Nomination for inscription

on the World Heritage List Roșia Montană

Mining Landscape

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2
ROȘIA MONTANĂ
MINING LANDSCAPE

Nomination for inscription

on the World Heritage List

State Party
Romania

State, Province or Region

Alba County

Name of Property
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape

Geographical coordinates
46° 18’ 22” N
23° 7’ 50” E
6
Description of
the boundary of the
nominated property

Tăul Mare (© Radu Sălcudean)

The boundary of the property has been being a dominant feature of the landscape and its settle-
delineated by a process of first by mapping the range of ments, and which were subjected to mining purposes and
identified attributes that convey potential Outstanding a distinctive agricultural regime that was vitally import-
Universal Value, ensuring that all of these are encom- ant in the daily life of the mining community throughout
passed in order to meet the condition of integrity, and its history. Further, the boundary encompasses extensive
then by carefully selecting a clearly defined line that can archaeological potential (in both the landscape and un-
be readily identified on the ground. Due consideration derground), our current knowledge to be supplemented
was also given to protection and management criteria. by a forthcoming programme of Lidar survey to comple-
Mountain ridgelines have been utilised, that ment more than a decade of archaeological research on,
coincide with the watershed (water being important to and beneath, the ground.
ore processing), in order to achieve a high level of func-
tional integrity in terms of the mining cultural landscape,
its processes and defining features - cultural and natural,
geographical and geological. This approach is also posi-
tive in terms of visual integrity (visual impact) as the site
is located in a natural amphitheatre surrounded on three
sides by dividing ridges and peaks, such flanking ranges
7
Proposed
Statement of Outstanding
Universal Value
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape contains The village of Roșia Montană boasts an
the most significant, extensive and technically diverse impressive inventory that illustrates a diversity of
underground Roman gold mining complex currently architectural styles, eclectic influences fused with local
known in the world. Workings attested by the famous tradition, a cosmopolitan settlement whose roots and
Roman wax-coated wooden writing tablets have been embellishments are based on freeholders’ exploitation
dated to the Roman occupation of Dacia (106–170 CE) of gold. Five religious denominations and several ethnic
and, together with potentially previous and subsequent groups have lived together in work and community
phases, mining activity spans more than two millennia. life, a situation that is reflected in the current character
Historically, precious metals coinage financed trade and of this Transylvanian mining settlement substantial-
military force that, together, created and sustained em- ly frozen in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries
pires. At Roșia Montană all phases have left their mark, at the inception of its prosperous urbanisation under
both underground and at surface, an evolution almost Austro-Hungarian rule. Churches dominate the built
exclusively determined by people’s quest for gold. This environment and contribute substantially to its symbolic
socio-technical palimpsest of successive empires and imagery. Characteristic buildings with outer porches
cultures has unparalleled time-depth and is exceptionally form a typological background to a series of distinctive
diverse and readable in such a compact area. and mostly decorative features that were borrowed from
Roșia Montană is situated in a natural am- the repertoire of Classical or Baroque architecture. This
phitheatre of massifs and radiating valleys in the structure, distinguished also by grand walls and monu-
Metalliferous range of the Apuseni Mountains, located mental gates that face winding roads, gradually gives way
in the historical region of Transylvania in the central part in the industrial suburbs to miners’ households consist-
of present-day Romania. The site represents the centre ing of wooden dwellings above high stone-built base-
of the so-called Golden Quadrilateral of the Southern ments, many of which housed ore-processing workshops
Carpathians – the richest precious metals province with water sumps fed by springs that could be used in the
in Europe. harshest of winters. Final interventions derive from the
Gold occurred in veins within seven small communist regime that imposed nationalisation in 1948,
mountains that visually dominate the landscape of Roșia and which ended traditional family – or small group –
Montană, itself surrounded on three sides by dividing operated mining. State-run mining by underground and
ridges and peaks. Towering crags are pierced by old opencast ended in 2006. Properties that today proclaim
mine entrances, their tops scarred by opencast working. a past built on gold, are still home to a living community;
Roman archaeology at surface is prolific and perva- and the landscape continues to yield a living. Its cultur-
sive, comprising ore-processing areas, living quarters, al and natural assets are of such quality, however, that
administrative buildings, sacred areas and necropolises, opportunities for a sustainable future have perhaps never
some with funerary buildings with complex architecture, been brighter.
all set in relation to over 7 km of ancient underground
workings discovered to date. Forest and scree mix on
steep slopes and, mounted on rocky knolls, the towers
and spires of historic churches command the villages
of Roșia Montană and the much smaller Corna, settle-
ments constrained by relief in valleys that also provided
for ore-dressing, communication and transport. Steeply
sloping meadows are characterised by agro-pastoral
practices that are as old as the mining activity itself, and
a number of artificial lakes, formerly header ponds for
ore processing that were greatly expanded from 1733,
punctuate higher elevations.
8
Criteria under which
the property is nominated
(ii), (iii), (iv), (vi)

Roman-Catholic church and cemetery, in the historic

centre of Roșia Montană (© Radu Sălcudean)

Justification
for Criteria
→ Criterion (ii): innovative techniques developed by skilled migrant
Illyrian-Dalmatian miners to exploit gold in such ways
to exhibit an important interchange that suited the technical nature of the deposit. Control of
of human values, over a span of time precious metal resources, to use as currency, was a fun-
or within a cultural area of the world, damental factor in the development of Roman military
on developments in architecture or power and Imperial expansion. When in possession of
technology, monumental arts, town- the Apuseni Mountains there was an imperative to imme-
planning or landscape design; diately commence mining in an efficient manner.
A decade of professional underground archae-
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape contains the ological campaigns, beginning in 2001, elucidates a fu-
world’s pre-eminent example of an underground Roman sion of imported Roman mining technology with locally
gold mine and, further, demonstrates over 2,000 years of developed techniques, unknown elsewhere from such an
subsequent exploitation and continuous settlement. early era. Multiple chambers that housed treadmill-op-
Many of the mining features preserved in erated water-dipping wheels for drainage represent a
over 7 km of Roman workings demonstrate exceptional technique likely routed from Hispania to the Balkans,
9

whilst perfectly carved trapezoidal-section galleries, the landscape reveals evidence of an increasing scale
helicoidal shafts, inclined communication galleries with of modification through time to serve mining and the
stairways cut into the bedrock, and vertical extraction way of life of its communities under successive control
areas (stopes) superimposed above one another with the of empires and state, each phase adding to, or in some
roof carved out in steps, are in a combination so specific case erasing, its predecessors. Today, life continues in
to Roșia Montană that they likely represent pioneering a landscape little changed in some respects, retaining
aspects in the technical history of mining. its capacity to yield a limited yet traditional living from
The significance of Roşia Montană Mining agriculture. Its cultural and natural assets, however, are
Landscape is not limited to antiquity as the Apuseni of such quality that they have the potential to offer a
Mountains were Europe’s main source of gold from the sustainable future for generations that follow.
end of the Crusades in the thirteenth century until the
discovery of the Americas in the sixteenth century, there- → Criterion (iv):
after remaining pre-eminent in terms of output, during
the era of Austro-Hungarian rule in particular, when to be an outstanding example of a type
German, Austrian and Hungarian miners were brought of building, architectural or technological
in and used their own advanced technology to exploit the ensemble or landscape which illustrates
deposits on a much larger scale. (a) significant stage(s) in human history;

→ Criterion (iii): Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is testimony

to the long history of gold exploitation in the Carpathian
to bear a unique or at least exceptional precious metals province of the Golden Quadrilateral,
testimony to a cultural tradition or to a from the Roman era to the twenty-first century. It is
civilization which is living or which has an exemple that illustrates the strategic control and
disappeared vigorous development of precious metals’ mining by the
Roman Empire, essential for its longevity and military
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape embodies power. Following the decline of mining in Hispania
the cultural tradition of one of the oldest documented (Iberian Peninsula, modern Spain and Portugal),
mining communities in Europe, anciently founded by Aurariae Dacicae (Roman Dacia, AD 106 to AD 272) was
the Romans and which survived under influences of the only significant new source of gold and silver for the
successive socio-technical and organisational systems Roman Empire, among the likely key motivations for
whilst gradually waning until its final disappearance at Trajan’s conquest.
the beginning of the twenty-first century. The pre-eminent underground Roman mining
The site was the most important precious network, with its outstanding technical attributes and
metal mine located in the Golden Quadrilateral of the associated landscape, is exceptional testimony to the
Romanian Carpathians and is associated with excep- diffusion and further development of precious metals
tional epigraphic testimony from the Roman Imperial mining technology during the expansion of the Roman
era. Wax-coated wooden writing tablets discovered in Empire in the 2nd and 3rd centuries CE. Archaeological
the mine during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries investigation has revealed important aspects that con-
have been correlated with numerous stone epigraphic tribute to the global history of mining. Such extensive
monuments discovered on site. Together they provide an perfectly carved trapezoidal-section galleries, helicoidal
authentic picture of daily life and cultural practice in this shafts and inclined communication galleries with stair-
ancient frontier mining camp community. ways cut into the bedrock, and vertical extraction areas
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is rooted in (stopes) superimposed above one another with the roof
a past that evolved in a tradition consistently bound by carved out in steps, are unknown elsewhere from such
efforts to extract gold. Detailed physical testimony is an early era. Features such as multiple chambers for
provided by: the underground mining works, chrono- treadmill-powered water-dipper wheels (and the wooden
logically differentiated by distinctive technical features; remains of such equipment), whilst recorded but mostly
the socio-technical surface mining landscape consisting destroyed elsewhere in the Roman world by subsequent
of ore-processing areas, habitation areas, sacred areas, modern mining, are preserved at Roșia Montană. They
necropolises; the current mining village built at the dawn are of exceptional value due to their rarity, extent and
of the industrial era; and the extensive documentation of state of conservation.
the communities that generated them. The modern socio-technical mining legacy is
Archaeological evidence survives alongside the significant, too, from the prolific Habsburg legacy of the
legacy of modern underground mining operations, whilst seventeenth to nineteenth centuries to the pre-industrial
10

The entrance to the Holly Cross master gallery,

photograph from the 1900’s (C. Lajos)

mining and ore-processing methods captured at the mo- → Criterion (vi):

ment of technological changes on the verge of the mod-
ern industrial revolution. Mining operations undertaken to be directly or tangibly associated with
at this time were mostly by ‘freeholder’ families that events or living traditions, with ideas, or
favoured the continuation of such ore-dressing methods with beliefs, with artistic and literary works
until nationalisation in 1948. of outstanding universal significance;
Large-scale underground mining started under
the communist regime, an era that has left enormous The Roman wax-coated wooden tablets (tabu-
caverns, and in 1971 this switched to large-scale opencast lae ceratae) of Alburnus Maior (Roşia Montană) were
working of the Cetate massif, destroying the spectac- made famous by the great German historian Theodor
ular Roman mining works known as the “Citadel” and Mommsen (1817–1903), generally regarded as one of the
continuing until 2006 by which time it had effectively greatest classicists of the nineteenth century. They repre-
reduced the elevation of the mountain by as much as sent a significant source for his interpretation of Roman
twenty per cent. The apartment blocks inserted in the law and on the law of obligations, which had a significant
first stage of the socialist age into an essentially eigh- impact on the German Civil Code, subsequently forming
teenth-nineteenth century architectural ensemble is a the basis for similar regulations in other countries such
striking relic of this era. as Portugal, China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Greece
and Ukraine.
Around 50 Roman wax-coated wooden tablets
were discovered during the 1780s and 1850s in mining
galleries at Roşia Montană, with some 24 surviving in
museums around the world. These are first-rate sources
of legal, socio-economic, demographic and linguistic
information not only regarding Alburnus Maior but
the entire Dacian province and, implicitly, the Roman
Empire. The tablets provide intimate details of life in
the mining community and are also correlated with an
unparalleled number of stone epigraphic monuments,
votive and funerary, discovered on site and preserved
in museums at Roşia Montană, Cluj-Napoca, Turda,
11

Wax-coated tablet XI (NHMR Archives)

Alba Iulia and Deva. Information reveals explicit details

of mining organisation, sale and purchase contracts,
receipts of loans with interest, and the sale of slaves.
Epigraphic evidence attests not only Illyrians but also
Greek and Latin migrants hired to work in the mines and
organised in associations (e.g. collegia aurariorum, societas
danistaria).
Academic research into the history of the
Roman Empire during the Antonine dynasty and its
relationship to the Dacians’ gold and gold extracted
from Roman Dacia has opened a new area of research
into European cultural history: the economic recovery
of the Roman Empire, the commencement of mon-
umental public construction works in Rome, among
which the Forum and Trajan’s Column are perhaps the
most important elements, and the direct linkage to the
gold-mining area of Dacia where Alburnus Maior was its
principal centre.
The perceived value of Roșia Montană’s gold
resources, like that of other gold-producing regions,
changes with time, trade, technology and ownership of
territory. The destination and uses of gold also change
with the above. For the Romans, gold was vital for
currency to pay its soldiers across its Frontiers - and for
funding the import traffic that plied the ‘roads’ of silk and
spices that led to Rome.

Votive altar dedicated to Janus,

Hop Găuri Area (NHMR Archives)
General view – Tăul Mare, Cârnic Massif, Cetate Massif
and the former mining exploitation (© Radu Sălcudean)

General view – Cetate Massif with the traces of the open pit mine
from the Communist period (© Radu Sălcudean)
14

The Square on a market day.

In the background Ajtai Palace, demolished in the
1980s, photograph from the 1900’s (C. Lajos)

Văidoaia area, a typical small-scale mining

neighborhood; each house or group of houses had a
stamping mill, photograph from the 1900’s (C. Lajos)
15
Statement of Statement of
integrity authenticity
The property contains all the necessary attri- The area proposed currently constitutes a
butes that express Outstanding Universal Value. It is con- detailed testimony to unparalleled Roman gold mining
strained within a natural amphitheatre that is radically and humanity’s relationship with the landscape, as well
different from the surrounding landscape and includes as to more than two millennia of mining practices by suc-
all metalliferous massifs of Alburnus Maior and the two cessive empires and cultures. It contains attributes that
principal valleys (Roşia and Corna) for ore-dressing, are high in authenticity in terms of the location and the
settlement, transport and communication. The land- form and materials of surviving historic features, with a
scape represents a palimpsest of successive empires and clear sense of how, when and by whom mining shaped
cultures that have shaped it. Its most recent exploitation, the land.
open pit mining from 1971 to 2006, is responsible for its In terms of knowledge, unparalleled epigraphic
largest scale and most dramatic physical change – though and documentary evidence combined with a decade of
this activity is ultimately representative of irreversible intensive systematic archaeological investigation has
loss and unsustainable practice. already provided a major contribution to the under-
The boundary has been determined using a standing of Roman mining techniques and organisation.
combination of geological/mining maps, natural features Significant potential remains for the Roman period
such as ridgeline watersheds (functional, for water sup- as well as for further stages in the mining landscape
ply in ore-processing) and viewsheds (into and out of the evolution.
property), roads, and the administrative boundaries that
will assist with management of the property. It includes
all areas with significant archaeological potential.
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape has under-
gone multiple transformations; some gradual over the
centuries, and some sudden and devastating such as
the destruction of the Roman openworks on Cetate (the
“Citadel”) by opencast mining starting in the 1970s,
and the recent sustained buildings demolition campaign
that began in 2004 in preparation for the resumption of
open pit mining and the creation of processing facilities.
During the latter, important exemplars of local archi-
tectural heritage and even entire portions of built fabric
(such as the central area of Corna), were destroyed in a
total that exceeded 250 properties. A significant num-
ber survive, however, as a direct result of local owners
maintaining efforts, or due to new investor’s repairs. The
state of conservation of many historic buildings remain
poor - making the preservation and conservation of this
precious heritage all the more important - and some
unauthorised development of small-scale housing has
taken place. At the same time community based heri-
tage programmes have made the connection between
local owners, professionals in the field of conservation
and volunteers from all over the world. During the last
decade a range of historic buildings have been rescued
using local resources and traditional techniques.

Roman Mining Gallery (© Ivan Rous)

16
Requirements
for protection
and management

Training workcamp (Adoptă o casă Summer Schools)

The property is included in a wider area that will benefit from these provisions with the submission
is designated in view of its protection by urban planning of the nomination file to UNESCO. Until then, heritage
regulations, an area that also comprises several individu- authorities in Romania are preparing new forms of man-
ally designated elements, from the Roman mining works, agement for such multi-governance sites and landscapes
to the historic houses and two geological formations. uniting different heritage typologies that will integrate
The more direct protection is granted by list- local partnerships and programmes in which relevant
ing, with 50 elements within the property included in the players come together to achieve each management goal.
Historic Monuments List. They comprise the archaeolog- An active citizenship journey over the last
ical site with a few particular sub-components, the his- decade, where civic society and heritage practitioners
toric centre of the mining town, the Roman mines in Mt. have come together in recognition of the unique Roșia
Cârnic, houses and churches. Several other components Montană heritage, show that the management of the
are currently being assessed for listing, among them the property can be founded on cross-sectorial support and
header ponds of the extensive hydro-technical system. people-centred approaches. These programmes also
Under this protection framework, the respon- triggered systematic monitoring campaigns which are
sibilities fall with the municipality, in respect to the pro- now being endorsed by heritage institutions. This is al-
tection through urban planning measures, and with the ready improving the capacity for specialized institutions
respective owners, when it comes to listed properties. and local authorities to work with other institutions and
According to the law, once a nomination is civil society to build on the successes of Roșia Montană
submitted, all provisions in place for World Heritage and learn from the experience of working there for other
sites will apply to the respective property as well. These heritage places.
include the management system designed to protect all
World Heritage properties in Romania. Roșia Montană
Traces of modern mining, Mt. Cârnic (© Ivan Rous)

Tipical Roman mining gallery in Mt. Orlea Modern mining works in Văidoaia Massif
(© Barry Gamble) (© Asociaţia ARA)
18

Mining and agro–pastoral landscape,

Tăul Anghel and Tăul Brazi (© Radu Sălcudean)
19
 R
OMÂNIA Name and contact information of
official institution/agency
IN S

I
NIULU
TITUTU

IM O
LN

TR
AȚ
ION PA
AL AL

ORGANIZATION: Institutul Naţional al Patrimoniului

National Institute of Heritage
ADDRESS: 16 Ienăchiţă Văcărescu, Bucharest
TEL: +40–21–336.60.73
FAX: +40–21–336.99.04
E-MAIL: secretariat@patrimoniu.gov.ro
WEB: www.patrimoniu.gov.ro
www.rosiamontana.world
Nomination for Inclusion
in the World Heritage List Roșia Montană
Mining Landscape

Nomination Document
Roșia Montană
Mining Landscape

Nomination for Inclusion

in the World Heritage List
Path to Rosia Montana © Daniel Vrăbioiu
Foreword

It is with great pleasure and honour that I support and

promote Roșia Montană Mining Cultural Landscape to be part of the UNESCO
World Heritage List.
There are a great many things which recommend Roșia Montană.
Not only was it the most active mining hub in our Carpathians, but also the one
with the greatest longevity in the documented history of mankind. Mining ac-
tivity has occurred practically uninterrupted since the Bronze Age, it blossomed
in the Antiquity, further developed in the Middle Ages, sustained during the
Modern Era, and was recently suspended. One thing that strikes me is how,
until the communist regime nationalized private properties – in 1948 – that
mining activity was entirely traditional. The industrialisation phenomenon
in the area is thus quite recent. For thousands of years, mining in the region
served the families living there. This type of mining – provided by minimal,
yet consistent incursions - has led to a unique landscape, which now fosters
a distinct area and identity, shaped by the symbiotic interaction between hu-
mans and nature. What we are witnessing is a gradual, meticulous modelling
of the natural habitat, generation by generation, in such depth that the people
living there bear the mark of the very thing they have been trying to possess.
One must tread lightly when it comes to striking the right balance
between the economic development agenda and the environmental one. My
government strived to achieve this equilibrium focused on sustainability, there-
fore I believe the mining landscape can serve as a prime example of how society
and the local comunity can gracefully benefit from the two.
Roșia Montană is the first industry-related heritage site that Romania
nominates to be part of the World Heritage family. This is no small feat. Having
gone through intensive, anachronistic industrialisation during the communist
regime, modern Romania has disconnected itself from the cultural value of its
industrial sites, associating them with planned economy and authoritarian rule.
It is now time for our country to make amends with its past and learn from it.
This is why Roșia Montană is the most remarkable and complex case Romania
can present to the world in this sense.
Regardless of the signature at the end, this letter voices the resolution
of the Romanian people to give humanity an archeological gem and my gov-
ernment's commitment to this nomination to UNESCO, in an effort to ensure
that Roșia Montană may not only be forever in our hearts, but so too in those
of our global community.

Dacian Cioloș
Prime Minister
 Contents

Section 1 7
Identification of the Property

1.a State Party and Country 7

1.b Region 7
1.c Name of the Property 7
1.d Geographical Co-Ordinates to the Nearest Second 7
1.e Maps and Plans Showing Boundaries 7
of the Property
1.f Area of the Property 7

Section 2 13
Description

2.a Description of the Property 13

2.b History and Development 68

Section 3 83
Justification for Inscription

3.1.a Brief Synthesis 83

3.1.b Criteria Under Which Inscription 84
is Proposed and Justification
3.1.c Statement of Integrity 86
3.1.d Statement of Authenticity 87
3.1.e Protection and Management Requirements 88
3.2 Comparative Analysis 89
3.3 Proposed Statement of 109
Outstanding Universal Value

Section 4 115
State of Conservation and
Factors Affecting the Property

4.a Present State of Conservation 115

4.b Factors Affecting the Property 117

Section 5 125
Protection and Management of the Property

5.a Ownership 125

5.b Protective Designations 125
5.c Means of Implementing Protective Measures 127
5.d Existing Plans Related to Municipality and Region 129
in Which the Proposed Property is Located
5.e Property Management Plan 130
5.f Sources and Levels of Finance 131
5.g Sources of Expertise and Training in Conservation 131
and Management Techniques
5.h Visitor Facilities and Statistics 132
5.i Policies and Programmes Related to the Presentation 133
and Promotion of the Property
5.j Staffing Levels (Professional,Technical 133
and Maintenance)
Section 6 135
Monitoring

6.a Key Indicators for Measuring 135

State of Conservation
6.b Administrative Arrangements for 136
Monitoring the Property
6.c Results of Previous Reporting Exercises 136

Section 7 137
Documentation

7.a Photographs, Slides, Image Inventory and 137

Authorisation Table and Other Audiovisual Materials
7.b Texts Relating to Protective Designation, Copies of 144
Property Management Plans or Documented
Management Systems and Extracts of Other
Plans Relevant to the Property
7.c Form and Date of Most Recent Records or Inventory 146
of the Property
7.d Address Where Inventory, Records and Archives are Held 146
7.e Bibliography 146

Section 8 151
Contact Information

8.a Preparer 151

8.b Official Local Institution/Agency 151
8.c Other Local Institutions 151
8.d Official Web Address 151

Section 9 152
Signature on Behalf of the State Party

Section 10 153
Acknowledgements
8
 1. Identification
of the Property

1.a Country (and State Party if different) 1.c Name of Property

Romania Roșia Montană Mining Landscape

1.b State, Province or Region 1.d Geographical coordinates

County Alba N 46° 18’ 22”
Municipalities of Roșia Montană and Abrud E 23° 7’ 50”

1.e Maps and plans, showing the 1.f Area of nominated property (ha.)
boundaries of the nominated property and proposed buffer zone (ha.)
and buffer zone Property: 1663.65 ha
Buffer zone: 341.42 ha
Total: 2005.08 ha

NO. MAP / PLAN SCALE COMMENT

Map showing the location of the property

Pl. 1 A4
within Europe

Map showing the location of the property within Romania and Alba
Pl. 2 A4
County

Cadastral plans of the

nominated property

Cadastral plan showing the boundary of the nominated property

Pl. 3 A4
and the buffer zone

Photoplan showing the boundary of the nominated property and

Pl. 4 A4
the buffer zone.

Cadastral plan showing the boundary of the nominated property

Pl. 5 A3
and the buffer zone

Photoplan showing the boundary of the nominated property and

Pl. 6 A3
the buffer zone.

Cadastral plan showing the boundary of the nominated property,

- annexed, at the back of
Pl. 7 the buffer zone and indicating legal protection areas within the 1/5000
nomination (folded large format)
nominated property

Cadastral plan showing the boundary of the nominated property,

- annexed, at the back of
Pl. 8 the buffer zone and the technical characterization of the 1/5000
nomination (folded large format)
nominated property
9
Roman Catholic Church and Cemetery, in the historic centre of Roșia
Montană (© Radu Sălcudean) Cadastral plan showing the boundary of the
nominated property and the buffer zone
Overview inTăul Mare, Roșia Montană Photoplan showing the boundary of the
nominated property and the buffer zone.
(© Radu Sălcudean)
 2. Description

2 Description of Property

a Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is a single area that comprises the

gold mining landscape of Roșia Montană together with its historic
underground mine networks.
The property is nominated as a cultural landscape.

This section is divided into:

A. Location and setting p. 13

B. Attributes:
1. Mining Exploitation: Underground p. 16
and Surface
2. Archaeological Areas p. 34
3. Built heritage features p. 43
C. Landscape character p. 53
D. Geological setting and Mineralisation p. 66
E. Flora p. 67

2.a Location and setting

A

Roșia Montană is situated in a natural amphitheatre of massifs and radiating

valleys in the Metalliferous range of the Apuseni Mountains, located in the historical region of
Transylvania in the central part of present-day Romania. The site represents the centre of the so-
called Golden Quadrilateral of the Romania’s Western Carpathians - the richest precious metals
province in Europe

2.a Attributes
B

CODE CATEGORY NAME

1 Mining Exploitation: Underground

and Surface

1.1 Mining Exploitation: Underground

1.1.1 Cârnic Massif Roman Galleries

Lety Massif Roman Galleries: Cătălina Monulești

1.1.2
Roman Galleries

1.1.3 Cetate Massif Roman mining features

15
1.1.4 Orlea Roman Galleries

1.1.5 Cârnic Roman fire-setting complex

1.1.6 Cârnic Early Modern Galleries

1.1.7 Cătălina Monulești Early Modern Galleries

1.1.8 Cetate Early Modern Galleries

1.1.9 Văidoaia Massif: Early Modern underground workings

1.2 Mining exploitation: Surface

1.2.1 Cârnic Roman Openworks

1.2.2 Cetate Roman Open Pit

1.3 Ore-processing features:

Header Ponds

1.3.1 Tăul Mare

1.3.2 Tăul Ţarina

1.3.3 Tăul Corna

1.3.4 Tăul Brazi

1.3.5 Tăul Anghel

1.3.6 Tăul Cartuș

1.3.7 Tăul Ţapului

1.3.8 Tăul Găuri

1.3.9 Ore Rail

1.4 Mining administration

1.4.1 State Mining Headquarters (18th – 20th centuries)

1.4.2 Miners’ Dormitory (early 20th century)

1.4.3 Mining Professional School (late 19th century)

2 Archaeological Areas

2.1 Roman archaeology

2.1.1 Hăbad Sacred Area

2.1.2 Găuri – habitation

2.1.3 Hăbad – habitation

2.1.4 Tăul Ţapului

2.1.5 Hop Necropolis

2.1.6 Nanului Valley Sacred Space

2
2.1.7 Carpeni Zone

2.1.8 Jig-Piciorag Area

16
 2.1.9 Ţarina Necropolis

2.1.10 Pârâul Porcului - Tăul Secuilor

2.1.11 Tăul Cornei - Corna Sat Zone

2.1.12 Balmoșești - Islaz Area

3 Built Heritage Features

3.1 Modern town / Village Roșia Montană (Modern)

3.1.1 neighbourhood in the upper zone Square

Townhouses with commercial ground floors; no. 323-328, 388

3.1.1.a cluster
(late 18th – early 19th century)

3.1.1.b cluster “Sicilian Street”

Roman-Catholic Church and parish ensemble (18th - middle

3.1.1.c cluster
19th, early 20th century)

Unitarian Church and parish ensemble

3.1.1.d cluster
(1796, 18th - middle 19th cent, 1933)

3.1.1.e cluster The Casino (1880-1900), no. 329, and Summer Garden

3.1.1.f cluster The former Administrative Palace (1896), no. 310

3.1.2 neighbourhood in the upper zone Brazi

3.1.3 neighbourhood in the upper zone Ieruga

3.1.4 neighbourhood in the upper zone Tăul Brazi

3.1.5 neighbourhood in the upper zone Văidoaia

3.1.6 neighbourhood in the upper zone Berk

3.1.7 neighbourhood in the upper zone Sosași

3.1.8 neighbourhood in the upper zone Orlea

Greek-Catholic Church and parish ensemble (1720, 1741, mid

3.1.8.a cluster
19th century), no. 135

Orthodox Church and parish ensemble (1781, mid 19th

3.1.8.b cluster
century), no. 175

3.1.8.c cluster The administrative centre. Town Hall

3.1.9 neighbourhood in the lower zone Gura Minei

3.1.10 neighbourhood in the lower zone Vercheș

Aitaj House, later Miners’ Club (no. 242), Maternity ward (no.
3.1.10.a cluster
251), Gritta House (no. 258), Miner households

3.1.10.b cluster State school and kindergarten; no. 274 (1905-1915)

3.1.10.c Blocks of flats of the 1960s

Description

3.2 Town / Village Corna (Modern)

3.2.1 Orthodox Church (1719), no. 707

3.2.2 Greek-Catholic Church (19th century), no. 692

17
 3.2.3 Miners households

3.3 Town / Village Ţarina (Modern)

3.3.1 Traditional farmhouse (19th century), Ţarina no. 1248

Traditional farmhouse (20th century), with polygonal stable,

3.3.2
Ţarina no. 1254

3.4 Town / Village Balmoșești, Blidești (Modern)

1 Mining exploitation:
Underground and Surface

1.1 Mining exploitation:

Underground

Underground mining networks in Cârnic (MNIR Archives). 2

1. Recent works, 2. Unaccesible works, 3. Mine entrance, 4. Recent pillar
room, 5. Modern gallery, 6. Vertical Modern site, 7. Horizontal Modern
site, 8. Roman gallery, 9. Roman site.
18
 70 km of underground works have so far been surveyed during recent inves-
tigation (out of 150 km estimated), with archaeologists assigning a time bracket in the following
approximate proportions:
→ 7 km (10%) “Ancient” workings excavated by hand with iron tools
and/or fire;
→ 10 km (14%) “Modern” workings (17th and 18th centuries) excavated by
blasting with black powder;
→ 53 km (76%) “Recent” works (19th and 20th centuries) excavated by dyna-
mite and modern powered equipment.
The Roman workings recorded are not a single network but a total identified across all
the targeted massifs (with greatest emphasis placed on the investigation of the Cârnic and Cetate
Massifs). All such workings were encountered in a condition described as back-filled, a common
mining practice that indeed has aided the structural preservation of certain features and artefacts.
Such backfill, however, was commonly not “ancient”, most ancient workings having been reopened
by subsequent generations of miners during the medieval and modern periods (‘Roman’ miners
were heavily selective of the highest-grade ores, leaving a resource of profitable values exposed
and in situ for later miners). Most Roman workings are therefore commonly intersected by later
workings, inevitably leading to a loss of integrity. What survives – and indeed what is recorded so
far – still means that Roșia Montană represents the most extensive and technically diverse under-
ground Roman gold mining complex currently known in the world.
Based on a meticulous inter-disciplinary approach, and some modern technology – in-
cluding 3D scanning – the broad layout of the Roman mining works could be reconstructed. This
revealed a systematic consistency in shape and distribution of uniform, highly engineered, work-
ings – all likely made within the space of a little over 60 years.

→ 1.1.1 Cârnic Massif Roman Galleries

This is the most extensive and significant mining system recorded anywhere
in the Roman Empire. The Roman galleries in Cârnic contain three major technical typologies of
mining that are unparalleled elsewhere, including within other Roman networks in Roșia Montană:
spiral staircase galleries; vertical stopes with roofs cut in reverse stairs; and pillar-supported stopes.
A fourth typology, seen in other Roman mines, inside and outside of Romania, are stepped com-
munication galleries.
A precious discovery was that of a Roman hydraulic system in the Păru Carpeni mine, a
very significant property in the ensemble. This was the first such example to be found and properly
recorded in Romania by archaeologists. In a relatively good state of conservation, it is a rare dis-
covery in the Roman world and its remains have been recorded and left in a state of preservation
in the humid levels of the mine.
Description

Well-preserved Roman level, with modern (re-excavated) level

(MNIR Archives)
19
Roman level crossed by modern level
(MNIR Archives)

2
Blackened wall markings indicating positions of lamp niches
(MNIR Archives)
20
 Roman adit level (MNIR Archives)

Roman galleries intersected by modern workings

(MNIR Archives)
Description

Roman galleries with evidence for fire-setting

(MNIR Archives)
21
Păru Carpeni: Cumulative cross-section of the two
levels with four water wheel chambers for drainage
(B. Cauuet)

Păru Carpeni: Water wheel chamber with monoxyle 2

ladder - as discovered in situ. (© B. Cauuet)
22
 → 1.1.2 Lety Massif Roman Galleries:
Cătălina Monulești Roman Galleries

This network includes the galleries of Cătălina Monulești, Sf. Iosif and Sf
Laurenţiu, and contains much pristine archaeology, including dated Roman woodwork in vari-
ous contexts. The specific conditions of humidity are ideal for preservation and many artefacts
discovered have been recorded and left in situ.
A remarkable treadmill-powered water-dipping wheel system was discovered in Cătălina
Monulești during archaeological investigations in the 2000s, installed in multiple chambers, one
upon the other, it represents the same design as that discovered in Păru Carpeni mine in Cârnic
Roman Galleries.

A monoxyle notched ladder (4.90 m length) discovered in a Launder (wooden water-channel) that received
perfect state of preservation inside the backfill of a vertical, water from the still adjacent remains of the upper
stepped, stope in Cătălina Monulești Mine. Well-organised waterwheel in Cătălina Monulești Mine. (© C. Tamas)
transport routes for miners include stone-cut stairways and
ramps, and larger steps climbed with wooden ladders that
suggest that ore and waste rock was removed from
underground carrying loads on their backs. (© B. Cauuet)
Description

Waterwheel hub – still in connection with its spokes – discovered in Cătălina Monulești Mine. Two
complex treadmill-powered water-dipping wheel systems (Cătălina Monulești, and Păru Carpeni
mines) were found installed in multiple chambers, one upon the other, and which eventually
23

discharged via a short adit. (© C. Tămaș)

→ 1.1.3 Cetate Massif Roman mining features

Cetate Massif has been subject to archaeological excavations (Zeus Area, Găuri
Area), but most of the Roman mining features have not been yet addressed. An important part of
the Cetate Massif has been compromised in terms of integrity by the incursion of modern work-
ings. Still, under the modern exploitation level there is an area of great potential, poorly or never
researched to date.

Cetate-Zeus Area. Roman works (MNIR Archives)

→ 1.1.4 Orlea Roman Galleries

Orlea Massif has only been subject to preliminary archaeological investiga-

tion – both underground and at surface where it is thought that there are likely concealed Roman
entrances to mine workings. A wooden notched ladder was found in the Roman galleries and
radiocarbon dated to the 2nd century CE.
The quality of Roman mining engineering is apparent in the perfectly carved trapezoi-
dal-section galleries and stepped inclined shafts of the Orlea Galleries, open to visitors since the
communist period in the 1970s when the mining museum was first established. Some authenticity
has been partially impacted in the provision of access, but this is partly reversible, as is some rather
obtrusive cabling infrastructure.

2
24

Roman galleries with trapezoidal cross-section (© L. Niculae) Roman mining works – room with pillars (© L. Niculae)
 → 1.1.5 Cârnic Roman fire-setting complex

Fire-setting complex (MNIR Archives)

→ 1.1.6 Cârnic Early Modern Galleries

Cârnic. Roman gallery (MNIR Archives)

Description

Cârnic Early Modern Gallery

(MNIR Archives)
25
 Cârnic Modern works – “caverns” (© I. Rous)

→ 1.1.7 Cătălina Monulești Early Modern Galleries

2
26

Cătălina Monulești. Modern pillar alongside Roman gallery (© C. Tămaș)

 → 1.1.8 Cetate Early Modern Galleries

Cetate Early Modern galleries (MNIR Archives)

Beneath the floor of Cetate pit there is a modern underground network of work-
ings along veins and in extraction chambers. All levels are interconnected by shafts and caverns.
Description
27

Văidoaia. medieval and modern open works (© L. Niculae)

→ 1.1.9 Văidoaia Massif: Early Modern
underground workings

Mining works in Văidoaia Massif are thought to be Medieval or Early Modern.

Also, surface Roman exploitations vestiges can be expected to be detected.

1.2 Mining exploitation:

Surface

→ 1.2.1 Cârnic Roman Openworks

Intensive archaeological excavations have been conducted at Cârnic Massif in

Piatra Corbului area where vestiges of surface Roman exploitations are in evidence.

Cârnic-Piatra Corpbului Roman slope-side works

opened with fire and water (© H. Ciugudean)

→ 1.2.2 Cetate Roman Open Pit

Intensive archaeological excavations have been conducted at Cârnic Massif in

Piatra Corbului area where vestiges of surface Roman exploitations are in evidence.
Cetate - Găuri Area: Roman works opened
with fire and water (MNIR Archives)

2
28
 1.3 Ore-processing features:
Header Ponds

An extensive network of header ponds was created, probably incorporating

pre-existing ponds, starting in the first half of 18th century. Set into favourable positions on the
slopes of the mountains surrounding Roșia Montană and Corna, they gather water from springs and
streams, from rain and melting snow, kept by artificial dams. The dams of the larger ponds – Mare,
Corna, Ţarina, Brazi, Anghel, Găuri – are built of substantial well-engineered earth embankments
lined and faced with stone, sometimes with particular architecture elements to define the sluice
outlets at their base. Sophisticated water supply control mechanisms were installed in the larger
ponds, and survive in good condition.
After the cessation of traditional mining they were abandoned, absorbed into the natural
and agricultural landscape and developed specific ecosystems of high natural significance. They
contribute significantly to the character of the entire property.

→ 1.3.1 Tăul Mare

The largest of all the header ponds in Roșia Montană, Tăul Mare is also among
the first to be (re)built in the 18th century, starting in 1733. It is set at an altitude of 1025 m, it covers
an area of 40,000 m2 and retains 200,000 m3 of water behind a 110 m dam, 25 m high. It has been
enlarged, reinforced and repaired several times, from the late 18th century, in 1779, to 1913 and 1929.
Its sluice outlet portal, dated 1913 on its keystone, is among the examples of fine archi-
tectural detailing, typical for early industrial architecture in the area.
Today the dam is overgrown with high vegetation, which hides it from view and pos-
es a serious problem for its conservation, an issue to be addressed in the forthcoming Property
Management Plan.
Description
29

Tăul Mare (© R. Sălcudean)

 Tăul Mare after the reinforcement works in 1929 (Postcard)
→ 1.3.2 Tăul Ţarina

Set high above Roșia Montană, on the slopes of Ţarina, at an altitude of

950 m, it covers 8,500 m2 and has a capacity of 25,000 m3 of water. Its dam is made of earth, clad
in stone. The sluice outlet chamber opens at the base of the dam through a fine stone portal.
It was enlarged in 1779. Of its repairs, the most important happened in 1914. Now it is
covered by young forest vegetation.
Upstream from it there are several other smaller ponds, gathering the waters from the
surrounding slopes and flowing in a cascade from one to the next.
Tăul Ţarina (© L. Niculae)

2
30
 → 1.3.3 Tăul Corna

Set at an altitude of 965 m, above the village of Corna, bellow the peaks of
Cârnic - Piatra Corbului, Ghergheleu and Citera, the pond is defined by its sinusoidal dam, with
the most elaborate architectural portal at its sluice outlet. Like the others, it is overgrown with
vegetation and will be subject to conservation management.

Tăul Corna (© S. Florian)

→ 1.3.4 Tăul Brazi

1.3.5 Tăul Anghel

The two header ponds are one next to the other, set at the upper, eastern end
of Roșia Valley, just above the last houses of the mining town. Tăul Anghel is higher, set at 990 m,
at the rim of the slopes closing Tăul Brazi, at 950 m. Together they illustrate the network approach
to the ore processing water management of the mining site.
Tăul Brazi had a small wooden control cabin on its dam, now lost. Today the pond is used
for recreational aestival activity.
Tăul Anghel is highly overgrown, which makes it less visible and raises conservation issues
that will be dealt with in the forthcoming Property Management Plan.
Description
31

Tăul Brazi (A.O. Bach)

 →
→

1.3.7
1.3.6
Tăul Cartuș

Tăul Ţapului
Tăul Ţapului (MNIR Archives) Tăul Cartuș (MNIR Archives)

Tăul Brazi and Tăul Anghel (© R. Sălcudean)

2
32
 → 1.3.8 Tăul Găuri

Tăul Găuri (MNIR Archives)

→ 1.3.9 Ore Railway

The property boundary has been extended to include the Ore Railway (mid
19th century) from the mining area to the site of the former ore-processing plant. Authenticity and
integrity are high, including the impressive inclined plane section that descends to the current road
where the property is terminated as integrity is compromised beyond. The line was decommis-
sioned in 2006 and the track removed. However, most substantial engineering structure remains.
Description

Holy Cross ore railway 1927 (V. Zotinca)

33
 Ore railway incline (NLR Archives)

1.4 Mining administration

→ 1.4.1 State Mining Headquarters (18th – 20th centuries)

Roșia Montană no. 178

The headquarters were established here from the moment when the Habsburg
government took over the organization of the underground mining and developed it on a large
scale. It is therefore important for the modern history of mining in Roșia Montană.
The present buildings are transformed mid-19th century and again at the turn of 20th
century, on the background of the 18th century structures. The headquarters include the roll-call
house with the mine entrance shaft, offices and housing for the higher staff, along with ancillary
buildings. Set apart from these, lies the house of the mine leader. The architecture is restrained
but distinctive, with several features specific to early industrial architecture in the area.
It incorporates in the former roll-call house a descent into the “Holy Cross” master
gallery, dug in the time of Empress Maria Theresa. This unites all major operating systems under-
ground. Today it is still the headquarters of the state mine, hosting as well the local mining museum.
State Mining Headquarters. Roll-call room and
shaft leading to the mines (v. Zotinca)

2
34
 → 1.4.2 Miners’ dormitory (early 20th century)
Roșia Montană no. 185

Miners’ dormitory (INP Archives)

→ 1.4.3 Mining Professional School (late 19th century)

Roșia Montană no. 208

Mining Professional School (INP Archive)

Description
35
 2 Archaeological Areas

2.1 Roman archaeological areas

Ancient archaeological monuments have been grouped into three

typologies:

→ Residential areas with accompanying infrastructure (Hop-Găuri, Hăbad,

Tăul Ţapului, Carpeni Hill);

→ Sacred areas with temples (Hăbad, Nanului Valley and possibly Carpeni);

→ Zone funeral (cremation necropolises - Hop, Tăul Corna, Jig-Piciorag,

Ţarina Pârâul Porcului - Tăul Secuilor and groups of graves in the Nanului
Valley and Carpeni Hill).

The funerary practices of the ancient populations that were colonised at

Alburnus Maior by the Romans feature strongly in archaeological revelations: notably 7 necropolises
(Hop Găuri, Tăul Corna, Ţarina, Pârâul Porcului / Tăul Secuilor, Jig Piciorag, Carpeni and Szekely)
and an outstanding Roman funerary precinct at Tăul Găuri, with more than 1,450 cremation graves.
Apart from significances conferred upon individual archaeological sites, the charac-
teristics and distribution in the landscape of necropolises on the slopes and plateaus, as well as
habitat and sacred places, provides data to help reconstruct an ancient local topography that was
intimately associated with ancient gold mining and processing areas. Remains of habitations,
sacred areas, necropolises and funerary areas, together with evidence of ore-processing activities
integrated within dwellings, and paved Roman roads, are buried beneath a shallow earth veneer
and are more or less well preserved.
Artefacts discovered (particularly during preventive archaeological campaigns) include
an astonishing more than 70 votive altars in 2001–02, alone. The artefact collection also includes
everyday Roman ceramics and pieces of funerary architecture – over 10,000 items, their conser-
vation undertaken by specialised staff in the laboratories of a number of Romanian museums.
Much has been published, and new interpretations that have emerged from the discoveries at
Roșia Montană have laid foundations in defining new directions for the research of Roman Dacia.

→ 2.1.1 Hăbad Sacred Area

This is the site that comprises the remains of buildings that are associated
with inscribed altars that provide information on the mining community and its religious beliefs,
as well as ancient toponyms on guild organisations (collegia).
Bulding in the sacred area of Hăbad (MNIR Archives)

2
36
 General view of the excavation area in Hăbad (MNIR Archives)

Hăbad votive altars (MNIR Archives)

→ 2.1.2 Găuri – habitation

Description

A section of the roman road crossing the site in the Găuri area.
(MNIR Archives)
37
Roman pottery recovered from inside the dwelling in the Găuri Plan of dwelling in the “Găuri” section
“Găuri” section (MNIR Archives) (MNIR Archives)

Detail of dwelling in the “Găuri” section Excavated habitat structures in Găuri area (MNIR Archives)
(MNIR Archives)

→ 2.1.3 Hăbad – habitation

Roman pottery recovered from the dwelling
in the “Hăbad” section (MNIR Archives)

2
38
 Plan of Roman dwelling in “Hăbad” section
(MNIR Archives)

→ 2.1.4 Tăul Ţapului

archaeological area
Description

Plan of Building no. 1 - Building no. 2 at Tăul Ţapului

(MNIR Archives)
39
→ 2.1.5 Hop Necropolis

The discovery, restoration and conservation in situ of the Tăul Găuri circular
funerary monument remains a rare example in Romania. It is a stone circular mausoleum, with
a drum of ashlar blocks enclosing a low tumulus over two phases of primary cremation burials.

Circular monument in the foreground with Hop Necropolis

→ 2.1.6 Nanului Valley Sacred Zone in the background (MNIR Archives)

Extensive archaeological excavations have taken place in the Nanului Valley

and sacred places (‘temple’ complexes) have been identified at Szekely, Tomuș, Drumuș and Dalea,
with a Funerary Area at Drumuș – Szekely.
Nanului Valey general view of TII worship edifice
(MNIR Archives)
General view of Dalea sacred space in Nanului valley

2
(MNIR Archives)

40
Description

Roman altars and pottery are amongst the principal artefacts

recovered from Nanului Valey–Dalea (MNIR Archives)
41
→ 2.1.7 Carpeni Zone

Carpeni Hill has been the target of preliminary archaeological excavations

and in situ preservation of the entire area (surface and underground). A habitation area identified
on the hill comprises a series of Roman public buildings with hypocaustum (e.g. Bisericuţă and
Tomuș) that emphasise a potential administrative role and are to be considered in relationship
with a possible sacred area and a funerary zone in the western sector.

Artefacts recovered from Carpeni Hill: Trajan

coins minted in Caria Province, Asia Minor
(MNIR Archives)
Silver buckle from Carpeni Hill; Ceramic roof tile
with stamp Leg. XIII Gemina (MNIR Archives)

→ 2.1.8 Jig-Piciorag Area

There is a Roman cremation necropolis, and an ancient primary ore-processing

site at Jig Piciorag. Artefacts recovered include Roman pottery and costume adornments.

2
42

General view from the east of the point Bara (MNIR Archives) General view of the properties Gomboș and Bara,
from the north (MNIR Archives)
 → 2.1.9 Tăul Tarina

In the present state of research there have been identified and excavated cre-
mation graves (on-the-spot or ad ustrina cremation types), with elements of funerary architecture
and funerary enclosures.

Funerary precint from Ţarina area Decoration from the funerary precint in ţarina
(MNIR Archives) (MNIR Archives)

→ 2.1.10 Pârâul Porcului – Tăul Secuilor

Extensive archaeological excavations have taken place at Pârâul Porcului -

Tăul Secuilor. A Roman necropolis of the 2nd century CE was discovered, with 287 cremation
graves identified and 277 excavated. The relationship with other buildings nearby is as yet unclear.
Artefacts recovered include Roman altars, pottery, elaborate funerary architectural elements,
costume adornments, coins and glassware.
Description

Funerary precint from Pârâul Porcului – Tăul Secuilor area

(MNIR Archives)
43
→ 2.1.10 Tăul Cornei – Corna Sat Zone

Extensive archaeological excavations have taken place in Tăul Cornei and

Corna village area. A Roman cremation necropolis was located close to Tăul Cornei.Artefacts
discovered include Roman altars, pottery, funerary architectural elements, costumes, coins
and glassware

View of Citera Budeștilor (MNIR Archives).

Tăul Corna. Overview of the necropolis.
→ 2.1.11 Balmoșești – Islaz Area

Preliminary archaeological evaluation, the character of archaeological research

being confined to surveys, does not provide sufficient data for more than a preliminary assessment
of cultural resources. However, earlier archaeological investigations suggested a Bronze Age date
for several features, and possible Roman date for others. This area has been prudently included
within the property for its archaeological potential, particularly the perceived linkages between
gold and local Bronze Age culture.

2
44

Islaz Fortification (MNIR Archives)

 3 Built heritage features

3.1 Town / village:

Roșia Montană (Modern)

In Roșia Montană there are currently (2016) 43 architectural structures placed

on the national list of historical monuments. The existing historic building stock dates mostly from
the 18th to early 20th century, with few conspicuous later additions.
The general structure of the town and its street pattern respond to the territorial distribu-
tion of extraction areas, with two main nuclei, one – the administrative centre – set between Orlea
and Cetate massifs, the other one – the historic centre – between Jig-Văidoaia, Lety and Cârnic. The
numerous now-abandoned public functions set into the town centre speak of prosperity and of the
bustling life of gold mining, and so do the conspicuous ‘cultured’ features of the street façades of
houses. Starting from the Square, where the public activities were concentrated in an urban architec-
tural ensemble with a strong representational character, the urban structure gradually dilutes into
the mining-and-agro-pastoral suburbs which are represented by loose groups of households which
combine common agricultural areas and annexes – barns and pens and gardens – with traditional
processing installations and spaces or even mine adits opening in their backyards.
The overall image of the town, as a built landscape, is defined to a considerable degree by
the materiality of its architecture. This, however, has changed during the past decades, with cement
renders often taking the place of the bright whitewashed lime plaster, and tin or even corrugated
cement taking place of the soft and perfectly integrated wooden shingle. This is an aspect to be
dealt with in the Property Management Plan.

→ Neighbourhoods

→ 3.1.1 Square

An ethnically mixed population belonging to the economic and social elites

inhabited “Piaţa” (the Square) and its immediate neighbourhood, the former economic and ad-
ministrative centre of the locality. The presence of three churches (Roman Catholic, Calvinist and
Unitarian), grouped in this limited area, defines the image of a religious and cosmopolitan society
without tracing strict boundaries on ethnic or religious means. However, the social demarcation
is here clearly visible by the scale and preciousness of the architecture.
The former site of the weekly fair has an irregular shape, with slightly sloping level,
surrounded by two storey buildings, in compact fronts, as an amphitheatre at the eastern end of
the main street.
Description
45

Central area with three churches: Unitarian (left), Protestant (centre), Roman Catholic (right) (postcard)
→ 3.1.1 cluster: Townhouses with commercial
a ground floors; no. 323–328, 388
(late 18th - early 19th century).

This group of houses with urban aspect on the north-eastern and south-eastern
fronts of the Square generates one of the main landmarks of Roșia Montană. With commercial –
shops, pubs, workshops – spaces to the ground floor and living spaces on the first floor, opening
up towards the Square through many shop-windows and windows, with their facades decorated
with insignia and historicist stuccos at the first floor, they lend to this upper nucleus of the locality
the character of a typical small town in the time of the Austrian and Austrian-Hungarian Empire.
Despite being to a large extent inscribed in the local typology, with a porch to the court-
yard, all these houses exhibit an elaborate decor facing the street, like an urban scenography set
against a mostly rural background.
Four of the houses – nos. 324, 326, 327, 328 – are individually listed as historical monuments

North-east front of the Square early 1940s (Silviu Bocaniciu Sr.)

→ 3.1.1 cluster: “Sicilian Street”

b

The street, its starting point in the Square, follows a sinuous path with the same
urban character - continued fronts of two-storey houses. It is narrow and with-
out sidewalks, and preserves (under the recent asphalt) the historic cobblestone pavement. Basalt
blocks protect the facades against the vehicles. Houses no. 390, 391, 393, 395, 397, 398, are all indi-
vidually listed as historical monuments. In spite of this, house no. 393 collapsed through neglect.

→ 3.1.1 cluster: Roman-Catholic Church and parish ensemble

c (18th - middle 19th, early 20th century)

The church, no. 549; 1866: historical monument – the largest among the places
of worship in Roșia Montană dominates the historical centre from a high plateau at the south-east
of the Square, looming its white, stern neoclassical silhouette on the slopes of Cârnic mountain
marked by mining.
A cultural landscape shaped by mining: the Roman-Catholic Church at the foot of Carnic
Massif and a backdrop of a steep scree of mined waste rock. Surrounding it, the cemetery (no. 2
549B), dressed in dense trees, descends to the Square and contains the Chapel (no. 549A) that
marks the site of the first Catholic church. Recent archaeological excavations have revealed that
46

the terrace behind the church is an old dump. Near the church there is the Catholic rectory (no.
 317), the Parish school and culture hall (no. 318 – now the public cultural centre), the bell-ringer’s
house (no. 319 – recently collapsed and later demolished) and the teachers’ house (no. 320). They
are large buildings revealing urban aspect and structure. Apart from the bell-ringer’s house, which
has, traditionally, the first level in stone and the second level in wood, these buildings are entirely
of stone and brick masonry.

→ 3.1.1 cluster: Unitarian Church and

d parish ensemble

The Unitarian church (16th Century; rebuilt 1796), no. 530 - set on a plateau,
dominates the Square from the northeast, in a dialog with the Roman-Catholic church to the op-
posite side. The exact date of its reconstruction, 1796, is recorded in an inscription.
The Unitarian Parish House (no. 391) and the chorister’s house (no. 390) as well as the
bell-ringer’s house (no. 553) define by their massive, particular silhouettes, the crossroad in the
eastern corner of the Square, at the starting point of Sicilian Street.

→ 3.1.1 The Casino (1880–1900),

e no. 329, and summer garden

The Casino served as a bar, cinema, ball-room and general place of celebration
until recently, when it was abandoned. The main hall preserves a wooden board vaulted ceiling.
On its side and to the rear the Casino connects to the once Summer garden, where a
brass band would have played in a gazebo, on the higher platform of this small public park. The
high trees, alleys and platforms are still preserved.

→ 3.1.1 The former Administrative Palace (1896),

f no. 310

The headquarters of all the public services of the village, is located in close
proximity to the Square. Together with the State school and kindergarten (no. 274), it is among
the last major investments of imperial administration in Roșia Montană. Sitting on a terrace to 2-3
m above the street level, it dominates the entrance to the Square by its classicized proportions,
order and decorations.

→ 3.1.2 Brazi neighbourhood

The area spreads along a few ascending ridgelines and valleys, south-east of
the Square, towards the Brazi header pond. It comprises several outstanding historic dwellings,
with Baroque and Classical character, and many others characteristic for the Interwar period.
They are all set into a diffuse historical fabric, with mostly historical buildings, a not much altered
street pattern and streetscape – with cobbled steep and rugged streets, fenced by dry stone walls
and tree lines.

→ 3.1.3 Ieruga neighbourhood

A particular small group of houses, concentrated around a crossroads up street

Description

from the Square, this neighbourhood features three massive houses, of Baroque allure (nos. 407-
409), form the compact eastern front of a little square where the Ieruga mine used to be. Built
around 1875, they represent a particular type of dwelling, preferred by the wealthy families of
miners. Houses have walls and vaults of stone and brick at the first level and high second level built
of wooden beams and plastered, containing up to 6 rooms. To the street, the large windows are
fitted with “roștele” - iron bars with rich floral decorations. The roof of the house no. 407 keeps the
47

voluminous, double sloped baroque structure. On the side facing the courtyard there is a generous
porch (Ro. târnaţ). House and annexes surround the courtyard paved with stone slabs. In the yard
no. 408, an underground cavity appears to be an old entrance to a mine gallery. The obstructed
arch at the base of the façade indicates a former channel, which crossed the cellar to feed an ore
washing basin (“jomp”). The sidewall, supported by buttresses contribute to the particular, un-
mistakable appearance of this area.
The smaller houses’ position on the parcel is dependent on parcels’ shape and
the characteristics of the land, which often needs to be levelled, terraced and strengthened with
dry stone walls (“maur”). On the north side of the little square, House no. 406 features the specific
Interwar period traits – larger windows, gable roofs with trelliswork – and bears on the facade the
year of building (1937) along with the mining insignia of the crossed hammers.

→ 3.1.4 Tăul Brazi neighbourhood

© Daniel Vrăbioiu

→ 3.1.5 Văidoaia neighbourhood

© Ștefan Bâlici

→ 3.1.6 Berk neighbourhood

© Lorin Niculae

→ 3.1.7 Sosași neighbourhood

2
© Ștefan Bâlici

48
 → 3.1.8 Orlea neighbourhood

3.1.8 cluster: Greek-Catholic Church

a and parish ensemble

The Greek-Catholic Church of the Dormition (1720, 1741, mid 19th century),
no. 135, stands on a terrace descending to the valley of Roșia at the foot of Orlea Massif, millen-
nial area of gold mining. The church shares the lower, western core of the locality, concentrating
around it the material and immaterial values of this predominantly Romanian area. The high bell
tower, with its stepped, pyramidal roof erupts from this low position to dominate the image of Roșia
Montană from any viewing angle. Thereby, the parish rectory (1815, 1854), no. 137, distinguishes
between surrounding households through both age, size and position on the plot. Nearby, until
1918, stood the Greek Catholic confessional school built in 1868. In the cemetery is the tomb and
memorial of Simion Balint, parish priest at this Church and leader of the 1848 Revolution, the most
imposing local historic figure.

The Greek-Catholic Church of the Dormition

(R. Slotta, V. Vollmann, I. Dordea)

→ 3.1.8 cluster: Orthodox Church and

b parish ensemble
Description
49

The Orthotox Church with Mt. Cetate in Background, Roșia Montană

(V. Zotinca)
→ 3.1.8 cluster: administrative centre –
c Town Hall

The administrative centre, Town Hall (INP Archives)

→ 3.1.9 Gura Minei neighbourhood

Gura Minei Neighbourhood, 1927 (V. Zotinca)

→ 3.1.10 Vercheș neighbourhood

3.1.10 cluster: representative houses

a along the main street

It includes the Ajtai House, later Miners’ Club, the house used as Maternity
ward, a pair of rural vernacular houses and the imposing Gritta House. The street front is loose,
the houses alternating with wide empty spaces - orchards, gardens, pastures.

→ 3.1.10 State school and kindergarten;

b no. 274 (1905–1915)

The ensemble occupies a large plot, unlike the small parcels of the neighbour-
ing households, midway between the two centres of the village – the lower one around the Orthodox
and Greek catholic churches and the upper, surrounding the Square. It is a large building, following 2
an official architectural program and marks the last significant economic and demographic boom
of the community. It is now under restoration, with significant changes to its historical layout
50

(complete change of roof structure) and with the works interrupted

 → 3.1.10 cluster: Blocks of flats
c in the sixties

Blocks of flats in the sixties (© Claudia Apostol)

3.2 Corna (Modern)

This is a village situated in the upper, more open, part of the Corna Valley.
While some of the households are scattered on the slopes, the rest of the buildings gather around
more compact nuclei, close to the two header ponds and the communal road. The lowest nucle-
us consists of several houses along the communal road. A second nucleus is formed around the
two churches and several other public functions, below Tăul Cartuș, with plots distributed along
the paths connecting to the upper part of the village. The upper part of the village consists of the
third nucleus of houses, close to Tăul Corna. The last two nuclei are connected by a network of
intertwining paths and were built in direct relation to the historical mining activity. The layout of
the household is typical for the mountainous area, enhancing the rural appearance characterized
by the lack of a continuous street front and the alternation of houses and gardens with different
functions. As in the rest of the area, the sloped terrain determines adaptations of the house struc-
ture. Its skyline is defined by the presence of the churches, the open pit mining works on the Cetate
quarry, Cârnic Massif and Piatra Corbului.

→ 3.2.1 Orthodox Church

This is the oldest church in the area of Roșia Montană, and it occupies a large
flat plot in the widening of the Corna Valley. Built in 1719, it illustrates the church typology present
in the Apuseni Mountains since the 18th century. It is part of a less compact nucleus of construc-
tions, together with the parish house and public buildings such as the kindergarten or the cultural
centre and a few other houses. The appearance of the public and private constructions, plastered
but undecorated, with a traditional structure, and their position within the plots, is closer to the
scattered village type of the area.

→ 3.2.2 Greek-Catholic Church

Surrounded by the cemetery and more detached from the village centre build-
ings’ nucleus, the church is situated on a small, sloped plateau in the wider area of the Corna Valley.
Description

It dates from the 19th century, being an important landmark for the landscape of the village. It is
smaller than the other churches in the area, but it also illustrates the typology of the stone-built
churches of the Apuseni Mountains.

→ 3.2.3 Miners households

51
 Upper nucleus in Corna village (© Lorin Nicolae)
3.3 Ţarina (Modern)

Ţarina is a village located near the eastern part of Mt. Orlea and its minefield,
covering an area defined by hills with rather high slopes. This proximity to the minefiled had in-
fluenced the activities and generated the inhabitation of the territory in a very peculiar way. The
Josephine Land Survey of the 18th century presents the settlement as a string of houses along the
stream that comes from Ţarina header pond.
The village followed the stream until it reaches Foieș (Roșia stream). Its location had
favoured the construction of traditional houses, typical for miners: rather small constructions
with ground floor made of stone masonry, while the single upper level was built of wooden beam
construction, plastered on the inside.
The connection with the stream permitted the rise and use of stamping mills on both
sides. Its natural hilly landscape had also been favourable for the other type of habitat: the typical
mountain household.
Ţarina is composed of three defined areas gathered along the main paths that histori-
cally linked Roșia Montană to Câmpeni and other villages from the north. The main paths have a
northwest orientation, the easiest way the mountain could be crossed with oxen and carts.
The hierarchy of the paths leading to Tarina is influenced by the proximity to the
Market Square.
Few traditional miners’ households can be seen in the landscape close to the stream. The
other two areas are more recent, with modern houses that reflect a peasant way of life.

→ 3.3.1 Traditional farmhouse (19th century),

Ţarina no. 1248

A representative example of a traditional house in Ţarina, house no. 1248, built

in the late nineteenth century. It has a spatial and functional structure typical for the area: the living
part consists of two rooms accessible by the corridor and an annex – kitchen – added on one side
of the house. The main level rises above a cellar which adjusts to the slope. The building system is
also locally specific, representing a version of a widespread solution in the Apuseni. The ‘Blockbau’
system (log construction) with walls composed of horizontal beams arranged in crowns is applied
here in a version with urban remnants. The basement walls are made of stone masonry and lime 2
mortar, like the vault that used to cover the space. The roof is hipped and covered with shingles.
52
 In the middle of the one room basement stands the mining ‘jomp’, a small shallow ba-
sin used to retain the water for washing the processed ore during winter time. Signs of a previous
stamping mill could be read in the terrain configuration.

19th century Traditional farmhouse, Ţarina

© Ștefan Bâlici

→ 3.3.2 Traditional farmhouse (20th century),

with polygonal stable

Located on the fringe of the Orlea mining field, where miners gathered the
rocks from the exploitation, the house presents vernacular and mining features. It is built with two
storeys. The cellar is made of stone masonry, having two rooms covered with wooden beams. The
upper level is accessible from the traditional corridor, exposing two rooms. The outside plaster still
preserves blue paint, used as traditional rendering.
Close to the house is the old stable, a peculiar wooden construction with four sides,
of which one has a polygonal shape. This feature is said to be inspired by rural architecture, as a
response to harsh windy weather conditions. It was used for sheep and cattle. The high loft was
used as a hay stockpile.
Description

Traditional farmhouse with polygonal stable

© Ștefan Bâlici
53
3.4 Balmoșești - Blidești (Modern)

Balmoșești, one of the smallest satellite-villages of Roșia Montană, is located

on the northern slopes of Roșia valley, west of Mt. Orlea. Its importance lays in adding a rural layer
to the mining area. This settlement is formed of simple scattered houses with modern appearance
(modern vernacular style), built mainly in the 20th century.
The households are close to the main path, an unpaved road that follows the slopes
of the mountain. The path leaves Roșia Montană, near the Mining Enterprise ensemble, going
around Orlea quarry and ascending towards northwest. The settlement is approximately at half
the distance from the starting point to the top of the mountainside. A small artificial lake lays over
the settlement, as a sign of a possible small-scale mining background.

Blidești (Modern)

Another satellite village of Roșia Montană, Blidești stands on the western

section of the southern slopes that define Roșia valley. Hidden from the daily routes, Blidești is
linked with Corna valley through a northwest oriented path. It comprises three groups of scattered
buildings. Of all Roșia Montană valley this settlement has the fewest households, being inhabited
by a small number of families as their houses with annexes show.

2
54
 2.a Landscape
Description
C characterisation

Piatra Corbului, protected area of national interest

© Edmond Kreibic
55
 2
56
 The altitude ranges between 600–1200m and the physical elements that define
the geographical landscape are the peaks (900–1100 m altitude) with amplitude, depth and filtered
perspectives by the forestland and meadows and the valleys (500-800 m altitude) with meadow
landscape and dry valleys. The geographical landscape is modelled also on the hydrographic net-
work and the geological structure of the mountains:
The landforms dominate the territory to the south, east and north by the Tile (918m),
Cetate, Cārnic (1807m), Ghergheleu (1157m), Rotundul (1187m), Brădeţel (1011m), Ghipidele
(1050m) and Coltău Hill (1094m). Due to differences in height of 700-800m and different
hardness and composition of rocks, erosion and human activities has contributed extensively to
shape the land.
The hydrological network is formed by streams flowing into the Roșia and Corna Valley
and the header ponds used in the past to serve the streams for the stamp mills. Groundwater
gravity-flow mine drainage enters the rivers Roșia and Corna, as do tributaries from the Roșia
Montană commune.

Reserves and Monuments

of Nature

There are two protected geological sites: Piatra Despicată (Cleft Stone) and
Piatra Corbului (Raven’s Stone), are protected areas of national interest (ZNPIN) and natural mon-
uments and were defined by Law no. 5/2000 - Law of the approval of National Spatial Development
Plan- Section III - Protected Areas.
Both sites were formed at the beginning of the Quaternary.
Piatra Despicată, with an area of 0.25 hectares, is located 1 km southwest of Roșia
Montană, between Cârnic and Cetate peaks and has isolated aspect of block resistant to erosion.
The site was declared a “natural monument” in 1954. Its geological composition is dif-
ferent from the geology of the area, being an andesite block, weighing several tonnes, located over
the dacite rock of Cârnic Massif. It is believed that the stone block gained its current location after
a volcanic explosion from the Ore Mountains produced in the last phase of the Neogene period
approximately 15–20 million years ago.
Piatra Corbului with an area of 5 ha, situated between Ghergheleu and Curmătura peaks,
surrounded to the east and west roads that go to Roșia Poieni mining area. The natural reserve is
situated at 1100–1150 m altitude, with an aspect of black basalt.
Description
57

View on Piatra Corbului and Cârnic Massif - Southern slope

© Radu Sălcudean
 Landscape character types:
Agro-pastoral landscape

Overview of Roșia Montană Mining Landscape

© Petru Mortu
Land management, for industrial and agro-pastoral practices, takes places on
plateaus and steep slopes. Consists of: pastures, hay-meadows, meadows adjacent to the village,
orchards, interspersed with small patches of arable land. It is widespread in the territory and also
on perimeter settlements.
Human intervention in this landscape is of considerably lower intensity compared to
other similar areas in the Apuseni mountains. Thus, pastures, orchards and meadows have been
continually maintained with a low intensity land use and traditional practice that is highly beneficial
for species richness. Cattle grazing and crop rotation biennial or triennial systems (ploughing one
year and fallow for two or three years) and soil terracing sustains land fertility.

arrangement of the keys elements and shape of landscape plots.

View of Tăul Mare and Roșia Valley. Field patterns: spatial

© Radu Sălcudean

Hay-meadows adjacent to the pastures are colourful and species-rich with the presence
of “6520 Mountain hay-meadows” (Annexe 1 of the EU Habitats Directive), ‘High Nature Value’
meadow habitat. Lower fields around the settlements receive more fertilization, in the form of
animal dung, than the other with more nutrient-poor hay-meadows. The pastures near the ponds 2
are “6230 Species-rich Nardus grassland, on siliceous substrates in mountain areas” listed as a
priority habitat in Annexe 1 of the EU Habitats Directive.
58
 View on cattle stable with a agro-pastoral production facility with solitary trees which through
particular usage or historical tradition gain a specific significance; high cultural and historical
value and biodiversity potential, (© Radu Sălcudean)

The agro-pastoral landscape, woodland, the hydrological network, archaeological sites

and mining exploitation areas, are defined by distinctive morphologies and typologies due to pro-
cess characteristics and in relation to the settlement.

Rough grazings with terraced field and shrubs succesion in the background
© Radu Sălcudean

There are fields elongated perpendicular to the slope. A difference of the texture fragmen-
tation is visible between the Ţarina, Balmoșești, Blidești areas, where the agro-pastoral landscape
is less fragmented and dominant due to the geographical characteristics of the Corna Valley, where
is more fragmented and interspersed with the woodland and industrial landscapes. Different types
(sub-units) of the agro-pastoral landscape are bounded by plantation property boundaries, fenc-
es or dry stone masonry (“mauri”), for example in the meadows around the settlements (Roșia
Montană, Ţarina).
Description

Small trees hedge with individual trees, fences and dry stone
masonry and crosses to delineate or mark boundaries
© Radu Sălcudean, Mihaela Hărmănescu

Landscape value is enhanced by the good state of preservation of specific plant habitats,
protected and rare plants cited in the Red List of Plants in Romania and Romanian rare vulnerable
Inventory of meadows (2003).
59
 Rocks and stony ground landscape

On the highest slopes toward the top of the hill, inside the pastures areas there
are rocks and stony ground characterized by “natural rock gardens” where vegetation is influenced
by the secondary effects of metalliferous mineralisation.

“Natural rock gardens”, (© Daniel vrăbioiu)

Woodland / Forest landscape

Woodland occupies the altitudinal area between 600 - 1200 m, with a distinc-
tive substrate and micro-climate sometimes leading to the phenomena of vegetation inversion.
The landscape is characterized by the deciduous and coniferous forests and the woodlands stretch
over small fragmented areas with different utilities. The spread of deciduous trees is inside the
inhabited area and on the southern slopes of the Jig and Văidoaia massifs, in the eastern part de-
limiting the settlement and Tăul Mare.
Due to characteristic processes, the background southeast of Roșia Montană is heavily
vegetated with coniferous woodland (on Cârnic), linking historic extraction and agro-pastoral
landscapes. Woodland is also characterized by deciduous stands. Along with the presence of spe-
cies and training for fixing the sterile soil (junipers), vegetable groups punctuate the whole area
near Roșia Montană - becoming stronger environmental elements.
Conifers, massive trees and resinous shrubs are spread on rocky substrate on the north
slope of Cârnic, in Tăul Brazi and Corna areas. These create a natural reinforcement of the soil
against erosion, landslides and the formation of debris. They also contribute to soil formation.
Forest in relation with mining exploitation with high historical and
cultural value and high ecological potential

2
60
 Another characteristic of the woodland are the trees with distinctive vegetation com-
posite on watercourses and near the ponds that confirm the relation between nature and mining
activity. Grouped trees and deciduous shrubs mark the limits of different properties (meadows,
households) through linear plantations.

Living fences created as rows of shrubs to delineate boundaries, ponds and

roads, ensure erosion protection and improve landscape (© Radu Sălcudean)

The resulting patchwork of fields, meadows, wetlands and woodlands created a unique
pattern of land uses, which was carefully adapted to topographical conditions.

Wetland landscape/
Flushes and mires

These areas are defined along rivers, streams and ponds and are set in relation to the
agro-pastoral landscape and woodland. They also derive from mining activities and water management.
The hydro-technical ensemble made by header ponds, and the installation of water
control and routing, fundamentally changed the hydrology within the landscape. These artificial
elements, arranged throughout the territory, were partially absorbed into the natural environ-
ment while generating lower specific wetland landscape (characterized by the relation between
anthropogenic and natural elements), characterized by “High Natural Value” and rare aquatic
vegetation with distinctive and unique acid bog (7110 on Annexe 1 of EU Habitats Directive). The
cultural importance of these facilities is given by more harmonious (medieval) mining activity and
its interaction with the natural environment. Meanwhile, the main ponds (Tăul Mare, Tăul Brazi,
Tăul Corna) have become important geographical landmarks.
Description
61

Tăul Brazi landscape (© Radu Sălcudean)

 function and specific flora (© Radu Sălcudean)
Former header ponds with water retention
Archaeological landscape

The archaeological heritage, through the way to adapt to the natural environ-
ment, is currently building a specific landscape: Necropolises, sacred areas and housing areas are
subordinate to the natural environment through their arrangement on the terracing of slopes or
high points with a broad perspective on the valley; probably directly related to mountain ranges
and the place of gold ore exploitation.

→ The necropolises are located on slopes or on plateaus oriented towards the

valleys, following the same script, where the southern orientation is favour-
able. There are seven necropolises: Tăul Cornei, Carpeni-Balea, Hop-Găuri,
Valea Nanului, Pârâul Porcului, Ţarina and Jig-Piciorag.

→ The sacred buildings are built on heights and probably were connected with
entries to galleries. Sacred spaces were identified in five points: Hăbad-
Oprișa, Hăbad-Brădoaia, Dalea, Szekely and Drumuș points.

→ Ancient habitat structure has housing systems typical for mountain areas
and in direct relation with the mining activities.

→ The ore processing zone (at Jig-Piciorag Point) confirms that the ancient
habitat is connected with the historical centre of Roșia Montană and Cârnic
Massif (underground exploitation).

The representative landscape of archaeological sites scattered diffusely throughout the

entire territory provides a comprehensive and accurate picture of the land topography and the
ancient habitat both at micro scale by type and their position and large scale by the built landscape
history as a whole.
Overview of Roșia valley from Balmoșești (MNIR Archive)

2
62
 Mining landscape

Important preserved mining landscapes bear testimonies to the history of

Roman, medieval and modern mining, located at the edge of the settlement and beyond.
Roman period evidence is significant testimony to a concerted effort of around 50 years,
in which one of the largest known underground Roman mining complexes developed at Roșia
Montană. Medieval and modern testimonies are significant in terms of underground developments
and of preindustrial ore processing.
Preindustrial exploitation profoundly impacted upon the natural landscape: header
ponds, bare mountains, mine openings and the sites of stamp mills and water management infra-
structure create distinctive features within the mining landscape. After the cessation of traditional
mining, these traces of human activity have mellowed into the natural landscape.
The landscape of the hydro-technical system is also characterized by a stream and pond
infrastructure that formerly supplied the stamp mills in Corna, Roșia Valley and part of Ţarina.
Rocks and debris from mining operations are characterized by specific habitats.

Overall view of the Tăul Mare and mining landscape (© Radu Sălcudean)

Landscape of surface
mining exploitation:

Cârnic and Cetate massifs bear traces of traditional and modern (late 20th
century) mining in the form of mine entrances and rocky slopes devoid of vegetation.
Description
63

Mount Cârnic – vestiges of prehistoric and Roman slope-side works opened with fire and water (© Horia Ciucudean, Radu Sălcudean)
 Mining exploitation underground network

The underground network is characterised by Roman galleries and early mod-

ern galleries. Roman galleries form a dense network excavated into the following massifs: Orlea,
Carpeni, Cetate, Cârnic and Letea. Exploration, transport, ventilation and drainage galleries con-
verge on mineral extraction areas. Traces of habitation and sacred areas highlighted on the south
side of Rosia Valley (Carpeni and Valea Nan) link with the areas of ore exploitation of the Cetate
and Orlea massifs.

