The Manifesto Villafranca del Bierzo - Part 2

MANIFESTO - SECTION 2:

DEFENSE OF CAMINO HERITAGE, DEFINING AND WAY-MARKING CAMINO TRAILS

This is a difficult one for me.  I agree and support all of the proposals under this section. 

But, I have doubts about the validity of the so-called ‘ONE ROUTE’ called the Camino de Santiago pilgrimage route, which was created by the Council of Europe in 1984 – 1987 and culminated in the “ONE ROUTE” being added to the World Heritage list in 1993 . 

For a more educated opinion than mine, click here for an informed article about the validity of the Council of Europe and World Heritage declarations on the Camino de Santiago pilgrimage route - http://pilgrim.peterrobins.co.uk/santiago/heritage.html  

I must add a disclaimer before I even start on this post!

Disclaimer: 

• I LOVE THE CAMINO. 
• I HAVE WALKED TO SANTIAGO 9 TIMES IN 14 YEARS.
• I HAVE HELD UMPTEEN PRACTICAL WORKSHOPS TO HELP PEOPLE PLANNING TO WALK THE CAMINO ROUTES. 
• I HAVE WRITTEN 3 BOOKS ON THE PRACTICAL ASPECTS OF THE CAMINO.
• I FORMED A COMPANY IN 2010 TO TAKE SMALL GROUPS OF LIKE-MINDED PEOPLE ON THE CAMINO. 
• I ADMIRE AND SUPPORT ANY AND ALL WORK DONE TO PRESERVE AND PROTECT THE CAMINO.
• WHETHER I AM OF THE OPINION THAT ANY OF THE TRAILS IN EUROPE IDENTIFIED FOR WORLD HERITAGE STATUS ARE ‘AUTHENTIC’ OR NOT, I ACCEPT THAT THE ‘CAMINO’ AS KNOW IT IS THE ONLY ‘CAMINO’ WE’VE GOT, AND AS A WORLD HERITAGE SITE IT MUST BE PROTECTED AND PRESERVED.  

Now - back to the Manifesto.

DEFINING THE CAMINO TRAILS, DEFENSE OF CAMINO HERITAGE

 

Defining the Camino trails and defence of the Camino Heritage can be discussed as one heading – in that order.

Many academics have argued that the only routes which can be positively identified as being ‘pilgrimage routes’ to the tomb of Saint James are those in Galicia.  The pilgrimage to the tomb of Saint James was a Galician invention.  It spread to the rest of Spain, then to all of Europe and now it is a global phenomenon.  The only starting place we can be sure of is Coruna and because that route is only 75km pilgrims who walk from there do not qualify for a Compostela.

 

Like a myriad of rivulets and streams flowing into a great lake, the further away from the area surrounding the city of Santiago de Compostela, the more problematic it becomes to identify the many different paths taken by medieval pilgrims, let alone trying to establish ‘one route’ as the only pilgrims ‘Way’. 

(The Camino de Santiago cannot be positively identified in the same way as other World Heritage sites, such as, for instance, the Great Wall of China.)

“While the course of the different routes is generally known, very little of them survive in anything approaching their original form.”  (Council of Europe) 

Getting back to FICS and AMIGOS who are the guardians of the Camino.

It must be really frustrating for them when the same findings and proposals are reached after almost every congress, conference, symposium or meeting of the different organizations dealing with the Camino since 1999.  This is not the first time there has been a Manifesto calling for UNESCO to list the Camino de Santiago on the ‘World Heritage in Danger list’. 

Ten years ago the YESA NO campaign mobilised thousands of supporters at rallies to protest against the enlargement of the Yesa dam in Aragon.  http://www.yesano.com/camino_noticias.htm

They applied to have that part of the Camino added to the World Heritage in Danger list. 

At first UNESCO’s response was that the section of the Camino in danger was not the same as that which was covered in the 1993 World Heritage listing.  In the end, UNESCO reported that “a compromise solution put forward for the Yesa Dam was found and agreed upon by ICOMOS after they were assured that part of the original Route, which would be submerged by the heightening of the Dam, would be preserved in a similar way to the section now beneath the concrete runway of the airport of Santiago de Compostela, which has already been accepted as part of the World Heritage property.”

Four years ago, in December 2010, representatives of more than eighty Jacobean and other organizations from various European and South American countries signed a document in Santiago de Compostela, accusing the government of not defending the Camino Frances from multiple threats and attacks, such as the works of the circle of Las Cañas in Logrono, a suburb in Cizur Menor (Pamplona) the destruction of the Hospital de las Tiendas, among many others.  A “Manifesto de Compostela” which has was promoted by the Galician Association of Friends of the Camiño de Santiago, asked UNESCO to include the path in the list of World Heritage in Danger.

