. & Herzfeld E., 1920, Archäologische Reise im Euphrat und Tigr -begiet, Forschungen zur islamischen Kunst, vol. II, D. Reimer, Berlin. Tabbaa Y., 2002, «The Mosque of Nūr al-Dīn in Mosul, 1170-1172», Annal Islamologiq 36, p. 339–360. al-Ta´i N., 2018, «Ahali al-mawsil al-qadima yashraʿuna fi iʿadat al-iʿmar baʿda al-maʿarik», Sawt al-Imarat [01/01/2018] URL www.ehmiratesvoice.com. Turku H., 2018, The destruction of cultural property Switzerland. a weapon of war : ISIS in Syria and Iraq, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, Uluçam A., 1989, Irak’taki Türk Mimari Eserleri, Kültür Bakanlığı, Ankara. UNESCO Executive Board 204 EX/32, 2018, «Reviving the mosul spirit: The recovery of the city through culture and education. the human dimension at the centre of iraq’s recovery», Report, UNESCO, URL unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0026/ 002618/261863E.pdf. UNITAR-UNOSAT, 2017, «Damage Assessment of Old City, Mosul, Ninawa Governorate, Iraq, Imagery Analysis: 18 July 2017, published 21 July 2017, version 1.0.», Report, Geneve, URL http://www.unitar.org/unosat/node/44/2631?utm_source= unosat-unitar&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=maps. 260 ISSN 2272-8120 9 772272 812001