Built–up (architectural) landscape

This landscape contains built–up elements: from ponds and their mining heaps
to settlement and buildings. The typology and morphological structure of human settlements are
in relation to natural elements and main activities. The following types are distinguished:

→ linearly developed along watercourses, valleys and the main roads, with
interdependent relationships with water in the past (former stamp mills, in
Roșia Montană, Corna, Ţarina)

→ in the proximity of mining activities: mine accesses in Jig massif, Cârnic and
Letea, mining heaps, historic earthworks, etc. influenced the settlement
structure in the two main cores (the valley and historic centre)

→ in the proximity of woodlands, as an “extension” of the natural element

(Blidești, Corna)

→ in the proximity of agro-pastoral landscape (Blidești, Balmoșești) with dif-

fuse limits and types of the settlement.

Roșia Montană (550–580 m altitude)

Rural - urban type settlement with mixed structure related to geomorphology
and topography: nuclei include the churches, various buildings, and areas of mining exploitation,
and the core of Roșia Valley with the Roșia River (its use correlated with former stamp mills).
Mountain massifs, that are places of ore exploitation, constrain a settlement structure
that ties in with the linear structure of the valley: Cetate and Orlea flanking the lower pole, with
churches in the valley; and Jig Văidoaia, Letea and Cârnic around the higher pole of the historical
centre. Anthropogenic changes in the landscape shaped for industrial purposes become a signifi-
cant defining factor in the urban structure of settlement.
Overview of Roșia Montană settlement
© Radu Sălcudean

2
64
 Street network is not regular, small streets winding through properties, following the
uneven, sinuous topography. Stones extracted during the mining exploitation and stone ground
of stamps mills were used to pave the roads, properties delimitation and construction material.
The crossroads, public spaces and settlement boundary are marked by crosses, votive,
memorial and funeral monuments adding symbolic, historical value to associated spaces.

Monument of World War I, ca. 1930; located next to a Memorial Cross, in front of one of the buildings of the mining administration
(professional school, c.1910) (© Iozefina Postăvaru)
Cross “from Ghenoveva”, located close to the Square, nearby the Casino, attached to house no. 331 (19th century); (© Iozefina Postăvaru)
Cross of Mihail Gritta, 1837, marks the grave of the rich miner and donor of churches, today overlaid by the street with blocks of flats dating
from the 1960s; (© Ioan Andron)
Cross, 19th century, located on the road to Tăul Brazi (© Iozefina Postăvaru)

Corna (600–800m altitude)

Rural settlement with mixed structure. One linear nucleus emerges along
Corna Valley, whilst other concentrations are located around the churches and the ponds. In the
highland area of the settlement, the limits are diffuse and allow passage from one property to
another, related to the agro-pastoral activities and in the valley area. The limits are defined by
natural elements and are in direct relation to the mining activities.
Description

View on Corna churches with Cârnic and Cetate

Peaks in the background, mining exploitations from
the Roman to modern period (© Radu Sălcudean)
65
 Overrview on Corna Valley dwelling, among the
Corna brook (© Ștefan Angelescu)
Ţarina(1004 m altitude)
Situated near the eastern part of Orlea Massif has also a mixt structure. The
dwellings, close to Roșia Montană, were related to mining activities. In its upper part it is a scattered
hamlet with agro-pastoral activities.

dispersed households on the hills (© Radu Sălcudean)

View on the Tăul Ţarina and Ţarina hamlet with

Balmoșești (846 m altitude) and Blidești (825m altitude) are rural/vernacular

settlements (hamlets) with diffuse and scattered structure and natural limits, and rural households
that are related to agro-pastoral activities. The hamlets’ structure is typical for Apuseni Mountains’
rural settlements: the households and outbuildings are situated in the middle or as extension of
the property, perpendicular with the road and depending on the relief. Dispersed, the hamlets are
settlements form with no communal facilities, and weak infrastructure.
Households are spread on the hills and their inhabitants are called “side – settlers” (“lă- 2
tureni”), their main occupation being agriculture and cattle breeding. There is a temporary form
of living of the hayfields where cattle stable and one-room buildings are situated.
66
 Single farmstead with a agro-pastoral production facility ( © Radu Sălcudean)

Priorities for management

→ maintenance of traditional use of agro-pastoral landscapes and the preser-

vation of their habitats

→ maintenance of constitutive landscape elements such as boundaries,

landmarks, enclosures, singular elements that contains testimonials of the
historical evolution

→ the field margins of low intensity agro-pastoral land that often contains a
diversity of flowers

→ preservation of the character of the landscape

→ maintenance of constitutive elements of landscape characteristics that

support identity

→ reference to appropriate(heritage, archaeology, biodiversity, etc) strategies

for different landscape types
Description
67
2.a Geological setting
D and Mineralisation

Geological setting

Roșia Montană is situated in the Apuseni Mountains, located in the heart of the
Romanian Carpathians. Three main ore deposit districts are known in the Metalliferous Range, a
very rich gold-silver province worked since the Roman period, and likely before (a selection of mines
found within this province are listed in the annexe of the national comparative analysis). It is known
as the Golden Quadrilateral, and for over two millennia it was one of Europe’s principal goldfields.
The precious metals deposits (gold-silver) are epithermal in origin – deposited from warm
waters at comparatively shallow depths under conditions of comparatively low temperature and
pressure. The Roșia Montană deposit relates to two major events of Neogene volcanism/magma-
tism: Cetate dacite (13.5 - 1.1 million years ago) and andesites (9.3 – 0.47 million years ago).
The bulk of the gold-silver in the deposit is concentrated within two adjacent dacitic
intrusives: Cetate and Cârnic; which appear to join at depth. Two main types of gold-silver min-
eralisation are present with the deposits - disseminated (within dacite) and breccia. Within the
Cetate and Cârnic intrusives the highest-grade mineralisation is confined to sub-vertical breccia
pipe structures (often containing fragments of crystalline basement). Two (Cetate and Carpeni) are
located within the Cetate intrusive, and four (Napoleon, Corhuri, Cănţăliște and Piatra Corbului)
are located within the Cârnic intrusive. Amongst these common breccia pipes, the largest is the
Cetate Breccia that was mined at surface by the Romans (and possibly in prehistoric times, also)
as evidenced by numerous historic photographs of the large opencast (the “Citadel”), mined-out
during open pit operations from 1972 to 2006 for the low-grade gold the Romans left behind.
Surrounding the dacitic intrusives is a unit of volcanoclastic sediments that also hosts
precious metal mineralisation. Situated between the Cetate and Cârnic intrusives, and extending
along the southern boundary of the Cetate intrusive, is a breccia body known as the Black Breccia.

Mineralisation

Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is centred on a world-class gold deposit (with

a low - intermediate sulphidation state). It comprises various types of ore bodies: veins, breccia
structures (breccia pipes and breccia dykes), stockworks, and impregnations. The geological age
of mineralisation is indicated around 12.7 million years ago.
Gold occurs as free gold, and in electrum (natural gold – silver alloy). In addition, silver
minerals occur (argentite, proustite, polybasite), sulphides (common pyrite, and uncommon chal-
copyrite, sphalerite, galena, tetrahedrite, arsenopyrite) and tellurides (hessite, sylvanite, petzite,
altaite and Te-bearing argyrodite).
Gold grades decrease with depth, and a horizon of maximum concentration occurs.
Geological investigations evidenced the skill of Roman period miners who chased high-grade gold
values, only, restricting ‘dead’ work in barren ground only where necessary for access and trans-
port, drainage and ventilation – and only then if they were not able to drive in mineralised ground.

Reserves and Monuments of Nature

There are two “Reserves and Monuments of Nature” within Roșia Montană
Mining Landscape, comprising two rare geological formations, Piatra Corbului (Raven Stone) and
Piatra Despicată (Cleft Stone).
The Raven Stone was declared a “monument of nature” in 1969 and placed within a
protected area of 5 hectares. It is a mostly sheer-faced crag located at an altitude of 950 metres on
the southern slope of Cârnic Massif, and in which Roman mining (and even possibly prehistoric
mining) was conducted, including the use of primitive methods using fire, water and vinegar. The
name of the monument comes from the shape of the stone, suggesting a raven’s head, but also 2
perhaps from the large number of ravens that nest in the area.
The Cleft Stone was declared a “natural monument” in 1954. Its geological composition
68

is different from the geology of the area, being an andesite block, weighing several tonnes, located
 over the dacite rock of Cârnic Massif. It is believed that the stone block gained its current location
after a volcanic explosion from the Ore Mountains produced in the last phase of the Neogene
period approximately 15 – 20 million years ago.

2.a Flora
E

Geological setting

Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is a cultural landscape that provides a dis-

tinctive habitat for rich botanical diversity. Geographical position, geology, mineralogy, climate, soil
and hydrographical factors, together with prolonged anthropogenic interventions, have produced
a distinctive territory characterised by a wide variety of typologies.
Two millennia, and more, of gold mining activity imposed substantial cumulative dis-
ruptive action upon the biogeography of the property. But that does not mean that the current
ecosystem lacks biodiversity; the situation is quite the opposite – especially at the landscape scale.
Indeed, a lack of modernisation in traditional agro-pastoral practice preserves what is effectively
a relict Bronze Age landscape, set among scenery that is of high aesthetic value.
The property is characterised by a distinctive mosaic of natural and exposed rocky mas-
sifs strewn with metalliferous mine debris, lakes (former header ponds) that occupy the higher
elevations, forest (coniferous and deciduous), mountain meadows and hayfields, and the built-up
area of Roșia Montană village. In close proximity are semi-natural habitats of High Nature Value
grasslands (oligotrophic pastures and mesotrophic hay-meadows, traditionally farmed and lush
with wildflowers) and mires - listed in Annexe I of the EU Habitats Directive, together with orchids
and other plant species that are Red-listed in Romania.
The following significant plant communities are present at Roșia Montană (Annexe I EU
Habitats Directive listings shown where relevant, after Akeroyd, 2006):

HABITAT SPECIES LISTING

Asplenium septentrionale
Silene dubia subsp. Dubia.
‘Dacian communities of fissures of siliceous rocks
with Asplenium adiantum-nigram, Asplenium
Metal-rich rock outcrops EU 8230
septentrionale and Silene nutans subsp. Dubia (Red
listed as Near Threatened).
‘Silceous rock with pioneer vegetation of the Sedo-
Scleranthion’

Metal-rich mine debris Metallophyte species

Oligotrophic pastures,
‘Acidophilous mountain Nardus pastures’ Priority habitat EU 6230
locally species-rich

Oligotrophic, dwarf Lety Massif Roman Galleries: Cătălina Monulești

shrub, montane heaths Roman Galleries

Mesotrophic, montane,
species-rich hay- EU 6520 Mountain hay-meadows
meadows

Eriophorum latifolium (Central European yellow-

Base-rich mire
sedge fen)

Acid mire Drosera rotundifolia EU 7110

Alnus incana and Telekia speciosa –

Description

Woodland edge ‘Alluvial forestsof the Alnion incanae’ Priority habitat EU 91E0
69
2 History and Development

Traditional mining lanscape in early 1940s ( Silviu Bocaniciu Sr.)

Introduction

Ancient Alburnus Maior, medieval Rubeo Flumine, Verespatak, Goldbach,

Rotbach, Roșia de Munte and Roșia Montană: they are all the same place. Here an evolution al-
most exclusively determined by people’s quest to exploit gold spans more than two millennia;
perhaps even twice that. What is certain is that today we find a socio-technical palimpsest created
by successive empires and cultures that has unparalleled time-depth, above and below ground.
The landscape displays significant natural assets – some that determined the path of cultural in-
teraction, and some that developed as a direct result of it. These attributes combine with cultural
richness to produce a type of countryside that not only conveys authentic Romanian rural culture,
but which also represents a traditional scene that has disappeared across much of Europe. This
landscape, and the processes that shaped and sustain it, is not just property with an inventory. It
gives us a point of entry into a common emotional ground of memory and belonging. It is a precious
asset that needs to be fully understood in order to value it, and then one might hope to share in the
knowledge of those that truly care for it.
That the highest values must be assigned to Roșia Montană as an ancient gold mining
centre of the Roman Empire is well known amongst top academics and experts in the field. There
are, however, substantial visible marks of uninterrupted habitation and mining operations for at
least 700 years from the 13th century CE.
The combination of evidence for underground gold mining exploitation, surface ore-pro-
cessing, and related, often integrated, surface habitation, cemeteries, sacred places and other
remains, together constitute an ancient mining landscape that is rare for the Roman Empire, and
extremely rare for Romania. The significance of this cultural landscape is elevated further by
intensive and well-resourced archaeological investigation, tight radiocarbon dating and by the 2
discoveries of numerous wooden artefacts and mining implements within the galleries, some of
which have been dated by dendrochronology.
70
 The cultural landscape holds much knowledge yet to be discovered, in good time and by
sensitive method. Like Greeks, the Romans began their rise to power with very little gold in their
natural resources and, once Hispania breathed signs of exhaustion, gold-rich Dacia was fair game.
Archaeological research during the 2000s, by multi-national teams coordinated by the National
History Museum of Romania, elucidates the opinion of Romanian historian and archaeologist Vasile
Pârvan (1882–1927) that Alburnus Maior was, in ancient times: a Californian town of international
civilisation, a frontier place that incorporated several temporary and permanent areas related to
the presence of Dalmatian-Illyrian colonists, and others from regions of Hellenistic tradition south
of the Danube that specialised in gold exploitation.

This section is divided into:

A. Pre-Roman p. 69
B. Roman (106–170 CE) p. 70
C. Medieval and Early Modern (to 17th century) p. 75
D. 18th and 19th centuries p. 75
E. 20th century p. 79
F. 21st century p. 81

2.b Pre-Roman
A

Prehistoric surface mining works along a seam

© Horia Ciugudean

The earliest elements of the site, however, date back to the Bronze Age, and a
number of exceptional gold artefacts dating to this period have been found in the region.
Small-scale placer gold recovery is believed to have started in this period. Placer refers
Description

to alluvial, from rivers, the word derived from Catalan and Spanish meaning a shoal or sand bar,
and which entered international mining vocabulary in the 1848 Californian Gold Rush. It is also
likely that shallow hard-rock surface mining (trenches along the surface exposures of gold veins)
also took place. In 513 BCE Heredotus wrote of the Persian king Darius who started a war against
the Agathyrsi - a branch of the Scythians living on the banks of the Maris (Mures River) in order to
seize their gold. Heredotus remarks that: “they were highly delighted with large amounts of gold.”
The Mures River delimits the Golden Quadrilateral in the south.
71
 In 218 – 202 BCE, the Romans gained access to the gold mining region of Spain during
the second Punic War with Carthage, and recovered gold by alluvial and hard rock methods. In
50 BCE the Romans began the issue of a gold coin called the Aureus.

2.b Roman
B (106–170 CE)

Wax Tablet XI (MNIR Archives)

Votive altar dedicated to Janus.

Hop Găuri Area (MNIR Archives)

Roman funerary monuments, Funerary Monument, Mining Museum,

Drumuș Area (MNIR Archives) Roșia Montană (© Lorin Niculae)
72
 Reconstuction of the Circular Funerary
Monument at Hop Găuri (© Virgil Apostol)

There was major gold mining and socio-economic activity in Roșia Montană
during the Roman period (2nd century CE). The first underground mines in the property date im-
mediately following the Roman conquest of Dacia in 106 CE. Dacians were known to the Romans
as great metalworkers. In pre-Roman Dacia, where gold mines were very probably the property of
Dacian kings, their direct passing into the property of the Roman state took place immediately after
Dacia’s conquest, as early as the reign of Emperor Trajan (as seemingly proved by the inscription
laid by Hermias, libertus of the emperor, procurator aurariarum).
By August 106 CE the war was over and Dacia was set up as a Roman province.
Ancient sources report that the Romans found the equivalent of over 165 tonnes of gold
in the Dacian thesaurus. Kriton (private doctor to Emperor Trajan) wrote about huge amounts of
Dacian gold transported to Rome by their conquerors. Emperor Trajan celebrated his victory by
announcing over 100 days of games and, with a boosted treasury from the spoils of Dacia, built
his Forum and Column in Rome. The price of gold in the Empire sank during the following years:
in 97 CE one pound of gold cost 3,962 dr.; by 127 CE it cost at most 3,800 dr.
After occupation the Romans improved the organisation of gold mining and processing
methods, extracting an estimated 500 tonnes of gold during their 166-year rule. Aurariae Dacicae,
together with the metalla Illyrici presented the richest source of metals in the entire Empire during
100 CE – 400 CE.
What is now Roșia Montană became the most important precious metals mining centre
in the new Roman province. Its first attestation, on a wooden wax-coated writing tablet discovered
in one of the mining galleries is dated February 6th, 131 CE. It also records the Roman name of the
Description

place: Alburnus Maior.

The Italic civilization of Ancient Rome was amongst the most remarkable in the world, its
imperial period lasting a remarkable 1,500 years. Ultimately what creates and sustains empires is
military force and trade. Rome – essentially devoid of precious metals on its own territory – needed
gold and silver as coinage to pay its fighters; the term soldier (Medieval Latin soldarius, literally
meaning “one having pay”) ultimately derives from the Roman word solidus (Latin for “solid”),
73
the name of the Late Empire gold coin. And in terms of trade, Rome became the largest city in the
world in ancient times – a gigantic emporium of luxury goods such as silk, pearls, ivory and spices
- imported from India, China and elsewhere and paid for in gold. Gold was also something the
citizens of Rome deeply desired: for jewellery, and to simply convey sheer wealth. Trajan’s sights
fell on Dacia at a time when he wanted to defend his Roman frontiers, but also a time when precious
metal mining under Imperial control in Hispania had peaked in the first century CE. Whether it is
coincidence, or not, it is certain that after the Dacian Conquest, gold mining began immediately
and a procurator was brought to the Carpathian province, more likely directly from Rome rather
than from Dalmatia - as presupposed on the basis of his wife’s name Salonia (liberta from Salona).
The mining exploitation and organisation forms based on the Dalmatian and Illyrian
model suggest that the Romans adapted the fiscal administration to specifically Roman organi-
sational forms. In this a series of local (foreign) institutions were meant to provide economic and
demographical prosperity to such provinces. The importance of the Dacian gold territory, especially
of Alburnus Maior, in the framework of the customs system is reflected in the presupposition of
the existence of a customs station.
Roșia Montană is un-paralleled as a Roman mining centre in terms of its documented
epigraphy, an exceptional contribution to the authenticity of our understanding of the place. The
wax-coated wooden writing tablets are first-rate sources of legal, socio-economic, demographic
and linguistic information - not only regarding Alburnus Maior, but the entire Dacian province
and, implicitly, the Roman Empire. The tablets reveal explicit details of mining organisation, sale
and purchase contracts, receipts of loans with interest, and the sale of slaves. The evidence attests
not only Illyrians, but also Greek and Latin migrants hired to work in the mines and organised in
associations (e.g. collegia aurariorum, societas danistaria).
The writing tablets are also correlated with an unparalleled number of stone epigraphic
monuments, votive and funerary. Most epigraphs seem to derive from the settlement on “Carpeni”
and the cemetery at “Ţarina”. They were made of the Orlea gritstone. Those emerged before the
recent archaeological campaigns were discovered by chance, without systematic and scientific
research, which facilitated their migration to various collections; others vanished altogether. Many
sculptural monuments of medallions and reliefs bear decorative and symbolic elements that evi-
dence the intensive colonisation of mining technicians and specialists from Dalmatia. A number
of the epigraphs have been preserved at the mining museum in Roșia Montană, whilst others are
in the care of museum collections in Cluj-Napoca, Turda, Alba Iulia, Deva and Bucharest.

Roman mining techniques

Roman knowledge of geology was rudimentary, and they possessed limited

technical mining skills. They were soldiers and farmers first, and never real miners. When they
extended their dominion by conquest they made use of the submissive skill of the conquered
peoples in the mining regions they overran. They had a tendency to retain, whenever possible,
inherited “barbarian” socio-technical forms of mineral exploitation. In the case of Roșia Montană,
hard rock mining expertise may have been limited, or absent, however, as it is known that skilled
migrant Illyrian-Dalmatian miners were imported to exploit gold in such ways that suited the
technical nature of the deposit.
The pre-eminent underground Roman mining network that survives at Roșia Montană
possesses outstanding technical attributes that provide exceptional testimony to the diffusion and
further development of precious metals mining technology during the expansion of the Roman
Empire in the 2nd and 3rd centuries CE. Archaeological investigation has revealed important aspects
that contribute to the global history of mining. Such extensive perfectly carved trapezoidal-section
galleries, helicoidal shafts and inclined communication galleries with stairways cut into the bed-
rock, and vertical extraction areas (stopes) superimposed above one another with the roof carved
out in steps, are unknown elsewhere from such an early era and, further, are not described in
known literature. Features such as multiple chambers for treadmill-powered water-dipper wheels
(and the wooden remains of such equipment), whilst recorded but mostly destroyed elsewhere in
the Roman world by subsequent modern mining, are preserved at Roșia Montană. These are of 2
exceptional value due to their rarity, extent and state of conservation.
The Roman period did not involve revolutionary technology, it involved adequate, and
appropriate, technology applied to the extraction and processing of ores and metals – sufficient to
74
 meet a high level of demand, at affordable prices. The Roman Imperial period brought intensifi-
cation of that which already existed in Greek and Roman republican times, rather than innovation
in methods of exploitation and is characterized by the extent of operations and the quantity of
output. Under Augustus, existing mines expanded and new mines opened, using extensive shafts
and underground galleries. Crude devices such as tarred baskets and buckets for bailing were
used, hoisting them with a hemp rope. Drainage adits were used in combination with wooden
treadmill-powered water-dipping wheels, in pairs and in series, worked by men who pushed the
treads with their feet. Examples of these have been discovered at Roșia Montană. The Archimedean
Screw, or cochlea, which was brought from the irrigation ditches of Egypt to the mines of Spain
was also likely used.
Mining was done by hand using iron tools: picks, hammers and chisels. Timbering for
support was rarely used in Roșia Montană because the inclined shafts and levels were small; but
cross beams supported by uprights are evidenced in more dangerous ground (the same as in the
case of Rio Tinto mines). Pillars of rock were sometimes left as supports for the roof in larger
stopes, and filling with waste was another method for preventing collapse. Many entries were
steeply inclined. Lighting was by rush lamps, and niches in the sidewalls of levels are commonly
encountered. Many ancient lamps have been recovered.

Roman galleries in Cârnic Massif (© Ivan Rous)

Description

Roman Mining Gallery in Orlea Massif

© Lorin Niculae
75
Roman Gallery in Cârnic Massif, Roșia Montană Roman works with evidence for fire-setting
© Ivan Rous © Radu Sălcudean

Roman ore processing (gold and gold-silver ores),

concentration and smelting

The Romans commonly used cupellation, an ancient technique where a

gold-silver alloy (electrum) is treated under high temperatures under a controlled operation to
separate the noble metals from any base metals that might be present in the ore. Precious metals
do not oxidize or react chemically like the base metals that form slags or other compounds. The
Romans also developed advanced methods of parting gold and silver (the removal of silver from
gold, therefore increasing the purity of gold).
Ore containing precious metals was first roasted in order to oxidise any minor sulphides
present; this also helped to better disintegrate harder rock. It was then crushed using hammers or
mechanical stamps, then ground into a fine powder with pestle and mortar, or with rotary grinders
like a grain mill. Crushing and grinding workshops have been discovered in Roșia Montană during
several recent archaeological campaigns. The ore is then concentrated by water and gravity, either
by panning, or on inclined wooden boards using some material to collect the heavy gold (the ori-
gin of the “Golden Fleece”). The concentrate is then charged in crucibles with specific additives,
like lead metal or lead oxide, to facilitate the smelting process and to extract the two noble met-
als. Gold and silver pass into the lead metal and then, the lead-gold-silver mixture is poured into
moulds and subjected to cupellation to separate the noble metals from the alloy by oxidising the
lead. During underground archaeological excavations at Roșia Montană, a litharge (lead oxide)
roll was discovered in the Roman underground galleries of Cârnic massif, being found within a
secondary backfilling deposit of an inclined adit situated very close to the surface (few examples
of archaeological evidence concerning the various steps of gold-silver metallurgy are known from
prehistoric and ancient periods). The last step of the smelting process involved the separation or
parting of gold and silver by the cementation process, using reagents such as salt, including sodium
chloride, antimony sulphides and nitrates, a process that originated in Lydia in 6th century BCE.
After abandoning the rich gold and silver mines in Roman Dacia, the focus of Roman
exploitation of ore was transferred to the provinces on the right bank of the Danube, to Moesia Prima
and Dacia Ripensis and farther into the hinterland of the Balkan Peninsula, in Dacia Mediterranea
and Dardania. In 271 CE most Roman troops abandon Dacia after fighting off barbarian Goths.
2
76
 2.b Medieval and Early Modern
C (to 17th century)

It is assumed that there was little activity between the 3rd and 13th centuries in
terms of gold exploitation in Roșia Montană, a period substantially with no written evidence. After
the Romans left, society was organised into village communities and unions of village communities
which, in time, united into larger political-administrative formations named knezdoms, dukedoms
and lands, constituting the core of the future Principality of Transylvania.
Gold mining is next attested in the 1230s and continued to grow through the Medieval
and into Modern Times. Although there is much archaeological work needed to investigate this
period, there are a number of historical references that serve to highlight this activity. Following the
Hungarian conquest of Romanian principalities and dukedoms, gold mining expanded as German
miners (hospites) were colonised in the area. Under Béla IV (1206–1270), King of Hungary and
Croatia (1235–1270), administrative structures had their own Romanian organisation, settlements
usually conferred with the name of a respective river - as the majority of the Romanian popula-
tion lived along river valleys. The date 1238 is significant as, at Cricău and Ighiu, German miners
received the right to extract gold from “Chernech” - which is identified with the Cârnic massif in
Roșia Montană. After Béla, in 1271, King Stephen donated the gold producing “land of Abrud and
Zlatna” to the Alba Iulia diocese. In 1327–28, under King Carol Robert, the mining law was changed:
previously, when a gold or silver mine was discovered on private property, the king took the land
into his possession, giving the owner other estates in exchange, and taking 1/8 of gold and 1/10 of
silver. The new rules meant owners could keep land with precious metals, keeping 1/3 themselves
and giving the king 2/3 of the exploitation. Mining developed intensely and Chernech mine was
again mentioned, this time in 1347.
At the beginning of 16th century, gold mines belonged to local patricians, and in 1579
some townspeople from Abrud are recorded as owning stamps and washing machines in Corna
and Roșia valleys. In 1618, under Gabriel Bethlen’s reign, an exemption from military service was
introduced for miners, together with special aids for disabled miners, and freedom of circulation.
In 1642, documents mention the so-called “fortress” – the Roman gold mine of Roșia Montană,
together with hayfields and stamps. In 1676 there were 77 stamps recorded in the property. In 1690,
the Habsburgs gained possession of Transylvania through the Hungarian crown.

2.b 18th and 19th centuries

D
Description

Private stamping mills, photograph from the 1900s

(Csíky Lajos)
77
 The entrance to the Holly Cross Master Gallery of the gold Corna Reservoir, photograph from the 1900s (Csíky Lajos) Brazi Reservoir, photograph from the 1900s (Csíky Lajos)
mines, photograph from the 1900’s (Csíky Lajos)

2
78
 The Square on a market day. In the background Ajtai Palace,
demolished in the 1980s, photograph from the 1900s (Csíky Lajos)

Văidoaia area, a typical small-scale mining neighborhood; each house or group

of houses had a stamping mill, photograph from the 1900s (Csíky Lajos)

In the 18th century Transylvania was under Habsburg rule and became part
of the Habsburg Empire. During the reign of Empress Maria Theresa (1740–1780) and Joseph II
(1780–1790), a revival of mining took place in Roșia Montană under a well-organised framework
related to the creation and development of the Mining Treasury by the Habsburg Empire. During
this fresh impetus the underground network was greatly extended using gunpowder blasting and
Description

assisted by the introduction of ore-transport in wagons on rails. Ore processing, by numerous

waterwheel-powered stamping mills located in the main valleys (119 in 1757, 226 in 1772), was or-
ganised and sustained by the creation and possibly by the reuse of a series of large header ponds
(HU: tó, RO: tău from DE: Teich). The creation of ponds, the setting up of new mines with waged
labour, together with private capital participation, characterises this period. In 1746 the first private
mine in Roșia Montană was Sfânta Treime (Vercheșul de Jos - Râzna). Stamps were donated to the
79

churches (e.g. to Roșia, donated by Jurca Dumitru and Lupea Achim). From 1760-62 the commune
was called Verespatak and Maria Theresa, like her predecessors, administered Transylvania as a
separate province (she proclaimed it a principality in 1765). In 1773, Empress Maria Theresa signed
the statute of mining in Abrud, and made a donation to the Roșia Montană Catholic church. This
included the cherished icon of Virgin Mary with a necklace of black pearls. Maria Theresa also
modernised the large header pond of Tăul Mare, from which there are detailed records, including
the use of an innovative water outlet control mechanism.
In 1781–82 the community lodged a complaint against compulsory labour hours “by hand
and by cart” for the arrangement of such a “storage lake”. In the uprising that ensued – the Revolt
of Horea, Cloșca and Crișan, of 1784 – citizens of Roșia Montană set fire to Hungarian houses, the
Catholic church and a few mine entries. Soon, mining specialists from Austria and upper Hungary
were colonised in the area, a move that significantly changed the ethnic composition of the commu-
nity and brought Western culture in the form of Central European houses, together with elements
of Baroque and Neo-classical decorative art. Roșia Montană citizens took part in the Revolution of
1848–49 and George Gritta and priest Simion Balint became local heroes. After 1854 Roșia Montană
acquired a dual name: Verespatak-Roșia, aligned with both Hungary and Romania. It separated
from Abrud in 1857, and received an official statute in 1860. In 1867 Transylvania falls under the
direct rule of Hungary. In the 1880 census there were 758 households with a population of 3,439.
The underground heritage of the 18th to 19th centuries is prolific and significant as one
of the larger mining complexes of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Further, in terms of a techno-
logical mining ensemble, it retains rare features such as wooden trackways or railways, the humid
conditions in the mine having preserved, like their Roman wooden predecessors, substantial ar-
chaeology that rarely survives elsewhere. A characteristic of this new era was the use of gunpowder
explosives in driving galleries much faster than ever before, allowing a more extensive penetration
of the massifs. These workings have been archaeologically investigated in the Cârnic massif, only.
The hydro-technical system is impressive, and more extensive than presently visible;
originally it counted over 100 header ponds and each will have had extensive leats (watercourses)
of which some are visible in the landscape, and some not. Less visible, too, is evidence of the large
number of small waterwheel-powered stamping mills that were operated by numerous families
in the valleys. Traditional, pre-industrial mining was brought to an end by the communist nation-
alisation in 1948, all private stamping mills being abolished and destroyed. But their archaeology
will still be there, and is worthy of detailed study.
Historic events that happened in, and around, Roșia Montană include the 1784 Revolt
of Horea, Cloșca and Crișan, and the 1848 Revolution. They have left their traces on the ground,
and in the intangible history of the place.
This first mining revival under the Habsburg reign of Empress Maria Theresa (1740–1780)
and Joseph II (1780–1790) not only brought fresh socio-economic impetus to Roșia Montană,
but also led to a succession of important discoveries that relate to the history of the place, and
of the Roman Empire. This was a time when the celebrated Roman wax-coated wooden writing
tablets began to be discovered, the largest cache of 11 items being recovered from the Cătălina
Monulești Roman Gallery (tablets were discovered in 1786, 1788, 1790, 1820, 1824, 1854 and 1855).
The unanimously accepted view among experts is that they were placed in relatively inaccessi-
ble mine galleries for safe keeping at a time of crisis: the Germanic Marcomanni incursions into
Roman Dacia during 167–170 CE, part of the Marcomannic Wars that embraced the whole length
of the Roman Empire’s northeastern European frontier along the river Danube. The great scholar
Theodor Mommsen, who visited Roșia Montană in 1851–53, studied these tablets. Arguably, as one
of the most important attestations of Roman law, he published them in his Corpus inscriptionum
Latinarum. The newest dated tablet coincides with a sudden suspension of the ancient archaeo-
logical record at Roșia Montană.
Some tablets were destroyed immediately after they had been found because of their
critical state of preservation and the sudden contact with drying air when taken from their humid
hiding places. Others disappeared. 24 are preserved, however, as remarkable epigraphic docu-
ments that yield unique, abundant and precise information regarding the economic aspects, the
habitat system, the religious life and the juridical relations that governed this mining commu-
nity. Unlike other similar discoveries in the Roman Empire, such as the batches of tablets from 2
Vindolanda (Britannia) or Pompei (Italy), which also include elements of correspondence or literary
80
 exercises, the Transylvanian Triptychs are official documents, exclusively. They are namely legal
documents-instrumenta, with a strictly particular and individual nature.

2.b 20th century

E

Procesing Plant. Stamping mills and electric power station

at Gura Roșiei, 1927 (V. Zotinca)
Description

Private mine in Rosia Montana, 1929 (A.O. Bach)

81
Cetate Massif, before and during the explosions in 1974 that
destroyed the upper level of the historic mining works, as captured
by geologist Aurel Sîntimbrean

After the Great Union of 1918, Roșia Montană was called Roșia de Munte.
During World War I, most mining activity ceased. In 1930 California stamps were intro-
duced for more efficient crushing of gold ore. Share holding companies (cuxe) supervised mining
activity. The 1940s precipitated a decline, and emigration of miners and their families to other
Romanian mining fields, such as Valea Jiului, became commonplace.
After World War II, a communist-dominated government was installed under the sphere
of Soviet influence. The 1948 nationalisation of the private exploitation of gold ore made the use
of stamps forbidden and many private mines were closed. Traditional, pre-industrial mining was
replaced by large-scale, underground industrial-scale mining and, subsequently, by opencast min-
ing. The mining community suffered intimidation, brutal treatment and reprisals by repressive
authorities in attempting to coerce family members to reveal the places where they “had hidden
the gold for hard times”. This was a dark time for the people of Roșia Montană. There was a rapid
decline in prosperity, a general persecution of former mine owners, of stamps, stores and taverns,
and a steady exodus from the place. In 1956 the population of Roșia Montană had fallen to 2,371,
with 341 in Corna. Properties changed ownership at an unprecedented rate and underwent rap-
id physical degredation and decay. The spectacular Roman mining remains that survived in the
Cetate Massif - the “Big Fortress” and the “Small Fortress” - were taken off the jurisdiction of the
Monuments of Nature 2 February, 1970, to allow for large-scale opencast mining.
Communist era mining has left an indelible legacy in the landscape, but its less durable
components have already substantially disappeared. Of course this period also forms an import-
ant part of the property’s story, an era that represents the third and final phase of large-scale gold
exploitation.

2
82
 2.b 21st century
F

General View - Tăul Mare, Cârnic Massif, Cetate Massif

and the former mining exploitation (©Radu Sălcudean)

During the 1990s the state mine continued its open-cast exploitation of Mt
Cetate (and in its final years even of Mt Cârnic), to be closed in 2006, on the eve of Romania’s
accession to the European Union, as a non-profitable, state subsidized enterprise. From the late
1990s a new proposal emerged, from a potential private investor, for resuming open-cast mining
and expanding it to the entire site. From the early 2000s, this turned into a project that has taken
several administrative steps in view of receiving approval, but never succeeded. At the same time,
a strong public opinion emerged, in favour of preserving the cultural heritage of the site, which
would have been endangered by the implementation of the mining project, considering at least
the superposing of planned mining elements with specific, listed cultural heritage features.
The mining company has acquired properties within the footprint of the mining project,
and became one of the major landowners in the area. It has also benefitted from a mining-only
zoning plan. In 2016, the zoning plan of the municipality was annulled in court, closing the circle
and bringing the community to the situation of no- mining plans.
During this interval, the active citizens of the area and supporting NGO’s mounted a
strong case for the preservation of the site, on ownership, environmental and cultural rights. Within
the ensuing civic movement, the desire of promoting the site for the World Heritage emerged.
The same period saw the first systematic archaeological research campaign, developped
within the framework of the proposed mining project. Database and GIS location systems were
adopted since 2001, within the specially established Alburnus Maior National Research Programme,
under the coordination of the National Museum of Romanian History, of Bucharest. This led to a
great advance in knowledge on the site, which brought further detail and precision to the overall
assessment, indicating a most valuable cultural and natural heritage place.
Description
83
 3
84

Overview of Rosia Montană valley (© Ștefan Angelescu)

 3. Justification
for Inscription

3.1 Brief synthesis

a Roșia Montană Mining Landscape contains the most significant, extensive

and technically diverse underground Roman gold mining complex currently known in the world.
Workings attested by the famous Roman wax-coated wooden writing tablets, have been dated to
the Roman occupation of Dacia (106–170 CE) and, together with potentially previous and sub-
sequent phases, mining activity spans more than two millennia. Historically, precious metals
coinage financed trade and military force that, together, created and sustained empires. At Roșia
Montană all phases have left their mark, both underground and at surface, an evolution almost
exclusively determined by people’s quest for gold. This socio-technical palimpsest of successive
empires and cultures has unparalleled time-depth and is exceptionally diverse and readable in
such a compact area.
Roșia Montană is situated in a natural amphitheatre of massifs and radiating valleys in
the Metalliferous range of the Apuseni Mountains, located in the historical region of Transylvania
in the central part of present-day Romania. The site represents the centre of the so-called Golden
Quadrilateral of the Southern Carpathians – the richest precious metals province in Europe.
Gold occurred in veins within seven small mountains that visually dominate the land-
scape of Roșia Montană, itself surrounded on three sides by dividing ridges and peaks. Towering
crags are pierced by old mine entrances, their tops scarred by opencast working. Roman archaeology
at surface is prolific and pervasive, comprising ore-processing areas, living quarters, administrative
buildings, sacred areas and necropolises, some with funerary buildings with complex architecture,
all set in relation to over 7 km of ancient underground workings discovered to date. Forest and
scree mix on steep slopes and, mounted on rocky knolls, the towers and spires of historic churches
command the villages of Roșia Montană and the much smaller Corna, settlements constrained by
relief in valleys that also provided for ore-dressing, communication and transport. Steeply sloping
meadows are characterised by agro-pastoral practices that are as old as the mining activity itself,
and a number of artificial lakes, formerly header ponds for ore processing that were greatly ex-
panded from 1733, punctuate higher elevations.
The village of Roșia Montană boasts an impressive inventory that illustrates a diversity of
architectural styles, eclectic influences fused with local tradition, a cosmopolitan settlement whose
roots and embellishments are based on freeholders’ exploitation of gold. Five religious denomi-
nations and several ethnic groups have lived together in work and community life, a situation that
is reflected in the current character of this Transylvanian mining settlement substantially frozen
in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries at the inception of its prosperous urbanisation under
Austro-Hungarian rule. Churches dominate the built environment and contribute substantially to
its symbolic imagery. Characteristic buildings with outer porches form a typological background
to a series of distinctive and mostly decorative features that were borrowed from the repertoire of
Classical or Baroque architecture. This structure, distinguished also by grand walls and monumen-
tal gates that face winding roads, gradually gives way in the industrial suburbs to miners’ house-
holds consisting of wooden dwellings above high stone-built basements, many of which housed
ore-processing workshops with water sumps fed by springs that could be used in the harshest of
winters. Final interventions derive from the communist regime that imposed nationalisation in
1948, and which ended traditional family- or small group-operated mining. State-run mining by
underground and opencast ended in 2006. Properties that today proclaim a past built on gold, are
still home to a living community; and the landscape continues to yield a living. Its cultural and
natural assets are of such quality, however, that opportunities for a sustainable future have perhaps
85

never been brighter.

3.1 Criteria under which inscription is proposed
(and justification for inscription under these

b criteria)

→ Criterion (ii):

to exhibit an important interchange of human values, over

a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on
developments in architecture or technology, monumental
arts, town–planning or landscape design

Roșia Montană Mining Landscape contains the world’s pre-eminent example

of an underground Roman gold mine and, further, demonstrates over 2,000 years of subsequent
exploitation and continuous settlement.
Many of the mining features preserved in over 7 km of Roman workings demonstrate
exceptional innovative techniques developed by skilled migrant Illyrian-Dalmatian miners to ex-
ploit gold in such ways that suited the technical nature of the deposit. Control of precious metal
resources, to use as currency, was a fundamental factor in the development of Roman military
power and Imperial expansion. When in possession of the Apuseni Mountains there was an im-
perative to immediately commence mining in an efficient manner.
A decade of professional underground archaeological campaigns, beginning in 2001,
elucidates a fusion of imported Roman mining technology with locally developed techniques,
unknown elsewhere from such an early era. Multiple chambers that housed treadmill-operated
water-dipping wheels for drainage represent a technique likely routed from Hispania to the Balkans,
whilst perfectly carved trapezoidal-section galleries, helicoidal shafts, inclined communication
galleries with stairways cut into the bedrock, and vertical extraction areas (stopes) superimposed
above one another with the roof carved out in steps, are in a combination so specific to Roșia
Montană that they likely represent pioneering aspects in the technical history of mining.
The significance of Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is not limited to antiquity as the
Apuseni Mountains were Europe’s main source of gold from the end of the Crusades in the thir-
teenth century until the discovery of the Americas in the sixteenth century, thereafter remain-
ing pre-eminent in terms of output, during the era of Austro-Hungarian rule in particular, when
German, Austrian and Hungarian miners were brought in and used their own advanced technology
to exploit the deposits on a much larger scale.

→ Criterion (iii):

to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to

a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living
or which has disappeared

Roșia Montană Mining Landscape embodies the cultural tradition of one of the
oldest documented mining communities in Europe, anciently founded by the Romans and which
survived under influences of successive socio-technical and organisational systems whilst gradually
waning until its final disappearance at the beginning of the twenty-first century.
The site was the most important precious metal mine located in the Golden Quadrilateral
of the Romanian Carpathians and is associated with exceptional epigraphic testimony from the
Roman Imperial era. Wax-coated wooden writing tablets discovered in the mine during the eigh-
teenth and nineteenth centuries have been correlated with numerous stone epigraphic monuments
discovered on site. Together they provide an authentic picture of daily life and cultural practice in
this ancient frontier mining camp community.
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is rooted in a past that evolved in a tradition consis-
tently bound by efforts to extract gold. Detailed physical testimony is provided by: the underground 3
mining works, chronologically differentiated by distinctive technical features; the socio-techni-
cal surface mining landscape consisting of ore-processing areas, habitation areas, sacred areas,
86
 necropolises; the current mining village built at the dawn of the industrial era; and the extensive
documentation of the communities that generated them.
Archaeological evidence survive alongside the legacy of modern underground mining
operations, whilst the landscape reveals evidence of an increasing scale of modification through
time to serve mining and the way of life of its communities under successive control of empires
and state, each phase adding to, or in some case erasing, its predecessors. Today, life continues in
a landscape little changed in some respects, retaining its capacity to yield a limited yet traditional
living from agriculture. Its cultural and natural assets, however, are of such quality that they have
the potential to offer a sustainable future for generations that follow.

→ Criterion (iv):

to be an outstanding example of a type of building,

architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which
illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history

Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is testimony to the long history of gold ex-
ploitation in the Carpathian precious metals province of the Golden Quadrilateral, from the Roman
era to the twenty-first century. It is an exemplar that illustrates the strategic control and vigorous
development of precious metals’ mining by the Roman Empire, essential for its longevity and
military power. Following the decline of mining in Hispania (Iberian Peninsula, modern Spain and
Portugal), Aurariae Dacicae (Roman Dacia, AD 106 to AD 272) was the only significant new source
of gold and silver for the Roman Empire, among the likely key motivations for Trajan’s conquest.
The pre-eminent underground Roman mining network, with its outstanding technical
attributes and associated landscape, is exceptional testimony to the diffusion and further develop-
ment of precious metals mining technology during the expansion of the Roman Empire in the 2nd
and 3rd centuries CE. Archaeological investigation has revealed important aspects that contribute
to the global history of mining. Such extensive perfectly carved trapezoidal-section galleries, heli-
coidal shafts and inclined communication galleries with stairways cut into the bedrock, and vertical
extraction areas (stopes) superimposed above one another with the roof carved out in steps, are
unknown elsewhere from such an early era. Features such as multiple chambers for treadmill-pow-
ered water-dipper wheels (and the wooden remains of such equipment), whilst recorded but mostly
destroyed elsewhere in the Roman world by subsequent modern mining, are preserved at Roșia
Montană, are of exceptional value due to their rarity, extent and state of conservation.
The modern socio-technical mining legacy is significant, too, from the prolific Habsburg
legacy of the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries to the pre-industrial mining and ore-processing
methods captured at the moment of technological changes on the verge of the modern industrial
revolution. Mining operations undertaken at this time were mostly by ‘freeholder’ families that
favoured the continuation of such ore-dressing methods until nationalisation in 1948.
Large-scale underground mining started under the communist regime, an era that has
left enormous caverns, and in 1971 this switched to large-scale opencast working of the Cetate
massif, destroying the spectacular Roman mining works known as the “Citadel” and continuing
until 2006 by which time it had effectively reduced the elevation of the mountain by as much as
twenty per cent. The apartment blocks inserted in the first stage of the socialist age into an essen-
tially eighteenth-nineteenth century architectural ensemble is a striking relic of this era.
Justification for inscription

→ Criterion (vi):

to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living

traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and
literary works of outstanding universal significance

The Roman wax-coated wooden tablets (tabulae ceratae) of Alburnus Maior

(Roșia Montană) were made famous by the great German historian Theodor Mommsen (1817–
1903), generally regarded as one of the greatest classicists of the nineteenth century. They represent
a significant source for his interpretation of Roman law and on the law of obligations, which had
87
a significant impact on the German Civil Code, subsequently forming the basis for similar regula-
tions in other countries such as Portugal, China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Greece and Ukraine.
Around 50 Roman wax-coated wooden tablets were discovered during the 1780s and
1850s in mining galleries at Roșia Montană, with some 24 surviving in museums around the world.
These are first-rate sources of legal, socio-economic, demographic and linguistic information not
only regarding Alburnus Maior but the entire Dacian province and, implicitly, the Roman Empire.
The tablets provide intimate details of life in the mining community and are also correlated with an
unparalleled number of stone epigraphic monuments, votive and funerary, discovered on site and
preserved in museums at Roșia Montană, Cluj-Napoca, Turda, Alba Iulia and Deva. Information
reveals explicit details of mining organisation, sale and purchase contracts, receipts of loans with
interest, and the sale of slaves. Epigraphic evidence attests not only Illyrians but also Greek and
Latin migrants hired to work in the mines and organised in associations (e.g. collegia aurariorum,
societas danistaria).
Academic research into the history of the Roman Empire during the Antonine dynasty
and its relationship to the Dacians’ gold and gold extracted from Roman Dacia has opened a new
area of research into European cultural history: the economic recovery of the Roman Empire, the
commencement of monumental public construction works in Rome, among which the Forum and
Trajan’s Column are perhaps the most important elements, and the direct linkage to the gold-min-
ing area of Dacia where Alburnus Maior was its principal centre.
The perceived value of Roșia Montană’s gold resources, like that of other gold-producing
regions, changes with time, trade, technology and ownership of territory. The destination and uses
of gold also change with the above. For the Romans, gold was vital for currency to pay its soldiers
across its Frontiers - and for funding the import traffic that plied the ‘roads’ of silk and spices that
led to Rome.

3.1 Statement of Integrity

c The property contains all the necessary attributes that express Outstanding Universal
Value. It is constrained within a natural amphitheatre that is radically different from the surrounding
landscape and includes all metalliferous massifs of Alburnus Maior and the two principal valleys
(Roșia and Corna) for ore-dressing, settlement, transport and communication. The landscape
represents a palimpsest of successive empires and cultures that have shaped it. Its most recent
exploitation, open pit mining from 1971 to 2006, is responsible for its largest scale and most dra-
matic physical change – though this activity is ultimately representative of irreversible loss and
unsustainable practice.
The boundary has been determined using a combination of geological/mining maps,
natural features such as ridgeline watersheds (functional, for water supply in ore-processing) and
viewsheds (into and out of the property), roads, and the administrative boundaries that will assist
with management of the property. It includes all areas with significant archaeological potential.
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape has undergone multiple transformations; some gradual
over the centuries, and some sudden and devastating such as the destruction of the Roman open-
works on Cetate (the “Citadel”) by opencast mining starting in the 1970s, and the recent sustained
buildings demolition campaign that began in 2004 in preparation for the resumption of open pit
mining and the creation of processing facilities. During the latter, important exemplars of local
architectural heritage and even entire portions of built fabric (such as the central area of Corna),
were destroyed in a total that exceeded 250 properties. A significant number survive, however, as
a direct result of local owners maintaining efforts, or due to new investor’s repairs. The state of
conservation of many historic buildings remain poor - making the preservation and conservation of
this precious heritage all the more important - and some unauthorised development of small-scale
housing has taken place. At the same time community based heritage programmes have made the 3
connection between local owners, professionals in the field of conservation and volunteers from
all over the world. During the last decade a range of historic buildings have been rescued using
88

local resources and traditional techniques.

 In terms of the integrity of individual components and elements:
The underground mining network comprises successive phases that exploited the same
deposit – from the Roman period to the 20th century. It is remarkable that so much of the Roman
network – highly selective in mining the richest ores – still survives (over 7 km currently recorded).
Ore grades were highest near the surface but, by the 18th century, not only did modern technol-
ogy enable the mines to operate at greater depths, but improved and larger-scale ore-processing
enabled much lower grade ores to be mined, profitably. These later phases no doubt destroyed
extensive Roman remains (in many extant cases there are modern workings intersecting Roman
workings) but these later workings are part of the full history of the property and serve to highlight
the incredible extent of Roman mining.
The header ponds (ore processing features) are each high in terms of integrity, including
those with surviving equipment. Further work will be done in locating and defining smaller ponds,
and the watercourses both ‘upstream’ and ‘downstream’ that are part of functional integrity.
In terms of the settlements, the Roman archaeological investigations have yielded prolific
evidence, and no doubt much more remains to be discovered. Interpretation, at this stage, is diffi-
cult at the landscape scale, including broader relationships between components. In this regard,
a comprehensive Lidar survey will be undertaken for the first time at Roșia Montană, and this will
not only assist with interpretation but will guide the future research programme.
Modern settlements have been degraded to a certain extent by the loss of properties,
post-World War II economic decline, and indeed hardship, causing an acceleration in this respect,
but damaging, too, have been the preparations for the revival of opencast mining that has resulted
in the demolition of significant numbers. Some unauthorised building of structures in an effort to
obtain compensation from mining investors has also created some negative impacts.

3.1 Statement of Authenticity

d The area proposed currently constitutes a detailed testimony to unparalleled

Roman gold mining and humanity’s relationship with the landscape, as well as to more than two
millennia of mining practices by successive empires and cultures. It contains attributes that are high
in authenticity in terms of the location and the form and materials of surviving historic features,
with a clear sense of how, when and by whom mining shaped the land.
In terms of knowledge, unparalleled epigraphic and documentary evidence combined
with a decade of intensive systematic archaeological investigation has already provided a major
contribution to the understanding of Roman mining techniques and organisation. Significant po-
tential remains for the Roman period as well as for further stages in the mining landscape evolution.
In terms of the authenticity of individual components and elements:
The underground mining network comprises successive phases that exploited the same
deposit – from the Roman period to the 20th century. Almost all networks are highly authentic,
though some tourist access works during the 1970s at Orlea Roman Galleries have slightly impacted
negatively, though to a certain extent this is reversible. In terms of enhancing knowledge for the
networks of the 18th century onwards, it is planned to undertake research in several German and
Justification for inscription

Czech archive collections which are known to hold material concerning Roșia Montană and other
mines in the Golden Quadrilateral.
The header ponds (ore processing features) are each high in terms of authenticity, in-
cluding those with surviving equipment. Enlargements, and modifications, are part of their his-
torical and industrial development, and their modern adapted function. Almost all of the original
engineering structures (including impressive dams) remain intact with original detailing, and
contemporary construction drawings survive.
In terms of the settlements, the Roman archaeological investigations have yielded pro-
lific authentic evidence that has been undisturbed and in its original context. Substantial dating,
combining various techniques, has confirmed consistent dates of occupation.
89
 Modern settlements are remarkably high in terms of authenticity, not only in terms of
location and surviving associated elements of plots, but so too in terms of materials and workman-
ship. Ironically, socio-economic decline has not only frozen development but prevented in many
cases any alterations and modernisations to fabric. Understandably, in many cases, the state of
conservation is poor, but conservation interventions can now be incorporated within a conservation
management plan to be implemented incrementally and with the objective of being foremost able to
maintain such pristine authenticity by using traditional materials and local traditional craftmanship.

3.1 Protection and

management requirements

e The property is included in a wider area that is designated in view of its pro-
tection by urban planning regulations, an area that also comprises several individually designated
elements, from the Roman mining works, to the historic houses and two geological formations.
The more direct protection is granted by listing, with 50 elements within the property
included in the Historic Monuments List. They comprise the archaeological site with a few par-
ticular sub-components, the historic centre of the mining town, the Roman mines in Mt. Cârnic,
houses and churches. Several other components are currently being assessed for listing, among
them the header ponds of the extensive hydro-technical system.
Under this protection framework, the responsibilities fall with the municipality, in re-
spect to the protection through urban planning measures, and with the respective owners, when
it comes to listed properties.
According to the law, once a nomination is submitted, all provisions in place for World
Heritage sites will apply to the respective property as well. These include the management system
designed to protect all World Heritage properties in Romania. Roșia Montană will benefit from these
provisions with the submission of the nomination file to UNESCO. Until then, heritage authorities
in Romania are preparing new forms of management for such multi-governance sites and land-
scapes uniting different heritage typologies that will integrate local partnerships and programmes
in which relevant players come together to achieve each management goal.
An active citizenship journey over the last decade, where civic society and heritage prac-
titioners have come together in recognition of the unique Roșia Montană heritage, show that the
management of the property can be founded on cross-sectorial support and people-centred ap-
proaches. These programmes also triggered systematic monitoring campaigns which are now being
endorsed by heritage institutions. This is already improving the capacity for specialized institutions
and local authorities to work with other institutions and civil society to build on the successes of
Roșia Montană and learn from the experience of working there for other heritage places.

3
90
 3.2 Comparative analysis

Comparison between Roșia Montană and:

A. Relevant World Heritage Sites

B. Relevant Tentative List Sites (2016)
C. Relevant, selected, other mine sites
D. Roman gold mines in Romania

METHODOLOGY An initial scoping exercise systematically considered a large number of proper-

ties (see annexe) in order to isolate those that have an appropriate relevance in terms of like-for-like
comparisons. More detailed comparisons made with these properties that express similar values
to the nominated property are presented here. Additional scrutiny has been applied in instances
of shared typological and chronological-regional provenance.
Precious metal (gold, silver, platinum) mining is necessarily a separate category com-
pared to base metals, coal and iron, and other industrial minerals. The comparative rarity of such
metals together with the economic dimension creates obvious ramification in terms of the physical
testimony of associated cultural heritage. However, even gold deposits commonly vary considerably
from silver deposits: They sometimes require different technology to mine, especially in alluvial or
eluvial exploitation that is strongly related to gold and not silver (except, to a much lesser degree,
when the two metals occur naturally as a gold-silver alloy called electrum); different technology to
process the ore; and due to the value of the output may command different organisational methods.
Values for gold mining at Roșia Montană are highly significant under the theme of mining
in the Roman Empire (therefore, as a comparator, then other sites must clearly relate to the geog-
raphy and economy of the Roman world) and also under the theme of European Gold Mining (so,
with a significant heritage of Austro-Hungarian mining then classic central European properties
are especially relevant).

CONCLUSION The conclusion is that ancient mines, especially precious metal mines, are
under-represented on the World Heritage List, and that Roșia Montană Mining Landscape contains
the most extensive, technically diverse, and significant underground Roman gold mining
complex currently known in the world.
It is an exemplar that illustrates the strategic control and vigorous development of
precious metals’ mining by the Roman Empire, essential for its longevity and military power.
Following the decline of mining in Hispania (Iberian Peninsula, modern Spain and Portugal),
Aurariae Dacicae (Roman Dacia, AD 106 to AD 271) was the only significant new source of gold
and silver for the Roman Empire, amongst the likely key motivations for Trajan’s conquest. The
highest quality, extent and technical diversity of underground Roman workings at Roșia Montană
– in the second, successor, principal precious metals region under Roman imperial control – makes
the property stand out as exceptional.
Further, mining continued in phases that span two millennia. Although the 2nd century
CE and 18th – 19th century phases are the most significant, all phases have left their mark, both
Justification for inscription

underground and at surface, creating a socio-technical palimpsest of successive empires and cul-
tures with unparalleled time-depth, exceptionally diverse and readable in such a compact area.
No comparable properties are known to exist which might be nominated in the
future, either in Romania, the same geo-cultural area, or the world.
91
World Heritage Site Country Date Criteria Date range Principal typology
inscribed
Gold Silver Salt Coal Copper Lead Zinc Iron Other
mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining

pre–17th century
1600–1699
1700–1799
1800–1899
1900–1999
2000–
Roșia Montană Romania (iii), (iv)

Europe and North America

Las Médulas Spain 1997 (i), (ii), (iii), (iv)

Hallstatt-Dachstein/Salzkammergut Cultural Landscape Austria 1997 (iii), (iv)

Major Mining Sites of Wallonia Belgium 2012 (ii), (iv)

Kutna Hora: Historical Town Centre with the Church of St Czech Minor
1995 (ii), (iv)
Barbara and the Cathedral of Our Lady at Sedlec Republic

From the Great Saltworks of Salins-les-Bains to the Royal

France 1982 (i), (ii), (iv)
Saltworks of Arc-et-Senans, the Production of Open-pan Salt

Nord-Pas de Calais Mining Basin France 2012 (ii), (iv), (vi)

Mines of Rammelsberg, Historic Town of Goslar and Upper 1992

Germany (i), (ii), (iii), (iv)
Harz Water Management System 2010

Zollverein Coal Mine Industrial Complex in Essen Germany 2001 (ii), (iii)

Røros Mining Town and the Circumference Norway 1980 (iii), (iv), (v)

2008
Wieliczka and Bochnia Royal Salt Mines Poland (iv)
2013

Historic town of Banská Štiavnica and the Technical Minor Minor Minor
Slovakia 1993 (iv), (v)
Monuments in its Vicinity

Spain, Mercury
Heritage of Mercury. Almaden and Idrija 2012 (ii), (iv)
Slovenia

Mining Area of the Great Copper Mountain in Falun Sweden 2001 (ii), (iii), (v)

Ironbridge Gorge UK 1986 (i), (ii), (iv), (vi) Minor

Blaenavon Industrial Landscape UK 2000 (iii), (iv)

3
92 Tin
Cornwall and West Devon Mining Landscape UK 2006 (ii), (iii), (iv) Arsenic
World Heritage Site Country Date Criteria Date range Principal typology
inscribed
93 Justification for inscription
Gold Silver Salt Coal Copper Lead Zinc Iron Other
mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining

pre–17th century
1600–1699
1700–1799
1800–1899
1900–1999
2000–
Africa

There are no relevant properties listed.

Latin America and the Caribbean

City of Potosi Bolivia 1987 (ii), (iv), (vi)

Historic Town of Ouro Preto Brazil 1980 (i), (iii)

Historic Centre of the Town of Diamantina Brazil 1999 (ii), (iv) Diamonds

Sewell Mining Town Chile 2006 (ii)

Humberstone and Santa Laura Saltpeter Works Chile 2005 (ii), (iii), (iv) Salpeter

(i), (ii), (iv)

Historic Town of Guanajuato and Adjacent Mines Mexico 1988
and (vi)

Historic Centre of Zacatecas Mexico 1993 (ii), (iv)

Asia and the Pacific

Iwami Ginzan Silver Mine and its Cultural Landscape Japan 2007 (ii), (iii), (v)

Sites of Japan’s meiji Industrial Revolution: Iron and Steel,

Japan 2015 (ii), (iv)
Shipbuilding and Coal Mining
Las Médulas, (© Barry Gamble)

3
94
 3.2 Comparison of the property with
A relevant World Heritage Sites

SPAIN
Las Médulas
Inscribed 1997 under criteria (i), (ii), (iii), (iv)

CONCLUSION The properties of Las Médulas and Roșia Montană are entirely different:
Las Médulas represents opencast mining of a consolidated palaeo-alluvial deposit, which
was then abandoned during the Roman period, whilst Roșia Montană represents under-
ground hard-rock mining with extensive development, including settlement, by multiple
empires and cultures from Roman times to the 20th century. But they are also somewhat com-
plementary, as together they represent two of the principal gold exploitation systems under Roman
imperial control, in the two most important source regions of the precious metal that provided
currency to sustain the Roman Empire and its military power that was key to its survival.

BACKGROUND Las Médulas is the world’s largest and best-preserved example of a Roman
opencast gold mine. Located in modern northwest Spain, it operated during the 1st and 2nd cen-
turies CE in Roman Hispania, a region that was of crucial economic importance as the principal
source of gold during the early period of the Roman Empire. When the gold resources of Hispania
were depleted, the only principal new source of gold for the Roman Empire was from Roman Dacia
(Roșia Montană).
The World Heritage property of Las Médulas comprises the mines themselves, repre-
sented by ancient working faces of sheer cliffs above the once-productive layer of palaeo-placer
gold, together with large areas of tailings now given over to agriculture. Tens of kilometres of leats
(aqueducts, with some sections cut in bedrock and in short tunnels) survive as the feeder part of
the Roman hydraulic technique known as ruina montium. This was described by Pliny in Historia
Naturalis published in 77 CE and comprised a system of water capture from distant sources by such
long leats, its storage in reservoirs, and its sudden release to surge through vertical and horizontal
tunnels excavated in the mountain. Erosion and massive pressure caused catastrophic collapse
of the working face of the opencast mine. This was hydraulic (water pressure) mining 1,700 years
before it was famously re-introduced in the American California Gold Rush in 1853. Authenticity
has been preserved, the site being subjected to little subsequent industrial activity and land-use
pressure. Well-managed visitor access since inscription has meant that the site preserves many of
its highly authentic features in a form little different from abandonment in ancient times. Integrity
is intact and almost the entire site is included within the property. There remains considerable
opportunity for archaeological work in terms of understanding associated Roman settlement.
In terms of relative state of conservation, the principal rock type (conglomerate) is rel-
atively well cemented and sheer faces have reasonable stability, though some more sandy-clay
sections continue to preferentially weather. Tailings areas are now used for agriculture, including
large plantations of sweet chestnut trees, a species introduced by the Romans and which responds
well to coppicing, a practice responsible for the characteristic appearance of many specimens that
may be as old as 500 years or more. The tailings pond is maintained as a lake. There is also evidence
Justification for inscription

of Roman social infrastructure, including some excavated and protected archaeology (e.g. mine
official’s residence), but much remains located but unexcavated.
In terms of protection and management, the Regional Government declared the
Archaeological Zone of Las Médulas a Cultural Space in 2010. This is a legal category created for
Sites of Cultural Interest, the highest legal protection for cultural sites in Spain. No buffer zone
was created at the time of inscription (nor is one deemed necessary), but the site boundary was
enlarged for the Cultural Space in order to mitigate any negative impact on the property. There is a
Manager and a Governing and Advisory Committee for both the Natural Monument and Cultural
Space, and three Directorates-General of the Castilla y Leon Regional Government are involved:
Cultural Heritage and Sites; Tourism; and Natural Environment; with the latter taking greatest
active responsibility for management.
95
 SLOVAKIA
Historic Town of Banská Štiavnica and the Technical
Monuments in its Vicinity
Inscribed 1993 under criteria (iv), (v)

CONCLUSION The property does not contain any evidence of Roman mining heritage
or Roman settlement. It shares with Roșia Montană a similar geology, mineral deposit type and
structure, topography, and a predominantly 18th-19th century precious metals (silver) mining heri-
tage developed under Austro-Hungarian imperial rule. Contemporary and similar attributes relate
to surface hydro-technical systems (though primarily for water powered pumping and winding at
Banská Štiavnica, versus ore-dressing at Roșia Montană) and underground mining technology,
with underground networks being available to visitors at both locations. However in terms of set-
tlement, Banská Štiavnica’s population was more than a magnitude greater than Roșia Montană,
and in general was more prosperous with almost continuous urban development that spanned
some five centuries. Consequently, this is reflected in large-scale harmonious urbanism with rows
of compact burgher architecture, a formal and very high status mining town more akin to some of
the German medieval mining towns than the small-scale and irregular plan of the Transylvanian
mountain mining village of Roșia Montană – albeit with some of the architectural style and embel-
lishments borrowed from a shared Viennese cultural influence. Therefore the mining settlements
of Banská Štiavnica and Roșia Montană are complementary.

BACKGROUND The rich central Slovakian mining region is located in one of the largest volcanic
areas in Europe and was the most important centre of precious metal mining in the Hungarian
and Austro-Hungarian empires. It was divided into “Silver” (Banská Štiavnica), “Copper” (Banská
Bystrica) and “Gold” (Kremnica). In Banská Štiavnica silver (and to a lesser extent gold and base
metals) were concentrated in steeply dipping veins and deep, 400-500 m, sub-horizontal veins
hosted in a large caldera.
Mining is recorded by the Romans as being undertaken by the Celtic Cotoni tribe who
settled here until they were deported to Pannonia by Rome in the Marcomannic Wars (166–180 CE).
Thereafter mining continued in phases from the medieval to modern periods, and is distinguished
by innovative technology, pioneering mining education, and prolific output. Consequently, the
property includes two castles, churches, late-Gothic buildings and burgher houses, Renaissance
palaces and squares. The town’s first silver (and gold) mining boom came in the 15th and 16th cen-
turies, the second (peak production) came in the 18th century when the waterpower supply system
for winding and pumping from ever-deepening workings was greatly expanded. During the reign
of the Austro-Hungarian empire, Empress Maria Theresa founded the Mining Academy of Banská
Štiavnica (1762) and the diffusion of technology and migration of mining expertise (many of whom
in Hungary also came earlier from Germany and the Tirol) continued, impacting positively upon
Roșia Montană.
The property name was justifiably changed in 2006 to include the ‘technical monuments’
in its vicinity. The surrounding area contains important remains of early mining and metallurgical
operations and includes large historic mining waterpower supply networks at surface - similar to
those in the Harz and the Erzgebirge. The remarkable system (fifteenth to eighteenth century,
collectively known as tajchy) comprises over 30 reservoirs (the oldest of which, Velkà Vodarenska,
was built before 1510), an elaborate series of dams (the longest 775 m long) and over 70 km of
collecting channels and 50 km of connecting channels. The development of mining technology
in the vicinity is well-recorded and includes the first global use of black powder in mining (1627),
the water column pumping engine (1749) and other steam pumping engines (Newcomen), first
turbine (1840s) and steel winding rope (1837).
Authenticity is high and has been preserved and integrity is intact, although in terms of
relative state of conservation, a number of fine buildings in the town suffer from severe conser-
vation issues, the situation improving, however, through the subsidy programme of the Ministry
of Culture. The property is protected under the legal mechanisms of Historic Sites (Conservation
Reserve) and National Cultural Monuments. 3
96
 CZECH REPUBLIC
Kutna Hora: Historical Town Centre with the Church of St Barbara
and the Cathedral of Our Lady at Sedlec
Inscribed 1995 under criteria (ii), (iv)

CONCLUSION The property does not contain any evidence of Roman mining heritage or
Roman settlement, nor of gold mining. It shares with Roșia Montană a similar geology, mineral
deposit type and topography, and a predominantly 18th-19th century precious metals (silver) mining
heritage under Austro-Hungarian imperial rule. The settlements are very different in comparison,
the development of the medieval Bohemian Royal Mining Town of Kutna Hora (1276) spanning
the 13th to 19th centuries and once competing with Prague in terms of its cultural, political and
economic importance. Therefore the mining settlements of Kutna Hora and Roșia Montană are
complementary.

BACKGROUND Silver was mined following rich strikes made in the late 13th century. Mining
laws and a mint were founded by King Wenceslaus II in 1300 and the area boomed with unrestricted
mining development, beneath and to the south of the city. The peak period of prosperity was during
the 14th and 15th centuries, although mining continued until the 19th century.
The property is essentially the city, and many architectural masterpieces stand as testi-
mony to an exceptional prosperity from silver. These include the late Gothic church of St Barbara
(patron saint of miners), Cathedral of the Holy Virgin Barbara and the Cathedral of Our Lady at
Sedlec, together with Hradek castle and Baroque Jesuit College.
Authenticity is preserved and integrity is intact. The site is in a good relative state of con-
servation and the standard of protection is regarded as adequate, and of management, excellent.

GERMANY
Mines of Rammelsberg, Historic Town of Goslar and
Upper Harz Water Management System
Inscribed 1992 with an extension in 2010 under criteria (i),
(ii), (iii), (iv)

CONCLUSION The property does not contain any evidence of Roman mining or Roman
settlement, nor of gold mining. It shares with Roșia Montană an exceptional longevity of activity,
being worked systematically and almost continuously for 1,000 years, although of course com-
mencing at a much later date. Each mine applied an extensive use of water: solely for ore dressing
at Roșia Montană, whilst the Harz employed much larger-scale water management for power. Both
mines possess underground visitor access. In terms of settlement, they are complementary:
the form and much of the buildings in the Hanseatic timber-framed merchants’ town of Goslar are
a product of the Middle Ages, with a lack of subsequent prosperity freezing much development,
whilst Roșia Montană, a miners’ village of different scale, form, materials and architecture, is also
frozen in time, except some several centuries later.

BACKGROUND Rammelsberg possesses extensive underground remains, particularly signifi-

cant being those from the Middle Ages and Renaissance period. The water management ensemble
is the largest of its kind in Europe, developed over a period of some 800 years primarily for power
Justification for inscription

to drive waterwheel-powered pumps at surface and underground, together with surface processing
and smelting facilities. Mining water energy systems similar to the Harz survive in the Erzgebirge
(Germany, nomination in progress with the Czech Republic as part of a transboundary mining
cultural landscape), Banská Štiavnica (Slovakia, inscribed as part of the technical monuments of
the World Heritage Site) and Kongsberg (Norway).
The two mining centres are historically connected in terms of the diffusion of such tech-
nology (to Roșia Montană, e.g. waterwheel-powered stamps) and migration of mining masters and
experienced miners and ore-dressers.
Authenticity is high in the mining technical ensemble, the water management system
and the town of Goslar, and integrity of the series is intact. The relative state of conservation is
good, with positive activity and no current threats. Legal protection is provided via the Monument
97

Protection Act and each part of the series is well managed.

 BOLIVIA
City of Potosi
Inscribed 1987 under criteria (ii), (iv), (vi)

CONCLUSION The property does not contain any evidence of Roman mining or Roman
settlement, nor of gold mining and was developed in an entirely different geo-cultural con-
text (colonial Latin America) at a much later date (16th century). It shares with Roșia Montană: the
mining of precious metals (silver from true silver ores, however, as opposed to electrum and native
gold); a similar deposit type (vein) in a mountain setting; similar mining technology; ore-processing
using aqueducts and artificial lakes; an exceptional longevity of activity from the 16th century to
the present day (continuing); and both properties include the settlement - though of course Potosi,
in stark contrast to Roșia Montană, is a large Spanish colonial-era silver mining city with dis-
tinctive “Andean Baroque” style architecture that heavily influenced architectural development
elsewhere in the Andes.

BACKGROUND The site consists of the silver mines of the Cerro Rico, notably the Royal mine
complex, an ore-processing water management system comprising an intricate system of aque-
ducts and artificial lakes, the colonial town with its Royal Mint (reconstructed in 1759) and no less
than 22 parish or monastic churches and a cathedral, patrician houses and the barrios where the
workers lived. Following a period of disorganized exploitation of the bonanza of near-surface pure
native silver lodes, the Cerro de Potosí reached full production after 1580 when the patio amalga-
mation process was implemented and it became one of the world’s largest industrial complexes.
Production continued on a large scale until the 18th century, slowing down only after the country's
independence in 1825. It continues on a small scale today.
The authenticity of the Cerro de Potosi (Cerro Rico, Rich Mountain) is threatened as
continued and uncontrolled mining caused portions of the summit to collapse (as in 2011). Integrity
is intact but threatened, and there are deficiencies in conservation of the archaeological industri-
al heritage, and insufficient attention in the restoration and upgrading of residential structures.
Churches in the historical centre were restored in 2015 and 2016. Former Municipal Regulations
for the Preservation of Historic Zones of the City of Potosi is now law, although inefficient en-
forcement of protective legislation and control of unregulated mining activity in Cerro de Potosi
continues. A Management Committee is presently being established to implement an Integrated
Management Plan.

BRAZIL
Historic Town of Ouro Preto
Inscribed 1980 under criteria (i), (iii)

CONCLUSION The property does not contain any evidence of Roman mining or Roman
settlement, and was developed in an entirely different geo-cultural context (colonial Latin
America) at a much later date (from 17th century). It shares with Roșia Montană: gold mining
(although the primary inscription is for the urban ensemble), and its associated mining settle-
ment - although they each share an irregular urban pattern, Ouro Preto is a much larger, Spanish
colonial-era, mining town with outstanding Baroque architecture.

BACKGROUND Ouro Preto (Black Gold) is the old capital of Minas Gerais, and owes its origins
to the discovery and exploitation of gold during the ‘Black Gold rush’ in the 17th century and in the
18th century period known as Brazil’s ‘Golden Age’. This was a time when the city played a leading
role in Brazil's history, and the fine Baroque city is the principal component of the property, with
mining features limited to the gullies in the river valley where alluvial ‘black’ gold was exploited
together with minor levels and stopes into the mountainside.
Authenticity has been preserved, and integrity of the urban nucleus built in the colonial
period is intact. Protection is organised under a Municipal Master Plan that incorporates a Special
Protection Zone designation. The Municipal Cultural and Natural Heritage and Urban Policy 3
Councils, supported by the Municipal Secretariat of Urban Heritage and Development, manage it.
98
 MEXICO
Historic Town of Guanajuato and Adjacent Mines
Inscribed 1988 under criteria (i), (ii), (iv), (vi)

CONCLUSION The property does not contain any evidence of Roman mining or Roman
settlement, and was developed in an entirely different geo-cultural context (colonial Latin
America) at a much later date (from mid-16th century). It shares with Roșia Montană: precious
metals mining (although silver, from true silver ores, as opposed to gold), a similar mineral deposit
(vein) in the mountains, with similar technology employed, except in ore processing. Underground
workings (for example La Valenciana) are included, but the primary inscription is for the urban
ensemble of the mining town: Guanajuato is a much larger, Spanish colonial-era, mining town
with outstanding neo-classical and Baroque architecture that influenced buildings throughout
Mexico. It is very different in scale, form, design and architecture, being developed in a very dif-
ferent culture and time.

BACKGROUND Founded by the Spanish in 1548 when rich outcrops of silver were discovered
in the La Luz area of Guanaxhuata. The region became the world’s leading silver-mining centre in
the 18th century, and silver mining continues, albeit on a much smaller scale, today.
The cultural landscape is centred on the town with its fine Baroque and Neoclassical
monuments resulting from the prosperity of the mines, and the nearby Spanish colonial silver
mining ensemble including the shafts (impressive on a world scale for the period) of La Valenciana
and Ryas mines, together with outstanding patio ore-dressing floors.
Authenticity of the urban plan (based on four original forts), its surviving form (not laid
in a grid pattern) and fabric of the town is preserved. Integrity is intact though the layout and
scale of the historic town is threatened by urban pressure due to population growth, something
that also has the ability to compromise the overall characteristic of the landscape. In terms of
conservation, restoration works are to a high standard. The law for the protection of the histor-
ic town was one of the first such laws in Mexico (1953), and protection is the responsibility of
Instituto Nacional de Anthropologia e Historia (INAH, under the Ministry of Public Education).
Management is implemented by the State of Guanajuato which receives collaboration from the
national Ministry for Urban Development and Environmental Protection, the Junta de Monumentos
and the Ayuntamiento (Federal, State and Local Authorities).

