Final Report UTLP_30062021

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Page 180

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Page 181

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Page 182

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Page 183

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Page 184

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Page 185

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Page 186

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Page 187

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Page 188

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Attachment-3 Dear Swadhin It is nice to know that my suggestions have been useful and are further solicited! I do not have a written document of what I spoke about that day for the zoom meeting. However, I will try and recollect briefly: 1. It is important to locate the monuments and landscape of Mainamati and adjacent areas within the larger networks of communication across the Bay of Bengal; 2. What have been the specific routes and directions of influence? Not linear or unidirectional but the circuits of exchange. including reverse flows? 3. What is the relationship of architectural expression with portable artefacts in discussing architecture and mobility? 4. Within these frameworks. the unique contribution of Mainamati needs to be highlighted. as for example. the unique features of its monastic clusters and architectural complexes. 5. The ancient and modern narratives associated with the unique values of Mainamati masterpieces like the bronze Vajrasattva and Avalokitesvara, which were to travel to the aborted international exhibition in Paris, can offer a useful point of departure to highlight lessons in Heritage, Ownership, Theft, Conservation and Sharing. This also highlights the significance of these masterpieces nationally and internationally. I have copied Suchandra to this email just in case she recalls something more from my presentation. Hope this is useful. Regards, Parul Parul Pandya Dhar. Ph.D. Associate Professor of South and Southeast Asian Art History, Department of History, University of Delhi, Delhi 110007. INDIA. https://du-in.academia,edu/ParulPandyaDhar http://www.du.ac.in/dufuploads/Faculty%20Profiles/History/Parul PandyaDhar Historypdf Page 189

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Ministry of Cultural Affairs Department of Archaeology Heritage Cell Webinar series on Updating the Tentative List of Bangladesh Webinar-4: Cultural Landscape of Mahasthan and Karatoya River Date & Time: 12 July 2020 at 5:30 PM Welcome Speech: Mr Md. Hannan Mia, Director General, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Closing Speech: Mr Md. Fahimul Islam, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Cultural Affairs, Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh Presenters:  Mst. Naheed Sultana, Regional Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh  Mr Md. Abu Said Inam Tanvirul, Custodian, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Panel Members:  Professor Dr Sufi Mustafizur Rahman, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Savar, Dhaka  Professor Dr Jaya Menon, Department of History, Shiv Nadar University, India  Professor Dr Masood Imran, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Savar, Dhaka  Professor Dr Monica L. Smith, Navin and Pratima Doshi Chair in Indian Studies, University of California, Los Angeles, USA  Professor Dr Veronica Strang, FAcSS, Executive Director, Institute of Advanced Study, Durham University, UK  Dr Md. Shafiqul Alam, Former Director General, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh  Ms Shabiha Pervin, Additional Secretary, Ministry of Cultural Affairs, Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh  Mr Md Ataur Rahman, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Cultural Affairs, Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh Consultants:  Dr Sharif Shams Imon, Assistant Professor and Academic Coordinator, Heritage and Tourism Programmes, Institute for Tourism Studies, Colina de Mong-Há, Macao  Dr Swadhin Sen, Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka Guests:  Ms Beatrice Kaldun, Head of the Office and UNESCO Representative to Bangladesh  Ms Coline Lefrancq, representative of French Bangladesh Joint Venture Mission Rapporteurs:  Mr Md. Jayed, Custodian, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh  Ms Urmila Hasnat, Research Assistant, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Summary of the webinar Ms Kizzy Tahnin of UNESCO, Dhaka Office started the webinarby requesting Mr Md. Hannan Mia, Director General, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh to deliver the welcome speech. Page 190

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Mr Md. Hannan Mia, Director General, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh in his speech described the objectives of the webinar. Then, Ms Tahnin asked Ms Beatrice Kaldun, Head of the Office and UNESCO Representative to Bangladesh to share a few thoughts. After the speech of Ms Beatrice Kaldun, she requested Dr Swadhin Sen, to moderate this session of the webinar. Dr Swadhin Sen started the session wishing peace to the departed soul of Mr Md. Mujibur Rahman, Assistant Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh who passed away recently. He also thanked everyone who worked hard to organise the webinar. The presentation has been presented by Ms Naheed Sultana, Regional Director, Department of Archaeology. Ms Naheed Sultana started by describing the landscape setting and human settlement of Mahasthan, as well as the cultural landscape setting, location of Mahasthan on Renel’s Bengal map, name of official/ administrative documents and historical and literary evidence about Pundrabardhana or Pundranagara (present Mahasthangarh). She proposed 13 sites for serial nomination among the 41 sites which were mentioned in the presentation. She also presented the proposed sites with images, ground plan, site plan and maps, and justified the proposed sites with Criteria (ii), (iii) & (iv) of Outstanding Universal Values (OUV). She also showed the authenticity, integrity and management of the proposed sites in her presentation. Dr Swadhin Sen thanked the presenter and invited the panel members and consultants to give their comments on the presentation as review. Their comments are as follows: 1. Professor Dr Sufi Mustafejur Rahman: Prof. Rahman started the review with his comments:  The starting point of the settlement should be uniform. There are some inconsistencies with the starting of the settlement in the presentation.  The title of the theme is ‘‘Cultural Landscape of Mahasthan and Karotoya River’’, but in the second slide of the presentation, the name used was ‘Mahasthangarh’. The name of the property should be uniform, as either Mahasthan or Mahasthangarh or Pundranagar.  How many sites are early historic and how many are early medieval has to be clearly identified and what the basis of the selection is should also be included.  The hinterland and periphery of the property should be more specific.  What was the methodology of periodisation?  The date of Gobind Bhita should be rechecked because the date goes back to the early historic period and not the early medieval period.  Presenters should rethink and rewrite the authenticity of the properties.  Good photographs should also be added. 2. Professor Dr Jaya Menon: Prof. Menon followed with her comments:  One important point is that all the archaeological remains seem to be confined to the Eastern part of the rampart. Cunningham’s map shows that most of the monuments like most of the excavated areas and establishments are to the east and he also noted that the western area of the Citadel is devoid of evidence. There are three hypotheses about Mahasthangarh which are shown in the Cunningham map that could be added with the final dossier.  This place was occupied for a long period of time, so public interaction is needed to develop the site.  The local community is to be involved in developing the site.  The museum should also be altered or removed from there because this is a very important site.  Mahasthangarh is an early historic site but not too similar to the Harappan/Indus civilization. Mahasthangarh is a unique site. Page 191

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 She also sent her written comments on the presentation (Attachment-1). 3. Professor Dr Masood Imran:  Mahasthangarh is a living site, as the local people are living there with archaeological remains. So, the involvement of local communities is necessary for a mutual understanding and collaboration among all stakeholders involved in the protection and development of World Heritage sites.  There are many gaps in ethnological data and history by heritage residence.  Local history writer, local orator, local popular myths, etc. can be considered to reconstruct the history. Dr Imran also sent his written comments on the presentation (Attachment-2). 4. Professor Dr Monica L. Smith:  The important outstanding universal value and uniqueness is how people are using the dynamic landscape for a long period of time. Mahastahangarh has a long archaeological sequence like Buddhist culture, Hindu culture and Islamic culture, and thus. different types of architectural remains can be found there like temples, mosques, monasteries, palaces etc. which is value added to the contribution.  The archaeological realities of Mahanthangarh show living dynamic urban-rural engagement which is something that is a very powerful way of understanding the long-term developments of cities.  The Mahasthangarh provides a strong component of Archaeology which is a long occupational sequence at the site of Mahasthangarh and in many of the surrounding settlements. The settlements have an early component, and medieval component and a modern component. Later on, she also sent her written comments on the presentation (Attachment-3). 5. Dr Md. Shafiqul Alam:  Preparing a nomination dossier is very critical work. So, officials of the Department of Archaeology need proper training facilitated by UNESCO for this work. Moreover, he asked for emphasis on the inter- cultural issues.  The presenter proposed three criteria. But criterion 6 should also be included in the proposal.  What is the relation between the cultural landscape and the physical landscape? 6. Professor Dr Veronica Strang:  GIS mapping should be included in the proposal.  Further systematic survey is needed  Involvement of the expert workers are needed Later she sent her written comments on the presentation (Attachment-4). Dr Sharif Shams Imon summarised the total session. He said that the session was very successful but the story of the property was missing and information such as the level of mapping and documentation were insufficient. Dr Swadhin Sen thanked everyone and invited Mr Md. Fahimul Islam to end the session. Mr Md. Fahimul Islam has given thanks to every participant and ended the session. Attachments: 1. Written comments of Professor Dr Jaya Menon (Page: 6-9) 2. Written comments of Professor Dr Masood Imran (Page: 10-13) 3. Written comments of Professor Dr Monica L. Smith (Page: 14-16) 4. Written comments of Professor Dr Veronica Strang (page: 17-19) Page 192

