Temple shelters providing shade and protection
Video: Mark Zammit Cordina
Protecting visitors from the pounding sun seems to be as important as safeguarding the megalithic temples at Ħaġar Qim and Mnajdra, according to those who voiced their opinion on the tents sheltering the site for conservation purposes.
The shade they created is a major plus and for that reason – but not only – the controversial intervention seems to have gone down well, according to a vox pop on site.
Generally speaking, the tents may be aesthetically displeasing from afar but things change once you get up close and personal and the long-term benefits outweigh the cons. The question, if anything, was: why was it not done before.
Tourists at Ħaġar Qim yesterday said the high-tech, protective tents did not detract from their experience and even tour guides, familiar with the uncovered version, welcomed them.
Thierry Abbat, a French guide, who has been visiting the temples five times a year for the past three, approved the “contrast between the future and the past”.
Speaking in the breeze under the tent, tour guide Monica Kottmann said they might not look great from far but it was “so comfortable under them for us... and for the temples”.
A colleague, Maria Attard, said her first impression was that she would have preferred the temples as they used to be before, with the backdrop of the sea and the sky, but she admitted they now had a “special, mystical aura”.
“The tents may be an eyesore from a distance but they have not decreased the importance of the temples... For future generations, it was worth it,” said the woman, who has been a guide since 1984.
Cruise liner passengers, in Malta for a day, were by no means upset by the tents, claiming it was a “good idea”.
German Thomas Bieber said they were the way forward: tourists did not have to walk in the sun and the sea view was not obstructed.
Andy Bartlett from Luton was not bothered by the shelters, welcoming the shade from the warmth he was not used to back home. “It may be a distraction but it does not ruin the experience.”
Norwegian Svein Erik Ulverud and Christine Racek from New Jersey both believed in the importance of protecting the site, which, for Mr Ulverud, had been done carefully and well.
Joanne Farrugia Ciantar, a Heritage Malta senior clerk for 17 years, claimed the stone was already “feeling different” plus visitors stayed longer and could appreciate the site better. “Aesthetically, you cannot have it all but once you get close, none of the beauty is lost.”
Reuben Grima, senior curator of prehistoric sites, had pointed out that the gradient in the colour of the stone, and even burn marks, could now be made out by the naked eye whereas, before, it was bleached white by the sun.
But the positive comments were not shared by architect Richard England who cannot stomach the tents and even less the visitor centre, which is about to be completed. In his view, covering the temples was “debatable” but he disagreed entirely with the project.
“Approaching this holy ground, the impression is much more of a football stadium than a sacred, ancient temple,” Prof. England said.
Not everyone was so vociferous and the employees at the restaurant in the vicinity had no opinion and were unfazed. “I have not been there since I was a child,” said the waitress.
Taxi driver Anthony Aquilina and coach driver Alfred Cauchi had no complaints either and considered the tents to be a necessity. Mr Cauchi said they might have gone “to the other extreme but if the only means of conservation is to have a shelter, then they need to be covered”.
Nazzarenu Farrugia, the parker of 17 years, had other alternatives, although his advice was not heeded. He claimed linseed oil and another form from prickly pears would have done the trick to preserve the 5,000-year-old temples. “But we got money from the EU, so we used it,” he complained.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
21 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Martin Spiteri
Sep 4th 2009, 09:56
@richard england
I am Glad that Mr England feels like approaching a football ground than a holy place. I cant forget how our holy places were turned into ice cream parlours when pope John Paul came to Malta in 1990. You did not care for our tastes all you cared is for your childish grey blues and pinks. Only God knows how much you laughed behind our backs when it was approved. It is incredible how projects like yours get accepted. What a pity that valletta city disaster wasnt awarded to you to turn it into some futuristic nonesence with visions of Narnia
Kathy Elliot
Sep 3rd 2009, 13:14
*rolls eyes* Mr England, Sir, please make an architectural project that is pleasing to the eye yourself, first. Thanks.
