CC BY
19TOURISM AND RECREATION
THE INFLUENCE OF PLANTS ON HISTORICAL HERITAGE IN THE COUNTRYSIDE LANDSCAPES
Assoc. Prof. Galev Emil PhD and Gurkova Maria PhD and Galev Nikolay
Bulgaria, Sofia, University of Forestry
Abstract. The influence of vegetation on visual impact of historical monuments and the physical influence of plants on cultural heritage is the focus of discussion in the paper. The visual impact of monuments on the hikers and excursionists sidelong trails is described in detail. It has found that it largely depends on the surrounding vegetation. The physical influence of trees on archaeological sites and other heritage objects themself is also studied in this research. A great number of practical examples have been examined with the purpose of drawing some general conclusions from this problem to the advantage of landscape design practice. Using color photographs took during the field research conducted in selected rural areas located in different parts of Bulgaria and observations from a number of different positions for a lot of monuments and memorials the survey shows a considerable role of vegetation in visual impact of monuments over the observers. The results of analysis have revealed the categorically finding that some of identified mature and aged trees around objects of heritage are authentic and should be preserved as much time as possible, but others can seriously damage cultural heritage with their roots or branches. The research concludes that from the standpoint of aesthetic value or attractiveness the vegetation often plays a leading role. It is not a detailed study of compositional principles for the formation of spaces around the monuments, but demonstrates the complexity of the problem and gave some results in addition to the theoretical foundations in this respect.
Keywords: Vegetation, Historical Monuments and Memorials, Visual impact, Archeological Objects, Authenticity, Cultural Heritage
Introduction. The monuments and memorials and cultural heritage are attractive landscape elements and are often the main focus in the observation. They are usually situated in picturesque landscape sceneries as accent features and are almost always surrounded by trees or other vegetation. The architecture components of the heritage and surrounded vegetation form a specific pair, which combines natural, cultural and historical values. They serve as emphasis points in the landscape and form the local and regional identity of the countryside. This paper should be read as an attempt to clarify some arguments in conjunction with the question "What role do plants play in visual impact and physical survival of cultural and historical monuments?". It aim is not to give specific guidelines for design of the monuments, but only to highlight the key factors for monuments' vision, which are determined by surrounding plants. Although the scenic beauty metrics are quite debatable and controversial case it is hoped that the conclusions of this paper will facilitate needed discussion on vegetation appropriateness and usefulness in monument's landscape designs.
Material and methods. Cultural and historical monuments are very important elements of heritage in every country in the world. Many of them, such as memorials and architectural structures that serve to perpetuate some event or person are arranged with tree, shrub and herbaceous vegetation. The same can be said for some archaeological sites with the difference that vegetation there appeared by itself. In all these cases, the vegetation plays a particular role that is much more important than its role without the object of heritage. The vegetation, especially trees around the monuments is an integral component of cultural landscapes. These trees are important historical symbols and features too. They are mostly located at sides or intersections of roads, in streets, squares and in the open spaces and are important cultural heritage and historical legacy in the landscape. The monuments are often set in impressive landscape sceneries as marked features and are usually accompanied by one or more trees. The architecture and the tree(s) form a specific pair of monuments, which combines natural, cultural and historical values. (Toth, A., 2016). Stoycheva and Tzolova (2001) and many other authors have tried to identify the specific preferences of the people and their criteria for picturesqueness and attractiveness of the landscape "paintings". It can be said that in our country there
is a theoretical vacuum in this case, but current research and practical developments give hope for successful and positive developments of this problematic. This study seeks to determine how exactly the vegetation generates the attractiveness of the monuments and memorials, and in what circumstances it increase or decrease their visual impact. According to the majority of authors like Stoycheva and Kabatliyska (2002), Kouneva et al. (2009), etc. the most impact on human perceptions have shaped and sized forming plants that form the landscapes. They create a general impression, but mainly in the detail are essential contours, colors, scents and even sounds that are characteristic of the vegetation. There have also been made numerous surveys. Ulrich (1986) explores such psychological reactions in human comprehension of vegetation in the landscape and found that trees with thick stems and crowns are perceived positively by the observer, while those with thin stems and crowns developed only create bad feelings. Same opinion supports Brivot (1982), regarding "... mighty old trees, their crowns are spread of tens of meters and attracts their shade in summer, while the effect of the game of