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Attachment-1 Discussion on presentation The Cultural Landscape of Mahasthan and the Karatoya River by Prof Dr Jaya Menon Many thanks to Mr Md Khairul Bashar and Professor Swadhin Sen for the invitation to discuss the inscription of Mahasthangarh and its Environs on UNESCO’s World Heritage List, and more specifically to talk on the cultural landscape of Mahasthan and the Karatoya River. This gives me the opportunity to meet again, virtually, colleagues such as Monica Smith and Swadhin Sen but also meet for the first time, Professors Mostafizur Rahaman, Masood Imran, Shafiqul Alam and Veronica Strang. These are very difficult times globally with Covid-19 and it almost seems strange to discuss something so removed from that. However, we all continue to function. Mahasthan appears to be a fascinating site with immense continuing potential for research. It is not surprising that it is on a tentative WHS list. Even though it was discovered quite early, with a map produced by Alexander Cunningham as he did with the major sites, it has been explored and excavated over roughly one and a half centuries. Some of the work has been of isolated mounds or monuments to more comprehensive archaeological, environmental and geohydrological work more recently with the Bangladesh-French collaboration. The geographical context of the site and its immediate hinterlands, in the Barind Tract, is significant in terms of being protected by floods from the Karatoya River. This gives the rationale for the early establishment of the site in this location, which seems to have been in the Mauryan period, making this an important urban centre for this region and this period. The region shows evidence for multiple periods of habitation, though admittedly there seem to be more religious establishments and defensive architecture rather than those presenting evidence for more domestic living. An interesting point has been noted by Jean-Francois Salles, that the archaeological remains largely seem confined to the eastern side of the area enclosed by the ramparts with more than half of the western side completely devoid, so far, of archaeological evidence of habitation, so apparent in Cunningham’s 1879 map. Salles suggested three hypotheses: one, that the western part was devoted to cultivation and/or grazing of animals; two, that if this area was occupied, there were light dwellings or small hamlets that have not survived; and three, that archaeological remains are buried too deep, down to about 6-7 m. in the alluvium, to have been discovered so far. I would think that this would be an interesting aspect to explore further, in terms of areas within what are considered to be urban strongholds, keeping in mind that urban centres even into the present are not necessarily completely built up. I also think the dossier will need to explain these absences, and this could be done in view of what Coline Le Franq explained as future work envisaged at Mahasthangarh. Another aspect of this larger region of Mahasthan and its environs is that of the placement of religious establishments, as possibly other activities such as craft production, outside the walled complex. This king of spatial pattern is in keeping with urban centres in other parts of India, and at Mahasthan the existing or proposed gates and routes seem to suggest pathways to these establishments, such as in the north to Govinda Bhita, Bashu Vihar and Vihar to the northwest, in the south, to the yet unexplored Mogadasa, likely accessed by Buri ka Gate, and further south, Gokul Medh. Yet, there were also religious shrines within the citadel, such as Bairagi Bhita, suggesting that there may have been different considerations at play. Keeping the title of this panel discussion in view, I feel that somewhat less attention has been paid to the Karatoya River. The site of Mahasthan clearly was located on its western bank, and given that the Barind Tract is limited to its east by the river, I can see why most maps in the presentation (as also P.C. Sen’s) seem to stop at the river. In discussions of the hinterlands, the areas to the north, west and south are invariably mentioned. However, there are reasons why the site was located close to the river. In some parts, the Barind overhangs the river, but the river was clearly accessed as noted in the 1920s by K.N. Dikshit. In reference to Govinda Bhita, Salles points out that Dikshit found a stone-paved slope to the river which has now disappeared. He noted that Sen and Dikshit mentioned long and massive walls along the banks of the river built to protect the site against erosion, and there were staircases down to the river or to the ghats, which disappeared in the floods of 1922. Dikshit seems to have found some traces of these constructions and it appears a small part was still visible in 1993 when work began again at the site. The fact that there was possibly a gate in the southeastern part of the rampart walls suggests it may have been an access towards the river. Similarly, in the northeast, there may have been an ancient gate Page 193

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 under the later construction Jahazghat, possibly leading to Govinda Bhita on the bank of the Karatoya. The river is known to be navigable and areas on the other side of the river were given to marsh and extensive rice paddies. Were there possibly river crossings in the north and the south? Can the River Karatoya be added to the UNESCO dossier as more than just a protecting flank to the eastern walls of the site? It appears that most of the area, other than the protected archaeological monuments and sites, are either occupied by hamlets or by cultivated fields. The Department of Archaeology has acquired some of the lands on the eastern side, but a considerable part of the site and its environs is under private ownership. While the dossier does mention that shallow ploughing would not have harmed the sub-surface archaeological remains, the fact remains that much of the past remains is under human use. It seems that the areas excavated by the Bangladesh- French team were filled back after completion of excavation for various reasons, possibly ranging from safety of the surrounding communities to that being perhaps one of the conditions of excavation. Unlike Paharpur, where there is a massive establishment with its contiguous elements that have been exposed, the remains at Mahasthan are disparate and separate. This is partly because a large part of the site has not been excavated or studied, and also because of the population and field density. The only way this could be changed is if more areas were acquired, which is not advisable. The fact remains that there may be local communities living in areas acquired by the government, and subject to rules of monitoring regarding construction or altering the nature of the archaeological remains. If the site and its environs were to be inscribed in the UNESCO list, this would have an impact on local communities, as has been noted at Hampi and other sites in South Asia. Ideally, people should protect heritage remains in their vicinity but this will happen if past remains are part of the ancestral memory in some way of local communities, which is very often not the situation. The other way to involve local communities is to make the site relevant in economic terms to people and that seems to be already part of the dossier as a strategy. I was happy to note that the dossier takes into account this aspect and makes a bid to include local communities in efforts to protect and conserve the site, and to involve people in research and documentation through public archaeology. In the context of the discussion in the webinar, I thought to add another point. One is that I think it is unnecessary to dwell on Harappan urbanism as was done in the draft dossier. I think it would be better to focus and contextualize Mahasthangarh as a historical site, as an early urban centre going back to the early historical period. This is important as this is a long-lived region with many histories. However, as most of the extant structures belong to the medieval period, with almost no remains of the early historic period remaining exposed, the inscription on the World Heritage list will need to focus on the medieval structures. If the DoA of Bangladesh decided to expose early historic structures and keep them exposed as in an open-air museum, that will add to the observable and known value of the site. Otherwise, the earliest levels would have to be attested through photographs of sections, digs, and artefacts, but little else. Page 194