MEXICO
Historic Centre of Zacatecas
Inscribed 1993 under criteria (ii), (iv)

CONCLUSION The property does not contain any evidence of Roman mining or Roman
settlement, and was developed in an entirely different geo-cultural context (colonial Latin
America) at a much later date (from mid-16th century). It shares with Roșia Montană: precious
metals mining (although silver, from true silver ores, as opposed to gold), a similar mineral deposit
(vein) in the mountains, with similar technology employed, except in ore processing. Underground
workings (El Eden) are included, but the primary inscription is for the urban ensemble of the
mining town: Zacatecas is a much larger, Spanish colonial-era, mining town with outstanding
Baroque architecture. It is very different in scale, form, design and architecture, being developed
Justification for inscription

in a very different culture and time.

BACKGROUND Zacatecas was founded by Spain in 1546 as a result of the discovery of a rich
silver lode (San Bernabé). Located in mountainous, ravine-like, topography, the town developed to
the south of the mining area, on the road from the capital of “New Spain”, and reached the height
of its prosperity in the 16th and 17th centuries; being overtaken by Guanajuato in the 18th century.
This colonial city retains an exceptional preservation of 16th century urban design, taken
as the basis for further development in the 18th and 19th centuries (when it also retained an im-
portant role as the site of a mint). Many fine buildings with a profusion of Baroque facades where
European and indigenous decorative elements are found side by side. The Baroque cathedral, built
between 1730 and 1760, is one of many fine religious buildings.
99
 Authenticity of the original street pattern and fabric of the town is preserved,
with few modern interventions among the buildings. Integrity is intact though the layout
and scale of the historic town is threatened by urban pressure due to population growth,
something that also has the ability to compromise the overall characteristic of the land-
scape. In terms of conservation, restoration works are carried out to a high standard.
Protection is afforded by the Federal Law on Monuments and Archaeological, histor-
ic and Artistic Zones (1972), with the Historic Zone of Zacatecas under the control of
the State Government by Law on the Protection and Conservation of Monuments. The
Management Plan is implemented by cooperation of Instituto Nacional de Anthropologia
e Historia (INAH, under the Ministry of Public Education) with the Junta de Monumentos
and the Ayuntamiento (Federal, State and Local Authorities).

JAPAN
Iwami Ginzan Silver Mine and its Cultural Landscape
Inscribed 2007 under criteria (ii), (iii), (v)

CONCLUSION The property does not contain any evidence of Roman mining or Roman
settlement, and was developed in an entirely different geo-cultural context (mining com-
menced at a much later date, 16th century, in Japan whilst under its Edo “isolation period”, and
during the later Meiji period development). It shares with Roșia Montană: mining landscape in-
cluding extensive archaeology, precious metals mining (silver, and to a much lesser extent gold),
a similar mineral deposit (vein) in the mountains, with similar technology employed, except in ore
processing. Underground workings are included. The settlement is very different in design and
architecture, being developed in a very different culture: an archetypal Japanese Edo-era coastal
mining settlement, comprising fortresses and castles, temples, merchants’ and miners’ houses.

BACKGROUND Iwami Ginzan Silver Mine pioneered the development of silver mining in
pre-Modern Asia and contributed to the exchange of values between East and West by achieving
the large-scale production of high quality silver through the development of the Asian cupellation
techniques transferred from China through Korea. Archaeological remains date from the 16th to
20th centuries, and include silver mines, smelting and refining sites and mining settlements, and
transport infrastructure including roads and ports. Elements of the property collectively demon-
strate the original mining land-use system and the whole process ranging from silver exploitation
to shipment.
Authenticity is preserved and integrity intact, with the relative state of conservation being
predominantly intact. Protection is via domestic laws and a municipal ordinance, and management
implements a strategic preservation and management plan.

3
100
Relevant Tentative List Sites Country Tentative Criteria Date range Principal typology
listing
101 Justification for inscription
Gold Silver Salt Coal Copper Lead Zinc Iron Other
mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining

pre–17th century
1600–1699
1700–1799
1800–1899
1900–1999
2000–
Latin America and the Caribbean

Ancient Lavrion Grece 2014 (ii), (iv)

Mining Historical Heritage Spain 2007 (i), (ii), (iv)

Mining basins on the Tinto River (Rio Tinto)

and Tharsis River, Huelva, Andalusia

Rodalquilar Mines, Almeria

Linares-La Carolina Mining District, Jaen

Alto Guadiato Mining District: Belmez, Espiel,

Pefiarroya-Pueblonuevo. Cordoba

Sierra Almagrera Mining District, Almeria

Ojos Negros Mines, Teruel, Aragon

Bellmunt del Priorat Mines, Tarragona

Cartagena and La Union Mining Basins, Murcia

Las Encartaciones iron ore mines, Ortuella, Vizcaya

Iron Trail with Erzberg and the old town of Steyr Austria 2002 (i), (ii), (iii), (iv)

Czech
Industrial Complexes in Ostrava 2001 (i), (iv), (v)
Republic

Czech Republic (ii), (iii), (iv), Tin

Cultural Landscape of the Ore Mountains 2012 Uranium
with Germany (v), (vi)

Tarnowskie Gory Lead-silver mine and its underground

Poland 2013 (i), (ii), (iii), (iv)
water management system

The Klondike USA 2004 (iv), (v)

Relevant Tentative List Sites Country Tentative Criteria Date range Principal typology
listing
Gold Silver Salt Coal Copper Lead Zinc Iron Other
mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining

pre–17th century
1600–1699
1700–1799
1800–1899
1900–1999
2000–
Africa

The former metallurgical sites for the reduction of iron

Burkina Faso 2012 (iii), (iv)
(Ronguin, Tiwega, Yamane, Kindbo, Bekuy, Douroula)

Central African
The paleo-metallurgical sites in Bangui 2006 not stated
Republic

Metallurgical site Begon II Chad 2005 not stated

Curious iron mines of Tele-Nugar Chad 2005 not stated

The Barberton Mountain Land, Braberton Greenstone Belt South

2009 (viii)
or Makhonjwa Mountains Africa

The Zaghouan-Carthage Roman hydraulic complex Tunisia 2012 (i), (iv)

Latin America and the Caribbean

Pulacayo, Industrial Heritage Site Bolivia 2003 (iii), (iv), (vi)

Gold Route in Parati and its landscape Brazil 2004 (ii), (iv) Various

Asia and Pacific

The Sado complex of heritage mines, primarily gold mines Japan 2010 (ii), (iii), (iv)

The Salt Range and Khewra Salt Mine Pakistan 2016 (v), (viii)

3
102
 3.2 Comparison between Roșia Montană
B and Relevant Tentative List Sites
(mining-related properties)

GREECE
Ancient Lavrion
Tentative Listing 2014 under proposed criteria (ii), (iv)

CONCLUSION The property does not contain any evidence of Roman mining or Roman
settlement but is a highly significant silver mine with ancient origins.
Ancient Lavrion and Roșia Montană are very different. Lavrion was a silver mine, as
opposed to gold, and there are no Roman mining works at Lavrion. Further, the underground
technological exploitation ensemble at Roșia Montană is completely different, as is the devel-
opment of settlement. There is some complementarity, however, each being representative of the
two major European powers of Ancient Greece and the Roman Empire, ancient Europe’s largest
and most powerful civilisation that also conquered the Greek peninsula. The properties, located
within the same geo-cultural region, represent the two most important precious metals (silver and
gold) that were fundamental in the rise and power of each civilisation.
It shares with Roșia Montană: mining landscape including extensive archaeology, pre-
cious metals mining (silver, as opposed to gold), a similar mineral deposit (steeply dipping veins),
with similar technology employed, except in ore processing. Extensive underground workings are
included, as are impressive archaeological vestiges of settlement, including impressive temples.

BACKGROUND Like the Romans, the Greeks began their rise to power in antiquity with very
little gold in their natural resources. Under Greek rule there was a little active gold mining tak-
ing place in the Thrace Mountains located in the northern part of the country but, overall, it was
massively subordinate to silver production – which was centred upon Ancient Lavrion, the largest
silver-mining centre in both ancient and modern Greece.
During the Classical period (5th and 4th centuries BCE), exploitation of the mines by
the city of Athens became extremely important to the creation of the great Athenian fleet and the
financing of the major building projects of the Athenian Hegemony. The silver of Lavrion literally
set the foundations of the city-state of Athens, building the Acropolis and Parthenon and making
it possible to mint silver coinage as amongst the first widely used international coins.
Scattered settlements-industrial villages, secular and religious buildings (including the
Temple of Poseidon at Cape Sounio), fortifications and cemeteries make up the overall operation
of the site: economic, military, religious, cultural and administrative. From the 3rd century CE the
mines entered a period of decline, and in the 6th century CE the mines were abandoned, with sub-
stantial renewed activity only resuming in the 1860s and continuing through to the 20th century.
Extensive remains also survive from this era.

SPAIN
Mining Historical Heritage
Tentative Listing 2007 under proposed criteria (i), (ii), (iv)
Justification for inscription

CONCLUSION The list of extensive properties, located in the same geo-cultural region as Roșia
Montană, contain evidence of Roman mining and Roman settlement. Roman Hispania (today’s
Spain and Portugal) was the richest source of precious and base metals to the Roman Republic and
the early Empire - until they became increasingly impoverished by intensive exploitation and were
eclipsed in terms of gold production by Roman Dacia following the conquest in 106 CE.
Within Spain’s Mining Historical Heritage, the Mining basins on the Tinto River (Rio
Tinto) and Tharsis River, Huelva, whilst being the closest comparator, is entirely different from
Roșia Montană: they were not gold mines, and they no longer contain an extensive under-
ground Roman network (mostly destroyed by modern opencast mining). This property, however,
possesses some complementarity with Roșia Montană as they both represent some of the larg-
103

est metal mines of the Roman Republic and early Empire. This complementary case with Roșia
Montană is certainly not a displacement case – either way - and both properties contribute to an
essential understanding of the astonishing success of the Roman Empire, one of the world’s largest
and long-lived ancient civilisations.
It shares with Roșia Montană: mining landscapes including extensive archaeology,
precious metals mining (silver and gold), similar mineral deposits (steeply dipping veins), with
similar technology employed (underground mining and opencast), and similar ore processing
technologies. Extensive underground workings are included (though most Roman evidence was
destroyed by modern open pit mining), as are archaeological vestiges of settlement together with
diverse modern remains.
Writing tablets discovered at Rio Tinto, Aljustrel copper mine in Portugal, and those at
Roșia Montană combine to provide exceptional epigraphic testimony of mine organisation in the
Roman Empire.

BACKGROUND Some of the mines inventoried in this large tentative listing were operated
during the Roman period. Evidence of Roman mining in Spain dates from 206 BC (Second Punic
War), and the territory represented the Empire’s most important source of silver, gold, copper
and lead that was fundamental in the rise of the Roman Republic and subsequent Empire. Two
examples, Rio Tinto and Rodalquilar, are the most relevant in terms of Roman mining of precious
metals, although modern mining has largely destroyed Roman evidence. Much of what has been
lost, however, was reported, and some recorded, during the 19th century.
Rio Tinto once demonstrated the most spectacular scale of Roman opencast and un-
derground mining, with many important discoveries of ancient technology being made in the
advancement of modern workings, from 1724 and particularly from 1873. This is one of the most
significant metallurgical regions of the ancient world, and although modern mining destroyed
spectacular Roman vestiges (some Roman shafts were 450 feet deep with galleries drained by a
combination of wooden treadmill dipper wheels and adits), some important sites survive.
The overall mining operation was run by a sophisticated system of Roman governance.
Two bronze tablets, discovered in 1876 and 1906, showed how the government of Rome would
lease out Iberian mines to individual conductores who paid 50 per cent commission on the ore
they excavated. They also related issues of safety, slaves, bathhouses etc. Along with bronze tablets
discovered at Aljustrel copper mine in Portugal, those of Rio Tinto and Roșia Montană combine
to provide exceptional epigraphic testimony of Roman mine organisation.
Modern mining heritage comprises a number of conserved mining and industrial infra-
structure. The notable architectural heritage of Rio Tinto settlement dates mostly to the 19th and
early 20th centuries.

CZECH REPUBLIC with GERMANY

Cultural Landscape of the Ore Mountains
Tentative Listing 2012 under criteria (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), (vi)

CONCLUSION Located in the same geo-cultural region as Roșia Montană, the property con-
tains no evidence of Roman mining and Roman settlement. It shares with Roșia Montană an
exceptional longevity of activity, being worked systematically and almost continuously for more
than 800 years, although of course commencing at a much later date. Mines included precious
metals (though silver as opposed to gold) and applied similar technology in the exploitation of
vein deposits, an extensive use of water, solely for ore dressing at Roșia Montană, whilst the Ore
Mountains employed much larger-scale water management for power. Both properties possess
underground visitor access. In terms of settlement, they are complementary: the form and
much of the buildings in the ensemble of mining towns in the Ore Mountains is a product of the
Middle Ages, with subsequent development added primarily in the 18th and 19th centuries. The
settlements, in comparison, developed at a different time in a very different environmental context
and are much greater in scale, with a different form and layout, architecture and materials to the
miners’ village of Roșia Montană.
3
BACKGROUND The Mining Cultural Landscape Erzgebirge/Krušnohoří illustrates the for-
mative influence of mining and metallurgy on the development of the landscape and its culture
104
 for more than 800 years, from the 12th to the 21st centuries. It is a very large transboundary serial
property that represents a decentralised mining landscape in a Central European mountain region.
The mines of Saxony are the sites of many important medieval advances in mining tech-
nology, including adit drainage from the 12th century. Silver production expanded rapidly in the
Erzgebirge after 1470 with important mining centres in Schneeberg, St Annaberg, Bucholz and
Marienberg. The mines of St Annaberg and Marienberg achieved their maximum output around
1560 and declined rapidly after 1577 due to low prices created by the surge of silver imports from
the New World (after 1551). Mining towns such as Freiberg were world centres of excellence for
mining education – the Freiberg Mining Academy, established in 1765 as the world’s oldest uni-
versity of mining and metallurgy.

JAPAN
The Sado complex of heritage mines,
primarily gold mines
Tentative Listing 2010 under proposed criteria (ii), (iii), (iv)

CONCLUSION The property does not contain any evidence of Roman mining or Roman
settlement, and was developed in an entirely different geo-cultural context (mining com-
menced at a much later date, 16th century, in Japan whilst under its Edo “isolation period”, and
during the later Meiji period development and beyond until the late 20th century). It shares with
Roșia Montană: mining landscape including extensive archaeology, precious metals mining (gold,
and to a lesser extent silver), a similar mineral deposit (vein) in the mountains (it also includes an
alluvial gold mining site), with similar technology employed. Underground workings are included.
The settlements are very different in design and architecture, being developed in a very different
geo-cultural region: two archaeological 16th century settlement sites, typically early-Edo era min-
ing camps, and an archetypal Japanese Edo-era coastal mining settlement, comprising miners’
houses and an archaeological site of an important Shogunate Magistrate’s Office with associated
gold-silver parting and smelting remains

BACKGROUND The historic gold mine is located on Sado Island in the Sea of Japan. It was
originally considered as a joint nomination with Iwami Ginzan silver mine, now inscribed as a
World Heritage Site and described above. Its values relate to 400 years of gold-silver mining and
its socio-technical and economic impacts.
An extensive underground system is included, together with a comprehensive socio-tech-
nical ensemble. The impact of Japanese gold (half of which came from Sado) on the international
economy during the 17thcentury was significant.
Justification for inscription
105
Relevant, selected, Country Date Criteria Date range Principal typology
other mine sites inscribed
Gold Silver Salt Coal Copper Lead Zinc Iron Other
mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining

pre–17th century
1600–1699
1700–1799
1800–1899
1900–1999
2000–
Montefurado, Rio Duerna, Asturias Spain

Pino del Oro, Zamora Spain

Las Cavenes, Salamanca, Leon Spain

Três Minas (Tresminas) Portugal

Jales Portugal

Serra de Santa Justa, Valongo, Porto Portugal

Castromil, Castromil, Sobreira, Paredes, Porto Portugal

Aljustrel Portugal

Tagus River, Castelo Branco District Portugal

Sao Domingos Mine, Corte do Pinto, Alentejo Portugal Pyrite

Dolaucothi, Wales UK

Salsigne Gold Mine France

Salassi (northern Italy) and Durias river Italy

Sardinia Italy

Garam Hungary

Rauris Austria

Adatepe (Krumovgrad Bulgaria

Bor Serbia

3
106
Astyra (northwest Anatolia, near the city of Troy) and others Turkey
107 Justification for inscription

Relevant, selected, Country Date Criteria Date range Principal typology

other mine sites inscribed
Gold Silver Salt Coal Copper Lead Zinc Iron Other
mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining mining

pre–17th century
1600–1699
1700–1799
1800–1899
1900–1999
2000–
Sakdrisi Georgia

Wadi Dara area Egypt

Mahd adh Dhahab Saudi Arabia

Pachuca-Real del Monte Silver Mines Mexico

El Cobre copper mine Cuba

Sala silver mine Sweden Minor Minor

Kongsberg silver mines Norway

Kimberley Mines and Associated Early Industries South Africa (i), (ii), (iv), (vi) Diamonds

The Namaqualand Copper Mining Landscape South Africa (ii), (iii), (iv)

Pilgrim’s Rest Reduction Works South Africa (i), (ii), (iv), (vi)
3.2 Relevant, selected, other mine sites
C

Comparison of the property with international mining-related

properties not on the World Heritage List and not on state
party Tentative Lists

The phase with the highest significance related to gold mining at Roșia Montană
is the Roman era (106–272 CE). It is therefore relevant to compare the nominated property with
other known Roman mines (particularly gold mines) in the main areas providing the Empire with
key metals (gold, silver-lead, copper, iron): Spain and Portugal, United Kingdom, France, Italy,
central Europe, Greece and Turkey. Evidence concerning Roman mining in some countries is
scant but literature, the web, scientific papers and various organisations have been investigated
and contacted to reveal as much information about the most significant sites as possible within
the scope of this comparative exercise.
Lastly, some other mining properties around the world have been selected for compar-
ison, not that they, like most of the Roman examples, will ever be considered for nomination to
the World Heritage List.

PORTUGAL
Tresminas

CONCLUSION Tresminas (Três Minas) is the largest and most important ancient gold mining
complex in Portugal (part of ancient Roman Hispania) and is one of the world’s best examples
of a preserved open-pit hard-rock Roman gold mine together with its socio-technical context,
including several crushing and grinding mill sites.
The properties of Tresminas and Roșia Montană are very different. Roșia Montană
contains an underground Roman mining network that is vastly greater in extent, and one
that illustrates a far greater diversity in terms of its Roman mining technological exploitation
ensemble. The underground galleries at Tresminas were predominantly used for transportation
of gold ore, drainage and removal of waste. Roșia Montană also demonstrates subsequent
extensive development, including settlement, by multiple empires and cultures from Roman
times to the 20th century. There is, however, some complementarity as, together, they represent
two different gold exploitation systems under Roman imperial control, in the two most important
source regions of the precious metal that provided currency to sustain the Roman Empire and its
military power that was key to its survival.

BACKGROUND The mine consists of three open pits, two of which are of an impressive size:
Ribeirinha and Covas, the largest being approximately 500m long, 100m wide and 80m to 100m
deep. There are also shafts and galleries, predominantly used for transportation of gold ore, drain-
age and removal of waste, the largest of which is 250 metres in length with a 5 x 1.5m cross-section.
The site includes not only mining features but also the metallurgical processes to extract gold from
the ore such as crushing and grinding at several sites. The site is an Archaeological Protection Site
and survey in the surrounding area has detected settlement structures for housing and an aqueduct.
Mining likely commenced during the reign of Augustus (27 BCE – 14 CE) and continued
into the second century CE.

PORTUGAL
Serra de Santa Justa, Valongo, Porto

CONCLUSION Roșia Montană and Valongo are very different. Roșia Montană contains an
underground network that is vastly greater in extent, and one that illustrates an exceptional 3
and diverse Roman mining technological exploitation ensemble. Further, Roșia Montană
also demonstrates subsequent extensive development, including settlement, by multiple
108

empires and cultures from Roman times to the 20th century.

 The Valongo Roman gold mining area is characterised by a number of underground
Roman gold mines that make it the largest group of its type in Portugal (ancient Roman Hispania).
There is, therefore, some complementarity as, together they represent two of the most extensive
surviving underground gold mines under Roman imperial control, in the two most important source
regions of the precious metal that provided currency to sustain the Roman Empire and its military
power that was key to its survival. Other underground Roman gold mines occur in Portugal (and
Spain) that employed the same techniques, but Valongo is the largest yet discovered.

BACKGROUND The Valongo anticline (a large overturned fold) hosts a number of gold occur-
rences that were disseminated in veins that were exploited by the Romans. The largest was Volongo
(its historical significance has been recognised since the 18th century) with others at Castelo de
Paiva (24 km distant). Twin shafts, large gunnises (worked-out stopes) and drainage galleries sur-
vive (one gallery is 350 m long). Roman lamps have also been found.

UNITED KINGDOM
Dolaucothi, Wales

CONCLUSION Roșia Montană and Dolaucothi are very different. Roșia Montană contains
an underground network that is vastly greater in extent, and one that illustrates a greater
diversity in its Roman mining technological exploitation ensemble. Further, Roșia Montană
contains, in addition, an extensive archaeological and cultural landscape of socio-technical
attributes that span a period of more than two millennia.
Dolaucothi mine is the only underground Roman gold mine in Imperial Rome’s
Western Britannia (S Wales). Whilst Britannia was a comparatively insignificant source of gold,
it was a prolific source of base metals (tin, lead, copper), and silver. In this sense the two properties
share some complementarity.

BACKGROUND Dolaucothi gold mine is the only Roman gold mine known in the UK. The site
illustrates the stages of ore extraction from simple surface mining to underground mining, togeth-
er with the use of water – water channels (almost 10 km) and reservoirs on the hillside above the
opencast, and suggested evidence of steps down the hillside that may have had a series of sieves
and tables for washing. The opencast areas contain a number of tunnels of varying age. Due to
dip of veins a deep vertical shaft was sunk and horizontal galleries (stopes) opened out on three
levels. Fragments of a water-lifting wheel were recovered that provides evidence that mechanical
drainage was provided – similar to that discovered in multiple levels in Roșia Montană (recorded,
and some conserved remains) and Rio Tinto (destroyed).

3.2 Roman gold mines in Romania;

D a National Comparative Analysis

Roşia Montană is Romania’s most important Roman gold mine,

the richest gold-silver deposit in Europe that continued to be
exploited in multiple phases of activity until closure in 2006
Justification for inscription

Roman mining

Following the Roman occupation of Dacia, some 500 tonnes of gold were
extracted from Aurariae Dacicae during 166 years of Imperial rule. The Romans organised
gold mining (alluvial/surface and underground) and ore-processing in two principal regions
of the Carpathians (see map): Roşia Montana and the Golden Quadrilateral in the Apuseni
Mountains in present-day western Romania (district 1 on map); and in Caraș-Severin County
in the southern Carpathians in present-day southwest Romania (district 3 on map). Regarding
district 2 on the map (Baia Mare and Baia Sprie, Maramures County), mining exploration for
109

gold and silver commenced in the Gutâi Mountains of northwest Romania during the era of
Roman Dacia, however the Maramures region remained outside the Roman province and contains
no Roman mining activity.

Principal gold mining districts of Romania

(after Baron et al, 2011)

Of the 37 “suspected” Roman gold mining sites described in Romania (see

annexe), approaching a third are placer/alluvial/gold-washing sites, therefore not comparable with
the hard-rock underground mines of Roşia Montana. Only Bucium (also in the Golden Quadrilateral)
possesses extensive known Roman mining works.

ROMANIA
Bucium, Alba County

CONCLUSION Roşia Montana and Bucium are very different in terms of scale, and of sub-
sequent development, including settlement. The Bucium deposit is the nearest (6 km SSE)
Roman gold mining site to Roşia Montana, and is geologically similar. Substantial traces of mining
activity from the Roman period survive, including limited underground workings, similar in
level type (only) to Roşia Montana, although substantially this is an opencast mine. There are
associated traces of a settlement site and cemetery, though very much less significant than
the extensive Roman archaeology of Roşia Montana. There is little subsequent mining heritage,
modern operations by open pit having destroyed former evidence.

BACKGROUND Mining at Bucium is mostly confined to surface exploitation in opencuts, but

also several hundreds of metres of gallery, one, at least, trapezoidal in section as commonly en-
countered at Roşia Montana.

3
110
 3.3 Proposed Statement of
Outstanding Universal Value

Roșia Montană Mining Landscape

Roșia Montană Mining Landscape contains the most significant, extensive

and technically diverse underground Roman gold mining complex currently known in the world.
Workings date from the Roman occupation of Dacia (106–271 CE) and, together with potentially
previous and subsequent phases, mining activity spans more than two millennia. All phases have
left their mark, both underground and at surface, an evolution almost exclusively determined by
people’s quest for gold. This socio-technical palimpsest of successive empires and cultures has
unparalleled time-depth and is exceptionally diverse and readable in such a compact area.
Roșia Montană is situated in a natural amphitheatre of massifs and radiating valleys in
the Metalliferous range of the Apuseni Mountains, located in the historical region of Transylvania
in the central part of present-day Romania. The site represents the centre of the so-called Golden
Quadrilateral of the Southern Carpathians - the richest precious metals province in Europe.
Gold occurred in veins within seven small mountains that visually dominate the land-
scape of Roșia Montană, itself surrounded on three sides by dividing ridges and peaks. Towering
crags are pierced by old mine entrances, their tops scarred by opencast working. Roman archaeology
at surface is prolific and pervasive, comprising ore-processing areas, living quarters, administrative
buildings, sacred areas and necropolises, some with funerary buildings with complex architecture,
all set in relation to over 7 km of ancient underground workings discovered to date. Forest and
scree mix on steep slopes and, mounted on rocky knolls, the towers and spires of historic churches
command the villages of Roșia Montană and the much smaller Corna, settlements constrained by
relief in valleys that also provided for ore-dressing, communication and transport. Steeply sloping
meadows are characterised by agro-pastoral practices that are as old as the mining activity itself,
and a number of artificial lakes, formerly header ponds for ore processing that were greatly ex-
panded from 1733, punctuate higher elevations.
The village of Roșia Montană boasts an impressive inventory that illustrates a diversity of
architectural styles, eclectic influences fused with local tradition, a cosmopolitan settlement whose
roots and embellishments are based on freeholders’ exploitation of gold. Five religious denomi-
nations and several ethnic groups have lived together in work and community life, a situation that
is reflected in the current character of this Transylvanian mining settlement substantially frozen
in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries at the inception of its prosperous urbanisation under
Austro-Hungarian rule. Churches dominate the built environment and contribute substantially to
its symbolic imagery. Characteristic buildings with outer porches form a typological background
to a series of distinctive and mostly decorative features that were borrowed from the repertoire of
Classical or Baroque architecture. This structure, distinguished also by grand walls and monumen-
tal gates that face winding roads, gradually gives way in the industrial suburbs to miners’ house-
holds consisting of wooden dwellings above high stone-built basements, many of which housed
ore-processing workshops with water sumps fed by springs that could be used in the harshest of
winters. Final interventions derive from the communist regime that imposed nationalisation in
1948, and which ended traditional family – or small group-operated mining. State-run mining by
underground and opencast ended in 2006.
Justification for inscription

→ Criterion (ii):

to exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span

of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in
architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning or
landscape design

Roșia Montană Mining Landscape contains the world’s pre-eminent example of

an underground Roman gold mine. Many of the mining features preserved in over 7 km of Roman
workings demonstrate exceptional innovative techniques developed by skilled migrant Illyrian-
111

Dalmatian miners to exploit gold in such ways that suited the technical nature of the deposit. Control
of precious metal resources, to use as currency, was a fundamental factor in the development of
Roman military power and Imperial expansion. When in possession of the Apuseni Mountains
there was an imperative to immediately commence mining in an efficient manner.
A decade of professional underground archaeological campaigns, beginning in 2001,
elucidates a fusion of imported Roman mining technology with locally developed techniques,
unknown elsewhere from such an early era. Multiple chambers that housed treadmill-operated
water-dipping wheels for drainage represent a technique likely routed from Hispania to the Balkans,
whilst perfectly carved trapezoidal-section galleries, helicoidal shafts, inclined communication
galleries with stairways cut into the bedrock, and vertical extraction areas (stopes) superimposed
above one another with the roof carved out in steps, are in a combination so specific to Roșia
Montană that they likely represent pioneering aspects in the technical history of mining.
The significance of Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is not limited to antiquity as the
Apuseni Mountains were Europe’s main source of gold from the end of the Crusades in the thir-
teenth century until the discovery of the Americas in the sixteenth century, thereafter remain-
ing pre-eminent in terms of output, during the era of Austro-Hungarian rule in particular, when
German, Austrian and Hungarian miners were brought in and used their own advanced technology
to exploit the deposits on a much larger scale.

→ Criterion (iii):

to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition

or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared

Roșia Montană Mining Landscape embodies the cultural tradition of one of the
oldest documented mining communities in Europe, anciently founded by the Romans and which
survived under influences of successive socio-technical and organisational systems whilst gradually
waning until its final disappearance at the beginning of the twenty-first century.
The site was the most important precious metal mine located in the Golden Quadrilateral
of the Romanian Carpathians and is associated with exceptional epigraphic testimony from the
Roman Imperial era. Wax-coated wooden writing tablets discovered in the mine during the eigh-
teenth and nineteenth centuries have been correlated with numerous stone epigraphic monuments
discovered on site. Together they provide an authentic picture of daily life and cultural practice in
this ancient frontier mining camp community. Combined with a well-resourced recent, intensive
and systematic archaeological investigation and interpretation, an exceptional picture of the or-
ganisation, strategies and practices of ancient mining at the site have emerged.
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is rooted in a past that evolved in a tradition consistent-
ly bound by efforts to extract gold. Detailed physical testimony is provided by: the underground
mining works, chronologically differentiated by distinctive technical features; the socio-techni-
cal surface mining landscape consisting of ore-processing areas, habitation areas, sacred areas,
necropolises; the current mining village built at the dawn of the industrial era; and the extensive
documentation of the communities that generated them.
Archaeological evidence survives alongside the legacy of modern underground mining
operations, whilst the landscape reveals evidence of an increasing scale of modification through
time to serve mining and the way of life of its communities under successive control of empires
and state, each phase adding to, or in some case erasing, its predecessors.

→ Criterion (iv):

to be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or

technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant
stage(s) in human history

Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is testimony to the long history of gold ex-
ploitation in the Golden Quadrilateral, from the Roman era to the twenty-first century. It is an exem- 3
plar that illustrates the strategic control and vigorous development of precious metals’ mining by
the Roman Empire, essential for its longevity and military power. Following the decline of mining
112
 in Hispania (Iberian Peninsula, modern Spain and Portugal), Aurariae Dacicae (Roman Dacia, AD
106 to AD 271) was the only significant new source of gold and silver for the Roman Empire, among
the likely key motivations for Trajan’s conquest.
The pre-eminent underground Roman mining network, with its outstanding technical
attributes and associated landscape, is exceptional testimony to the diffusion and further develop-
ment of precious metals mining technology during the expansion of the Roman Empire in the 2nd
and 3rd centuries CE. Archaeological investigation has revealed important aspects that contribute
to the global history of mining. Such extensive perfectly carved trapezoidal-section galleries, heli-
coidal shafts and inclined communication galleries with stairways cut into the bedrock, and vertical
extraction areas (stopes) superimposed above one another with the roof carved out in steps, are
unknown elsewhere from such an early era. Features such as multiple chambers for treadmill-pow-
ered water-dipper wheels (and the wooden remains of such equipment), whilst recorded but mostly
destroyed elsewhere in the Roman world by subsequent modern mining, are preserved at Roșia
Montană, are of exceptional value due to their rarity, extent and state of conservation.
The modern socio-technical mining legacy is significant, too, from the prolific Habsburg
legacy of the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries to the pre-industrial mining and ore-processing
methods captured at the moment of technological changes on the verge of the modern industrial
revolution. Mining operations undertaken at this time were mostly by ‘freeholder’ families that
favoured the continuation of such ore-dressing methods until nationalisation in 1948.
Large-scale underground mining started under the communist regime, an era that has
left enormous caverns, and in 1971 this switched to large-scale opencast working of the Cetate
massif, destroying the spectacular Roman mining works known as the “Citadel” and continuing
until 2006 by which time it had effectively reduced the elevation of the mountain by as much as
twenty per cent. The juxtaposition of socialist-era apartment blocks inserted into an essentially
eighteenth-nineteenth century architectural ensemble is a striking relic of this era.

→ Criterion (vi):

to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions,

with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of
outstanding universal significance

The Roman wax-coated wooden tablets (tabulae ceratae) of Alburnus Maior

(Roșia Montană) were made famous by the great German historian Theodor Mommsen (1817-1903),
generally regarded as one of the greatest classicists of the nineteenth century. They represent a
significant source for his interpretation of Roman law and on the law of obligations, which had a
significant impact on the German Civil Code, subsequently forming the basis for similar regula-
tions in other countries such as Portugal, China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Greece and Ukraine.
Around 50 Roman wax-coated wooden tablets were discovered during the 1780s and
1850s in mining galleries at Roșia Montană, with 24 surviving in museums in Romania and abroad,
in Bucharest, Alba Iulia, Cluj, Blaj, Aiud, Berlin, Budapest. These are first-rate sources of legal,
socio-economic, demographic and linguistic information not only regarding Alburnus Maior but
the entire Dacian province and, implicitly, the Roman Empire. The tablets provide intimate details
of life in the mining community and are also correlated with an unparalleled number of stone epi-
graphic monuments, votive and funerary, discovered on site and preserved in museums at Roșia
Justification for inscription

Montană, Cluj-Napoca, Turda, Alba Iulia and Deva. Information reveals explicit details of mining
organisation, sale and purchase contracts, receipts of loans with interest, and the sale of slaves.
Epigraphic evidence attests not only Illyrians but also Greek and Latin migrants hired to work in
the mines and organised in associations (e.g. collegia aurariorum, societas danistaria).
Academic research into the history of the Roman Empire during the Antonine dynasty
and its relationship to the Dacians’ gold and gold extracted from Roman Dacia has opened a new
area of research into European cultural history: the economic recovery of the Roman Empire, the
commencement of monumental public construction works in Rome, among which the Forum and
Trajan’s Column are perhaps the most important elements, and the direct linkage to the gold-min-
ing area of Dacia where Alburnus Maior was its principal centre.
113
 Statement of integrity

The property contains all the necessary attributes that express Outstanding
Universal Value. It is constrained within a natural amphitheatre that is radically different from
the surrounding landscape and includes all metalliferous massifs of Alburnus Maior and the two
principal valleys (Roșia and Corna) for ore-dressing, settlement, transport and communication.
Though a greater part is overprinted by more modern mining activity, the landscape represents a
palimpsest of successive empires and cultures that have exploited it.
The boundary has been determined using a combination of geological/mining maps,
natural features such as ridgeline watersheds (functional, for water supply in ore-processing) and
viewsheds (into and out of the property), roads, and the administrative boundaries that will assist
with management of the property. It includes all areas with significant archaeological potential.
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape has suffered many aggressions followed by multiple
transformations; some gradual over the centuries, and some sudden and devastating such as the
destruction of the Roman openworks on Cetate (the “Citadel”) by opencast mining starting in the
1970s, and the recent sustained buildings demolition campaign that began in 2004 in preparation
for the resumption of open pit mining and the creation of processing facilities. During the latter,
important exemplars of local architectural heritage and even entire portions of built fabric (such
as the central area of Corna), were destroyed in a total that exceeded 250 properties. A significant
number survive, however, making the preservation and conservation of this precious heritage all
the more important. Significant threats remain, the state of conservation of many historic buildings
is poor and some unauthorised development of small-scale housing has taken place.

Statement of authenticity

The area proposed currently constitutes a detailed testimony to more than

two millennia of mining practices by successive empires and cultures. It contains attributes that
are high in authenticity in terms of the location and the form and materials of surviving historic
features, with a clear sense of how, when and by whom mining shaped the land.
In terms of knowledge, unparalleled epigraphic and documentary evidence combined
with a decade of intensive systematic archaeological investigation has already provided a major
contribution to the understanding of Roman mining techniques and organisation. Significant po-
tential remains.

Requirements for protection

and management

The property is included in a wider area that is designated for protection by

urban planning regulations. The property also contains several individually designated elements,
from the Roman mining works, to the historic houses and two geological formations.
More direct protection is granted by listing, with 50 elements within the perimeter of the
property included in the Historic Monuments List. They comprise the principal archaeological site
with a few particular sub-components, the historic centre of the mining town, the Roman mines
in Mt. Cârnic, houses and churches. Several other components are currently being assessed for
listing, among them the header ponds of the extensive hydro-technical system.
Under this protection framework, responsibility is with the municipality for protection
via urban planning measures, and with the respective owners in the case of listed properties.
In accordance with Romanian law, once a nomination is submitted, all provisions for
World Heritage sites apply to that nominated property. These include the management system
designed to protect all World Heritage properties in Romania.
Roșia Montană will benefit from this enhanced implementation of protection following
the submission of the nomination file to UNESCO.

3
114
Justification for inscription

Overview of Corna Valley

© Daniel Vrăbioiu
115
 4
Traditional wooden gate in Rosia Montană
© Daniel Vrăbioiu
116
 4. State of Conservation
and factors affecting
the Property

4 Present state of conservation

a The mining landscape is comprised of historical structures and textures whose

substance is, as may be expected, preserved in different degrees. A general assessment of the three
main categories, as set out in chapter 2, shows a broad division, with (i) the mining exploitation in
the category of generally well preserved features, with the exception of certain surface modern
elements, while (ii) the archaeological areas are fair and (iii) the built heritage in the category of
fair to poor preservation.
Whereas the state of conservation of archaeological heritage is directly connected to the
frail character of archaeological ruins, that of built heritage is caused by general decline since the
1950s, and the social and economic rupture created over the past 17 years when a new open-cast
mining project involved massive relocation and out-migration from the area.

Cetate-Găuri Area. Roman works (© Ivan Rous) Cetate-Găuri Area. Roman works (© Ivan Rouse)

(i) Mining exploitation

The state of conservation of the historic underground mining system can be

evaluated based on archaeological reports produced within the preventive research programme
developed between 2000 and 2006. The state of conservation differs significantly from one area
to another, from the very well preserved (e.g. Modern and Roman galleries, with their wooden
equipment and structures preserved), to areas that researchers decided not to investigate because
of safety reasons. Unsurprisingly for such a vast system, there are areas which will require con-
solidation, conservation works and consistent maintenance, but there are others where minimal
intervention will suffice.
The surface mining features are unevenly preserved. The most conspicuous alteration
was created by the move to modern open-cast mining in Mt. Cetate in the 1970s, which led to the
117
 destruction of the largest part of the Roman surface exploitation, known as ‘The Fortress’
(Rom. Cetate). The fundamental change created in the communist period - the nationalisation of
private property and the conversion to centralised mining - might have led to the disappearance
of the whole hydrotechnical system, but that did not happen. Even though the traditional installa-
tions for crushing the ore (stamping mills) and the water channeling system have disappeared, the
header ponds are conserved to a large degree. Presently used for leisure, their state of conservation
is good, and they mostly need only maintenance work. In contrast, the ore transportation system
to the processing plant at Gura Roșiei is severely altered. The ore railway needs sustained works
to recover its historical attributes: the route is still visible in the landscape of the valley, and the
embankment is preserved, while the now vegetated historical mining dumps are lining its way.
The tracks have been removed after the closure of the state mine, in 2006.
There is no known immediate threat to these elements. A long-term step-by-step conser-
vation and enhancement programme is necessary, and this is programmed within the management
plan under preparation.

Tăul Cornei sluice gate (© ARA Association)

(ii) Archaeological areas

The archaeological vestiges discovered to this moment have been to a large

degree reburied after conclusion of research. In the case of the circular funerary monument from
the Hop-Găuri Necropolis, a temporary shelter was built. The archaeological vestiges that were
the subject of the mentioned protective measures are in a fair state of conservation, while the areas
that were not protected after conclusion of research (Hop and Hăbad areas) are in a poor state of
conservation. In these cases conservation works must be carried out, to be programmed within
the management plan under preparation.

(iii) Built heritage

The built heritage is to a large extent brought to a poor state of conservation,

either as a result of ‘natural’ abandon (occurring at various points, in various moments as a result
of individual circumstances) or – much graver – by means of organized vacation of properties by the
systematic acquisition campaign conducted by the mining company. This led to a loss of building
stock. The existing structures require a comprehensive conservation plan to be prepared within
the management plan.
The buildings which are still owned and lived in by their traditional, local, owners are
generally in a much better state. There are exceptions, however: some of the historic churches (of
smaller, shrinking communities, such as Unitarian and Calvinist) are not in a good state, or the
uninhabited houses or agricultural and other ancillary structures.
State funded projects for conservation of listed buildings have been initiated this year.
Outside the town, the semi-natural areas, the pastures that need the traditional farming
activities – hay harvesting and grazing – in order to sustain their biodiversity and character are 4
threatened by the same general abandon. Some areas are already in the course of spontaneous
forestation. The continuation and/or resumption of traditional practices are among the measures
118

devised in the management plan.

 Unitarian parish house before and after restoration works(© ARA Association)

4 Present state of conservation

b
(i) Development Pressures
(e.g., encroachment, adaptation, agriculture, mining)

Encroachment
Encroachment has not been a significant pressure on the property as, in addi-
tion to socio-economic decline, population has also been falling. Over the past 50 years, buildings
density has decreased overall.

Depopulation
On the background of the general population decline came the extensive pur-
chase campaign by the mining company, which led to a severe depopulation, transforming certain
neighbourhoods into vacant areas - e.g. Sosași, where just two families are left. This has created
social devastation for the community.

Pressure for demolition

Demolition has occurred in some restricted cases in response to safety issues
(severely degraded and collapsing structures), and planned demolition in a series of other cases,
or wanton in others (e.g. preparation of clearance for intended mining operations). A conservation
management plan will be prepared that includes a risk register that targets vulnerable significant
buildings.
The Ministry for Development and Public Administration, at the initiative of the County
Council, establishes the priorities for elaborating risk maps and for establishing prevention and
mitigation measures according to the law. After the submission of the World Heritage nomination
file, new zoning plans will be initiated at government level, and they will include risk mapping at
local level and regulations for prevention and mitigation.

(iv) Responsible visitation at World Heritage sites

Baseline data
The property is well-known in Romania, and internationally. At present it at-
tracts more than 10,000 visitors per year (as reported by media), without any tourism infrastructure
or advertising. This broadly equates to the number formerly attained by other, now famous, rural
State of Conservation

World Heritage sites in Romania, like Biertan or Viscri, after years of planning and communication
(now, these figures are much exceeded).
In terms of infrastructure, the main facility is the Mining Museum, which currently op-
erates under the state mining company, Rosiamin, within its premises. The museum hosts an
underground section presenting a stretch of Roman galleries, belonging to the Orlea mining field
and also exhibits an open-air collection of mining installations, equipment and tools, a Lapidarium
of Roman and later epigraphical funerary and votive stelae, altars and other pieces, an indoor
exhibition with its main focus on an exceptional documentary photographic collection.
119
 For a few years there was a second museum exhibition, operated by the Roșia Montană
Gold Corporation, in a house it owns in the Market Square. It is now closed, but contains many
important artefacts, which belong to the state, in custody of Romania’s National Museum of History.
There are only a few accommodation facilities in Roșia Montană (a hostel and three bed-
and-breakfasts), to which is added a tourism association (NGO) and a few impromptu tourist guides.
Several info-points run by different organisations and the Roșia Montană Gold
Corporation have been functional in buildings on Market Square over the past years. They are
now all closed.
Despite underdeveloped physical infrastructure (that has, ironically, preserved a high
level of authenticity), there is fairly good and easy to reach virtual infrastructure for tourism in-
formation and activity planning, set up by private individuals. This will of course be coordinated,
supported and developed into a one-stop portal for the site, and surrounding area, which has high
potential for sustainable tourism, to be developed based on the website associated to the nomi-
nation, www.rosiamontana.world.

→ Patterns of uses

Place based visits:

The main visitor destinations are the state Mining Museum, the historic cen-
tre, the natural and mining landscape – with the mountain peaks and header ponds as principal
attractions. In summer, the ponds – especially Tăul Brazi and Tăul Mare – serve as recreational
areas for locals and members of neighbouring communities.
Educational tourism and professional tourism has also developed, with many school
groups visiting the Mining Museum, and groups of students and professionals from various fields,
such as geology, mining, ecology, architecture and territorial planning, visiting specific parts of
the nominated property.

Activity based visits:

For the past decade, the main local community NGO, Alburnus Maior, or-
ganised a protest and later cultural festival, called FânFest (Hay Festival). This attracted between
5,000 and 15,000 visitors a year, for a period of 4 to 6 days, featuring art, debate, theatre, music,
film, guided tours and much more, engaging the participants with the place and the cause for its
rescue – especially the internationally significant mining landscape, both above and below ground.
Visitors were mostly accommodated in the households of the local community. In 2016 the festival
was interrupted by its organizing committee, for re-planning.
Similarly, the municipality of Roșia Montană has been organising the annual Miners’
Day, drawing several thousand participants over one weekend in late August or early September
for a popular feast with music, dance and sports events.
During the past ten years, there has also been a new type of activity that regularly draws
a diverse range of people, including young people, to Roșia Montană: voluntary participation in
the professionally supervised conservation of architectural heritage, through summer schools,
workshops and volunteer camps organised by a heritage NGO, ARA, in partnership with the local
community organisation, Alburnus Maior. This activity has evolved into the successful Adopt-a-
House at Roșia Montană programme that has attracted more than 200 people from 10 European
countries, to work on the conservation of local historic houses and churches.
Most tourism is aestival, except for smaller-scale holidaying, which brings visitors for
New Year and Easter, with organised holiday packs provided by local NGOs and families, exhibiting
local customs and traditions.
Most of the visits are day-visits, with the exception of the activity-based, which range
from a few days to two weeks.

→ Planned changes

If the property achieves inscription on the World Heritage List, the existing legal 4
provisions placed upon the management body – the Organizing Committee for UNESCO – include
the duty to enhance tourism at the property that supports sustainable development. Future progress
120

will be guided, and implemented, by this body.

 Under a planned change to the legal definition of the management system applicable
across existing, and tentative, World Heritage Sites in Romania (presently published for consul-
tation by the Ministry of Culture), a local partnership will be introduced into the system, aimed to
better represent local communities. This will ensure that local people will be able to better contrib-
ute into the assessment, planning and decision making process, including local knowledge, plans
and resources, and engaging more people on the ground with their heritage.
The most important decision for the improvement of the existing visiting infrastructure
has already been initiated: transfer of the Mining Museum (currently operated by the state mining
company) to public property of the state. This will then be developed to become a national museum
under the Ministry of Culture. This transfer will create the conditions to enable funding for the
restoration of the historic complex (built during the Habsburg era as the mining headquarters)
and an upgraded museum that relates its important collections directly to the nominated proper-
ty. The new mining museum will make the perfect place to exhibit the important archaeological
collections resulted from the recent ground research campaigns, partly exhibited in the past years
in the RMGC museum, now closed.
In the future, and especially with a successful inscription, it will be possible for more
underground sections of the Orlea mining field, together with those from other mining fields (also
protected historic monuments) to be gradually opened for conservation works and visitor access.
This could be done based on specialized technical projects. Great potential exists for connections
from one mining field to another, engaging with different interpretive themes and access/difficulty
levels that respect, for example, the pristine authenticity of ancient remains in one sector versus
the robust, less-constrained and more ‘adventurous’ activity in another.
Similarly, it will be possible for various sections of surface archaeological sites to be sub-
ject to further conservation prior to becoming open for visitors. A significant educational potential
exists, in addition to tourism.
In terms of planned activities, priority shall be given to resume the high-summer FânFest
(Hay Festival) organized by the local community. This has become a brand event, bringing visitors,
and most importantly, creating awareness from the local to international scale, generating a better
understanding of the property, its history, its current problems and its place in today’s world.
In terms of potential forms of deterioration of the property due to visitor pressure, a po-
tential threat is perceived to be inappropriate construction works and new buildings. The control
and management of construction activity – be it for restoration and reuse of existing structures,
or (if appropriate) for building new ones – will be ensured by means of zoning plans, at different
scales, and corresponding regulations in the context of a conservation management plan (CMP)
which will be initiated at government level after submission of the nomination file. Visitor impacts
upon archaeological sites, above and below ground, will also be strictly controlled in the context
of the CMP, and its interpretation and visitor management remit.
Compared to present visitation levels, the carrying capacity of the site is much higher,
especially with visitor management planning in progress. Thus, there is no immediate danger in
this regard, and there is time to proceed with a thorough study, in order to inform the policy making
of the Organizing Committee for UNESCO.
An estimated increase in visitation levels should be subjected to caution at this stage,
with no more than 15,000 people projected per year in the first three years. This is to allow for the
better physical infrastructure to be developed, and to manage community expectations. Desired
outcomes include overnight stay visits, and the sale of high quality local products and services thus
contributing to the economy of the property.
State of Conservation

(v) Number of inhabitants within the property

and the buffer zone

Estimated population AREA OF NOMINATED PROPERTY: 600

located within: BUFFER ZONE: 100
TOTAL: 700
YEAR: 2016
121
 The most recent census (2011) indicates a total of 913 people living in the vil-
lages that are (partly or completely) included in the nominated property, 973 in the village of Abrud
municipality that is partly included in the property, and 96 in those included in the proposed
buffer zone (details below). Since the census, the population in the area has decreased – out of the
general trend in the wider area (migration, natural decrease), and out of reasons particular to the
place (mining project induced migration and blocked development). Moreover, the nominated
property comprises some of the villages just partly. The village of Abrud municipality is included
but marginally, with only a few houses. Therefore, an estimate can be made of the population
within the property, which cannot exceed 600 people. Similarly, in the buffer zone the estimated
population cannot exceed 150 people.

→ 2011 Census:

Villages included ROȘIA MONTANĂ — 618 Villages included GURA ROȘIEI — 96

in nominated property: BALMOȘEȘTI — 44 in buffer zone:
BLIDEȘTI — 19
BUNTA — 6
CORNA — 38
ŢARINA — 88
ABRUD-SAT — 973

Reformat parish house (© ARA Association)

Parohia reformată
Ruin of a traditional house (© ARA Association)

4
122

Ruină
 4.a Location and setting

CODE CATEGORY NAME STATE OF CONSERVATION

good fair poor

21 32 11
1 Mining Exploitation: Underground 13 7 3
and Surface

1.1 Mining Exploitation: Underground

1.1.1 Cârnic Massif Roman Galleries •

Lety Massif Roman Galleries: Cătălina Monulești
1.1.2
Roman Galleries •

1.1.3 Cetate Massif Roman mining features •

1.1.4 Orlea Roman Galleries •
1.1.5 Cârnic Roman fire-setting complex •
1.1.6 Cârnic Early Modern Galleries •
1.1.7 Cătălina Monulești Early Modern Galleries •
1.1.8 Cetate Early Modern Galleries •
1.1.9 Văidoaia Massif: Early Modern underground workings •
1.2 Mining exploitation: Surface

1.2.1 Cârnic Openworks •

1.2.2 Cetate Roman Open Pit •
1.3 Ore-processing features:
Header Ponds

1.3.1 Tăul Mare •

1.3.2 Tăul Ţarina •
1.3.3 Tăul Corna •
1.3.4 Tăul Brazi •
1.3.5 Tăul Anghel •
1.3.6 Tăul Cartuș •
1.3.7 Tăul Ţapului •
State of Conservation

1.3.8 Tăul Găuri •

1.3.9 Ore Rail •
1.4 Mining administration

1.4.1 State Mining Headquarters (18th – 20th centuries) •

1.4.2 Miners’ Dormitory (early 20th century) •
123
1.4.3 Mining Professional School (late 19th century) •
2 Archaeological Areas 0 8 4

2.1 Roman archaeology

2.1.1 Hăbad Sacred Area •

2.1.2 Găuri – habitation •
2.1.3 Hăbad – habitation •
2.1.4 Tăul Ţapului •
2.1.5 Hop Necropolis •
2.1.6 Nanului Valley Sacred Space •
2.1.7 Carpeni Zone •
2.1.8 Jig-Piciorag Area •
2.1.9 Ţarina Necropolis •
2.1.10 Pârâul Porcului - Tăul Secuilor •
2.1.11 Tăul Cornei - Corna Sat Zone •
2.1.12 Balmoșești - Islaz Area •
3 Built Heritage Features 6 17 4

3.1 Modern town / village Roșia Montană (Modern)

3.1.1 neighbourhood in the upper zone Square

Townhouses with commercial ground floors; no. 323-

3.1.1.a cluster
328, 388 (late 18th - early 19th century) •

3.1.1.b cluster “Sicilian Street” •

Roman-Catholic Church and parish ensemble (18th -
3.1.1.c cluster
middle 19th, early 20th century) •
Unitarian Church and parish ensemble (1796, 18th -
3.1.1.d cluster
middle 19th, 1933) •
The Casino (1880-1900), no. 329, and Summer
3.1.1.e cluster
Garden •

3.1.1.f cluster The former Administrative Palace (1896), no. 310 •

3.1.2 neighbourhood in the upper zone Brazi •

3.1.3 neighbourhood in the upper zone Ieruga •

3.1.4 neighbourhood in the upper zone Tăul Brazi •

3.1.5 neighbourhood in the upper zone Văidoaia •

3.1.6 neighbourhood in the upper zone Berk •

3.1.7 neighbourhood in the upper zone Sosași • 4

3.1.8 neighbourhood in the upper zone Orlea •
124

Greek-Catholic Church and parish ensemble (1720,

3.1.8.a cluster
1741, mid 19th century), no. 135 •
 Orthodox Church and parish ensemble (1781, mid 19th
3.1.8.b cluster
century), no. 175 •

3.1.8.c cluster The administrative centre. Town Hall •

3.1.9 neighbourhood in the lower zone Gura Minei •

3.1.10 neighbourhood in the lower zone Vercheș

Aitaj House, later Miners’ Club (no. 242), Maternity

3.1.10.a cluster ward (no. 251), Gritta House (no. 258), Miner •
households

3.1.10.b State school and kindergarten; no. 274 (1905-1915) •

3.1.10.c cluster Blocks of flats of the 1960s •

3.2 Town / Village Corna (Modern)

3.2.1 Orthodox Church (1719), no. 707 •

3.2.2 Greek-Catholic Church (19th century), no. 692 •

3.2.3 Miners households •

3.3 Town / Village Ţarina (Modern)

3.3.1 Traditional farmhouse (19th century), Ţarina no. 1248 •

Traditional farmhouse (20th century), with polygonal
3.3.2
stable, Ţarina no. 1254 •
3.4 Town / Village Balmoșești, Blidești (Modern)
•
State of Conservation
125
 5

Overview of Rosia valley

126

© Radu Sălcudean
 5. Protection and
Management of
the Property
The Property Management Plan of Roșia Montană Mining Lanscape is under
preparation, and will sit within the existing management framework - anticipating/following the
current revision of the national system of protection, management and monitoring for World
Heritage in Romania. The new national system is aimed at meeting higher expectations of her-
itage (e.g. contribution to Sustainable Development) as well as to meet obligations of the World
Heritage Convention. Published by the Ministry of Culture for consultation in December 2016,
the expectation is for implementation during the first half of 2017. It integrates new provisions
regarding the active role of local communities in the management of World Heritage properties,
coordinated management measures for natural/cultural sites in connection with the State’s support
mechanisms for management and heritage-based development. The present status as a ‘nominated
property’ also triggers formal procedure and national requirements in terms of urban planning
and a Property Management Plan.
A campaign for the information of the local community upon the advantages and re-
sponsibilities brought by the World Heritage Status has been conducted (august – november 2016).
The survey afterwards showed that the major part of the local population is aware of the and in
favour of achieving this status and, based on this, the active involvement of the community in the
preservation of the property’s values is to be expected.

5 Ownership

a The main category of land ownership is private, comprising individual owners,

associations of owners, local authorities, organisations and companies. Out of this category, the
largest owners are currently the Municipality of Roșia Montană and the State Mining Company
Minvest S.A. Deva with an estimated share of around 45% of land within the nominated property,
as well as Roșia Montană Gold Corporation with an estimated share of around 30 % of land with-
in the nominated property. The rest is comprised of individual owners, associations of owners,
organisations (churches). This information is being constantly updated and is being integrated
in the new cartographic portal of the National Agency for Cadaster and Land Registration, which
has been operational since 2015.
The surface area of the mining fields which have been operated as opencast mines in the
latter part of the communist period – Cetate and Cârnic – is in the public property of the Municipality
of Roșia Montană. The underground resources, by Constitution, are in public property (art. 136
(3) – therefore all underground mining fields are public property, belonging to the state.

5 Protective designation

b The entire Municipality of Roșia Montană is designated as “very high con-

centration of built heritage with cultural value of national interest”, by the Law for the approval
of the National Spatial Development Plan – Section III, Protected areas (L. 5/2000), in view of its
protection by means of territorial and urban planning measures.
The same law designates, in its annexes (I and III), specific values within the territory
of the municipality, which must be protected by urban planning measures. These include nature
values and cultural values, as listed on the next page.
127
Annex I (excerpt): I. Protected natural areas of national
interest and nature monuments

2. Reserves and nature monuments

2.8 Piatra Despicată [Split Rock], 0.20 ha
2.83 Piatra Corbului [Raven’s Rock], 5.00 ha

Annex III (excerpt): I. Cultural heritage values of national interest

(historic monuments of exceptional national value)

g) Urban ensembles:
g) 3. The historic centre
l) Industrial architecture:
l) 1. The Roman galleries of the gold mining works
m) Monuments of vernacular architecture
(village dwellings):
m) 2. Houses (18th–19th Cent.)

II. Municipalities with very high concentration of built

heritage with cultural value of national interest

Roșia Montană, Abrud

The next complementary level of protection is granted by the Law for the protection of his-
toric monuments (L. 422/2001), by means of listing of individual monuments, ensembles and sites.
Based on the provisions of the above-mentioned law, the official List of Historic
Monuments includes, in its latest edition from December 2015, 51 items located in the Municipality
of Roșia Montană, of which 50 are included in the nominated property.

List of Historic I. Archaeological monuments

Monuments of
County Alba 140 Alburnus Maior – Roșia Montană archaeological
(excerpt): site (for which a clear perimeter was established in
November 2016)
141–145 Roman settlements and vestiges, mining works
(5 distinctive sites included in the above)
146 Galleries of Mt. Cârnic (distinctively listed but also
included in the above perimeter)

II. Architecture monuments

471 The historic centre of the town

473–513 Houses, churches and parish houses (41)

III. Commemorative and agora monuments

666 Commemorative monument to Simion Balint

Of all designated or listed components of the property, the two nature monuments have
been declared first, in 1969, and later designated by the law in 2000, together with all other posi-
tions presented above.
Of the listed monuments included in the nominated property, 44 have been designated
in 1991–1992, and included in the List of historic monuments of 1992, and 6 have been added in
2004 as sub-components or divisions of the existing listed archaeological site. 5
The assessment of other 18 architectural and technical elements within the property start-
ed recently (September 2016), as part of the listing procedure initiated at the request of National
128

Commission for Historic Monuments. The procedure includes former miners’ dwellings in the
 property of the municipality, all the presently unlisted historic churches, the headquarters of the
state mine, and the header ponds belonging to the hydrotechnical system of the site. According to
the Law for the protection of historic monuments, these properties have the legal status of historic
monuments until the completion of the listing process (but no more than one year), when a final
decision is reached and published by order of the Minister of Culture.
Landscape integrated protection is to be further consolidated together with the recent
(November 2016) Government Decision regarding the Heritage Theses. These principles for law
modification are to ensure for the first time, a correlated vision for a landscape protection approach
within Romanian legislation.

Gritta House (© ARA Association)

5 Means of implementing
protective measures

c Protected areas

The first level of protection, ensured by the designation of the municipality

and certain components of the property as protected areas, should be applied by means of urban
regulations, establishing the dos and don’ts in terms of urban planning indicators. The aim of
protection is to ensure an integrated protection of the cultural and natural values.
Protection and Management

In the case of Roșia Montană, this overarching protection status has not yet been effec-
tively applied, as the urban planning documents – zoning plan and regulation for the entire munic-
ipality, called Plan Urbanistic General (PUG), and zoning plan and regulation for distinctive areas,
called Plan Urbanistic Zonal (PUZ) – have been initiated by local authorities, but later aborted.
The situation is critical as presently there is no regulation in place after the previous PUG - based
mainly on the opencast mining project - has been definitively cancelled in court.
Currently, the responsibility for initiating, approving and implementing such documents
is with the municipality, through the Local Council. Once the nomination file for the property is
submitted, the central authorities take over the responsibility to initiate and fund such documents,
and thus the planning blockage shall be removed. Until the approval of such urban planning, a
newly passed (November 2016) Emergency Order of the Government that modifies the Law of
territorial and urban planning (No. 350/2001), is now allowing maintaining and restoration works
129

even in the absence of urban planning regulations.

 The perspective that the law, and especially the subsequent methodology for the elab-
oration of such zoning plans, gives to the protection of values is that of sustainable development.
Therefore, the vision is not purely restrictive, but constructive.
All measures set forth by the law in respect to protected areas are compulsory for all
public authorities, and all the works entailed by the protection of designated values are declared
of public utility (Law no. 422/2001 regarding the protection of historical monuments)

Historic monuments

The next level of protection, ensured by listing of specific built heritage as

historic monuments, is applied by establishing clear control and responsibility levels on all action
or non-action in respect to those listed values. It sets the duty: of owners to maintain, protect
and restore; of local authorities to monitor and issue building permits and of central authorities
to control, offer technical assistance and enforce the law in case of illegal actions against the
protected values. Listing also creates the premise for accessing funding for the protection of the
respective historic monuments, from national or European Union sources, under the National
Restoration Programme or dedicated lines of structural funds (e.g. Regional Operational Plan,
Rural Development National Plan).
The priorities of the Ministry of Culture in terms of protection of built heritage, set
forth in September 2016 by its professional advisory body, the National Commission for Historic
Monuments, include Roșia Montană. This makes it possible to grant funds for the restoration of
historic monuments through the National Restoration Programme.
The National Institute of Heritage, which is managing the National Restoration
Programme, has received three applications from Roșia Montană for next year’s funding plan,
which were assessed and included in the budget proposed to the Ministry of Culture. This is unprec-
edented for historic monuments from Roșia Montană. The score of the evaluation for funding of
those three historic monuments was raised significantly by the presence of the site on the national
Tentative List for World Heritage.
According to the law (Law no. 564 /2001 for the approval of the GO no. 47/2000), once
a nomination is submitted, all provisions in place for World Heritage properties will apply to the
respective property as well. These include the management system designed to protect all World
Heritage properties in Romania. Roșia Montană will benefit from these provisions with the sub-
mission of the nomination file to UNESCO.

Greek–Catholic church in Corna, currently undergoing

130

listing procedure (© Radu Sălcudean)

 5 Existing plans related to municipality and
region in which the proposed property

d is located
(e.g., regional or local plan, conservation plan,
tourism development plan)

Strategy for Culture and National Heritage 2016–2022

Ministry of Culture, 2016

Under the current revision of the sectorial Strategy for Culture and National
Heritage 2016–2022, the Ministry of Culture sets up a new programme dedicated to World Heritage
properties and Tentative List properties, in order to ensure the protection, maintenance, con-
servation and socio-economic inclusion of these resources within the local communities. Roșia
Montană is specifically listed under several other objectives of the Strategy as well as under the
key projects section.

Sustainable Development Strategy of Alba County

for the period 2014–2020
Alba County Council, 2014

The development vision for County Alba, stated in the Sustainable Development
Strategy 2014-2020, sets out from the beginning the role of its unique cultural and natural heritage
resources for the development of the county, and puts among its strategic objectives “Heritage as
a motor of creativity” (strategic objective 3), and among the priority objectives, the restoration of
heritage buildings, starting with World Heritage properties, and the protection and enhancement
of archaeological sites (priority objective 3.1). Under the same objective, the strategy indicates
the creation of cultural routes, with specific provisions for a Gold and Mine Crystal Route in the
Apuseni Mountains and for the Narrow-gauge Railway Route, which crosses the same mountains,
reaching the bottom of the Roșia Valley, a Route of UNESCO World Heritage in County Alba, along
with many other projects.
The strategy also sets provisions for the modernization of the routes infrastructure, with
both the national road Abrud-Cîmpeni and the county roads being included, and of the electricity,
energy, water, sewage and waste-water treatment infrastructure (Priority objective 2.1).
The programmes set forth by the county strategy are correlated to the thematic objectives
of the Europe 2020 Strategy.

Zoning Plans for the Municipality of Roșia Montană –

to be initiated by the Ministry of Development

Legislation in place regarding protection of World Heritage in Romania also

includes nominated properties that benefit from it as soon as they are officially submitted. The
initiation of the General Urban Plan (PUG) elaboration by the Ministry of Regional Development
and Public Administration will be then legally possible immediately after the Roșia Montană Mining
Protection and Management

Landscape is officially nominated. The PUG objective is to ensure the desired state of conservation
of the property while making the transition from industrial zoning, in support of open pit mining
and processing, to that of heritage-lead zoning appropriate to a nominated World Heritage property.
The Ministry of Culture, through the National Institute of Heritage & The National
Museum of Romanian History already ensured one of the essential documentations on which the
PUG is to be initiated – the study establishing the overall boundaries of the Alburnus Maior
listed archaeological site. The study was validated by the National Commission for Historic
Monuments as well as the National Commission for Archaeology and is to be used also as one of
the key scientific studies for the future conservation plan.
At the same time, within the National Restoration Programme, the National Institute
of Heritage included in its monuments selection and budget proposal for 2017 three of the mon-
uments of Roșia Montană in need of restoration – one church and two parish houses out of which
131

one is in need of urgent intervention.

 A Conservation Plan, is to be prepared by the County Council after submission of the
nomination to UNESCO, according to legal provisions. It will involve specialized public institu-
tions - mainly the National Institute for Heritage - as well as heritage practitioners, urban planners,
landscape architects and civil society entities that already proved their professional capability and
dedication to the heritage of Roșia Montana during the last decades. This cooperation between
public authorities, heritage institutions and civil society can be built - on an already solid foundation
– as a model of conservation in Roșia Montană and can be further used as an example to be followed
for other heritage places. Based on the already existing experience for conservation action on the
site, an integrated conservation plan is bound to be compiled effectively in the next 6–9 months.

5 Property management plan or other

management system

e Although there is as yet no effective management plan in place for the property,
a new management system is being constructed within the revision of the national system for the
protection, managing and monitoring of World Heritage Sites - and nominated properties. The
system integrates three levels of intervention: Under the current revision of the sectorial Strategy
for Culture and National Heritage 2016–2022, the Ministry of Culture sets up a new programme
dedicated to World Heritage properties and Tentative List properties, in order to ensure the protec-
tion, maintenance, conservation and socio-economic inclusion of these resources within the local
communities. Roșia Montană is specifically listed under several other objectives of the Strategy as
well as under the key projects section.

→ administrative, through the Alba County Council that is responsible, by

law, with establishing the management plan through a UNESCO Organizing
Committee (COU)

→ professional and scientific, through the National Institute of Heritage

(INP) that is responsible by law with the scientific coordination and moni-
toring of World Heritage and nominated properties (member of the COU).
INP is - local community action, through the local partnership that was
integrated (as member of the COU) in the new national system. The part-
nership for Roșia Montană in the World Heritage List was legally created
(November 2016) by local people and entities to the purpose of supporting
the nomination and contributing to the elaboration and implementation of
the Management Plan.
The management system includes a 5-year programme for the protection
and management of the property (the Property Management Plan) as well
as implementation and monitoring annual action plans to be prepared.
Along with the three principal poles described above, it includes the cooper-
ation of the Roșia Montană local authority and of representatives (members
of the COU) of central or local county offices of the Ministry of Environment,
Ministry of Development and Local Administration, Ministry of Interior
Affairs, National Tourism Authority, Emergency Situations Authority, with
their respective legal specific responsibilities. A key role is the one of the lo-
cal county office of the Ministry of Culture (member of the COU), in charge
for monitoring all the area and issuing the Ministry’s permits for interven-
tions in the nominated area.

As a result of this system being operational, the Property Management Plan for the Roșia
Montană Mining Landscape will be prepared according to the legal provisions of Romania, with 5
the scientific coordination of the National Institute of Heritage, the cooperation of independent
experts and specialized other institutions, the input of the local community and the assistance
132

of the COU. It will be guided by key international documents such as Managing Cultural World
 Heritage (UNESCO resource manual due to be translated and published, with permission, by the INP),
the ICOMOS Charter for the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites (“ENAME
Charter”, 2008), and others. The plan will include a section on the management of tourism as
support of sustainable development and one on heritage interpretation. The plan will illustrate the
increasing preoccupation in Romania for the European Landscape Convention implementation
as well as industrial heritage recognition through the integrated management of a multi-layered
landscape (nature, archaeology, heritage, agro-pastoral, industry).
Note: all interventions made before the approval of the PUG and the management and
conservation plans are being carefully monitored through the existing legal mechanisms and they
are concentrated on maintenance and conservation works aimed at the preservation of the iden-
tified valuable attributes of the nominated property.

5 Sources and
levels of finance

f As stated above, urban planning instruments for nominated areas are to be

financed by the state through the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration. The
management plan – i.e. the 5-year programme for management and protection - is to be financed
by the Ministry of Culture, through the National Institute for Heritage (INP), possibly also with the
budgetary contribution of the local county authorities. All functioning of the COU and monitoring
activities will be financed by the County Council.
A pilot strategy recently adopted by the government, for three disadvantaged areas with
one centre in Roșia Montană – Apuseni Mountains include technical and financial assistance for
interventions in the nominated property for conservation, infrastructure, small business develop-
ment etc. The assistance is being provided through a Governmental Unit for Technical Assistance
(UGAT) newly based in Roșia Montană.
Regional (county) and national government structures, depending on type of project and
eligibility are in place to assist National funds (through the National Institute for Heritage within
the National Restoration Programme) or European funds projects of the local authorities, NGO-s
and private owners. Research, conservation and restoration projects, urban/rural regeneration
and infrastructure are all eligible for European funding mechanisms (POR, PNDR, SEE, SUERD etc.)

5 Sources of expertise and training in

conservation and management techniques

g Conservation of the site requires preservation and continuity in traditional

construction techniques as well as producing traditional building materials. The already gained
expertize through conservation and rescue programmes of professional associations integrating
Protection and Management

also local know-how, have already produced a solid ground for future conservation and manage-
ment of the property. Specialized institutions of the state such as the National Institute of Heritage,
National Museum of Romanian History, several universities, The Dendrochronology Laboratory
in Transylvania etc., have joined these efforts in various specialized projects and are therefore
continuing to ”produce” professional expertize. Several key projects are to be implemented such
as the restoration of three architectural monuments through the National Restoration Programme
and the continuation of the Adopt a House in Roșia Montană volunteer summer programme.
The Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Education have drafted recently (November
2016) the mission and functional structure of a new centre of excellence in arts and crafts which
is to be created in Roșia Montană under the auspices of the two and will benefit from the UGAT
assistance. The centre is to function in some and to restore some other historic buildings of the site
while creating also local capacity / training young local people in traditional building techniques.
133
Shingle maker (© Radu Sălcudean) Blacksmith (© Radu Sălcudean)

5 Visitor facilities and

infrastructure

h Although no formal infrastructure for tourism is in place at the desired stan-

dards, a spontaneous hospitality network is regularly receiving guests (bed and breakfast); hiring
bicycles; offering guided theme tours, holiday packages, in relation or not with the summer festi-
vals and activity-based tourism. This is one of the property’s authentic attractions and should be
encouraged by networking complementary initiatives of the existing (La Gruber, Casa Petri, Visit
Rosia Montana, Rosia Montana Verde Association), and future local tourist operators.
The State Mining Museum is the main visitor facility, providing access to a section of
the Mt. Orlea Roman galleries as well as exhibiting unique Roman funerary monuments, mining
technology, a collection of photographs and documents. The museum functions in the adapted
buildings of the Sate Mining Company Rosiamin for which the development of the museum, the
interpretation of the heritage and the visitor facilities were not a priority. These aspects are to be
resolved through a new museum project once its transfer to the Ministry of Culture is realized
(according to the Memorandum passed in the Government in December 2016). This will also 5
integrate the public archaeological collections of the new museum founded by the private mining
company which, although existing since 2010, is still not open to the public.
134
 5 Policies and programmes related to the
presentation and promotion of the property

i Internationally the property is extremely well known through high profile heri-
tage organizations such as Europa Nostra, World Monuments Watch, ICOMOS, TICCIH etc., achieving
prominence on their websites and also through their official actions. They publically and openly
supported the protection of Roșia Montana’s heritage.
National promotion is currently made through civic, environment protection and heritage
Conservation NGO’s (Alburnus Maior Association, Mining Watch Romania, Architecture Restoration
Archaeology – ARA Association and others). On the local level, independent actions to present and
promote the property have been developed by local NGOs, through their actions – most notably
FânFest, but also Gold Trail – and their websites; likewise small private operators in the area are pro-
moting the property through their tourism related businesses (Made in Rosia Montana and others)
Key information related to the nomination process, heritage protection actions and
the elaboration of management instruments is to be integrated in the newly created portal
www.rosiamontana.world administrated by the National Institute of Heritage.

Landscape workshop (© ARA Association)

5 Staffing levels and expertise

(professional, technical, maintenance)

j The National Institute of Heritage, responsible by law for the nomination files
as well as for monitoring inscribed World Heritage Sites, is already employing a specialized team
- architects, engineers, art historians, landscape architects etc. - for that purpose and has represen-
tatives in the respective UNESCO Organizing Committees (COU). According to the new project
Protection and Management

of Government Ordinance (to be decided during the first half of December 2016), INP will benefit
from an increase in the staff number dedicated to the creation of a UNESCO department to better
implement the World Heritage Convention.
Locally, the county office of the Ministry of Culture as well as the Government Technical
Assistance Unit (UGAT), with the scientific cooperation of INP, are to provide assistance to local
initiatives for conservation and restoration as well as for private or public new interventions and
infrastructure works in order to ensure their integrated approach and compatibility with the au-
thenticity and integrity requirements.
Already several local professionals who have been involved in conservation projects in
the last decade can take the responsibility of small technical teams for maintenance and can assist
local authorities in monitoring the property. On a medium term basis, the graduates of the Roșia
Montană arts and crafts centre will be able to contribute with their newly acquired competences
135

to the sites maintenance.

 6
136

Văidoaia quarry and the Roman Catholic church

© Daniel Vrăbioiu
 6. Monitoring
According to Romanian Legislation and article 29 of the World Heritage
Convention, the National Institute for Heritage – INP is to produce periodic reports, every 6 years,
on the state of conservation of the property as well as the administrative and legislative provisions
for the property every 6 years. However due to the complexity of the site and the necessity of ur-
gent intervention for acquiring the desired state of conservation in some of the attributes, a closer
monitoring programme is necessary, on an annual basis. This is to look at specific technical issues
related to the archaeological and built heritage conservation, mining works maintenance, forests
and agro- pastoral landscape traditional use, habitats and biodiversity as well as overall manage-
ment of the property. The INP will ensure through proper specialized partnerships, an integrated
culture-nature vision upon this monitoring process.

