Zprávy památkové péče 2016, 76(6):617-626

Heritage underground: historical underground mine works and the possibilities of understanding and protecting their values

Ondřej Malina

The historic mining underground is a specific area in several respects, even though it is only one segment of technical monuments and only a part of the cultural heritage of the mining and processing of raw materials.
The growing interest of the general public in underground heritage is reflected in the number of newly accessible sites with historical underground mining as well as in the response in schools. Nowadays, for example, one can study Geoscience and lignite tourism at the Technical University in Ostrava.
The possibilities of montane heritage preservation are dramatically limited by mining legislation as almost a monopolistic legal framework, the most important laws and implementing decrees of which do not include the concept of a historical or heritage value of mine works. This leads to a situation in which the historical value of several dozens of mine works as a cultural monument (or inscription onto the ÚSKP Central Registry) is clearly declared, but their practical documentation or protection may not be possible at all.
Research of underground mines is also specific in terms of archeology. The low concentration of findings combined with the large sizes of caving or sedimenting limit the discovery of tangible artefacts but do not make it impossible. An understanding of the context of the findings is very important, however, leading to the determination, documentation, and correct interpretation of immovable technological traces and the overall character of a mine work in a finding site. The main task of underground exploration tends to be seeking out sites where the original situation associated with prolonged miners' stays is still accessible. The ideal situation is a discovery of hard to reach or remote areas where mining took place only in one brief period and later stages of exploration and mining did not remove the remains of older periods, most usually also the most valuable stages.
The discovery and interpretation of technological details, surfaces, structures, and spaces is the second major task leading to a successful evaluation of a mine's chronological and technological development.
Essential details also include various marks or pockets in hewn beams and timber. Among the most distinguishable surfaces are those equally modified by hewing, for which the direction of excavation is typically distinguishable. Lens-shaped dug areas of part the work or the whole area are frequent, created by fire. Constructions underground occur most frequently as dry-stacked foundation walls. Frequent immovable and movable findings are wooden parts of the original equipment such as mine supports. Another group is represented by components of water-based mining equipment (pumps), wooden troughs, or remnants of smoke levels.
The first step to successfully evaluating these phenomena is to map them out. A simpler method of surveying documentation is mapping using a mine compass and strip. The second common option is measuring the total station with a rangefinder that allows for a very detailed surveying of even more complicated shapes underground. At the Jeroným Mine near Čistá, most of the known space was measured in this way; digital documentation also allows for the easy creation of map atlases in a geographic information system (GIS) printed on A4 paper. Historically and heritage-valuable details, structures, surfaces, and spaces are subsequently drawn.
A major theme of the historical underground is securing them, a process carried out in order to limit the negative impacts of mining activities on the surface and to make the mine accessible to visitors. In terms of legislation, it is often not clear whether a certain mine endangers a public area or not. If possible, it is better to secure the entry into a mine before demolishing it, especially when thorough research was not carried out. The main part of constructional work is securing historical mines and equipping them to make them accessible to repeated visitor traffic.
The general problem with practically tying underground mines to heritage preservation is their initially temporary nature. The lifespan of most stopes and their equipment was intended to survive over the longer term and usually only had to allow for the extraction of ore. For regular visitor traffic, a mine requires stability. The final form of securing and localizing a mine is primarily defined by technical mining requirements; regarding heritage, the main question remaining is whether to admit such alterations and make it part of the exhibited mine, or to hide it and direct the visitors' attention only to the earlier stages of a mine's development.
Generally unstable areas need to be fully bracing using steel reinforcement ribbing. Theoretically, such places can be concealed using wood paneling that resembles wooden reinforcement. Here, however, we come to the question of authenticity and a discrepancy between how a mine looked during its operation and how it is perceived by the average visitor.
A key question in introducing new construction is reversibility, in other words the possibility of returning the site to its state prior to the insertion thereof. In terms of authenticity, the ideal situation is one in which the route naturally goes from more recent entrance spaces to more remote areas in the depths of the mine without modern interventions, areas which can be accessed only by more agile visitors and which require no support work. Transitions between different preserved spaces may be immediate, but they should not be frequent and should be based on an overall concept and not on how much of a budget needs to be spend in a given year. Comprehensive documentation and evaluations of sites which deserve more careful consideration for their preservation make the decision-making process much easier.
A specific and complex problem of making mines accessible in the broad sense, i.e. not just for tourists, is the recovery of older items. Re-opening old mines, or parts of them, carries the risk of damaging surviving historical situations and findings. At the same time, however, it presents a new chance to learn something about them and gain new knowledge that could be usable at other sites.
How much damage actually occurs to a historic mine by its disposal? This is a question whose assessment is impossible without research and documentation of the underground and therefore demands access to the sites by authorized persons. Examples of failed cases are numerous and varied, and this issue should be based on the correct questions. The NHI may guarantee heritage protection to a number of mines, but it still lacks the professional capacity for understanding and presenting their values. It is high time to approach this as an opportunity rather than a problem. The historical underground is a continuation of the unique architectural heritage fund of the Czech Republic. It has its own specific potential which, if we consider only individual mines, can not be fully expressed. The NHI is an organization with national authority, and the question arises as to whether its current minimal involvement in this area is a desirable situation. Making mines accessible may be understood as a continuation of mining by other means. The original raw materials are replaced by the unique experiences of its visitors. When modifying mines for operation, the result is usually an irreversible violation of at least part of the authentic situation, but a greater awareness of the general public may be gained about the value of the historic underground, consequently leading to more meaningful and simpler ways to protect them.

Keywords: lignite monuments; heritage care system; mines; mining law; heritage law

Published: December 1, 2016  Show citation