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Attachment-2 Comments on the webinar on the theme `Cultural Landscape of Mahasthan and Karatoya River’ Masood Imran Mannu, PhD Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka, Bangladesh Positioning of Mashasthan along with Karatoya River in cultural landscape segment to achieve the listing of World Heritage is a brilliant idea. I must appreciate it. If I look back to the dominating practices of archaeology, history and managing heritage in Bangladesh, it is navigating towards the idea of out of the box. Because, the idea of cultural landscape has been generated by UNESCO to understand the mechanisms of shaping the landscape by the community. Here a transcendental, fluid and shifting technologies are being actively played by the everyday practices of heritage-dweller. Couple of stories practices have been developed and, they have to be conceived a series of layers. Mahasthan is an ideal example to explain its heritagization-importance through ‘cultural landscape’. According to the handbook of cultural landscape of UNESCO, the very notion of landscape is highly cultural, and it may seem redundant to speak of cultural landscapes; but the describing term ‘cultural’ has been added to express the human interaction with the environment and the presence of tangible and intangible cultural values in the landscape. UNESCO’s approach, therefore, attest to the changing norms and practices in heritage discourse and the selection of world heritage. The “cultural landscape” values can be found in the way people have shaped the landscape not only through their activities of building monuments, places, digging tanks, removing earths, modifying land for various purposes. Simultaneously, it represents the production of various meanings through myths, beliefs, stories, and other modalities. The concept also emphasizes a balance by seeking to incorporate the ways nature has influenced the human activities. Therefore, the management strategy should be to ensure the knowledge-participations. Another important aspect is, since 2007, UNESCO considered the idea of community as an essential component of the concept of the “five C”. It means that cultural landscape should also be perceived and interpreted in relation to the people’s perceptions and practices, from the past to the present. However, I found the huge gap with the theme and the content of presentation. Presentation tried to emphasize the archaeological importance. Yes, it is obvious that archaeologically Mahasthan is very much important, where history has been found from Mauryan period to the present date. These are all about materialistic understanding, where people’s practices got the secondary and tertiary importance. But, when we talk about cultural landscape, people’s practices and reshaping the archaeological evidence should get equal importance. These understanding will make a journey towards the past with the beauty of different layered archaeological understanding. But surprisingly, this presentation content divided the people’s present practices and archaeological finding in two different part, which are also named after archaeological evidences of Mahasthan and Cultural Heritage. It has surprised me. I found that the presenter did not conceive the idea of cultural landscape properly. They have a lack of understanding of contemporary cultural heritage studies conceptually and of the UNESCO’s changing practices of world heritage selection. The presenters showed couple of photographs of present practices and have given a journalistic description. It is an outsider’s understanding of culture, which is not acceptable in the idea of cultural landscape. If we talk about the knowledge-sharing, in this case, we should have to know the people’s voice. It can be possible, if an extensive ethnographic survey is conducted. It is also, essential to redraw the political understanding of the surveyors. It is all about mindscape. Therefore, I would like to add couple of recommendations, which should be done before finalising the report on cultural landscape of Mahasthan and Karatoya River. Some of these recommendations should be done for proposing the theme for tentative listing, the rest can be done before preparing the final dossier: Page 195

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 1. Please try to conceive and elaborate upon the idea of Cultural Landscape in reference to Mahasthan; 2. The connectivity within the archaeological evidences by popular and academic understanding has to be addressed 3. It will ensure the knowledge-participation of heritage residents. 4. It should be a horizontal understanding of Mahasthan, which provide the knowledge of the huge cultural landscape, which was within Pundravardana Bhukti. According to the epigraphic materials of the Gupta period from North Bengal (nine inscriptions) clearly show that Pundravardhana bhukti was divided into several visayas or districts. 5. To understand the relationship within the Visayas, the story of Chand Sawdagar and snack goddess Padma can easily be used to do that, which had been done by Tabibur Rahman. It resulted in one of the famous structures named after the bridal suites of Behula-Lakhindar. 6. Therefore, I would like to suggest that every waterbody should be included (i.e., Kalidaha sagar) in the thematic understanding 7. Karatoya Mahatmya is the finest literary source to describe the cultural landscape of Mahasthan, which should be logically used to prepare the single story with different layers. 8. Define the Agencies / stakeholders and locate the interconnectivity; 9. Try to understand the social stratification of heritage residents. Beware to deal with the representatives of local governments. In fact, who are not the heritage dewller. 10. Try to develop a conceptual and methodological framework to set the required criteria, regarding this, I would like to recommend the handbook of cultural landscape 11. Please conduct a systematic survey to identify the core area and the buffer area by following the cultural landscape concept 12. Geneart one story, which will able to explain the entire cultural landscape 13. Potter village, blacksmiths in hat and other places, mahathan hat, mazar, Friday prayer, oros and annual fair are connected with this living landscape, which are deeply with the popular telos and the pundravardhana bhukti. Please conduct an ethnographic survey properly 14. Please try to establish a synchronization from title to conclusion and generate a harmonisation to justify the four pillare (i.e. authenticity, intrigration) 15. Last but not least, the mechanism of representation of the cultural heritage of Mahasthan in international level 16. Please develop a management plan, which will be denoted the sharing knowledge between DoA, academicians and heritage residents. Page 196

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Attachment-3 Monica L. Smith University of California, Los Angeles, USA [email protected] Comments after “Cultural Landscape of Mahasthan and Karatoya River” panel discussion 12 July 2020 In 1999, the Mahasthangarh site/region was placed on the UNESCO Tentative List and the current discussion was focussed on the renaming of the Tentative List entry to include the concept of “Cultural Landscapes.” I would like to expand upon the following points made in my commentary during the webinar held 12 July 2020 under the auspices of the Department of Archaeology, Heritage Cell, and UNESCO, with thanks for the meticulous preparation of the PPT presentation and other documents provided to the panelists for that session. Here are three reasons why and how Mahasthangarh and its environs deserve retention on the Tentative List, and could be considered for eventual World Heritage nomination: 1) Cities and hinterlands. Mahasthangarh (as a defined locality with fortification walls) illustrates how cities are not just about a central core area but also integrate large areas of hinterlands that have specialized functions. This concept of “suburbia” in archaeological cities is being explored in other regions of the world (such as the Maya zone of Mexico and Central America), but also resonates with modern visitors’ experiences of the variable densities of populations and types of suburb settlements. A city may have a formal perimeter, but its influence and population are not contained only within that perimeter. People pass in and out of the city to the surrounding region while taking ideas, goods and their labor power back and forth to different localities. The city of Mahasthangarh is surrounded by a diversity of physical landforms (such as the Karatoya River, the bhils, the natural uplands of the Barind Tract) with a topography that is further augmented and modified by human activities (including structures, rice farming, tanks, rampart walls, and canals). 2) Deep chronology. The site of Mahasthangarh has a continuous occupation starting c. 4th century BCE (and perhaps earlier; one does not yet know whether there are areas within the site that have earlier occupational layers yet to be discovered). This continuous occupation shows the longevity of the city even though many things changed: political groups changed, religious traditions changed, and even the river changed, but the city itself survived. This shows the longevity of cities and how they remain centers of population even throughout periods of environmental and social challenges. This deep chronology also enables a discussion of resilience and sustainability (two popular topics in the study of urbanism). In terms of visitation and relevance, people tend to travel both to discover something new and to connect themselves to the history of their own identity. One can propose that Mahasthangarh, with its longevity throughout different periods of history, provides the opportunity for such types of philosophical and emotional connections for visitors from many global regions and religious traditions. 3) Architecture and place-making. Within each settlement area and throughout the landscape of Mahasthangarh, there is a very active dynamic relationship between humans and their environments. In a monsoon climate, people make choices about which architecture to build very solidly and which architecture can be made more cheaply. In the excavations in which I participated at Mahasthangarh as well as at Bhasu Vihara, it was clear that domestic architecture was constructed and reconstructed practically every year in order to address both the desires for household growth and the realities of monsoon effects on brick structures. Yet the landscape all around Mahasthangarh shows that many structures of both secular and religious intent were built on a scale that defies the annual destruction of the monsoon, including the walls of Mahasthangarh itself and the robust structures of the Buddhist, Hindu, and Muslim religious traditions. The dynamic relationship of water, clay, and stone in the environment of Mahasthangarh provides the ecological framework for understanding cultural Page 197

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 activities throughout the long course of time. These cultural activities were actively encoded into the daily lives of ancient people, as well as sought-after by historical visitors such as Hiuen Tsang and continuing in the modern day as local residents actively engage with historical structures through ritual and commerce. The Department of Archaeology is to be commended for its attention to conservation that enables visitors to experience the grand architecture of the many settlements in and around Mahasthangarh. Minor stylistic comments: The figure captions should please have the dates of the various time periods discussed. Figures 6.3b and 6.4 could be cut, or please explain in more detail. The comparative images of urban planning should be made clearer as sometimes it is difficult to see the outlines of the ramparts from the different other sites. Please make clear (for individuals not familiar with South Asian archaeology) what is the significance of Chandraketugarh in India as the nearest similar settlement to Mahasthangarh. In general, there could be more discussion of trade and transportation, again keeping in mind the significance of the Karatoya River as a corridor of contact and trade that would have included not only sites in nearby countries but also other trade centers in Bangladesh such as Wari-Bateshwar. Page 198