light and shadow in their crown is an outstanding ...". There have been shown particularly spectacular specimens of various types, including forms of weeping beech. General rule the author is that the viewer should be given the opportunity to fully enjoy the magnificence of old trees, so they advised to leave in small groups where they can be the dominant element, and before them in all cases have a large open area. Stoycheva and Tzolova (2001) estimated high beauty and diversity resulting from the spring flowering trees and shrubs in the forest landscape. The same notes Kabatliyska (2007) determining that people are not impressed by some of the colors that make up the natural background in parks or in the landscape, namely blue, green and brown. Emotional impact of the white color of flowering trees and shrubs depends on surrounding objects. This impact is positive when it is white in combination with pale colors, but with bright and dark colors, it manifests itself in strong and striking contrasts that can cause fatigue. White colors on cloudy days make the landscapes more bright and pleasant. Another source of vivid effects in the landscape has the fruit colors of ornamental trees and shrubs. Significant theoretical contribution to the development of the issue of visual assessment of the landscape is the study of Kurbatov (1988). He structured a set of visual characteristics and created a system of six indicators for evaluation including: size and size scale; canopy; configuration, visual barriers, visual magic tricks. Visual perception of the landscape by the author is a function of the plastic structure of the terrain and vegetation. The Directives in respect of forest landscape design developed by the Forestry Commision (1994) recommended the design process to start with an assessment of the landscape as the main criterion to be visible, and those sectors which can be seen from most locations receive the highest score. Buhyoff (1986) developed statistical models for predicting the beauty of sight to the trees and within them. The same issue is addressed by Colvin (1973). He introduces an indicator called "sculpture of the green forms" which examines the spatial structure of tree-distances, but uses only visual criteria. Stoycheva, M. (2016) and a number of other authors used computer simulations of landscapes for their aesthetic evaluation.
In conclusion we can say that the attempts made to establish the psychological effects of different categories of visitors to the compositional elements and environmental conditions for relaxation (volume plant, flowers, water areas, architectural park elements, open spaces, panoramic views, etc.) have not made generally valid findings, it is impossible to formulate what all people can subjectively like in one place. However it seems pretty clear, how the landscape image remains in their minds, namely through visual memories for expression of relief, herbal and other natural and anthropogenic components of landscapes.
Open spaces around the monuments provide the best opportunities for visual perceptions of tourists and analysis of landscapes in terms of landscape architects. There, the field of surveillance is the most spacious and gives a good choice of perspective. Since each level of monitoring we have a different horizon and a different distance to a pictorial plane. This determines as important different plans in space. The main purpose of this research work is to point out the importance of plant design of historical and cultural monuments in the landscape.
Results and discussions, including research limits and advantages. In this part of the study are used more pictures and less comments, because it is difficult to systematize some subjective sense of aesthetics. Through comparisons are presented both positive and negative effects caused by vegetation around some monuments.
Figure 1 convinces us that vegetation affects particularly strong creating a contrast in color terms, and thus allowing the monument to stand out in space and to be seen more easily and to be highlighted more convincing.
Fig.1. Monuments highlighted by vegetation that enhances their effect
Fig. 2. Inferior and unsupported vegetation depersonalize the monument
Fig. 3. Monuments situated but not harbored in the plant environment
Figure 2 shows the negative effect that causes a poor maintenance of plant environment of monuments. In figure 3 we can see how important the spatial distribution of vegetation in the surrounding area of the monument is. In some cases the vegetation diminishes and "blurs" the architectural volumes of monuments and instead to focus on themselves incorrectly located vegetation distracted gaze or concentrate it in other directions.
Fig. 4. Vegetation which competes and decreases the impact of the monument
There are monuments that have existed for years and even centuries. In cases where around them is planted lasting high tree (Figure 4), it "outgrows" monument itself and begins to compete with its size and even surpasses it and shifted or hidden from view of the observer. Sometimes the trees themselves act as monuments (Figure 5). As well as any other focus of the urban or natural environment the monuments should be placed in an appropriate and consistent visual frame. This framework or frameworks are essential for their full acceptance by all sides that are expressive or intended for exposure. Therefore, the frame itself may be different, ie unilateral, or on both sides, and sometimes even closed, for example from all sides. In almost all cases, the visual framework of the monuments in the world is being built with tree or other decorative or natural vegetation (Figure 6).
