Prehistoric temples get futuristic roof

Peter Bonnici

Apr 9th 2009, 00:23

@ Joe Fenech
I think Fondazzjoni Patrimonju Malti should have been responsible for this.

v.pulis

Apr 8th 2009, 11:10

Erich von daniken was right after all! Aliens did help build the maltese temples and it seems they forgot to take off afterwards!

Joseph W. Galea

Apr 8th 2009, 09:46

Only in Malta !!!!

Joseph A Borg

Apr 8th 2009, 09:14

my goodness! we have a lot of grumpy experts commenting this story!

I would recommend the so called experts proffering their dissenting opinion below to check on the internet about these technologically advanced tents. They're hardly anything new and have been used as _semi-permanent_ structures in airports in the desert and areas with risk of hurricanes.

Regarding aesthetics I recommend the hot heads refrain until they experience the place first hand but paying for a ticket to support the preservation effort and hopefully see the solution from a different perspective!

Adrian Allain

Apr 8th 2009, 08:52

How unsightly.
If a sensible roof incorporating solar panels had been designed, instead of this atrocity, Mother Nature would now be providing electricity to the sight.
A little more thought could have produced something really worthwhile.

Joe Fenech

Apr 8th 2009, 00:03

Peter Bonnici:

"IL-HOBZ AGHTIH LIL MIN JAF JIEKLU ! "

Spot on!!!! MEPA should chose its experts well in order to make good decisions!

Joe Fenech

Apr 7th 2009, 22:58

Mr T Mifsud

I've been to the Louvre several times. One can hardly notice the glass. But how can one compare French finesse and Maltese 'ejja ha mmorru'?

James A. Tyrrell

Apr 7th 2009, 21:57

What worries me is the fact that this thing looks like a giant hang-glider. Given the speed the wind can reach sometimes how long will it be before this takes off, possible causing damage to the temples in the process?

Michele Sarlo

Apr 7th 2009, 21:44

The first UFO crash site in Malta.

Peter Bonnici

Apr 7th 2009, 19:55

For all those who wish to enjoy the beauty of the temples, all you have to do is pay a small entrance fee and walk around them underneath the protective cover. Now you can do so under the scorching sun, and in the rain. From afar they were not much of a site anyway.
Something had to be done and something was done. But of course, our team experts here below seem to have had better solutions. How very clever. Perhaps you ought to have attended the meetings at Mepa when discussions were held to provide valuable input.

IL-HOBZ AGHTIH LIL MIN JAF JIEKLU !

Michael Agius

Apr 7th 2009, 19:17

The cover is exactly identical to the one that covers the temple of Diana just outside Larnaca in Cyprus. This is also a world heritage site and by coincidence the same solution was adopted. I wonder whether they consulted the experts of prehistorical temple protection that are Messrs Camilleri, Xuereb and Fenech before finalising their project.

G.Sammut

Apr 7th 2009, 18:56

I agree with D Galea. The issue is not that Something had to be done. No one really disputes that. What's under dispute is What Thing had to be done.
And What a Thing has been done!!

Franco Farrugia

Apr 7th 2009, 18:53

I am sorry: I don't agree with certain statements to allow Mother Nature to do its work. If man can somehow help to protect the temples for some extra time, ... why not?

After all, nothing is being written in stone: the roof is something temporary and it can be removed anytime people want, without any damage to the temples.

I am sure that if a transparent material was used, the material would have stopped being so transparent within a few months, owing to dirt, weather effects, etc ... and the dirt would be there for all to see.

I don't like the roof myself ... but hey, hopefully it would serve to protect the temples, so it's ok with me.

D.Galea

Apr 7th 2009, 17:49

@T.Mifsud

But again it doesn't counter my argument, at least the mona lisa's protection array is transparent & still permits it's to be appreciated...so why not the same for temples?? Someone provide me with a plausible scientific reason & I'll back down.

T Mifsud

Apr 7th 2009, 17:29

To all anti-preservationists below:

Please try and counter these arguments with some sense and reason:
Did you ever go to The Louvre in Paris? Have you seen the most famous painting in the world? The Mona Lisa is proudly displayed on a wall of its own ... behind a thick bullet proof / tamper proof / anti flash glass that somewhat removes some of its vibrance when viewed through glass. However, it is the ONLY way how the treasure is preserved best, while it is enjoyed the most today and for generations to come.

The case of Mnajdra is the same. True it has been covered but SOMETHING has been done to preserve it. The theory that it stood thoudands of years does not hold because recent study showed its state of deterioration. And then it only took a nights worth of security lapsus for it to have succumbed to sacreligious vandalism.