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Attachment-4 SOME COMMENTS ON The Cultural Landscape of Mahasthan and Karatoya River Veronica Strang 17.7.20 It was a pleasure to be included in the webinar discussion regarding the Mahasthan and Karatoya River on July 12th 2020. The documentation produced by the Department of Archaeology and a range of scholars to support the Bangladesh Government’s bid for the Mahasthan and Karatoya River to be designated as a World Heritage Site has been thoroughly researched, and presents a clear picture of the rich history of cultural, social and religious change in the area. The multiple archaeological sites and objects that provide a material record of this historical palimpsest are meticulously documented, and provide compelling evidence of the value of the area as a key cultural heritage site. The use of cultural landscape theory is helpful. This recognises that such sites reveal a dynamic interaction between communities and places over time, and that they are formed via this interactive process. Implicit in the documentation is an matching recognition that the material characteristics of the place – the geology, hydrology and topography of it; the flora and fauna; the local ecosystems; the climate, and so on, are also agentive in forming this relationship, and influencing the kinds of human lifeways that can be sustained in this environment. The flows of water through landscapes – what I would call ‘waterscapes’ – are particularly important in that they form a literally essential part of how communities engage with places over time. It may be useful for the project to bring the waterscape more to the surface. There are useful hints in the document: mentions of changes in the Karatoya’s course and patterns of flow; the constancy of its position around the central site; and how the river’s embracing curve and the moats completing a ring of water enhanced the security of the fortification. Of particular interest in the cultural waterscape, are sites such as the holy well, Jiyat Kunda, which is a classic celebration of water as the substance of life. There are also the ghats dedicated to female deities and mythological figures, and connections with Manasa, an important serpent being representing the powers of water. These sites express the core meanings of water – its capacities to generate life and provide spiritual and bodily well-being – that are shared across time and across religions. As such, they provide ways to discuss not only changes but also important continuities and shared ideas that pertain across time and space. There is obvious potential to compose a parallel/complementary narrative about the intangible cultural heritage residing in the religious ideas that are expressed in the temples and holy places, in particular those relating to water. In a Durkheimian sense (which assumes that religious beliefs are reflective of social and political arrangements) this would also serve to reveal shifts in political structures and gender relations over time. There have clearly been some important religious changes since the earliest sites were established, and it would be interesting to articulate how, in particular, these have led to changes in the control and management of (and access to) water. As a fundamentally connective substance, water is similarly useful for revealing changes and continuities in people’s material engagements with the environment, and it might be useful to consider bringing into the mix a more detailed history of the land and waterscape, and the practices that have been enabled or discouraged. There is growing recognition, in work relating to water, that ‘infrastructure’ is not just the engineered constructions of human societies, but also the characteristics and flows of ecosystems: for example, the capacities of forests and wetlands to store water and thus stabilise water flows. Archaeologist Matthew Edgeworth describes human relationships with waterflows as a kind of ’wrestle’ to direct these, in which the physical properties of water and other materials may – and often do – resist such direction. Making a dualistic divide, as Western societies have tended to do, between Nature and Culture, is constraining, and problematises UNESCO’s designation of heritage as being either ‘cultural’ or ‘natural’. The more coherent view offered in many non-Western cultures, that all living kinds inhabit a shared environment, enables a holistic Page 199

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 vision of people’s relationships with places and their non-human inhabitants and materialities. I have tried to encapsulate this more coherent way of thinking in my work on ‘re-imagined communities’. Thus in strengthening the bid, some additional detail about the non-human aspects of the environment might be useful in providing a sense of how the cultural heritage evident in the archaeological record is located in wider engagements with that environment. This would also serve to connect historical beliefs and practices with the contemporary rituals, ceremonial bathing, festivals etc. that compose the area’s intangible or more ephemeral cultural heritage. Possibly more could also be said about current environmental and social issues: in particular the ongoing expansions or intensifications in agriculture and irrigation, and local capacities to support the increase in tourism that often accompanies designation as a World Heritage Site. Both for a UNESCO bid, and for successful tourism there is a need for an accessible narrative that ‘tells the story’ of why a place and its heritage is important. In this case, narrative momentum is ably provided by an account of successive examples of forts, temples and their location in emergent urban areas. An account of how people lived and worshipped in these, and engaged with the wider environment, would help to ‘join the dots’ on the map, connect these sites, and give a sense of the ‘whole story’. What this suggests is that the project might benefit from bringing in (or giving more rein to) the perspectives of other disciplinary areas, such as expertise in environmental change, ethnographic accounts etc. I wish the proponents of the bid every success in their endeavours. Veronica Strang __________________________________________________________ Contact details: Telephone: Professor Veronica Strang FAcSS Landline: +44 (01865 436380 Executive Director Mobile: 07880 75284 Institute of Advanced Study Durham University Websites Cosin’s Hall, Palace Green Durham Institute of Advanced Study. Durham DH1 3RL https://www.dur.ac.uk/ias/staff/?id=10491 University of Oxford Postal/street address: https://www.anthro.ox.ac.uk/people/professor- 11 East Street, Osney Island, veronica-strang Oxford, OX2 0AU, UK Academy of Social Sciences https://www.acss.org.uk/fellow/professor-veronica- strang/ Page 200

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Ministry of Cultural Affairs Department of Archaeology Heritage Cell Webinar series on Updating the Tentative List of Bangladesh Webinar-5: Mughal Water Forts in Bangladesh Date & Time: 23 July 2020 at 5:00 PM Welcome & Closing Speech: Mr Md Amiruzzaman, Deputy Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Presenters:  Dhrubo Alam, Deputy Transport Planner, DTCA  Khandokar Mahfuz Alam, Assistant Architect, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Panel Members:  Dr Sharif Shams Imon, Assistant Professor and Academic Coordinator, Heritage and Tourism Programmes, Institute for Tourism Studies, Colina de Mong-Há, Macao  Dr Swadhin Sen, Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka  Ms Kamrun Nesa Khondokar, Assistant Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka Guest:  Md. Hannan Mia, Director General, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Rapporteur:  Ms Tania Sultana, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Summary of the webinar Mr Md Amiruzzaman, Deputy Director of the Department of Archaeology welcomed all to the webinar. Then he invited the presenters to present their proposed theme. The presentation was prepared by Dhrubo Alam, Deputy Transport Planner, Dhaka Transport Coordination Authority and Khandokar Mahfuj Alam, Assistant Architect, Dept. of Archaeology. It was presented by Mr Dhrubo Alam. In their presentation, they stated that Subahdar (governor) Islam Khan, who in popular culture is thought to be the founder of the township of Dhaka in 1610, expanded and strengthened the naval forces (Mughal ‘Nowara’ or naval fleet) and appointed a ‘commander in Chief’ or ‘Meer-i-Bohor’. It is said that within a century they (the Mughals) probably built or renovated these forts along the rivers in the vicinity of the city at strategic locations as a way of securing the capital. Though there is a persisting controversy whether Mir Jumla or Islam Khan built them, there is no doubt about their purpose. Page 201

