Conservation of heritage is one of the ways where cultural past is celebrated, as well as knowledge from the same is gleaned for the future. The conservation methods are looked at from various lenses, referred to within this research as “models.” These conservation models may be applicable across multiple examples of architecture or would be very specific to any system of design involved. Within this research, the “model” of conservation is looked at as a building-level intervention. This “model” is taken for application onto the site, as the density of knowledge regarding the heritage is extracted. This research envisions the illustration of the two divergent models of conservation, within the common patronage of Marathas. Here, affirming the divergent nature of conservation models, are various case examples of Maratha temples, spread across Maharashtra. The research is a comparative study of these temples, whose origins lay in multitudes of historic elements such as the architecture of the Yadavas of the ninth century and the Orissan Architecture of the eleventh century. Conservation models for the same are seen in two sets of systems. The first is contextual models of conservation, wherein heritage as an element is looked at as a product of its context and its dialectics between setting and spatial interactions. The second is the stylistic model of conservation, where heritage as an element is looked at as a product of its craft techniques, architectural expression and modularity achieved, due to its socio-political exchanges. These temples are compared on the parameters of its typology, site context, and architectural style. The ontological observation is that despite these temples being under the same patronage, divergent models of “building-element-specific” and “building-structure-specific” models are derived from the architectural history of these temples, which are contextual and regionalist in form.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Multivalences in Conservation Approaches—Comparing Conservation Models for Maratha Temples of Krishna River Valley, Satara and Nagpur City

  • Vishnu K. Suresh,
  • Himali Hardas

摘要

Conservation of heritage is one of the ways where cultural past is celebrated, as well as knowledge from the same is gleaned for the future. The conservation methods are looked at from various lenses, referred to within this research as “models.” These conservation models may be applicable across multiple examples of architecture or would be very specific to any system of design involved. Within this research, the “model” of conservation is looked at as a building-level intervention. This “model” is taken for application onto the site, as the density of knowledge regarding the heritage is extracted. This research envisions the illustration of the two divergent models of conservation, within the common patronage of Marathas. Here, affirming the divergent nature of conservation models, are various case examples of Maratha temples, spread across Maharashtra. The research is a comparative study of these temples, whose origins lay in multitudes of historic elements such as the architecture of the Yadavas of the ninth century and the Orissan Architecture of the eleventh century. Conservation models for the same are seen in two sets of systems. The first is contextual models of conservation, wherein heritage as an element is looked at as a product of its context and its dialectics between setting and spatial interactions. The second is the stylistic model of conservation, where heritage as an element is looked at as a product of its craft techniques, architectural expression and modularity achieved, due to its socio-political exchanges. These temples are compared on the parameters of its typology, site context, and architectural style. The ontological observation is that despite these temples being under the same patronage, divergent models of “building-element-specific” and “building-structure-specific” models are derived from the architectural history of these temples, which are contextual and regionalist in form.