6.a Key indicators for measuring state of conservation

INDICATOR PERIODICITY LOCATION OF RECORDS

INP, Division for World Heritage,

Monitoring Unit
Maintenance and conservation of the immovable
County office of the Ministry
heritage (archaeological and built)
Annual, with a 6 years report following of Culture
1 • Authenticity of materials
the periodic reporting cycle
Report to be submitted to
• Authenticity of techniques
UNESCO every 6 years
• Integrity of the material structures
National Museum of
Romanian History

INP, Division for World Heritage,

Monitoring Unit
Maintenance and conservation of the mining Quarterly / or as often as necessary following
County office of the Ministry of
works (surface and underground) mining security standards (for areas opened
Culture
2 for visitors
• Integrity of the material structures
National Museum of Romanian
• the accessibility of the works Annual for other works
History

Specialized partners

Maintenance and conservation Quarterly / every season INP, Division for World Heritage,
of the landscape character Monitoring Unit
(pastures, ponds etc)
3 County Office of the Ministry of
• Traditional use of the land Culture
• Maintenance works
Specialized partners

Monitoring and conservation of the flora Quarterly / appropriate season

INP, Division for World Heritage,
and fauna features
Monitoring Unit
4
• Protected fauna monitoring
Specialized partners
• Protected flora monitoring

Geology and water systems

INP - Division for World Heritage,
Monitoring Unit
5 • Protected geological structures monitoring Quarterly / appropriate season
Specialized partners
•Water levels and water quality monitoring
137
6.b Administrative arrangements
for monitoring property

The nominated property is to be monitored, according to legal previsions in

Romania, by the National Institute of Heritage - INP, possibly in cooperation with other specialized
partners if the case.

National Institute of Heritage (INP) tel. +40-21-336.60.73

16, Ienăchiţă Văcărescu fax +40-21-336.99.04
Bucharest, Romania, 040157 secretariat@patrimoniu.gov.ro
www.patrimoniu.gov.ro
www.rosiamontana.world

6.c Results of previous reporting exercises

World Monuments Fund Report World Monuments Watch programme 2016

https://www.wmf.org/project/ro%C8%99ia-montan%C4%83-
mining-landscape

Europa Nostra Report 7 most endangered sites 2013

http://www.europanostra.org/rosia-montana/

Romanian Academy Report on http://www.acad.ro/forumuri/doc2013/d0619- 2013

the Roșia Montană Mining Project ProiectulRosiaMontana-AnalizaAR.pdf

Architecture+ Urbanism. Traditional Rural Housing in Barbieri, M. coord.,

2013
Alba County. Survey and vernacular architecture valorization Consiliul Judeţean Alba,

Archaeological Research Reports under Published in the respective National Archaeological Annual 1999–2006
the coordination of the National Museum Reports, and Alburnus Maior series of publications 1999 - 2006
of Romanian History

University of Toulouse – underground Beatrice Cauuet 2001–2008

mining archaeological research reports
Published in the respective National Archaeological Annual Reports

Romania’s Presidency, Report of the

Presidential Commission for the Built Heritage Editura ICR, București 2010
and the Historic and Natural Sites

Paula Popoiu, Ed.

Roșia Montană Ethnological Study 2004
Ed. DAIM, București

Heritage at Risk ICOMOS Report http://www.icomos.org/risk/ 2000, 2003

The Design Centre for National Cultural Heritage

(CPPCN, now the INP)
Research and inventory for the built
heritage of the villages of Roșia Montană 2000–2001
Stroe, A., Stroe, A,, Andron, I.G., Postăvaru, I.
and Corna.
INP Archive

Akeroyd, John R.
The Botanical and Anthropogenic Landscape of Roșia
edited by P. Cocean, 101-113. Cluj-Napoca: Cluj University
Montană (Apuseni Mountains, Romania)” In Roșia Montană 2012
Press,.2012
in Universal History,

Akeroyd, John R., Jones, Andrew

6
Rosia Montana: a case for protection rather than destruction http://www.rosiamontana.org/sites/default/files/Anex1__Akeryod_ 2006
Jones_biodiv_Ro.pdf
138
 7. Documentation
7.a Photographs and audiovisual image
inventory and authorization form
Id. No. Format Caption Date of Photo Photographer/ Copyright owner Contact details of Non
(slide (mo/ yr) Director (if different than copyright owner exclusive
/ print of the video photographer/ (Name, address, tel/ cession of
/ video) director of video) fax, and e-mail) rights

1 JPEG Path to Rosia Montana 08/2012 Daniel Vrăbioiu same as photographer YES

Roman Catholic Church

and Cemetery, in the
2 JPEG 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
historic centre of Roșia
Montană

Overview inTăul Mare,

3 JPEG 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
Roșia Montană

Underground mining
4 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
networks in Cârnic

Well-preserved Roman
5 JPEG level, with modern (re- 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
excavated) level

Roman level crossed by

6 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
modern level level

Blackened wall markings

7 JPEG indicating positions of 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
lamp niches

8 JPEG Roman adit level 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES

Roman galleries with

9 JPEG evidence for 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
fire-setting

Three Roman galleries

10 JPEG intersected by modern 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
workings

Păru Carpeni: Cumulative

cross-section of the two
11 JPEG levels with four water 2001 Beatrice Cauuet same as photographer YES
wheel chambers for
drainage

Păru Carpeni: Water wheel

chamber with monoxyle
12 JPEG 2001 Beatrice Cauuet same as photographer YES
ladder – as discovered
in situ

A monoxyle notched
ladder (4.90 m length)
discovered in a perfect
13 JPEG 2001 Beatrice Cauuet same as photographer YES
state of preservation inside
the backfill of a vertical,
stepped, stope

Launder (wooden water-

channel) that received
14 JPEG water from the still 2001 Călin Tămaș same as photographer YES
adjacent remains of the
upper waterwheel

Waterwheel hub - still in

connection with its spokes
15 JPEG 2001 Călin Tămaș same as photographer YES
- discovered in Cătălina
Monulești Mine

16 JPEG Cetate-Zeus Area: 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES

Roman works

17 JPEG Roman galleries with 2013 Ivan Rous same as photographer YES
trapezoidal cross-section
139

Roman mining works –

18 JPEG 2013 Ivan Rous same as photographer YES
room with pillars
19 JPEG Fire-setting complex 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES

Cârnic Early
20 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
Modern Gallery

21 JPEG Cârnic. Roman gallery 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES

Cârnic: Modern
22 JPEG 2012 Ivan Rous same as photographer YES
works – “caverns”

Cătălina Monulești
23 JPEG Modern pillar alongside 2012 Călin Tămaș same as photographer YES
Roman Gallery

Cetate Early
24 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
Modern Galleries

Văidoaia: Medieval and

25 JPEG 2007 Lorin Niculae same as photographer YES
Modern open works

Cârnic - Piatra Corbului:

Roman slope-side works
26 JPEG 2010 Horia Ciugudean same as photographer YES
opened with fire
and water

Cetate - Găuri Area:

27 JPEG Roman works opened 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
with fire and water

28 JPEG Tăul Mare 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES

Tăul Mare after the

29 JPEG reinforcement works 1929 Postcard same as photographer YES
in 1929

30 JPEG Tăul Tarina 2007 Lorin Niculae same as photographer YES

31 JPEG Tăul Corna 2011 Sebastian Florian same as photographer YES

32 JPEG Tăul Brazi 1929 Arthur Oskar Bach same as photographer YES

33 JPEG Tăul Brazi-Tăul Anghel 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES

34 JPEG Tăul Cartuș 2004 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES

35 JPEG Tăul Tapului 2004 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES

36 JPEG Tăul Găuri 2004 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES

37 JPEG Holy Cross ore railway 1927 NLR Archives same as photographer YES

38 JPEG Ore railway incline 1920s NLR Archives same as photographer YES

State Mining
Headquarters Roll-call
39 JPEG ca. 1927 V. Zotinca same as photographer YES
room and shaft leading
to the mines

40 JPEG Miners’ dormitory 2001 INP Archives same as photographer YES

Mining Professional
41 JPEG 2001 INP Archives same as photographer YES
School

Hăbad Building in sacred

42 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
area

Bulding in the sacred

43 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
area of Hăbad

44 JPEG Hăbad: Votive altars 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES

General view of the

45 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
excavation area in Hăbad

A section of the roman

46 JPEG road crossing the site in 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
the Găuri area.

Roman pottery
recovered from inside
47 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
the dwelling in the
“Găuri” section

Detail of dwelling in the

48 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
“Găuri” section
7
Excavated habitat
49 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
structures in Găuri area
140
 Roman pottery
recovered from the
50 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
dwelling in the “Hăbad”
section

Plan of Roman dwelling

51 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
in “Hăbad” section

Plan of Building no.

52 JPEG 1 - Building no. 2 at Tăul 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
Ţapului

Tăul Tapului_Layout
53 JPEG Building no. 1 - Building 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
no. 2

Circular monument in
the foreground with Hop
54 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
Necropolis
in the background

Nanului Valey general

55 JPEG view of TII worship 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
edifice

General view of Dalea

56 JPEG sacred space in Nanului 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
valley

Roman altars and

pottery are amongst
57 JPEG the principal artefacts 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
recovered from Nanului
Valey–Dalea

Artefacts recovered from

Carpeni Hill: Trajan coins
58 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
minted in Caria Province,
Asia Minor

Silver buckle from

Carpeni Hill; Ceramic
59 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
roof tile with stamp Leg.
XIII Gemina

General view from the

60 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
east of the point Bara

General view of the

61 JPEG properties Gomboș and 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
Bara,from the north

Funerary precint from

62 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
Ţarina area

Decoration from the

63 JPEG 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
funerary precint in Ţarina

Funerary precint from

64 JPEG Pârâul Porcului – Tăul 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
Secuilor area

Tăul Corna. Overview of

65 JPEG the necropolis. 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
View of Citera Budeștilor

66 JPEG Islaz Fortification 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES

Central area with three

churches: Unitarian
67 JPEG 20th C. postcard unknown YES
(left), Protestant (centre),
Roman Catholic (right)

North-east front of the

68 JPEG ca. 1940 Silviu Bocaniciu Sr. same as photographer YES
Square early 1940s

Tăul Brazi
69 JPEG 2012 Daniel Vrăbioiu same as photographer YES
neighbourhood
Documentation

70 JPEG Văidoaia neighbourhood 2007 Ștefan Bâlici same as photographer YES

71 JPEG Berk neighbourhood 2006 Lorin Niculae same as photographer YES

72 JPEG Sosași neighbourhood 2007 Ștefan Bâlici same as photographer YES

The Greek-Catholic R. Slotta, V.

73 JPEG 1930s same as photographer YES
Church of the Dormition Vollmann, I. Dordea
141
 The Orthotox Church
with Mt. Cetate in
74 JPEG 1920s V. Zotinca same as photographer YES
Background, Roșia
Montană

The administrative
75 JPEG 2010 INP Archives same as photographer YES
centre, Town Hall

Gura Minei
76 JPEG 1927 V. Zotinca same as photographer YES
Neighbourhood

77 JPEG Blocks of the 1960s. 2014 Claudia Apostol same as photographer YES

78 JPEG Corna Village, overview 2001 Ștefan Bâlici same as photographer YES

Upper nucleus in Corna

79 JPEG 2007 Lorin Nicolae same as photographer YES
village

19th century Traditional

80 JPEG 2013 Ștefan Bâlici same as photographer YES
farmhouse, Tarina

Traditional farmhouse
81 JPEG 2014 Ștefan Bâlici same as photographer YES
with polygonal stable

Piatra Corbului (Raven's

82 JPEG Stone) protected area of 2012 Edmond Kreibic same as photographer YES
national interest

View on Piatra Corbului

83 JPEG and Cârnic Massif 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
Southern slope

Overview of Roșia
84 JPEG Montană Mining 2009 Petru Mortu same as photographer YES
Landscape

View of Tăul Mare

and Roșia Valley.
Field pattern: spatial
85 JPEG 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
arrangement of the keys
elements and shape of
landscape plots.

View on cattle stable

with a agro-pastoral
production facility with
solitary trees which
through particular
86 JPEG usage or historical 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
tradition gain a specific
significance; high
cultural and historical
value and biodiversity
potential

Rought grazings with

terraced field and
87 JPEG 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
shrubs succesion in the
background

Small trees hedge with

individual trees, fences
88 JPEG and dry stone masonry 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
and croces to delineate
boundaries

89 JPEG “Natural rock gardens” 2012 Daniel Vrabioiu same as photographers YES

Forest in relation with

mining exploitation
90 JPEG with high historical and 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
cultural value and high
ecological potential

Living fences created

as rows of shrubs to
delineate boundaries,
91 JPEG 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
ponds and roads, ensure
erosion protection and
improve landscape

92 JPEG Tăul Brazi landscape 2004 Edmond Kreibic same as photographer YES

7
Former head ponds with
93 JPEG water retention function 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
and specific flora
142
 Overview of Roșia valley
94 JPEG 2004 MNIR archive same as photographer YES
from Balmoșești

Overall view of the

95 JPEG Tăul Mare and mining 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
landscape

Mount Cârnic – vestiges

of prehistoric and Roman Radu Sălcudean
96 JPEG 2012 same as photographers YES
slope-side works opened Horia Ciucudean
with fire and water

Overview of Roșia
97 JPEG 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
Montană settlement

Monument of World War

I, ca. 1930; located next
to a Memorial Cross,
98 JPEG in front of one of the 2015 Iozefina Postăvaru same as photographer YES
buildings of the Mining
Company (housing for
workers, c.1910)

Cross "from Ghenoveva";

located in the Market,
nearby the Casino,
attached to the house
99 JPEG 2015 Iozefina Postăvaru same as photographer YES
no. 331 (19th century),
building that served as
a hospital, bank, cinema
and, since 1930, housing

Cross of Michael Gritta,

1837; marks the grave
of the rich miner and
100 JPEG donor of churches, today 2000 Ioan Andron same as photographer YES
overlaid by the street
with blocks dating from
the 1960s

Cross, 19th century;

101 JPEG located on the road to 2015 Iozefina Postăvaru same as photographer YES
Tăul Brazi

View on Corna churches

with Cârnic and Cetate
Peaks backgrounds, the
102 JPEG 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
mining exploitations
from the roman to
modern period

Overrview on Corna
103 JPEG Valley dwelling, among 2012 Ștefan Angelescu same as photographer YES
the Corna brook

View on the Tăul Ţarina

Tarina hamlet with
104 JPEG 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
dispersed households on
the hills

Single farmstead with a

105 JPEG agro-pastoral production 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
facility

Traditional mining
106 JPEG 1940s Silviu Bocaniciu same as photographer YES
landscape in early 1940s

Prehistoric surface
107 JPEG mining works along a 2010 Horia Ciugudean same as photographer YES
seam

108 JPEG Wax Tablet XI 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES

Votive altar dedicated

109 JPEG to Janus. 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES
Hop Găuri Area

Roman funerary
Documentation

110 JPEG monuments, 2003 MNIR Archives same as photographer YES

Drumuș Area

Funerary Monument,
111 JPEG Mining Museum, 2003 Lorin Niculae same as photographer YES
Roșia Montană

Reconstuction of the
112 JPEG Circular Funerary 2004 Virgil Apostol same as photographer YES
Monument at Hop Găuri
143
 Roman galleries in
113 JPEG 2013 Ivan Rous same as photographer YES
Cârnic Massif

Roman Mining Gallery in

114 JPEG 2007 Lorin Niculae same as photographer YES
Orlea Massif

Roman Gallery in Cârnic

115 JPEG Massif, 2013 Ivan Rous same as photographer YES
Roșia Montană

Roman works with

116 JPEG 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
evidence for fire-setting

Private stamping mills,

117 JPEG photograph from the 1900s Csíky Lajos same as photographer YES
1900s

Brazi Reservoir,
118 JPEG photograph from the 1900s Csíky Lajos same as photographer YES
1900s

Corna Reservoir,
119 JPEG photograph from the 1900s Csíky Lajos same as photographer YES
1900s

The entrance to the

Holly Cross Master
Gallery of the gold Corna
120 JPEG Reservoir, photograph 1900s Csíky Lajos same as photographer YES
from the 1900s
mines, photograph from
the 1900’s

The Square on a market

day. In the background
121 JPEG Ajtai Palace, demolished 1900s Csíky Lajos same as photographer YES
in the 1980s, photograph
from the 1900s

Văidoaia area, a typical

small-scale mining
neighborhood; each
122 JPEG house or group of 1900s Csíky Lajos same as photographer YES
houses had a stamping
mill, photograph from
the 1900s

Procesing Plant.
Stamping mills and
123 JPEG 1927 V. Zotinca same as photographer YES
electric power station
at Gura Roșiei, 1927

Private mine in Rosia

124 JPEG 1929 Arthur Oskar Bach same as photographer YES
Montana, 1929

Cetate Massif, before

and during the
explosions in 1974 that
destroyed the upper
125 JPEG 1974 Aurel Sîntimbrean same as photographer YES
level of the historic
mining works, as
capturedby geologist
Aurel Sîntimbrean

General View - Tăul Mare,

Cârnic Massif, Cetate
126 JPEG 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
Massif and the former
mining exploitation

Overview of Rosia
127 JPEG 2012 Ștefan Angelescu same as photographer YES
Montană valley

128 JPEG Las Medulas 2016 Barry Gamble same as photographer YES

129 JPEG Overview of Corna Valley 2012 Daniel Vrăbioiu same as photographer YES

Traditional wooden gate

130 JPEG 2012 Daniel Vrăbioiu same as photographer YES
in Rosia Montană

Cetate-Găuri Area.
131 JPEG 2013 Ivan Rous same as photographer YES
Roman works

Cetate-Găuri Area.
132 JPEG 2013 Ivan Rous same as photographer YES
Roman works

7
133 JPEG Tăul Cornei sluice gate 2010 ARA Association same as photographer YES
144
 Unitarian parish house 2008
134 JPEG before and after 2009 ARA Association same as photographer YES
restoration works 2010

135 JPEG Reformat parish house 2010 ARA Association same as photographer YES

Ruin of a traditional
136 JPEG 2010 ARA Association same as photographer YES
house

137 JPEG Overview of Rosia valley 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES

138 JPEG Gritta House 2010 ARA Association same as photographer YES

Greek–Catholic church
in Corna, currently
139 JPEG 08/ 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES
undergoing listing
procedure

140 JPEG Shingle maker 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES

141 JPEG Blacksmith 2012 Radu Sălcudean same as photographer YES

142 JPEG Landscape workshop 2011 ARA Association same as photographer YES

Văidoaia quarry and the

143 JPEG 2012 Daniel Vrăbioiu same as photographer YES
Roman Catholic church

ABBREVIATIONS:

BNR
Biblioteca Naţională a României
National Library of Romania
Documentation

INP
Institutul Naţional al Patrimoniului
National Institute of Heritage

MNIR
Muzeul Naţional de Istorie a României
145

National Museum of Romanian History

 7 Texts relating to protective designation, copies
of property management plans or documented

b management systems and extracts of other plans

relevant to the property

Romanian Legislation

Law no.378/2001 on the approval of Emergency Ordinance no. 43/2000 regarding the protec-
tion of archaeological heritage and the declaration of certain archaeological sites as areas of
national interest, published on the 18th of July 2000.

Law no. 5/2000 on the approval of the National Spatial Development Plan - Section III,
Protected Areas, published on the 6th of March 2000.

Law no. 182/2000 on the Protection of National Movable Cultural Heritage, published on the
27th of October 2000.

Law no. 350/2001 on Territorial and Urban Planning, published on the 6th of July 2001.

Law no.564/2001 on the approval of the Government Ordinance no. 47/2000 on establishing
certain protection measures for the historical monuments included in the World Heritage List,
published on the 1st of November 2001.

Law no. 311/2003 on Museums and Public Collections, published on the 8th of July 2003.

Law no. 12/2006 regarding changes and completions on Law no. 311/2003 on Museums and
Public Collections published on the 11th of January 2006.

Law no. 6/2008 on the legal regime of Technical and Industrial Heritage published on the 14th
of January 2008.

Law no. 85/2003 on Mining, published on the 18th of March 2003.

Emergency Ordinance no. 195/2005 on Environment Protection, published on the 30th of

December 2006.

Emergency Ordinance no. 34/2013 on the organization, administration and exploitation of

Permanent Meadows and on the change and completion of the Land Fund Law no. 18/1991,
published on the 23rd of April 2013.

Emergency Ordinance no. 57/2007 on the status of Protected Natural Areas, the conservation of
natural habitats and wild flora and fauna, published on the 29th of July 2007.

Law no. 213/1998 regarding Public Property Goods, published on the 17th of November 1998

The date of each law corresponds to its publishing in the Official Journal of Romania.

7
146
 Romanian Governmental
Policies and Guidance

Government Decision regarding the Heritage Theses, adopted on the 29th of November 2016.

Order of the Minister of Transportation, Construction and Tourism no. 562/2003 - Development
methodology and framework content for planning documents for protected built areas (PUZ)

Memorandum on the Development of integrated pilot programmes through European funds

and the national budget for improving the socio-economic situation of the inhabitants of the
former mining areas of Valea Jiului, Roșia Montana – Apuseni Mountains and of the mar-
ginalized communities in Moldova (Vaslui – Iași), adopted by the Romanian Government in
September 2016.

National Strategies

The Strategy for Culture and National Heritage 2016–2022

The National Sustainable Development Strategy 2013–2020–2030
The Sustainable Development Strategy of Alba County 2014–2020
The Strategic Concept of Spatial Development 2030
The National Strategy and Action plan for the Conservation
of Biodiversity 2014–2020

Local Authority Policies

Roșia Montana Sustainable Development Strategy

International Conventions
and Directives

The European Cultural Convention, ratified by Law no. 77/1991.

The Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, accept-
ed by the Decree 187/1990
The European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage, ratified by Law
no. 150/1997
The Convention regarding the protection of European Architectural Heritage -The Granada
Convention, ratified by Law no. 157/1997
The European Landscape Convention, ratified by Law no.451/2002
The Convention on Biological Diversity, ratified by Law no. 58/1994
The Habitat Directive
The Birds Directive

Other

The Population and Housing Census, 2011 - http://www.alba.insse.ro/cmsalba/rw/pages/rezul-

tate_rpl.ro.do
Documentation

Opinion survey regarding the inclusion of Rosia Montana in UNESCO World Heritage. Survey
done by SC CSOP SRL (KANTAR-TNS), coordinator - Diana Anghel, research manager.
November - December 2016.
147
7 Form and date of most recent records
or inventory of property

c National List of Historic Monuments – LMI

http://patrimoniu.gov.ro/ro/monumente-istorice/lista-monumentelor-istorice

National Archaeological Record – RAN

http://ran.cimec.ro/

Section no. III - Protected Areas of the Law no. 5/2000 for the approval of the
National Spatial Development Plan
http://www.cdep.ro/pls/legis/legis_pck.htp_act_text?idt=22636

7 Address where inventory, records

and archives are held

d INSTITUTUL NAŢIONAL AL PATRIMONIULUI

[NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF HERITAGE]

16, Ienăchiţă Văcărescu St.

Bucharest, Romania, 040157

7 Bibliography

e Archaeology:

Apostol, Virgil. “Funerary Architecture in Alburnus Maior (Roșia Montană): The Circular
Monument.” Dacia, N.S., tomes XLVIII-XLIX (2004-2005): 249-282.

Cauuet, Béatrice, et al. “Roșia Montană, com. Roșia Montană, jud. Alba [Alburnus Maior]
Punct: Cârnic.” Cronica Cercetărilor Arheologice - Campania 2003 (2004): 283-288.

Cauuet, Béatrice. “Équipements en bois dans les mines d’or protohistoriques et antiques
(Gaule et Dacie romaine).” Archéologie et paysage des mines anciennes. De la fouille au musée,
edited by M.-Ch. Bailly-Maître, C. Jourdain-Annequin, M. Clermont-Joly, 57-73. Paris: Editions
Picard, 2008.

Cauuet, Béatrice. “Gold and silver extraction in Alburnus Maior mines, Roman Dacia (Rosia
Montana, Romania). Dynamics of exploitation and management of the mining space.” Paisagens
Mineiras Antigas na Europa Ocidental. Investigação e Valorização Cultural, Atlas do Simpósio
Internacional, Boticas, 25-26-27 julho 2014, coordinated by Luís Fontes, 83-106. Boticas: 2014.

Ciobanu, Radu. “Kastellum Ansienses si templul lui Ianus din zona Găuri de la Roșia Montană 7
– probleme de epigrafie, arhitectură și simbolică spaţială.” [Kastellum Ansienses et le temple de
Janus de la zone Gauri de Rosia Montana: problèmes d’epigraphie, architecture et symbolique
148

spatiale] Apulum 47 (2010): 57-76

 Ciugudean, Horia, Wollman, Volker. “Noi cercetări privind mineritul antic în Transilvania
(I).” [New research regarding ancient mining in Transylvania (I)] Apulum 42 (2005): 95-116.

Ciugudean, Horia. “Ancient gold mining in Transylvania: the Roșia Montană – Bucium area.”
Caiete ARA 3 (2012): 219-232.

Damian, Paul, ed. Alburnus Maior I. Bucharest: Ed. Cimec, 2003.

Damian, Paul, ed. Alburnus Maior II. Bucharest: Ed. Cimec, 2004.

Damian, Paul, ed. Alburnus Maior III/1. Necropola romană de la Tăul Corna. [Alburnus Maior
III/1. The Roman Necropolis of Taul Corna] Cluj-Napoca: Ed. Cimec, 2008.

Damian, Paul, Borș, Corina. “Consideraţii privind managementul arheologic în contextul

proiectului minier Roșia Montană. Programul Naţional de Cercetare «Alburnus Maior» (2001-
2006).” [Considerations regarding the archaeological management in the context of the Roșia
Montană Mining Project. National Research Program «Alburnus Maior» (2001-2006)] Cercetări
arheologice XIV-XV (2007-2008): 481-555.

Hoffmann, Andreas. “Die römischen Wachstafeln von Roșia Montană – Einführung, Text und
Übersetzung, Kommentar.” [The Roman Wax-tablets of Roșia Montană - Introduction, text and
translation, commentary] Silber und Salz in Siebenbürgen (2002): 65-90.

Milea, Zaharia. “Sculpturi romane de la Alburnus Maior în Muzeul de istorie din Turda.”
[Roman Sculpures from Alburnus Maior in Turda History Museum] Apulum 9 (1971): 435-441.

Momsen, Theodor. Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, vol. XVII - Miliaria imperii Romani. 1863.

Mrozek, Stanislaw. “Aspects sociaux et administratifs des mines d'or romaines de Dacie.”
Apulum 7, no. 1 (1968): 307-326.

Russu, Ioan Iosif, ed. Inscriptiones Daciae Romanae. [Daco-Roman Inscriptions] Bucharest: Ed.
Romanian Academy: I, 1975, II, 1977, III/1, 1977, III/2, 1980, III/3, 1984, III/4, 1988.

Simion, Mihaela, Apostol, Virgil, Vleja, Decebal. Alburnus Maior II, Monumentul funerar
circular – The Circular Funeral Monument. Bucharest: Ed. Cimec, 2004.

Sîntimbrean, Aurel, Bedelean, Horea. Roșia Montană Alburnus Maior. Cetatea de scaun a
aurului românesc, [Rosia Montana Alburnus Maior. The Citadel of Romanian Gold] 2nd ed. Alba-
Iulia: Ed. ALTIP, 2004.

Sîntimbrean. Aurel, Wollman, Volker. “Aspecte tehnice ale exploatării aurului în perioada ro-
mană la Alburnus Maior (Roșia Montană).” [Technical aspects of the gold mining in the Roman
Alburnus Maior (Roșia Montană)] Apulum 12 (1974): 240-279.

Ţentea, Ovidiu. “Legion XIII Gemina and Alburnus Maior.” Apulum 40 (2003): 253-265.

Ţentea, Ovidiu. Bath and Bathing at Alburnus Maior – Băile Romane de la Alburnus Maior.
Documentation

Cluj-Napoca: Mega, 2015.

Wilson, Andrew, Mattingly, David, Dawson, Michael. Statement of Significance, Cârnic

Massif, Roșia Montană, jud. Alba, Romania. Oxford: University of Oxford, 2011.

Wilson, Andrew, Mattingly, David, Dawson, Michael. Response to D. Jennings, A Critical

Analysis of the Report: ‘Statement of Significance: Cârnic Massif, Roșia Montană, jud Alba Romania’
149

by A Wilson, D Mattingly and M Dawson. 2013.

Wollmann, Volker. Mineritul metalifer, extragerea sării și carierele de piatră în Dacia Romană –
Der Erzbergbau, die Salzgewinung und die Steinbrüche in Römischen Dakien. [Metal Mining, Salt
Extraction and Stone Quarries in Roman Dacia] Cluj-Napoca - Klausenburg: Muzeul Naţional
de Istorie a Transilvaniei, 1996.

Zerbini, Livio. “Le miniere d’oro della Dacia: appunti sulla loro cronologia.” [The Gold Mines
of Dacia: Notes on Their Chronology] Apulum 47 (2010): 241-247.

History, Sociology, Ethnography:

Balog, Iosif Marin. “Efectele socio-economice ale mineritului în «Patrulaterul Aurifer»

al Apusenilor în perioada 1850-1914.” [Socio-economic impacts of mining in the «Golden
Quadrilateral» of the Apuseni Mountains during 1850-1914] Anuarul Institutului de Cercetări
Socio-Umane «Gheorghe Șincai» al Academiei Române, no. LIII (2014): 147-165.

Balog, Iosif Marin. “Școală și societate în «Cadrilaterul Aurifer» al Apusenilor 1800-1914.”

[School and Society in the «Golden Quadrilateral» of the Apuseni Mountains 1800-1914]
Anuarul Institutului de Cercetări Socio-Umane «Gheorghe Șincai» al Academiei Române XVIII
(2015): 5-29.

Barbieri, M. coord., Arhitectură+Urbanism. Locuirea rurală tradiţională din judeţul Alba.

Relevare și promovare valori arhitecturale tradiţionale vernaculare din judeţul Alba. [Architecture+
Urbanism. Traditional Rural Housing in Alba County. Survey and vernacular architecture valori-
zation.] Alba Iulia: Consiliul Judeţean Alba, 2014.

David, Lucian, Peisajele etnografice din România. [Etnographical Landscapes of Romania]

București: Ed. Etnologică, 2015.

Dunăre, Nicolae. “Mijloace tradiţionale în agricultura Munţilor Apuseni în prima jumătate a

secolului XX.” [Traditional means in the agriculture of the Apuseni Mountains in the first half of
the 20th century] Apulum 11 (1973): 573-634.

Ghinoiu, Ion (coord), Atlasul Etnografic Român. (The Ethnographic Atlas of Romania), vol I –
Ocupations. Bucharest: The Publishing House of the Romanian Academy, 2003.

Ghinoiu, Ion (coord), Atlasul Etnografic Român. (The Ethnographic Atlas of Romania), vol II –
Habitat. Bucharest: The Publishing House of the Romanian Academy, 2005.

Popoiu, Paula, ed. Roșia Montană: Studiu etnologic. [Roșia Montană: Ethnological Study]
Bucharest: DAIM, 2004.

Ţuţuianu, Adriana. “Contribuţii la o clasificare etnografică a așezărilor din Munţii Apuseni.”

[Contributions concerning an ethnographical classification of the settlements from Apuseni
Mountains] Apulum 38, no. 2 (2001): 41-53.
Veres, Mădălina-Valeria. “Putting Transylvania on the Map: Cartography and Enlightened
Absolutism in the Habsburg Monarchy.“ Austrian History Yearbook 43 (2012): 141–164.

Sîntimbrean, Aurel. Muzeul Mineritului din Roșia Montană, [Rosia Montana Mining Museum]
Bucharest: Sport-Turism, 1989.

Sîntimbrean, Aurel. “Învăţământul minier la Roșia Montană, judeţul Alba.” [Mining Education
in Rosia Montana, Alba County] Apulum 38, no. 2 (2001): 147-154.
7
150
 Architecture:

Apostol, Virgil, Bâlici, Ștefan, eds. Roșia Montană. Documente de arhitectură. I. [Roșia
Montana. Architectural documents. I.] Bucharest: Ed. ARA, 2010.

Apostol, Virgil, Bâlici, Ștefan, eds. Roșia Montană. Documente de arhitectură. II. [Roșia
Montana. Architectural documents. II.] Bucharest: Ed. ARA, 2012.

Niedermaier, Paul. “Zur Entstehung von Goldbach (Roșia Montană).” [On the origin of
Goldbach (Roșia Montană)] Silber und Salz in Siebenbürgen (2002): 163-166.

Pop, Virgil. “Die städtebauliche Struktur von Roșia Montană.” [The Urban Structure of Roșia
Montană] Silber und Salz in Siebenbürgen (2002): 167-179.

Stroe, A., Stroe, A,, Andron, I.G., Postăvaru, I. “Roșia Montană. Inventarierea patrimoniului
construit.” [Roșia Montana. Built Heritage Inventory] Buletinul Comisiei Monumentelor Istorice
XX, 1-2 (2009): 66-112.

Wollmann, Volker. Patrimoniu preindustrial și industrial în România. [Preindustrial and indus-

trial heritage in Romania], vol. I-II. Sibiu/Hermannstadt: Honterus, 2010-2011.

Natural and Cultural heritage:

Akeroyd, John R., Jones, Andrew. Rosia Montana: a case for protection rather than destruction.
http://www.rosiamontana.org/sites/default/files/Anex1__Akeryod_Jones_biodiv_Ro.pdf

Akeroyd, John R. “The Botanical and Anthropogenic Landscape of Roșia Montană (Apuseni
Mountains, Romania)” In Roșia Montană in Universal History, edited by P. Cocean, 101-113. Cluj-
Napoca: Cluj University Press, 2012.

Bâlici, Ștefan. “Roșia Montană. An overview on the question of cultural heritage” Caiete ARA 4
(2013): 205-228.

Cocean, Pompei, ed. Roșia Montană in Universal History. Cluj-Napoca: Cluj University
Press, 2012.

Scazzosi, L. Politiche e culture del paesaggio. Esperienze internazionali a confronto. [Landscape

policies and cultures. New comparison] Roma: Gangemi, 1999.

Monographs:

Roman, Bazil, Sîntimbrean, Aurel, Wollmann, Volker. Aurarii din Munţii Apuseni. Studiu
istorico-tehnic și album. [The Goldminers of the Apuseni Mountains. Historical-technical study
and album] Bucharest: Editura Sport-Turism, 1982.

Slotta, Rainer, Wollmann, Volker, Dordea, Ion, eds. Silber und Salz in Siebenbürgen, Katalog
zur Ausstellung im Deutschen Bergbau-Museum Bochum „Das Gold der Karpaten – Bergbau in
Roșia Montană“ vom 27. Oktober 2002 bis zum 05. August 2003. [Silver and Salt in
Documentation

Siebenbürgen. Catalog of the Exhibition in the German Mining Museum Bochum "The Gold of
the Carpathians - Mining in Rosia Montana" from 27 October 2002 to 5 August 2003] Bochum:
Deutsches Bergbau-Museum, 2001-2002.
151
Official reports and documents:

Romanian Academy, Position Statement of Romanian Academy regarding Roșia Montană

mining project. Accessed December 05, 2016. http://www.acad.ro/forumuri/pag_forum_
RosiaMontana.htm.

Administraţia Prezidenţială. Raportul Comisiei Prezidenţiale pentru Patrimoniul Construit,

Siturile Istorice și Naturale [Romania’s Presidency, Report of the Presidential Commission for the
Built Heritage and the Historic and Natural Sites; in Romanian]. Bucharest: Editura Institutului
Cultural Român, 2010.

Other

Szabo, Jozsef. O evaluare a studiului de impact asupra mediului pentru proiectul Rosia Montana
cu accent pe aspectele de biodiversitate [An evaluation on the environmental impact study of the
Roșia Montană project with emphasis on biodiversity aspects] 2006. http://www.rosiamontana.
org/sites/default/files/Studiu_Principal_Joszef_Szabo_ro.pdf

Plan Urbanistic Zonal – Zona istorică centrală Roșia Montană [Zonal Urban Plan – Central
Historical Area of Roșia Montană] 2006, S.C. OPUS. S.R.L.

7
152
 8. Contact Information
of responsible authorities

National Institute of Heritage tel. +40-21-336.60.73

16, Ienăchiţă Văcărescu fax +40-21-336.99.04
Bucharest, Romania, 040157 secretariat@patrimoniu.gov.ro

8.a Preparer 8.b Official Local Institution/ Agency

Name: Alba County Council

Irina IAMANDESCU 1, Piaţa Ion I.C. Brătianu,
Title: Alba Iulia
Dr. tel. +40-258-813.380
Address: fax +40-258-813.325
16, Ienăchiţă Văcărescu St. cjalba@cjalba.ro
City, Province/
State, Country: National Institute of Heritage
Bucharest, Romania, 040157 16, Ienăchiţă Văcărescu,
Tel: Bucharest, Romania, 040157
+40-21-336.60.73 tel. +40-21-336.60.73
Fax: fax +40-21-336.99.04
+40-21-336.99.04 secretariat@patrimoniu.gov.ro
e-mail:
irina.iamandescu@patrimoniu.gov.ro

8.c Other Local Institutions

Roșia Montană Gold Mining Museum Roșia Montană Local Council / Consiliul
178 Principală, Roșia Montană Local Roșia Montană
Roșia Montană Mayor’s Office / Primăria
Cîmpeni National Information Roșia Montană
and Tourist Promotion Centre Str. Principală 184, 517615, Roșia Montană,
Gării St, f.n., Cîmpeni, Romania judeţul Alba
+40-258-771.215 +40 258 783 101
primaria_cimpeni@yahoo.com www.primariarosiamontana.ro

Alba County Office of the Ministry of National Union Museum, Alba Iulia
Culture / Direcţia Judeţeană pentru 12-14 Mihai Viteazul,
Cultură Alba Alba Iulia, 510010
20, Regina Maria, Alba Iulia, ju- tel. +40-258-813.300
deţul Alba contact@mnuai.ro
+40 258 819 212
www.alba.djc.ro
8.d Official Web adress

http://www.rosiamontana.world
Contact name:
Irina IAMANDESCU
E-mail:
153

irina.iamandescu@patrimoniu.gov.ro
9. Signature on behalf
of the State Party

Hon. Ms. Corina Șuteu,

Minister of Culture
154
 10. Acknowledgements

Collective Coordinators
elaboration:
Barry Gamble
independent expert
for World Heritage

Irina Iamandescu
director al Direcţiei Patrimoniu Imobil
Institutul Naţional al Patrimoniului

Elaboration: National Institute of Heritage

Mihaela Hărmănescu
Raluca Iosipescu
Iozefina Postăvaru
Alexandra Stoica
Eduard Hazu
Irina Leca
Răzvan Lie
Alexandru Gagiu

National Museum of Romanian History

Paul Damian,
Deputy Director, Coordinator of the Alburnus
Maior National Research Programme
Mihaela Simion
Corina Borș

Consulting: Horia Ciugudean

155
© Johannes Kruse
  
National Institute  
of Heritage 
 
 
 
 
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape 
Protection and Management Plan (RMMP) 
 
Second version,  
February 2018 
 

 
 
  
National Institute  
of Heritage 
 
 
 
 
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape 
Protection and Management Plan (RMMP) 
 
Second version,  
February 2018 
 
 
 
 
 
Coordination: 
Irina Iamandescu, architect, PhD (INP) 
Barry Gamble, geologist, World Heritage Consultant, UK 
Irina Popescu‐Criveanu, architect and urban planner 
 
Contributors: 
Ioana Tudora, architect and landscape planner, PhD 
Iozefina Postăvaru, art historian 
Raluca Iosipescu, archaeologist, PhD 
Mihaela Hărmănescu, architect, PhD 
Irina Leca, art historian 
 
Data base and graphics: 
Mihai Manolescu, architect 
 
  
 
 

 
View on Roșia Valley (Ștefan Angelescu) 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Introduction  7 
Two Millennia of Gold Exploitation  7 
Outstanding Universal Value  11 
Proposed Statement of Outstanding Universal Value  11 
Statement of Integrity  13 
Statement of Authenticity  13 
Requirements for Protection and Management  13 
Consistent Management of a Proposed World Heritage Site  14 
 
Protection and Management Plan  15 
Function and Legal Status  15 
Strategic Frame  16 
Vision and Mission  16 
General Objectives  16 
Specific Objectives  17 
Protection and Management Directions  20 
Operational Priorities  21 
Summary  22 
 
Description of the property  25 
Property identification   25 
Brief description  29 
Nominated Components (OUV and associated values)   29 
Natural Heritage and Landscape   36 
Site’s Setting Vicinities  42 
Summary  46 
 
Conservation Status  49 
Risk Assessment  49 
Development Model  59 
Specific Issues and Operational Measures  61 
Positive and Negative Factors affecting OUV  68 
 
Protection and Management Status  72 
Property and Land Use  72 
Development Limitations    76 
Legal Regulation for Conservation and Preservation   77 
Protection of natural and cultural Hheritage  77 
Protected areas and urban regulation system  79 
Stakeholders   80 
Site Administration Legal frame  81 
 
Opportunities and Threats   83 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Issues and Strategic Policies  86 
Conservation and Management Principles   86 
Authenticity, a condition of OUV  86 
Integrity, a condition of OUV  86 
Protection and management, a requirement of OUV  86 
Accessibility  87 
Sustainability  87 
Overall view on corresponding policies  87 
Specific View on Roșia Montană Mining Landscape Strategic Frame  89 
 
Implementation of the Management Plan   91 
Initiating the Protection and Management System  92 
Involving other central public administration and decentralised public services  92 
Creating the governance structure  93 
Information and public consultation  93 
Approval process  94 
Sharing the Responsibilities  94 
Governance – Summary  102 
 
Monitoring and Evaluation  104 
Legal Provisions  104 
Monitoring Status  105 
Inventory and Site Diagnosis  106 
Evaluation of Results  108 
 
Interpretation and Presentation Brief   111 
Aims and Theme  111 
Overview of Existing On‐site Interpretation  112 
Resources and Audience  116 
Image Design Standards  117 
Recommendations  118 
 
Action Plan  120 
Action Plan – Summary  120 
Protection and Management Directions / Operational programs  123 
 
Appendices   125 
Appendix 1.  ICOMOS Resolution 18GA 2014/26 – Rescue of the Roșia Montană mining landscape [...]  125 
Appendix 2.   Site’s Description ‐ Roșia Montană Built heritage features (3.1) brief presentation  127 
Appendix 3.   Territory development: relevant archaeological and historical information  131 
Appendix 4.  Additional information (plates 1‐6)  141 
 
Acronyms List   153 
   
  

     
 
Artefact recovered from Carpeni Hill: 
Trajan coin minted in Caria Province, Asia Minor (MNIR Archive, Romania) 
 
 
 7 

Introduction 
Two millennia of Gold Exploitation1 
 
Ancient Alburnus Maior, medieval Rubeo Flumine, Verespatak, Goldbach, Rotbach, Roșia de Munte and 
Roșia Montană: they are all the same place. Here an evolution almost exclusively determined by people’s 
quest  to  exploit  gold  spans  more  than  two  millennia;  perhaps  even  twice  that.  What  is  certain  is  that 
today  we  find  a  socio‐technical  palimpsest  created  by  successive  empires  and  cultures  that  has 
unparalleled  time‐depth,  above  and  below  ground.  The  landscape  displays  significant  natural  assets  – 
some that determined the path of cultural interaction, and some that developed as a direct result of it. 
These attributes combine with cultural richness to produce a type of countryside that not only conveys 
authentic  Romanian  rural  culture,  but  which  also  represents  a  traditional  scene  that  has  disappeared 
across much of Europe. This landscape, and the processes that shaped and sustain it, is not just property 
with  an  inventory.  It  gives  us  a  point  of  entry  into  a  common  emotional  ground  of  memory  and 
belonging. It is a precious asset that needs to be fully understood in order to value it, and then one might 
hope to share in the knowledge of those that truly care for it. 
The earliest elements of the site, however, date back to the Bronze Age, and a number of exceptional gold 
artefacts dating to this period have been found in the region. Small‐scale placer gold recovery is believed to 
have started in this period. Placer refers to alluvial, from rivers, the word derived from Catalan and Spanish 
meaning  a  shoal  or  sand  bar,  and  which  entered  international  mining  vocabulary  in  the  1848  Californian 
Gold Rush. It is also likely that shallow hard‐rock surface mining (trenches along the surface exposures of 
gold  veins)  also  took  place.  In  513  BCE  Herodotus  wrote  of  the  Persian  king  Darius  who  started  a  war 
against the Agathyrsi – a branch of the Scythians living on the banks of the Maris (Mures River) in order to 
seize  their  gold.  Herodotus  remarks  that:  ‘they  were  highly  delighted  with  large  amounts  of  gold.’  The 
Mures River delimits the Golden Quadrilateral in the south. 
There was major gold mining and socio‐economic activity in Roșia Montană during the Roman period (2nd 
century CE). The first underground mines in the property date immediately following the Roman conquest 
of Dacia in 106 CE. Dacians were known to the Romans as great metalworkers. In pre‐Roman Dacia, where 
gold mines were very probably the property of Dacian kings, their direct passing into the property of the 
Roman  state  took  place  immediately  after  Dacia’s  conquest,  as  early  as  the  reign  of  Emperor  Trajan  (as 
seemingly  proved  by  the  inscription  laid  by  Hermias,  libertus  of  the  emperor,  procurator  aurariarum).  By 
August 106 CE the war was over and Dacia was set up as a Roman province. 
Ancient  sources  report  that  the  Romans  found  the  equivalent  of  over  165  tonnes  of  gold  in  the  Dacian 
thesaurus. Kriton (private doctor to Emperor Trajan) wrote about huge amounts of Dacian gold transported 
to Rome by their conquerors. Emperor Trajan celebrated his victory by announcing over 100 days of games 
and, with a boosted treasury from the spoils of Dacia,  built his Forum and Column in Rome. The price of 
gold in the Empire sank during the following years. After occupation the Romans improved the organisation 
of gold mining and processing methods, extracting an estimated 500 tonnes of gold during their 166‐year 
rule. Aurariae Dacicae, together with the metalla Illyrici presented the richest source of metals in the entire 
Empire during 100 CE – 400 CE.  
Roșia  Montană  became  the  most  important  precious  metals  mining  in  the  new  Roman  province.  Its  first 
attestation,  on  a  wooden  wax‐coated  writing  tablet  discovered  in  one  of  the  mining  galleries  is  dated 
February 6th, 131 CE. It also records the Roman name of the place: Alburnus Maior. 
Roșia  Montană  is  un‐paralleled  as  a  Roman mining  in  terms of  its documented  epigraphy, an exceptional 
contribution to the authenticity of our understanding of the place. The wax‐coated wooden writing tablets 
are first‐rate sources of legal, socio‐economic, demographic and linguistic information ‐ not only regarding 
Alburnus  Maior,  but  the  entire  Dacian  province  and,  implicitly,  the  Roman  Empire.  The  tablets  reveal 
explicit details of mining organisation, sale and purchase contracts, receipts of loans with interest, and the 
sale of slaves. The evidence attests not only Illyrians, but also Greek and Latin migrants hired to work in the 
mines and organised in associations (e.g. collegia aurariorum, societas danistaria). 
The writing tablets are also correlated with an unparalleled number of stone epigraphic monuments, votive 
and  funerary.  Most  epigraphs  seem  to  derive  from  the  settlement  on  “Carpeni”  and  the  cemetery  at 
“Ţarina”.  They  were  made  of  the  Orlea  gritstone.  Many  sculptural  monuments  of  medallions  and  reliefs 
bear decorative and symbolic elements that evidence the intensive colonisation of mining technicians and 
specialists from Dalmatia. A number of the epigraphs have been preserved at the mining museum in Roșia 
Montană, whilst others are in the care of museum collections in Cluj‐Napoca, Turda, Alba Iulia, Deva and 
Bucharest. 

1
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape, Nomination for Inclusion in the World Heritage List, Nomination Document, December, 2016. 
 8 

The  pre‐eminent  underground  Roman  mining  network  that  survives  at  Roșia  Montană  possesses 
outstanding  technical  attributes  that  provide  exceptional  testimony  to  the  diffusion  and  further 
development of precious metals mining technology during the expansion of the Roman Empire in the 2nd 
and 3rd centuries CE. Archaeological investigation has revealed important aspects that contribute to the 
global  history  of  mining.  Such  extensive  perfectly  carved  trapezoidal‐section  galleries,  helicoidal  shafts 
and inclined communication galleries with stairways cut into  the bedrock, and vertical extraction  areas 
(stopes)  superimposed  above  one  another  with  the  roof  carved  out  in  steps,  are  unknown  elsewhere 
from  such  an  early  era  and,  further,  are  not  described  in  known  literature.  Features  such  as  multiple 
chambers  for  treadmill‐powered  water‐dipper  wheels  (and  the  wooden  remains  of  such  equipment), 
whilst recorded but mostly destroyed elsewhere in the Roman world by subsequent modern mining, are 
preserved  at  Roșia  Montană.  These  are  of  exceptional  value  due  to  their  rarity,  extent  and  state  of 
conservation. 
After abandoning the rich gold and silver mines in Roman Dacia, the focus of Roman exploitation of ore was 
transferred  to  the  provinces  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Danube,  to  Moesia  Prima  and  Dacia  Ripensis  and 
farther  into  the  hinterland  of  the  Balkan  Peninsula,  in  Dacia  Mediterranea  and  Dardania.  In  271  CE  most 
Roman troops abandon Dacia after fighting off barbarian Goths. It is assumed that there was little activity 
between the 3rd and 13th centuries in terms of gold exploitation in Roșia Montană, a period substantially 
with no written evidence. After the Romans left, society was organised into village communities and unions 
of  village  communities  which,  in  time,  united  into  larger  political‐administrative  formations  named 
knezdoms, dukedoms and lands, constituting the core of the future Principality of Transylvania. 
Gold mining is next attested in the 1230s and  continued to grow through the  Medieval and into Modern 
Times. Although there is much archaeological work needed to investigate this period, there are a number of 
historical  references  that  serve  to  highlight  this  activity.  Following  the  Hungarian  conquest  of  Romanian 
principalities  and  dukedoms,  gold  mining  expanded  as  German  miners  (hospites)  were  colonised  in  the 
area. Under Bela IV (1206–1270), King of Hungary and Croatia (1235–1270), administrative structures had 
their own Romanian organisation, settlements usually conferred with the name of a respective river ‐ as the 
majority of the Romanian population lived along river valleys. The date 1238 is significant as, at Cricău and 
Ighiu,  German  miners  received  the  right  to  extract  gold  from  “Chernech”  ‐  which  is  identified  with  the 
Cârnic  massif  in  Roșia  Montană.  After  Bela,  in  1271,  King  Stephen  donated  the  gold  producing  “land  of 
Abrud  and  Zlatna”  to  the  Alba  Iulia  diocese.  In  1327–28,  under  King  Carol  Robert,  the  mining  law  was 
changed: previously, when a gold or silver mine was discovered on private property, the king took the land 
into his possession, giving the owner other estates in exchange, and taking 1/8 of gold and 1/10 of silver. 
The new rules meant owners could keep land with precious metals, keeping 1/3 themselves and giving the 
king 2/3 of the exploitation. Mining developed intensely and Chernech mine was again mentioned, this time 
in  1347.  At  the  beginning  of  16th  century,  gold  mines  belonged  to  local  patricians,  and  in  1579  some 
townspeople from Abrud are recorded as owning stamps and washing machines in Corna and Roșia valleys. 
In  1618,  under  Gabriel  Bethlen’s  reign,  an  exemption  from  military  service  was  introduced  for  miners, 
together with special aids for disabled miners, and freedom of circulation. In 1642, documents mention the 
so‐called “Citadel” – the Roman gold mine of Roșia Montană, together with hayfields and stamps. In 1676 
there were 77 stamps recorded in the property. In 1690, the Habsburgs gained possession of Transylvania 
through the Hungarian crown. 
In the 18th century Transylvania was under Habsburg rule and became part of the Habsburg Empire. During 
the reign of Empress Maria Theresa (1740–1780) and Joseph II (1780–1790), a revival of mining took place 
in Roșia Montană under a well‐organised framework related to the creation and development of the Mining 
Treasury  by  the  Habsburg  Empire.  During  this  fresh  impetus  the  underground  network  was  greatly 
extended  using  gunpowder  blasting  and  assisted  by  the  introduction  of  ore‐transport  in  wagons  on  rails. 
Ore processing, by numerous waterwheel‐powered stamping mills located in the main valleys (119 in 1757, 
226  in  1772),  was  organised  and  sustained  by  the  creation  and  possibly  by  the  reuse  of  a  series  of  large 
header  ponds  (HU:  tó,  RO: tău  from  DE: Teich). The  creation  of  ponds,  the setting  up  of  new  mines  with 
waged labour, together with private capital participation, characterises this period. In 1746 the first private 
mine in Roșia Montană was Sfânta Treime (Vercheșul de Jos ‐ Razna).  
From 1760‐62 the commune was called Verespatak and Maria Theresa, like her predecessors, administered 
Transylvania  as  a  separate  province  (she  proclaimed  it  a  principality  in  1765).  In  1773,  Empress  Maria 
Theresa signed the statute of mining in Abrud, and made a donation to the Roșia Montană Catholic church. 
This  included  the  cherished  icon  of  Virgin  Mary  with  a  necklace  of  black  pearls.  Maria  Theresa  also 
modernised the large header pond of Tăul Mare, from which there are detailed records, including the use of 
an  innovative  water  outlet  control  mechanism.  In  1781–82  the  community  lodged  a  complaint  against 
compulsory labour hours “by hand and by cart” for the arrangement of such a “storage lake”. In the uprising 
that  ensued  –  the  Revolt  of  Horea,  Cloșca  and  Crișan,  of  1784  –  citizens  of  Roșia  Montană  set  fire  to 
Hungarian houses, the Catholic church and a few mine entries.  
 9 

Soon,  mining  specialists  from  Austria  and  upper  Hungary  were  colonised  in  the  area,  a  move  that 
significantly changed the ethnic composition of the community and brought Western culture in the form of 
Central European houses, together with elements of Baroque and Neo‐classical decorative art.  
Roșia Montană citizens took part in the Revolution of 1848–49 and George Gritta and priest Simion Balint 
became local heroes. After 1854 Roșia Montană acquired a dual name: Verespatak‐Roșia, aligned with both 
Hungary and  Romania. It separated from Abrud in 1857, and received an official statute in 1860. In 1867 
Transylvania falls under the direct rule of Hungary.  
The  underground  heritage  of  the  18th  to  19th  centuries  is  prolific  and  significant  as  one  of  the  larger 
mining complexes of the Habsburg Empire. It retains rare features such as wooden trackways or railways, 
the humid conditions in the mine having preserved, like their Roman wooden predecessors, substantial 
archaeology  that  rarely survives  elsewhere. A  characteristic  of this  new  era was  the  use  of  gunpowder 
explosives in driving galleries much faster than ever before, allowing a more extensive penetration of the 
massifs.  These  workings  have  been  archaeologically  investigated  in  the  Cârnic  massif,  only.  The  hydro‐
technical system is impressive, and more extensive than presently visible; originally it counted over 100 
header  ponds  and  each  will  have  had  extensive  leats  (watercourses)  of  which  some  are  visible  in  the 
landscape, and some not. Less visible, too, is evidence of the large number of small waterwheel‐powered 
stamping mills that were operated by numerous families in the valleys. Traditional, pre‐industrial mining 
was  brought  to  an  end  by  the  communist  nationalisation  in  1948,  all  private  stamping  mills  being 
abolished and destroyed. But their archaeology will still be there, and is worthy of detailed study. 
After the Great Union of 1918, Roșia Montană was called Roșia de Munte. During World War I, most mining 
activity  ceased.  In  1930  California  stamps  were  introduced  for  more  efficient  crushing  of  gold  ore.  Share 
holding companies held mining activity, in concession. The 1940s precipitated a decline, and emigration of 
miners and their families to other Romanian mining fields, such as Valea Jiului, became commonplace. 
After World War II, a communist‐dominated government was installed under the sphere of Soviet influence. 
The 1948 nationalisation of the private exploitation of gold ore made the use of stamps forbidden and many 
private  mines  were  closed.  Traditional,  pre‐industrial  mining  was  replaced  by  large‐scale,  underground 
industrial‐scale  mining  and,  subsequently,  by  opencast  mining.  The  mining  community  suffered 
intimidation,  brutal  treatment  and  reprisals  by  repressive  authorities  in  attempting  to  coerce  family 
members to reveal the places where they “had hidden the gold for hard times”. There was a rapid decline in 
prosperity,  a  general  persecution  of  former  mine  owners,  of  stamps,  stores  and  taverns,and  a  steady 
exodus  from  the  place.  In  1956  the  population  of  Roșia  Montană  had  fallen  to  2,371,  with  341  in  Corna. 
Properties  changed  ownership  at  an  unprecedented  rate  and  underwent  rapid  physical  degradation  and 
decay. The spectacular Roman mining remains that survived in the Cetate Massif ‐ the “Big Citadel” and the 
‘Small Citadel’ – were taken off the jurisdiction of the Monuments of Nature 2 February, 1970, to allow for 
large‐scale opencast mining.  
Communist era mining has left an indelible legacy in the landscape, but its less durable components have 
already substantially disappeared. Of course this period also forms an important  part of the property’s 
story, an era that represents the third and final phase of large‐scale gold exploitation.  
During  the  1990s  the  state  mine  continued  its  open‐cast  exploitation  of  Mt  Cetate  (and  in  its  final  years 
even of Mt Cârnic), to be closed in 2006, on the eve of Romania’s accession to the European Union, as a 
non‐profitable, state subsidized enterprise. From the late 1990s a new proposal emerged, from a potential 
private investor, for resuming open‐cast mining and expanding it to the entire site. From the early 2000s, 
this  turned  into  a  project  that  has  taken  several  administrative  steps  in  view  of  receiving  approval,  but 
never succeeded. At the same time, a strong public opinion emerged, in favour of preserving the cultural 
heritage  of  the  site,  which  would  have  been  endangered  by  the  implementation  of  the  mining  project, 
considering  at  least  the  superposing  of  planned  mining  elements  with  specific,  listed  cultural  heritage 
features.  The  mining  company  has  acquired  properties  within  the  footprint  of  the  mining  project,  and 
became one of the major landowners in the area. It has also benefitted from a mining‐only zoning plan.  
In  2016,  the  zoning  plan  of  the  municipality  was  annulled  in  court,  closing  the  circle  and  bringing  the 
community  to  the  situation  of  no‐  mining  plans.  During  this  interval,  the  active  citizens  of  the  area  and 
supporting NGO’s mounted a strong case for the preservation of the site, on ownership, environmental and 
cultural rights.  
Within  the  ensuing  civic  movement,  the  desire  of  promoting  the  site  for  the  World  Heritage  emerged.  
The  same  period  saw  the  first  systematic  archaeological  research  campaign,  developed  within  the 
framework of the proposed mining project. Database and GIS location systems were adopted from 2001, 
within the specially established Alburnus Maior National Research Programme,under the coordination of 
the National Museum of Romanian History, Bucharest. This led to a great advance in knowledge of the 
site,  which  brought  further  detail  and  precision  to  the  overall  assessment,  indicating  a  most  valuable 
cultural and natural heritage place. 
 10 

 
Cetate Massif, before and during the explosions in 1974 
that destroyed the upper level of the historic mining works, 
as captured by geologist Aurel Sîntimbrean 
 11 

Outstanding Universal Value 
 
Romania, represented by the Ministry of  Culture and  National Identity, assumed the following protection 
and  management  focal  points  for  the  Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  nominated  property,  in 
correspondence with the Proposed Statement of Outstanding Universal Value. 

Proposed Statement of Outstanding Universal Value 
In order to fulfil the ICOMOS suggestions included in the “Interim report and additional information report” 
(GB/AS/1552/IR, 22 December 2017), Romania is submitting a reviewed Proposed Statement of Outstanding 
Universal Value (2018), concentrating on attributes that date from the Roman era, as follows2: 
Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  contains  the  most  significant,  extensive  and  technically  diverse 
underground Roman gold mining complex currently known in the world.  
Roșia  Montană  is  situated  in  a  natural  amphitheatre  of  massifs  and  radiating  valleys  in  the  Metalliferous 
range  of  the  Apuseni  Mountains,  located  in  the  historical  region  of  Transylvania  in  the  central  part  of 
present‐day Romania. The site represents the centre of the so‐called Golden Quadrilateral of the Southern 
Carpathians  –  the  richest  precious  metals  province  in  Europe.  Gold  occurred  in  veins  within  seven  small 
mountains  that  visually  dominate  the  landscape  of  Roșia  Montană,  itself  surrounded  on  three  sides  by 
dividing ridges and peaks.  
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is testimony to the Roman Imperial era of gold exploitation in the Golden 
Quadrilateral  of  the  Romanian  Carpathians.  It  is  an  exemplar  that  illustrates  the  strategic  control  and 
vigorous  development  of  precious  metals’  mining  by  the  Roman  Empire,  essential  for  its  longevity  and 
military power. Following the decline of mining in Hispania (Iberian Peninsula, modern Spain and Portugal), 
Aurariae Dacicae (Roman Dacia, CE106 to CE 271) was the only significant new source of gold and silver for 
the Roman Empire, among the likely key motivations for Trajan’s conquest. 
Roman exploitation for gold occurred throughout the property, and dates from the Roman occupation of 
Dacia (106–271 CE). Archaeology at surface is prolific and pervasive, comprising ore‐processing areas, living 
quarters,  administrative  buildings,  sacred  areas  and  necropolises,  some  with  funerary  buildings  with 
complex architecture, all set in relation to over 7 km of ancient underground workings discovered to date. 
Forest  and  scree  mix  on  steep  slopes  of  the  metalliferous  mountains  and,  mounted  on  rocky  knolls,  the 
towers and spires of historic, but later, churches now command the villages of Roșia Montană and the much 
smaller Corna, settlements which overprint earlier Roman settlement, constrained by relief in valleys which 
also provided  for ore‐dressing, communication and transport. Steeply sloping meadows are characterised 
by  agro‐pastoral  practices  that  are  as  old  as  the  mining  activity  itself,  and  a  number  of  artificial  lakes, 
formerly  header  ponds  for  ore  processing  that  were  greatly  expanded  from  1733,  punctuate  higher 
elevations; a system for which Roman origin is very likely. 
→   Criterion  (ii):  to  exhibit  an  important  interchange  of  human  values,  over  a  span  of  time  or  within  a 
cultural  area  of  the  world,  on  developments  in  architecture  or  technology,  monumental  arts,  town‐
planning or landscape design 
Roșia  Montană  is  the  world’s  pre‐eminent  example  of  an  underground  Roman  gold  mine,  the  site 
illustrating  a  fusion  of  imported  Roman  mining  technology  with  locally  developed  techniques  and, 
further, testimony to the development and diffusion of precious metals mining technology during the 
expansion  of  the  Roman  Empire  in  the  2nd  and  3rd  centuries  CE,  important  in  the  global  history  of 
mining.  Many  of  the  mining  features  preserved  in  over  7km  of  Roman  workings  demonstrate 
innovative  techniques  developed  by  skilled  migrant  Illyrian‐Dalmatian  miners  to  exploit  gold  in  such 
ways  that  suited  the  technical  nature  of  the  deposit.  Control  of  precious  metal  resources,  to  use  as 
currency,  was  a  fundamental  factor  in  the  development  of  Roman  military  power  and  Imperial 
expansion.  When  in  possession  of  the  Apuseni  Mountains  there  was  an  imperative  to  immediately 
commence  mining  in  an  efficient  manner  –  and  the  technical  diversity  of  surviving  underground 
workings reveal, in totality, the range of site‐specific techniques that were successfully developed here. 
The site illustrates a fusion of imported Roman mining technology with locally developed techniques; 
unknown elsewhere from such an early era. Multiple chambers that housed treadmill‐operated water‐
dipping wheels for drainage represent a Roman technique routed from Hispania to the Balkans, whilst 
perfectly  carved  trapezoidal‐section  galleries,  helicoidal  shafts,  inclined  communication  galleries  with 
stairways cut into the bedrock, and vertical extraction areas (stopes) superimposed above one another 
with  the  roof  carved  out  in  steps,  are  in  a  combination  so  specific  to  Roșia  Montană  that  they  likely 
represent pioneering aspects in the technical history of mining. 
 

2
   The first Proposed Statement of Outstanding Universal Value was included in the December 2016 Nomination document. 
 12 

 
 
→   Criterion (iii): to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization 
which is living or which has disappeared 
Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  embodies  the  cultural  tradition  of  one  of  the  oldest  documented 
mining communities in Europe, anciently founded by the Romans in the most important precious metal 
mine located in the Golden Quadrilateral of the Romanian Carpathians. Detailed physical testimony is 
provided  by:  the  underground  mining  works,  chronologically  differentiated  by  distinctive  technical 
features;  the  socio‐technical  surface  mining  landscape  consisting  of  ore‐processing  areas,  habitation 
areas, sacred areas and necropolises.  
Interpretation of the site history was enriched by the wax‐coated wooden writing tablets discovered in 
the mine during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. They have been correlated with prolific stone 
epigraphic monuments discovered on site and, together, they provide an authentic picture of daily life 
and  cultural  practice  in  this  ancient  frontier  mining  camp  community.  Combined  with  outcomes  of 
recent, intensive and systematic archaeological investigation, a compelling picture of the organisation, 
strategies and practices of ancient mining at the site have emerged. 

→   Criterion  (iv):  to  be  an  outstanding  example  of  a  type  of  building,  architectural  or  technological 
ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history 
Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  is  testimony  to  the  Roman  Imperial  era  of  gold  exploitation  in  the 
Golden  Quadrilateral  of  the  Romanian  Carpathians,  illustrating  the  strategic  control  and  vigorous 
development of precious metals’ mining by the Roman Empire, essential for its longevity and military 
power. 
The  pre‐eminent  Roman  mining  works  represent  a  technological  ensemble  unknown  elsewhere from 
such an early era: extensive perfectly carved trapezoidal‐section galleries, helicoidal shafts and inclined 
communication  galleries  with  stairways  cut  into  the  bedrock,  vertical  extraction  areas  (stopes) 
superimposed  above  one  another  with  the  roof  carved  out  in  steps,  and  multiple  chambers  for 
treadmill‐powered  water‐dipper  wheels.  An  astonishing  amount  of  wooden  timbering,  and  wooden 
remains of technical equipment, whilst recorded but mostly destroyed elsewhere in the Roman world 
by subsequent modern mining, is preserved at Roșia Montană. 
→   Criterion (vi): to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with 
beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance 
The  Roman  wax‐coated  wooden  tablets  (tabulae  ceratae)  of  Alburnus  Maior  (Roșia  Montană)  are  of 
outstanding  universal  significance  as  they  not  only  represent  a  tangible  record  of  Roman  imperial 
mining  traditions,  but  also  a  primary  source  for  the  interpretation  of  Roman  law  and  on  the  law  of 
obligations.  This  was  made  famous  by  the  great  German  historian  Theodor  Mommsen  (1817‐1903), 
generally regarded as one of the greatest classicists of the nineteenth century, and created a significant 
impact on the German Civil Code (1900), which subsequently formed the basis for similar regulations in 
other countries such as Portugal, China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Greece and Ukraine.  
Around 50 Roman wax‐coated wooden tablets were discovered during the 1780s and 1850s in mining 
galleries  at  Roșia  Montană  and,  of  these,  24  survive  in  museums  in  Romania  and  overseas:  in 
Bucharest, Alba Iulia, Cluj, Blaj, Aiud, Berlin and Budapest. These are first‐rate sources of legal, socio‐
economic,  demographic  and  linguistic  information  not  only  regarding  Alburnus  Maior  but  the  entire 
Dacian  province  and,  implicitly,  the  Roman  Empire.  The  tablets  provide  intimate  details  of  life  in  the 
mining  community  and  are  also  correlated  with  an  unparalleled  number  of  stone  epigraphic 
monuments, votive and funerary, discovered on site and preserved in museums at Roșia Montană, Cluj‐
Napoca, Turda, Alba Iulia and Deva. Information reveals explicit details of mining organisation, sale and 
purchase contracts, receipts of loans with interest, and the sale of slaves. Epigraphic evidence attests 
not  only  Illyrians  but  also  Greek  and  Latin  migrants  hired  to  work  in  the  mines  and  organised  in 
associations  (e.g.  collegia  aurariorum,  societas  danistaria).  Academic  research  into  the  history  of  the 
Roman Empire during the Antonine dynasty and its relationship to the Dacians’ gold and gold extracted 
from  Roman  Dacia  has  opened  a  new  area  of  research  into  European  cultural  history:  the  economic 
recovery  of  the  Roman  Empire,  the  commencement  of  monumental  public  construction  works  in 
Rome,  among  which  the  Forum  and  Trajan’s  Column  are  perhaps  the  most  important  elements,  and 
the direct linkage to the gold‐mining area of Dacia where Alburnus Maior was its principal centre. 
 13 

Statement of Integrity 
The  property  contains  all  the  necessary,  and  unique,  combination  of  attributes  that  express  Outstanding 
Universal  Value.  The  largest  and  most  technically  diverse  example  of  a  Roman  gold  mine  in  the  world  is 
wholly constrained within a natural amphitheatre that is radically different from the surrounding landscape. 
It includes all  metalliferous  massifs of Alburnus Maior and the two principal valleys (Roșia and Corna) for 
ore‐dressing, settlement, transport and communication. 
Though a greater part is overprinted by subsequent mining activity, the underground gold mining network 
discovered  to  date,  together  with  pervasive  Roman  mining  and  occupation  evidence  at  surface,  is 
remarkably  well‐preserved.  Moreover,  ten  years  of  archaeological  excavation  and  of  in‐situ  conservation 
has resulted in a generally good state of conservation.  
The boundary of the property has been determined using a combination of geological/mining maps, natural 
features such as ridgeline watersheds (functional, for water supply in ore‐processing) and viewsheds (into 
and out of the property), roads, and the administrative boundaries that will assist with management of the 
property. It includes all areas with significant archaeological potential. 
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape has been subjected to multiple transformations; some gradual over the 
centuries, and some sudden and  devastating such as the destruction of the Roman openworks on Cetate 
(the “Citadel”) by opencast mining starting in the 1970s. More recently, preparations for the resumption of 
open pit mining and the creation of processing facilities, whilst contributing massively to the understanding 
of Roman Alburnus Maior, resulted in a sustained modern buildings demolition campaign (mostly twentieth 
century properties) that began in 2004. 

Statement of Authenticity 
The  nominated  property  constitutes  an  unparalleled  and  detailed  testimony  of  the  largest  known  Roman 
underground gold mine. It contains a unique combination of attributes that are high in authenticity in terms 
of the location and the form and materials of surviving historic features that are easily readable and provide 
a  clear  sense  of  how,  when  and  by  whom  mining  shaped  the  land.  In  terms  of  the  authenticity  of 
knowledge,  unparalleled  epigraphic  and  documentary  evidence  combined  with  a  decade  of  intensive 
systematic  archaeological  investigation  (including  prolific  radiocarbon  dating  and  dendrochronology  of 
unusually large amounts of well‐preserved timber underground) has already provided a major contribution 
to  the  understanding  of  Roman  mining  techniques  and  organisation.  Significant  potential  for  further 
research remains in order to achieve a greater knowledge of the site’s history and development. 

Requirements for Protection and Management 
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is already protected as, in accordance with Romanian law, all provisions 
for World Heritage sites apply to the respective nominated property once the nomination is submitted to 
UNESCO.  These  include  the  management  system  designed  to  protect  all  World  Heritage  properties  in 
Romania. 
The  property  is  also  included  in  a  wider  area  that  is  designated  for  protection  by  territory  planning 
regulations, a framework directly under the responsibility of the municipality. The property further contains 
several individually designated elements, from the Roman mining works to two geological formations. More 
direct protection is granted by listing, with 50 elements within the perimeter of the property included in the 
Historic Monuments List, notably the principal archaeological site with sub‐components such as the Roman 
mines in Mt. Carnic and the historic centre of the mining town.  
Whilst  not  pertaining  to  Roman  cultural  assets,  important  exemplars  of  local  architectural  heritage  were 
destroyed in the early 2000s, a total that exceeded 250 properties. A substantial number survive, however, 
and as the continuous exploitation of Roșia Montană’s gold spans more than two millennia, the protection 
of the Roman mining site is best achieved through a more holistic approach as adopted in the Management 
Plan, protecting wider values of this complex site with its layered historic values. Significant threats to this 
modern architectural heritage remain, the state of conservation of many historic buildings is poor and some 
unauthorised development of small‐scale housing has taken place.  
 
 
 14 

Consistent Management of a World Heritage Site 
 
1. The Roșia Montană Mining Landscape Protection and Management Plan (RMMP) was commissioned for 
the property by the World Heritage Unit at the National Institute for Heritage (INP), Bucharest, as a way to 
assist the stakeholder group in preparation and management as a candidate World Heritage Site. 
2. The RMMP is an integrated and participatory ‘living’ document that, on the basis of the justification of 
the  values  of  the  Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape,  explains  how  this  significance  will  be  sustained  in 
management, development, repair, alteration and any new use. 
3.  The  Plan  is  understood  as  a  part  of  the  protection  and  management  activities  concerning  the  Roșia 
Montană  Mining  Landscape  nominated  property.  Its  first  goal  is  to  define  the  strategic  frame  for  all 
necessary actions concerning the nominated area. For that reason, the Plan aims to coordinate general and 
specific policies, programs and projects led by several public administrations as well as local site protection 
structures,  NGOs  and  community  representatives  in  order  to  protect,  conserve  and  enhance  the 
authenticity, integrity and historic character of the Site, in the benefit of the current and future generations. 
6. The Plan is intended to gather all stakeholders and parties interested in the heritage of Roșia Montană 
Mining Landscape, make possible a better understanding, sharing and promotion of values of the property, 
build on and encouraging community involvement as well as placing heritage at the heart of community life. 
4.  The  realistic,  transdisciplinary  approach  to  specific  protection  and  management  issues  leads  to  an 
operational identification and evaluation of the property and of its relevant specificities and values, as well 
as  of  the  predictable  threats  and  development  opportunities,  for  the  benefit  of  current  and  future 
generations. 
5. The RMMP will coordinate its goals with other strategic development, environmental and economic plans 
concerning  the  nominated  property  or  larger  areas,  in  order  to  ensure  that  the  benefits  of  the  potential 
World Heritage Site inscription are integrated with wider social and economic regeneration targets.  
 
According to the Recommendation concerning the Preservation of Cultural Property Endangered by Public or 
Private works (1968)3, preventive and corrective measures should be aimed at protecting or saving cultural 
property from  public  or  private  works  likely  to  damage  and  destroy  it,  such  as  ‘works  required  by  the 
growth  of  industry  and  the  technological  progress  of  industrialized societies  such  as  airfields,  mining  and 
quarrying operations and dredging and reclamation of channels and harbours’ – art. II.8(h).  
In the spirit of this recommendation, understanding the economic and social issues in the Roșia Montană 
case, the RMMP aims to find the appropriate way to sustain and enhance the cultural and natural values of 
the  landscape.  Creating  the  basis  of  coordination  and  communication  between  the  official  bodies,  the 
investors and the community’s representatives is one of the missions assumed by this plan, in in order to 
ensure the avoidance of threats or damage to the precious cultural landscape. 
The long period of time that the proposed mining project has been given consideration, has forged both a 
new understanding of such cases and a series of new, better prepared actors to take on the challenges of 
dealing  with  unconventional  heritage  and  decommissioned  industrial  areas.  Civil  society  organisations 
improved  their  instruments  and  projects,  increased  their  capacity  to  act  and  attract  the  public;  the  local 
community in Roșia Montană became much more aware of its values and their potential, and became more 
active in this respect; local, regional and national authorities learned to deal with a new type of project, the 
large  industrial  (specifically  mining)  development,  contemporaneously  with  large  public  infrastructure 
projects.  New  subjects  have  been  consecrated  on  the  public  scene  –  environmental  protection,  and  its 
subsequent,  connected kin, cultural heritage – and both together as cultural landscape. The international 
professional  and  civic  community  has  also  stepped  in,  and  argued  for  the  integrated  conservation  of  the 
cultural  and  natural  values  of  the  place.  Ultimately,  driven  by  this  case  too,  the  legal  system  for  the 
protection and management of World Heritage properties is being revised and improved4, to include new 
objectives, such as sustainable development, or the active and constant involvement of local communities 
in the protection and management of nominated and inscribed sites. 