Fig. 5. Cases where the vegetation itself is a monument
Besides the visual framework it is very large the importance of background on which a monument stands more or less spectacular. Usually this background is provided by plants too (Figure 7). Sometimes the background instead of helping to highlight the monument causing the opposite: neglected and demeaned or "hidden" it from the view. Figure 8 shows some positive examples of successful backgrounds built behind the monuments. The contrast is basically for a spectacular display
of monuments and this is achieved relatively easily, even using the natural vegetation with good knowledge of the morphological features of plants and their seasonal events.
Fig. 6. Well framed monuments in visual frameworks
Fig. 7. The background that monuments stand out is of great importance for their impact
The impact of some monuments depends on the location of the observer. From some perspectives vegetation might played absolutely no role, and from other points of observation to exert a decisive influence on the effects of the monument. Even those trees located at considerable distances from the monument can significantly influence the visual perception of the monument. For a compositional understanding of such complex spatial relationships it is need a comprehensive landscape design project for the area around the monument.
Fig. 8. Successfully created background of vegetation in front of which convincingly stand monuments and their impact is highly
Conclusions. The trees and other vegetation located around monuments can play an important role in increasing of cultural and historical monuments' impact in the landscape. In some cases they can increase significantly this impact. On the other hand trees, shrub and invasive vegetation can destabilise the impact of some monuments and decrease their nobleness and gravity.
Artistic process during landscape design always requires creating spectacular views until we get the whole picture in particular as regards of a monument. Within an urban environment we have to comply strictly with the architectural framework, but in rural and forest areas we have to make much more using vegetation as a means of expression and to take into account a lot of principles and know morphological and environmental features of ornamental plants.
In order to make the design project more adequate to the monument and to ensure opportunely construction of an acceptable environment around it is advisable to use existing tree groups and massifs, which immediately or after a partial reconstruction could assume the functions of the relevant part of the perspective view. In this case, some essential principles, combining parts of park perspective methods and spatial composition can make design process much meaningful and the resulting monument exterior more picturesque and attractive. Such principles must be sufficiently simple, fast and effective to provide an aesthetic landscape design.
REFERENCES
1. Toth, A., (2016) Sacral Monuments and Trees as Heritage in the Landscape, Small Sacral Architecture & Memorial Trees as Symbolic Landscape Features, In: The 5th LE:NOTRE Landscape Forum, Landscape: From Natural to Cultural from; 16th - 20th March 2016 in Pafos, Cyprus.
2. Brivot F. (1982) L'ombre des grands arbress. L'ami des jardins et de la maison No 685.
3. Buhyoff G. (1986) Prediction of Scenic quality for Southern Pine Stands. Forest Science No 3: 769-778.
4. Colvin B. (1973) Land and Landscape. Ed. J. Murray, 414 p.
5. Forestry Commision (1994) Forest Landscape Design - Guidelines. HMSO, London.
6. Kabatliyska Z. (2007) Flowers in the Bulgarian monasteries - interior and exterior, traditions and future. "Vita nova' Work Shop - Klissoura monastery, 10-21 July, 2007. Academia Danubiana, Vol. 5: 10-13.
7. Kouneva Tz., Kabatliyska Z., Petrova R., Jancheva G. (2009) Annual wild flowering (Moorish) meadows. Avangard Prima, Sofia, ISBN: 978954323326-7, 84 p.
8. Kurbatov Y. (1988) Architectural forms and natural landscapes - composite connection., Leningrad, University of Leningrad Publisher. (in Russian).
9. Stoycheva M., Tzolova G. (2001) About some dynamic accents and their visual and aesthetic perception in nature landscape. Jubilee book, University of forestry.
10. Stoycheva M., Kabatliyska Z. (2002) Influence of floral compositions upon human psychological condition. ECLAS, Budapest conference.
11. Stoycheva M. (2016) A Spatial Method in the Park Design, PhD thesis, University of Forestry, Sofia, Bulgaria.
12. Ulrich R. (1986) Human responses to vegetation and landscapes. Landscape and urban planning 13, No 1: 29-44.