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Then he gave a brief description about Sonakanda, Hajiganj and Idrakpur Fort. He proposed criteria (ii) and (iv) to justify the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the site. He said that the buildings are unique as individual structures and also as an overall system. There were no singular design pattern or guideline (shape, size, height) for the structures as they were all purpose-built. All of them have been connected with water-based transport networks and in some cases surface-based. According to Mughal Mirza Nathan, they can be built fast, with local materials like mud and bamboo. Finally, he said that it is very hard to find any siege fort in the eastern part of Bengal from the Mughal period (Damdama). They are more common in Northern India and where the land is not flat. With the advent of gunpowder and modern weaponry in the seventeenth century, the Mughals built forts with range to protect themselves from enemies. Feedback from the Panel Members: Kamrunnesa Khandakar, Associate Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University said that this presentation must include the river system, historical changes in the system, and river roots of Bengal. For these, she suggested reading the book “Baharishthan-E-Gaibi” by Mirja Nathan, “Akbernama” and also a book related to these by Kamrunnesa herself. She talked about military strategy, defence system, building materials of the fort, and so on. She also suggested calling these river forts and to do further deep research on them. Md. Hannan Mia, Director General (Additional Secretary), Department of Archaeology, said that emphasis should be given on water and the strategy of the forts. He showed and described the geographical location, situation and strategic position of Bengal during that time by Joao De Barros’ and Mathews Ven Den Brooke’s Maps. A.K.M. Syfur Rahman, Assistant Director, Khulna Division, Dept. of Archaeology stated that the historical concept of the presentation was good but in the OUV, the authenticity and integrity portions must improve. He mentioned Dhaka Fort (no longer present today) situated in old Jelkhana, Lalbagh which was very similar to these. He also suggested mentioning the different kinds of water sources in ancient Dhaka in terms of describing the landscape. Dr Shawin Sen, Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University said that there were no forts in South Asia until the 13th century or prior which were not associated with water sources, so the uniqueness of the chosen forts must be described. He also said that not to use any information which is already invalid. He suggested reducing the portion on political history and adding the difference of these forts to North Indian and Western Indian Mughal fort architecture. He also showed the differences from the book Portuguese in Bengal: A History Beyond Slave Trade. He also emphasised on monetary and trade system. Dr Sharif Shams Imon, President, ICOMOS Bangladesh said to reduce the presentation significantly and to make the comparative analysis to show how it’s different from other forts. If it cannot be justified, then the site cannot be added. Finally, the host concluded the session by giving thanks to all. Page 202

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Ministry of Cultural Affairs Department of Archaeology Heritage Cell Webinar series on Updating the Tentative List of Bangladesh Webinar-6: Buddhist monuments in the area around Jagadala Mahavihara Date & Time: 23 July 2020 at 6:00 PM Welcome & Closing Speech: Mr Md. Hannan Mia, Director General, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Presenters:  Ms Lovely Yesmin, Deputy Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Panel Members:  Dr Sharif Shams Imon, Assistant Professor and Academic Coordinator, Heritage and Tourism Programmes, Institute for Tourism Studies, Colina de Mong-Há, Macao  Dr Swadhin Sen, Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka  Mr Md. Amiruzzaman, Deputy Director of Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Rapporteur:  Mr Md. Khairul Bashar Swapan, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Summary of the webinar Mr Md. Hannan Mia, Director General of the Department of Archaeology welcomed all to the webinar, then he invited the presenter to present their proposed theme. Ms Lovely Yesmin, Deputy Director, Department of Archaeology started the presentation by giving thanks to all. Her presentation was on the topic: Buddhist monuments in the area around Jagadala Mahavihara. She presented Jagadal Mahavihara as the proposed property, the location with geo-coordinates of the property, surroundings and current state of the property, management, and integrity and authenticity of the property. She justified Jagadal Mahaviahara with the criteria (ii), (iii) & (iv) of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) given by UNESCO. She compared the proposed property with Jagjibonpur and Danga of West Bengal, India. After the presentation, the panel members and consultants delivered their speeches as review: 1. Asst. Professor Dr Sharif Shams Imon:  Sufficient images and drawings of the proposed properties should be included to prove authenticity and integrity.  The justification and comparison of OUV of the proposed properties should be clarified, interpreted and strongly proved.  Comparative analysis should be done differently by studying existing World Heritage sites. 2. Professor Dr Swadhin Sen:  Images, maps and drawings of the proposed properties should be included.  Comparative analysis should be done not only in national contexts but also in universal/global contexts by studying existing World Heritage sites. Page 203

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06  Jagatjibonpur, Vikramshila of West Bengal and Lakhisarai of Vihar of India may be compared for the justification and comparison of OUV of the proposed properties.  In the justification and comparison of OUV, the significance of regional and network contexts with images, maps and drawings by ensuring the best quality should be included.  References of data, images, maps and drawings must be included. Later on, he also sent his written comments on the presentation (Attachment-1) 3. Md. Amiruzzaman:  Thanked the presenter for preparing the presentation in such a short time and with limited resources. He also emphasised preparing different maps, layouts and other documents to strengthen the proposal. Mr Mia thanked everyone for attending the session. Attachments 1. Written comments of Dr Swadhin Sen Page 204

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Attachment-1 Comments on ‘Jagaddal(a) Mahavihara’ PPT 1. The theme of the presentation was supposed to be on ‘Buddhist monuments around Jagaddal(a) Mahavihara’. 2. The quality, content, and narratives of the PPT are extremely poor. 3. There is not a single well-developed maps/cartographic presentation. Most of them are either scanned in a bad quality, or do not conform to the required attributes. 4. Well known archaeological monuments like `The Temple of Halud Vihara’, ‘The recently excavated mound of Agra-Digun’, The monument and mound of Mahisantosh’ and other mounds and sites in the vicinity especially within Dhamuirhat Upazila have not been included. The mounds around the excavated monastery must be described and named. The area of the settlements including the artefacts and tanks and palaeochannels should be there with photo/maps with precise captions. 5. The photos are really bad and do not represent the monumental remains of Jagaddal(a) Mahavihara. The articles by Mahabub ul-Alam in the journal of Pratnatattva and in the recent volume on the History of Bangladesh should have been consulted properly. 6. The artefacts recovered from the excavation are not represented with their contextual references, captions and chronology. For example, the Bronze images are particularly important and unique and personally, I sent those images for their identification to renowned art historian and iconographer Prof. Claudine Bautze-Picron. She has identified a few rare and important varieties. They are included in the paper on Jagaddal(a) Mahavihara excavation in the volume of Pratnatattva (I was the executive editor of the volume). There is a rare image of the Buddist goddess Nairatma, the second idol of this kind, from Eastern India. 7. The plan of the monastery is also especially important to point at. Monasteries with circular corner cells/bastions are not common in Bangladesh. Jagajjibanpur Monastery ( Nandadirghika Mahavihara according to the recovered copper plate inscription issued by Mahendrapala) in West Bengal (7-8 km from the border of Porsha Upazila, Bangladesh), Monastery of Antichak (identified as Vikramshila Mahavihara) in Bihar, recently excavated monastery in Laxmisarai, Bohar has some resemblance in terms of the circular corner room. The importance of this architectural layout and the continuation of occupation after a period of destruction(?) [attested by conflagration] have to be pointed out with photographs and plans. Other important antiquities from the excavation are not presented. 8. The stone panels depicting the shikara’s of temples and stupas are of greater significance. 9. Most importantly, the debates regarding the location of Jagaddla Mahavihara mentioned by Sandhyakar Nandin (noted by AKM Zakariah and Mahabub ul Alam) are missing. 10. The OuV and selection criteria are not focussed, and the justifications have to be supported by acceptable and well-argued narratives. Recommendations: 1. I feel that the dummy presentation should be initiated only after the preparation of a PPT with a minimum standard. The minimum standard has not been achieved in this ppt. 2. The data/photos must be collected from the Regional Office (formally, if necessary). Consultation with Mr Mahabub ul Alam, Former Assistant Director of the DoA is essential. Swadhin Sen, PhD Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University 23 July 2020 Page 205