3
   http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php‐URL_ID=13085&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html 
4
A process that started in 2016 and, following a few interruptions caused by changes of government, is due for completion in 2018. 
 15 

Protection and Management Plan 
Function and Legal Status 
 
1. The Roșia Montană Mining Landscape Protection and Management Plan (RMMP) concerns the Romanian 
Site Roșia Montană Mining Landscape, nominated for inclusion in the World Heritage List (2016).  
5
2.  The  document  adheres  to  both  national  specific  legislation   on  World  Heritage  properties,  and 
international requirements and recommendations.  
3.  The  Romanian  law  gives  the  same  legal  status  to  the  inscribed  properties  and  to  the  nominated 
properties,  imposing  duties  to  national  and  local  Authorities  and  to  the  owners.  These  duties  are  to  be 
respected as well as others originating in specific legislation on historic monuments, nature and landscape 
protection.  
4.  Following  the  Romanian  legislation6,  this  Protection  and  Management  Plan  represents  the  long‐term 
protection  and management  document7,  for  the 2018‐2028  period.  It  is  followed  by mid‐  and short‐term 
protection, monitoring and Management Plans treating about general and specific actions. 
5.  As  affirmed  in  the  Operational  Guidelines  for  the  Implementation  of  the  World  Heritage  Convention, 
‘protection and management of World Heritage properties should ensure that their Outstanding Universal 
Value, including the conditions of integrity and/or authenticity at the time of inscription, are sustained or 
enhanced over time’8. 
6. In conclusion, the Roșia Montană Mining Landscape Protection and Management Plan (RMMP) is to be 
understood  as  part  of  the  existing  protection  and  management  system,  as  established  by  the  Romanian 
legislation,  after  the recognition,  by  the State Party,  of its  responsibilities  following  the 1990 adhesion to 
the World Heritage Convention9. 
7.  The  document  includes  specific  issues  concerning  the  other  International  or  European  Conventions 
signed and assumed by Romania in the heritage and landscape fields.  
8. The  document  is  compatible  with  the  pending  amendments  and  changes  to  the  national  legal  system, 
aiming to meet higher expectations of heritage (e.g. contribution to sustainable development) as well as to 
better meet obligations of the World Heritage Convention, integrating new provisions regarding the active 
role of local communities in the management of World Heritage properties10. 

5
  Law 564/2001 concerning the protection of historic monuments inscribed in the WHL and following legislation. 
6
  Management and monitoring methodologies, as statued by HG 493/2004 concerning the approval of the Methodology concerning 
the monitoring of historic monuments inscribed in the WHL and of the Methodology concerning the management and protection 
of historic monuments inscribed in the WHL (HG 493/2004 pentru aprobarea Metodologiei privind monitorizarea monumentelor 
istorice înscrise în Lista patrimoniului mondial şi a Metodologiei privind elaborarea şi conţinutul‐cadru al planurilor de protecţie şi 
gestiune a monumentelor istorice înscrise în Lista patrimoniului mondial) and, also, by the detailed studies commissioned by the 
Ministry of Culture in 2000 in order to prepare the aforementioned legislation. 
7
  Management and Protection Program (Program de gestiune şi protecţie), following HG 493/2004.  
8
   Operational  Guidelines  for  the  Implementation  of  the  World  Heritage  Convention  (WHC.17/01  12  July  2017),  IIf.  96  – 
http://whc.unesco.org/en/guidelines/ 
9
   CPUN Decision 187/1990 for acceptance of the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, 
Adopted by the UNESCO General Conference at its seventeenth session Paris, 16 november 1972 
10
   Published  by  the  Ministry  of  Culture  for  consultation  in  December  2016,  later  reviewed,  now  expected  to  be  approved  during 
2018. More details in the Nomination Document, Chapt. 5. 
 16 

Strategic Frame 
 
Vision and Mission 
Nominating  the  Property  represents  the  Romania’s  Statement  of  Intent  concerning  the  future  of  Roșia 
Montană’s Roman heritage, its community and its cultural and mining landscape.  
As a response to the ICOMOS Resolution 18GA 2014/26 – Rescue of the Roșia Montană mining landscape 
and  promotion  of  a  sustainable  development  model,  by  this  nomination,  the  Romanian  authorities 
reinforced  their  commitment  and  ensured,  as  called  in  this  Resolution,  that  ‘precedence  is  given  to  the 
protection, conservation and enhancement of cultural heritage over industrial and construction pressures, 
and consequently to implement policies and best practices, in accordance with the provisions of all relevant 
international charters and international conventions adopted by Romania’11 (see Appendix 1).  
The RMMP is conceived following the vision for the Roşia Montană Mining Landscape World Heritage Site: 
Enhancing the Outstanding Universal Value of the site as fundament for comprehensive, sustainable local 
development  in  the  interest  of  the  local,  national  and  international  communities.  The  vision  takes  into 
account  the  1972  World  Heritage  Convention,  linking  the  concepts  of  nature  conservation  and  the 
preservation of cultural properties and the fundamental need to preserve the balance between the two12, 
highest points of an evolution started with the first League of Nations’ international heritage conservation 
document, The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments (1931)13. 
The RMMP will take into consideration the preservation of the OUV attributes and of all associated values 
(supporting  attributes)  acting  in  the  same  territory,  outmost  local  and  national  importance  and 
representing  the  heart  of  the  local  community’s  identity.  This  approach  is  necessary,  taking  into 
consideration  the  overlapping  of  the  historical  layers  and,  also,  the  spatial  practices  that  can  sustain  or 
damage  the  OUV.  Moreover,  the  associated  values  of  local  and  national  interest  represent  an  important 
infrastructure for the mise en valeur of the OUV. 
The  State  Party’s  mission  is  to  ‘ensure  the  identification,  protection,  conservation,  presentation  and 
transmission  to  future  generations  of  the  cultural  and  natural  heritage’14  of  the  Roșia  Montană  Mining 
Landscape, as pre‐eminent example of mining exploitation, technical innovation and territorial consequent 
development.  

General Objectives 
The mission is to be accomplished following two complementary focus directions or general objectives: 
 Preservation of natural, cultural and landscape values – General Objective I (GO‐I);  
This objective focuses on three main directions: 
 Conserving the proposed OUV of Roșia Montană Mining Landscape, together with the associated 
values, for current and future generations through a values‐led approach; 
 Undertake and facilitate research to increase knowledge and understanding of the site in order to 
create  a  scientific,  dynamic,  database  in  the  benefit  of  the  conservation  process  and  of  the 
interpretation  and  presentation  of  the  history  and  significance  of  the  site  to  the  highest 
appropriate quality; 
 Ensuring  that  an  appropriate  level  of  legal  protection  for  the  property  is  supported  by  effective 
protection,  active  conservation  and,  where  possible,  enhancement  of  authenticity,  integrity  and 
historic character; 
 Promoting  opportunities  within  the  site  for  heritage‐led  regeneration  and  optimising  the 
contribution  of  the  site  to  the  local  economy,  by  developing  a  non‐invasive  tourist  and  site 
presentation infrastructure and, complementary, compatible economic activities. 
 Sustainable development of the community and of its resources – General Objective I (GO‐II). 
This objective focuses on three main directions: 
 Integrating cultural and natural values of the property, in order to increase the overall quality of 
the landscape and utilise local resources to generate sustainable development; 
 Ensure  that  programs  for  conservation  of  the  property  are  integrated  into  policies  for  economic 
development and into regional and national planning, where appropriate; 

11
   https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Secretariat/2015/GA_2014_results/ 
GA_2014_Resolutions_EN_20150109_finalcirc.pdf 
12
   http://whc.unesco.org/en/convention/ 
13
   First International Congress of Architects and Technicians of Historic Monuments, Athens 1931, held under the authority of the 
League of Nations – see http://www.icomos.org/en/charters‐and‐texts/179‐articles‐en‐francais/ressources/charters‐and‐
standards/167‐the‐athens‐charter‐for‐the‐restoration‐of‐historic‐monuments 
14
   http://whc.unesco.org/en/convention/ (Art. 4) 
 17 

 Promoting  opportunities  within  the  site  for  heritage‐led  regeneration  and  optimising  the 
contribution  of  the  site  to  the  local  economy,  by  developing  a  non‐invasive  tourist  and  site 
presentation infrastructure and, complementary, compatible economic activities; 
 Gather all stakeholders and parties interested in the heritage of Roșia Montană Mining Landscape 
for  a  better  understanding,  sharing  and  promotion  of  values  of  the  property,  and  to  encourage 
community involvement and its benefits, placing heritage at the heart of community life; 
 Develop guidelines for future heritage‐led interventions at significant sites and features to promote a 
sustainable approach that integrates conservation with the needs of communities and visitors. 
 
Specific Objectives 
The Specific Objectives are linked to the inscription criteria: insuring protection while developing a future 
for a living community. 
→   Criterion  (ii):  to  exhibit  an  important  interchange  of  human  values,  over  a  span  of  time  or  within  a 
cultural  area  of  the  world,  on  developments  in  architecture  or  technology,  monumental  arts,  town‐
planning or landscape design 
Correlated Specific Objective: 
 Preserving the multiplicity of heritage values in their specific interconnection system (SO‐I) 
Preserving  the  artefacts  as  well  as  their  interconnections,  understood  in  a  larger  diachronic 
perspective, demands a clear  understanding  of  the  scale  of the  exploitation,  of the  continuity  of 
the  mining  activity,  of  the  specificity  of  each  historical  period  and  of  the  related  artefacts,  from 
mine  galleries  to  human  settlements,  from  dwellings  and  administrative  buildings  to  industrial 
infrastructure, from epigraphic heritage to vernacular crafts. 
The  protection  process  starts  with  the  comprehension  of  this  system,  in  a  serious  process  of 
identification  and  evaluation  of  the  Outstanding  Universal  Value,  of  the  site’s  components’ 
conservation  status,  of  the  potential  risks,  creating  the  knowledge  framework  to  define  dos  and 
don’ts in terms of: 
 archaeological heritage 
 industrial (modern) heritage 
 historic and urban heritage 
 vernacular heritage 
 natural heritage  
 intangible heritage 
 landscape as natural and cultural specific local synthesis 
We understand the continuous character of the identification and evaluation activities as well as 
the evolution of the public perception. In both directions, a link with the principles of the Council 
of Europe’s European Landscape Convention (assumed by Romania in 2002)15 is to be followed‐up, 
in order to assimilate and integrate the evolutional dimension of the territory, as well of its image. 
 
→   Criterion (iii): to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization 
which is living or which has disappeared 
Correlated Specific Objectives: 
 Developing a future for a fragile mountain community as well as for its cultural tradition (SO‐II) 
Avoiding depopulation linked to the cessation of the mining core‐activity needs new development 
scenarios  concerning  three  main  aspects,  all  in  the  benefit  of  landscape  protection,  tourism 
development and local culture consolidation: 
 developing rural and ecological tourism structures; 
 developing site presentation infrastructure; 
 developing knowledge and educational structures; 
 developing other compatible industrial and commercial activities; 
 improvement of environment conditions. 
This objective has to be understood in order to implement the principles developed in the Council of 
Europe’s Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society (Faro Convention, 2005), starting with 
the definition of cultural heritage as ‘group of resources inherited from the past which people identify, 
independently of ownership, as a reflection and expression of their constantly evolving values, beliefs, 
knowledge  and  traditions’  and  of  the  heritage  community  as  ‘people  who  value  specific  aspects  of 
cultural  heritage  which  they  wish,  within  the  framework  of  public  action,  to  sustain  and  transmit  to 
future generations’16. 

15
   Law 451/2002 for ratification of te European Landscape Convention, adopted in Florence, 20 October 2000. 
16
  http://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full‐list/‐/conventions/rms/0900001680083746 (Art. 2) 
 18 

→   Criterion  (iv):  to  be  an  outstanding  example  of  a  type  of  building,  architectural  or  technological 
ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history 
 Preserving the community’s multi‐cultural structure, assets and historic activities (SO‐II) 
Avoiding  industrial  resources  exploitation  is  a  long‐term  process,  based  on  the  mutual 
comprehension of sustainable development as well into the local community than in the larger one 
– the national and international communities, the economic and politic communities.  
This  issue  places  Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  in  a  contemporary  debate  concerning  the 
relationship  between  conservation  and  economic  development,  as  shown  by  the  recent  history. 
The  evolution  of  the  debate,  including  national  and  international  heritage  NGO’s  or  professional 
associations,  such  as  ICOMOS  Romania,  important  economic  actors,  population  representatives 
and  political  decision‐makers  shows  the  growing  importance  of  heritage  protection  and 
sustainable development issues in the major economic choices. Roșia Montană became, from this 
point of view, an important international case‐study. 
The  improvement  of  environment  conditions  is  one  of  the  focal  points  of  the  protection  and 
management  objectives.  The  planned  development  of  better  collaboration  with  the  local 
administration and economic actors may become a good‐practice example for the future.  
Concerning  the  mining  activities,  historic  as  well  as  present  ones,  we  refer  to  the  to  the  TICCIH 
position  statement  regarding  mining  in  World  Heritage  Sites.  However,  the  IUCN's  World 
Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) position statement on mining and associated activities in 
relation to protected areas (Welcomed by IUCN Council on 27 April 1999)17 has, also, to be taken 
into account.  
As Roșia Montană Mining Landscape may be understood as an IUCN protected area of Category V: 
Protected Landscape/Seascape (‘A protected area where the interaction of people and nature over 
time has produced an area of distinct character with significant ecological, biological, cultural and 
scenic  value:  and  where  safeguarding  the  integrity  of  this  interaction  is  vital  to  protecting  and 
sustaining the area and its associated nature conservation and other values’18), there are two main 
directions to follow: 
(a)  In  Categories  V  and  VI,  exploration  and  minimal  and  localised  extraction,  for  example  for 
heritage and conservation‐related purposes, is acceptable only where this is compatible with the 
objectives of the protected  area and then only after environmental impact assessment (EIA) and 
heritage  impact  assessment  (HIA)  based  on  ICOMOS  guidance  and  subject  to  strict  operating, 
monitoring and after use restoration conditions. This should apply "best practices" environmental 
approaches, and 
(b)  In  recognising  the  important  contribution  the  mining  industry  can  play,  opportunities  for 
cooperation  and  partnership  between  the  mining  industry  and  protected  area  agencies  in  the 
setting of the nominated property should be strongly encouraged. Collaboration with the mining 
industry should focus on securing respect and support for this position statement; broadening the 
application  of  best  environmental  practice  for  mining  activity;  and  exploring  areas  of  mutual 
benefit19. 
The Objectives of Management for the IUCN V category of protected areas are: 
 to  maintain  the  harmonious  interaction  of  nature  and  culture  through  the  protection  of 
landscape  and/or  seascape  and  the  continuation  of  traditional  land  uses,  building  practices 
and social and cultural manifestations; 
 to  support  lifestyles  and  economic  activities  which  are  in  harmony  with  nature  and  the 
preservation of the social and cultural fabric of the communities concerned; 
 to maintain the diversity of landscape and habitat, and of associated species and ecosystems; 
 to  eliminate  where  necessary,  and  thereafter  prevent,  land  uses  and  activities  which  are 
inappropriate in scale and/or character;  
 to provide opportunities for public enjoyment through recreation and tourism appropriate in 
type and scale to the essential qualities of the areas;  
 to  encourage  scientific  and  educational  activities  which  will  contribute  to  the  long  term 
wellbeing  of  resident  populations  and  to  the  development  of  public  support  for  the 
environmental protection of such areas; and  

17
  WHC‐99/CONF.209/20 (Paris, 25 October 1999) – see http://whc.unesco.org/archive/1999/whc‐99‐conf209‐20e.pdf (Annex 1). 
IUCN defines protected area as "an area of land and/or sea especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological 
diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means".  
See also IUCN World Heritage Advice Note: Mining and Oil/Gas Projects (2013) – 
http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iucn_advice_note_on_mining_in_wh_sites_final_060512__2_.pdf 
18
  https://www.iucn.org/theme/protected‐areas/about/protected‐areas‐categories 
19
  WHC‐99/CONF.209/20 – Position Statement, items 3 and 7.  
 19 

 to  bring  benefits  to,  and  to  contribute  to  the  welfare  of,  the  local  community  through  the 
provision of natural products (such as forest and fisheries products) and services (such as clean 
water or income derived from sustainable forms of tourism). 
Being aware of all IUCN, ICME/ICMM and TICCIH position statements concerning mining activities 
related  to  World  Heritage  Sites,  this  Protection  and  Management  Plan  aims  to  create  the 
possibility  of  a  scientific,  independent  and  democratic  debate  between  stakeholders,  in  order  to 
create  the  basis  for  potential  conflict  resolution  in  the  benefit  of  the  maintenance  of  World 
Heritage values and of the integrity of the site20. 
This statement leads to several activity directions: 
 preservation of traditional mining knowledge and practices through conservation‐led activity; 
 preservation of farming complementary traditional activities; 
 preservation of the multi‐cultural dwelling types and heritage 
 preservation of the specific, long‐time built mining, agricultural and forestry landscape. 
 
→   Criterion (vi): to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with 
beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance 
Correlated Specific Objective: 
 Preserving the intangible heritage of Roșia Montană, concerning the community’s organization and 
practices from the Roman era to the contemporary period (SO‐IV) 
Understanding  the  importance  of  Roșia  Montană  mining  area  in  the  European  context,  its 
characteristics  linked  with  the  relevant  administrative  and  political  areas  in  the  Antiquity, 
Medieval, Early Modern, Modern and Contemporary periods, in a multi‐cultural social perspective, 
will create the basis for intangible heritage preservation and, in a general perspective, enhancing 
public appreciation and understanding of cultural heritage. 
Following  the  UNESCO  Convention  for  the  Safeguarding  of  the  Intangible  Cultural  Heritage 
(assumed by Romania in 2005)21  principles defined for the  national level  will concern, first of all, 
the  significant  heritage  legacy  and,  in  a  complementary  way,  the  local  ensemble  of  ‘practices, 
representations, expressions, knowledge, skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and 
cultural  spaces  associated  therewith  –  that  communities,  groups  and,  in  some  cases,  individuals 
recognize as part of their cultural heritage’.22  
The major action directions are the two following ones: 
 preservation  of  the  multi‐cultural  communities  living  and  working  habits,  knowledge,  beliefs 
and traditions; 
 enhancing  public  appreciation  and  understanding  of  cultural  heritage  site  by  developing 
presentation and interpretation policies. 
The  interpretation  and  presentation  activities  are  understood  –  following  the  ICOMOS  Ename 
Charter for the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites (Québec, 2008) principles 
–  as  ‘essential  components  of  heritage  conservation  efforts  and  as  a  means  of  enhancing  public 
appreciation and understanding of cultural heritage sites’.23  

20
   See also the Proceedings of the Technical Workshop on World Heritage and Mining, Gland, Switzerland, 2001 – 
https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/import/downloads/heritage_mining.pdf 
21
   Law 410/2005 for the acceptance of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, adopted in Paris, 17 
October 2003. 
22
   https://ich.unesco.org/en/convention (Art. 2) 
23
   http://www.icomos.org/charters/interpretation_e.pdf (Preamble) 
 20 

Protection and Management Directions 
Preserving the mining heritage, with a special attention to the Roman structures (and to all those elements 
declared as carrying attributes for the OUV), needs the creation of an effective protection and management 
system (including monitoring and periodical reporting). 
The process will follow four major management objectives, leading to the principal management directions. 
These  directions  link  the  specific  case  of  Roşia  Montană  to  the  Romanian  management  system,  as 
stipulated by law, including the protection and monitoring dimensions: 
 Preserving OUV and supporting attributes 
 Knowledge development (inventories and documentation; research) 
The inventory activities are concerning full full audit of the present situation, organised according 
to  attributes  and  their  inner  components,  together  with  historical  data.  The  database  creation, 
already  started,  is  one  of  the  most  important  activities  to  be  followed‐up,  together  with  the 
archive issues.  
Scientific  and  research  work,  for  which  an  international  Scientific  Committee  for  Roșia  Montană 
Mining  Landscape  has  been  set  up,  has  to  continue  in  order  to  clarify,  define  and  extend  the 
nominated attributes. 
 Property‐use management (site administration, site use) 
Site  administration  and  utilisation  represent  the  nodal  point  of  the  Management  Plan.  As  a 
conflictual situation between heritage protectors and the main development present actors (and 
main land‐owner) exist, the administration and utilisation problems are, in the Roșia Montană site, 
to be understood and supported by each and all parties. This process will take longer time than in 
other WHL sites, and international help and advice are necessary. The site administration structure 
will be reinforced, gathering all the stake‐holders and creating a stronger cooperation basis. 
The  management  documents  creation  (including  sharing  responsibilities;  public  information  and 
participation;  finalisation,  endorsement  and  approval;  elaboration  and  approval  of  the  specific 
protection plans, of the annual plans) is a continuous activity.  
The cooperation in developing documents and activities with all public authorities is to be created 
in  order  to  accomplish  the  legal  duties  and,  also,  the  Management  Plan  specific  issues;  the 
cooperation  with  local  –  public  and  private  –  structures,  involving  a  split  local  community, 
represents a priority and challenging issue for the Management Plan.  
The  current  management  problems  are  to  be  realised  in  the  legal  frame  created  by  general 
legislation,  local  regulations  and,  also,  the  Management  Plan’s  priorities.  We  mention  the  listed 
buildings enforcement notices24 as principal protection documents for all the attributes. 
The last, but not less‐important issue, concerns the administration’s finance plan, including public 
and private budgets and, in perspective, economic activities leading to a financial independence of 
the administration structure.  
 Preserving site’s authenticity and the integrity 
 Prevention measures, avoiding catastrophic events 
Based on technical expertise, the prevention measures plans will include all the specific measures 
included  in  several  sector  plans  (such  as  forestry  Management  Plans,  territorial  risk  and  hazard 
prevention  plans  etc.),  adding  all  specific  necessary  data,  together  with  a  scheduling  of  the 
necessary administrative and technical measures. One of the first issues will concern the massifs’ 
stabilisation, the water Management Plan, including the ponds’ specific problems.  
The  main  environmental  problems  (such  as  air,  soil  and  water  pollution  etc.)  will  be  taken  into 
account  separately,  utilising  information  from  the  State’s  Environmental  Agencies.  We  are 
mentioning  the  fact  that  the  high  environmental  risk  situation  makes  the  cooperation  between 
institutions very difficult, so this Management Plan issue will take longer to be clearly stated. 
 Preserving the values and authenticity of the site  
The  monitoring  activities,  based  on  the  national  system  legislation  and  on  the  ICOMOS  and 
UNESCO recommendations, are determined in the Management Plan (periodic inspections, specific 
documents, communication). 
The results of the monitoring activities are determined in the Management Plan, defining priority 
actions in order to conserve and increase the conservation state for all attributes; the actions are 
linked with the legal persons with responsibilities in every process; necessary budgets are defined. 

24
  The  documents,  created  by  the  Ministry  of  Culture’s  structures  by  the  effect  of  the  protection  of  historical  monuments  law 
(L422/2001),  are  officially  informing  the  owners  about  their  responsibilities  concerning  the  historical  monuments.  They  include 
identification  of  elements  helding  cultural  value,  maintaining  and  restoration  rules  etc.  which  are  all  compulsory  for  property 
owners as well as for teanants or visitors.  
 21 

 Conservation state preservation and improvement  
The OUV and the supporting attributes preservation need the creation of the reglementary missing 
frame:  the  Romanian  State  has  to  finance  and  follow,  urgently,  urban  and  territory  plans 
(containing  clear  development  options,  based  on  heritage  protection  policies);  this  obligation  is 
one of the priorities of the Management Plan.  
The  necessary  interventions,  included  in  the  Management  Plan  according  to  the  established 
priorities, have to be followed‐up in order to preserve the OUV and the supporting attributes.  
Finally,  trainings  will  have  to  be  organised,  in  order  to  strengthen  the  local  protection  and 
management structure technical capacity and, also, in order to increase the specific knowledge for 
the potential working team (craftsmen’s training). 
 Promotion, interpretation and education  
The  promotion,  interpretation  and  education  concerning  Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  will  be 
included  in  the  Management  Plan  as  an  important  issue  and,  also,  as  a  possible  bridge  to  the 
community’s real heritage, habits and needs. 
 Permanent protection and management update 
The  monitoring  activities,  based  on  the  national  system  legislation  and  on  the  ICOMOS  and  UNESCO 
recommendations,  are  stated  in  the  Management  Plan  (periodic  inspections,  specific  documents, 
communication, defining priority actions). 
These five chapters will be followed and detailed in the Management Plan.  
Those  elements  indicated  as  being  in  poor  condition  are  the  subject  of  priority  consideration  in 
conservation actions, especially targeted ‘at risk’ elements (see Risk Assessment, below).  
 
Operational Priorities 
Preserving the Roman and post‐Roman mining heritage as most significant stage in Roșia Montană and the 
complementary  relevant  developments,  till  nowadays,  mean  –  preliminarily  –  to  define  specific  steps 
towards achieving the aims and, acting as milestones for evaluation:  
 Identify  the  nominated  property’s  principal  conservation  and  management  needs  and  issues,  and 
develop policies and strategic management objectives to address them, within a continuous process.  
 Develop a strategic fund‐sourcing tool for conservation of the property, providing reassurance that any 
finance  granted  will  benefit  a  heritage  of  international  significance  and  for  future  generations  of  all 
nations. 
 Build and maintain strong partnerships between the community, site owners, local, regional, national 
and international organisations, making sure everyone shares an understanding of what matters, and 
why,  before  any  major  decisions  are  taken,  and  to  provide  strategic  and  day‐to‐day  guidance  for 
relevant practitioners.  
 Share  actions  and  responsibilities  with  appropriate  stakeholders  to  optimise  capacity  and  resource 
potential, to manage change carefully so as not to damage what is special, and to promote sustainable 
opportunities for heritage‐led regeneration and activity. 
 22 

Summary 
Vision 
Enhancing the Outstanding Universal Value of the site as fundament for comprehensive, sustainable local 
development in the interest of the local, national and international communities. 

Mission 
Insuring the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission to future generations of 
the cultural and natural heritage’25 of the Roșia Montană Mining Landscape, as a pre‐eminent example of 
Roman legacy, land‐use and mining exploitation continuity and territorial consequent development. 

General objectives 
The general objectives regard the OUV preservation in the local development context. 
 Preservation of natural, cultural and landscape values – General Objective I (GO‐I);  
 Conserving the proposed OUV of Roșia Montană Mining Landscape, together with the associated 
values, for current and future generations through a values‐led approach; 
 Undertake and facilitate research to increase knowledge and understanding of the site in order to 
create  a  scientific,  dynamic,  database  in  the  benefit  of  the  conservation  process  and  of  the 
interpretation  and  presentation  of  the  history  and  significance  of  the  site  to  the  highest 
appropriate quality; 
 Ensuring  that  an  appropriate  level  of  legal  protection  for  the  property  is  supported  by  effective 
protection,  active  conservation  and,  where  possible,  enhancement  of  authenticity,  integrity  and 
historic character; 
 Promoting  opportunities  within  the  site  for  heritage‐led  regeneration  and  optimising  the 
contribution  of  the  site  to  the  local  economy,  by  developing  a  non‐invasive  tourist  and  site 
presentation infrastructure and, complementary, compatible economic activities. 
 Sustainable development of the community and of its resources – General Objective I (GO‐II). 
 Integrating  cultural  and  natural  values  of  the  property,  in  order  to  better  understand  the 
relationships  and  dependencies  between  these  values  and  increase  the  overall  quality  of  the 
landscape; 
 Ensure  that  programs  for  conservation  of  the  property  are  integrated  into  policies  for  economic 
development and into regional and national planning; 
 Gather all stakeholders and parties interested in the heritage of Roșia Montană Mining Landscape 
for  a  better  understanding,  sharing  and  promotion  of  values  of  the  property,  and  to  encourage 
community involvement and its benefits, placing heritage at the of community life; 
 Develop  guidelines  for  future  heritage‐led  interventions  at  significant  sites  and  features  to 
promote a sustainable approach that integrates conservation with the needs of communities and 
visitors. 

Specific objectives 
 Decrypting the multiplicity of heritage values in their specific interconnection system (SO‐I) 
 Archaeological heritage (Roman era and other periods); 
 Industrial (modern) heritage; 
 Historic and urban heritage; 
 Vernacular heritage; 
 Natural heritage; 
 Landscape as natural and cultural specific local synthesis. 
 Preserving the community’s multi‐cultural structure, assets and historic activities (SO‐II) 
 Preservation of traditional mining knowledge and practices; 
 Preservation of farming complementary traditional activities; 
 Preservation of the multi‐cultural dwelling types and heritage; 
 Preservation of the specific, long‐time built mining, agricultural and forestry landscape. 

25
http://whc.unesco.org/en/convention/ (Art. 4)
 23 

 Developing a future for a fragile mountain community as well as for its cultural tradition (SO‐III) 
 Developing rural and ecological tourism structures; 
 Developing site presentation infrastructure; 
 Developing knowledge and educational structures; 
 Developing other compatible industrial and commercial activities; 
 Improvement of environmental conditions. 
 Preserving  the  intangible  heritage  of  Roșia  Montană,  concerning  the  community’s  organization  and 
practices from the Roman era to the contemporary period (SO‐IV) 
 Preservation  of  the  multi‐cultural  communities living  and  working habits,  knowledge,  beliefs  and 
traditions; 
 Enhancing  public  appreciation  and  understanding  of  cultural  heritage  site  by  developing 
presentation and interpretation policies. 

Protection and management directions/Operational programs 
 Knowledge development (connected with SO‐I activities) 
 Property use management (connected with SO‐II activities) 
 Integrity preservation and regeneration (connected with SO‐III activities) 
 Prevention measures; avoiding catastrophic events; 
 Site monitoring and priority programs 
 Preserving the values and authenticity of the monument and preserving its optimal physical state 
 Interpretation and presentation (connected with SO‐IV activities) 
 Results’ evaluation process 

Operational priorities 
 Identify  the  nominated  property’s  principal  conservation  and  management  needs  and  issues,  and 
develop policies and strategic management objectives to address them, within a continuous process.  
 Develop a strategic fund‐sourcing tool for conservation of the property, providing reassurance that any 
finance  granted  will  benefit  a  heritage  of  international  significance  and  for  future  generations  of  all 
nations. 
 Build and maintain strong partnerships between the community, site owners, local, regional, national 
and international organisations, making sure everyone shares an understanding of what matters, and 
why,  before  any  major  decisions  are  taken,  and  to  provide  strategic  and  day‐to‐day  guidance  for 
relevant practitioners.  
 Share  actions  and  responsibilities  with  appropriate  stakeholders  to  optimise  capacity  and  resource 
potential, to manage change carefully so as not to damage what is special, and to promote sustainable 
opportunities for heritage‐led regeneration and activity. 

Every effort will be made to share and promote this vision, to accomplish the mission and to ensure the 
consultation  and  participation  of  local  communities  in  the  protection  and  conservation  of  their  local 
heritage. 

 
 
24 
 25 

Description of the Property 
Property Identification  
 
 

 
Country (and State Party if different)  
Romania  
 
State, Province or Region  
County Alba 
Municipalities of Roșia Montană and Abrud (nominated property) 
Municipalities of Roșia Montană, Abrud, Bucium, Lupşa (buffer zone) 
 
Name of Property 
Roșia Montană Mining Landscape 
 
Geographical coordinates 
N 46° 18’22’ 
E 23° 7’50’ 
 
Area of nominated property (ha.) and proposed buffer zone (ha.) 
Property 1637.78 ha 
Buffer 275.29 ha 
Total 1913.07 ha 
 
Estimated population: 
Property: ca. 600 
Buffer zone: ca. 100 
Total: ca. 700 
Year: 2016 
26 
27 
28 
 29 

Brief Description 
 
Roșia  Montană  is  situated  in  a  natural  amphitheatre  of  massifs  and  radiating  valleys  in  the  Metalliferous 
range  of  the  Apuseni  Mountains,  located  in  the  historical  region  of  Transylvania  in  the  central  part  of 
Romania.  The site represents  the  so‐called  Golden  Quadrilateral of  the Romania’s Western  Carpathians  – 
the richest precious metals province in Europe. 
As  described  in  Statement  of  Significance  –  Cârnic  Massif,  Roşia  Montană,  jud  Alba,  Romania,  written  in 
2010 at the request of the Romanian Ministry of Culture in 2010, ‘the Cârnic Massif constitutes part of a 
wider  cultural  landscape  of  high  significance  [...].  The  evidence  of  Roman  mining  in  Cârnic  is  part  of  the 
largest, most  extensive  and  most  important  underground  mine  complexes within  the Roman  Empire. [...] 
The  underground  evidence  of  mining,  galleries,  adits  and  technology  gains  in  significance  because  it  is 
associated  with  an  historic  landscape  above  ground  with  evidence  of  processing,  settlements,  ritual  and 
communities.  Further  evidence,  from  epigraphy,  wax  tablets  and  closely  dated  archaeological  deposits, 
enhances Roşia Montană as one of the world’s outstanding heritage assets. [...] 
In  combination,  the  subterranean  workings,  the  surface  landscape  of  ore  processing  areas,  settlements, 
religious places and cemeteries, and the documented history of the associated communities constitute an 
extraordinarily  detailed  record  of  Roman,  medieval,  Early  Modern  and  communist‐period  mining 
exploitation.  The  Cârnic  massif  in  particular  contains  the  most  extensive  complexes  of  underground 
workings in the Roşia Montană region, and these must be preserved as an ensemble, in their entirety.’ 
The  report  recognize  that  ‘the  Cârnic  massif  in  particular  contains  the  most  extensive  complexes  of 
underground workings in the Roşia Montană region, and these must be preserved as an ensemble, in their 
entirety’; also, ‘the overall significance of this mining landscape as a whole is greater than the sum of its 
parts. Allowing the archaeological discharge of any one of these sites would do irreparable damage to the 
integrity of the mining landscape as a whole.’26 
In  order  to  give  a  brief  description  of  the  site,  we  will  first  describe  the  attributes  (the  nominated 
components27  –  archaeological  heritage,  industrial  (modern)  heritage,  historic  and  urban  heritage, 
vernacular heritage) followed by all those elements declared as carrying attributes that contribute to OUV 
and, finally, we will statue on the landscape characterisation.  
The  landscape  characterisation  is  understood  as  starting  step  for  the  landscape  identification  and 
evaluation process, following the European Landscape Convention guidelines and understanding landscape 
as natural and cultural specific local synthesis.  
 
Nominated Components (OUV and associated values) 
The ancient mining zone of Roșia Montană was structured around the exploitation of four main massifs – 
Cetate,  Cârnic,  Jig‐Văidoaia,  and  Orlea,  in  both  opencast  and  underground  workings,  with  underground 
workings  also  in  the  areas  of  Hăbad,  Carpeni,  Cârnicel  and  Coş‐Lety.  Most  of  these  areas  have  known 
associated surface sites – settlements, ore‐processing areas, religious buildings, and cemeteries28.  
The combination of underground workings, above‐ground opencast workings, ore‐processing, settlements, 
sacred sites and cemeteries adds up to a mining landscape of unique significance whose integrity should be 
29
maintained, as destruction of any part of it would diminish it greatly . 
 
1. Mining exploitation: Underground and Surface 
Combination  of  evidence  for  underground  mining  exploitation,  above‐ground  processing  and  related 
surface habitation, cemeteries, sanctuaries and other remains, which together constitute an ancient mining 
landscape;  numerous  wooden  artefacts  and  mining  implements  within  the  galleries  (over  30  wooden 
writing tablets which open a remarkable window on the world of the Alburnus Maior mining community, 
recording organisational features of the mining operations, loans, wage labour contracts, the sale of slaves, 
details of  ethnic  groupings  of miners  and the  dissolution  of a burial  club  or  collegium);  stone  inscriptions 
recording  information  on  the  religious  preferences,  ethnic  composition  and  status  of  the  mining 
community.30 

26
   Prof Andrew Wilson, Prof David Mattingly, Michael Dawson FSA MIfA, Statement of Significance – Cârnic Massif, Roşia Montană, 
jud Alba, Romania, University of Oxford, September 2010 with additional summary July 2011 
27
   Roșia Montană Mining Landscape, Nomination for Inclusion in the World Heritage List, Nomination Document, December, 2016. 
28
Statement of Significance..., op. cit., pp. 7 sq.
29
Ibid, p. 10.
30
Ibid.
 30 

1.1. Mining exploitation: Underground 

     

     
From up left to down right: Cârnic – Blackened wall markings (MNIR Archive); Cătălina Monulești – Waterwheel hub (Călin Tămaș); 
Cetate – Zeus Area. Roman works (MNIR Archive); Orlea – Roman mining works – room with pillars (Lorin Niculae); Văidoaia – 
Medieval and modern open works (Lorin Niculae); Cătălina Monulești. Modern pillar alongside Roman gallery (Călin Tămaș). 

The  Cârnic  Massif  Roman  Galleries  (1.1.1)  network  is  the  most  extensive  and  significant  mining  system 
recorded  anywhere  in  the  Roman  Empire.  The  Roman  galleries  in  Cârnic  contain  three  major  technical 
typologies  of  mining  that  are  unparalleled  elsewhere,  including  within  other  Roman  networks  in  Roșia 
Montană:  spiral  staircase  galleries;  vertical  stopes  with  roofs  cut  in  reverse  stairs;  and  pillar‐supported 
stopes. A fourth typology, seen in other Roman mines, inside and outside of Romania, is represented by the 
stepped communication galleries. A precious discovery was that of a Roman hydraulic system in the Păru 
Carpeni mine, a very significant property in the ensemble.  
The Lety Massif Roman Galleries network (1.1.2) includes the galleries of Cătălina Monulești, Sf. Iosif and Sf. 
Laurenţiu, and contains much pristine archaeology, including dated Roman woodwork in various contexts. 
The  specific  conditions  of  humidity  are  ideal  for  preservation  and  many  artefacts  discovered  have  been 
recorded and  left in situ. A remarkable treadmill‐powered water‐dipping wheel system was discovered in 
Cătălina  Monulești  Roman  Galleries  (1.1.2)  during  archaeological  investigations  in  the  2000s,  installed  in 
multiple chambers, one upon the other, it represents the same design as that discovered in Păru Carpeni 
mine in Cârnic Roman Galleries. 
The Cetate Massif Roman mining features (1.1.3) has been subject to archaeological excavations (Zeus Area, 
Găuri Area), but most of the Roman mining features have not been yet addressed. An important part of the 
Cetate Massif has been compromised in terms of integrity by the incursion of modern workings. Still, under 
the modern exploitation level there is an area of great potential, poorly or never researched to date. 
The  underground  mining  exploitation  has  other  components,  as  Orlea  Roman  Galleries  (1.1.4),  open  to 
visitors  since  the  communist  period  in  the  1970s  when  the  mining  museum  was  first  established,  Cârnic 
Roman fire‐setting complex (1.1.5), Cârnic Early Modern Galleries (1.1.6), Cătălina Monulești Early Modern 
Galleries  (1.1.7),  Cetate  Early  Modern  Galleries  (1.1.8)  and  Văidoaia  Massif:  Early  Modern  underground 
workings (1.1.9). 
 
1.2. Mining exploitation: Surface 

   
From left to right: Cârnic – Piatra Corbului Roman slope‐side works (Horia Ciugudean); 
Cetate ‐ Găuri Area: Roman works opened with fire and water (MNIR Archive) 

Vestiges of surface Roman exploitations are in evidence: the Cârnic Roman Openworks (1.2.1), in the Piatra 
Corbului area, listed together with the remaining galleries and associated archaeological features from the 
Cetate Roman Open Pit (1.2.2) (the massif having been reduced by destructive opencast mining).  
 31 

1.3. Ore‐processing features: Header Ponds 

     
From  up  left  to  down  right:  Tăul  Mare  and  surrounding  area  (Radu  Sălcudean);  Tăul  Ţarina  (Lorin  Niculae);  Tăul  Brazi  and  Tăul  Anghel 
(Radu Sălcudean). 

An extensive network of header ponds was created, probably incorporating pre‐existing ponds, starting in 
the  first  half  of  18th  century.  Set  into  favourable  positions  on  the  slopes  of  the  mountains  surrounding 
Roșia Montană and Corna, they gather water from springs and streams, from rain and melting snow, kept 
by artificial dams. The dams of the larger ponds – Tăul Mare (1.3.1), Tăul Ţarina (1.3.2), Tăul Corna (1.3.3), 
Tăul Brazi (1.3.4), Tăul Anghel (1.3.5), Tăul Cartuş (1.3.6), Tăul Ţapului (1.3.7), Tăul Găuri (1.3.8) – are built 
of substantial well‐engineered earth embankments lined and faced with stone, sometimes with particular 
architecture  elements  to  define  the  sluice  outlets  at  their  base.  After  the  cessation  of  traditional  mining 
they  were  abandoned,  absorbed  into  the  natural  and  agricultural  landscape  and  developed  specific 
ecosystems of high natural significance. They contribute significantly to the character of the entire property. 
The  property  boundary  has  been  amended  (2018)  to  exclude  the  Ore  Railway  (1.3.9)  (mid  19th  century) 
from  the  mining  area  to  the  former  ore‐processing  plant.  The  line  was  decommissioned  in  2006  and  the 
track  removed.  However,  most  substantial  engineering  structure  remains,  including  the  inclined  plane 
section. 
 
1.4. Mining administration 

  
State mine headquarters (V. Zotinca). 

The State Mining Headquarters (18th – 20th centuries) (1.4.1), located in Roșia Montană, were established 
here when the Habsburg government took over the organization of the underground mining and developed 
it on a large scale. The headquarters include the roll‐call house with the mine entrance shaft, offices and 
housing for the higher staff, along with ancillary buildings. Set apart from these, lies the house of the mine 
leader. It incorporates in the former roll‐call house a descent into the “Holy Cross” master gallery, dug in 
the time of Empress Maria Theresa, uniting all major operating systems underground. The ensemble is still 
used as headquarters for the state mine, hosting as well the local mining museum.  
The  same  position  concerns  also  the  Miners’  dormitory  (early  20th  century)  (1.4.2)  and  the  Mining 
Professional School (late 19th century) (1.4.3). 
 
 32 

2. Archaeological Areas 
2.1. Roman archaeological areas 

   

   
From up left to down right: Dwelling and excavated habitat structures in Găuri area;  
The circular monument and Hop Necropolis; Islaz Fortification (MNIR Archive) 

The characteristics and distribution in the landscape of necropolises on the slopes and plateaus, as well as 
habitat and sacred places, provide data to help reconstruct an ancient local topography, intimately 
associated with ancient gold mining and processing areas. Remains of habitations, sacred areas, 
necropolises and funerary areas, together with evidence of ore‐processing activities integrated within 
dwellings, and paved Roman roads, are buried beneath a shallow earth veneer, more or less well preserved. 

Ancient archaeological monuments have been grouped into three typologies: 
(a)   Residential areas with accompanying infrastructure: Hop‐Găuri – habitation (2.1.2), Hăbad – habitation 
(2.1.3), Tăul Ţapului (2.1.4), Carpeni Hill (2.1.7); 
(b)   Sacred  areas  with  temples:  Hăbad  Sacred  Area  (2.1.1),  Nanului  Valley  (2.1.6)  and  possibly  Carpeni 
(2.1.7);  
(c)   Zone funeral (cremation necropolises) – Hop Necropolis (2.1.5), Tăul Cornei – Corna Sat Zone (2.1.11), 
Jig‐Piciorag Area (2.1.8), Ţarina Necropolis (2.1.10), Paraul Porcului – Tăul Secuilor (2.1.11) – and groups 
of graves in the Nanului Valley Sacred Space (2.1.6) and Carpeni Hill (2.1.7). 
The  funerary  practices  of  the  ancient  populations  that  were  colonised  at  Alburnus  Maior  by  the  Romans 
feature strongly in archaeological revelations: notably 7 necropolises (Hop Găuri, Tăul Corna, Ţarina, Pârâul 
Porcului / Tăul Secuilor, Jig Piciorag, Carpeni and Szekely) and an outstanding Roman funerary precinct at 
Tăul  Găuri,  with  more  than  1,450  cremation  graves.  Apart  from  significances  conferred  upon  individual 
archaeological sites, the characteristics and distribution in the landscape of necropolises on the slopes and 
plateaus, as well as habitat and sacred places, provides data to help reconstruct an ancient local topography 
that  was  intimately  associated  with  ancient  gold  mining  and  processing  areas.  Remains  of  habitations, 
sacred  areas,  necropolises  and  funerary  areas,  together  with  evidence  of  ore‐processing  activities 
integrated within dwellings, and  paved Roman roads, are buried beneath a shallow  earth veneer and are 
more  or  less  well  preserved.  The  discovered  artefacts  (particularly  during  preventive  archaeological 
campaigns)  include  more  than  70  votive  altars  in  2001–02,  alone.  The  artefact  collection  also  includes 
everyday Roman ceramics and pieces of funerary architecture – over 10,000 items, their conservation being 
undertaken by specialised staff in the laboratories of a number of Romanian museums.  
Complementarily, in the Bălmoșești – Islaz Area (2.1.12), a Roman fortificated habitat area, superposed by 
medieval  habitat  evidences,  has  been  identified  and  primarly  researched.  Its  higher  importance  –  as  first 
defense structure identified in the Roşia Montană area – was highlighted in the archaeological reports31. 

31
  Cristina Crăciun, Vasile Moga, „Cercetări de teren şi sondaje arheologice”, in Paul Damian (coord.), Alburnus Maior, I, 2003, pp. 
37‐39; Paul Damian, Corina Borş, «Consideraţii privind managementul arheologic în contextul proiectului minier Roşia Montană. 
Programul Naţional de Cercetare „Alburnus Maior” (2001–2006)», in Cercetări Arheologice, XIV–XV, Bucureşti: MNIR, 2007‐2008, 
p. 502, 519. 
 33 

3. Built heritage features 
3.1. Town / village: Roșia Montană (Modern) 
 

  
View on Roșia Montană, with the central area in the foreground (Radu Sălcudean) 

Roșia  Montană  (550–580  m  altitude)  has  a  mixed  structure  related  to  geomorphology  and  topography: 
nuclei  including  the  churches,  various  buildings,  and  areas  of  mining  exploitation,  and  the  core  of  Roșia 
Valley with the Roșia River (its use correlated with former stamp mills); mountain massifs, that are places of 
ore exploitation, constrain a settlement structure that ties in with the linear structure of the valley: Cetate 
and Orlea flanking the lower pole, with churches in the valley; and Jig Văidoaia, Letea and Cârnic around the 
higher pole of the historical centre. Anthropogenic changes in the landscape shaped for industrial purposes 
become a significant defining factor in the urban structure of settlement. 
The existing historic building stock dates mostly from the 18th to early 20th century, with few conspicuous 
later  additions.  The  general  structure  of  the  town  and  its  street  pattern  respond  to  the  territorial 
distribution  of  extraction  areas,  with  two  main  nuclei,  one  –  the  administrative  –  set  between  Orlea  and 
Cetate massifs, the other – the historic one – between Jig‐Văidoaia, Lety and Cârnic. The numerous now‐
abandoned  public  functions set  into  the town speak  of prosperity  and  of  the  bustling life  of gold  mining, 
and so do the conspicuous ‘cultured’ features of the street facades of houses.  
Starting  from  the  Square  (3.1.1),  where  the  public  activities  were  concentrated  in  an  urban  architectural 
ensemble  with  a  strong  representational  character  (townhouses  with  commercial  ground  floors,  ‘Sicilian 
Street’,  Roman‐Catholic  and  Unitarian  churches  and  parish  ensembles,  the  Casino,  the  former 
Administrative  Palace),  the  urban  structure  gradually  dilutes  into  the  mining‐and‐agro‐pastoral  suburbs 
which  are  represented  by  loose  groups  of  households  which  combine  common  agricultural  areas  and 
annexes – barns and pens and gardens – with traditional processing installations and spaces or even mine 
adits  opening  in  their  backyards.  The  other  neighbourhoods  (3.1.2‐3.1.10),  as  Brazi  (several  historic 
dwellings, with Baroque and Classical character, others characteristic for the Interwar period), Ieruga (three 
massive houses, of Baroque allure, form the compact eastern front of a little square where the Ieruga mine 
used to be), Tăul Brazi, Văidoaia, Berk, Sosași, Orlea. Gura Minei and Vercheş have different characteristics. 
The Roşia Montană built heritage inventory, realized in 2000 by a team of historians and art historians from 
the National institute of Heritage (INP, former CPPCN, INMI) led to a 110 record analytical forms covers the 
entire  village  –  see  Appendix  2.  The  2006  study  concerning  the  main  chore  of  Roșia  Montană  creates 
regulations in order to protect Roşia Montană’s heritage refined the mentioned information32. 

Roșia Montană – five churches, five communities (c ARA); North‐east front of the Square, early 1940s (Silviu Bocaniciu Sr) 
 

32
   Adriana  Stroe,  Aurelian  Stroe,  Ioan  George  Andron,  Iozefina  Postăvaru,  ‘Roșia  Montană.  Inventarierea  patrimoniului  construit’ 
[Roșia Montană. Built Heritage Inventory], Buletinul Comisiei Monumentelor Istorice XX, 1‐2 (2009), pp. 66‐112; S.C. OPUS S.R.L., 
Plan Urbanistic Zonal – Zona istorică centrală Roșia Montană [Zonal Urban Plan – Central Historical Area of Roșia Montană], 2006. 
 34 

3.2. Town / village: Corna (Modern) 

   
Habitation area in Corna Valley (Ștefan Angelescu); Corna churches (Radu Sălcudean) 

The village (600–800m altitude) is situated in the upper, more open, part of the Corna Valley. While some of 
the households are scattered on the slopes, the rest of the buildings gather around more compact nuclei, 
close to the two header ponds and the communal road. The lowest nucleus consists of several houses along 
the  communal  road.  A  second  nucleus  is  formed  around  the  two  churches  and  several  other  public 
functions, with plots distributed along the paths connecting to the upper part of the village. The upper part 
of the village consists of the third nucleus of houses, close to Tăul Corna. The last two nuclei are connected 
by a network of intertwining paths and were built in direct relation to the historical mining activity.  
The  rural  settlement  has  a  mixed  structure:  one  linear  nucleus  emerges  along  Corna  Valley,  whilst  other 
concentrations are located around the churches and the ponds; in the highland area of the settlement, the 
limits  are  diffuse  and  allow  passage  from  one  property  to  another,  related  to  the  agro‐pastoral  activities 
and in the valley area (the limits are defined by natural elements, in direct relation to the mining activities). 
The oldest church in the area of Roșia Montană, the Orthodox Church (3.2.1), built in 1719, illustrates the 
church typology present in the Apuseni Mountains since the 14th century. Surrounded by the cemetery and 
more detached from the village buildings’ nucleus, the Greek‐Catholic Church (3.2.2) is dating from the 19th 
century, illustrating the same typology of the stone‐built churches of the Apuseni Mountains. 
 

3.3. Town / village: Ţarina (Modern) 

     
View on Tăul Ţarina and Ţarina hamlet (Radu Sălcudean); Traditional farmhouse, Ţarina (3.3.1); Traditional farmhouse with polygonal 
stable (3.3.2) (Ștefan Bâlici) 

Ţarina (1004 m altitude) is a village located near the eastern part of Mt. Orlea and its mining field, covering 
an  area  defined  by  hills  with  rather  steep  slopes.  This  proximity  to  the  mining  field  had  influenced  the 
activities and generated the inhabitation of the territory in a very peculiar way. The Josephine Land Survey 
of the 18th century presents the settlement as a string of houses along the stream that comes from Ţarina 
pond.  Ţarina  is  composed  of  three  defined  areas  gathered  along  the  main  paths  that  historically  linked 
Roșia Montană to Câmpeni and other villages from the north. The main paths have a northwest orientation, 
the easiest way the mountain could be crossed with oxen and carts. The hierarchy of the paths leading to 
Ţarina is influenced by the proximity to the Market Square.  
 35 

Few traditional miners’ households can be seen in the landscape close to the stream. The other two areas 
are more recent, with modern houses that reflect a peasant way of life. Situated near the eastern part of 
Orlea Massif has a mixed structure: the dwellings, close to Roșia Montană, were related to mining activities; 
in its upper part it is a scattered hamlet with agro‐pastoral activities. 
Representative  examples  of  traditional  houses  in  Ţarina  are  the  late  nineteenth  century  Traditional 
farmhouse  (19th  century),  Ţarina  no.  1248  (3.3.1)  and  the  Traditional  farmhouse  (20th  century),  with 
polygonal stable (3.3.2). Located on the fringe of the Orlea mining field, where miners gathered the rocks 
from  the  exploitation,  the  house  presents  vernacular  and  mining  features,  including  the  old  stable,  a 
peculiar wooden construction with four sides, of which one has a polygonal shape. 
 

3.4. Town / village: Bălmoșești ‐ Blidești (Modern) 

     
Views on Bălmoşeşti (3.4.1) household and other landscape signs (Ioana Tudora) 

Rural/vernacular  settlements  (hamlets)  with  diffuse  and  scattered  structure  and  natural  limits,  and  rural 
households  that  are  related  to  agro‐pastoral  activities,  Bălmoșești  (846  m  altitude)  and  Blidești  (825m 
altitude) have a typical structure for Apuseni Mountains’ rural settlements:  
 the  households  and  outbuildings  are  situated  in  the  middle  or  as  extension  of  the  property, 
perpendicular with the road and depending on the relief; 
 dispersed, the hamlets are settlements form with no communal facilities, and weak infrastructure. 
 households  are  spread  on  the  hills  and  their  inhabitants  are  called  ‘side  –  settlers’  (‘lătureni’),  their 
main occupation being agriculture and cattle breeding; 
 temporary form of living of the hayfields where cattle stable and one‐room buildings are situated. 
Bălmoșești (3.4.1), one of the smallest satellite‐villages of Roșia Montană, is located on the northern slopes 
of  Roșia  valley,  west  of  Mt.  Orlea.  Its  importance  lays  in  adding  a  rural  layer  to  the  mining  area.  This 
settlement is formed of simple scattered houses with modern appearance (modern vernacular style), built 
mainly in the 20th century. The households are close to the main path, an unpaved road that follows the 
slopes  of  the  mountain.  In  recent  years  the  hamlet  became  even  smaller  as  part  of  the  houses  were 
abandoned and demolished. 
The  path  leaves  Roșia  Montană,  near  the  Mining  Enterprise  ensemble,  going  around  Orlea  quarry  and 
ascending  towards  the  northwest.  The  settlement  is  approximately  at  half  the  distance  from  the  starting 
point to the top of the mountainside. A small artificial lake lays over the settlement, as a sign of a possible 
small‐scale mining background. 
Another  satellite  village  of  Roșia  Montană,  Blidești  (3.4.2)  stands  on  the  western  section  of  the  southern 
slopes that define Roșia valley. Hidden from the daily routes, Blidești is linked with Corna valley through a 
northwest oriented path. It comprises three groups of scattered buildings. Of all Roșia Montană valleys this 
settlement has the fewest households, being inhabited by a small number of families as their houses with 
annexes show. 

       
Views on Blideşti (3.4.2) households and other landscape signs (Ioana Tudora) 
 36 

Natural Heritage and Landscape 
4. Natural Heritage and Landscape 
4.1. General Information 

Geological setting (4.1.1) 
The Roșia Montană deposit relates to two major events of Neogene volcanism/magmatism: Cetate dacite 
(13.5 ‐ 1.1 million years ago) and andesites (9.3 – 0.47 million years ago). The bulk of the gold‐silver in the 
deposit  is  concentrated within two adjacent dacitic intrusives: Cetate and Cârnic; which appear to join at 
depth.  Two  main  types  of  gold‐silver  mineralisation  are  present  with  the  deposits  ‐  disseminated  (within 
dacite) and breccia. Within the Cetate and Cârnic intrusives the highest‐grade mineralisation is confined to 
sub‐vertical breccia pipe structures (often containing fragments of crystalline basement). Two (Cetate and 
Carpeni)  are  located  within  the  Cetate  intrusive,  and  four  (Napoleon,  Corhuri,  Cănţăliște  and  Piatra 
Corbului) are located within the Cârnic intrusive. Amongst these common breccia pipes, the largest is the 
Cetate  Breccia  that  was  mined  at  surface  by  the  Romans  (and  possibly  in  prehistoric  times,  also)  as 
evidenced by numerous historic photographs of the large opencast (the ‘Citadel’), mined‐out during open 
pit operations from 1972 to 2006 for the low‐grade gold the Romans left behind. Surrounding the dacitic 
intrusives is a unit of volcanoclastic sediments that also hosts precious metal mineralisation.  
 

Mineralisation (4.1.2) 
Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  is  a  world‐class  gold  deposit  (with  a  low  ‐  intermediate  sulphidation 
state). It comprises various types of ore bodies: veins, breccia structures (breccia pipes and breccia dykes), 
stockworks, and impregnations. The geological age of mineralisation is indicated around 12.7 million years 
ago. Gold occurs as free gold, and in electrum (natural gold – silver alloy). In addition, silver minerals occur 
(argentite, proustite, polybasite), sulphides (common pyrite, and uncommon chalcopyrite, sphalerite, galena, 
tetrahedrite, arsenopyrite) and tellurides (hessite, sylvanite, petzite, altaite and Te‐bearing argyrodite).  
 

Geographic setting (4.1.3) 
The altitude ranges between 600–1200m and the physical elements that define the geographical landscape 
are the peaks (900–1100 m altitude) with amplitude, depth and filtered perspectives by the forestland and 
meadows and  the valleys (500‐800 m altitude) with meadow landscape and dry valleys. The geographical 
landscape is modeled also on the hydrographic network and the geological structure of the mountains. The 
landforms dominate the territory to the south, east and north by the Tile (918m), Cetate, Cârnic (1807m), 
Ghergheleu (1157m), Rotundul (1187m), Brădeţel (1011m), Ghipidele (1050m) and Coltău Hill (1094m). Due 
to differences in height of 700‐800m and different hardness and composition of rocks, erosion and human 
activities  has  contributed  extensively  to  shape  the  land.  The  hydrological  network  is  formed  by  streams 
flowing into the Roșia and Corna Valley and the header ponds used in the past to serve the streams for the 
stamp  mills.  Groundwater  gravity‐flow  mine  drainage  enters  the  rivers  Roșia  and  Corna,  as do  tributaries 
from  the  Roșia  Montană  commune33.  Some  temporary  torrents  are  also  present  on  the  high  part  of  the 
hills, part of them related also to the ponds system.  
 

Natural heritage (4.1.4) 

Piatra Despicată (romaniaturism.com) and Piatra Corbului (financiarul.ro) 

Two  protected  areas  of  national  interest  (ZPIN)  and  natural  monuments  are  located  in  the  nominated 
property  area.  Both  are  geological  sites,  formed  at  the  beginning  of  the  Quaternary.  Piatra  Despicată 
(4.1.4.1), with an area of 0.25 hectares, is located between Cârnic and Cetate peaks and has isolated aspect 
of  block  resistant  to  erosion.  The  site  was  declared  a  ‘natural  monument’  in  1954.  Its  geological 
composition is different from the geology of the area – andesite block located over the dacite rock of the 
massif.  Its  protection  status  is  corresponding  to  the  IIIrd  Category  IUCN.  Piatra  Corbului  (4.1.4.2),  with  an 
area of 5 ha, is situated between Ghergheleu and Curmătura peaks. The natural reserve is situated at 1100–
1150 m altitude, with an aspect of black basalt; its protection status is corresponding to the IVth Category 
IUCN. 

33
   Roșia Montană Mining Landscape, Nomination for Inclusion in the World Heritage List, Nomination Document, December, 2016. 
 37 

4.2. Landscape Characterisation 

Landscape  identification  and  evaluation  is  a  full  process,  mobilising  those  concerned  in  order  to  reach  a 
better  knowledge  of  landscape,  guiding  the  work  of  landscape  identification  and  evaluation  through 
exchanges  of  experience  and  methodology  between  the  Parties  at  a  European  level,  as  statued  by  the 
European  Landscape  Convention.  The  process  aims  at  setting  landscape  quality  objectives  for  the 
landscapes identified and assessed, after public consultation and the implementation of landscape policies 
(introducing  policy  instruments  aimed  at  protecting,  managing  and/or  planning  the  landscape).  The 
landscape characterization presented in the Nomination document is a first step to this process and it may 
be redefined in the future. 
Two millennia, and more, of gold mining activity imposed substantial cumulative disruptive action upon the 
biogeography  of the  property.  But  that  does  not  mean  that  the current ecosystem  lacks  biodiversity; the 
situation  is  quite  the  opposite  –  especially  at  the  landscape  scale.  Indeed,  a  lack  of  modernisation  in 
traditional  agro‐pastoral  practice  preserves  what  is  effectively  a  relict  Bronze  Age  landscape,  set  among 
scenery that is of high aesthetic value. 
The  property  is  characterised  by  a  distinctive  mosaic  of  natural  and  exposed  rocky  massifs  strewn  with 
metalliferous mine debris, lakes (former header ponds) that occupy the higher elevations, forest (coniferous 
and deciduous), mountain meadows and hayfields, and the built‐up area of Roșia Montană village. In close 
proximity are semi‐natural habitats of High Nature Value grasslands (oligotrophic pastures and mesotrophic 
hay‐meadows,  traditionally  farmed  and  lush  with  wildflowers)  and  mires  ‐  listed  in  Annexe  I  of  the  EU 
Habitats  Directive,  together  with  Calaminarian  grasslands,  orchids  and  other  plant  species  that  are  Red‐
listed in Romania and/or Europe. 
 
Agro‐pastoral landscape (4.2.1) 

General and particular characteristic views (Radu Sălcudean, Mihaela Hărmănescu) 

Human  intervention  in  this  landscape  of  pastures,  hay‐meadows,  meadows  adjacent  to  the  village, 
orchards,  interspersed  with  small  patches  of  arable  land  is  of  considerably  lower  intensity  compared  to 
other similar areas in the Apuseni Mountains. Thus, pastures, orchards and meadows have been continually 
maintained  with  a  low  intensity  land  use  and  traditional  practice  that  is  highly  beneficial  for  species 
richness. Cattle grazing and crop rotation biennial or triennial systems (ploughing one year and fallow for 
two or three years) and soil terracing sustains land fertility.  
A difference of the texture fragmentation is visible between the villages and different types (sub‐units) of 
the agro‐pastoral landscape are bounded by plantation property boundaries, fences or dry stone masonry 
(‘mauri’), for example in the meadows around the settlements (Roșia Montană, Ţarina)34. 
Another  notable  difference  is  easy  to  observe  between  the  south‐oriented  pasture  areas  and  north‐
oriented  ones.  Thus,  the pastures  with  southern  exposer  are  more  degraded  by  drougths  and tend  to  be 
slowly replaced by shrubs and bushes. 

  
North‐south orientation of the pastures (Ioana Tudora)

34
   Ibid. 
 38 

Rocks and stony ground landscape (4.2.2) 

Natural rock gardens (Daniel Vrăbioiu)

On the highest slopes toward the top of the hill, inside the pastures areas there are rocks and stony ground 
characterized  by  ‘natural  rock  gardens’  where  vegetation  is  influenced  by  the  secondary  effects  of 
metalliferous mineralisation. 

Woodland / Forest landscape (4.2.3) 

     
Forest landscape (Ioana Tudora); boundaries (c Radu Sălcudean); permeable limits to other landscape types (Ioana Tudora) 

Woodland occupies the altitudinal area between 600‐1200 m, with a distinctive substrate and micro‐climate 
sometimes  leading  to  the  phenomena  of  vegetation  inversion.  The  landscape  is  characterized  by  the 
deciduous  and  coniferous  forests  and  the  woodlands  stretch  over  small  fragmented  areas  with  different 
utilities. The spread of deciduous trees is inside the inhabited area and on the southern slopes of the Jig and 
Văidoaia massifs, in the eastern part delimiting the settlement and Tăul Mare. The background southeast of 
Roșia  Montană  is  heavily  vegetated  with  coniferous  woodland  (on  Cârnic),  linking  historic  extraction  and 
agro‐pastoral landscapes. Conifers, massive trees and resinous shrubs are spread on rocky substrate on the 
north slope of Cârnic, in Tăul Brazi and Corna areas. These create a natural reinforcement of the soil against 
erosion, landslides and the formation of debris. They also contribute to soil formation. 
 
Wetland landscape/Flushes and mires (4.2.4) 

       
Actual and former header ponds with water retention function and specific flora (Ioana Tudora, Radu Sălcudean, Lorin Niculae) 

The  hydro‐technical  ensemble  made  by  header  ponds,  and  the  installation  of  water  control  and  routing, 
fundamentally changed the hydrology within the landscape. These artificial elements, arranged throughout 
the territory, were partially absorbed into the natural environment while generating lower specific wetland 
landscape  (characterized  by  the  relation  between  anthropogenic  and  natural  elements).  The  cultural 
importance  of  these  facilities  is  given  by  more  harmonious  (medieval)  mining  activity  and  its  interaction 
with the natural environment. Meanwhile, the main ponds (Tăul Mare, Tăul Brazi, Tăul Corna) have become 
important geographical landmarks.  
The  present  water  system  is  doubled  by  other  traces  of  disappeared  ponds  although  their  shape  and 
structure is clearly visible in the landscape. Also some dried ditches, connecting the ponds, are still visible in 
the  landscape.  Some  of  the  dried  ditches  are  built  with  the  same  maure  (dry  masonry)  technology  while 
others are just simple earth excavations.  
 39 

Some new ponds are built for fishery (in the lower part of the town) and some of the old, mining ponds are 
also use to grow fish (Tăul Brazi). An important issue related to the new fishery activity is created by the 
extensive insertion of the Chinese carp, invading specie that is currently destroying the water ecosystems.  
Another important feature of the landscape is the presence of a large number of torrent valleys with rich 
riparian vegetation (Alnus sp., Salix sp., Populus sp.) that has an important ecological role in correlation with 
meadows and pastures.  
 
Archaeological landscape (4.2.5) 

     
Excavated habitat structures in Găuri area (MNIR Archive); same area archaeological evidence (Ioana Tudora) 

The archaeological heritage, through the way to adapt to the natural environment, is currently building a 
specific  landscape.  Necropolises,  sacred  areas  and  housing  areas  are  located  on  slopes  or  on  plateaus 
oriented  towards  the  valleys,  where  the  southern  orientation  is  favourable;  subordinate  to  the  natural 
environment  through  their  arrangement.  The  ancient  habitat  structure  has  housing  systems  typical  for 
mountain  areas  and  in  direct  relation  with  the  mining  activities.  Due  to  the  vegetation  dynamic  and 
protection needs, most of the archaeological sites are slightly legible in the landscape today. 
Additional  archaeological  sites,  that  cannot  be  clearly  identified yet,  might be  found  on the  slopes  (often 
covered by forests, as the recently discovered stone circular mausoleum), as well as in the inhabited valleys 
(where  the  current  activities  make  difficult  the  archaeological  research).  Therefore,  a  LIDAR  survey  is 
already agreed in order to obtain a better image on the entire area.  
 
Mining landscape (4.2.6) 

     
Mount Cârnic – vestiges of prehistoric and Roman slope‐side works opened with 
fire and water (Horia Ciugudean, Radu Sălcudean) 

Important  preserved  mining  landscapes  bear  testimonies  to  the  history  of  Roman,  medieval  and  modern 
mining, located at the edge of the settlement and beyond. Roman period evidence is significant testimony 
to a concerted  effort  of  around  50  years,  in  which  one  of  the largest  known  underground  Roman  mining 
complexes  developed  at  Roșia  Montană.  Medieval  and  modern  testimonies  are  significant  in  terms  of 
underground  developments  and  of  preindustrial  ore  processing.  Preindustrial  exploitation  profoundly 
impacted upon the natural landscape: header ponds, bare mountains, mine openings and the sites of stamp 
mills and water management infrastructure create distinctive features  within the mining landscape. After 
the cessation of traditional mining, the traces of human activity have mellowed into the natural landscape. 
 
 40 

Built–up (architectural) landscape (4.2.7) 
The  typology  and  morphological  structure  of  human  settlements  follows  natural  elements  and  main 
activities. The following types are distinguished:  
Linearly  developed  along  watercourses,  valleys  and  the  main  roads  (4.2.7.1),  with  interdependent 
relationships  with  water  in  the  past:  Roșia  Montană,  Corna,  Ţarina  (this  type  concerns  all  exploitation 
villages  as  well  as  commercial  zones;  the  colonists’  villages;  also,  moving  agro‐pastoral  high‐altitude 
properties ‘to the line’, in the valleys, represents an historic process in modern Transylvania). 
Compact  developed  in  the  proximity  of mining  activities  (4.2.7.2):  mine  accesses  in  Jig massif,  Cârnic  and 
Letea,  mining  heaps,  historic  earthworks,  etc.  influenced  the  settlement  structure  in  the  two  main  cores 
(the valley and historic ) in the proximity of woodlands, as an ‘extension’ of the natural element (Blidești, 
Corna).  
Disperse habitat developed on the crests and on the sunny side of the hills (4.2.7.3), with diffuse limits and 
types of the settlement, in proximity of agro‐pastoral landscape (Blidești, Bălmoșești and parts of the other 
villages).  This  habitat  is  characteristic  for  all  Romanian  mountain  communities  all  over  Transylvania  and 
other Romanian provinces. 

Linearly developed upon valleys ‐ mining villages (4.2.7.1)  

 
(xplorio.ro; evsymca.wordpress.com, adoptaocasa.ro) 

Compact developed – mining activity centres (4.2.7.2) 

(albatv.ro) 

Dispersed dwellings – agro‐pastoral villages (4.7.3) 

(Ioana Tudora) 
 
 41 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
Văidoaia, no. 451. Miner’s house (Irina Popescu‐Criveanu) 
 42 

 
Site’s Setting Vicinities 
Outside the limit of the nominated site and its buffer zone, other traditional and mining villages are located 
in Cărpiniș, Coasta Henții, Curături, Dăroaia, Gârda‐Bărbulești, Gura Roșiei, Iacobești, Ignățești, Șoal, Vârtop, 
ll  in  the  Roșia  Montană  commune.  They  all  have  similar  characteristics:  traditional  dwelling  and  farming, 
linked to the mining activities, wood culture. As the area is conserving most of its traditional characteristics, 
its development should be managed in order to support the Roșia Montană tourism development.  

Cărpiniş  

Gura Roşiei – general view (ro.wikipedia.org). The narrow gauge railway system (760 mm) from Turda to Abrud (94 km, operated 1912‐
1997) was rehabilitated and functions for a 11 km long distance, from Abrud to Gura Roşiei, Cărpiniş and Cîmpeni (www.cfi.ro).  

     
Şoal, birthplace of Ion Oargă Cloșca (1747‐85) – general view; Cloşca’s memorial house; detail (ro.wikipedia.org) 

Vârtop ‐ Hoanca Urzicarului NPA (informatii‐romania.ro; romaniaturism.ro) 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 43 

 
 
 
 
 
In the vicinity of Roșia Montană, the former village of Geamăna (Lupşa commune) shows the effects of the 
late 1970’s mining practices, linked to the Roșia‐Poieni exploitation.   

 
The Roșia Poieni copper mine open pit (obiectiv.info) 

   
The former village of Geamăna; the church after the drowning of the Sessia Valley 
(largest pond in Europe, created in the 1980s) (primanatura.ro) 

    
(mediafax.ro, Dan Tăuţan) 

 
 44 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The Bucium area, belonging to the commune of Bucium, which comprises several villages (Bucium Cerbu, 
Bucium Muntari, Bucium Sasa, Bucium Poieni, Bucium Izbita) and partially to the town of Zlatna, are located 
toward the north‐eastern extremity of the so‐called “Golden Quadrilateral”, in the so‐called Roșia Montană‐
Bucium metallogenetic district, southeast of the well‐known Roșia Montană gold deposit35.  
‘While the Roșia Montană region is better known for older or recent archaeological excavations, the Bucium 
valley remains practically unexplored, despite Roman finds being reported here in the 19th and first half of 
the 20th century. [...] The field surveys conducted at the mining sites provided the possibility of clarifying 
the Iron Age and Roman mining techniques used in the Bucium‐Zlatna region from the late Iron Age to the 
3rd century AD. At these sites, characterized by large opencast mines, the earliest works from La Tène were 
found  sited  at  the  edge  of  the  later,  larger  works.  These  were  saved  from  later  reworking  because  they 
36
were worked for only a short time’ .  

     
Zlatna: Aerial view of a Roman pond (piscina) on the Poduri plateau; Peter and Paul mine with the original Roman 
entrance and inside main gallery – ) – Ciugudean, H. 2007, fig. 14 and 19. 

   
Trail with traces of exploitation ‐ segment of the Roman Road. Vâlcoi Mount, Bucium  
(Mihaela Hărmănescu, 2014/2015) 

‘Although it is still difficult to estimate the location of the first prehistoric mining areas, some of the ancient 
opencast mines at Roșia Montană (Găuri and Cetate) and Bucium (Ieruga, Gaura Perii) may be considered 
very  good  candidates  in  this  respect’37.  Also,  ‘a  connection  could  be  proposed  between  the  alignment  of 
Early  Bronze  tumulus‐burials  graves  and  the  ancient  routes  of  communication  in  the  Roșia  Montană  – 
Bucium  –  Zlatna  area.  There  was  a  “Golden  Corridor”  along  the  Ampoi  valley,  which  connected 
Transylvanian  metal  ores  with  different  cultural  regions  (Lower  Danube,  the  Adriatic  shore  and  northern 
Greece)’38.  ‘A  pilot  Cultural  Path  has  already  been  promoted  in  the  Roșia  Montană‐Corna‐Bucium  area 
under the name of “Drumul Aurului” (The Golden Way). Several physical paths were created and signposted 
in the landscape, and multilingual full‐colour brochures introducing the paths were printed, helping visitors 
to learn about the archaeological sites and monuments that were all well looked after’39.  

The  Bucium  valley  museum  (‘Muzeul  Buciumanilor’  has  been  established  in  an  old  house  of  Bucium;  its 
inauguration dates from august 2017. Landscape studies  and, also, heritage studies40 will led to reinforce 
connections  in  the  ‘Golden  Quadrangle’,  especially  between  Roșia  Montană  and  Bucium‐Zlatna  areas,  as 
similar and complementary mining landscape areas. 

35
   Horia Ion Ciugudean, ‘Landscape archeology in south‐west Transylvania: ancient gold mining in the Bucium‐Zlatna region’, in 
I. Vainovski‐Mihai (ed.), New Europe College GE‐NEC Program 2004‐2005, 2005‐200, 2006‐2007, Bucureşti: New Europe College, 
2007, http://www.nec.ro/data/pdfs/publications/ge‐nec/2004‐2007/HORIA_ION_CIUGUDEAN.pdf 
36
   Ibid. All information concerning the Bucium Project and the related heritage sites at www.buciumland.ro 
37
   Horia Ciugudean, ‘Ancient gold mining in Transylvania: the Roșia Montană ‐ Bucium area’, in Caiete ARA. Arhitectură. Restaurare. 
Arheologie, 3/2012, http://www.simpara.ro/files/horia‐ciugudean‐caiete‐ara‐3.pdf 
38
   Ibid.
39
   Horia Ion Ciugudean,’Landscape archaeology..., op. cit. 
40
   See the RPER – Rencontres du Patrimoine Europe‐Roumanie studies and practice in Bucium. 
 45 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Other  natural  protected  areas  –  Detunata  Goală,  Poiana  cu  Narcise  (Daffodin  Glade  Natural  reserve)  are 
located in the same Bucium commune, located 10 km east from Gura Cornei. 

