������Ƶ

RIYADH: Every culture preserves its heritage in a different way. In the West, it is a science; in many non-Western societies, it is a shared responsibility passed down through generations, according to experts.

Around the world, societies approach heritage through lenses shaped by their philosophies, traditions and education systems. Western and non-Western methodologies, though different in approach, share the same goal — to safeguard heritage as a living resource for the future. 

“The differences between Western and Non-Western approaches are rooted in the histories of the various countries and regions of the world,” Giovanni Fontana Antonelli, consultant at the Heritage Commission, told Arab News.

He explained that the Western approach to preservation emerged in Europe following the Industrial Revolution when newfound stability and wealth spurred interest in ancient civilizations. Groups of intellectuals, artists, philosophers, archeologists and art historians began to study how to protect those vestiges, especially for the newly born middle class.

Two leading figures shaped early conservation theories in Europe: John Ruskin in the UK and Eugene Viollet-Le-Duc in France.

“Circa 200 years ago, two main schools of thought shaped the future of the theory and practice of heritage conservation, in Europe, in North America and worldwide,” said Antonelli, adding these theories spread throughout the colonial reach of European powers such as Britain and France, as well as Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Holland, Germany and Italy. 

Although these approaches differed in methods, they shared what Antonelli described as “the consciousness of living in the tradition of greater knowledge compared to others in the world.”

“This corpus of knowledge … was substantially enriched throughout the 20th century with the experiences of several European countries. (With) the Italian School of Conservation, for example, Cesare Brandi, laid the foundation of the ‘conservation and restoration method’,” he said. 

The principles were later formalized in the Venice Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS, 1964), a landmark document that summarized decades of accumulated expertise. 

Antonelli said the key document was “still embedded in a Eurocentric vision,” and it took 30 more years for global discussions to open up to non-Western perspectives.

“The Nara Conference, organized by UNESCO, ICOMOS and ICCROM (International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property) and held in Japan in 1994, was a game-changer in the debate about authenticity, one of the key criteria of the entire debate on conservation (as included in the Venice Charter),” Antonelli said. “For the first time a non-Western approach was acknowledged and recognized internationally.”

Since then, the field has evolved. While western institutions still dominate due to their academic and financial resources among other reasons, non-Western practices have gained recognition for their locally grounded and community-based methods.

“Non-western approaches are well informed in Asian countries, such as Japan, Korea and China, but also in South-East Asia, where the restoration of ancient temples and any other historic buildings follows customary restoration protocols that periodically substitute the architectural elements of the historic buildings, without altering their authentic nature,” he explained.

He highlighted unique traditions in Sub-Saharan Africa, where heritage conservation is often a communal effort.

“The annual maintenance of earthen plasters in the Sahel region is an event that involves all the citizens of the town in a festival that has strong ties also with the intangible aspects of cultural heritage,” he said. 

In ������Ƶ, heritage preservation carriers both tangible and spiritual significance. The Kingdom’s approach emphasizes maintaining not only material artifacts but also the values and stories attached to them, recognizing how understanding the past helps shape the nation’s future. 

Earlier this month, the Saudi Heritage Commission hosted International Restoration Week in Riyadh, bringing together experts and enthusiasts. Among them was Faris Al-Harmah, a teacher and craftsman who has practiced traditional woodwork for more than 20 years.

“In the past, they used oil to preserve wood because it increases the life of the wood as it penetrates,” he said. “The most famous type of oil is the Danish oil.”

He added that this method, although common today, has deep historical roots. Among the first people to use oil in preserving wooden objects were the Vikings.

Al-Harmah added preservation techniques must be adapted to the object’s purpose. For kitchen utensils, for instance, oil is not used because it might oxidize and produce a harmful substance unsafe for human consumption. Instead, beeswax is used.

He also pointed out how, in the past, Saudis used animal fat to protect large wooden doors from friction and environmental damage — an example of resourceful, sustainable preservation before the advent of industrial materials.

Such methods reflect a distinctly local philosophy: one rooted in practicality, community knowledge and sustainable environmental adaptation.

As heritage professionals increasingly seek balance between preservation theory and lived tradition, experts like Antonelli believe the dialogue between Western and non-Western methodologies is crucial for the future of conservation.