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Ministry of Cultural Affairs Department of Archaeology Heritage Cell Webinar series on Updating the Tentative List of Bangladesh Webinar-7: Monumental remains around Halud Vihara Date & Time: 23 July 2020 at 7:00 PM Welcome & Closing Speech: Mr Md. Hannan Mia, Director General, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Presenters:  Ms Lovely Yesmin, Deputy Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh  Mr Md. Mohidul Islam, Assistant Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Panel Members:  Dr Sharif Shams Imon, Assistant Professor and Academic Coordinator, Heritage and Tourism Programmes, Institute for Tourism Studies, Colina de Mong-Há, Macao  Dr Swadhin Sen, Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka  Ms Mst. Naheed Sultana, Regional Director of Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Rapporteur:  Mr Md. Shahin Alam, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Summary of the webinar Mr Md. Hannan Mia, Director General of Department of Archaeology welcomed all to the webinar. He then invited the presenter to present their proposed theme. Ms Lovely Yesmin, Deputy Director, Department of Archaeology started the presentation by giving thanks to all. Her presentation was on the topic: Monumental remains around Halud Vihara. She presented Halud Vihara as the proposed property, the location with geo-coordinates of the property, surroundings and current state of the property, management, integrity and authenticity of the property. She justified Halud Vihara with the criteria (ii), (iii) & (iv) of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) given by UNESCO. After the presentation, the panel members and consultants delivered their speeches as review. 3. Asst. Professor Dr Sharif Shams Imon:  Sufficient images and drawings of the proposed properties should be included to prove authenticity and integrity.  The justification and comparison of OUV of the proposed properties should be clarified, interpreted and strongly proved.  Comparative analysis should be done differently by studying existing World Heritage sites. 4. Professor Dr Swadhin Sen:  In the justification and comparison of OUV, the significance of regional and network contexts with images, maps and drawings by ensuring the best quality should be included.  Comparative analysis should be done not only in national contexts but also in universal/global contexts by studying existing World Heritage sites. Page 206

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06  Regional heritage may be compared for the justification and comparison of OUV of the proposed properties.  References of historical data, images, maps and drawings must be included. 3. Mr Md. Hannan Mia:  Emphasis on justifying and comparing the proposed properties in the context of global perspectives for the criteria of OUV  He also emphasised that better work needs to be done for updating World Heritage tentative lists. Mr Mia then gave his thanks and closed the session of the webinar. Page 207

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Ministry of Cultural Affairs Department of Archaeology Heritage Cell Webinar series on Updating the Tentative List of Bangladesh Webinar- 8: The Mosque City of Gour Date & Time: 29 August 2020 at 5.00 PM Welcome & Closing Speech: Mr Md. Khairul Bashar Swapan, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Presenters:  Ms Mst. Naheed Sultana, Regional Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh  Mr Md. Abu Said Inam Tanvirul, Custodian, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Panel Members:  Dr Sharif Shams Imon, Assistant Professor and Academic Coordinator, Heritage and Tourism Programmes, Institute for Tourism Studies, Colina de Mong-Há, Macao  Dr Swadhin Sen, Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka  Ms Afroza Khan Mita, Regional Director of Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Rapporteur:  Ms Tania Sultana, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Summary of the webinar Mr Md. Khairul Bashar Swapan, Field Officer of Department of Archaeology welcomed all to the webinar. He then invited the presenter to present their proposed theme. The presentation was given by Ms Naheed Sultana, Regional Director, Rajshahi & Rangpur Division, Department of Archaeology. In her presentation, she stated that the ruins of the fortified city of Gaur and its hinterlands are located on the India-Bangladesh border in the Malda district of West Bengal and Chapai Nawabganj district of Bangladesh. The citadel and hinterlands area was full of mosques, mausoleums, madrasha, darbar hall, different type of gateways roads, royal houses, tanks and so on. She mentioned that among the six criteria, the proposed site meets criteria (ii) and (iv) of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV). To justify criteria (ii), Ms Sultana described that the hinterland area clearly demonstrates that the people of ancient periods planned, engineered and utilized the landscape according to necessity and also to provide the agricultural surplus essential to support the city population, religious institutions and royal elites. And in the case of (iv), she added that along with the great buildings and their remains of the Sultanate and Mughal periods, the hinterland also contains the organisation of the whole landscape, urban planning and management of the environment. These pieces of evidence exhibit the significant stages of the architectural ensemble and landscape as well. Page 208

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Then to justify the two criteria of OUV she said for criteria (ii) that the actual significance of the area however lies not in the individual mounds or monuments but in the whole area i.e., the fortified city and its hinterland. The evidence of the planning and the utilisation of the landscape is clear both in the individual components and in their relationships. And in terms of (iv), she proposed that the hinterland shows the cultural sequences of two different periods, with their very distinct cultural futures particularly, architectural styles and elements, type of buildings, ornamentation in the buildings and so on. Ms Sultana then described the integrity of the site, saying that the hinterland preserved the standing monuments, cultural mounds, ancient ponds, roads, culverts, etc. These elements were articulated with one another and there was a very strong relationship amongst them. Only a few excavations in some sites have occurred and the remaining large number of mounds are still untouched. After showing some pictures regarding this, she ended her presentation by thanking all. The panel members then commented on the presentation. 1. Mr Sharif Shams Imon:  The maximum portion of the citadel lies in West Bengal, so, in this case, a transboundary nomination can be submitted and then it will be easier to meet the criteria, but in the case of only the Bangladesh portion, the maximum portion will remain missing, making it very challenging.  Captions of the pictures and the time of capturing them can be mentioned.  In the case of criterion (ii), an important interchange of values has occurred, so strong evidence is needed to identify where and when the interchange has occurred. Examples must be mentioned in the period of Mughal and Sultanate periods separately and at the same time at the mixture of the two periods. 2. Prof. Swadhin Sen:  Criteria (v) can be added to improve the proposal because the history of Gaur city is very much engaged with the river and still some embankments can be identified. The changing of the river course Ganga was one of the main reasons for the abandonment of the city of Gaur.  More study is necessary to differentiate Mughal mosques and Sultani mosques.  The similarities and dissimilarities of the town planning with other places can also be mentioned to justify this site as a unique one.  More maps can be added and also some description from the ancient tourists mainly from China. Finally, the host concluded the session by thanking all. Page 209

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Ministry of Cultural Affairs Department of Archaeology Heritage Cell Webinar series on Updating the Tentative List of Bangladesh Webinar-9: Barobazar Group of Monuments (The Ancient City of Muhammadabad) Date & Time: 29 August 2020 at 6.00 PM Welcome & Closing Speech: Mr Md. Khairul Bashar Swapan, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Presenters:  Ms Afroza Khan Mita, Regional Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh  Mr A K M Syfur Rahman, Assistant Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh  Ms Urmila Hasnat, Research Assistant, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Panel Members:  Dr Sharif Shams Imon, Assistant Professor and Academic Coordinator, Heritage and Tourism Programmes, Institute for Tourism Studies, Colina de Mong-Há, Macao  Dr Swadhin Sen, Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka  Dr Md. Atauar Rahman, Regional Director of Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Rapporteur:  Ms Tania Sultana, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Summary of the webinar Mr Md. Khairul Bashar Swapan, Field Officer of Department of Archaeology welcomed all to the webinar then invited the presenters to present their proposed theme. The presentation was presented by Afroza Khan Mita, Regional Director, Khulna & Barisal, Department of Archaeology and A.K.M. Syfur Rahman, Assistant Director, Khulna Division, Department of Archaeology. In their presentation, they stated that the small township of Barobazar encompasses an area of about 6.44 km2 and still bears the signature of the Sultani Period. The monuments are concentrated on the north bank of the river Bhairav and to the west of the present highway. They proposed criteria (vi) to justify the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the site. They said the property is managed under the Antiquities Act, 1968 (Amendment 1976). In addition, the Department of Archaeology protects the property under the Antiquities Export Control Act (1947), the immovable Antiquities Preservation Rules (1976), the Conservation Manual (1923) and the Archaeology Works code (1938). Though efforts have been made to address the conservation problem derived from salinity, this has not been comprehensively solved and deterioration has continued. The implementation of the management plan, including conservation provisions, will need to be monitored to evaluate achieved results and provide new action plans in response to emerging conditions. They added that in order to preserve the authenticity of the monuments, conservation and restoration action have respected the use of original materials (lime and mortar). Most of the architectural ruins were under soil before conducting archaeological excavation carried out by the Department of Archaeology. The monuments are starving for lack of regular monitoring, repair work and due to human and environmental interventions. Many of Page 210