       
41
Monument with mining signs in Bucium commune, classified by RPER‐ RO ;  
Detunata Goală, Bucium Commune (National Natural Reserve (Mihaela Hărmănescu) 

 
View on Detunata Goală, Detunata Flocoasă (Mihaela Hărmănescu) 

 
Roman finds within the “Golden Quadrangle” (apud Wollmann 1996) 
 – Ciugudean, H. 2007, fig. 5.  
 

41
   Iozefina Postăvaru, Mihaela Hărmănescu, Ştefana Bianu, Repertoriu patrimoniu rural Bucium, Caiet III, Bucureşti: MasterPrint, 
2014. 
 46 

Summary 
Table 1. Nominated components (OUV and associated values) – attributes  
 

Attributes, as described in the Nomination Document (code, name)  Brief description  Period  Heritage 

Category 
1  MINING EXPLOITATION: UNDERGROUND AND SURFACE  The ancient mining zone of Roșia Montană was structured around the exploitation of four 
main massifs – Cetate, Cârnic, Jig‐Văidoaia, and Orlea, in both opencast and underground 
workings, with underground workings also in the areas of Hăbad, Carpeni, Cârnicel and Coş‐
Lety. Most of these areas have known associated surface sites – settlements, ore‐processing 
areas, religious buildings, and cemeteries. The combination of underground workings, above‐
ground opencast workings, ore‐processing, settlements, sacred sites and cemeteries adds up 
to a mining landscape of unique significance whose integrity should be maintained, as 
destruction of any part of it would diminish it greatly. 
  1.1  Mining Exploitation: Underground  The Roman workings recorded are not a single network  (R) ‐  (A) 
    1.1.1  Cârnic Massif Roman Galleries  but a total identified across all the targeted massifs.  Roman  Archaeolo‐
    1.1.2  Lety Massif Roman Galleries: Cătălina  All such workings were encountered in a condition described as  gical 
Monulești Roman Galleries  back‐filled, a common mining practice that indeed has aided  heritage 
    1.1.3  Cetate Massif Roman mining features  the structural preservation of certain features and artefacts. 
    1.1.4  Orlea Roman Galleries  Most Roman workings are therefore commonly intersected by 
    1.1.5   Cârnic Roman fire‐setting complex  later workings, inevitably leading to a loss of integrity. What 
survives still means that Roșia Montană represents the most 
extensive and technically diverse underground Roman gold 
mining complex currently known in the world. 
    1.1.6  Cârnic Early Modern Galleries  Such backfill, however, was commonly not “ancient”, most  (EM) –   
    1.1.7  Cătălina Monulești Early Modern Galleries  ancient workings having been reopened by subsequent  Early 
    1.1.8  Cetate Early Modern Galleries  generations of miners during the medieval and modern periods  Modern 
    1.1.9  Văidoaia Massif: Early Modern  (‘Roman’ miners were heavily selective of the highest‐grade 
underground workings  ores, leaving a resource of profitable values exposed and in situ 
for later miners).  
  1.2  Mining exploitation: Surface  Vestiges of surface Roman exploitations are in evidence: the  (R) ‐   
    1.2.1  Cârnic Roman Openworks  Cârnic Roman Openworks, in the Piatra Corbului area, listed  Roman 
  together with the remaining galleries and associated 
    1.2.2  Cetate Roman Open Pit  archaeological features from the Cetate Roman Open Pit (the ‐ 
massif having been reduced by destructive opencast mining).  
  1.3  Ore‐processing features: Header Ponds  An extensive network of header ponds was created, probably  (M) ‐  (B) 
    1.3.1   Tăul Mare  incorporating pre‐existing ponds, starting in the first half of  Modern  Industrial 
    1.3.2   Tăul Ţarina  18th century. Set into favourable positions, they gather water  (modern) 
    1.3.3   Tăul Corna  from springs and streams, from rain and melting snow, kept by  heritage 
    1.3.4   Tăul Brazi  artificial dams. The dams of the larger ponds are built of well‐
    1.3.5   Tăul Anghel  engineered earth embankments lined and faced with stone, 
    1.3.6   Tăul Cartuș  sometimes with particular architecture elements. Water supply 
control mechanisms were installed in the larger ponds, and 
    1.3.7   Tăul Ţapului 
survive in good condition. After the cessation of traditional 
    1.3.8   Tăul Găuri 
mining they were abandoned, absorbed into the landscape and 
developed specific ecosystems.  
  1.4   Mining administration  Located in Roșia Montană, the headquarters were established  (M) ‐  (C) Historic 
    1.4.1   State Mining Headquarters   here when the Habsburg government took over the  Modern  and urban 
  organization of the underground mining and developed it. They  heritage 
    1.4.2   Miners’ Dormitory  include the roll‐call house with the mine entrance shaft, offices 
  and housing for the higher staff, along with ancillary buildings. 
    1.4.3   Mining Professional School   Set apart, lies the house of the mine leader, incorporating the 
former roll‐call house a descent into the “Holy Cross” master 
gallery, uniting the major operating systems underground.  
2  ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREAS  Remains of habitations, sacred areas, necropolises and funerary     
areas, together with evidence of ore‐processing activities 
integrated within dwellings, and paved Roman roads, are 
buried beneath a shallow earth veneer, more or less well 
preserved. 
  2.1  Roman archaeology  Ancient archaeological monuments have been grouped into  (R) ‐  (A) 
    2.1.1   Hăbad Sacred Area  three typologies:  Roman  Archaeolo‐
    2.1.2   Găuri – habitation  (a)   Residential areas with accompanying infrastructure: 2.1.2,  gical 
    2.1.3   Hăbad – habitation  2.1.3, 2.1.4, 2.1.7;   heritage 
    2.1.4   Tăul Ţapului  (b)   Sacred areas with temples: 2.1.1, 2.1.6 and possibly 2.1.7;  
    2.1.5   Hop Necropolis  (c)   Zone funeral (cremation necropolises) – 2.1.5, 2.1.11, 
    2.1.6   Nanului Valley Sacred Space  2.1.8,2.1.10, 2.1.11, and groups of graves: 2.1.6 and 2.1.7. 
    2.1.7   Carpeni Zone  The characteristics and distribution in the landscape of 
    2.1.8   Jig‐Piciorag Area  necropolises on the slopes and plateaus, as well as habitat and 
    2.1.9   Ţarina Necropolis  sacred places, provide data to help reconstruct an ancient local 
    2.1.10   Pârâul Porcului ‐ Tăul Secuilor  topography, intimately associated with ancient gold mining and 
    2.1.11   Tăul Cornei ‐ Corna Sat Zone  processing areas.  
    2.1.12   Bălmoșești ‐ Islaz Area  Roman fortificated habitat area, superposed by medieval  (R) – 
habitat evidences.  Roman 
(Md) ‐ 
Medieval 
 47 

 
 
Attributes, as described in the Nomination Document (code, name)  Brief description  Period  Heritage 
Category 
3   BUILT HERITAGE FEATURES       
  3.1   Modern town / Village [Roșia Montană/Modern]  Roșia Montană (550–580 m altitude) has a mixed structure  (M) ‐  (C) Historic 
    3.1.1   Square  related to geomorphology and topography: nuclei including the  Modern  and urban 
      3.1.1.a   Townhouses with commercial  churches, various buildings, and areas of mining exploitation,  heritage 
ground floors; no. 323‐328,  and the core of Roșia Valley with the Roșia River (its use  (D) 
388 (late 18th – early 19th  correlated with former stamp mills); mountain massifs, that are  Vernacular 
century)  places of ore exploitation, constrain a settlement structure that  heritage 
      3.1.1.b   ‘Sicilian Street’  ties in with the linear structure of the valley: Cetate and Orlea 
      3.1.1.c   Roman‐Catholic Church and  flanking the lower pole, with churches in the valley; and Jig 
parish ensemble (18th –  Văidoaia, Letea and Cârnic around the higher pole of the 
middle 19th, early 20th  historical . Anthropogenic changes in the landscape shaped for 
century)  industrial purposes become a significant defining factor in the 
      3.1.1.d   Unitarian Church and parish  urban structure of settlement. 
ensemble (1796, 18th ‐  The existing historic building stock dates mostly from the 18th 
middle 19th cent, 1933)  to early 20th century, with few conspicuous later additions. The 
      3.1.1.e   The Casino (1880‐1900), no.  general structure of the town and its street pattern respond to 
329, and Summer Garden  the territorial distribution of extraction areas, with two main 
      3.1.1.f   The former Administrative  nuclei, one – the administrative – set between Orlea and Cetate 
Palace (1896), no. 310  massifs, the other one – the historic – between Jig‐Văidoaia, 
    3.1.2   Brazi  Lety and Cârnic. The numerous now‐abandoned public 
    3.1.3  Ieruga  functions set into the town speak of prosperity and of the 
    3.1.4   Tăul Brazi  bustling life of gold mining, and so do the conspicuous 
    3.1.5   Văidoaia  ‘cultured’ features of the street facades of houses.  
    3.1.6   Berk  Starting from the Square (3.1.1), where the public activities 
    3.1.7   Sosași  were concentrated in an urban architectural ensemble with a 
    3.1.8   Orlea  strong representational character (townhouses with 
      3.1.8.a   Greek‐Catholic Church and  commercial ground floors, ‘Sicilian Street’, Roman‐Catholic and 
parish ensemble (1720, 1741,  Unitarian churches and parish ensembles, the Casino, the 
mid 19th century), no. 135  former Administrative Palace), the urban structure gradually 
      3.1.8.b   Orthodox Church and parish  dilutes into the mining‐and‐agro‐pastoral suburbs which are 
ensemble   represented by loose groups of households which combine 
      3.1.8.c   The administrative centre  common agricultural areas and annexes – barns and pens and 
    3.1.9   Gura Minei  gardens – with traditional processing installations and spaces or 
even mine adits opening in their backyards. 
    3.1.10   Vercheș 
      3.1.10.a   Aitaj House, later Miners’  The other neighbourhoods (3.1.2‐3.1.10), as Brazi (several 
Club (no. 242), Maternity  historic dwellings, with Baroque and Classical character, others 
ward (no. 251), Gritta House  characteristic for the Interwar period), Ieruga (three massive 
(no. 258), Miner households  houses, of Baroque allure, form the compact eastern front of a 
      3.1.10.b   State school and  little square where the Ieruga mine used to be), Tăul Brazi, 
kindergarten; no. 274 (1905‐ Văidoaia, Berk, Sosași, Orlea. Gura Minei and Vercheş have 
1915)  different characteristics. 
      3.1.10.c   Blocks of flats in the sixties 
  3.2  Town / Village [Corna (Modern)]  The village (600–800m altitude) is situated in the upper, more  (M) ‐  (C) Historic 
    3.2.1   Orthodox Church (1719), no. 707  open, part of the Corna Valley. While some of the households  Modern  and urban 
    3.2.2   Greek‐Catholic Church (19th century), no.  are scattered on the slopes, the rest of the buildings gather  heritage 
692  around more compact nuclei, close to the two header ponds  (D) 
and the communal road. The lowest nucleus consists of several  Vernacular 
houses along the communal road. A second nucleus is formed  heritage 
around the two churches and several other public functions. 
The upper part of the village consists of the third nucleus of 
houses, close to Tăul Corna. The last two nuclei are connected 
by a network of intertwining paths and were built in direct 
relation to the historical mining activity. The layout of the 
household is typical for the mountainous area.  
  3.3  Ţarina (Modern)  Ţarina (1004 m altitude) is a village located near the eastern  (M) ‐  (D) 
    3.3.1  Traditional farmhouse (19th century),  part of Mt. Orlea and its minefield, covering an area defined by  Modern  Vernacular 
Ţarina no. 1248  hills with rather high slopes.   heritage 
    3.3.2   Traditional farmhouse (20th century), with  Ţarina is composed of three defined areas gathered along the 
polygonal stable  main paths that historically linked Roșia Montană to Câmpeni. 
The hierarchy of the paths leading to Ţarina is influenced by the 
proximity to the Market Square. Few traditional miners’ 
households can be seen in the landscape close to the stream. 
The other two areas are more recent, with modern houses that 
reflect a peasant way of life. 
  3.4  Bălmoşeşti – Blideşti (Modern)  Rural/vernacular settlements (hamlets) with diffuse and  (M) ‐  (D) 
    3.4.1  Bălmoşeşti (Modern)  scattered structure and natural limits, and rural households  Modern  Vernacular 
    3.4.2  Blidești (Modern)  that are related to agro‐pastoral activities, Bălmoșești (846 m  heritage 
altitude) and Blidești (825m altitude) have a typical structure 
for Apuseni Mountains’ rural settlements. 
 48 

 
Table 2. Natural heritage and landscape characterisation 
 

4  NATURAL HERITAGE AND LANDSCAPE  Brief description 
  4.1   General Information  Roșia Montană is situated in the Apuseni Mountains, located in the heart of the Romanian Carpathians. Three 
main ore deposit districts are known in the Metalliferous Range, a very rich gold‐silver province worked since 
the Roman period, and likely before, known as the Golden Quadrilateral. 
    4.1.1  Geological setting   The gold‐silver deposits are epithermal in origin. The Roșia Montană deposit relates to two major events of 
Neogene volcanism/magmatism: Cetate dacite (13.5 ‐ 1.1 million years ago) and andesites (9.3 – 0.47 million 
years ago). Surrounding the dacitic intrusives is a unit of volcanoclastic sediments that also hosts precious 
metal mineralisation. Situated between the Cetate and Cârnic intrusives, and extending along the southern 
boundary of the Cetate intrusive, is a breccia body known as the Black Breccia 
    4.1.2  Mineralisation   Roșia Montană Mining Landscape is d on a world‐class gold deposit (with a low ‐ intermediate sulphidation 
state). It comprises various types of ore bodies: veins, breccia structures (breccia pipes and breccia dykes), 
stockworks, and impregnations. The geological age of mineralisation is indicated around 12.7 million years 
ago. Gold occurs as free gold, and in electrum (natural gold – silver alloy). In addition, silver minerals occur 
(argentite, proustite, polybasite), sulphides (common pyrite, and uncommon chalcopyrite, sphalerite, galena, 
tetrahedrite, arsenopyrite) and tellurides (hessite, sylvanite, petzite, altaite and Te‐bearing argyrodite). Gold 
grades decrease with depth, and a horizon of maximum concentration occurs.  
    4.1.3  Geographic setting   The altitude ranges between 600–1200m and the physical elements that define the geographical landscape 
are the peaks (900–1100 m altitude) with amplitude, depth and filtered perspectives by the forestland and 
meadows and the valleys (500‐800 m altitude) with meadow landscape and dry valleys.  
The geographical landscape is modelled also on the hydrographic network and the geological structure of the 
mountains. The landforms dominate the territory to the south, east and north by the Tile (918m), Cetate, 
Cārnic (1807m), Ghergheleu (1157m), Rotundul (1187m), Brădeţel (1011m), Ghipidele (1050m) and Coltău Hill 
(1094m). Due to differences in height of 700‐800m and different hardness and composition of rocks, erosion 
and human activities has contributed extensively to shape the land. The hydrological network is formed by 
streams flowing into the Roșia and Corna Valley and the header ponds used in the past to serve the streams 
for the stamp mills. Groundwater gravity‐flow mine drainage enters the rivers Roșia and Corna, as do 
tributaries from the Roșia Montană commune. 
    4.1.4  Natural heritage   Two protected areas of national interest (ZPIN) and natural monuments, under protection by the effect of Law 
no. 5/2000 ‐ Law of the approval of National Spatial Development Plan‐ Section III ‐ Protected Areas, are 
located in the proposed site’s area. Both are geological sites, formed at the beginning of the Quaternary. 
4.1.4.1  Piatra  0.25 hectares, located 1 km southwest of Roșia Montană, between Cârnic and Cetate peaks; isolated aspect of 
Despicată  block resistant to erosion. “Natural monument” since 1954. Andesite block, weighing several tonnes, located 
(Cleft Stone)  over the dacite rock of Cârnic Massif (possibly gained its location after a volcanic explosion from the Ore 
Mountains produced in the last phase of the Neogene period approximately 15–20 million years ago); its legal 
protection status is corresponding to the IIIrd Category IUCN. 
4.1.4.2  Piatra Corbului  5 ha, situated between Ghergheleu and Curmătura peaks, 1100–1150 m altitude, with an aspect of black 
(Ravens Stone)  basalt; its legal protection status is corresponding to the IVth Category IUCN. 
  4.2   Landscape Characterisation   
    4.2.1  Agro‐pastoral landscape   Land management, for industrial and agro‐pastoral practices, takes places on plateaus and steep slopes. 
Consists of: pastures, hay‐meadows, meadows adjacent to the village, orchards, interspersed with small 
patches of arable land. It is widespread in the territory and also on perimeter settlements. Human 
intervention in this landscape is of considerably lower intensity compared to other similar areas in the 
Apuseni mountains. Thus, pastures, orchards and meadows have been continually maintained with a low 
intensity land use and traditional practice that is highly beneficial for species richness. Cattle grazing and crop 
rotation biennial or triennial systems (ploughing one year and fallow for two or three years) and soil terracing 
sustains land fertility. 
    4.2.2  Rocks and stony ground  On the highest slopes toward the top of the hill, inside the pastures areas there are rocks and stony ground 
landscape  characterized by ‘natural rock gardens’ where vegetation is influenced by the secondary effects of 
metalliferous mineralisation. 
    4.2.3  Woodland / Forest  Woodland occupies the altitudinal area between 600 ‐ 1200 m, with a distinctive substrate and micro‐climate 
landscape  sometimes leading to the phenomena of vegetation inversion. The landscape is characterized by the 
deciduous and coniferous forests and the woodlands stretch over small fragmented areas with different 
utilities.  
    4.2.4  Wetland  These areas are defined along rivers, streams and ponds and are set in relation to the agro‐pastoral landscape 
landscape/Flushes and  and woodland. They also derive from mining activities and water management. The hydro‐technical ensemble 
mires  made by header ponds, and the installation of water control and routing, fundamentally changed the 
hydrology within the landscape. These artificial elements, arranged throughout the territory, were partially 
absorbed into the natural environment while generating lower specific wetland landscape (characterized by 
the relation between anthropogenic and natural elements), characterized by ‘High Natural Value’ and rare 
aquatic vegetation with distinctive and unique acid bog (7110 on Annexe 1 of EU Habitats Directive).  
    4.2.5  Archaeological landscape  The necropolises are located on slopes or on plateaus oriented towards the valleys, following the same script, 
where the southern orientation is favourable. Ancient habitat structure has housing systems typical for 
mountain areas and in direct relation with the mining activities. The ancient habitat is connected with the 
historical of Roșia Montană and Cârnic Massif (underground exploitation).  
    4.2.6  Mining landscape  Important preserved mining landscapes bear testimonies to the history of Roman, medieval and modern 
mining. Preindustrial exploitation profoundly impacted upon the natural landscape: header ponds, bare 
mountains, mine openings and the sites of stamp mills and water management infrastructure; after the 
cessation of traditional mining, these traces of human activity have mellowed into the natural landscape. The 
modern and contemporary mining changed landscape (stream and pond infrastructure, rocks and debris from 
mining operations, mine entrances and rocky slopes devoid of vegetation, underground network and, also, 
open pits).  
    4.2.7  Built–up (architectural)   
landscape 
      4.2.7.1  Linearly  Linearly developed along watercourses, valleys and the main roads, with interdependent relationships with 
  developed  water in the past: Roșia Montană, Corna, Ţarina (this type concerns all exploitation villages, forest or mineral 
  upon valleys –  exploitation as well as commercial zones; the colonists’ villages; also, moving agro‐pastoral high‐altitude 
  mining villages  properties ‘to the line’, in the valleys, is representing an historic process in modern Transylvania).  
      4.2.7.2  Compact  Compact developed in the proximity of mining activities: mine accesses in Jig massif, Cârnic and Letea, mining 
developed –  heaps, historic earthworks, etc. influenced the settlement structure in the two main cores (the valley and 
mining activity  historic ) in the proximity of woodlands, as an ‘extension’ of the natural element (Blidești, Corna). Typical 
centres  developments for activities, administrative or commercial centres.
      4.2.7.3  Disperse  Disperse habitat developed on the crests or knolls and on the sunny side of the hills, in the proximity of agro‐
dwellings –  pastoral landscape, with diffuse limits and types of the settlement (this habitat is characteristic for all 
agro‐pastoral  Romanian mountain communities all over Transylvania and other Romanian provinces). 
villages  
 49 

Conservation Status 
Risk Assessment 
 
1. Mining Exploitation: Underground and Surface 
1.1.  Mining exploitation: Underground 

A detailed study of the mining vestiges from Roșia Montană has been realized in 1999‐2007; the study – led 
by the  TRACES  Laboratory  from  Toulouse,  France,  in partnership  with  the  Babeş‐Bolyay  University  of  Cluj 
Napoca  and  the  geological  Laboratory  from  München,  Germany  –  focused  on the  Roman  workings. After 
2001,  the  study  entered  the  frame  of  the  ‘Alburnus  Maior  National  Research  Program  initiated  by  the 
Romanian  Ministry  in  charge  of  Culture42;  Roșia  Montană  Gold  Corporation  supported  this  research 
program.  The study  included  a  multidisciplinary  approach,  starting  from  the  exploration of  the accessible 
underground  cavities,  continuing  with  archaeological  diggings  and  with  a  detailed  geological  study  of  the 
mining works43.  
The present  information show that the underground galleries, of  various  periods,  dimensions, length and 
sections, are in different conservation and stability states, from relatively stable to essentially collapsed44. 
An  overall  view  of  the  conservation  status,  necessary  in  order  to  create  the  basis  of  the  conservation 
projects, is to be done.  
 The conservation status of the nominated components is described in the archaeological reports45 ‐ see 
Table 2 for a more detailed description.  
 The Cârnic Massif, studied between 1999 and 2003, represents ca 75 km of mining workings, including 
ca 5 km of Antique workings (1.1.1), generally well‐conserved46, together with the Cârnic Roman fire‐
setting complex (1.1.5) and the Cârnic Early Modern Galleries (1.1.6).  
 The Roman and Modern workings from Cătălina Monuleşti (1.1.2, 1.1.7), studied between 2002‐2005 
and 2011‐2012, may be conserved, restored, consolidated and presented to the public: for the Roman 
period,  the  specific  conditions  of  humidity  are  ideal  for  preservation  and  many  artefacts  discovered 
47
have been recorded and left in situ; the access area is in a good state of conservation ; 
 The  Cetate  Massif  Roman  mining  features  (1.1.3),  studied  between  2000  and  2002,  show,  under  the 
modern exploitation level, a great archaeological potential, poorly researched to date; as an important 
part  is  compromised  by  modern  workings,  the  conservation  process  should  start  with  the  massif’s 
stabilisation.  Also,  a  modern  network  of  workings  along  veins  and  in  extraction  chambers  located 
beneath the floor of the Cetate pit – the Cetate Early Modern Galleries (1.1.8) – was studied. Until the 
commencement of the large opencast mine in the 1970s, the Cetate massif had four ancient opencast 
pits (‘curţile Romane’) on the top, and the sides were riddled with mine galleries of ancient, medieval 
and Early Modern date. Photographs taken before the recent mining began show the massif as being 
similar in shape and nearly as large as the Cârnic massif48; 
 The  Orlea  Roman  Galleries  (1.1.4)  have  been  preliminary  investigated  only  (2004‐2006);  opened  to 
visitors since the 1970s (museum), the archaeological area is impacted for access, partly reversible; 
 The  Văidoaia  Massif,  studied  between  2003‐2004:  together  with  the  Early  Modern  underground 
workings (1.1.9), Roman exploitations vestiges are expected to be detected (as a Roman necropolis and 
a Roman ore‐processing site were discovered nearby). 

42
   Coordinated by the National History Museum of Romania, Project Manager Dr Paul Damian. 
43
   See Călin‐Gabriel Tămaş, Béatrice Cauuet, ‘Advances in ancient mining studies from a geological perspective: Roșia Montană case 
study (Apuseni Mountains, Romania)’, in Studia Universitatis Babes‐Bolyay, Geologia, Special Issue, MAEGS‐16, 2009 (‘Geology for 
Society: Education and Cultural heritage’), pp 101 sq. 
44
   See, for information, Geo‐Design Consulting Engineers Ltd. (UK), Roșia Montană ‐ Cârnic Massif Mine Museum Stabilisation 
Proposals and Cost Estimates, March 2007 
45
   http://ran.cimec.ro/sel.asp (Repertoriul Arheologic Naţional). See also STANTEC CONSULTING, Studiu de condiţii iniţiale asupra 
patrimoniului cultural, s.a., Client: S.C. RMGC S.A. (http://www.rmgc.ro/Content/uploads/uploads_eia/impactul‐potential/cultura‐
patrimoniu/04.9‐Studiu‐de‐conditii‐initiale‐asupra‐patrimoniului.pdf) 
46
   http://cronica.cimec.ro/detaliu.asp?k=2338 ‐ RAN 6770.01; LMI AB‐I‐s‐A‐20329. 
47
   http://cronica.cimec.ro/detaliu.asp?k=4947&d=Roșia‐Montană‐Alba‐Galeria‐Catalina‐Monulesti‐masivul‐Cos‐2012 ‐ RAN 6770.11; 
LMI AB‐I‐m‐A‐00065.05. According to the document Informaţii cu privire la patrimoniul cultural al Roşiei Montane şi gestionarea 
acestuia (http://www.mmediu.ro/new/wp‐content/uploads/Roșia_Montană/02/Volumul%2048.pdf), the area has been studied 
between 2002‐2005. 
48
   Prof. Andrew Wilson, Prof. David Mattingly, Michael Dawson FSA MIfA, op. cit. 
 50 

1.2.  Mining exploitation: Surface 

There is less detailed information about the Cârnic Roman Openworks (1.2.1) and the Cetate Roman Open 
Pit (1.2.2) state of conservation – see the underground positions above; the protection steps will start on 
the integrity and conservation status and, subsequently, will define the appropriate conservation methods; 
the management issues will follow, together with their visiting policies.  

1.3.  Ore‐processing features: Header Ponds 

The dams are in a medium state of conservation explained by the lack of works for a long period; technical 
appraisals have to be done to insure their structural integrity, to be continued with reinforcement projects 
and their execution. Particularly, the dams are overgrown with vegetation, affecting the historical landscape 
diversity and, also, posing serious problems in terms of conservation. The tourist use of these ponds needs 
regular maintenance, including vegetation control and water circulation.  
Tăul Mare (1.3.1) needs urgent restoration; Tăul Găuri (1.3.8) has to be researched, as drawn archaeological 
pieces may be found.  
The  present  water  system  is  doubled  by  other  traces  of  disappeared  ponds  although  their  shape  and 
structure is clearly visible in the landscape. Also some dried ditches, connecting the ponds, are still visible in 
the  landscape.  Some  of  the  dried  ditches  are  built  with  the  same  maure  (dry  masonry)  technology  while 
others are just simple earth excavations.  
Some new ponds are built for fishery (in the western part of Roșia Montană) and some of the old, mining 
ponds are also use to grow fish (Tăul Brazi). An important issue related to the new fishery activity is created 
by  the  extensive  insertion  of  the  Chinese  carp,  invading  specie  that  is  currently  destroying  the  water 
ecosystems.  

1.4.  Mining administration 

The State Mining Headquarters (1.1.1) are still utilised as headquarters of the state mine,  hosting  as well 

the  local  mining  museum.  Linked  with  the  1972‐opened  galleries  (400  m);  medium  and  low  state  of 
conservation  –  the  whole  ensemble  (10  buildings)  needs  restoration,  including  the  enlargement  of  the 
visiting  infrastructure  (see  also  1.1.4);  the restoration will concern  also  landscaping  works.  This  ensemble 
should become the central museal infrastructure in Roșia Montană. 
The  descent  into  the  ‘Holy  Cross’  master  gallery  from  the  former  roll‐call  house  gives  the  opportunity  to 
extent the visiting area of the Orlea Massif towards the master‐gallery of the Theresian period and newer. 
The  landscaping  works  will  concern  the  whole  parcel,  including  the  open‐space  existing  museal  functions 
and the historic spruce plantations (Picea abies), together with the typical stone‐walls (maure). 
The  Miners’  Dormitory  (1.4.2)  is  in  a  medium  state  of  conservation;  the  restoration  process  had  been 
started  by  the  Municipality,  and  some  minimal  measures  of  conservation  had  been  taken;  the  process 
should continue, including the conversion to a new public function (formerly, dormitory, mining school and 
cinema). Both positions are protected by their historical monument status. 
The Mining Professional School (1.4.3) is abandoned and needs restoration and conversion to a new public 
function. Proceedings for inclusion in Romania’s Historical Monuments’ List are in process. 

 
 51 

2. Archaeological Areas 
The  archaeological  areas  have  been  discovered  and  researched  in  several  periods;  the  most  important 
discoveries have been made between 1999 and 2006, due to systematic research financed by the RMGC, 
according with its legal obligations, based on a partnership between CPPCN (lately INMI, now INP – National 
Institute of Heritage) and the National Museum of the Union – Alba Iulia. After 2001, the National Research 
Program ‘Alburnus  Maior’  has  been  created  by  the Ministry  of Culture  Order  No  2504/07.03.2001, under 
49
the coordination of the National Romanian History Museum (MNIR) .  
The archaeological site ‘Alburnus Maior’, protected by the inscription in the National Historical Monuments’ 
List since 1992, has been defined in terms of limits and attributes during 2016; this process – undertaken in 
parallel  with  the  UNESCO  nomination  document  –  ensures  the  effective  protection  of  the  site,  under 
Romanian law, of all archaeological evidences found in the Roşia Montană area50. 
As  the  research  focused  on  the  expected  future  mining  exploitation,  the  discoveries  are  unequally 
distributed; also, the Roman period has been treated with priority, leaving other periods less documented51. 
In  this situation, one  of the  first  issues  of  the Management Plan  will  concern  the  archaeological research 
systematic continuation. 

2.1. Roman Archaeology 

From all the archaeological discoveries, only the Hop Roman stone circular mausoleum has been restored 
and  conserved  in  situ  (good  state  of  conservation).  The  other  sites  have  been  studied  and  are  left  in 
conservation  for  future  actions.  The  major  risks  are  linked  with  neglecting  (the  uncontrolled  growing 
vegetation as well as uncontrolled building actions or the lack of stability of certain sectors may affect the 
sites even before intensive mining approaches).  

 
3. Built Heritage Features 
Judging the whole built heritage of the sites’ area, the current situation is a result of the diminution of the 
mining activity after 1990 and its extinction after 200752, together with the general Romanian tendency of 
negative population growth after 1990, leading to the abandon of an important part of the properties. The 
process has been  accelerated  by  the  RMGC  systematic  action  in  order  to  acquire ownership  rights  in the 
future  exploitation  area,  mostly  in  the  Roșia  Montană  and  Corna  areas.  However,  even  if  an  important 
number of buildings has been demolished, a large number of households are still preserved, , ensuring the 
integrity of the general lansdscape. 
The state of conservation may be considered medium in a general view; the principal identified risk is the 
lack  of  maintenance  and  also,  in  some  areas,  the  continuation  of  the  demolition  process,  following  the 
decrease of the stable population and/or the activities’ irreversible changing.  
The  reality  of  property  neglect  has  to  be  understood  in  this  direction,  in  order  to  identify  appropriate 
mechanisms  capable  to  create  repopulation,  preservation  and  sustainable  activities.  For  the  in‐use 
households,  as  well  as  for  the  major  part  of  the  other  buildings,  bad  rehabilitation  practices  are 
representing the major risk. It concerns all traditional built parts – plasters, roofs, socles, masonry, fences, 
gates etc. – concerned by replacement with non‐traditional structures.  
The conservation state presented in this report is the result of the 2017 inspection process held by the INP 
that used previous surveys and monitoring reports (2000‐2007, CPPCN, OPUS, ARA, RMGC) as comparative 
support. 

49
   See the synthetic documents concerning the archaeological research in Roșia Montană before 2000 (annex F) and the fortuitous 
discoveries (annex G), realised by Dr Mihaela Simion, in Studiu de condiţii iniţiale asupra patrimoniului cultural, s.a., op. cit. 
50
   Documentaţie  pentru  precizarea  limitelor  monumentului  istoric  Situl  arheologic  Alburnus  Maior  –  Roșia  Montană,  sat  Roșia 
Montană, comuna Roșia Montană, județul Alba, nr. crt. AB: 140, Cod LMI 2015: AB‐I‐s‐A‐00065. The site covers all the attributes 
nominated under the 1 ‐ Mining Exploitation, 2 ‐ Archaeological Areas and 3 ‐ Built Heritage Features positions. 
51
   Ibid., p. 3. 
52
   Hotărârea nr. 644/2007 privind aprobarea închiderii definitive și monitorizării factorilor de mediu postînchidere a unor mine și 
cariere, etapa a X‐a, și modificarea unor acte normative în domeniul închiderii unor mine și cariere 
 52 

Inventories 
There are several inventories for the Roșia Montană villages, containing analytic data for households and 
other properties, including functional, technical and state of conservation data: 
53
 The 2000‐2001 CPPCN inventory, concerning Roşia Montană and Corna ; 
 The  2001‐2002  Opus  inventory,  Roșia  Montană,  Corna,  Bălmoşeşti,  Blideşti,  Ţarina  and  also  Bunta, 
Gârda and Gura Minei54; 
 The 2006‐2007 Opus inventory, concerning Roșia Montană central area55; 
 The 2016‐2017 INMI evaluation site‐visits, realised for the nomination file and management plan.  
The  2000‐2001  CPPCN  inventory  created  110  records  (40  historical  monuments56  and  70  other  valuable 
buildings)  and,  also,  a  first  operational  synthesis  concerning  the  built  settlements;  the  documents  were, 
subsequently, used for the development of urban Regulations in the Roşia Montană area.  
The  2001‐2001  OPUS  evaluation  concerned  658  properties.  The  inventory  contains  owner  data,  technical 
information, state of conservation evaluation, photographs and, also, ground floor survey sketches. In the 
nominated  site’s  territory,  the  inventory  showed  534  properties  in  Roșia  Montană  (326),  Corna  (129), 
Bălmoşeşti (8),  Blideşti  (22)  and Ţarina  (49),  finding 2,1%  of  the properties in  a  ruined state, 6,0%  in  bad 
condition, 22,8% in medium condition and 69,1% in good condition57.  
The  2004 OPUS  evaluation  – concerning  only the  Roșia  Montană’s  historical  centre  – found 23,8%  of  the 
properties in bad condition, 54,3% in medium condition and 21,9% in good condition58.  
The 2006‐2007 Opus inventory brought data for 253 properties, 172 located in the historic centre of Roșia 
Montană,  as  established  in  the  2007  PUZ  and  81  located  in  the  periphery.  All  are  included  in  the  WHL 
nominated site’s territory. From those, 3859 were historical monuments, 33 were proposed to be included 
in the LMI and 81 other were considered as valuable properties. 
Also, the Ministry of Culture Departmental Administration of Alba County issued most of the listed buildings 
enforcement  notices,  legal  documents  officially  informing  the  owners  about  their  responsibilities 
concerning the historical monuments – in 2012.  
Today, the state of conservation has significantly improved for a range of  restored properties (NGOs, RMGC 
and other private owners), while the state of conservation of the majority of the built heritage has generally 
decreased as a result of the lack of mainaining works 
Between  2003  and  2012  the  Roșia  Montană  Gold  Corporation  pursued  a  continued  demolition  campaign 
within the territory of its intended project, with the explicit aim of clearing the land in view of its planned 
large  scale,  open  cast  mining  operation.  Over  250  homesteads  were  demolished,  distributed  in  Roșia 
Montană and in 7 villages of the Municipality: Corna, Cărpiniș, Țarina, Bunta, Bălmoșești, Iacobești, Blidești, 
and  also  in  Gura  Cornei,  a  village  in  the  neighbouring  Municipality  of  Abrud.  Out  of  this  total,  206 
homesteads were located within the nominated property. 
No demolitions were carried out within the protected area of the Historic Centre of Roșia Montană, or in 
the area of the other important nucleus of the town, the administrative centre, except for very few houses 
fallen  in  ruin  and  then  demolished  (ex.  no.  319).  The  distribution  of  demolished  homesteads  shows  a 
majority in the town of Roșia Montană (112), and significant numbers in Corna (43) and Țarina (30). In Roșia 
Montană,  the  majority  of  demolished  houses  were  located  in  the  lower  segment  of  the  town,  dispersed 
along the valley and its ramifications. 
In terms of dating, most of the demolished houses were dated to the 20th c.  
The quality of demolished houses, as it happens, was not the highest, with a few notable exceptions. One of 
the oldest and most important houses of central Corna has been offered to the “ASTRA” Open‐air museum 
in Sibiu, where it is exhibited today.  
Despite the tragic loss of so many buildings, the quality and variety of the remaining built fabric – most of it 
highly relevant for the particular local building culture, developed in close connection to the mining activity 
– is still capable of conveying the values of the mining landscape. 

53
   CPPCN, Proiect T‐131 – Roșia Montană – Studiu de fezabilitate, Inventarierea clâdirilor şi structurilor istorice din localitatea Roşia 
Montană, 2000, INP archive. See also Adriana Stroe et al., op. cit.  
54
   INP archive. 
55
   OPUS SRL, Plan Urbanistic Zonal – Zona istorică centrală Roșia Montană [Zonal Urban Plan – Central Historical Area of Roșia 
Montană] 2006. 
56
  It is to be noticed that the 2002 Historical Monuments’ list had 40 individual monuments’ positions; the 2004 list had only 39, as 
o os
n  203 wasn’t recorded anymore. In 2010, 3 historical monuments have been added (n  175, 376 and the railway station – 
exterior to the nominated site), resulting 42 individual positions; one commemorative monument has been added in the 2015 list. 
57
   INP archive (calculations utilising the villages tables). 
58
   OPUS – Atelier de arhitectură, Centrul Istoric Roșia Montană, Plan de management al patrimoniului cultural, redactarea I. 
document pentru consultarea părţilor, aprilie 2006. 
59
  The 2004 list had 39 monuments. 
 53 

 
The trend stopped in 2014 after strong community  action. A real protection policy will be strengthened by 
the presence of a site administration structure, capable of monitoring of the whole site’s territory. 
Last  but  not  least, no  urban  regulations  are  valid  for  the Roșia  Montană’s administrative territory,  as  the 
former  plans  have  been  declared  invalid  in  justice  (2015)60.  Heritage  protection  is  difficult  to  express 
without urbanistic specific regulations; however, this situation creates a de facto moratorium, as building 
permits regarding heritage protection measures and public space inhancement can be accorded to solicitors 
and the progress of positive development is not affected61. In the same time, the impossibility to authorise 
major works prevents from heritage destruction, improper interventions, construction of new buildings and 
alteration  of  traditional  architecture.  The  unauthorised  improper  interventions  are  to  be  proposed  for 
reevaluation and eventually eliminated through Law enforcement. 

Surveys 
Other  detailed  studies  have  been  realised  (some  are  published)  for  churches  and  other  buildings  and 
households of historical interest:  
 The first survey campaigns organised by the Association ‘Architecture. Restoration. Archaeology’ (ARA) 
in  2007,  continued  in  the  following  years  within  the  ARA  Summer  Schools.  The  results  of  these 
campaigns  have  been  presented  in  the  first  volume  of  the  series  of  documents  of  architecture  from 
Roșia Montană, published in 2010, which comprises 12 objectives: churches, public edifices, dwellings, 
technical facilities.  
 The second survey, documented from 2009 to 2011, led to the second volume of the series, including 9 
objectives:  3  churches  and  6  houses,  built  between  the  first  decades  of  the  18th  century  and  the 
second quarter of the 20th62.  
As the ARA documents are specifying, ‘the surveys were produced in the larger part with traditional means, 
by hand measurements with the marked measuring tape, with the triangulation method, completed with 
general  and  detail  measurements  taken  with  modern  topographic  instruments.  In  elevations  all 
measurements  are  taken  from  a  convenient  horizontal  reference  plane  (Waagriss).  The  means  for 
documenting the heritage involved in the campaign dedicated to the site of Roșia Montană have gradually 
diversified,  including  recently  ‐  thanks  to  the  collaboration  with  the  Austrian‐German  organisation  EKG 
Baukultur ‐ the 3d laser scanning, in the attempt to acquire as large an amount of precise information as 
possible  under  conditions  of  limited  accessibility.  A  few  of  the  difficult  subjects  –  high  precision 
documentation and detailing of urban fabric or of certain historic mining vestiges, but also the recording of 
architecture  objects  different  in  scale  and  complexity  ‐  were  tasks  meant  to  test  the  potential  of  this 
technique for future investigations and have offered already the raw material for the surveys of two among 
the monuments presented in this volume, the Roman‐Catholic church in Roșia Montană and the Orthodox 
church in Corna.  
Each surveyed objective is described by plans, cross‐sections, façades and architecture or furnishing details. 
The  survey captures the  overall  and  detail  architectural  structure,  but  it also  includes  information  on the 
buildings' state of preservation. 
Through  the  publication  of  the  surveys  of  the  Greek‐Catholic  and  Roman‐Catholic  churches  in  Roșia 
Montană  and  the  Orthodox  church  in  Corna,  ARA  presented  a  complete  picture  of  the  historic  religious 
architecture  of  the  site,  illustrated  by  all  seven  churches  belonging  to  five  of  the  Transylvanian  historic 
denominations:  Orthodox,  Greek‐Catholic,  Roman‐Catholic,  Unitarian,  Calvinist.  The  domestic  landscape, 
that  of  traditional  dwelling,  is  presented  by  a  selection  which  catches  both  the  architecture  of  urban 
influence (houses nos. 321, 390, 475) and the rural one (263, 1248), either associated with familial mining 
(255, 263), with trade and crafts (321, 390) or with livestock raising (263, 1248). 
A criterion for selecting the objectives to survey, set from the first volume of architecture documents, was 
that of a possible contribution to the administrative protection of the valuable buildings of the site. Thus, 
the documentation was oriented toward those buildings for which ARA had required the inclusion on the 
Historic Monuments List. Among these we mention the Administrative Palace, the Unitarian, the Calvinist 
and the Orthodox churches in Roșia Montană and the Greek‐Catholic and Orthodox churches in Corna.  

60
   https://www.juridice.ro/195962/anularea‐pug‐si‐puz‐comuna‐Roșia‐Montană‐implicatii.html 
61
   L 50/2001, art. 2 (4): the only possible works are (a) works concerning modification, repair, protection, restoration and 
preservation of buildings of any kind, provided that the same function is maintained, the ground surface and their volumetry; 
b) repair works concerning communication ways, technical equipment, without modification of the route and, as the case may be, 
of their functionality; c) repair works concerning fences, urban furniture, landscaping, public parks and gardens, pedestrian 
squares and other public space development works;d) research and prospection works for geotechnical studies, quarrying, 
ballasts, gas and oil wells, as well as other exploitation; e) organization of tent camps. The other works (including opening mining 
exploitation underground or surface areas) are forbidden.
62
   This chapter’s text is took up from the ARA site ‐ http://www.simpara.ro/GB/UK‐510.htm 
 54 

The  practical  utility  of  the  architecture  documents  was  also  proven  by  the  use  of  some  of  the  published 
materials  for  the  planning  and  implementation  of  conservation  and  restoration  works  ‐  from  small‐scale 
interventions,  set  in  the  category  of  maintenance  and  repairs  (current  or  exceptional)  applied  chiefly  to 
finishes (e.g. the Unitarian church, house no. 321, house no. 1248), to those of greater scope, which went 
through all phases, from preliminary assessment, to planning and execution (the Unitarian parish house, no. 
391)’63. 
The  ARA  report  mention  that  ‘the  selection  includes  only  buildings  belonging  to  the  enduring  local 
community  of  Roșia  Montană,  which  is  subject  to  immense  disintegrating  pressures  from  the  mining 
company Roşia Montană Gold Corporation, in its attempt to make room for its planned mining project, with 
the price of displacing the inhabitants and destroying the built heritage. The result of these actions of the 
mining company is visible at every step in Roșia Montană and it is illustrated in the documents presented 
here, which record in the site plans the change ‐ dramatic in some points ‐ of the built context as a result of 
the  sustained  demolitions  campaign  led  by  the  mining  company  starting  in  2004.  Now  we  are  in  the 
situation  of  not  being  able  to  retrace  on  the  ground  important  exemplars  of  local  architectural  heritage 
(such as Şuluţiu House, to give but one example) or even entire portions of built fabric (such as the central 
area  of  Corna).  Altogether,  the  buildings  from  more  than  250  properties  have  been  demolished  so  far. 
The building stock which has not fallen prey to this destruction campaign is extremely precious and justifies 
all efforts to save it’64. 

Restoration projects 
Three  positions  from  Roșia  Montană  have  been  considered  for  funding  trough  the  National  Restoration 
Program (2016); the process is ongoing:  
 Unitarian parish office in Roșia Montană (no 551, historical monument – AB‐II‐m‐B‐00309 (3.1.1) 
 Greek‐Catholic Church in Orlea (no 135, under the AB‐I‐s‐A‐00270 position) (3.1.8.a) 
 Greek‐Catholic parish ensemble in Orlea (no 137 – historical monument ‐ AB‐II‐m‐B‐00271) (3.1.8.a)65 
The National Institute of Heritage has proposed collaboration with the Roșia Montană Municipality, in order 
to prepare surveys and technical documents for restoration and including in the public visitable circuit the 
historical monuments owned by the Municipality66: 
 Cultural Hall, former Miners Dormitory (no 137 – historical monument ‐ AB‐II‐m‐B‐00273) (1.4.2) 
 Aitaj House, later Miners’ Club (no 242, under the AB‐I‐s‐A‐00270 position) (3.1.10.a) 
 Maternity ward, former miner house(no 251, under the AB‐I‐s‐A‐0027 position) (3.1.10.a) 
The ARA Association had realised several urgent interventions and restoration projects in Roșia Montană67: 
 Unitarian parish office in Roșia Montană (no 551, historical monument – AB‐II‐m‐B‐00309 (3.1.1) – 
emergency interventions, 2007 
 Unitarian parish house (no. 391, AB‐II‐m‐B‐00297) (3.1.1.d) – inaugurated summer 2017 as centre for 
cultural heritage interpretation; 
 Unitarian church (no 530, under the AB‐I‐s‐A‐00270 position) (3.1.1.d) – emergency interventions in 
order to eliminate the degradation causes; in progress (the church is in use; it is also utilised for cultural 
actions); 
 Traditional farmhouse in Țarina (no 1248, under the AB‐I‐s‐A‐00065 position) (3.3.1), inaugurated 
summer 2016, volunteers centre; 
 Square house with commercial spaces (no 321, under the AB‐I‐s‐A‐00270 position) (3.1.1), inaugurated 
in 2014; in use; local information point added in 2017; 
 Miner house in Tăul Brazi (no 475, under the AB‐I‐s‐A‐00065 position) (3.1.4) – abandonned, now 
utilised as housework in progress; 
 Urban influences house (no 331, AB‐II‐m‐B‐00285) (3.1.1.e) – formerly unused, now bed & breakfast; 
works initiated by ARA and continued by the owner under ARA’s consultancy); 
 Greek‐Catholic Church in Orlea (no 135, under the AB‐I‐s‐A‐00270 position) (3.1.8.a) – elimination of 
the degradation causes; needs restoration – included since 2016 in the PNR program;  
 Townhouse with commercial ground floors (no 399) (3.1.1) – in use; 
 Unitarian cantor’s house (no 390, AB‐II‐m‐B‐00296) (3.1.1.d) – reparations; needs restoration; in use. 
 

63
   http://www.simpara.ro/GB/UK‐510.htm 
64
   Ibid. 
65
   https://goo.gl/beYJBy 
66
   INP information, September 2017. 
67
   ARA information, September 2017. 
 55 

3.1.  Modern town / Village [Roșia Montană/Modern] 

The village’s depopulation has many implications concerning the conservation state of the several nuclei of 
the village: the central parts (where the public activities were concentrated) are partially abandoned; the 
former  elite’s  houses  were  used  for  other  representative  functions  since  1948.  The  other  housing  areas, 
well populated until the 2000s, with more rural characteristics, are in better condition.  
The RMGC led, according with their legal obligations, a rehabilitation and maintaining program for several 
buildings in Roșia, mostly listed and in the central area; these interventions  have not been linked to create 
new functions, as well as – without preventive maintenance – their conservation state may become worse. 
As the interventions concerned mostly the visible parts of the buildings, other conservation problems may 
occur  in  a  medium‐term  horizon.  In  the  same  time  many  RMGC  buildings  are  not  maintained  at  all since 
approx. 2009, the explanation being that works will start only after the initiation of the mining project (!).   
Several heritage protection NGOs started restoration projects in the villages of Roșia (mainly) and Corna –. 
One of the benefits of the NGO’s implication (based on good conservation practices, involving volunteers as 
well as local community’s members) concerned systematic actions in a long‐term approach.  
This process has influenced local initiatives and mentality, as seen in several cases of changing rehabilitation 
aims and methods for the community’s members, and of the creation of traditional tourist infrastructure. 
The  growing interest  in  Roșia  Montană’s  heritage  led  also  to  several  property  purchases  in  the area and, 
also, made some rather young and educated families to set in the village and integrate in the community. 

3.2. Town / Village [Corna (Modern)] 

The  village’s  problems  are  similar  to  Roșia’s  ones.  A  particular  aspect  is  concerning  the  industrial  traffic 
towards  the  Roșia  Poieni  open‐pit,  in  exploitation.  The  highest  risk  for  Corna  is  linked  with  the  complete 
destruction scenario, avoided by the WHL nomination. The two churches, Orthodox and Greek‐Catholic, are 
in an on‐going process to be inscribed in the National Historical Monuments’ List (LMI). 

3.3. Ţarina (Modern) 

The  same  problems  are  touching  Ţarina,  where,  as  the  some  families  settled  here,  a  tourist  nucleus  was 
born by association.  

3.4. Bălmoşeşti – Blideşti (Modern) 

Bălmoşeşti is the less‐populated village; the imminence of the village community’s extinction makes urgent 
a  rehabilitation  process  concerning  the  built  structures  and  the  local  activities.  Even  if  the  state  of 
conservation of the built structures is stable, an increased attention has to be addressed to neglection, in 
the two cases of Bălmoşeşti and Blideşti. 
new  feature  of  Blidești  is  represented  by  two  very  dense  groups  of  new  houses,  built  for  the  purpose  of 
being  immediately  selled  as  a  response  to  the  real  estate  pressure  created  by  the  mining  project. 
The houses are not fit to be inhabited and are strongly contrasting both with the traditional way of dwelling 
and with the natural landscape. They are to be eventually demolished through Law enforcement.  
 56 

4. Natural Heritage and Landscape 
The following items are developed after the landscape characterisation studies done for the benefit of the 
site’s WHL inscription.  
Landscape studies have also been realised by the RMGC, linked to the planned mining exploitation in Roșia 
Montană  and  Corna68.  A  simulation  of  the  landscape  image  after  closing  the  exploitation  has  also  been 
done, showing the landscape modifications from several points of view; as the principal identified risk for 
Roșia Montană’s landscape  would be intensive mining,  we are reproducing here the three maps showing 
landscape impact in the building period, in the exploitation period and at the end of the exploitation period 
for the RMGC project. 

 
     
Potential  impact  of  the  mining  exploitation  (http://www.rmgc.ro/proiectul‐Roșia‐Montană/mediu/evaluarea‐impactului‐asupra‐
mediului‐la‐Roșia‐Montană.html ‐ 4.7 Impactul Potenţial – Peisajul – Anexe – EXHIBIT 4.7.7.a impactul potential in faza de constructie; 
EXHIBIT 4.7.7.b impactul potential in faza de exploatare; EXHIBIT 4.7.7.c impactul potential in faza de inchidere) 

Agro‐pastoral landscape (4.2.1)  
The  major  type  of  ecosystem  is  represented  by  secondary  meadows  and  forest  pastures,  due  to  an 
intensive, long‐term, anthropic utilisation of the territory and of its resources69.  
Human intervention in this landscape is of considerably lower intensity compared to other similar areas in 
the Apuseni  Mountains.  Thus,  pastures,  orchards and  meadows  have  been  continually  maintained  with  a 
low intensity land use and traditional practice that is highly beneficial for species richness.  
The depopulation and the diminution of agricultural activities led, in the last 25 years, to a changing process 
concerning  the  agro‐pastoral  landscape;  it  concerns,  mostly,  the  diminution  of  pastures  in  the  benefit  of 
forestry  vegetation  (with  an  intermediate  state  of  medium  size  vegetation  –  bushes  such  as  Crataegus 
monogyna, Rosa canina etc. and young forestry vegetation)70. 
The Management Plan aims to conserve an appropriate equilibrium between the two principal ecosystems, 
agro‐pastoral  and  woodland.  The  measures  will  be  defined,  based  on  specific  studies  to  be  followed‐up, 
linked with environmental policies, urban and territorial regulations. 
National  policies  concerning  the  silvo‐pastoral  areas  and  environmental  policies  have  to  be  taken  into 
consideration to define modern, sustainable approaches in traditional farming, as most parts of the agro‐
pastoral  areas  are  integrated  in  the  PNDR  (National  Program  for  Rural  Development)  program  and 
therefore subjected to traditional and ecological management. 
The  John  Akeroyd  &  Andrew  Jones  report  on  biodiversity  is  mentioning  that  ‘some  60%  of  the  area  is 
apparently covered by “meadows” (grasslands), with 20% hay‐meadows. As well as a number of rare and 
threatened  grassland  plants  and  communities,  it  is  of  interest  that  we  recorded  eight  grassland  orchid 
species,  of  which  six  are  Red‐listed  as  Rare  in  Romania:  Pyramidal  Orchid  (Anacamptis  pyramidalis), 
Fragrant Orchid (Gymnadenia conopsea), Bug Orchid (Orchis coriophora), Burnt‐tip Orchid (Orchis ustulata), 
Lesser Butterfly‐orchid (Platanthera bifolia) and Globe Orchid (Traunsteinera globosa)’71.  
The  report  presents  in  detail  the  characteristic  species,  and  conclude  that  ‘at  least  some  of  these  plant 
assemblages of oligotrophic pastures should probably be included in ‘6230 Species‐rich Nardus grassland, 
on  siliceous  substrates  in  mountain  areas’  listed  as  a  priority  habitat  in  Annexe  1  of  the  EU  Habitats 
Directive’72. More, ‘species‐rich grasslands, perhaps because they are still widespread in Romania, have not 
always been given the recognition they deserve as habitats of major ecological and cultural significance, not 
least for attracting tourists and enhancing the country’s image abroad’73. 

68
   See RMGC, Raport privind evaluarea impactului asupra mediului generat de proiectul Roșia Montană, 4.7., Peisajul, 
http://www.rmgc.ro/Content/uploads/uploads_eia/impactul‐potential/peisajul/04.7‐Peisajul.pdf  
69
   Raport privind evaluarea impactului asupra mediului..., 4.7., Peisajul, op. cit. 
70
   Ibid. 
71
   Roșia Montană: a case for protection rather than destruction, Report by John Akeroyd & Andrew Jones, July 2006, p. 2. 
72
   Ibid., p. 3. 
73
   Ibid., p. 12. 
 57 

Rocks and stony ground landscape (4.2.2) 
The stability problems, as well as other natural risks have to be taken into account. The measures will be 
defined,  based  on  specific  studies  to  be  followed‐up,  linked  with  environmental  policies,  urban  and 
territorial regulations. 
In terms of biodiversity, the same report shows the characteristic species for the most precipitous slopes. 
The ‘naturally occurring level bare rock or open, gravelly areas within pastures towards the summits of the 
hills’  are  ‘probably  associated  with  metal  ores,  which  prevent  complete  grass  domination  and  represent 
natural rock gardens [...]. The natural bare rocky ground with Sedum, and outcrops tending to Calaminarian 
communities  with  the  metallophile  fern  Asplenium  septentrionale,  are  among  the  richest  assemblages  of 
habitats  of  this  type  we  have  seen  anywhere.  The  potential  influence  of  metal  ores  on  vegetation  to 
produce Calaminarian plants associations would be indicated by the presence of Asplenium septentrionale 
and this needs further study. It is worth noting that Calaminarian habitats (EU Habitats Directive Annexe 1, 
6130 Violetalia calaminariae association), often surrounding the ancient working of metalliferous rock veins 
and associated spoil receive protected status in many parts of the EU for a suite of rare and unusual plant 
species  which  often  show  signs  of  adaptation  to  produce  local  races/ecotypes.  Population  phenotypic 
diversity in Silene nutans subsp. dubia (see below) is evidence of this process’. 

Woodland / Forest landscape (4.2.3) 
The forests represent the dominant type of ecosystem in the site’s area and, by exception, rocks and stony 
ground and wetland. The beech forest is the natural type of forestry vegetation (Valea Roșia, Corna); mixed 
areas, including beech and coniferous and even coniferous mixed area are present, in small areas (mostly in 
the Cârnic area). Between the massifs of forest, meadows and pastures and small‐surface forests give the 
characteristic image of the site’s area74. 
Secondary  forests  are  to  be  often  found  in  the  site  area:  the  birch  (Betula)  presence  shows  an  ancient, 
closed  exploitation  area.  The  surfaces  covered  by  birch  trees  are  marking  old  tailings  heaps  or  old 
excavations as the birch is the only pioneer species that is installing spontaneously on such terrains and is 
not otherwise specific for the local ecosystem. Such areas are scattered over the territory and is present on 
all hillsides – in Țarina, Blidești, Cetate etc.75 
The  John  Akeroyd  &  Andrew  Jones  report  on  biodiversity  is  mentioning  ‘Spruce  (Picea  abies)  woodland 
(forestry plantations) (Vaccinio‐Piceetea) adjacent to the grasslands has a number of additional species to 
what  we  saw  elsewhere.  These  included  Willow  Gentian  (Gentiana  asclepiadea),  Hawkweed  (Hieracium 
umbellatum),  Stag’s‐horn  Clubmoss  (Lycopodium  clavatum),  Wall  Lettuce  (Mycelis  muralis),  Aposeris 
(Aposeri  foetida),  Wood  Speedwell  (Veronica  Montană)  and  the  shrub  Guelder  Rose  (Viburnum  opulus)’. 
Also,  ‘a  narrow  strip  of  woodland  in  a  gully  leading  down  to  one  of  the  lakes  has  the  handsome  and 
distinctive  composite  Telekia  speciosa  growing  beneath  Grey  Alder  (Alnus  incana),  Sycamore  (Acer 
pseudoplatanus)  and  an  introduced  Sorbus  sp.  (Telekio  speciosae–Alnetum  incanae  (Coldea  1986)  1991). 
This damp woodland association is an EU Habitats Directive priority habitat (91E0* Alluvial forests, Alnion 
incanae)’76. 
The  forest  landscape  state  of  conservation  is  recorded,  as  forestry  heritage  is  managed  following  the 
national forestry policy, on the basis of local Forestry Management Plans. Taking into account the rarity of 
some species’ association should be possible through cooperation between the scientific and research level 
and the operational one, in the site administration’s legal frame.  
On the southern exposure, often, hydrophilic vegetation is to be found along the torrents valleys and other 
water features, thus participating to the paradox created by the general vegetation inversion77.  

Wetland landscape/Flushes and mires (4.2.4) 
The  anthropic  wetlands  (partially  absorbed  into  the  natural  environment  while  generating  lower  specific 
wetland  landscape)  have  to  be  considered  as  important  biodiversity  areas;  their  conservation  may  be  in 
contradiction with the conservation or restoration of the industrial landscape; the Management Plan issues 
in  this  direction  should  be  defined  following  specific  studies,  in  order  to  decide  the  future  appropriate 
actions. 

74
   See RMGC, Raport privind evaluarea impactului asupra mediului generat de proiectul Roșia Montană, 4.7., Peisajul, 
http://www.rmgc.ro/Content/uploads/uploads_eia/impactul‐potential/peisajul/04.7‐Peisajul.pdf  
75
   Ibid.  
76
   John Akeroyd & Andrew Jones, Roșia Montană: a case for protection rather than destruction, op. cit., p. 11. 
77
   RMGC, Raport privind evaluarea impactului asupra mediului generat de proiectul Roșia Montană, 4.7., Peisajul, 
http://www.rmgc.ro/Content/uploads/uploads_eia/impactul‐potential/peisajul/04.7‐Peisajul.pdf  
 58 

Concerning  the  biodiversity,  Dr  John  Akeroyd  and  Dr  Andrew  Jones  encountered  ‘at  least  eight  pristine 
grassland/mire/bog plant communities, all species‐rich’, the bog habitat being, possibly, ‘unique in northern 
Romania’; one  ‘particularly  surprising’  habitat  that  they  encountered was ‘sphagnum  bog  in  hollows  with 
78
associated  acid  mire,  flushed  mire  and  meadow  habitats’ .  The  complex  of  bog  habitats  ‘would  be 
impossible  to  replace  using  even  the  most  expensive  and  exhaustive  techniques  in  ecological  restoration 
and  mitigation.  The  complex  soil  chemical  reactions  including  the  role  of  hydrogen  pumps  in  Sphagnum, 
and  variation  in  acid  peats  will  have  created  these  habitats  over  thousands  of  years  possibly  from 
vegetation succession and infill of small lakes and pools – hence they are extremely sensitive features’79. 
The hydrophilic vegetation is also installing around the  ponds  creating  a risk of dykes’ degradation in the 
long‐term. A strict surveillance of the invading tree vegetation on dykes is therefore necessary in order to 
avoid possible dykes’ cleavages. Specific water vegetation like reed is also invading the ponds and risks to 
lead to warping of the water surfaces (the ponds in Țarina)80.  

Archaeological landscape (4.2.5) 
The  archaeological  landscape  shows  the  intensity  of  human  activities  in  the  whole  site’s  area.  Its 
conservation depends on the research continuation, linked with land‐use regulations, and on a very strong 
policy concerning the presentation and interpretation actions. For the moment, the Hop‐Găuri area seems 
to be the first area to be presented; as the necropolis archaeological research was finalised and the area has 
been covered, a project aiming at its presentation is necessary.  
Due to the vegetation dynamic and protection needs, most of the archaeological sites are not legible in the 
landscape today. However, the vegetation types suggest former exploitation areas, as mentioned above. 

Mining landscape (4.2.6) 
Landscape  transformations  are  linked  with  agricultural  activities,  as  usual  in  mountain  inhabited  regions; 
the  mining  activities  modelled  the  landscape  (extraction  areas,  open‐pit  exploitation  areas,  water 
management systems, sterile accumulations). A specific and most valuable attribute of the area, the mining 
landscape is to be preserved. 
Its fragility is linked with the cessation of traditional and modern mining systems; the preserved traces will 
be  conserved.  Vegetation  growth  remains  a  major  risk  for  the  mining  landscape:  hiding  former  activity 
areas,  putting  into  danger  built  structures  as  ponds  and  dams,  damaging  archaeological  areas.  The 
Management  Plan  will  adopt  a  policy  aiming  to  create  equilibrium  between  natural  potential  in  a  less‐
habited and less‐activity area and conservation of the historic landscape, reminding of the former intensity 
of human activities in the whole area. 
In terms of biodiversity, the John Akeroyd & Andrew Jones report mention that ‘mining scars and debris are 
colonized  by  Ling  (Calluna  vulgaris),  later  by  Redberried  Elder  (Sambucus  racemosa),  Silver  Birch  (Betula 
pendula) and Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris). Rock communities tending towards Calaminarian, with Asplenium 
septentrionale  and  Silene  nutans  subsp.  dubia,  are  a  feature  of  the  mined  areas.  It  is  worth  noting  that 
Calaminarian habitats (EU Annexe 1, 6130 Violetalia calaminariae), often surrounding the ancient working 
of  metalliferous  rock  veins  and  associated  spoil  are  receiving  protected  status  in  the  EU  (e.g.  Halkyn 
Mountain, North Wales, and Gang Mine, Derbyshire, UK), for their facies of rare and unusual plants. Some 
of  these  species  show  evidence  of  adaptation  to  produce  local  ecotypic  variants  or  races  [...].  It  also 
indicates the need for detailed survey of these mine workings for such characteristic species; also lichens 
and  other  lower  plants  (the  EIA  reported  only  10  lower  plants,  all  mosses).  At  least  300  bryophytes  are 
recorded from the Apuseni Mountains. Floristically these metallophile communities are analogous but not 
referable  to  those  in  northern  Europe  and,  as  suggested  by  the  presence  of  Silene  nutans  subsp.  dubia 
(endemic  to  the  mountains  of  Transylvania),  probably  represent  an  undescribed  plant  community.  This 
nodum  has  affinities  with  both  Woodsia  ilvensis–Asplenietumseptentrionalis  T.Tx.  1937  (R6219)  and  the 
endemic and threatened ‘Dacian communities of fissures of siliceous rocks with Asplenium septentrionale, 
Asplenium septentrionale and Silene nutans subsp. dubia (R6219)’81. 

78
   John Akeroyd & Andrew Jones, Roșia Montană: a case for protection rather than destruction, op. cit., p. 2. 
79
   Ibid., p. 6. 
80
   RMGC, Raport privind evaluarea impactului asupra mediului generat de proiectul Roșia Montană, 4.7., Peisajul, 
http://www.rmgc.ro/Content/uploads/uploads_eia/impactul‐potential/peisajul/04.7‐Peisajul.pdf  
81
   Ibid., p. 10. 
 59 

Built–up (architectural) landscape (4.2.7) 
The  built‐up  landscape  is  linked  with  activities  areas,  environmental  conditions,  property  status,  land‐use 
practices  and  construction  methods.  Maintaining  the  landscape’s  characteristics  and  image  may  be  an 
objective for urban and territorial regulations. Still, as the conservation state and the diversity depend on 
population  and  activities,  the  urbanistic  approach  finds  its  limits.  Sociological  studies  may  establish,  in  a 
complementary way, the community’s vitality, habitudes, aims, in order to give directions for future social 
development scenarios.  
In a general way, the mining villages (4.2.7.1) are more stable, even if the population diminishes; the mining 
activities centres (4.2.7.2), less utilised, are endangered. The agro‐pastoral villages (4.2.7.3), traditional by 
structure and image, will survive in smaller areas. 
Particularly,  property  changes  affect  the  landscape’s  structure  and  image;  studying  the  historic  social 
manifestations of the local communities is one of the most important issues for management, in order to 
understand the historical trends. A special attention has to concern traditional and historic landmarks and 
signs, as their signification are vanishing: village and property boundary stone marks, free passages through 
properties, public or community‐owned structures etc. 

Development Model 
 
The site’s conservation requires a sustainable development model, adapted to the fragile Roşia Montană 
community,  whose  economy  was  –  historically  and  traditionally  –  based  on  mining,  forestry  and 
pastoralism.  
Mining has, until ten years ago, been a mainstay of economic activity in the property, as open pit mining, 
uneconomic and environmentally damaging, ceased in 2007. Knowledge and engineering skills dispersed as 
people moved away to seek new jobs elsewhere; but some remained to leave a small pool of experienced 
and  skilled  people  who  know  the  specificities  of  the  property.  Also,  agro‐pastoral  activities’  knowledge 
represents a strong advantage for the Roșia Montană’s community, even if the population loss diminished 
the potential of these activities. 
The  major  choice  addressed  to  yield  long‐term  economic  potential  by  attracting  tourism  and  other 
sustainable  rural  development  has  to  build  on  the  natural  assets,  skills  and  strengths  of  the  local 
community.  ‘This  model,  involving  high  quality  tourism,  and  the  production  and  marketing  of  high‐value 
food  and  other  products,  within  the  remarkable  cultural  context  and  underpinned  by  biodiversity 
conservation and training programmes for farmers, could surely too be combined with any future plan for 
sustainable mining'82.  
The success of such a scenario, positioning the territory’s and the community’s sustainable development as 
principal asset, insuring heritage conservation in the broadest sense, needs to revoke mentality obstacles 
such  as  the  one‐way  future  development.  Finding  alternative  approaches  to  intensive  and  destructive 
modern  mining  is  representing  the  main  hindrance  to  overcome,  needing  cooperation  and  real  opening 
from all national and local deciders and stake‐holders.  
In this state of mind, the Roșia Montană Mining Landscape protection and management represents one of 
the  most  difficult  cases,  as  economic  pressure  had  already  led  to  social  perturbations  and  conflicts. 
Conversely,  utilising  the  economic  interests  for  the  area  in  order  to  build  a  stronger,  sustainable 
development model is to be preferred.   
The  principal,  cost‐expensive,  development  issues  will  consist  of  financial  investment  in  sustainable 
development, including environment measures in order to diminish the negative effect of the more recent 
mining  activities,  landscape  conservation  and  rehabilitation  process,  roads  and  tourism  infrastructure,  as 
the  area  has  to  become  more  accessible.  Heritage  conservation  at  the  site’s  scale  needs,  also,  a  great 
financial effort; scheduling priorities is presently one of the principal difficulties of the Management Plan.  
Regarding conservation and management of cultural heritage of the highest values, support is provided by 
the  World  Heritage  Unit  at  the  National  Institute  for  Heritage  (INP),  Bucharest.  Policies  and  programmes 
related  to  the  promotion  of  the  heritage  of  Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  are  managed  by  local 
governments,  culture  institutions  and  non‐governmental  organisations.  Activities  in  this  field  are  carried 
out, among others, as mentioned below (See Management structures). 

82
   John  R.  Akeroyd,  ‘The  Botanical  and  Anthropogenic  Landscape  of  Roșia  Montană  (Apuseni  Mountains,  Romania)’,  in  Romanian 
Academy, Babeş‐Bolyai University, ICOMOS România, Roșia Montană in Universal History, Cluj University Press, 2012. 
 60 

This development model has a;so been highlighted by a study, aiming at a comprehensive decision analysis 
of the Roșia Montană project83; taking into account four alternative options: the updated project with the 
provisions  from  the  2013  Agreement  between  RMGC  and  the  Romanian  Government;  the  ‘zero 
alternative’  –  the  mining  project  would  be  dropped,  but  nothing  else  would  be  done  instead  in  Roșia 
Montană; the project in its initial form, with the provisions from the 1999 licence; and the alternative of 
touristic  development  in  Roșia  Montană,  all  in  several  scenarios.  It  concluded  that  ‘drawing  on  the 
sensitivity  analysis,  we  can  conclude  that  the  alternative  of  implementing  the  project  with  the  old 
provisions  (Alt.  3),  dating  in  the  1999  licence,  can  be  dropped,  because  it  is  clearly  the  most 
disadvantageous of the four options. In addition, in most cases, the Tourism alternative (Alt. 4) turns out 
to be the optimal one’. Also, ‘in certain cases the difference from the updated project with the provisions 
from  the  2013  Agreement  (Alt.  1) and  the  Zero  alternative  (Alt.  2)  is  not  very  large,  given  that  the  data 
available for this latter option comes from imprecise and uncertain projection’. 
‘The  Tourism  Alternative,  which  seems  to  be  a  potentially  very  attractive  option,  ultimately  depends  on 
political will and on how such a project would be implemented. In addition, the 8th Scenario reflects the 
current situation, where action has been frozen as a result of the massive protests, which were to a great 
extent  due  to  the  lack  of  transparency,  the  legality  problems  and  the  credibility  of  the  whole  process’. 
Also, ‘if these stakeholders want the continuation of the project and its acceptance by civil society, the key 
challenge  is  to  increase  the  transparency  of  the  process  and  improve  the  credibility  and  legal  aspects, 
entering an honest dialogue with the civil society, in order to gain people’s trust. If these aspects cannot 
be  met,  the  decision‐makers  need  to  pay  attention  to  the  alternatives  available  for  a  sustainable 
development  in  the  area.  From  these  results,  there  are  some  future  obvious  directions  of  inquiry  and 
action:  research  in  cooperation  with  other  EU  member  states  of  alternative  technologies  leading  to 
environmentally  safer  mining  [...];  perform  an  even  more  elaborated  analysis  by  expanding  the  multi‐
criteria  tree  with  more  detailed  technical  information,  leading  to  a  wider  number  of  branches  and 
subcriteria, after gaining more input on: touristic development, local authority plans in case the project is 
rejected for good, public opinion preferences and perceived risks and needs; introduce more alternatives 
for sustainable development in areas where state‐funded mining was ceased’84. 
In  conclusion,  any  future  development  strategy  for  the  Roşia  Montană  area  should  be  able  to  fit 
heritage  conservation  and  environment  obligations  as  well  as  a  sensitive  evaluation  of  mining 
rehabilitation  scenarios.  Traditional,  smaller‐scale  mining  may  be  taken  into  account  for  touristic/ 
demonstrative purposes, as a development alternative, together with agriculture and forestry activities, 
local crafts and sustainable tourism.  
The development scenarios  will fit the UNESCO Policy to integrate a sustainable development perspective 
within the processes of the World Heritage Convention (2015). Following this policy requires ‘the building of 
necessary  capacities  among  practitioners,  institutions,  concerned  communites  and  networks,  across  a 
winde  interdisciplinary  and  inter‐sectorial  spectrum.  To  this  end,  States  Parties  should  promote  scientific 
studies and research develop tools and guidelines, organize training and provide quality education [...]; in 
doing  so,  the  potential  contribution  of  non‐governmental  organisations  should  be  taken  into  account.  A 
focus on cultural and biological diversity as well as the linkages between the conservation of cultural and 
natural heritage and the various dimensions of sustainable development will enable all those concerned to 
better engage with World Heritage, protect its OUG and fully harness its potential benefits for communities.’85 
Other recent Recommendations are guiding the Roşia Montană Mining Landscape approach. As urban and 
rural landscape, both UNESCO Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape (2011) and ICOMOS‐IFLA 
Principles Concerning Rural Landscapes as Heritage (2017) are to be followed: 
 Finding ‘a balance between long‐term sustainable (economic, social, cultural, environmental) resource 
use and heritage conservation, and the short‐term needs of rural workers’ quality of living, which is a 
prerequisite for the continuation of activities that generate and sustain rural landscapes’86 is a principal 
issue in the Roşia Montană territory.  
 Managed through the historic urban landscape approach, ‘new functions, such as services and tourism, 
are important economic initiatives that can contribute to the well‐being of the communities and to the 
conservation  of  historic  urban  areas  and  their  cultural  heritage  while  ensuring  economic  and  social 
diversity and the residential function’. 

83 , 
   Adriana  Mihai,  Adina  Marincea,  Love  Ekenberg ‘A  MCDM  Analysis  of  the  Roșia  Montană  Gold  Mining  Project’,  Sustainability, 
2015, 7(6), 7261‐7288, http://www.mdpi.com/2071‐1050/7/6/7261/htm#B19‐sustainability‐07‐07261. The study cites several 
alternative  development  studies:  Maiorescu,  G. (Coord.).  Model  de  dezvoltare  turistică  a  zonei  miniere  Zlatna‐Bucium‐Roșia 
Montană‐Baia de Arieș în perspectiva dezvoltării durabile, ca alternativă a activității monoindustriale extractive în declin; INCDT: 
București, Romania, 2004; Olaru‐Zăinescu, S. Dezvoltare durabilă alternativă mineritului la Roșia Montană. Analiza resurselor şi 
elemente de strategie. Asociaţia Alburnus Maior, 2006 – these two studies aren’t available online anymore.  
84
   Ibid. See, for a Romanian version, Adriana Mihai, Adina Marincea, Love Ekenberg, Analiza procesului decizional în cazul Roșia 
Montană, Median Research Center, 2015, https://openpolitics.ro/wp‐content/uploads/raport_Roșia_Montană.pdf 
85
   http://whc.unesco.org/en/sustainabledevelopment/ 
86
   https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/General_Assemblies/19th_Delhi_2017/Working_Documents‐First_Batch‐
August_2017/GA2017_6‐3‐1_RuralLandscapesPrinciples_EN_final20170730.pdf 
 61 

Specific Issues and Conservation Policies 
 
1. Mining Exploitation: Underground and Surface 
1.1  Mining exploitation: Underground 

Based on the state of conservation status, described below, the conservation policies will focus on: 
 Maintaining of the local conditions of temperature and humidity; 
 Reinforcing the weakened parts of the galleries;  
 Conservation of the artefacts – if possible, in situ; 
 Continuation of archaeological research and survey; 
 Limitation of public access in endangered sites; 
 Rehabilitation and extension of the visitable areas.  
This last action should be prepared following several principles:  
 Choosing accessible, safe visiting conditions;  
 Creating the possibility to understand mining evolution (opening several period/types of galleries); 
 Concentrating the public access for better control and safety;  
 Linking  with  other  visitable  areas  (natural  and  built  heritage,  landscape  tours)  and  also  with  other 
Roman age heritage in extended areas of interest. 
 