Philip Zamit
Sep 3rd 2009, 10:54
I cannot agree more with Profs. England in his contribution. These tents are an eyesore for all to behold. Pity that what was once built to be a gift to the Gods and mankind was defaced in such a manner.
Rio Sammut
Sep 3rd 2009, 03:42
All our neolitic temples should be sprayed with invisible sealer to protect the stones from erosion for hundreds of years. No horrible circus tent is necessary! Much cheaper and more effective. The way it is at Hagar Qim, stones are still exposed to weathering and will deteriorate anyway, although admitidly more slowly.
The visitors' centre is simply atrocious!
Vince DeBono
Sep 2nd 2009, 23:26
I AM SURPRISED THAT PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED ENOUGH TO COMMENT , NOW ( STRESS NOW / TODAY ).
All the comments have been answered before ! Why repeat the questions? Have you woken up on 1 Sept 2009?
Opinions may be kept and repeated... but scientific reasons for the tent being put up have long been in the Times of Malta... Please stop revealing to all and sundry that you never considered /read about the subject before !
Dear Prof England .. if I may suggest , the aesthetics resemble the new Valletta project - but strangely you are in favour of a Parliament building as proposed while a necessary protective shelter gets your thumbs-down. Mmmm
Alfred Cassar
Sep 2nd 2009, 22:26
Maltese GEMGEM as usual, we're used to it now @ timesofmalta.com. Everybody is an expert to critisize but no one of them gave an idea of what should have been done to protect the temples.
Well done I think it was a good idea.
G.Schembri
Sep 2nd 2009, 22:09
These so called shelters are nothing but an eyesore, Hagar Qim was a beautiful part of our landscape now we have a circus tent that can be seen both from the sea and from land. Not to mention the horrible visitors centre.
I have never visited a historical site abroad which is covered by a tent, why do we have to spoil our heritige sites with modern monstrosities. First we spoilt Valletta with the concrete jungle - Sliema. Now we have spoilt Hagar Qim as well.
@edward bartolo I hope you are joking. If you reallylove Ggantija temples You should be insiting such monstrosity would not spoil them, and not insisting the same thing be done to them.
Sylvia Zammit
Sep 2nd 2009, 20:06
Great! Now can we have some decent shelters for the poor cab horses? They may not be part of our ancient heritage, but they a part of our 'tourist culture'.Even more important, they are sentient creatures who suffer needlessly!
martin buhagiar
Sep 2nd 2009, 20:02
Great !!!! all we need now is to change the uniforms of heritage malta's employees into something like bozo the clown, fits perfect with a circus tent. Great excuse for the elements, WOW since when the sun started damaging rocks and stone??????.I beleive the biggest concern is the salty sea spray and strong winds which i am sure this circus tent is offering no protection against. Well done Malta we really stand out
Steven Brockwell
Sep 2nd 2009, 19:43
well this is better then our new modern buss shelters if you can call it that?? for they provide no shelter at all. when it is raining you have to stand on the seat so you dont get wet >>>>> and that even includes holding an umbrella ??? i thought the word shelter meant protect ???
Francis Buhagiar
Sep 2nd 2009, 18:39
Imagine if we had the pyramids instead. Frans buhagiar
Vanessa Mifsud
Sep 2nd 2009, 18:03
Fair enough shelter for our amazing Temples is done, but the thing is why us MALTESE have to pay to go in? Why do we have to pay to go inside the cathedral @ Valletta, WHAT A SHAME!
A.M. Gauci
Sep 2nd 2009, 15:33
Honestly I think that this tent is an eyesore. It covers an important part of Maltese history and it certainly doesn't match with our ancient temples. I do understand that they need to be protected but why make a tent which doesn't compliment the surroundings?