“El Manifiesto de Compostela, firmado por asociaciones jacobeas, culturales y patrimoniales de varios países, solicita a la UNESCO que el Camino Francés entre a formar parte de la lista de Patrimonio Mundial en Peligro debido a los “continuos atentados” que sufre.”

A:  DEFINING THE CAMINO TRAILS

This was the problem facing the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in 1984. They implemented a program of co-operation and exchanges to promote public awareness in order to identify the routes and mark them with a common emblem and co-ordinate the various cultural and tourist activities and the restoration of monuments.

 Peter Robins - writing on the problems with identifying the pilgrimage paths in Spain.

·         The route is largely based on Roman roads; many of the settlements, such as Astorga and León, and much of the infrastructure, such as bridges and actual roadway, predate the pilgrimage, and would have been there whether the pilgrimage had existed or not

·         similarly, because there was an existing major road, many of the later settlements and infrastructure such as travellers' accommodation would have grown up along it too, again whether the pilgrim road to Santiago had existed or not; this is, after all, what happened to Roman roads in other countries, such as Britain

·         likewise, many villages and towns not on "the Route" have monuments that are just as impressive if not more so as some of those on the route

·         this is also the case for buildings on others of "the different pilgrimage routes"; how do they differ from those on "the Route"?

·         the argument is made that the pilgrimage route provided the channel for Romanesque architecture to spread to Spain, yet the earliest Romanesque churches are in Catalonia and have nothing to do with Santiago; conversely, several of the major monuments of the Camino Francés, such as León and Burgos cathedrals, are post-Romanesque, and others are of a distinctly Spanish baroque style.

·         in addition, any route/road changes over time; this means it is not a fixed 'heritage site'.

http://pilgrim.peterrobins.co.uk/santiago/heritage.html 

The major basis for the routes in Frances and Spain was the ‘Liber Sancti Jacobi “ which is now thought to have been written either for Duke William, Count of Poitiers, or King Alfonso, and not as a general guide describing any specific pilgrimage roads leading to Spain. 

www.saint-jacques.info/anglais/guide.htm  

Too many academic papers have been written on the so called Codex Calixtinus to mention here but suffice it to say that there is overwhelming evidence that the book does not describe four routes in France, and that there were no dedicated Santiago de Compostela pilgrimage routes in many other countries of Europe either.  Researchers agree that there were roads, paths and tracks followed by travellers, traders and armies etc that were also used by pilgrims to shrines all over Europe as well as to Santiago de Compostela.   

“The terms pilgrim "roads" or "routes” were invented by Romance philologists and art historians, whose contested or amended theories should not dominate our conceptions nowadays. In a wider historical context, the expression "pilgrim road" may denote the routes preferred by pilgrims. Again, the further one gets away from Spain and France, the vaguer the notion of specific routes for Santiago pilgrims becomes.”  Klaus Berbers - Federal Republic of Germany – 1988 Bamberg Congress. 

 “Of course, in this region, there is a great deal of evidence of the cult of Saint James, whether in the form of churches or altars, statues, crosses, place names or roads. However, these are evidence of the cult of Saint James in general rather than evidence of the pilgrimage routes.  The term Santiago pilgrim route properly applies only to those mediaeval or modern routes closely associated in function with the cult of Saint James or the Santiago pilgrimage. In the upper Rhineland, at least, such routes do not exist.  That is why we remain sceptical about the Council of Europe project entitled ‘Santiago de Compostela European cultural route’. It is unreasonable to interpret any evidence of the cult of Saint James as proof of the existence of a pilgrimage route.” H.P. Schneider – Switzerland – 1988 Bamberg Congress 

Throughout the discussions at the 1988 Bamberg Congress about identifying a ‘Santiago de Compostela European Cultural Route’ many representatives of the different countries raised doubts about the existence of such routes in Europe. 

What about the confraternities, symbols of Saint James and churches named for him? 

“There were 12 confraternities of Saint James in the upper Rhineland.  According to the available information, the confraternities of Saint James  ….  were associations organised for the purpose of prayer for the souls of the dead. In short, they were not confraternities of Santiago pilgrims for Santiago pilgrims. We must therefore conclude that - at least as far as the upper Rhineland is concerned - the confraternities of Saint James were of no importance to the pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela.”   

“The fact that a hospital or hospice was dedicated to a particular saint does not tell us anything about its function, which can only be elucidated by the written sources for each particular case. The hospices, including those dedicated to Saint James, took in not only Santiago pilgrims but all other pilgrims and all poor travellers.”  