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 the structures continue to be in religious and secular use contributing to the social and communal harmony by the way of retaining the original features of traditional practices. They mentioned that the original picturesque location and the natural setting of these densely located religious and secular monuments, along with the medieval form and design, are intact. The threat of unauthorised activities by the community and the extreme salinity of the soil and atmosphere, both of which can potentially threaten the physical integrity of the attributes, are being closely monitored by the site managers. In particular, interventions are needed to preserve the Barobazar Group of Monuments (The Ancient City of Muhammadabad). After showing some pictures regarding this, they ended their presentation by thanking all. Feedbacks from the Panel Members: 1. Dr Sharif Shams Imon:  If there is any boundary map of the “Urban Centre” mentioned in the presentation then it will fulfil the criteria.  However, it is also possible to submit it without the boundary map if the authenticity of the described structures remains intact. In this case, the mint can play an important role; only the mosque is not enough for this nomination. After the feedback from the panel members, a general discussion was held. In this session, Md. Amiruzzaman, Deputy Director (Antiquity) mentioned, by referencing a book, that Muhammadabad is still not established as a city. Finally, the host concluded the session by thanking all. Page 211

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Ministry of Cultural Affairs Department of Archaeology Heritage Cell Webinar series on Updating the Tentative List of Bangladesh Webinar-10: National Assembly Complex, Bangladesh Date & Time: 12 September 2020 at 5.30 PM Welcome & Closing Speech: Mr Md Amiruzzaman, Deputy Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Presenters:  Ar. Md. Wahiduzzaman Ratul, Institute of Architects Bangladesh Panel Members:  Dr Sharif Shams Imon, President, ICOMOS Bangladesh  Mr Khandoker Mahfuz Alam, Assistant Architect, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Rapporteur:  Mr Shahin Alam, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Summary of the webinar Mr Md Amiruzzaman welcomed all to the webinar then handed over the rest of the session to Dr Sharif Shams Imon. Dr Imon then invited the presenter to present the proposal. The chosen site for this presentation was the National Assembly Building of Bangladesh, which the presenters described as the masterpiece of renowned architect Luis Kahn. They also informed that that Government of Bangladesh has collected all drawings of the National Assembly Building of Bangladesh from Luis Kahn’s office at USA. They presented that this building meets the criteria (i), (ii) and (iv) of Outstanding Universal Values (OUV). They also described the Core zone and Buffer zone of this building, and compared it to other modern architecture in various countries. Comments by Dr Imon: a) How the ongoing Metro Rail project affecting the site should be mentioned. b) It is a national heritage site declared by RAJUK. c) He also had concerns about the boundaries of this building and the metro rail South-East corner at this Building Complex. d) Consent is needed from PWD and Speaker of National Assembly Building to submit the site for the tentative list. e) He admired that it’s a strong proposal for Modern Architecture. Mr Amiruzzaman thanked all who attended the webinar session. Page 212

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Ministry of Cultural Affairs Department of Archaeology Heritage Cell Webinar series on Updating the Tentative List of Bangladesh Webinar- 11: The Architectural Work of Muzharul Islam, an Outstanding Contribution to the Modern Movement in South Asia Date & Time: 12 September 2020 at 6.30 PM Welcome & Closing Speech: Mr Md Amiruzzaman, Deputy Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Presenters:  Ar. Muhtadin Iqbal, Institute of Architects Bangladesh  Ar. Sujaul Islam Khan, Institute of Architects Bangladesh Panel Members:  Dr Sharif Shams Imon, Assistant Professor and Academic Coordinator, Heritage and Tourism Programmes, Institute for Tourism Studies, Colina de Mong-Há, Macao  Mr Khandoker Mahfuz Alam, Assistant Architect, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Rapporteur:  Mr Shahin Alam, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Summary of the webinar Mr Md Amiruzzaman welcomed all to the webinar. He then invited the presenters to present their proposed theme. The presentation was given on architect Mazharul Islam’s modern architectural works, with twelve buildings of his nominated for serial nomination. They described the justification of this serial nomination and Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) for criteria number (ii). They also described the present management system of those buildings. Comments by Dr Imon: f) They also nicely compared modern architecture of other countries with Mazharul Islam’s buildings. g) They identified the attributes of those buildings and some small changes of those buildings. h) They also identified and defined the characteristics of those buildings. i) The presenters defined and clarified the OUV for Mazharul Islam’s buildings. j) The consent of all twelve buildings will be needed for the tentative list and any further process of submitting the dossier. Mr Amiruzzaman thanked all who attended the webinar. Page 213

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Ministry of Cultural Affairs Department of Archaeology Heritage Cell Webinar series on Updating the Tentative List of Bangladesh Webinar-12: Cultural Landscape and Monuments of Medieval Capital Sonargaon to Panam city Date & Time: 18 September 2020 at 5.00 PM Welcome & Closing Speech: Mr Md. Khairul Bashar Swapan, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Presenters:  Dr A.T.M. Masood Reza, Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Khulna University  Mr Muhammad Nurul Kabir Bhuiyan, Assistant Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University Panel Members:  Dr Sharif Shams Imon, Assistant Professor and Academic Coordinator, Heritage and Tourism Programmes, Institute for Tourism Studies, Colina de Mong-Há, Macao  Dr Swadhin Sen, Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka  Ms Maliha Nargis Ahmed, Associate Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka  Mr Md Amiruzzaman, Deputy Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Rapporteur:  Mr Shahin Alam, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Summary of the webinar Mr Md. Khairul Bashar Swapan, Field Officer of the Department of Archaeology welcomed all to the webinar. He then invited the presenters to present their proposed theme. In their presentation, they described the rivers and landscape, location of heritage sites, Bengal delta and its landscape, Sonargoan and its landscape, historical records of the region, archival references, historical narratives, documentary research, presented historical maps of Sonargaon and archival photographs, evidence, outstanding universal values, justification of three criteria, integrity, authenticity, management system and properties list (attached pdf file of presentation). He mentioned that among the six criteria the proposed site meets criteria (ii), (iii) and (v). Mr Nurul Kabir justified criteria (ii) by showing that the Sonargaon-Panam bears testimony of the development of a vernacular knowledge base on settlement pattern admirably adapted to the deltaic cultural and geographical context of Bengal. The sites exploited the uplands and low lands to initiate the habitation culture in the area following a complex, strategic and utilitarian relationship of man, land and water over a long span of time. This is demonstrated by an urban plan adapted to the topography starting from the medieval period to the colonial period in radial and rectilinear patterns respectively. He described how water dynamics play important role in placing principal city zones like Bandar, bazar, bridges, and mosques within suitable and strategic connection with canals and rivers. He also described that rectilinear urban setting is evidenced in colonial Panam which is guarded by Pankhiraj Khal on either side of the township in an east-west axis. The city possesses entrances and exits in the same direction - Page 214