As mentioned before, why did the British leave Stonehenge without a tent? It rains more heavily in England than in Malta and rain causes a great deal of damage to stone, but the British were sensible enough to leave Stonehenge in its most natural state possible.
victor pulis
Sep 2nd 2009, 15:29
Notice that the first lady interviewed had the Heritage Malta logo emblazoned on her shirt. Her comment was expected to praise the shelters. Saying that the stones have already shown signs of improvement(!) must be taken with a large dose of salt.
Most of the tourists interviewed commented about the shade the shelters provide not on the aesthetic value.
Conrad Thake
Sep 2nd 2009, 14:39
A necessary evil to protect the temples would be the only rationale. However, certainly the original relationship between the temples and the surrounding landscape, seas, and skies can no longer be appreciated. Most visitors seem to have been more content in that they were afforded some shelter from the oppressive sun --- in which case wearing a wide-brimmed hat would have been less intrusive. As regards the emerging visitors' centre --- the less said the better.
Joseph Schembri
Sep 2nd 2009, 11:48
I have been asking for such covers for some two decades. As Richard England says - they are aesthetically horrible - but what can one do? Does he have a better solution? The good point that I see about the tents is that this intervention is completely reversible unlike what happened during the British era when megaliths were covered in cement to protect them!
Meanwhile the visitors' centre is really an unnecessary eyesore but an interpretation point was really needed. The article mentions the parker - I am sure that had the journalist asked him he would have said that it is untrue that no digging was carried out. He is there every day and like me he saw heavy machinery digging into the rock. Again I hope that whatever was dome to build the visitors' centre is completely reversible should we change our minds in a decade or two.
Andre Muscat
Sep 2nd 2009, 10:31
The committee running this circus tent and football stadium entrance have dwindled these magestic temples which for the last 5000 yrs perhaps even more have dicided for commercial purposes and comfort to shade the temples with this horror!!!! ASK THE ENGLISH EXPERTS WHY THEY HAVENT COVERED STONEHENGE WITH THE SAME HIGHTECH!!! MALTESE CIRCUS TENT!!!
All we have are stand by experts of the day without any insight.
The temples were built to resonate the plasma energy and electromagnetic waveslengths falling on them and CHART THE HEAVENS, SUN VENUS AND MOON POSITION TO WARN US OF PREVIOUS AND FUTURE POLE SHIFTS. these have been covered!!!by the 2009 unprofessional masters of tourism to utilize EU funds.
These should have been left in their natural environment treat the stone in a sientific manner and they would still survive another couple of thousand years.
By that time the Department of authority responsible will become the archeological site remembered for ruining our maltese heritage. WHY DONT YOU GO AND HAVE ANOTHER 360 Deg PHOTO OF OUR LOVELY CIRCUS TENT FOR OUR NEXT REPRINT TOURIST BROUCHERE.
John Abela
Sep 2nd 2009, 09:51
"But the positive comments were not shared by architect Richard England who cannot stomach the tents"...
...makes them gain even more points in my book! Still have to see a Richard England creation which I can actually stomach...
Well done Heritage Malta!
Jan Zammit
Sep 2nd 2009, 09:32
Classic comment by umbrella man at the end. That was hilarious. We really should have listened to him after all these years rather that the EU :-)
Jake Micallef
Sep 2nd 2009, 09:29
On the structure: I think a good comment was that this is a greta contrast on how modern and old/heritage can coexist. They protect against elements but more importantly ensure that future generations will be able to enjoy these temples.
On the article itself: The translation/interpretation of what the parker said is wrong when compared to the original sound clip in the video. He didn't mean WE used the EU funds...but rather his implications was that FOREIGNERS (the EU) used the funds so WE (Locals) had no say...
edward bartolo
Sep 2nd 2009, 09:28
I suggested the same thing for the Ggantija Temples that happen to be the oldest standing building in the world. However, for some reason I cannot imagine, my post was rejected.
The Ggantija Temples are also part of our heritage, let us protect the visitors from scorching sun and the temples from the ill effect the weather.
@ EU
Thanks for helping us protect our heritage.