Note:  
RMGC had chosen, as conservation areas, the following sectors: the Cătălina Monuleşti gallery (wax tablets, 
ancient  mine  dewatering  system),  the  Păru  Carpeni  mining  sector  (system  of  overlapped  chambers, 
equipped  with  Roman  wood‐made  mine  water  drainage  devices),  the  Piatra  Corbului  area  (traces  of  the 
ancient  and  medieval  galleries  dug  by  the  fire  setting  technique)  and  the  Văidoaia  massif  area  (areas  or 
open‐cast mining can still be found dating back to the ancient period)87. The realisation of a mining museum 
in  the  Cătălina  Monuleşti  gallery  has  been  taken  into  consideration  and  partially  implemented  by  the 
RMGC88. 
In 2007, an assessment aiming to provide an opinion on the feasibility of preserving the mine workings and 
to develop  a  basis  for  the estimation of  the  cost of  turning the  mine workings  into  a  Mine  Museum,  has 
been commissioned by the RMGC89. The tour (25 stops, three hours) has been developed with assistance 
from Dr. Călin Tamaș (Babeș‐Bolyai University, Cluj‐Napoca); it was conceived to pass through a variety of 
workings  (mining  methods,  time  periods),  its  realisation  requiring  backfilling  or  stabilising90.  The  cost 
estimation  took  into  account  Associated  Facilities,  Access  Roads  –  Car  Parks,  Slope  Stabilisation  and 
Landscaping, Portals, Shafts, Intervening Access Admits, Modern Workings, Ancient Workings91. This is only 
an estimation for a very different development scenario based on intensive mining. The new heritage based 
sustainable  development  scenario  will  determine  a  less  invasive  approach  on  mining  conservation.  The 
costs will, however, remain elevated. 

87
   http://en.rmgc.ro/Content/uploads/uploads_eia_en/Capitol%2012/Potential%20Impact%20‐%20Archaeology.pdf 
88
   http://cronica.cimec.ro/detaliu.asp?k=4947&d=Roșia‐Montană‐Alba‐Galeria‐Catalina‐Monulesti‐masivul‐Cos‐2012 ‐ RAN 6770.11; 
LMI AB‐I‐m‐A‐00065.05.  
89
   See,  for  information,  Geo‐Design  Consulting  Engineers  Ltd.  (UK),  Roșia  Montană  –  Cârnic  Massif  Mine  Museum  Stabilisation 
Proposals and Cost Estimates, March 2007 
90
   Ibid.  
91
   Ibid. 
 62 

1.2  Mining exploitation: Surface 

Based on the state of conservation status, described below, the conservation policies will focus on: 
 Conservation of the main structures of the archaeological sites; 
 Continuation of archaeological research and survey; 
 Extension of the visitable areas, by restoration and enhancement of the archaeological sites.  
This last action should be prepared following several principles:  
 Choosing accessible, safe visiting conditions;  
 Creating  the  possibility  to  understand  the  site’s  evolution  and  characteristics  (showing  off  several 
periods/functions/sites, linked to the mining and agricultural activities); 
 Linking with other visitable areas (natural and built heritage, landscape tours). 
 Landscape design of the area and of the open pits in order to host different community and tourist or 
cultural activities – correlated with the stabilisation / consolidation and protection of the underground 
galleries to be found under the open pits; 
 Landscape management plans in order to preserve the sterile, outlandish image of the heaps that are 
now perceived as an important part of the mining landscape. 

2. Archaeological Areas 
2.1. Roman archaeology 

Based on the state of conservation status, described above, the conservation policies will focus on: 
 Continuation of archaeological research and survey; 
 Completing the protection system; 
 Conservation  in  situ  and  mise  en  valeur  projects,  linked  with  the  visiting  infrastructure  and  with  the 
interpretation policies; 
 Controlling the land use and the building process; 
 Creation of coherent visitable areas.  
This last action should be prepared following several principles:  
 Choosing accessible, safe visiting conditions;  
 Creating  the  possibility  to  understand  culture  evolution  (creating  several  period/types  of  visitable 
archaeological areas such as housing, defence structures, sacred and funeral areas); 
 Concentrating the public access for better control and safety;  
 Linking with other visitable areas (mining exploitation, natural and built heritage, landscape tours) and 
also with other Roman age heritage in extended areas of interest. 
Note:  
The  Hop  Roman  stone  circular  mausoleum  has  been  restored  and  conserved  in  situ  (good  state  of 
conservation). The other sites have been studied and are left in conservation for future actions. 
 
2.2. Other periods discoveries 

The conservation policies will focus on: 
 Continuation  of  archaeological  research  and  survey  in  order  to  understand  the  characteristics  of  the 
territory before the Roman period, and in the middle‐age and modern era; 
 Completing the protection system, if necessary. 
 
 
 63 

3. Built Heritage Features 
The conservation of the built heritage features main issues is linked with a better protection (research and 
monitoring, legal protection status, urban and territorial regulations, conservation and restoration projects, 
strong monitoring) and, also, with appropriate presentation and interpretation policies. 
The  administrative  issues  (clarifying  ownership  issues,  creating  cooperation  structures  between  owners, 
municipality, economic actors, NGO’s and heritage protectors) are the basis for all management issues.  
The sociological and ethnological studies should create an operational knowledge basis, in order to define 
the appropriate communities’ development. These issues are strongly linked with the landscape policies. 
 
 
4. Natural Heritage and Landscape 
Based on the state of conservation status, described below, and on further detailed studies and analysis of 
the present situation and needs the conservation policies will focus on: 
 Conservation of the main structures of the silvo‐pastoral landscape, of the balance between the forest 
and pastures and meadows; 
 Protection of the archaeological sites to be found underground (limitation of trees growing in order to 
preserve  the  covered  ruins)  –  correlated  management  plans  with  PNDR  and  Romsilva  for  the 
archaeological sites); 
 Preserving the present system of properties’ delimitations and other territorial and social markings like 
stones, dry stone masonry, crosses etc.;  
 Conservation  of  the  mining  landscapes  (heaps,  open  pits  etc.)  –  correlated  management  plans  with 
Romsilva  in  order  to  limit  pioneer  plants  to  cover  important,  testimonial  elements  of  the  mining 
landscape but, in the same time to help to obtain a natural stabilisation of the affected areas.  
 Conservation of the present water system of ponds and ditches and its extension by reconstruction on 
the legible dried ponds. A further extension of the ancient system can be foreseen as detailed studies 
concerning the topic will be conducted; 
 Related to the ponds system, a monitoring and detailed mapping of temporary torrents can generate a 
better vision on the old water system related to the mining activity; 
 After a detailed technical re‐evaluation of the water system the consolidation of dykes should be done 
in accordance with the forestry management plans where radicular systems might harm the dykes and 
therefore presents security issues (as in the Tăul Mare pond case); 
 As the archaeological research and survey (see above) will continue, a landscape design for set off of 
the old or new discoveries in order to integrate the sites in a tourist trail; 
 To respect the characteristics of the settlements and of households as well as architectural typologies – 
measures to be integrated in the future PUG (urban development masterplan); 
 To preserve and to set off the main urban landmarks (as church spires, public spaces etc.). 
This last action should be prepared following several principles:  
 To set off the mining landscape features and to extend the system of the existing elements scattered in 
the area;  
 To preserve the landscape resulted of historical interactions between mining, farming and forestry, and 
associated land use that can be considered as a relict Bronze Age landscape (Akeroyd, 2012); 
 To integrate any further activities in the present landscape without affecting or removing its features 
and attributes. 
 
 64 

Table 3. Nominated components – conservation state, major risks and operational measures  
 

Attributes, as described in the Nomination Document (code, name)  Research, state of conservation and major risks  Operational measures 

1  MINING EXPLOITATION: UNDERGROUND AND SURFACE   
  1.1  Mining Exploitation: Underground  Research: 1999‐2007, TRACES Laboratory, Toulouse,  1. Protection issues (finalising 
    1.1.1  Cârnic Massif Roman Galleries  France, in partnership with the Babeş‐Bolyay University  the LMI individual inscription 
    1.1.2  Lety Massif Roman Galleries: Cătălina  of Cluj Napoca and the geological Laboratory from  for the 1.1.8 and 1.1.9 
Monulești Roman Galleries  München, Germany), focusing on the Roman workings.  components); 
    1.1.3  Cetate Massif Roman mining features  Multidisciplinary approach, starting from the exploration  2. Overall interdisciplinary view 
    1.1.4  Orlea Roman Galleries  of the accessible underground cavities, continuing with  of the conservation status, 
    1.1.5   Cârnic Roman fire‐setting complex  archaeological diggings and with a detailed geological  necessary in order to create the 
    1.1.6  Cârnic Early Modern Galleries  study of the mining works. Several non‐investigated  basis of the conservation 
areas.  projects; 
    1.1.7  Cătălina Monulești Early Modern Galleries 
    1.1.8  Cetate Early Modern Galleries  Protection: The archaeological site ‘Alburnus Maior’,  3. Conservation projects, linked 
    1.1.9  Văidoaia Massif: Early Modern  protected by the inscription in the National Historical  with the visiting infrastructure 
underground workings  Monuments’ List since 1992, has been defined in terms  and with the interpretation 
of limits and attributes during 2016; this process – held  policies; 
in the same time with the UNESCO nomination 
document – insures the effective protection of the site,  4. Archaeological research 
under Romanian law, of all archaeological evidences  continuation; 
found in the Roşia Montană area. The nominated  5. Monitoring. 
properties (1.1.1‐1.1.7) are listed individually in the LMI; 
 
no individual protection for 1.1.8 and 1.1.9. 
 
State of conservation: From 9 sites, 5 are in good state of 
 
conservation and 4 in a fair one (Nomination Document 
 
evaluation). The underground galleries, of various 
 
periods, dimensions, length and sections, are in different 
 
conservation and stability states, from relatively stable to 
Main management directions: 
essentially collapsed. 
[Archaeological heritage 
Major risks: neglect and lack of specific conservation and  conservation] 
maintaining, stability issues..  [Visiting infrastructure] 
  1.2  Mining exploitation: Surface  Research: Less‐investigated areas.  1. Protection issues (initiating 
    1.2.1  Cârnic Roman Openworks  Protection: General protection level for the Alburnus  the LMI individual inscription 
  Maior’site ; no individual protection for 1.2.2.   for the 1.2.2 component); 
    1.2.2  Cetate Roman Open Pit  2. Overall interdisciplinary view 
State of conservation: Both 2 sites are in poor state of 
conservation (Nomination Document evaluation).  of the conservation status, 
Detailed evaluation to be completed.  necessary in order to create the 
basis of the conservation 
Major risks: Neglect and lack of specific conservation and  projects; 
maintaining,, stability issues.  
3. Conservation projects, linked 
with the underground heritage, 
the visiting infrastructure and 
the interpretation policies; 
4. Landscape conservation and 
rehabilitation problems; 
5. Archaeological research; 
6. Monitoring. 
Main management directions: 
[Archaeological heritage 
conservation] 
[Landscape rehabilitation] 
[Visiting infrastructure] 
  1.3  Ore‐processing features: Header Ponds  Research: Less‐investigated areas (partial technical  1. Protection issues (finalising 
    1.3.1   Tăul Mare  documentation).  the LMI individual inscription 
    1.3.2   Tăul Ţarina  Protection: General protection level for the Alburnus  for all components); 
    1.3.3   Tăul Corna  Maior’site ; no individual protection, but the header  2. Maintenance issuesș 
    1.3.4   Tăul Brazi  ponds’ individual nomination in the LMI is in process.   3. Technical appraisals have to 
    1.3.5   Tăul Anghel 
State of conservation: All the sites are in good state of  be done to insure their 
    1.3.6   Tăul Cartuș  conservation (Nomination Document evaluation).   structural integrity, to be 
    1.3.7   Tăul Ţapului  continued with reinforcement 
    1.3.8   Tăul Găuri  Still, the lack of works for a long period affected the 
entire system. Particularly, the dams are overgrown with  projects and their execution; 
vegetation, affecting the historical landscape diversity  4. Investigations to clarify the 
and, also, posing serious problems in terms of  hydrotechnical system (periods, 
conservation. The tourist use of these ponds needs  characteristics, extent); 
regular maintenance, including vegetation control and  5. Specific studies, in order to 
water circulation. The anthropic wetlands are considered  decide the future appropriate 
important biodiversity areas; their conservation may be  actions in terms of heritage and 
in contradiction with the conservation or restoration of  biodiversity conservation; 
the industrial landscape. Extensive insertion of the 
Chinese carp, invading specie that is currently destroying  6. The tourist use of the ponds 
the water ecosystems.   needs regular maintenance, 
including vegetation control 
Major risks: Linked with neglect (lack of utilisation);  and water circulationș 
integrity problems (anthropic risk issues); biodiversity 
alteration risks.  7. Tăul Găuri (1.3.8) needs local 
underwater archaeological 
survey. 
Main management directions: 
[Industrial heritage 
conservation] 
[Landscape rehabilitation] 
[Archaeological heritage 
conservation] 
 65 

 
Attributes, as described in the Nomination Document (code, name)  Research, state of conservation and major risks  Operational measures 
  1.4   Mining administration  Research: Architectural inventory; detailed technical  1. Protection issues (finalising 
    1.4.1   State Mining Headquarters   documentation to be done in the perspective of  the LMI individual inscription 
  restoration works.  for the 1.4.1 and 1.4.3 
    1.4.2   Miners’ Dormitory  Protection: General protection level for the Alburnus  components); 
  Maior’site ; individual protection existing for 1.4.2; the  2. Conservation/ 
    1.4.3   Mining Professional School   1.4.1 and 1.4.3 components are in process of individual  restoration projects; new 
nomination in the LMI.  function (the 1.4.1 ensemble 
State of conservation:   should become the central 
From 3 sites, 2 are in fair state of conservation and 1 in a  museal infrastructure in Roșia 
poor one (Nomination Document evaluation):  Montană; the other buildings 
 Fair state of conservation (1.4.1); the whole ensemble  have to find new public 
(10 buildings) needs restoration, including the  functions); links with the 
enlargement of the visiting infrastructure (see also  archaeological underground 
1.1.4); the restoration will concern also landscaping  features (1.1.4); 
works.   3. Landscaping project (1.4.1); 
 The Miners’ Dormitory (1.4.2) is in a fair state of  4. Administrative issues 
conservation; the restoration process had been  (ownership, possible NGO 
started by the Municipality, and some minimal  partnerships). 
measures of conservation had been taken.   
 The Mining Professional School (1.4.3) is abandoned 
 
and needs restoration end conversion to a new public 
Main management directions: 
function.  
[Industrial heritage 
Major risks: Linked with neglect (lack of utilisation/  conservation] 
maintenance); unsatisfying restoration works risk (1.4.2).  [Visiting infrastructure] 
2  ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREAS     
  2.1  Roman archaeology  Research: The most import discoveries have been made  1. Protection issues (initialising 
    2.1.1   Hăbad Sacred Area  between 1999 and 2006, due to systematic research  the LMI individual inscription 
    2.1.2   Găuri – habitation  financed by the RMGC, based on a partnership between  for the 2.1.1, 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 2.1.6, 
    2.1.3   Hăbad – habitation  CPPCN (lately INMI, now INP ) and the National Museum  2.1.8‐2.1.12 components); 
    2.1.4   Tăul Ţapului  of the Union – Alba Iulia. After 2001, the National  2. Overall interdisciplinary view 
    2.1.5   Hop Necropolis  Research Program ‘Alburnus Maior’ has been created by  of the conservation status, 
    2.1.6   Nanului Valley Sacred Space  the Ministry of Culture Order No 2504/07.03.2001,  necessary in order to create the 
under the coordination of the National Romanian History  basis of the conservation 
    2.1.7   Carpeni Zone 
Museum (MNIR). Several non‐investigated areas.  projects; 
    2.1.8   Jig‐Piciorag Area 
    2.1.9   Ţarina Necropolis  Protection: General protection level for the Alburnus  3. Conservation projects, linked 
    2.1.10   Pârâul Porcului ‐ Tăul Secuilor  Maior’site ; individual protection existing for the 2.1.2,  with the visiting infrastructure 
    2.1.11   Tăul Cornei ‐ Corna Sat Zone 2.1.5 and 2.1.7 components; for the 2.1.1, 2.1.3, 2.1.4,  and with the interpretation 
    2.1.12   Bălmoșești ‐ Islaz Area  2.1.6, 2.1.8‐2.1.12 components, the proceedings for  policies; 
individual nomination in the LMI have to start. 
4. Archaeological research 
State of conservation: From 12 sites, 8 are in medium  continuation; 
state of conservation and 4 in a poor one (Nomination 
Document evaluation). The Hop Roman stone circular  5. Monitoring. 
 

mausoleum has been restored and conserved in situ   
(good state of conservation). The other sites have been   
studied and are left in conservation for future actions.    
Major risks: Neglect and lack of specific conservation and  Main management directions: 
maintaining, the uncontrolled growing vegetation as well  [Archaeological heritage 
as uncontrolled building actions or the lack of stability of  conservation] 
certain sectors may affect the sites .   [Visiting infrastructure] 
 66 

 
Attributes, as described in the Nomination Document (code, name)  Research, state of conservation and major risks  Operational measures 
3   BUILT HERITAGE FEATURES     
  3.1   Modern town / Village [Roșia Montană/Modern]  Research: Architectural inventory and evaluations (2001,  1. Protection issues (updating 
    3.1.1   Square  2004, 2007); detailed surveys and technical documents  the conservation status; 
      3.1.1.a   Townhouses with commercial  for several buildings. Historical studies for the centre.  finalising the LMI individual 
ground floors; no. 323‐328,  Protection: General protection level for the Alburnus  inscriptions); 
388 (late 18th – early 19th  Maior’site; historic and urban heritage general  2. Conservation/restoration 
century)  protection level for the historical centre of Roșia  projects; links with the local 
      3.1.1.b   ‘Sicilian Street’  Montană; individual protection existing for 42 items;  development issues; 
      3.1.1.c   Roman‐Catholic Church and  several components are in process of individual  4. Administrative issues 
parish ensemble (18th –  nomination in the LMI.   (clarifying ownership issues, 
middle 19th, early 20th 
No urban regulations are valid since 2015, as the former  creating cooperation structures 
century) 
plans have been declared invalid in justice. No building  between owners, municipality, 
      3.1.1.d   Unitarian Church and parish 
permit (with some exceptions) can be accorded to  economic actors, NGO’s and 
ensemble (1796, 18th ‐ 
solicitors, affecting the development issues.  heritage protectors); 
middle 19th cent, 1933) 
      3.1.1.e   The Casino (1880‐1900), no.  State of conservation:   5. Monitoring the whole 
329, and Summer Garden  From 19 nominated clusters, 4 are in good state of  ensemble’s conservation state; 
      3.1.1.f   The former Administrative  conservation, 12 in a fair one and 3 in poor state of  surveying legal protection 
Palace (1896), no. 310  conservation (Nomination Document evaluation).   proceedings concerning 
    3.1.2   Brazi  The village’s state of conservation may be considered fair  building/demolishment 
in a general view. The 2004 evaluation, in the Roşia  activities; 
    3.1.3  Ieruga 
    3.1.4   Tăul Brazi  Montană’s historical centre, found 23,8% of the  6. Initiating and realising the 
    3.1.5   Văidoaia  properties in bad condition, 54,3% in medium condition  General Urban Plan for the 
    3.1.6   Berk  and 21,9% in good condition. There is no updated  ROȘIA Montană’s 
    3.1.7   Sosași  evaluation for the whole built ensembles, no synthetic  administrative territory and the 
    3.1.8   Orlea  information about the restored buildings and no  Zonal Urban Plan for the WHL 
complete information about the demolishment process,  nominated site’s territory are 
      3.1.8.a   Greek‐Catholic Church and 
initiated after 2000.  high‐priority issues; 
parish ensemble (1720, 1741, 
mid 19th century), no. 135  As Roșia Montană’s historic centre was preserved by the  7. Increasing the heritage’s 
      3.1.8.b   Orthodox Church and parish  extensive mining project, its components were better  visibility and other presentation 
ensemble   conserved than the peripheral clusters’ ones.   and interpretation policies.  
      3.1.8.c   The administrative centre  Major risks: Demolition continuation; neglect (lack of   
    3.1.9   Gura Minei  utilisation/ maintenance) or abandon of the households   
    3.1.10   Vercheș  and of the other buildings; unsatisfying restoration works   
      3.1.10.a   Aitaj House, later Miners’  risk   Main management directions: 
Club (no. 242), Maternity  [Historic and urban heritage 
ward (no. 251), Gritta House  conservation] 
(no. 258), Miner households  [Vernacular heritage 
conservation] 
      3.1.10.b   State school and kinder‐
[Visiting infrastructure] 
garten; no. 274 (1905‐1915) 
[Landscape rehabilitation] 
      3.1.10.c   Blocks of flats in the sixties 
  3.2  Town / Village [Corna (Modern)]  Research: See 3.1.  See 3.1. Particularly, as the 
    3.2.1   Orthodox Church (1719), no. 707  Protection: General protection level for the Alburnus  Corna’s territory was destined 
    3.2.2   Greek‐Catholic Church (19th century), no.  Maior’site; no historic and urban heritage general  to be utilised in the RMGC 
692  protection level; the two churches (3.2.1 and 3.2.2) are  project, new development 
    3.2.3  Miners households  in process of individual nomination in the LMI.   scenarios have to be defined. 
 
State of conservation:    
From 3 nominated positions, 2 are in fair state of   
conservation and 1 in poor state of conservation   
(Nomination Document evaluation).    
The village’s state of conservation may be considered fair   
in a general view. In the 2001‐2002 inventory, in the   
whole site’s territory, found 23,8% of the properties in   
bad condition, 54,3% in medium condition and 21,9% in   
good condition. There is no complete information about   
 

the demolishment process initiated after 2000.   
 
The village was more affected by demolitions as it was 
Main management directions: 
destined to be replaced by the header pond of the 
[Historic and urban heritage 
intended exploitation project.  
conservation] 
Major risks: Demolishment continuation; neglect (lack of  [Vernacular heritage 
utilisation/maintenance) or abandon of households and  conservation] 
traditional agro‐pastoral activities.   [Visiting infrastructure] 
[Landscape rehabilitation] 
  3.3  Ţarina (Modern)  Research: See 3.1.  See 3.1.  
    3.3.1  Traditional farmhouse (19th century),  Protection: General protection level for the Alburnus   
Ţarina no. 1248  Maior’site; no historic and urban heritage general   
    3.3.2   Traditional farmhouse (20th century), with  protection level; the two farmhouses (3.3.1 and 3.3.2)   
polygonal stable  are in process of individual nomination in the LMI.    
 
State of conservation:  
 

 
From 2 nominated positions, 1 is in good state of   
conservation and 1 in a fair on (Nomination Document  Main management directions: 
evaluation). Fair state of conservation for the other  [Vernacular heritage 
households.   conservation] 
Major risks: See 3.2.   [Visiting infrastructure] 
[Landscape rehabilitation] 
  3.4  Bălmoşeşti – Blideşti (Modern)  Research: See 3.1.  See 3.1. Particularly, links with 
    3.4.1  Bălmoşeşti (Modern)  Protection: No historic and urban heritage general  archaeological potential of the 
    3.4.2  Blidești (Modern)  protection level.   land have to be realised in 
Bălmoşeşti. Communities’ 
State of conservation:   strengthen scenarios to define. 
Fair, similar to the other hamlets.    

Main management directions: 
Major risks: See 3.2. The accentuated loss of inhabitants,  [Vernacular heritage 
especially in Bălmoşeşti, demands urgent measures in  conservation] 
order to insure the community’s rehabilitation . 
[Visiting infrastructure] 
[Landscape rehabilitation] 
[Archaeological heritage 
conservation] 
 67 

Table 4. Natural heritage and landscape – conservation state, major risks and operational measures  
 

Attributes, as described in the Nomination Document   Research, state of conservation and major risks  Operational measures 

4  NATURAL HERITAGE AND LANDSCAPE     
  4.2   Landscape Evaluation  Research: Landscape characterisation studies for the WHL  1. Complex landscape identification and 
nomination document; Landscape and environment  evaluation studies, followed by the definition of 
studies linked with the RMGC project.  conservation and rehabilitation issues.  
Particularly, the underground is subject to natural  2. Complex environmental studies, followed by 
processes related to movements of the rock mass, water  management and monitoring. 
penetration and degradation of physical materials. This  3. Conserving an appropriate equilibrium 
requires appropriate management and monitoring, not  between the two principal ecosystems, agro‐
only based on heritage values but also on access and  pastoral and woodland; measures based on 
wider impacts on the system as a whole. The status of the  specific studies, linked with environmental 
underground needs to be examined in detail, its state of  policies, urban and territorial regulations. 
conservation recorded and a baseline established for 
monitoring.  4. Conserving the equilibrium between natural 
potential in a less‐habited and less‐activity area 
Protection: General protection level for the Alburnus  and conservation of the historic landscape, 
Maior’site; historic and urban heritage general protection  reminding of the former intensity of human 
level for the Roșia Montană’s historic centre. No urban  activities in the whole area. 
regulations for the whole territory. 
5. Conservation of the characteristic species, 
Major risks: Some of the landscape features may be  especially the protected ant the red‐listed as 
altered out of  lack of coordination of different  rare ones. 
stakeholders.  
6. Integrating conservation and rehabilitation 
landscape objectives in the urban and territory 
regulations. 
    4.2.1  Agro‐pastoral landscape   Conservation state: The depopulation and the diminution  1. Encouraging agro‐pastoral activities; land‐
of agricultural activities led, in the last 25 years, to a  use control and regulations. 
changing process concerning the agro‐pastoral landscape;  2. Creating development opportunities for 
it concerns, mostly, the diminution of pastures in the  ecological and active tourism. 
benefit of forestry vegetation (with intermediate state of 
medium size vegetation and young forestry vegetation). 
    4.2.2  Rocks and stony ground  Conservation state: Stability problems, as well as other  1. Defining specific conservation measures, 
landscape  natural risks have to be taken into account; biodiversity  based on detailed studies, linked with 
conservation issues.  environmental policies, urban and territorial 
regulations. 
    4.2.3  Woodland / Forest  Conservation state: The forest landscape state of  1.  Refining  the  Forestry  Management  Plans  to 
landscape  conservation is recorded, as managed on the basis of local  contain  specific  conservation  issues  for  rare 
Forestry Management Plans. Taking into account the  species’  association,  archaeological  issues  and 
rarity of some species’ association, cooperation between  traditional woodland uses. 
the scientific and research level and the operational one,   
in the site administration’s legal frame is needed. 
    4.2.4  Wetland  Conservation state: The anthropic wetlands (partially  1. Specific studies, in order to decide the future 
landscape/Flushes and  absorbed into the natural environment while generating  appropriate actions to preserve the rare 
mires  lower specific wetland landscape) have to be considered  habitats and the integrity of the industrial 
as important biodiversity areas; their conservation may be  heritage structures. 
in contradiction with the conservation or restoration of  2. Surveillance of the invading tree vegetation 
the industrial landscape.  on dikes is therefore necessary in order to 
avoid cleavages. 
3. Complex maintenance activities concerning 
the historic water management system. 
4. Protection of riparian vegetation that is not 
listed as forest (land use) 
    4.2.5  Archaeological landscape  Conservation state: The archaeological landscape shows  1. Archaeological research continuation 
the intensity of human activities in the whole site’s area.  2. Appropriate land‐use regulations 
Due to the vegetation dynamic and protection needs, 
most of the archaeological sites are not legible in the  3. Presentation and interpretation actions 
landscape today. The vegetation type suggests former  4. Vegetation‐growth control 
exploitation areas. 
    4.2.6  Mining landscape  Conservation state: The mining activities modelled the  1. Conserving the principal attributes of the 
landscape (extraction areas, open‐pit exploitation areas,  mining landscape. 
water management systems, sterile accumulations).   2. Restoration of disappeared or destroyed 
As specific and most valuable attribute of the area, the  mining landscape features and elements 
mining landscape has to be preserved as a whole.  (ponds and channels, rails and other 
infrastructures that can also serve the further 
development of the area) 
    4.2.7  Built–up (architectural)  Conservation state: see 3.1.   1. Research: historic and social studies, linked 
landscape  Maintaining the landscape’s characteristics and image  with territorial approaches and with urban and 
      4.2.7.1  Linearly  may be an objective for urban and territorial regulations.  territorial regulations. 
  developed  Still, as the conservation state and the diversity depend on  2. Community memorial measures (based on 
  upon valleys –  population and activities, the urbanistic approach finds its  ethnology studies) – conservation of the 
  mining villages  limits. Sociological and ethnological studies may establish,  immaterial heritage policies (traditional 
      4.2.7.2  Compact  in a complementary way, the community’s vitality,  activities, social manifestations etc.). 
developed –  habitudes, aims, in order to give directions for future 
mining activity  3. Community‐strengthen measures and 
social development scenarios.  responds to the population’s needs in terms of 
centres 
In a general way, the mining villages (4.2.7.1) are more  development, based on sociological studies. 
      4.2.7.3  Disperse 
stable, even if the population diminishes; the mining  4. Conservation of the material signs of the 
dwellings – 
activities centres (4.2.7.2), less utilised, are endangered.  historic and traditional landscape 
agro‐pastoral 
The agro‐pastoral villages (4.2.7.3), traditional by 
villages   5. Particularly, conservation of the traditional 
structure and image, will survive in smaller areas. 
and historic landmarks and signs, as their 
signification is vanishing. 
6. Social assistance structures creation, 
especially for the disperse‐dwelling settlements 
(such as medical, educational mobile systems). 
 68 

Positive and Negative Factors affecting OUV 
 
The  Management  Plan  assesses  the  positive  and  negative  factors  that  affect  potential  OUV  and  the 
associated values through impact on attributes.  
The Management Plan assesses the positive and negative factors that have affected values in the past, their 
current  status,  and  their  potential  trend  and  projection  for  the  future  (with  a  specific  focus  on  potential 
OUV). Implementation of the Management Plan will seek to mitigate the negative factors and threats to the 
potential  OUV  of  the  property  and  its  other  values,  and  to  maximise  the  opportunities  presented  by  the 
possible inscription as a WHS. These positive and negative factors have been distilled into issues that are 
each accompanied by strategic policies that are detailed below. 
The OUV stands on several aspects: 
 The unicity and authenticity of the OUV attributes – underground and surface Roman mining heritage; 
 The diversity  of the associated values, such as modern period mining and  housing, and agro‐pastoral 
land utilisation, leading to a various cultural landscape, created by multicultural communities, in time. 
 The high signification of the whole – 200 years or more of mining activity in one significant part of the 
Golden Quadrilateral of the Southern Carpathians ‐ the richest precious metals province in Europe; 
The positive and negative main factors affecting the OUV are linked with several aspects: 
 The  development  potential,  as  a  wealthy  community  is  more  capable  to  deal  with  complex 
conservation problems: 
 Social and economic aspects: the changes in terms of community (depopulation, cessation of the 
core  activities,  difficulties  to  build  a  sustainable  future),  decreasing  the  local  development 
potential; increase of people’s involvement in the local development; 
 Cultural  aspects:  local,  national  and  international  communities  approach  of  the  preservation 
policies; local understanding and desiderata concerning the suitable activities, starting with mining 
(influenced  by  poverty  as  well  as  by  the  lobby  for  other  interests  for  the  area’s  development); 
resistance  to  changes,  reflected  as  well  at  the  community  level  and  at  the  administrative  one; 
increasing interest in conservation policies and in the process of understanding of the benefices of 
the cultural tourism activities to the local economy; 
 Local  resources  and  activities,  creating  development  potential  and  limitations  as  well  as  the 
location in the national/international communication network. 
 Environmental  aspects,  as  well  as  natural  and  anthropic  risks  are  to  be  treated  separately,  as  they 
include the lack of consistent protection and management policies; their creation is the principal aim of 
the Protection and Management Plan: 
 Biodiversity aspects, to be managed together with national forestry and with heritage conservation 
plans; 
 Natural risks, to be managed in the whole region, by state‐created mechanisms; 
 Anthropic risks, linked mainly with neglect (affecting the mining infrastructure, the built heritage, 
the  landscape  and  the  agropastoral  structures)  and,  principally,  the  intensive  mining  approaches 
intentions presented as a unique development possibility;  
The positive and negative main factors affecting the OUV and associated values are presented in Table 5. 
They concern operational problems linked to the aspects mentioned above.  
We are highlighting several aspects concerning the main issues of the Protection and Management Plan: 
 The diversity of attributes leads towards different developments concerning the visiting infrastructure, 
to  various  types  of  conservation  projects  and  methods  and,  also,  to  creative  presentation  and 
interpretation policies; 
 The tradition loss (with several consequences on the site’s attributes integrity) is to be overcome by the 
Protection and Management Plan specific issues; 
 The  existing  capacity  of  the  community  to  adapt  to  changes  in  their  environment  is  related  to 
knowledge and attitudes towards change; 
 The  knowledge  and  technics  on  resource  use  and  management  increasement  need  further 
development on knowledge sharing processes. 
 
 
 69 

Table 5. Positive and negative factors affecting the OUV and associated values 
Factor  Current  Negative  Positive  Trend 
Status  (‐)  (+) 
+  =  ‐ 

Socio‐economic and cultural aspects 
Depopulation  RM is losing its  The main owner had  Depopulation seems to  The real trend has to be established by specific, detailed 
process  inhabitants and the  displaced more than  be slowed down.  studies. 
incoming population  700 persons during the  Emigration: a ratio of  The relative positive trend of the immigration has to be 
can’t yet balance the  last 15 years; a new  150 persons/year  helped by social appropriate policies. 
situation.   neighbourhood, called  between 2003 and 
Recea, had been  Immigration process starts to concern young, educated 
4033 inhabitants (1992)  2010; to compare with  population. 
4013 inhabitants (1999)  created in the town of  the 1990‐2002 period, 
2824 inhabitants (2017)  Alba Iulia.  with a ratio of 47  A 2016 measure, concerning financial aid to 
– the involution is  Population ageing as  persons/year and 2011‐ displacements, in the case of unfavored areas, such as 
directly linked with  the youngers are  2015, with a ratio of 72  Roșia Montană, allows financial aid to migrants from or 
people’s relocation;  migrating towards more  persons/ year;  towards these areas (for unemployed persons); 
Roșia Montană has lost  important economic  immigration: ratio of 56  it won’t help the stabilisation of the persons, but – 
30% of its population in  centres.   persons/year between  mainly – their departure. 
25 years;  Lack of potential local  1990‐2002; 42 
comparatively, Romania  working force.   persons/year between 
lost, in the same period,  2003‐2010, with a 
4% of its population and  The vacant properties  maximum of 110 
the Alba department,  have been, in majority,  persons in 2010 and 42 
10% (INSEE‐Tempo  dismantled.  persons/year between 
Online).  2011‐2015 (INSEE‐
Nominated site 2016  Tempo Online) 
estimated population: 
600; buffer zone: 100 
Property  The major owner  The ownership situation  The presence of a main  The real trend has to be established   
situation  (RMGC) has acquired  is not yet up to date –  real estate owner  by specific studies. 
large land surfaces,  this may affect the  allows a public‐private  The cadastral inventory has to be 
including households.  heritage protection  partnership in order to  produced (updated). 
Unclear property status  actions.  solve major local 
for part of the site’s  problems concerning 
territory  heritage and social 
problems. 
Community  There is a week social  After 20 years of  Growing number of  Growing  The split   
and other  trend towards forming  ‘thinking in the box’   local natural and  interest for  community 
associations  associations (as  of an intensive mining  cultural heritage  sustainable  expresses in 
generally in Romania)  project there are stil  associations in the area  development  the association 
around common  divided opinions and  (Roșia Montană in  and heritage  structure. 
interests.  scepticism about  World Heritage is  problems. 
26 registered  heritage based  fighting for the  Growing 
associations in RM  development scenarios  recognition and  interest for 
(culture – 1;  in Roşia Montană.   protection of the local  Roșia Montană 
development – 5;  cultural heritage value;  in the NGO’s 
common property in  Trai cu rost is sustaining  Romanian and 
village pastures,  active tourism).  international 
meadows, and woods  Several national and  community. 
associations – 2; cattle  international NGOs are  Growing 
farming associations –  interested in RM and  number of 
2; social or charity  promoting cultural and  heritage related 
associations ‐ 8, others);  sportive activities (such  events (R. 
other association  as ARA, Pachamama  Montană Day, 
involved in RM have  Romania, R‐PER).   Heritage Days); 
been created in other    also, sport 
locations.  events. 
Mobility and  The accessibility of the  The one‐way access to  The rather weak  The DJ 107 I    Negative trend 
accessibility  entire settlement is  the area limits touristic  accessibility of the area  modernisation  concerning the 
relatively weak.  activities development  didn’t allow a rapid  is financed  local circulation 
but also limits the  development after  since June  network 
access to work in  1990 and, therefore,  2017. The road  maintenance, 
proximal cities of the  permitted the  is connecting  as the dwelling 
local population.   continuity of traditional  the Apuseni  dispersed 
Negative effect for the  land use and building  tourist area  structure is in a 
landscape concerning  tradition.   from Aiud  negative trend. 
several access roads  Also the tourist  (DN1) to 
created for the mining  activities will be limited  Bucium Sat — 
area’s exploration.  and at slow pace  DN 74 (Cerbu), 
growing, not generating  with TEN‐T, by 
Activities’ development  DN1 – Sebeş 
is limited by the weak  an unsustainable 
growth.  Highway. 
accessibility. 
Tourism  The tourist  The existing hosting  Existing pedestrian,  Growing     
activity and  infrastructure is  capacity is insufficient  bike and motorbike  number of 
infrastructure   reduced and insufficient  for the touristic  routs developed by  tourists. 
for the number of  pressure already  local NGO (Trai cu rost)  Growing 
visitors.   present.   inside of the property  number of 
There are no pubs or  and related to other  hosting 
restaurants in town,  heritage vicinities.  facilities. 
limiting passage staying  Already some small  Agrotourism, 
in RM.   guest houses are  ecologic and 
Just some of the trails  created (Casa Manu,  active tourism 
are marked and clearly  Casa Petri, La Lepe,  structures. 
legible in the landscape  Bîrlă family, Plic family, 
Piatra Corbului chalet).  Growing 
but, as intensively  visibility of the 
circulated, sure and  Population dynamics  presentation 
easy to follow.   has created vacant  and heritage 
households, to be  interpretation 
developed for tourism.  actions. 
 70 
 

Factor  Current  Negative   Positive  Trend 

Status  (‐)  (+) 
+ =  ‐ 

Cultural and  The cultural/visiting  The museum doesn’t  Population dynamics  Growing  Financial and  Degradation 

visiting  infrastructure is  have the capacity and  has created vacant  number of  technical limits  continuation of 
infrastructure   reduced and not  human resources to  households, to be  houses opened  – as the  the existing 
diversified.   permit a larger public to  developed for the  to public (such  necessary  structures 
access the roman mines  visiting infrastructure.  as Roșia no 391,  investments are  without a 
even a clear demand for  Possibility to involve  1248, 321,  important may  followed‐up 
this is occuring.  public and private  331).  stop the visiting  action plan. 
Other museums and  capital, NGOs.  Vacant  infrastrucure 
memorial huses in the  households.  creation and 
Existing projects for  rehabilitation. 
vicinities are few.  extension of the   
The visiting structure of  museum and for other   
the site has to be  heritage visitable areas. 
created.   
Mining  No traditional or non‐ Tradition loss, in terms  Mining potential to be  The existing  Administrative  Degradation 
activities and  invasive mining  of historic activities;  established, in a  conflict  and other  continuation 
infrastructure   rehabilitation  development essential  sustainable manner;  between the  problems will  without a 
programmes.  issues.  mining potential in the  economic  slow down  followed‐up 
There is not ongoing  Degradation through  site’s region, as several  principal actor  mining  action plan 
coherent rehabilitation  negect (unstable open  deposits aren’t  and the project  activities 
program for the mining  pits and heaps, possible  exploited; possibility to  opponents  rehabilitation 
infrastructure (mines,  destruction of the  involve public and  (involving local  process. 
ponds, quarries).   ancient mines, slow  private capital.  and national  Financial and 
degradation of the  Possibility to follow‐up  community)  technical limits 
ponds’ system,  historic mining  may become  – as necessary 
anthropic linked risks).  infrastructure  lower after  investments are 
rehabilitation.  2018  huge 
Agricultural  No local agro‐pastoral  The present legislation  Most areas are still  The situation has to be studied in detail. No correlated 
activities,  infrastructure (milk  doesn’t protect the  used in traditional  information available in this moment. 
infrastructures,   collecting point, local  small households and  manner, conserving a  Growing abandonment of farmland and agropastoral 
and services  market, etc). The  the subsistence  valuable and balanced  households. 
agriculture activity in  agriculture.  ecosystem. 
the area seems mainly  The GAL doesn’t  The existence, at 
functioning as  support agricultural  national level, of rural 
subsistence agriculture.   activities.  development measures, 
Livestock: cattle ‐  Agricultural land seem  financed both with 
descending trend since  underused as a result of  national ant EU funds. 
1994 (2243); 1245 in  population dynamics, 
2003; pigs – 616 (1990);  real estate situation, 
281 (2003); sheep –  weak access to financial 
1543 (1991); 250 in  aids and mentalities. 
2003; hen – stable 
situation: 6500 (1990);  The common pastures 
6700 in 2003 (INSEE –  administration and 
Tempo Online. No data  management system 
for 2004‐2016)  have various problems.  
The Drumul Iancului 
GAL (Iancu, Bistra, 
Sohodol, Vidra, RM) 
is formed, giving 
possibilities to EU 
finance. 
Forestry  Important area included  No local clear strategy  Forestry management  The situation has to be studied in detail. No correlated 
in the national forestry  concerning forestry  plans followed‐up by  information available in this moment. 
heritage area. Bigger  activities developmen  national specific 
surfaces gained by  structures 
forestry, as agricultural 
and mining activities 
diminish or have 
disappeared. 
Other activities  40 firms appear to be  No defined strategy for  Creative industry linked  The situation has to be studied in detail. No correlated 
registered in RM (4 in  economic development.  with local  information available in this moment. 
industry, 6 buiding, 10  craftsmanship started 
commerce and services,  with one project ‐ hand 
7 transport, 4 hosting, 4  made products 
– other activities) and  (www.madeinRoșiaMo
12 authorised personal  ntană.ro)  
activities (PFA). 
Environmental aspects, natural and anthropic risks 
Biodiversity  Important biodiversity,  Partial and punctual  Monitoring possibility  The situation has to be studied in detail. Biodiversity 
created in correlation  studies (studies on  through Landscape  issues have to be correlated with built heritage issues 
with the environment  flora, and ornithology  observatory (LO),   (as vegetation growth may, locally, affect the heritage 
specificities (natural  and missing on large  Interest of Ministry of  structures and, also, the landscape characteristics); also, 
ressources as well as  mammals).  Environment    correlations with landscape archaeology have to be 
specific activities).  studied. 
Natural and  Erosion risks in narrow valleys (Corna, Roșia).      Growing risks of 
anthropic  Landslide risk in Corna Valley.  erosion, rock 
(technological)  fall, landslide 
risks   Technological risks for the entire territory (massifs’ stabilisation needed to  etc. Detailed 
prevent both erosion and rockfall; also, ponds’ dikes maintenance).  studies and 
No important flood risk.  monitoring 
processes to be 
pursued. 
 71 

Factor  Current  Negative  Positive  Trend 

Status  (‐)  (+) 
+  =  ‐ 

Environmental  Acidic water (accidentally polluting the surface and underground waters).    Stable, if no   

issues   Dust and exhaust gasses (in normal limits).   intensive 
mining activity 
Noise and vibrations (ceased after the Minvest closure).  starts. Special 
Heavy metals pollution of the overburden ‐ moderate favourability (40‐60  studies and 
points) for grazing and hay lands and small favourability (0‐20 points) for fruit  monitoring 
trees (apple, plum) and potato (Environmental Report PUZ 2007, rmgc.ro).  processes to be 
pursued. 
The historical pollution of soil and waters with heavy metals and their 
compounds has to be handled by the local or national authorities; also, the toxic 
waste from mining activities in the Roșia Montană village has to be neutralised. 
Administrative and conservation aspects 
Local public  As many other  Lack of transparency  Several development  Opportunity to  Stable in terms  No important 
administration  administrations, lack of  (Municipality’s site is  projects in the benefit  include  of  development 
specialised employees.  under construction).  of the community.  sustainable  administrative  projects till the 
Divergent interests in  Difficuties to deal with  Possibility to finance  development  capacity.  new urban 
the area are difficult to  specialised problems  new PUG and PUZ  issues and,  plans are 
deal with, in a split  (development  utilising national funds.  particularly,  created and 
community.  strategies, urban  heritage  approved. 
Existing  protection 
  planning and heritage  documentations in 
conservation issues), in  objectives in 
order to create the  the new 
a conflictual  basis for a new PUG. 
environment.  planning 
documents. 
No urban and territory 
planning documents   
(PUG, PUZ), as the 
existent ones have been 
cancelled in justice. 
Archaeological  Legal protection for the  Some of the  Existant serious  Positive trend    Negative trend 
heritage  entire site’s territory.   archaeological survey’s  archaeological surveys  of the  concerning 
protection   Internal situation of the  detailed results remain  for important parts of  protection as  archaeological 
protected site to be  unpublished.  the territory.  the control  heritage, built 
clarified.  Present difficult access  Possibility to include  system has  heritage 
to some of the privately  the new archaeological  improved.  integrity and 
Unclear legislation  landscape 
in several points  owned properties.  research programme in  Growing 
the National Annual  interest from  specificity  
(preventive  No urban regulations  if national 
archaeological  for the Roșia Montană’s  Archaeological Research  the scientific 
Plan.   and  systems 
proceedings and  territory, as the former  concerning 
responsibilities).  PUG has been cancelled  Forthcoming LIDAR  unspecialised 
national and  management, 
Financial and  by actions in justice.  survey that will provide  monitoring and 
research potential data  international 
organisational problems  community  protection 
touching the state’s  and can establish  aren’t firmly 
research priorities.    accorded to 
specialised  Roșia  created and 
administrations.  Montană’s  financed. 
archaeological  A strong 
heritage.  masterplan 
should include 
Built heritage  Legal protection for the  Some of the built  Existent serious surveys  Growing   
all interested 
protection   major part of the site’s  heritage survey’s  for important parts of  interest from 
authorities and 
territory implying the  detailed results remain  the built heritage.  the scientific 
stakeholders. 
Ministry of Culture and  unpublished.  Possibility of financing  and 
National Identity  Heritage surveys of the  through the PNR –  unspecialised 
involvement and  entire territory still to  National Restauration  national and 
control in all building  be done.   Program and other  international 
activity or development  national funds; also,  community 
intentions.  Difficult access to the  accorded to 
RMGC‐owned  European funds are 
Internal situation of the  available for  Roșia 
properties.  Montană’s built 
protected sites to be  conservation works. 
detailed.  No urban regulations  heritage. 
for the Roșia Montană’s  Possibility to finance 
Insufficient protection  new PUG and PUZ using   Possibility of 
centre, as the former  creation  
instruments addressed  PUZ has been cancelled  national funds (this will 
to the disperse  by actions in justice.  become mandatory 
dwellings, to industrial  after inscription). 
structures and to other  . 
landscape marks. 
Landscape  Legal obligations  Landscape  Possibility to finance  Possibility of   
protection and  assumed by the  identification and  new studies utilising  monitoring 
rehabilitation  ratification of the  evaluation processes  national funds.  through 
European Landscape  and  appropriate  Possibility to include  Landscape 
Convention.  regulations still to be  landscape issues in the  observatory 
defined.  new urban planning  (LO), under the 
No cooperation in this  documents.  Ministry of 
direction statued  Regional 
between national  Development 
concerned authorities.  and authority.  

Management  National legislation  Cooperation with the  Growing interest shown  Possibility to     

structures  imposes a strong  Roșia Montană  by the civil society (and  create an open, 
management for the  Municipality has  been  the NGOs), as well as by  transparent and 
WHL proposed and  discussed but not yet   scientific national and  appropriate 
inscribed sites, implying  agreed A local  international boards.  management 
management,  partnership with all     system, linked 
protection and  owners is still to be  with the WHL 
monitoring activities  agreed.  inscription 
and establishes clearly  Creating a common  process. 
the local and national  base for better 
authorities roles.  decisions represents a 
challenge in Roșia 
Montană’s case. 
 72 

Protection and Management Status 
Property and Land Use 
 
The ownership structure of individual attributes of the property is varied.  
The surface area of the mining fields which have been operated as opencast mines in the latter part of the 
communist period – Cetate and Cârnic – is in the public property of the Municipality of Roșia Montană.  
The underground resources, by Constitution, are in public property (art. 136‐3) – therefore all underground 
mining fields – are public property, belonging to the State. 
Out  of  these  categories,  the  main  category  of  land  ownership  is  private,  comprising  individual  owners, 
associations of owners, local authorities, organisations and companies. The largest owners are currently the 
Municipality of Roșia Montană and the State Mining Company Minvest S.A. Deva with an estimated share of 
around  45%  of  land  within  the  nominated  property,  as  well  as  Roșia  Montană  Gold  Corporation  with  an 
estimated share of around 30 % of land within the nominated property92.  
This information is integrated in the new cartographic portal of the National Agency for Cadastre and Land 
Registration,  operational  since  2015.  Thus,  the  legal  steps  for  including  the  properties  in  this  portal  have 
been  done  for  a  small  part  of  the  property  and  its  buffer  zone.  The  completion  of  the  process  is  an 
important issue for the management level. 

National Agency for Cadastre and Land Registration (ANCPI) evidence: white ‐ administrative limits; red: nominated property; orange: 
buffer zone; yellow: ANCPI integrated properties (http://geoportal.ancpi.ro/geoportal/imobile/Harta.html – 09.2017)  

As  information  form  the  Municipality  or  from  the  ANCPI  will  be  received  in  the  near  future),  updated 
statistics comprising ownership structure and related surfaces will soon be possible. 
In  the  Roșia  Montană  administrative  territory,  the  property  situation  –  correlated  with  landuse  (2016)  – 
is available from the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. The site’s situation has to be similar in 
percent, in larger part, to the commune’s territory situation (excepting the fact that the foreign investors’ 
share has to be larger)93. 

92
   Roșia Montană Mining Landscape, Nomination for Inclusion in the World Heritage List, Nomination Document, December, 2016. 
93
   INP archive. 
 73 

Table 6. Land use and property status in the Roșia Montană commune’s territory 

Roads  and  transportation 

Non‐agricultural ‐ total 
Households (and other 

Unproductive land 
Agricultural ‐ total 

Lakes and rivers 
Owners’ group 

constructions) 
infrastructure 
Vineyards 
Meadows 

Orchards 
Pastures 

Forests 
Arable 

Total 
NC 

% 
  Public   0  0  0  0  0  0  175  35  44  95  17  366  366  8,6 

  MM            0  175  8          183  4,3 

  ME            0      3  92  17  112  112  2,6 

  MTr            0      7      7  7  0,2 

  MEN          0 3 3  3  0,1

  Local (RM)  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  27  34  0  0  61  61  1,4 

  Private  250  1062  403  0  0  1715  1295  0  0  37  168  1500  3215  75,2 

  State            0            0  0  0 

  Local (RM)    285        285  576        145  721  1006  23,5 

  Legal            0  225          225  225  5,3 

persons 

  Individuals  250  777  403      1430  494      37  23  554  1984  46,4 

  Common            0            0  0*  0 
property 

  Foreign  30  26  534      590  83      20    103  693  16,2 
investors 

  Total  280  1088  937  0  0  2305  1553  35  44  152  185  1969  4274  100 

  %  6,5  25,5  21,9  0  0  53,9  36,4  0,8  1,0  3,6  4,3  46,1  100   

*Still, two common property associations (in village pastures, meadows, and woods) exist in Roșia Montană – their property is shown 
by the 225 ha of forests included in the legal persons’ category. 

In conclusion, the situation, based on the entire Roșia Montană territory, is as follows (2016): 
 Public property: 8,6% (composed by non‐agricultural land); administrators – the ministries in charge of 
environment  (forests),  economy  (roads,  yards  and  unproductive  land),  transportation  (roads)  and 
education (educational infrastructure). 
 Private property: 75,5% (composed both by agricultural and non‐agricultural land), including the local 
authorities private properties, of 23,5% (communal pastures and forests). Excepting the forests, where 
the property is owned, partially, by legal persons (5,3%), the major part of the private propery is owned 
by individuals (46,4%, included in a variety of land‐use categories). 
 The  foreign  investors  own  16,2%  of  the  Roşia  Montană’s  territory  (25,6%  from  the  total  agricultural 
land and 5,2% of the non‐agricultural land).  
As the site’s surface is of 1637.79 ha and their main properties have to be inside, the share part of the 
foreign investor may be around 30%, as estimated in the Nomination document. 

In terms of land‐use, the situation, based on the entire Roșia Montană territory, is as follows (2016): 
 Agricultural land is covering 53,9% of the whole territory (composed by 6,5% arable, 25,5% pastures, 
21,9% meadows); there are no vineyards or orchards, as local conditions aren’t favourable; 
 Non‐agricultural land is covering 46,1% of the whole territory (36,4% forests, 0,8 lakes and rivers, and 
8,9% other uses). The 8,9% other uses concerns 1,0% covered by roads, 3,6% by households (and other 
constructions)  and  4,3%  by  unproductive  land  (linked  with  mining  activities).  This  situation  is 
characterising a rural structure of the territory: even if the mining activity has brought here, historically, 
industrial and urban occupations, the population densification staid low.  
The low percent of the unproductive land (4,3%) shows the dimension of the surface mining activity. 
Also,  the  15,7%  of  agricultural  and  forest‐covered  land  acquisitions  by  the  foreign  investor  show  the 
amplitude of the future planned mining exploitation and of its consequences on the landscape. 

The  future  use  of  the  Property  and  buffer  zone  will  be  established  in  the  urban  planning  documents. 
The Ministry in charge of culture will revise the 2012 listed building enforcement  notice for the Alburnus 
Maior  –  Roșia  Montană  archaeological  site  (LMI  code:  140‐AB‐I‐s‐A‐00065),  covering  –  together  with  its 
buffer zone, the essential part of the nominated property area – see below, the Legal regulations chapter. 
 74 

Statistic figures haven’t been put forward in the two documents. Still, the related graphics give an accurate 
overview of the situation: 
 The 2008 PUZ Industrial Area Roșia Montană (Proiect Alba SA); 
 The 2009 PUZ Historic Central Area (Asar Grup, 2009). 
Statistics haven’t been made in the two documents. Still, the related exhibits give an acceptable overview of 
the problem. 
 
 

 
The 2008 and 2009 Zonal Urban Plans (PUZ) – ownership situation. 
 75 

Some comparative observations have to be made: 
 The  unproductive  land  in  the  pits  areas  is  in  the  public  domain  of  the  Roșia  Montană  Local 
Administration, of the Romanian state and, also, in the private domain of the local administration;  
 This situation is not completely reflected in the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (Table 
6), leading to the conclusion that some clarifications have to be made  concerning the public and the 
private domain of state; 
 The 2006 PUZ Historic Central Area Roșia Montană (OPUS SRL) is closer to field research observations. 
Analysing  the  2006  and  2009  PUZ,  concerning  the  same  territory,  the  process  of  land  acquisition  in  the 
centre of the Roșia Montană village by the RMGC appears clearly: 

 
The 2006 and 2009 Zonal Urban Plans (PUZ) concerning the Central historic area of Roșia Montană. RMGC’s properties are shown in 
brown (up, 2006 PUZ) and in blue (down, 2009 PUZ). 

In conclusion, clarifying the ownership in the Property’s area has to be done urgently and it will be set as a 
priority action in the Protection and Management Plan. 
 76 

Development Limitations 
 
Until the approval of the PUG, development actions are not allowed in the Roșia Montană administrative 
territory,  as  statued  by  the  L.  50/1991  (Art.  2.4),  with  several  exceptions,  limited  to  the  legal  protection 
status of the Property area (we mention the obligation to obtain endorsements from the Ministry in charge 
with culture, before the building permit): 
a)   Works  on  existing  buildings  (including  all  types  of  conservation  and  restoration  actions),  under  the 
condition of maintaining actual functions, surface and volume; 
b)   Repairing  works  concerning  communication  ways,  utilities,  without  changes  of  the  existing  routes  or 
function; 
c)   Repairing  works  for  fences,  street  furniture,  green  areas,  parks  and  gardens,  pedestrian  squares  and 
other public spaces  
c)   Research and prospection (sinkings and excavations) in order to realise geotechnical studies or all types 
of [industrial] exploitations. 
Another  exception  is  concerning  the  forest  roads  and  torrents  works:  they  are  excepted  from  the  local 
public authority approval (and, implicitly, from the normal endorsement system, including the Ministry’s of 
Culture  one)  by  effect  of  the  Forestry  Code  –  L.  46/2008  (Art.  85),  as  the  authorisation  is  given  by  the 
owner,  with  one  only  national  authority  in  charge  with  silviculture  endorsement.  Together  with  other 
forestry  works,  this  exception  creates  a  risk  in  archaeological  areas  and  also  concerning  the  landscape 
protection. The cooperation with forestry owners and with the related authorities is compulsory. 
The other building activities are not legal. That situation leads to a conservation of the actual situation, in 
terms of land use and, also, and gives a reasonable period (2018‐2023) to focus on the main development 
aspects: 
(1)   Heritage  conservation  and  tourism  development  structured  actions,  based  on  the  present  Protection 
and Management Plan; environment measures, as statued by law; 
(2)   Development strategies concerning agriculture, industry and tertiary sector activities, highlighting the 
future  mining  possible  activities  in  the  surrounding  area,  environment  and  social  measures  and, 
parallelly, urban planning documents (PUG, PUZ) preparation; 
(3)   Community’s participation increasement to all development decisions. 
The PUG elaboration process will be a priority for this period and will be compatible to the Protection and 
Management  Plan.  We  assume  a  maximum  5‐years  process,  as  endorsements  process  and  public 
consultation,  as  prudent  governance  is  based  on  encouraging  public  participation  and  involvement  of  all 
stakeholders.  The  Romanian  State’s  active  implication  (essentially  the  Ministry  of  Culture  and  National 
Identity  –  as  heritage  protector  and  the  Ministry  of  Development,  Public  Administration  and  European 
Funds as funding authority), as well as the local administration, as beneficiary. We notice that the law gives 
authority  in  the  case  of  World  Heritage  sites  or  nominated  properties  to  the  Government  (by  exception 
from the current case and respecting the local autonomy principles).  
In a 2018 short term, the activities will focus on: 
(1) Involving residents, actors, institutions and public bodies in the Protection and Management Plan final 
act; creating the management structures and starting their structured activities; 
(2)  Starting  the  urgent  actions  concerning  heritage  at  risk,  based  on  the  RMMP  and,  parallelly,  clarifying 
other priorities management. 

 
 
 77 

Legal Regulation for Conservation and Preservation 
 
The nominated property is subject to protection pursuant to several independent, yet complementary legal 
regulation  systems.  The  important  features  of  the  current  principles  and  forms  of  protection  of  the 
nominated  property  are  the  relationship  between  the  systems  of  protection  of  cultural  and  natural 
heritage,  and  overlapping  forms  of  protection  that  build  a  solid  foundation  for  the  creation  and 
implementation of a comprehensive, multidimensional and participatory management plan. 

Protection of natural and cultural heritage 
1.   The  entire  territory  of  the  Property  is  protected  as  Proposed  World  Heritage  List  site  (MLMP). 
According  to  the  law  (L  564  /2001  for  the  approval  of  the  GO.  47/2000),  once  a  nomination  is 
submitted, all provisions in place for World Heritage properties will apply to the respective property as 
well.  These  include  the  management  system  designed  to  protect  all  World  Heritage  properties  in 
Romania, the responsibilities, proceedings and also, financial dispositions. We notice the fact that the 
present Protection and Management Plan follows these prescriptions, together with the UNESCO and 
international scientific bodies’ recommendations.  
2.   The  entire  territory  of  Roșia  Montană  and  Abrud  are  designated  as  ‘very  high  concentration  of  built 
heritage  with  cultural  value  of  national  interest’,  by  the  Law  for  the  approval  of  the  National  Spatial 
Development  Plan  –  Section  III,  Protected  areas  (L.  5/2000),  in  view  of  their  protection  by  means  of 
territorial and urban planning.   
  The  same  law  designates,  in  its  annexes  (I  and  III),  specific  values  within  the  territory  of  the 
municipality, which must be protected by urban planning measures, essentially by generating natural 
and cultural protected areas of national interest. Those special values (VPCIN) are:  
I     Natural:  
Piatra Despicată (L.5/2000 code: II.I.2.2.8, 0.25 ha, IIIrd Category IUCN protection)  
Piatra Corbului (L.5/2000 code: II.I.2.2.83, 5.00 ha, IVth Category IUCN protection)  
II    Cultural:  
The historic centre (L.5/2000 code: III.I.1.g.3) 
The Roman galleries of the gold mining works (L.5/2000 code: III.I.1.l.3)  
Houses (18th–19th Cent.) (L.5/2000 code: III.I.1.m.2)  
The  protected  territory  generated  by  these  values  hasn’t  been  established,  nor  their  protected  area; 
these actions are in the responsibility of the Ministry in charge of urban planning.  
Landscape  integrated  protection  through  urban  and  territorial  planning  documents  is  to  be  further 
consolidated together with the recent (November 2016) Government Decision regarding the Heritage 
Theses. These principles for law modification are to ensure for the first time, a correlated vision for a 
landscape protection approach within Romanian legislation. 
3.  The  next  complementary  level  of  protection  is  granted  by  the  Law  for  the  protection  of  historic 
monuments (L. 422/2001), by means of listing of monuments, ensembles and sites, following thr World 
Heritage  Convention  categories.  Based  on  the  provisions  of  the  above‐mentioned  law,  the  official 
Historic Monuments’ List (LMI) includes, in its latest edition from December 2015, 51 items located in 
the Municipality of Roșia Montană, of which 50 are included in the nominated property.  
I.    Archaeological monuments 
140‐AB‐I‐s‐A‐00065 Alburnus Maior – Roșia Montană archaeological site  
141...145‐AB‐I‐s‐A‐00065.01...05 Roman settlements and vestiges, mining works (included in the above) 
146‐AB‐I‐s‐A‐20329 Galleries of Mt. Carnic (distinctively listed but also included in the above perimeter) 
II.   Architecture monuments 
471‐AB‐II‐s‐B‐00270 The historic centre of the town 
473...513‐AB‐II‐s‐B‐00271, 269, 272‐311 Houses, churches and parish houses (41 individual positions) 
III.   Commemorative and agora monuments 
666‐AB‐III‐m‐B‐00417 Commemorative monument to Simion Balint 
The assessment of other 18 architectural and technical elements within the property started recently 
(September 2016), as part of the listing procedure initiated at the request of National Commission for 
Historic Monuments.  
The procedure includes former miners’ dwellings in the property of the municipality, all the presently 
unlisted historic churches, the headquarters of the State mine, and the header ponds belonging to the 
hydrotechnical  system  of  the  site.  According  to  the  Law  for  the  protection  of  historic  monuments, 
these properties have the legal status of historic monuments until the completion of the listing process 
(but no more than one year), when a final decision is published by order of the Minister of Culture. 
 78 

  The  list  contains  general  position  as  well  as  individual  ones.  One  general  position  contains  linked 
internal positions, highlighting the most important attributes of the whole. The archaeological positions 
are listed as ensembles or sites; the built heritage is inscribed as ensembles or sites, if it concerns larger 
areas (like village centres) or as monuments, if it concerns individual positions (like households, etc.).  
3.1. The  Alburnus  Maior  –  Roșia  Montană  archaeological  site  (LMI  code:  140‐AB‐I‐s‐A‐00065)  is 
protected  by  the  inscription  in  the  National  Historical  Monuments’  List  since  1992;  it  is  listed  as 
historical monument of national relevance.  The  site  has  been  defined  in  terms  of  limits  and 
attributes  during  2016;  this  process  –  undertaken  in  parallel  with  the  UNESCO  nomination 
document – ensures the effective protection of the site, under Romanian law, of all archaeological 
evidences found in the Roşia Montană area. Its territory, together with its buffer zone, covers the 
essential part of the nominated property. 
  Its  linked  internal  LMI  positions  (141...145‐AB‐I‐s‐A‐00065.01‐05)  are  concerning  Orlea  Roman 
settlement  and  mining  exploitation,  Carpeni  vestiges,  Hop‐Găuri  precincts  and  the  Cătălina 
Monuleşti  gallery;  another  individual  monument,  146‐AB‐I‐s‐A‐20329,  is  concerning  the  Cârnic 
massif.  As  the  monument  concerns  Roman  archaeology,  the  direct  protection  refers  to  the 
nominated attributes under the 1.1.1‐1.1.5, 1.1.8, 1.2.1 and 2.1 positions.  
  The  1.1.6,  1.1.7  and  1.1.9  attributes  (non‐Roman  archaeological  areas)  and  the  other  attributes 
(1.3, 1.4, 3.1‐3.4) are, all, included in the 2016 established area or in its buffer zone, giving right to 
historical  monuments  protection  status,  excepting  some  European  funds,  given  only  to  the 
individual  positions.  The  process  of  including  all  the  nominated  attributes  as  LMI  individual 
positions has started (see below). 
3.2. The  Historic  centre  of  Roșia  Montană  (LMI  code:  471‐AB‐I‐s‐B‐00270)  is  protected  by  the 
inscription in the National Historical Monuments’ List since 1992; it is listed as historical monument 
of national relevance. 
Its  site  has  not  yet  been  legally  defined.  The  present  PMP  proposes  its  limits,  based  on  several 
studies realised in time. The site covers an important part of the Roșia Montană village; the major 
part of the individual positions is included (with five exceptions: 00269, 00271, 00277‐ 000279). 

 
Orthophotoplan  (INP  Achive):  white  –  administrative  limits;  red:  nominated  property;  orange:  buffer  zone;  yellow:  The  two  main 
historical monuments are covering the essential part of the nominated property.  
 79 

Protected areas and urban regulation system 
1.  The  Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  site,  together  with  its  buffer  zone,  represents,  to  Romanian 
legislation,  a  natural  and  cultural  protected  area  of  national  interest.  Essentially,  all  interventions  in  the 
nominated  property’s  territory  need  an  endorsement  from  the  Ministry  of  Culture  and  National  Identity, 
after consultation of the National Historic Monuments’ Commission.  
2. The legal status of protected area of all historical monuments, together with its buffer zone is effective 
once the LMI inscription is operated. However, the protection is consolidated only once the conservation 
attitude  on  each  one  of  its  components  and  the  development  model  are  approved  in  terms  of  urban 
planning  and  regulations,  by  the  means  of  a  zoning  plan  and  regulation  for  distinctive  areas,  called  Plan 
Urbanistic Zonal (PUZ), in order to ensure an integrated protection of the cultural and natural values.  
3.  The  perspective  that  the  law,  and  especially  the  subsequent  methodology  for  the  elaboration  of  such 
zoning plans, gives to the protection of values is that of sustainable development, including natural, cultural 
and landscape values as well as social, economic and environmental issues94. 
4. All measures set forth by the law in respect to protected areas are compulsory for all public authorities, 
and  all  the  works  entailed  by  the  protection  of  designated  values  are  declared  of  public  utility  (Law  no. 
422/2001 regarding the protection of historical monuments). 
5. In the case of Roșia Montană, this overarching protection status has not yet been effectively applied, as 
the  urban  planning  main  document,  called  Plan  Urbanistic  General  (PUG)  and  the  PUZ  for  the  RMGC 
Industrial Zone, approved in 2002 and modified in 2009, have been definitively cancelled in court (2015)95. 
Other PUZ96 – have been initiated by local authorities, but later aborted. 
6.  The  responsibility  for  initiating,  approving  and  implementing  such  documents  is  with  the  municipality, 
through the Local Council. Once the nomination file for the property is submitted, the central authorities 
take over the responsibility to initiate and fund such documents, and thus the planning blockage shall be 
removed. Until the approval of such urban planning by Government Decision, maintaining and restoration 
works are allowed, as explained above. 
7. The same territory contains two natural values, determining natural protected areas, to be integrated in 
the Roșia Montană Mining Landscape protected areas; the legal protection system for these areas is ruled 
by environment protection legislation97. Also, the forestry protection legislation influences the area. 
8.  In  conclusion,  the  fair  regulation  has  to  be  preceded  by  a  whole  process  of  research,  planning  and 
involving  local  community  and  stakeholders,  in  order  to  give  an  operational  response  to  a  future 
development based on the understanding of the main local issues: 
a. The presence of a recognised archaeological and built heritage attributes, as well as natural heritage 
attributes; 
b. The  presence,  in  the  same  territory,  of  a  fragile  community  composed  by  of  older  miners  and 
peasants, in need for protection in terms of traditions and occupations; 
c. The  specific  landscape,  created  by  the  community  in  more  than  two  thousand  years  continuity  of 
living, characteristic for mining activities as well as for agro‐pastoral activities; 
d. The difficulties – due to economic pressures, poverty and the relative isolation to find new, sustainable 
activities  and  to  implement  tourism  infrastructures  to  the  benefit  of  the  archaeological,  historical, 
immaterial and landscape heritage of the area. 
 
 

94
   Ordin MTCT nr. 562/2003 pentru aprobarea Reglementarii tehnice "Metodologie de elaborare si continutul‐cadru 
al documentatiilor de urbanism pentru zone construite protejate (PUZ)" – see 
http://www.mdrap.ro/userfiles/reglementari/Domeniul_XXIX/29_6.pdf 
95
   See, for more details: https://www.juridice.ro/195962/anularea‐pug‐si‐puz‐comuna‐Roșia‐Montană‐implicatii.html 
96
   Two succesive PUZ concerning the historic centre. 
97
   Ordonanța  de  urgență nr. 57/2007  privind  regimul  ariilor naturale  protejate,  conservarea  habitatelor  naturale, a florei și  faunei 
sălbatice and following legislation. 
 80 

Stakeholders  
 
In addition to the owners, managing authorities and the authorities at various levels in the process of care 
for  the  property  and  for  the  goals  established  in  the  Management  Plan,  non‐governmental  organizations 
and citizens perform an extremely important function. Their commitment, knowledge about the region and 
a  constant  presence  in  the  area  included  within  the  boundaries  of  the  property  and  its  buffer  zone  is  an 
important part of effectively protecting the values of the property. 
The Romanian State is present in Roșia Montană as owner of the underground resources and as minority 
investor  in  the  RMGC  project.  As  the  responsible  authority  concerning  the  consequences  of  the 
deindustrialization  period,  the  State  has  social  responsibilities  but,  also,  in  regard  of  EU  directives, 
responsibilities in the rehabilitation and minimization of waste and toxic tailings coming from the State 
98
activities in the extractive industries . In terms of natural, cultural heritage and landscape protection and 
in terms of environmental policies, the Romanian State has to follow its international commitments and 
the national legislation created under its authority.  
The  local  administration,  as  representative  of  the  local  population,  has  to  express  the  community’s 
desiderata.  As  elective  organism  (and,  also,  tax  collector),  its  main  responsibility  concerns  local 
development;  the  urban  planning  decisions  are  a  focal  point  of  the  administration’s  activity. 
As administrator of public property, it owns an important part of the site territory and rules the utilities 
system.  In  terms  of  heritage  protection  and  conservation,  the  local  administration  has  several 
attributions, described above. 
The local community is making a living out of public services, agriculture, wood processing, farm animals 
or tourism. It was somewhat split about the development alternatives and they have high expectations 
linked with the jobs that would be created by the future development. A December 2016 Survey ordered 
bt the National Institute of Heritage situates the community generally in favour of World Heritage Listing 
(30% completely for listing, 35% partially for listing)99. The respondents – local population in the villages 
concerned by the WHL project – were generally convinced that the heritage based development scenario 
can be a viable economic solution for the region but were concerned about the future jobs involved with 
this status100. The management plan should involve them actively. 
Private  owners  out  of  which  Roșia  Montană  Gold  Corporation  S.A.  is  the  main  one.  RMGC  is  a  joint 
venture  between  the  main  shareholder  Gabriel  Resources  Limited  (80.69%  shares)  and  the  Romanian 
State‐owned  company  Minvest  S.A.  The  Gabriel  Resources  Limited  company  presents  itself  as  having, 
since  1997,  a  principal  focus,  namely  ‘the  exploration  and  development  of  the  Roșia  Montană  gold  and 
silver project in Romania [...] to operational status. More recently, the ICSID Arbitration has now become 
the core focus of the Company’101. RMGC owns the exploitation license for Roșia Montană (the 1998‐2018 
license had been delivered to Minvest S.A. in 1998, approved in 1999 and transferred, in 2000, to RMGC) 
and,  also,  exploration  licenses  in  Roșia  Montană  and  Bucium102.  RMGC  owns  an  important  part  of  the 
property  and  has  legal  responsibilities  regarding  heritage  protection  as  well  as  social  responsibilities 
concerning  both  its  employees  and  the  local  community.  In  this  context  RMGC  has  been  the  main 
investor in the area and, together with other smaller private owners, its role should be integrated in the 
management plan.  
Other  investors  are  not  yet  a  strong  voice  in  Roșia  Montană  but  they  may  become  important  in  the 
protection and management process. 

98
   Following the accession to the European Union, the Romanian state could no longer subsidize the mining activities of state‐owned 
 
companies – see Adriana Mihai, Adina Marincea, Love Ekenberg, ‘A MCDM Analysis of the Roșia Montană Gold Mining Project’, 
Sustainability 2015, 7(6), 7261‐7288, http://www.mdpi.com/2071‐1050/7/6/7261/htm#B19‐sustainability‐07‐07261. 
99
  CSOP/KANTAR TNS, „Includerea Localității Roșia Montană în Patrimoniul Mondial UNESCO”, survey and sociological inquiry for the 
National Institute of Heritage, December 2016, 
https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=sondaj%20de%20opinie%20Rosia%20Montana%20   
100
   In 2007, a sociological study was conducted in the areas which would be impacted by the Roșia Montană project, and 62.7% of the 
interviewed  had  in  their  families  former  miners  and  held  positive  expectations  about  the  project.  In  2011,  the  perception  had 
changed: only 1/3 stated they had strong confidence in the company, and almost 2/3 of the respondents had little or very little 
confidence in the investors. Some respondents drew attention of the fact that while the people who work for the company have a 
better standard of living than before, the ones who will not be employed in the mining project, making a living out of agriculture, 
wood processing, farm animals or tourism, will be severely affected by the project.  
101
   Gabriel Resources Ltd. See http://www.gabrielresources.com/site/index.aspx (accessed on 21 Sept 2017). 
102
   See https://www.riseproject.ro/articol/documentele‐confidentiale‐ale‐afacerii‐Roșia‐Montană/ 
 81 

Civil  Society  –  locally  based  associations  as  well  as  national  organizations  –  is  a  key  actor  in  Roșia 
Montană,  having  almost  20  years  of  activity  in  projects  related  to  heritage  protection,  social 
engagement,  environmental  protection,  tourism  development.  Their  involvement  produced  positive 
effects  in  the  territory  and  the  community  –  restored  buildings,  creation  of  tourist  trails,  implemented 
social programs and development of local traditional skills – raised the community awareness regarding 
the  local  cultural  values  and  determined  a  positive  shift  in  the  local  views  regarding  the  viability  of  a 
heritage  based  development  scenario.  Through  investigative  journalism,  a  multi‐art  activist  festival 
(FânFest,  Roșia  Montană,  2004‐2015  with  a  2018  edition  under  preparation),  public  debates  and  other 
awareness  actions  throughout  the  country,  they  have  formed  a  critical  mass  of  citizens  opposing 
intensive  mining’103  and,  also,  supporting  the  sustainable  development  of  the  area  and  its  heritage 
conservation.  
A  new  NGO,  Asociaţia  Roșia  Montană  în  Patrimoniul  Mondial,  located  in  Roșia  Montană  and  formed, 
mainly,  by  locals,  aims  ‘the  creation  of  the  necessary  frame  for  the  community  participation  in  the 
proceedings for inscription in the World Heritage List’, including the approval and implementation of the 
management  paln,  of  the  Roşia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  site,  as  described  in  the  official 
registration104.  