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 east and west. Both of the cities, from different timeframes, utilise almost the same ways of water connectivity, suitability and strategies. Mr Kabir presented that Panam city presented a facade to its only street in order to enrich the visual symphony of the ensemble, where each building keeps its own identity blended with the harmonious whole. Thus, the city illustrates its own sense of aesthetic and art work. Here, the buildings follow a pattern language by which a unity had been achieved, like the use of two to three-storey height, axiality, symmetry, arched openings etc. The city innovates and exploits different types of building technology and construction methods to keep the horizontal proximity integrated. Such technologies are exemplified in shared wall technology, shared backyard settings, upper floor temple and so on to evidence of practising innovative and ingenuine building technology in the region Mr Kabir justified criteria (iii) by saying that the Sufis contributed in education culture and social change in Bengal and India. Sonargaon was an important seat for Sufis of the medieval world and had great influence on the cultural lifestyle of medieval Indian civilization. In Hindu mythology, the word ``Langalbandh`` refers to the place where a plough was stopped. He also said that the most delicate, the very lightest muslin was being manufactured in Sonargaon, and is known to be an important product traded in the \"Maritime Silk Road\" from Marco Polo's account. In addition, the Indian Ocean trade led by Arab merchants during the 8th-century report numbers and varieties of muslins being exported to Basra, Baghdad, Makkah and so on. To the east, it went to Java and China. Muslin manufactured from a cotton plant phutikarpos (Gossypiumarboreum var. neglecta), was unique to the area of Sonargaon and grew at the bank of the river Meghna only. He said that Sonargaon comprised important ports and markets of Bengal and contributed significantly to medieval trade and commercial orders of the world. Evidence comes from different foreign travellers account of the early fourteenth century and onwards, such as Moroccan traveller Ibn Battuta (1345 CE), Chinese travellers Hou Xian (1415 CE) and Ma Huan (1431 CE), English traveller Ralph Fitch (1586 CE), and Dutch traveller F. Pelsaert (1620s CE). Land route trade shows Sonargaon as a centre in a trans-Asian commercial nexus during the medieval period. He justified that Sadak e Azam, popularly known as the Grand Trunk Road, is an exceptional contribution in Indian history, facilitating communication, helped trade and commerce, swift dispatch of soldiers, strong espionage system and introducing an efficient postal department. This road placed Sonargaon as its last station, connecting all the major cities, trade zones and outposts of India during the medieval period. He described Ghiyasuddin who was a patron of scholars and poets; among others, the Persian poet Hafez kept correspondences with him. His reign (1389-1410 CE) may be termed as the golden age of Persian literature in Bengal and considered as intangible heritage value. Mr Kabir also tried to justify criteria (V) that the cultural landscape of Sonargaon-Panam, at the confluence of Shitalakkha, Brahmaputra and Meghna rivers, witnessed the formation of the first independent Sultanate and its capital in Bengal by 1338 CE. This landscape, by nature deltaic, conserved the strategic and utilitarian contexts to develop and safeguard the capital and contributed to an exceptional event in Bengal history: Fakhruddin Mubarak Shah declaring the first independence from Sonargaon placed Bengal in a global order of Muslim Ummah. Unlike other walled cities of Bengal, Sonargaon testifies a different fortification by rivers and the Bay of Bengal promoted waterfront and port for maritime trade and commerce. The capital Sonargaon also developed unique and innovative ideas of initiating a settlement pattern in an undulating landscape predominated by water in different degrees at different time of the year. The idea and philosophy placed human habitation over the uplands (Tek, Chala or Chawk) in relation to lowlands (Bald) to initiate a complex, strategic and utilitarian relationship of man with land and water. This relationship provided the landscape with a canal network enhanced with a number of bridges facilitating water flow, boat communication and drainage pattern in the city. He described that the colonial Panam explores a different sense of land usage to occupy a notable example of a suburb laying in between two canals. Panam city, popularly famous for its Siva temple, innovates different Page 215

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 organisation of temple architecture, facade articulation, built form element and so on to keep the physical buffer of the township intact and integrated. The process initiating upper floor inner shrines in the city testifies with unique and rare contribution from 18-19th century Bengal. Mr Kabir described that when it comes to integrity, Sonargaon and Panam have evolved over a period of nine centuries and have gone through successive periods of cyclic decay and growth. Archaeological and architectural records start from Langalbandh or Panchami Ghat towards the medieval capital Sonargaon and colonial township Panam, and the proposed cultural landscape is composed of almost every element and attribute to uphold the outstanding universal values mentioned above. By and large, the 'Landscape' still exudes wholeness and intactness in its fabric and urbanity and has absorbed changes and growth with its traditional resilience. With authenticity, the settlement pattern, architecture and archaeology of Sonargaon-Panam represents a sense of the character of its conception through authentic historical narrative and chronology. Historic and heritage records of the sites and surroundings - both tangible and intangible - bear testimony of unique, authentic and integrated notions of cultural lifestyle and cultural process from the beginning of early historic to medieval and colonial time frame of Bengal. Sultans and sultanates of Sonargaon have been attested by numerous inscriptions, coins, literature and other authentic archival and archaeological records. The city and its successors grew together in accordance with historical chronology and time frame. Urban morphology and setting of the cultural landscape proclaim medieval and colonial entity within a sequential process and perspectives. In addition, the historic zones or occupational sites have a considerable degree of authenticity in terms of location and setting, forms and designs, and materials and substances. The residential and commercial constructions have undergone inevitable modifications while safeguarding the original facades is yet to be done. The urban and visual integrity of Panam city (wide perspectives on either side of the road) and its defining attributes are fully intact, having been preserved in their essence and constituting an intelligible unit, whether taken as a whole or separately. Feedbacks from the Panel Members: 1. Dr Sharif Shams Imon:  The boundary needs to be clearly defined. Even if it is a cultural landscape, a boundary has to be shown.  Management needs to be more specific to the large area proposed.  The uniqueness of the proposed site requires stronger justification.  The connection between Muslin and Mosul needs clarification.  The uniqueness of Sufi arrival and the associated locations need to be clarified.  Does the Grand Trunk Road exist in the proposed site?  It is necessary to clarify what legal protection the site enjoys. 2. Prof. Swadhin Sen:  The connection from Sonargaon to Panam needs to be cleared. 3. Md. Amiruzzaman:  Instead of the existing title of “Cultural Landscape illustrated by the river Brahmaputra, Sitalakhya and Meghna: Sonargoan and Panam”, he would propose” Cultural Landscape and Monuments of Panam city”. Finally, the host concluded the session by thanking all. Page 216

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 06 Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Ministry of Cultural Affairs Department of Archaeology Heritage Cell Webinar series on Updating the Tentative List of Bangladesh Webinar-13: Late Mughal and Colonial Brick Temples of Bangladesh Date & Time: 18 September 2020 at 6.30 PM Welcome & Closing Speech: Mr Khandokar Mahfuz Alam, Assistant Architect, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Presenters:  Mr Shahin Alam, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Panel Members:  Dr Sharif Shams Imon, Assistant Professor and Academic Coordinator, Heritage and Tourism Programmes, Institute for Tourism Studies, Colina de Mong-Há, Macao  Dr Swadhin Sen, Professor, Department of Archaeology, Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka  Mr Md Amiruzzaman, Deputy Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh  Ms Rakhi Roy, Regional Director, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Rapporteur:  Mr Md. Khairul Bashar Swapan, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology, Bangladesh Summary of the webinar Mr Khandokar Mahfuz Alam welcomed all to the webinar then handed over the rest of the session to Dr Sharif Shams Imon. Dr Imon then invited the presenter to present his proposed theme. Mr Md. Shahin Alam, Field Officer, Department of Archaeology started the presentation by giving thanks to all. Names, location, built period, founders, historical overview, architectural overview, authenticity, integrity and Outstanding Universal Values (OUV) of 50 Mughal and Colonial brick temples of Bangladesh were presented in this presentation. Images, maps, site plans, ground plans, elevation drawings and so on of the temples were included in the presentation. Sateraratna Temple, Khelaram Datar Temple, Kantajee Temple & Hatikumrul Navaratna Temple for single nomination; and eleven Siva temples, a group of Rekha temples, the group of temples of Puthia Rajbarhi, a group of Bangla temples & a group of Navaratna temples for serial nomination were proposed in the presentation for UNESCO World Heritage tentative list. After the presentation, the panel members and consultants delivered their speeches as review. 1. Asst. Professor Dr Sharif Shams Imon: Giving thanks, he started his speech. At the beginning of his speech, he shared his appreciation for the presentation and gave some suggestions and corrections:  The justification and comparison of OUV of the proposed properties should be clarified and strongly proved.  Sufficient images and drawings of the past and present of the proposed properties should be included to prove authenticity and integrity.  Terminology of the temple types such as Rekha, Chala, Bangla etc. should be written. 2. Professor Dr Swadhin Sen:  Terminology of the temple types and their history and terracotta myths should be written.  Sufficient images, maps and drawings of the proposed properties should be included. Mr Alam thanked everyone and invited them to attend the next session and announced the ending of the session. Page 217

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 07 Annexure 07: Official letter for sending the draft findings to the UNESCO Page 218

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 08 Annexure 08: Conscent letters from different organizations Page 219

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 08 Page 220

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 08 Page 221

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 08 Page 222

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 08 Page 223

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 08 Page 224

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 08 Page 225

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 08 Page 226

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 08 Page 227

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 08 Page 228

Final Report on Updating the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List of Bangladesh ANNEXURE- 08 Page 229