M. Buhagiar

Apr 7th 2009, 17:23

@ J Farrugia ... well well, it might have to be pointed out to you that the megalithic monuments are no work of nature, but they are archaeological remains, made by mankind.

I do agree that sometimes ruins abandoned to the natural elements have their fascination ... but in this case, these ruins are already in a very bad state, and cannot be allowed to deteriorate completely!

For the sake of your argument, wouldnt you give medical treatment to someone who is ill? Or would you leave mother nature to take care of that person? Heritage managers have their responsibilities as people whose role is to preserve heritage for future generations, while allowing present ones to enjoy and appreciate it. In the case of these megalithic monuments, the situation is very sad ... it is like trying to keep an old person you love alive. Can you understand what cultural heritage really means to those who have it at heart?

J Farrugia

Apr 7th 2009, 16:50

@ J Tonna - Let mother nature do its bidding/. If they have to fall so let it be. But at least it would be the work of mother nature not obscenities made by man.

GFarrugia

Apr 7th 2009, 16:28

Is this a comical 20th century artistic endeavour combining the old and the new? What happened to transparency?

When the costs become too prohibitive to maintain this tent, I can just see sponsorship taking over. We may in the future look down on this wonderful island as we approach by airplane and see a message to all visitors, "EAT AT JOE'S."

SFenech

Apr 7th 2009, 15:46

OMG... is that a space shuttle or what??
I really hope that this stuff is replaced someday soon. I cry at the site of it. Hideous is the least. These temples have undergone so much since megalithic times. Is it possible that they cannot wait another few months to shelter them in a much more adequate manner?

The two adjacent quarry owners which were closed down due to these two magnefecient temples must really be feeling confused right now. Is this what the government and UNESCO had in mind to PRESERVE such beauties?

SHAME!!

M. Buhagiar

Apr 7th 2009, 15:32

@ H Gatt ... As far as I know, the Orkney Islands' prehistoric remains are not made of soft globigerina limestone, and moreover, even at Skara Brae there are some protective shelters over remains.

Richard Curmi

Apr 7th 2009, 14:39

someone should imform this site to change the whole structre about Mnajdra and how it looks now:(((.
http://www.megalithics.com/index.htm
Link on europe and you will be taken on a virtual tour of how beautifull and mystic it was before this horrenduos tent was installed.

Heritage Malta should inform other world sites,like the Mayas temples,or the Incas in Peru, or the Bagan Monuments in Myanmar,the Pyramids in Eygpt,and all the others,what a bright idea we came out with to preserve our temples for the next 4000 years from erosion.

Alexander Morana

Apr 7th 2009, 14:33

Nice one Malta. First we ruined Birgu with that crude, ugly garden now this?
Don't we have enough people who can come up with something creative for once?

J.Tonna

Apr 7th 2009, 13:13

MALTESE GEMGEM.

You down here! Do you have a better solution how to conserve these treasures???
As Matthew azzopardi rightly said "they suffered more damage since they were unearthed rather then when they were buried/covered". Should we cover them with soil as they were before??

D.Galea

Apr 7th 2009, 13:06

This must be some kind of joke right!?!? At the MOST!!! If even, did a TRANSPARENT tent come into mind!?! I'm not a geologist but I KNOW the rocks wouldn't have minded!!!

Nigel Lawrence

Apr 7th 2009, 13:02

Ghastly!

ceri whitley

Apr 7th 2009, 12:15

A very bizarre choice of covering - it is indeed very unfortunate that the relevant goverment bodies did not look at the transparent protective sheet material that are commonly used in other european states for this kind of monument.

An astonishing blot on an otherwise beautiful Maltese landscape.

Prosit Malta.

M. Buhagiar

Apr 7th 2009, 11:55

@ Everybody ... I might not like the design of the shelters at all. I definitely would have preferred to see the megalithic sites without such a massive negative visual intrusion! But I wish people would appreciate that the intention of the temporary protective shelters is precisely to protect them from the elements, hoping that a better way to preserve the megalithic monuments will eventually be found. The best option at present would have been to re-bury the sites. And no-one could have had any physical access to them. Would that have been preferred? One should also know that something had to be done ... these world reknowned megalithic monuments are literally deteriorating every second! Without any intervention, in a few years time, we would have had just a pile of dust, or maybe not even that, cos it would get blown away.

Please try to appreciate the work and all the scientific and ethical issues that the authorities and others involved in this Project had to go through, before slamming the shelters! At least try to base your arguments on some knowledge of the issue!