 “Thanks to the Guide, [Liber Sancti Jacobi] the idea became widespread that there were four routes to go to Compostela.  There is no evidence that any of the four routes or their extensions ever saw more pilgrim traffic than any others…. history has so far found no evidence of large departures for Compostela from these towns [Tours, Le Puy, and Vezelay, Arles].  The currently used Le Puy route, the GR65, is an invention of the 1970s that the creators admitted was not based on historical evidence - largely because there is no historical evidence.” Peter Robbins

 

“The current evolution of the European Institute of Cultural Routes into a technical tourist agency with everything aimed at the profit of the Greater Region centred on Luxembourg demonstrates this. Without the slightest attempt at authenticity, new maps have been produced. They trace back arbitrarily four routes in France into eight or nine European routes. The illusory nature of the maps drawn for Aquitaine by Alexandre Nicolaî and for France by Elie Lambert is even more so for Europe.   The Council of Europe recognises the symbolic character of these routes by making them intangible "Cultural Routes" whilst at the same time encouraging publication of guides and maps and actions on the ground of no serious historical validity. Those historians who at the time argued for a serious methodology in the research into routes were not listened to.” Fondation David Parou – France 

B:  MANIFESTO - DEFENSE OF CAMINO HERITAGE 

The Santiago de Compostela Declaration - 1987 

·         to identify the Santiago de Compostela pilgrim routes throughout Europe

·         to signpost the routes with a common emblem; and

·         to launch an extensive programmof European co-operation through the restoration and rehabilitation of the architectural and natural heritage lying in the vicinity of the routes and the organisation of cultural activities and exchanges between the towns and regions situated along them.  

“Preserving the outstanding universal value granted to the Route of Santiago implies the comprehensive protection of all the sites’ values –both tangible and intangible. The essence of cultural routes lies on the “interrelationship” of all their elements, which should not be considered separately. Preserving the values protected following Operational Guidelines criteria implies protecting the “communication system” represented by the Route of Santiago.”  WHC 1933 [I changed the words to bold] 

Buffer zones:  “The Route of Santiago WHC Nomination Documentation (UNESCO, 1993) indicates that the historical complex protected includes 30 meters to each side of the route and all the medieval areas of cities and towns crossed by it. Suarez-Inclan (2000) underlines that this protection was established with a temporal character and that final delimitation should be determined by planning instruments. Buffer zone should be expressly indicated on a revised version of the UNESCO dossier of the Route of Santiago.” 

C:  MANIFESTO - ON THE MATTER OF HISTORIC LEGAL DESIGNATION 

It is essential we ensure the Jacobean Itineraries with the most historical claims as pilgrimage ways receive proper legal designations and protection.  

As most academics and researchers have said, how does one decide which itinerary has the strongest historical claim to being a Santiago de Compostela route?  Neither the presence of a church or hospice dedicated to Santiago, nor a scallop shell on a bridge, nor a confraternity of Saint James in the area proves that it was on a traditional pilgrimage route or that it was the only route to Santiago. 

When the COE identified the present route of the Camino de Santiago, many villages claiming a Santiago pilgrimage connection were bypassed.  Those on the route have benefitted from what has been described as ‘arbitrary choices made without historical foundations” whilst others were excluded.   

This proposal can only be fair if the recognition of Jacobean itineraries is extended to all of those with claims to a historical Santiago pilgrimage connection, such as the Invierno Route (Winter Route) and the claim for a new route that will bypass Miraz and Arzua. 

D:  MANIFESTO: On the matter of Way-marking 

Although the yellow arrow is the icon of the Jacobean pilgrimage in all the world, a chaos of markings and signs litter the pathways on the Way of St. James.

We propose:  

1.      Unifying the way-marking of the Camino de Santiago throughout Europe based on the European Council guidelines. Wherever possible the yellow arrow will be used.  

Item 2 of the Santiago de Compostela Declaration is: 

 2.  establish a system of signposting for the principal points on the itinerary, using the emblem suggested by the Council of Europe 

Clearly the UNESCO emblem is only meant to be used on principle points and not on all the different routes through Europe to Santiago but the shell symbol and the yellow and blue colours were the most recognizable Jacobean symbols on all of the Santiago routes I've walked on in Spain, France, Switzerland and even Italy.

The yellow arrow, first painted as directional markers on the routes in Spain, was the work of Don Elias Valina Sampedro. 

 

If this was adopted by UNESCO as the official Camino de Santiago route-mark symbol then perhaps it should be standard for all the World Heritage routes.  Only certain sections of routes in other countries have WH status.   

2.      Creation of specific rules or laws to determine who is authorized to erect way marks; with fines or other sanctions for those who “freelance.”

3.      We propose the authorized way-markers be the same people who have always maintained the Way: Associations, confraternities and Jacobean entities without profit motives. 

 

I see what they are saying here but I can’t imagine restricting the painting of way-marks or directional symbols by law.  When I walked the Via Francigena in 2006, way-marks were few and far between.  Out of the way hotels and Casas had their own signs and way-marks directing tourists (and/or pilgrims) to their establishments.  Fining people (if they can prove that it was them) or applying other ‘sanctions’ seems a bit extreme!