The Venice Charter: A Bibliography

“The Actuality of the Venice Charter.” Scientific Journal: The Venice Charter 1964–2004: ICOMOS 4 (ICOMOS, 1994).

This article is a summary of the commentaries made during the 1990 International Symposium. It reviews the praises and critiques of the Venice Charter identified by the national committees, as well as the recommendation for the creation of a “parallel text” that would remedy the charter’s shortcomings.

Adam, Robert. “Does Heritage Dogma Destroy Living History?” Context: Institute of Historic Building Conservation 79 (2003): 7–11.

In this article Robert Adam criticizes the Athens, Venice, and Krakow Charters for only reinforcing the “principles of the previous document,” a phenomena he refers to as “mission creep.” To explain this concept, he compares the three charters.

Ahmad, Yahaya. “The Scope and Definitions of Heritage: From Tangible to Intangible.” International Journal of Heritage Studies 12, no. 3 (2006): 292–300.

This article compares the Venice Charter with subsequent charters adopted by UNESCO and ICOMOS and discusses how the definitions and principles of the charter have been reinterpreted over time.

Apell, Robert. “The Charter of Venice and the Conservation of Monuments of the Modern Movement.” First International DOCOMOMO Conference: Conference Proceedings, DOCOMOMO, 1991.

This article discusses the need for the Venice Charter and the historical context surrounding its creation. The author also discusses the Modern Movement and the preservation challenges modern architecture presents to the charter’s principles. The author pinpoints articles from within the charter and how they are compatible (or not) with modern architecture.

“The Application of the Venice Charter.” Scientific Journal: The Venice Charter 1964–2004, ICOMOS 5 (2004): 59.

This short article discusses the translation of the Venice Charter and “complementary charters” that have been created since the 1964 document.

Araoz, Gustavo F. Jr., and Brian L. Schmuecker. Discrepancies Between U.S. National Preservation Policy and the Charter of Venice. ICOMOS, 1987.

The catalyst for this paper was the growing concern within the field that preservation in the United States was diverging from the restoration norms and practices of the Venice Charter. The authors compare the history and contents of the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation with the charter to support or disprove this concern.

Bouras, Charalambos. “Strict and Less Strict Adherence to the Principles of Anastylosis of the Ancient Monuments in Greece.” The Acropolis Restoration News 9 (2009): 2–8.

In this article the author briefly discusses the history of the Venice Charter. He mentions that while nothing within the charter has changed, “discussions on bringing it up to date have been held two times.” The remainder of the document discusses the principles of the Venice Charter and how they have been applied to the restoration of ancient monuments throughout Greece.

Chalturin, A. G. “The Fifth General Assembly of ICOMOS—1978.” Scientific Journal: Thirty Years of ICOMOS 5 (1995): 38–39.

This publication summarizes the Fifth General Assembly, held in Moscow and Suzdal in 1978. The summary mentions the assembly’s proposed amendments to the Venice Charter and the motivation for suggested changes.

Chung, Seung-Jin. “Architectural Conservation in the East Asian Cultural Context with Special Reference to Korea.” Ph.D. Diss., University of New South Wales, 1998.

Dalibard, Jacques. “The Next 20 Years.” APT Bulletin 21, no. 1 (1989): 4–8.

This article provides a brief history of the Venice Charter and outlines the main criticisms of the document. The publication also discusses the ICOMOS Assembly in Moscow in which a revised version of the charter was proposed. The author discusses his opposition to the proposed changes as well as his criticisms of the original charter.

Erder, Cevat. “The Venice Charter Under Review.” Scientific Journal: The Venice Charter 1964–2004: ICOMOS 4 (ICOMOS, 1994).

This article summarizes some of the criticisms of the Venice Charter, specifically those that “led some experts to propose that the Venice Charter might well be expanded or changed further to reflect the broader interests in historic conservation.” The author also discusses “the pros and cons of this argument by conducting a critical review of the Venice Charter in order to point out why and in what respects the...