May this major and delicate intervention have the positive results aimed for!

Martin Gauci

Apr 7th 2009, 11:45

Well for one thing, this is a project long overdue. A reversible form of protection to the temples was necessary.; a necessary evil

M. Buhagiar

Apr 7th 2009, 11:35

@ Pawlu Xuereb ... what evidence do you have that the megalithic structures have been ruined now? Did you carry out some scientific study already? If so, could you please inform us where this information can be obtained from. They survived for so many thousand years because they were buried. That would have been the best alternative to protect the megalithic remains ... reburial.

@ Joe Camilleri ... Do you think the authorities just woke up one fine morning and decided to put up a shelter, just for fun?! Perhaps Heritage Malta should (although it has already done so in several cases) explain to those who have not been involved in this Project what a painstaking process it has been. Perhaps one should even publish the whole process since the initial idea of a protective shelter was born.

@ Joe Fenech ... Have you had access to the budget details of this Project? Or maybe the specifications of the materials used? If so, you may wish to enlighten us on how you got to your conclusions.

H Gatt

Apr 7th 2009, 11:26

These temples don’t need shelter but someone who will regularly be responsible for their maintenance and protection. We should for once have a look at what others in this field are already doing. The Orkney Islands off the coast of Scotland that are filled with prehistoric standing stones as well as the world famous Skara Brae prehistoric village (among other things) come to my mind. Our weather is mild when compared to those islands, yet all the remains on Orkney despite being exposed the elements including terrible weather conditions and sheep grazing around them all year round are in a fabulous state and are truly a magical sight to behold, something that Mnajdra and Hagar Qim can never be again! Yes you are right J. Sammut, it is absolutely hideous!

I Grech

Apr 7th 2009, 11:24

Heritage Malta: You totally lost my respect!

J Sammut

Apr 7th 2009, 11:19

@A Farrugia
Mutually exclusive?

Joe Fenech

Apr 7th 2009, 10:35

Couldn't this have been higher and wider so at least we can see the temples from afar?

And why such cheap material was used? One would definitely come across better transparent materials that filter sunlight.

There's ABSOLUTELY NOTHING futuristic about this. You can hire them for cheap: they're called marquis!

Matthew Azzopardi

Apr 7th 2009, 10:24

@Pawlu Xuereb

Dear Mr. Xuereb. they lasted 6000 years because they were buried for a big span of that time. In fact, they suffered more damage since they were unearthed rather then when they were buried/covered

Matthew Bonnici

Apr 7th 2009, 10:07

how nice to see that a shelter with an excellent ability to blend in with the surroundings whilst falling in sync with the structure it protects, was chosen by the relevant authorities.....

what kind of joke is this ?

these temples are said to be older than stonehenge .... however when i mention mnajdra, hagar qim and other similar temples in malta to foreigners they look at me as if im trying to convince them that casper really exists ....

MTA need to get cracking on letting other countries that we have these sites..... we have something that is better than what other countries have.... LETS CAPITALIZE on this.

R. Camilleri

Apr 7th 2009, 10:07

how horrible!!!!!! These are prehistoric temples not futuristic temples....

Joe Camilleri

Apr 7th 2009, 10:06

The least that could be done is to camouflage it to blend with the enviorment.

Did Heritage Malta study the turbulance effects on the temples under this 'futuristic roof' when strong southerly winds occur.

Let us hope that this is not THE BEGINING OF THE END.

A. Farrugia

Apr 7th 2009, 10:06

Function over form, Mr. Sammut! As long as it serves its purpose, I don't mind that the roof is not a work of art in themselves. It's what they're protecting that should be astonishing, and I'm sure anyone visiting the site would want to be impressed with what's UNDER the roof, not with the roof per se.

Let's just hope it fulfills its function properly and lives up to its name.. for the sake of Malta's heritage!

Pawlu Xuereb

Apr 7th 2009, 10:02

in an attempt to save it you've ruined it. everything has wear and tear - it lasted for 6000 years and will last another 6000 with the correct maintanance. but as typical of maltese administration those behind this can only see as far as their nose.

D Galea

Apr 7th 2009, 10:01

Well done to all authorities! You've destroyed this majestic scenery enjoyed over thousand of years, with a big white plastic 'baloon'...

Alex Spiteri

Apr 7th 2009, 09:58

tal-biza!

the day will come when those responsible for this act will have to answer a number of questions!

J.Sammut

Apr 7th 2009, 09:36

Absolutely hideous