 
 
 
Site Administration Legal Frame 
 
The site administration is one of the hard issues to develop in Roșia Montană’s specific case; a best solution 
in  the  existent  legal  frame has to  be found in  order to  develop management  and protection  actions. The 
main reasons are the following ones, all leading to expensive and long‐process development decisions: 
a.  Public  administration  and  the  local  community  in  need  after  the  deindustrialisation  process,  both 
dependent on the investors’ policies; 
b.  Hard legislation protecting as well mineral resources, natural and cultural heritage resources, forestry 
resoures,  environment  and  biodiversity,  rural  communities  and  activities,  unfavored  areas  etc., 
involving several public  authorities  and  expressing  different aspects,  all  of  public  interest,  partially in 
contradiction; 
c.  High‐conflictual political, economic and social environment concerning the area’s development. 

A  management  system  is  being  constructed  all  together  with  the  revision  of  the  national  system  for  the 
protection,  managing  and  monitoring  of  World  Heritage  Sites  and  nominated  properties.  The  system 
integrates three levels of intervention: 
 Administrative,  through  the  Alba  County  Council  that  is  responsible,  by  law,  with  establishing  the 
Management Plan through the UNESCO Organizing Committee (COU); 
 Professional  and  scientific,  through the  National  Institute of  Heritage (INP) that  is responsible  by  law 
with the scientific coordination and monitoring of World Heritage and nominated properties (member 
of the COU); an International Scientific Committee has been created. 
 Executive, through the local partnership that was integrated in the new national system.  
The  management  system  includes  a  5  years  programme  for  the  protection  and  management  of  the 
property (the Property Management Plan) as well as implementation and monitoring annual action plans to 
be prepared. Along with the three principal poles described above, it includes the cooperation of the Roșia 
Montană local authority and of representatives (members of the COU) of central or local county offices of 
the  Ministry  of  Environment,  Ministry  of  Regional  Development  and  Public  Administration,  Ministry  of 
Interior  Affairs,  Ministry  of  Tourism  ,  Emergency  Situations  Authority,  with  their  respective  legal  specific 
responsibilities.  A  key  role  is  the  one  of  the  local  county  office  of  the  Ministry  of  Culture  and  National 
Identity (member of the COU), in charge for monitoring all the area and issuing the Ministry’s permits for 
interventions in the nominated property. 

As a result of this system being operational, the Protection and Management Plan for the Roșia Montană 
Mining Landscape is prepared according to the legal provisions of Romania, with the scientific coordination 
of  the  National  Institute  of  Heritage,  the  cooperation  of  independent  experts  and  specialised  other 
institutions, the input of the local community and the assistance of the COU.  

103
   Adriana Mihai, Adina Marincea, Love Ekenberg, op. cit. 
104
  http://www.just.ro/registrul‐national‐ong/ [Associations] 
 82 

In order to achieve management objectives, including administration, protection and monitoring, the legal 
system permits the creation of a local structure. The structure may have several forms; the chosen solution 
was to create a ‘Partnership for Roșia Montană in the World Heritage List’, legally created (November 2016) 
by  local  people  to  the  purpose  of  supporting  the  nomination  and  contributing  to  the  elaboration  and 
implementation of the Management Plan, after debates with the Municipality and other entities.  
The first step of the Protection and Management Plan is to consolidate this local structure, by the following 
actions: 
 Enlarging the partnership’s active membership; 
 Specifying  the  Partnership’s  role  in  terms  of  protection  and  administration,  public  information  and 
participation, activities control and visiting activity organisation;  
 Creating a technical support team, with the aid of the National Heritage Institute; 
 Consolidating its budget within financial aids from  public  and local authorities, grants  and donations, 
admission fees; 
 Starting the operational work (2018). 
105
The second step (2021) is to obtain the public utility recognition for the Partnership . 

The Scientific Committee for Roșia Montană Mining Landscape has been set up in order to coordinate the 
conservation main issues (its members are mentioned in the Governance chapter): 
 Inventories and documentation; 
 Prioritised conservation work, including urgent works; 
 Cooperation in the development of planning documents, including a new urban plan; 
 Cooperation in developing documents and activities with forest and agricultural agencies; 
 Monitoring; 
 Activities  related  to  promotion,  interpretation  and  education  concerning  Roșia  Montană  Mining 
Landscape. 
 
Other  specific  local  structures  are  created  recently.  The  Memorandum  on  the  Development  of  integrated 
pilot  programmes  through  European  funds  and  the  national  budget  for  improving  the  socio‐economic 
situation of the inhabitants of the former mining areas of Valea Jiului, Roșia Montană – Apuseni Mountains 
and of the marginalized communities in Moldova (Vaslui – Iași), adopted by the Romanian Government in 
106
September  2016 .  The  memorandum  aimed  to  create  an  operational  structure,  under  the  Prime‐
Ministry’s Secretary, in order to ensure technical assistance for elaboration and implementation of national 
and European financed development projects.  
Three Technical Assistance Governmental Local Units (UGAT) have been created – one of them is the UGAT 
Munții  Apuseni,  located  in  Roșia  Montană.  The  UGAT  will  be  managed  by  a  project  manager  from  the 
Prime‐Minister or the Department Prefect structures and will function in the designed locations on the basis 
of Local Offices, functioning under the Prefect Institution, with employees and, also, may collaborate with 
NGOs or independent consultants. In May, 2017, the funds for the creation of the system were approved107.  
The  offices  will  function  on  the  basis  of  a  Protocol  between  the  Prime‐Ministry’s  Secretary  and  both 
ministries  in  charge  of  Interior  Affairs,  Regional  Development  and  Public  Administration,  with  the  logistic 
help of the local authorities.  
As  this  system  only  starts,  it  is  difficult  to  make  a  forecast  on  the  possible  operational  integration  of  the 
Partnership for Roșia Montană in the World Heritage List activities in the UGAT structure; this possibility has 
to be clarified (2018). 

105
   Ordonanţa Guvernului nr. 26/2000 cu privire la asociaţii şi fundaţii; Ordinul nr. 2664/2003 pentru aprobarea Criteriilor și procedurii 
de acordare a statutului de utilitate publică asociațiilor, fundațiilor și federațiilor care desfășoară activități din sfera de 
competență a Ministerului Culturii și Cultelor 
106
   http://www.prefecturavaslui.ro/pdf/doc2016/Memorandum.pdf 
107
   http://www.fonduri‐
ue.ro/images/files/programe/AT/POAT_2014/Alte_Doc/24.05/Plan_2017_rev_1_consultare_scrisa_membrii_ 
CM.pdf 
 83 

Opportunities and Threats  

In a general view, the opportunities and threats concerning the Protection and Management Plan concern 
several aspects: 
 Protection  Opportunity to ensure the effective protection of a multi‐level, world significance site 
  and reverse the landscape and heritage destruction ongoing process threat 
 Conservation  Opportunity to transmit to the future generations a multi‐secular mining site 
  despite the difficulties of a conflictual economic and administrative environment  
 Presentation  Opportunity to present the evolution of mining techniques and mining landscape  
  resulting from a challenging research and interpretation effort 
 Regeneration  Opportunity to regenerate a fragile, depopulated community 
  touched by poverty, by isolation and divided as a result of private economic interests  
 Economy  Opportunity to create a sustainable development model as alternative 
  to short‐term, one‐way monoindustrial development  

A  detailed  view,  corresponding  to  the  nominated  and  to  the  carrying  attributes,  is  presented  in  the 
following tables. 

Table 7. Nominated components (OUV and associated values)– opportunities and threats 
Attributes, as described in the Nomination Document   OPPORTUNITIES  THREATS  MITIGATION 
1  MINING EXPLOITATION: UNDERGROUND AND SURFACE       
  1.1  Mining Exploitation: Underground  Creation of a complex  Security risks – although  Developing, with a strong 
    1.1.1  Cârnic Massif Roman Galleries  system of visiting areas,  generally sound, some  political will and with the 
    1.1.2  Lety Massif Roman Galleries: Cătălina  developing of research and  areas are in need of urgent  communities’ participation, 
Monulești Roman Galleries  educational activities  structural evaluation and  alternative mining activities, 
    1.1.3  Cetate Massif Roman mining features  concerning mining  eventual consolidation.    preserving the nominated 
    1.1.4  Orlea Roman Galleries  techniques; traditional  Possible uncontrolled  attributes and including 
    1.1.5   Cârnic Roman fire‐setting complex  mining for specimens and  agriculture works and  them in the scientific and 
    1.1.6  Cârnic Early Modern Galleries  touristic activities  building initiatives.  visiting systems. 
opportunities.   Compulsory conservation 
    1.1.7  Cătălina Monulești Early Modern Galleries  
    1.1.8  Cetate Early Modern Galleries  The existence of several  actions; low extension of 
    1.1.9  Văidoaia Massif: Early Modern  periods mining systems  the visiting infrastructure, 
underground workings  (with a typological  based on an attentive 
variation) represents an  selection and on a realistic 
important asset.  financial approach. 
  1.2  Mining exploitation: Surface  Creation of an open air  Consolidating scientific 
    1.2.1  Cârnic Roman Openworks  amphitheatre in the Cetate  multidisciplinary research 
    1.2.2  Cetate Roman Open Pit  open pit, to be used for  activity, inventory and 
socio‐cultural events and  monitoring. 
for tourist activities, linked 
with the whole site visiting 
infrastructure and with 
landscape rehabilitation 
projects.  
  1.3  Ore‐processing features: Header Ponds  Different social uses for  Dams degradation under  Sensitive planning and 
    1.3.1   Tăul Mare  each pond, giving them a  anthropic and natural  selection; financing urgent 
    1.3.2   Tăul Ţarina  strong, distinctive character  influence.  studies, projects and 
    1.3.3   Tăul Corna  (from picnic areas to natural  Difficulties to treat with  maintenance actions. 
    1.3.4   Tăul Brazi  reserves and traditional  neighbours and to create 
    1.3.5   Tăul Anghel  mining assets, in the  visiting circuits. 
    1.3.6   Tăul Cartuș  context of rehabilitation of 
artisanal or school mining).  Financial problems, as the 
    1.3.7   Tăul Ţapului  investments are important; 
    1.3.8   Tăul Găuri  difficulties to collaborate 
with the local 
administration owner of the 
ponds. 
  1.4   Mining administration  The restoration of the  As new functions and  Several steps are needed; 
    1.4.1   State Mining Headquarters   administrative building can  buildings’ extensions cannot  focus on the conservation 
  provide space for the  be implemented before a  state of the buildings. 
enlargement of the  new PUG approval, the 
collection of the existing  major visiting infrastructure 
museum. It can also  cannot be realised integrally 
function as touristic  in a short term perspective. 
information point and   
research centre. The other 
buildings have to find new 
public functions. 
    1.4.2   Miners’ Dormitory  Steps have been taken for  The Ministry of Culture and  Creating a partnership 
  the Museum to be  National Identity may have  between the two ministries 
    1.4.3   Mining Professional School   transferred to the Ministry  lower financial potential  and preparing future 
of Culture and National  than the Ministry of  extension projects for the 
Identity administration.  Economy, actual  museum and for the 
administrator. This calls for  underground visitable 
better financial  galleries. 
programming. 
 84 
 

Attributes, as described in the Nomination Document   OPPORTUNITIES  THREATS  MITIGATION 

2  ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREAS       
  2.1  Roman archaeology  The restoration of the  Possible uncontrolled  Several steps are needed; 
    2.1.1   Hăbad Sacred Area  Roman vestiges in the  agriculture works and  focus on the Hop‐Găuri area 
    2.1.2   Găuri – habitation  vicinity of the Hop‐Găuri  building initiatives.  integrated archaeological 
    2.1.3   Hăbad – habitation  mausoleum may create a  landscape project.  
    2.1.4   Tăul Ţapului  unique site where the  Compulsory conservation 
    2.1.5   Hop Necropolis  Roman intensity of land  actions; low extension of 
    2.1.6   Nanului Valley Sacred Space  utilisation may be  the visiting infrastructure, 
presented in a spectacular  based on an attentive 
    2.1.7   Carpeni Zone 
frame.  selection and on a realistic 
    2.1.8   Jig‐Piciorag Area 
    2.1.9   Ţarina Necropolis  The other sites can be  financial approach. 
    2.1.10   Pârâul Porcului ‐ Tăul Secuilor  integrated in a visiting tour  Consolidating scientific 
    2.1.11   Tăul Cornei ‐ Corna Sat Zone  – related to landscape  multidisciplinary research 
    2.1.12   Bălmoșești ‐ Islaz Area  rehabilitation projects.   activity, inventory and 
monitoring. 
3   BUILT HERITAGE FEATURES       
  3.1   Modern town / Village [Roșia Montană/Modern]        
    3.1.1   Square  Around the main square,   The absence of urban  Focus on preparing urban 
a main centre of public  regulations makes possible  regulations and on 
    3.1.2   Brazi 
activities and functions  emergency restoration  monitoring. 
    3.1.3  Ieruga 
serving both the local  interventions and rather  Strengthening  the 
    3.1.4   Tăul Brazi  community and the visitors  difficult  more complex 
    3.1.5   Văidoaia  partnership with the local 
(shops, restaurants, pubs,  restoration works and  administration, NGOs, local 
    3.1.6   Berk  libraries, bookshops etc)  tourism infrastructure  community and other 
    3.1.7   Sosași  may be organised, involving  creation.  stakeholders. 
    3.1.8   Orlea  local capital and work force.  The lack of detailed  Urgent conservation actions 
      3.1.8.a   Greek‐Catholic Church and 
The absence of urban  regulation may lead, in the  to be fulfiled. 
parish ensemble (1720, 1741, 
regulations is keeping the  future, to inappropriate 
mid 19th century), no. 135  Future operational extent 
present state of facts stable,  private modernisation 
      3.1.8.b   Orthodox Church and parish  without major risks of  projects.   conservation projects. 
ensemble   destruction, giving more  The lack of legislation   
      3.1.8.c   The administrative centre  time to planning actions. 
    3.1.9   Gura Minei  permitting operational 
Financing the rehabilitation  conservation actions 
    3.1.10   Vercheș  operation through  reduces the amplitude of 
      3.1.10.a   Aitaj House, later Miners’  European funds and  the possible projects.  
Club (no. 242), Maternity  encouraging the owners to 
ward (no. 251), Gritta House  participate in an 
(no. 258), Miner households  appropriate way to the 
      3.1.10.b   State school and  restoration effort. 
kindergarten; no. 274 (1905‐
Creating local development 
1915) 
and increased incomes for 
      3.1.10.c   Blocks of flats in the sixties  owners and residents; new 
work places for the 
community. 
Particularly for the late 60’s 
buildings, decision to 
conserve them for marking 
the period or demolishing in 
the benefit of the site’s 
coherence.  
  3.2  Town / Village [Corna (Modern)]  Opportunity to develop a  Important loss of  Creating new development 
    3.2.1   Orthodox Church (1719), no. 707  complementary southern  inhabitants (as the Corna’s  scenarios for Corna; 
    3.2.2   Greek‐Catholic Church (19th century), no.  smaller centre, linked with  territory was destined to be  environmental measures. 
692  the Bucium mining area.  entirely used  for the 
    3.2.3  Miners households  header pond of the 
formermining project ); 
land slide risks. 
  3.3  Ţarina (Modern)  See 3.1    See 3.1.  
    3.3.1  Traditional farmhouse (19th century),   
Ţarina no. 1248   
    3.3.2   Traditional farmhouse (20th century), with   
polygonal stable 
  3.4  Bălmoşeşti – Blideşti (Modern)  Development opportunities,  Important loss of  Creating new development 
    3.4.1  Bălmoşeşti (Modern)  as heritage attributes are  inhabitants.  scenarios; environmental 
    3.4.2  Blidești (Modern)  less dense. Good exposure,  measures. 
dominating the Roșia Valley 
(possible touristic 
development, other 
activities as open‐air 
festivals, like Fân Fest). 
 
 

 
 
 85 

Table 8. Natural heritage and landscape – opportunities and threats 
Attributes, as described in the Nomination Document   OPPORTUNITIES THREATS MITIGATION 
4  NATURAL HERITAGE AND LANDSCAPE       
  4.2   Landscape Conservation and  Sustainable approach to integrate  Finding new, sustainable solution  Implementing strong 
Rehabilitation  in the new planification  for the economic investments in  conservation policies, based on 
documents.  Roșia Montană’s area need a  landscape studies and approving 
strong, collective, effort.  land‐use, visual assessment and 
regulations. 
Creating a Landscape 
Observatory (LO), as instrument 
to study and monitor the 
dynamics of the landscape – land‐
use control. 
    4.2.1  Agro‐pastoral landscape   The agro‐pastoral landscape  The depopulation of the area can  Encouraging agro‐pastoral 
represents one of the main  lead to a more underused  activities and, also, new 
resources for the community  landscape and to a new,  agricultural production‐oriented 
development and is currently  unbalanced report between  association system may improve 
underused, permitting an  pastures and woodlands.  the land use and contribute to 
intensification of the agricultural  The properties merging can  the economic sustainable 
activities in the area.   destroy the present (traditional)  development. 
The traditional use of the land is  landscape, the walls and hedges  The agricultural management will 
representing an important  limiting the old pastures and  foresee the necessary protection 
ecological resource and a  meadows   regulations of the traditional 
financial one, through agricultural    limits of plots – merged 
development; it also creates  properties will be managed as 
development opportunities for  separated areas.  
ecological and active tourism.   
    4.2.2  Rocks and stony ground  Active tourism opportunities;  Local instability of ground – calls  Activities’ regulation. 
landscape  landscape variety.  for evaluation, 
    4.2.3  Woodland / Forest  The woodland management  The depopulation and the  Refining the Forestry 
landscape  contributes to the local  diminution of agricultural  Management Plans to contain 
development; land stabilisation  activities led to the diminution of  specific conservation issues for 
and a larger variety of the  pastures in the benefit of forestry  rare species’ association, 
landscape as well as indicator of  vegetation (with intermediate  archaeological issues and 
ancient exploitations are other  state of medium size vegetation  traditional woodland uses. 
valuable attributes.   and young forestry vegetation). 
    4.2.4  Wetland  Ancient activities created, in time,  Their conservation may be in  Specific studies, in order to 
landscape/Flushes and  important biodiversity areas  contradiction with the  decide the future appropriate 
mires  specific for the area.  conservation or restoration of the  actions to preserve the rare 
industrial landscape.  habitats, the riparian vegetation 
and the integrity of the industrial 
heritage structures; surveillance 
of the invading tree vegetation on 
dikes. 
    4.2.5  Archaeological landscape  Oppotunity to understand the  Difficulties concerning priorities’  Archaeological research 
    4.2.6  Mining landscape  intensity and the continuity of  setting in terms of research and  continuation; conservation of the 
human activities in the whole  conservation.  material signs of the historic and 
site’s area.  traditional landscape concerning 
all periods. 
    4.2.7  Built–up (architectural)  Opportunity to understand the  Uniformity risk – construction  Creating sensitive urban and 
landscape  variety of dwelling in the whole  types and build practices;  territorial regulations, in order to 
      4.2.7.1  Linearly  site’s area as well as historic and    protect the dwelling 
  developed  traditional village organisation.  characteristics in terms of 
  upon valleys –  morphology and typology.  
  mining villages  Encourage traditional 
      4.2.7.2  Compact  occupations. 
developed – 
mining activity  Develop internal communications 
centres  between the villages. 
      4.2.7.3  Disperse 
dwellings – 
agro‐pastoral 
villages  

 
 
 86 

Issues and Strategic Policies 
Conservation and Management Principles 
 
Conservation  and  management is a  crucial responsibility that comes with World Heritage inscription, and 
this matter is given the utmost importance when a property is first entered onto the national Tentative List 
for UNESCO. Conservation and management is fully incorporated into national strategy, and policy will be 
guided by the following principles that are fundamental to World Heritage properties, and that will form the 
foundation for the management system and the spirit of its implementation:  
Outstanding  Universal  Value  (OUV),  the  pillar  of  the  World  Heritage  Convention  and  central  to  its  very 
definition of heritage. 
OUV and significance will be a core consideration in all conservation and management actions. OUV, in this 
case  of  a  cultural  landscape,  refers  to  cultural  significance  that  is  as  exceptional  as  to  transcend  national 
boundaries and to be of common importance for present and future generations of all humanity.  
OUV  is  the  highest  level  of  significance  of  the  property  but  there  will  be,  of  course,  other  levels  of 
significance that relate to national, regional or local values. These are still important. Any proposed changes 
to the  property,  in  particular  elements  that  are  deemed to  carry  attributes of  OUV,  shall be  examined in 
terms of its potential impact on OUV and significance; in effect a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA). 

Authenticity, a condition of OUV 
All conservation management actions should respect the authenticity and integrity of the property, in the 
spirit of the UNESCO Nara (Japan) declaration of 1994.  
Authenticity  is  very  relevant  to  host  communities  as  well  as  to  conservation  of  World  Heritage  sites. 
Interventions should not adversely impact the physical fabric, or the character and ‘spirit’ of sites and the 
authenticity  of  experience  (surface  and  underground).  Consideration  will  be  given  to  a  capacity  to  serve 
substantially  increased  visitor  numbers  without  a  negative  impact  upon  the  site,  both  physically  and  in 
terms of spirit of the place. 
The intellectual authenticity of information that guides conservation actions is paramount in the protection 
of cultural values. This should be based on evidence gathered through accepted, multidiscipline, scientific 
and  scholarly  methods;  the  preservation  of  documentary  records,  archives,  building  or  site  plans  and 
sections being encouraged. All levels and aspects of significance should be clearly distinguished and dated 
in respect of successive phases and influences in sustainable site development.  

Integrity, a condition of OUV 
Whilst the overall integrity of the nominated property is, of course, of great importance, the conservation 
of  the  industrial  heritage  depends  on  the  preservation  of  functional  integrity,  in  particular,  and 
interventions should therefore aim to maintain – and even enhance ‐ this as far as possible. Integrity can be 
diminished if components or machinery are removed, or subsidiary elements which form part of a whole 
site  are  destroyed;  for  example  waste  rock  spoil  heaps  (dumps)  that  are  intimately  associated  with  mine 
shafts, adits and openworkings.  
Preservation in situ should always be given priority consideration. Dismantling and relocating a building or 
structure is only acceptable when the site is in danger of being destroyed through unavoidable action, or 
overwhelming economic or social needs. If equipment can be returned to its original location and position 
then  this  may  be  desirable  as  long  as  it  is  not  under  threat,  its  conservation  conditions  are  suitable,  and 
such action can enhance the understanding of the site. 
In order to achieve integrity of the mining structures further research in situ is needed aimed to uncover / 
open ancient galleries and to acknowledge theirs extent. Similar issues are to be confronted at landscape 
level, where traces of ancient mining facilities are to be discovered by extensive and detailed research.  

Protection and management, a requirement of OUV 
The  basis  of the  management  system for  the  property  will  be  coordinated  and  inclusive  management  on 
behalf of the stakeholder group, thus upholding the WH Convention requirement that effective and active 
measures are taken for the protection, conservation and presentation of the cultural and natural heritage… 
to  give  the  cultural  and  natural  heritage  a  function  in  the  life  of  the  community  and  to  integrate  that 
heritage into comprehensive planning programmes. Article 5, WH Convention (1972).  
 
 87 

Accessibility 
The communication of the values of the  property will be done in a way that minimises barriers that may 
otherwise  prevent  actual,  or  potential,  visitors  and  users  from  gaining  the  optimum  benefit  from  their 
engagement.  There  are,  of  course,  and  for  reasons  of  safety,  conservation  and  ownership,  various 
restrictions  to  access,  particularly  and  predominantly  underground.  Specialised  access  has,  in  the  past, 
facilitated  scientific  and  archaeological  studies  to  remote  portions  of  the  mine  ‐  fully  supported  by 
experienced personnel. It is intended that greater controlled access to these extensive and highly significant 
areas  of  the  system  will  be  developed,  for  example  new  visitor  experiences,  including  special  guided 
expeditions and potentially even “extreme adventure” tours. 
With regards to the general principle, however, barriers to accessibility may include: 
 Organisational,  for  example  information  on  the  property  may  not  be  available  in  the  appropriate 
format or language, or staff at a site may not be able to respond to the needs of all visitors. 
 Physical, for example steps or ground surfaces that may prevent some people from experiencing a site. 
However, avoiding, or removing, all physical barriers may be difficult if not impossible; especially in a 
mining  landscape  that  includes  precipitous  terrain  and  extensive  underground  workings.  Particularly 
where safety and conservation issues apply, this also may not be appropriate, desirable, nor would be 
considered  reasonable.  In  such  cases,  it  is  important  to  consider  whether  alternative  ‘access’  can  be 
provided,  for  example  video,  or  web‐based  remote  access  including  3D  scanned  virtual  reality 
exploration. 
 
Sustainability 
The concept of sustainable development refers to a pattern of resource use that balances the fulfilment of 
basic human needs with the wise use of finite resources so that they can be passed on to future generations 
for  their  use  and  development.  Three  mutually  supportive  elements  comprise  environmental  protection 
(cultural and natural), economic growth and social equity, delivered via effective governance that includes 
a participatory multi‐stakeholder approach to policy and implementation.  
In terms of cultural World Heritage, the resource is the heritage itself, to be sustained and transmitted to 
future  generations.  And  this  resource,  and  its  conservation,  can  make  positive  contributions  to 
environmental, social and economic wellbeing. 
The  adaptation  of  an  industrial  site  or  building  to  a  new,  viable  use  to  ensure  its  conservation  is  usually 
acceptable,  except  in  the  case  of  sites  of  exceptional  historical  significance.  New  uses should respect the 
significant material and maintain original patterns of circulation and activity, and should be as compatible 
as possible with the original or principal use. Continuing to adapt and use industrial buildings, and indeed 
many historic buildings of various kinds, avoids wasting energy and resources and contributes to sustainable 
development. 
Interventions should be broadly reversible, and have a minimal negative impact and an optimum positive 
impact. Any unavoidable potentially negative changes should be documented and significant elements that 
are removed should be recorded and stored safely. Many industrial and living processes in general confer a 
patina that is integral to authenticity and ‘spirit’. 
Reconstruction, or returning to a previous known state, should be considered an exceptional intervention 
and one that is only appropriate if it benefits the integrity of the whole site. 
 
Overall view on corresponding policies  
There  are  several  points  concerning  the  main  problems  or  risks  occurring  in  the  management  process; 
the appropriate policies have to take them all into account in order to ensure the effective protection and a 
heritage‐led  development.  Other  management  levels  may  also  be  threatened,  including  programs,  plans, 
projects or actions. 
1.   Ongoing  conservation  and  management  needs  can  sometimes  be  difficult  to  identify,  particularly 
where multiple owners are concerned, and can present a challenge in terms of effective action.  
Ongoing  conservation  and  management  needs,  addressed  by  shared  responsibility  amongst 
stakeholders to identify needs and to implement effective action. 
2.   Resources, human and financial, to implement the MP can be a great challenge, both financially and in 
terms of capacity, and in many cases cannot demonstrate an economic return on investment. 
Resources, human and financial, to implement the MP will be the responsibility of all stakeholders to 
optimise  capacity  and  resource  potential,  and  the  overall  state  of  conservation  of  the  nominated 
property. 
 
 88 

3.  Heritage‐led sustainable development can often be a concept that is misunderstood and consequently 
neglected. 
The  potential  for  heritage‐led  sustainable  development  within  the  nominated  property  will  be 
evaluated, propagated and encouraged.  
4.  Legal and practical protection can often be very different in theory and practice. 
Increasing  legal  and  practical  protection  will  be  pursued  and  reviewed  where  appropriate  in  all 
relevant stakeholder plans and activities. 
5.   Research  and  increasing  knowledge  are  often  ignored  once  a  nomination  is  submitted,  or  a  site 
inscribed on the World Heritage List.  
Research  and  increasing  knowledge  of  the  site  will  be  pursued  and  encouraged,  based  on  a 
developing, and ongoing, research strategy that will enhance our understanding of cultural significance 
as a result of new information. 
6.  Conservation and maintenance can often be a long‐term problem, particularly beyond capital‐intensive 
short‐term  projects,  and  interventions  can,  in  some  cases  and  whilst  being  well  intended,  be 
detrimental if not properly informed.  
Conservation  and  maintenance  will  be  undertaken  on  a  continuous  basis,  to  the  highest  standards 
and with respect to authenticity, and will be supported by guidelines for heritage‐led interventions.  
7.  Related  monuments  and  sites  in  the  setting  can  often  be  lost,  diminishing  the  opportunity  for  wider 
associated activity and a wider benefit to the local economy. 
Related monuments and sites in the setting of the nominated property will be inventoried, assessed 
and conserved where possible, desirable and feasible.  
8.  Physical  and  intellectual  access  can  often  be  barriers  to  significant  parts  and  aspects  of  sites,  and  to 
particular audiences. 
Physical and intellectual access will be promoted where appropriate, sustainable and consistent with 
the values of the site.  
9.  Owners  of  archives  and  collections  sometimes  suffer  from  a  lack  of  awareness  of  the  relevance  or 
importance  of  their  material,  which  may  also  be  in  poor  condition,  kept  in  poor  conditions  (or  both) 
and may be inaccessible and vulnerable to long‐term guardianship. 
Archives  and  collections  related  to  the  site  will  be  identified,  qualified  and  quantified,  and  be 
protected, conserved, curated and made accessible where possible or appropriate. 
10.  Coordinated  marketing  is  often  difficult  to  achieve  where  multiple  features,  destinations,  political 
divisions or businesses are involved. 
Coordinated  marketing  will  be  informed  by  the  interpretation  and  tourism  strategy  to  ensure  a 
consistent and responsible use of the site, together with efficient use of resources.  
11.  Local resources are often neglected: agriculture and forestry are a suitable and desirable land‐use for 
parts of the property, but can sometimes cause damage to archaeological sites. Mining and quarrying 
can be historic industrial activities with significant values, but their continuance might, in many cases, 
be severely damaging to the historic environment.  
  Traditional agriculture techniques and methods are to be maintained in order to preserve the cultural 
landscape and the mosaic structure of the ecosystems. Forestry has to be developed in connexion with 
environment  policies,  and  archaeological  surveys,  in  order  to  contribute  to  the  OUV  attributes 
conservation.  Mining  (of  the  type  –  large‐scale  open‐pit)  is  an  inappropriate  activity  within  the 
nominated  property  due  to  the  nature  of  attributes  (particularly  underground,  and  structurally),  the 
totally destructive outcome that it would produce, and is illegal in relation to listed heritage assets. 
12.  Residential and commercial development is one of the greatest threats to World Heritage properties, 
together with inappropriate infrastructure development. The roads can be physically and aesthetically 
damaging to the historic environment, and natural ecosystem. 
  Residential  and  commercial  development  within  the  property  will  be  controlled  to  limit  change  to 
protect  and  conserve  and,  if  possible,  enhance  OUV.  Roads,  within  the  nominated  property,  will  be 
developed in connexion with their historic origin, and new development will have regard to this, as well 
as  to  attributes  and  their  setting,  and  the  structural  capacity  of  the  underground  environment,  and 
options for heritage and environmentally sensitive visitor movement will be sought.  
 
 89 

Specific View on Roșia Montană Mining Landscape Strategic Frame 
 
The  described  policies  will  be  detailed,  in  order  to  fit  the  general  and  specific  objectives  defined  for  the 
Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  –  work  in  progress.  Also,  the  policies  (and  corresponding  action  plan) 
have to fit the Romanian legal frame for the Protection and Management plan (see Principal Management 
Directions). 
Table 9. Strategic frame  
STRATEGIC FRAME 
General Objectives  Operational priorities, policies and measures 
GO‐1. Preservation of natural, cultural and landscape values
GO‐1.1. Conserving the proposed OUV of Roșia Montană  1. Identify the nominated property’s principal conservation and 
Mining Landscape, together with the associated values,  management needs and issues, and develop policies and strategic 
for current and future generations through a values‐led  management objectives to address them, within a continuous process 
approach   
GO‐1.2. Undertake and facilitate research to increase  Policies:  
knowledge and understanding of the site in order to  Ongoing conservation and management needs, addressed by shared 
create a scientific, dynamic, database in the benefit of the  responsibility amongst stakeholders to identify needs and to 
conservation process and of the interpretation and  implement effective action, including research and increasing 
presentation of the history and significance of the site to  knowledge 
the highest appropriate quality   
Measures (national level): 
Specific programs aiming OUV conservation (such as: mining heritage 
conservation, archaeological conservation, landscape conservation, 
building heritage conservation, supported by national financing 
programs, including inventory and research (dedicated research fund 
based on public programs or private funding), after RMMP Approval 
GO‐1.3. Ensuring that an appropriate level of legal  2. Develop a strategic fund‐sourcing tool for conservation of the 
protection for the property is supported by effective  property, providing reassurance that any finance granted will benefit a 
protection, active conservation and, where possible,  heritage of international significance and for future generations of all 
enhancement of authenticity, integrity and historic  nations. 
character   
GO‐1.4. Promoting opportunities within the site for  Measures (national level): 
heritage‐led regeneration and optimising the contribution  Provision  of  a  Consolidate  Budget  for  Roșia  Montană  and  facilitate 
of the site to the local economy, by developing a non‐ local  development  in  order  to  increase  the  local  incomes,  based  on 
invasive tourist and site presentation infrastructure and,  the RMMP 
complementary, compatible economic activities 
GO‐2. Sustainable development of the community and of its resources 
GO‐2.1. Integrating cultural and natural values of the  3. Build and maintain strong partnerships between the community, 
property, in order to increase the overall quality of the  site owners, local, regional, national and international organisations, 
landscape and utilise local resources to generate  making sure everyone shares an understanding of what matters, and 
sustainable development  why, before any major decisions are taken, and to provide strategic 
GO‐2.2. Ensure that programmes for conservation of the  and day‐to‐day guidance for relevant practitioners 
property are integrated into policies for economic   
development and into regional and national planning  Policy: Heritage‐led sustainable development 
within the nominated property, to be propagated and encouraged, 
aiming the rehabilitation of traditional activities, family farms, 
forestry, sustainable (demonstrational/experience) mining. 
 
Measures (national level): 
Investments and development programs in Roșia Montană 
(environment, infrastructures, landscape rehabilitation, local 
economy, fragile communities support etc.), based on national and 
regional development strategies 
GO‐2.3. Gather all stakeholders and parties interested in  4. Share actions and responsibilities with appropriate stakeholders to 
the heritage of Roșia Montană Mining Landscape for a  optimise capacity and resource potential, to manage change carefully 
better understanding, sharing and promotion of values of  so as not to damage what is special, and to promote sustainable 
the property, and to encourage community involvement  opportunities for heritage‐led regeneration and activity 
and its benefits, placing heritage at the centre of   
community life  Policy:  
GO‐2.4.Develop guidelines for future heritage‐led  Increasing  legal  and  practical  protection  will  be  pursued  and 
interventions at significant sites and features to promote  reviewed  where  appropriate  in  all  relevant  stakeholder  plans  and 
a sustainable approach that integrates conservation with  activities. 
the needs of communities and visitors   
Measures (national level): 
National programs addressed to community and heritage‐led 
development, specially to those of international recognised value 
 90 

Specific Objectives  Plans and programs
SO‐1. Preserving the multiplicity of heritage values in their specific interconnection system 
SO‐1.1. Archaeological heritage research   Database  improvement  program,  in  order  to  create  the  basis  for  all 
SO‐1.2. Industrial (modern) heritage  research,  conservation  and  administrative  actions;  crossed‐links  to 
other national databases. 
SO‐1.3. Historic and urban heritage  
Continuation  of  the  National  Alburnus  Maior  research  program,  in 
SO‐1.4. Vernacular heritage  partnerships  with  universities,  museums  and  research  institutions, 
SO‐1.5. Natural heritage  established  in  order  to  encourage  and  promote  research  of  the  OUV 
and other supporting attributes  
SO‐1.5. Landscape as natural and cultural specific local 
synthesis  Interdisciplinary  research  projects  to  be  promoted  in  order  to  better 
understanding  the  territorial  relations  that  drove  towards  a  specific 
development of the protected area 
Conservation  programs  concerning  OUV  and  associated  values, 
rehabilitation  programs  for  all  public  spaces  or  public‐owned  built 
structures and support to private initiatives 
Summer schools and research internships will be organised in order to 
encourage  interdisciplinary  and  voluntary  research  for  students  and 
young  professionals  and  to  forge  a  new  generation  of  practitioners 
and experts in the connected fields  
SO‐2. Preserving the community’s multi‐cultural structure and its historic activities 
SO‐2.1. Preservation of traditional mining knowledge and  Sociological  research  program,  in  order  to  understand  the 
practices  community’s specificity, aims and needs and, also, to create the basis 
SO‐2.2. Preservation of farming complementary  for population growth or stabilisation, knowledge improvement etc. 
traditional activities;  Landscape  research  program,  in  order  to  understand  the  local 
SO‐2.3. Preservation of the multi‐cultural dwelling types  specificity in terms of land‐use, dwelling, activities, property issues, in 
order to create the scientific base to local development 
and heritage 
Reducing  inadequate  constructions  and  activities  through 
SO‐2.4. Preservation of the specific, long‐time built 
implementation of an urban and territory development control (urban 
mining, agricultural and forestry landscape 
planning documents – PUG, PUZ, improved control system)  
SO‐3. Developing a future for a fragile mountain community 
SO‐3.1. Developing rural and ecological tourism  Local  regeneration  programs,  encouraging  and  facilitating  the 
structures  development of traditional activities (agriculture, forestry, sustainable 
SO‐3‐2. Developing site presentation infrastructure demonstrational  activities,  local  crafts)  and  sustainable  tourism 
(infrastructure, visiting tours, active tourism etc.). 
SO 3.3. Developing knowledge and educational structures
Accessibility  will  be  ensured  where  possible  in  order  to  visit  OUV 
SO‐3.4. Developing other compatible industrial and  attributes  and  other  support  attributes,  leading  also  to  increase  the 
commercial activities  accessibility of all dwellings and to create working places 
SO‐3.5. Improvement of environmental conditions Environment rehabilitation programs, in order to reduce the negative 
impact of the former mining exploitation, to reduce the potential risks 
and to enhance local development 
SO‐5. Preserving the intangible heritage of Roșia Montană, concerning the community’s organization and practices from the 
Roman era to the contemporary period 
SO‐5.1. Preservation of the multi‐cultural communities  Documents in public archives (official archives, museums, institutions, 
living and working habits, knowledge, beliefs and  etc.) concerning Roșia Montană, gold mining in Apuseni area and local 
traditions  habits  will  be  identified,  assessed  and  inventoried;  a  virtual  archive 
will be realised in order to permit long‐distance archive 
Documents  in  private  archives  concerning  Roșia  Montană  or  gold 
mining  in  Apuseni  area  and  local  habits  will  be  identified,  assessed, 
inventoried and purchased and/or scanned, where is possible, for the 
local archive 
Ethnological  research  program,  linked  with  the  sociological  research, 
in order to increase the knowledge about the local specificity 
Specific, local events programs, in order to ensure the sharing process 
of the local knowledge and traditions, in the national and international 
community’s benefit. 
SO‐5.2. Enhancing public appreciation and understanding  A local museum and archive will be established, in direct relation with 
of cultural heritage site by developing presentation and  the present museum. 
interpretation policies  The galleries where research has been finished will be rehabilitated / 
restored and consolidated (conforming with adapted detailed projects 
approved by CNMI) in order to enlarge the visiting area and to create 
better access/evacuation.  
Interpretations  of  the  OUV  attributes  and  support  attributes  will  be 
ensured in the site and in other profile museums in the country  
Virtual visiting  tours  will  be realised,  in the  frame of the  museum, in 
order  to  permit  a  clearer  image  of  the  OUV  for  persons  with 
disabilities  
Summer schools and research internships will be organised in order to 
encourage  interdisciplinary  and  voluntary  research  for  students  and 
young  professionals  and  to  forge  a  new  generation  of  practitioners 
and experts in the connected fields.  

 
 91 

Implementation of the Management Plan  
Areas and buildings with diverse ownership structure – from state‐owned sites (underground) to privately 
owned  sites  –  are  located  within  the  limits  of  the  property.  A  constructive  management  plan  for  a 
prospective  World  Heritage  Site  must  therefore  be  based  on  cooperation  of  the  owners,  authorities, 
stakeholders  and the  community  in  the  development  of a system  that  will  ensure effective  conservation, 
monitoring and co‐participation in change management in the property. The main stakeholders selected for 
each  of  the  areas  and  attributes  will  perform  an  essential  role  of  contact  points,  implementation 
coordinators  for  particular  areas  comprising  the  property,  and  persons  or  institutions  in  charge  of 
Developed at national level, based on the management strategy and the development proposal, based on 
the synthesis of regulations, optional alternatives and experts’ opinions. 
The Roşia Montană Protection and Management Plan is developed and approved by the Ministry of Culture 
and National Identity, through the National Institute of Heritage (INP) and aims: 
 Defining local management structures; 
 Defining objectives for management and protection and subsequent actions; 
 Defining priority actions; 
 Defining financing policies; 
 Defining principal management directions/programs; 
 Refining legal and regulatory framework necessary for protection. 
The  long‐term  goal  of  the  management  is  creating  development  and  economic  recovery,  in  order  to 
maintain life in the site’s territory, by a local heritage‐led development strategy. 
The specific objectives of management and protection are: 
1.   Preserving OUV and supporting attributes, by: 
Increasing the knowledge about the site’s attributes  Knowledge development program
Appropriate site administration and utilisation Property‐use management program 
 

3.   Preserving site’s authenticity and the integrity, by: 
Prevention measures, avoiding catastrophic events  Natural and anthropic risks’management program 
Preserving the values and authenticity of the site  Monitoring and priority measures program 
Conservation state preservation and improvement  Regulatory and technical framework for protection program
 
4.   Contributing to site’s recognition, by: 
Promotion, interpretation and education  Interpretation and presentation program 
 
5.   Permanent protection and management update, by: 
Protection and management quality control  Evaluation of results and reporting programs 
 
The principal management directions/operational programs are the following: 
 Knowledge development  
 Property‐use management  
 Risks’ management 
 Monitoring and priority measures 
 Regulatory and technical framework 
 Interpretation and presentation 
 Evaluation of results and reporting 
Managing and protecting the WHL site is ensured by convergent actions of all the actors involved: 
 Owners or administrators; 
 The Management and Protection Service of the site  
 Non‐governmental organizations; 
 Specialists, co‐opted experts; 
 Public or private economic agents; 
 Local public administration at the level of the territorial unit and at the county level; 
 Specialised central public administration and decentralised public services at the county level. 
 92 
 

Initiating the Protection and Management System  
 
Starting  the  management  and  protection  system  of  the  site  is  to  be  realised  as  a  priority  action  of  the 
Ministry of Culture and National Identity (MCIN) with the support of the Ministry of Development, in charge 
with urban planning (MDRAP). 
The  first  version  of  the  Roşia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  Protection  and  Management  Plan  (RMMP)  has 
been finalised by the Ministry of Culture and National Identity – National Institute of Heritage. Its approval 
needs several steps, described as follows. 
 
Involving other central public administration and decentralised public services 
As  the  RMMP  is  based  on  other  authorities’  involvement,  as  defined  by  law,  their  involvement  in  the 
management process has to be ensured. The consultation process has already started. 
The  effective  protection  is  ensured  by  the  State,  through  the  Ministry  of  Culture  financing  and  control 
system;  the  main  responsibility  in  terms  of  integrity  preservation  and  monitoring  is  in  the  charge  of  the 
Local Council and the owners. The County Council has a coordinating role for the local public administration 
authorities. 
The actions at the state level are performed by: 
 Ministry of Culture and National Identity (MCIN) – National Heritage Institute and specialized County 
directorate in charge with Culture (DCPN) (decentralised public services of the Ministry of Culture) 
 Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration  (MDRAP) and specialized county 
inspections (ISC) 
 Ministry of Economy (ME) 
 Ministry of Environment (MM) 
 Ministry of Waters and Forests (MAP) 
 Ministry of Tourism (MT) 
 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MADR) 
 State Secretariat for Cults (SSC) 
 Ministry of Public Finance (MFP) 
 Ministry of Internal Affairs (MAI) 
 Ministry of Research and Innovation (MCI) 
 Ministry of National Education (MEN) 
 Ministry of Labour and Social Justice (MMJS) 
 Ministry of Transport (MTr) 
 National Agency for Regional Development (ANDR) 
 National Agency for Mineral Resources (ANRM) 
 National Agency for Cadastre and Land Registration (ANCPI) 
 Others. 
 
The actions concerning the site shall be undertaken by: 
 The local public administration (Local Council and Alba County Council) 
 The UNESCO Organising Committee (organised by the County Council, following the law) 
 The Protection and Management Service (independent, local focus‐point) 
 The owners and/or administrators of the properties 
 Non‐governmental organizations (ONG) 
 Specialists, co‐opted experts 
First common meetings with all the responsible authorities: 1st trimester 2018.  
 
According to the Romanian law, the following steps are necessary before the RMMP approval:  
a)   The  adoption  of  a  protocol  concluded  between  the  local,  county,  central  authorities  and  the  local 
community, specifying the responsibilities of each party;  
b)   The adoption of an action plan comprising the actions, the responsible institutions, the obligations, the 
deadlines for implementation and the allocated funds. 
Estimated term: 4th trimester 2018 – See chapter ‘Sharing the responsibilities’. 
 93 

Creating the governance structure 
The RMMP integrates three levels of intervention: 
 Administrative,  through  the  Alba  County  Council  that  is  responsible,  by  law,  with  establishing  the 
management plan through a UNESCO Organizing Committee (COU); 
The UNESCO Organising Committee (COU), created by HG 1.268‐2010, is composed of:  
 Representative of the Ministry of Culture and National Patrimony; 
 Representative of the County Directorate for culture and national heritage; 
 Representative of the County Council; 
 Representative of the specialized structure within the Romanian Police; 
 Representative of the local community; 
 The monument coordinator 
Note: The Alba County has organised the COU for the two monuments inscribed in the WHL, located in 
the department – Câlnic and Căpâlna.  
 

 Scientific, through the National Institute of Heritage (INP) that is responsible by law with the scientific 
coordination  and  monitoring  of  World  Heritage  and  nominated  properties  (member  of  the  COU);  an 
International Scientific Committee is created. 
The International Scientific Committee (coordinating the conservation main issues) is composed by: 
 Barry Gamble 
 Dr Béatrice Cauuet 
 Dr Andrew Wilson 
 Dr John Akeroyd (to be confirmed) 
 Dr Stefan Brüggerhoff (to be confirmed) 
Other experts might be invited (historic and vernacular architecture, industrial architecture, landscape 
environment). 
 Executive, through the local partnership that was integrated in the new national system.  
 The ‘Partnership for Roșia Montană in the World Heritage List’, as independent, local focus‐point, 
has  been  legally  created  (November  2016)  by  local  people  to  the  purpose  of  supporting  the 
nomination  and  contributing  to  the  elaboration  and  implementation  of  the  management  plan, 
after debates with the Municipality and other entities.  
 The  local  partnership  will  act  as  an  independent  focus  point,  as  ‘protection  and  management 
service  (SGP)’.  Its  role  in  protection  and  administration,  public  information  and  participation, 
activities  control  and  visiting  activity  organisation  has  to  be  defined,  correlated  with  the  local 
administration responsibilities.  
 The Partnership will be helped by the National Institute of Heritage by creating a Technical support 
team. Also, consolidating its budget within financial aids from public and local authorities, grants 
and donations, admission fees is considered as priority action.  
Estimated term: 3rd trimester 2018 
  The second step (2021) is to obtain the public utility recognition for the Partnership. 
Local authorities dedicated persons will also take the executive responsibilities given by the law. 
 
Information and public consultation 
As developed at the national level, the RMMP has to be shared with the local administration and with the 
local community.  
As  local  interests  may  not  be  convergent,  the  first  step  is  to  inform  the  public  about  everyone’s 
responsibilities  and  benefices.  The  second  step  is  to  build  an  efficient  public  consultation  process, 
integrating the county and local administration. 
First meeting: 3rd trimester 2018; continuous process till the RMMP approval. 
 
 94 

Approval process 
The finalisation of the RMMP, including the information and consultation process inputs and conclusions, 
will precede the approval phase.  
Estimated term: December 2018 
The RMMP will be approved  by the Ministry of Culture and National Identity. Endorsements of the other 
administrative bodies will be obtained, facilitated by their involvement in the decision process. 
Estimated term: 1st trimester 2019 
Notes:  
(a) If Roşia Montană Mining Landscape is inscribed in the WHL, the Management and Protection Program 
for  the  Romanian  sites  inscribed  in  the  WHL  –  based  on  the  RMMP  –  will  be  approved  by  Government 
Decision, as established by law.  
(b)  The  Program  contains  the  major  directions  established  by  the  RMMP  and,  specifically,  the  protection 
and management activity programming. The Management and protection annual plan (in the responsibility 
of the Alba County Council) has to be approved, subsequently. 
 
 
Sharing the Responsibilities 
 
The  operation  of  the  management  and  protection  system  of  M.L.P.M.  is  a  problem  involving  conjugated 
actions  of  a  large number of  actors,  of  which  the most  important  is  the  Ministry  of  Culture and  National 
Identity.  
The  actions  at  the  state  level  are  performed  together  with  the  national  authorities  listed  above,  and 
principally: 
 

1.   The Ministry of Culture and National Identity (MCIN) 
  Acting directly, through the National Institute of Heritage and through the County Directorate. 
 

 Coordination of the management and protection activities 
 Initiating the activities by elaborating the RMMP; 
 Financing of its own activities and of the actions included in the RMMP (until some of them 
start to be funded from sources other than the central budget); 
 Financing the  management‐protection‐monitoring  system of the site  and in particular of the 
necessary data base in order to coordinate the functioning of the system; 
 Preparation of necessary documents linked with UNESCO‐WHC; 
 Relations with other national authorities; 
 Participating to the process of initiation and elaboration, together with the MDRAPFE, of the 
necessary urban and territorial planning documents;  
 Surveying all interventions through the legal‐defined control system. 
 Information management 
 Development  of  technological  infrastructure  –  data‐base  creation,  development  and 
administration,  sharing  process  with  all  the  concerned  institutions  and  owners,  particularly 
with the local focus‐point; 
 Creation of the site’s documents (initiation of their monitoring ); 
 Centralization and archiving of the M.L.P.M. (management and protection), 
 Ensuring the transmission of information related to the site at national and international level 
and, particularly, to UNESCO. 
 Coordinating the protection of the site 
 Drafting of the Management and Protection Program 
 Approval of the Management and Protection annual plans  
 Establishing funding priorities for interventions / restoration; 
 Establishing the financing system for the local focus‐point; 
 Providing  technical  assistance  for  the  development  of  small  and  medium‐sized  enterprises 
active in the field of restoration; 
 Providing technical assistance for schooling in traditional crafts and restoration; 
 Monitoring coordination and follow‐up. 
 
 95 

 Developing knowledge 
 Financing  further  studies  in  order  to  increase  the  knowledge  about  the  site’s  history  and 
attributes, including archaeological research; 
 Interventions  for  the  revitalization  of  traditional  activities  and  crafts  related  to  the 
conservation of the site; 
 Creating  through  training  and  information  new  or  better  qualified  personnel  for  the 
management system; 
 Increasing the level of information on the site through the media and other specific actions; 
interpretation and presentation strategy. 
 Financial responsibilities 
 Establishment  of  the  annual  budget  related  to  the  management  and  protection  of  the  site, 
including financial aid to the local focus point;  
 Approval or endorsement of all investment projects concerning the site. 
 Legal activities 
 Legal responsibility concerning the whole protection and management process; 
 Counselling the main actors in legal field, linked with heritage protection. 
 Investment activities 
 Investments in the administration and visiting infrastructure; 
 Financing involvement in conservation and restoration processes. 
 
 
2.   The Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration (MDRAP) 
 

 General responsibilities – development coordination and control 
 Initiating, financing, managing, implementing development programs and projects of national, 
regional and local interest (urban development, networks, urban infrastructure, housing etc.); 
we are highlighting the fact that preserving, restoring and enhancing the historical monuments 
inscribed in the WHL are declared, by law, objectives of national interest; the expropriation for 
a cause of public utility may be used to protect them. 
 Managing the field of spatial planning, urbanism, urban mobility and architecture, the field of 
public works, constructions, real estate management and development; 
 Ensuring through the specialized structures, the discipline and the quality in construction and 
territorial  planning,  the  authorisation  of  the  execution  of  the  construction  works  and  the 
approval of the technical‐economic documents; 
 Guides and supports the local public administration authorities and their specialized apparatus 
in the correct and unitary application of the legal provisions and the fulfilment of their duties. 
 Specific responsibilities  
 Financing of the elaboration or of the updating process for urban and territorial planning for 
the areas comprising historical monuments inscribed in the World Heritage List (state budget, 
through the MDRAP budget). The urban or territorial plans have to be updated (by including 
the specific issues defined in the Protection and Management Plans) within 12 months after 
approval of the programs. The approval of these plans is to be done by Government Decision; 
 Initiating,  financing,  managing,  implementing  development  programs  for  the  Roşia  Montană 
area (see above). 
 
3.   The Ministry of Economy (ME) 
 

 According to the law, the Ministry of Economy functions as a specialized body of the central public 
administration,  subordinated  to  the  Government,  which  applies  the  Strategy  and  Governance 
Program in the fields of economy, industrial policies, competitiveness, [...], non‐energetic mineral 
resources and sustainable development, [...], in line with the requirements of the market economy 
and to stimulate the initiative of economic operators (HG 27‐2007); 
 According with OM 273/2001 ME and its subordinated institutions are in charge with the Technical 
Program  of  conservation  of  the  mines  and  quarries  and  with  the  Conservation  Plans  and  their 
monitoring. 
 
 96 

4.   The Ministry of Environment (MM) 
 

 Specific responsibilities  
 ANANP  (National  Agency  for  Natural  Protected  Areas)  will  ensure  the  elaboration  of  the 
Natural  Heritage  and  Landscape  Specific  Management  Plan  (Landscape  with  natural  and 
cultural  values),  including  forestry  management,  biodiversity  protection  and  Natural 
monuments protection issues, together with MCIN and MDRAP; 
 Ensuring  the  implementation  of  the  Natural  Heritage  and  Landscape  specific  Management 
Plan and permanent field survey.  
 
5.   The Ministry of Research and Innovation (MCI) 
 

 Specific responsibilities  
 ANCSI (National Agency for Scientific Research and Innovation) will be coopted to insure the 
funds  and  the  implementation  and  of  a  specific  Sectorial  program  concerning  the 
Archaeological Heritage; 
 MCI  will  will  be  coopted  to  insure  support  research  fellowships  for  archaeological  research 
concerning  Roșia  Montană  as  a  priority  within  the  frame  of  dedicated  mobility  programs 
already existing. 
 
6.   The Ministry of National Education (MEN) 
 

 Specific responsibilities  
 MEN will be coopted to insure a dedicated dual professional program in Roșia Montană in 
order to train specialised workforce in restauration and related crafts; 
 The entire study curricula will be developed with MCIN following specific needs for qualified 
workforce in restoration field in Romania and, more specific in Roșia Montană. 
 
7.   The Ministry of Tourism (Mt) 
 

 Specific responsibilities  
 MT will fund the strategic investments for the development of a comprehensive infrastructure 
for tourism in Roșia Montană in conformity with the Masterplan for Tourism Investments that 
aim  at  the  development  of  local  communities  in  areas  with  high  touristic  potential  trough 
public funding of tourism infrastructure. 
 
8.   The National Agency for Mineral Resources (ANRM) 
 

 Manages the oil resources, the mineral resources and all the national geological reserves. ANRM 
observes the following main tasks: negotiating and decides ‐ in conjunction with other state public 
domain grantor – the terms and conditions of the oil agreements, licenses and permits of mining; 
agrees on such contracts, licenses and permits; regulates the conduct of petroleum operations and 
mining activities by rules, technical regulations and guidelines issued accordingly with the laws. 
 
 97 

The  actions  at  the  local  level  are  performed together by  the  local  public administration  (the  Alba County 
Council and the Roşia Montană Local Council) 
 
1.  The Alba County Council, as county coordinator 
 Elaboration of the Annual plans for protection and management, in consultation with the owners, 
administrators  or  holders  of  other  real  rights  over  the  buildings  in  question,  as  well  as  the 
respective  local  council  (endorsed  by  the  Ministry  of  Culture  and  Religious  Affairs  and  by  the 
central public administration authorities with attributions in the field); 
 Setting up the COU and ensuring its functioning; 
 May create a specialty compartment in its own structure for managing WHL sites issues, regarding 
the approval of urban planning documents; 
 Monitoring attributions in the WHL site, together with the local administration. 
 
The UNESCO Organising Committee 
 Developing  strategies  for  maintaining  monuments  and  preventing  possible  threats  to  their 
integrity; 
 Elaboration  of  the  protection  plan,  the  conservation  plan,  the  maintenance  plan,  as  well  as  the 
plan for the rehabilitation, promotion and valorisation of the monument (parts of the annual plan 
for protection and management); 
 Periodic  reporting  of  the  conservation  status  of  monuments,  of  general  or  specific  problems  as 
observed following the monitoring inspections; 
 Organizing public debates to draw attention to the importance of preserving the monuments and 
the necessary measures in order to improve its preservation, promotion and valorisation. 
  
2.  The Roşia Montană Local Council  
 Ensuring the protection of the listed historical monuments, located in the public or private domain 
of  the  municipality,  respectively  of  the  city  or  of  the  commune,  as  well  as  of  the  abandoned  or 
disputed historical monuments, allocating financial resources for this purpose;   
 Transmitting copies of the building or demolishment permits to the County Directorate in charge 
with Culture; 
 Carrying out the monitoring of the WHL monuments, through specialists (twice a year, following 
the law); 
 Cooperating  with  public  bodies  and  institutions  with  responsibilities  in  the  field  of  historical 
monuments  protection  and  ensures  the  implementation  and  observance  of  their  decisions; 
collaborating with owners, administrators or holders of other real rights on WHL monuments;  
 Participating, according to the law, to financing from own budgets, as well as from extra budgetary 
incomes, the necessary works; 
 Including  the  specific  objectives  set  out  in  the  Protection  and  management  program  in  the 
economic and social development plans and plans, as well as in the following permits; 
 Taking  the  necessary  technical  and  administrative  measures  to  prevent  the  degradation  of  WHL 
monuments, in collaboration with the County Directorates in charge with Culture; 
 Setting up specialized departments or posts or, as the case may be, establish specific duties in the 
field of the protection of historical monuments, monitoring and control of the application of the 
legal regulations regarding the protection of the WHL monuments, the programs and management 
plans; 
 Approving  the  building  permits  for  urgent  works  in  the  case  of  WHL  monuments  only  in 
accordance with the Ministry of Culture endorsement; 
 Ensuring, together with  the  decentralized  public services of  the  Ministry  of  Culture and  National 
Identity, the application of the MLPM logo and controling its maintenance by the owner; 
 Establishing  measures  for  the  guarding  and  protection  of  the  WHL  monuments,  irrespectively  of 
their ownership regime, indicating to the County Directorates in charge with Culture, as a matter 
of urgency, any violation of the law. 
 98 

NGO’s  involved  in  development  projects  related  to  heritage  protection,  environment  protection,  social 
inclusion and tourism development: 
 
Alburnus  Maior  –  Alburnus  Maior  Association  is  an  NGO  based  in  Roșia  Montană  that  represents  the 
interests of the inhabitants in Roșia and Bucium who want to preserve their traditional way of life. They did 
not want to sell their properties for mining purposes and they did not agree with the intensive open cast 
mining project. // www.rosiamontana.org // contact: Eugen David, Calin Capros.   
 
ARA – Architecture. Restoration. Archaeology is a professional organization active in the field of conservation, 
research  and  enhancement  of  cultural  heritage.  Its  activity  in  Roșia  Montană  for  more  than  10  years 
included:  survey  campaigns,  summer  schools,  workshops  and,  since  2012  a  large  program  of  heritage 
conservation  based  on  voluntary  participation  that  directly  involved  more  than  200  participants  ‐  mainly 
architectural,  construction  and  history  studies  students  –  and  associated  many  members  of  the  local 
community. // www.simpara.ro // Monica Margineanu, Virgil Apostol 
 
Made  in  Roşia  Montană  –  is  a  social  local  business  that  brings  a  supplementary  income  to  approx.  30 
families  in  Roșia  Montană.  Out  of  its  profit,  approx.  10%  is  reinvested  in  local  educational  programs.  // 
https://www.madeinrosiamontana.ro/ // Tica Darie  
 
RYMA  –  is  a  local  association  based  in  Alba  County,  that  is  implementing  community  space  reactivation 
projects  in  the  villages  of  Corna  and  Roșia  Montană.  Its  activities  are  coordinated  by  experts  and  are 
involving students as well as the local community. //  https://goo.gl/FnR2Nn // Cristina Candea  
 
Trai cu Rost – is a local integrated turism project aimed at Roșia Montană, Bucium and Corna areas, born at 
the  initiative  of  a  few  young  members  of  the  respective  communities  together  with  others,  from  several 
cities,  out  of  the  desire  to  ensure  a  sustainable  and  inclusive  tourism  development  based  on  alternative 
models. // Costel Zainea // http://traicurost.ro/  
 
Mining Watch Romania – is a network of organizations that supports local communities to preserve their 
identity and environment by stopping large scale intensive mining projects. The network is monitoring the 
mining permits issued by authorities and brings to public attention, to justice, as well as to the attention of 
the State and European responsible institutions, the detected irregularities or transgressions.   
// Roxana Pencea // http://miningwatch.ro/  
 
Prietenii Roșiei Montane / Asociaţia Bucureşti – Friends of Roșia Montană and București Association are an 
initiative  group  active  in  tourism  promotion  and  awareness  raising,  made  exclusively  of  volunteers  who 
organize, together with the local community, package tourist offers for visitors. They are also taking on the 
annual promotion in Romania and abroad of the Roșia Montană day (the 6th of February).  
// fb.com/PrieteniiRosieiMontane // https://vizitatirosiamontana.wordpress.com/ Alexandru Binescu  
 
Cercetașii  din  Roșia  Montană  –  is  the  local  scouts  centre  that  has  been  active  for  more  than  4  years 
through which regular children activities are organized locally and also through bivouacs in other regions. 
http://www.cercetasirosiamontana.ro/ Tica Darie 
 
Roşia Montană Maraton / Pachamama Romania – is a local initiative for organizing a local Marathon held 
annually in June, through which runners from all over the country are invited to discover Roșia Montană in 
an unconventional way through local projects and initiatives – is is not only a sport competition but a good 
spur for bonds between the visitors and the local projects, traditions and products. 
http://www.rosiamontanamarathon.ro/ // Alexandra Postelnicu.    
 
Fundaţia Culturală Roşia Montana – Roşia Montană Cultural Foundation is an NGO established in 2009 by a 
group of locals together with history, archaeology and geology experts with the purpose to support cultural 
and natural heritage protection in Roșia Montană through sustainable development, based on its four pillars – 
economic development, social development, environment protection and cultural diversity preservation.  
// Sorin Jurca // http://fundatia‐culturala‐rosia‐montana.com/  
 99 

Table 10. Site management – legal frame diagram for main activities, responsibilities and funding 
Activities   Responsibilities and Funding
based on the  Owners/adminis‐ State budget  Owner, if the  Local budgets 
Protection and  trators  owner is the 
management  (obligations)  state or local 
program for  public authorities 
historical  State budget  Own revenues Local budgets  Collected fee by 
monuments  grants within the  (possibility HG  grants, within the  the individuals or 
inscribed in the  limits of the  493)  limits of amounts  legal persons that 
World Heritage List –  amount provided    provided in the  provide touristic 
MLPM (same legal  in the annual  annual budgets  hosting services 
frame for nominated  budgets  (possibility)   (possibility OG 47); 
properties);  (possibility)     the amounts are 
  incomes to the 
the Program, led by 
local budget 
the Ministry of  State budget , by 
MCIN budget  (exclusive use for 
Culture and National 
MLPM)   
Identity, is based on  (possibility)  
a 5 years prevision    Extra‐budgetary  Co‐funding from 
period.  incomes  the own budget 
  (possibility OG 47)  (obligation OG 47) 
Legal basis: OG 
Co‐funding from 
47/2000 updated; 
extra‐budgetary 
HG 493/2004;  
incomes 
L 422/2001.  
(obligation OG 47) 
 
Guard / safety   MLPM represents special objectives, with guarantee guard, off pay, by the Home Office (The Interior 
Affairs Ministry) 
Reparation  Funding  Grants form State       
obligation  budget – funding 
(OG 47, HG 493)  possibility  Obligation  concerning  technical  and  administrative
Current maintenance   Funding  Grants form State    measures in order to prevent degradation
   
obligation  budget – funding 
(OG 47, HG 493)  possibility
Enhancement  Funding  Grants form State       
  obligation (OG 47,  budget – funding 
HG 493)  possibility 
National Interest  MCIN supports 
Objective   programs, 
(OG 47/2000)  revitalisation and 
enhancement 
projects program,  
decides strategies, 
co‐funds 
programs and 
publications for 
cultural animation 
and public 
interest 
stimulation 
towards HM  
(L 422/2001)
Research  Funding  State budget –      
obligation (OG 47,  funding possibility 
HG 493)  (OG 47, HG 493)
Restoration  Funding  State budget –  
obligation (OG 47,  funding possibility 
HG  493)  (GO, 47, GD, 493) 
National Interest 
Objective (OG 47) 
Consolidation  Funding  State budget –      
obligation (OG 47,  funding possibility 
HG 493)  (OG 47, HG 493)
Conservation  Funding  State budget –      
obligation (OG 47,  funding possibility 
HG 493)  (OG 47, HG 493) 
National Interest 
Objective (OG 47) 
 100 

Activities   Responsibilities and funding 
Urban planning  1. Funding the drafting of territorial and urban planning documents’ update for areas comprising historical 
documents  monuments inscribed on World Heritage List is made by the State Budget through the budget of the 
Ministry of Public Works, Transports and Housing (PUG, PUZ – notice the approval by OG) 
2. The Local Public Administrations (APL) have to include the specific objectives, foreseen in the Protection 
and Management Plan for MLPM in the programs and plans of socio‐economic and urban and, 
respectively, territorial development, and in the issued authorisations, conforming to the law. 
Legal regulations’  3. The APL monitors and controls the application of legal regulations concerning the protection of MLPM, 
application control   of the protection and management programs and plans
4. The APL pursues the application of the guarding and protection measures for MLPM,  indicating ‐ as a 
matter of urgency ‐ any violation of the law to the Ministry of Culture al National Identity’s deconcentrated 
departmental administrations (DPCN). 
5. The Ministry of Culture al National Identity (MCIN) ensures its own inspection and control of the 
historical monuments concerning the compliance of the released endorsements (L 422/2001). 
6. The MCIN controls the placement of the distinguishing mark certifying the status of a historic 
monument of a property, in order to protect it in time of peace or armed conflict (L 422/2001) 
Control of  7. The MCIN ensures its own inspection and control of all historical monuments regarding their 
conservation status;  conservation status as well as its own control over the working sites in the case of historical monuments, 
working sites’ control  irrespective of the property regime and the historical monument’s importance (national/local), of the 
nature of the interventions or their source of financing (L 422/2001)
Interventions  8. All interventions have to be endorsed by the Ministry of Culture and National Identity and by the 
concerning the  ministry in charge with urban planning (The Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration); 
MLPM sites and  these are communicated to the World Heritage Committee, in accordance with the UNESCO Convention 
buffer zones  on the Protection of the World Natural and Cultural Heritage, by the Ministry in charge of Culture. 
MLPM logo  9. The APL ensures, together with the DCPN, the application of the logo for Historical Monuments 
  inscribed in the World Heritage List (MLPM), and controls the maintenance of the sign by the owner 
Signs concerning MI,  10. The historical monument (MI), as well as the protected cultural area (ZPC), the historical town (OI) or 
ZPC, historical towns,  the historical village (SI) qualities are marked by a distinctive sign placed by the city hall representatives on 
historical villages   the historical monument, at the entrance to the area or in the historical town or historical village after 
case, in accordance with the methodological norms approved by order of the Minister in charge of Culture. 
The cost of the distinctive signs is borne by local public authorities (L 422/2001).
Specialised positions  11. The APL establish specialised departments or positions in its own structure or, where appropriate, 
in APL structure  establish precise service tasks in the field of the protection of MLPM (OG 47/2000) 
Protection of  12. The protection and preservation of historical monuments representing archaeological discoveries that 
archaeological  are left uncovered are done, under the law, by investors, under the coordination of the scientific 
heritage  coordinator of the site and of the organising institution (L 422/2001). 
13. In the case of construction, modification, extension or repair works on communication ways, technical 
and public amenities, including underground and underwater, excavations, quarrying operations, private 
or public private investors or credit instructors of publicly funded public institutions, after case, have the 
obligation to finance: 
a) establishing, through the feasibility study of the investment and by the technical project, the measures 
for the research and protection of the archaeological heritage or, as the case may be, the discharge of the 
archaeological burden of the area affected by the works and the application of these measures; 
b) the archaeological surveillance activity, for the entire duration of the works, aiming at the protection of 
the archaeological heritage and of the random archaeological discoveries; 
c) any changes to the project necessary to protect archaeological discoveries (OG 43/2000). 
14. The owners and holders of the right of administration or other real rights over the lands in which there 
are archaeological sites and those on which archaeological heritage sites have been established are 
obliged to allow the authorized personnel access for research and protection of the archaeological 
heritage, as well as for protection and guarding of the patrimony assets. 
15. The owners or land tenants, natural or legal persons of private law, are entitled to the payment of 
compensations for unrealized agricultural incomes on the lands under archaeological excavations for the 
period in which they are carried out, in the amounts and under the conditions established by the 
methodology approved by the decision of the Government. The compensation for unrealized agricultural 
income shall be paid to the person who financed the archaeological excavations, within 60 days from the 
start of the research (OG 43/2000). 
Collaborations   16. The MCIN collaborates with non‐governmental organisations, under the law, to carry out programs 
and projects for the protection of historical monuments (L 422/2001). 
17. The MCIN collaborates with interested international organisations and participates, in cooperation 
with them, to fund programs to protect historical monuments, including those inscribed in the World Heritage 
List. 
 
 101 

Table 11. Main budget resources to be accessed (examples) 
Restoration /  underground/surface mining  ME budget 
conservation   and quarries  
Restoration/  surface mining infrastructures  ME budget
rehabilitation  civil buildings  Private budget of the owners with support from MCIN’s budget 
or INP trough PNR 
educational infrastructure  AP 10 – rehabilitation, modernisation, construction of 
educational infrastructure – APL, Universities  
cultural heritage AP 5 – urban regeneration and cultural heritage – restauration, 
protection and conservation of cultural heritage – APL, ONG 
Development   MDRAP ‐ POR (regional operational program) 2014‐2020 
MDRAP – PNDL (National Plan for Local Development) – PNDL represents the main source for local 
infrastructure funding and is based on the principle of minimal set of public services available for 
each locality in the country for: health, education, water and sewerage, thermic and electric energy 
including public lighting, transport and roads, sanitation, culture, cults, dwelling, sport – APC, APL 
MDRAP – URBAN III – interregional cooperation program that aims to sustainable urban 
development – AP – Transnational level experience and good practises exchange; Improvement of 
administrative capacity; results valorisation and dissemination. – APL  
CNI (national Company for Investments) – National Program for Constructions of Public or Social 
Interest) – OG 25/2001 – investments aiming to ensure economic and social development of the 
country by new working places, local economic development and improvement of life conditions of 
citizens.  Principal areas of investments: mass or performance sport (sport halls, swimming pools, 
sport complexes, skating halls); culture and education (cultural establishments, higher education 
institutions, cinemas); social (health institutions in urban areas, emergency works); justice 
(restauration, rehabilitation, modernisation, construction of law courts) 
MAE / MDRAP – SUERD (Strategia Uniunii Europene pentru Regiunea Dunării / European Union 
Strategy for Danube Region) – Priority areas applicable for Roșia Montană: Road, rail and aerial 
connectivity; Sustainable energy, Environmental risks management; Conservation of biodiversity, 
landscapes and quality of air and spoil; support for IMM competitiveness, including cluster 
development; Social development based on Knowledge, research, education and information 
technologies; Investment in human resources and capacities; Amelioration of institutional capacity 
and cooperation. 
Competitiveness   AP (priority axis) 2 – competitiveness for small and medium enterprises (IMM) / modernising end 
extension of production/services spaces for IMM, including corporal and non‐corporal actives 
endowment – IMM  
Marginalised communities   AP 9 – marginalised communities (CLLD) – actions integrated by: investments in health and  
education infrastructures, social services, social economy activities, design of degraded urban 
spaces – APL, IMM, ONG, Cults 
Cadastre  AP 11 – cadastre – integration of existing data and extension of systematic registration in 
Romania’s rural areas; services improvement for cadastre registration – ANCPI 
  AP 12 – technical assistance, support for AM and intermediate organisms (ADR) – AMPOR, OIPOR
  MCI ‐ PNCDI III + Romanian Academy Programs – fundamental research funding – priority axis for 
heritage related research needed to be developed in following years 
 102 

Governance – Summary 
 
Areas and buildings with diverse ownership structure – from state‐owned sites (underground) to privately 
owned  sites  –  are  located  within  the  limits  of  the  property.  A  constructive  management  plan  for  a 
prospective  World  Heritage  Site  must  therefore  be  based  on  cooperation  of  the  owners,  authorities, 
stakeholders  and the  community  in  the  development  of a system  that  will  ensure effective  conservation, 
monitoring and co‐participation in change management in the property. The main stakeholders selected for 
each  of  the  areas  and  attributes  will  perform  an  essential  role  of  contact  points,  implementation 
coordinators  for  particular  areas  comprising  the  property,  and  persons  or  institutions  in  charge  of 
implementation measures.  
The Protection Coordinator is the Ministry of Culture and National Identity (MCIN), acting directly through 
the  World  Heritage  Unit  at  the  National  Institute  for  Heritage  (INP),  Bucharest  (in  order  to  coordinate 
professional,  scientific  and  technical  issues)  and  indirectly,  through  the  UNESCO  Organising  Committee 
(COU), to coordinate the management and administrative issues. 
The proposed Protection and Management Service (independent, local focus‐point – ‘Partnership for Roșia 
Montană  in  the  World  Heritage  List’)  will  assume,  together  with  the  local  authorities  dedicated  persons 
(local experts), executive charges. 
A  Scientific  Committee  and  a Technical  support  team, organised  by  the  INP,  will  be  in  charge,  linking  the 
central authority (MCIN) to the executive local level. 
The Steering Committee (UNESCO Organising Committee – COU) comprises representatives of the Ministry 
of  Culture  and  National  Identity  (World  Heritage  Unit  at  the  National  Institute  for  Heritage  (INP), 
Bucharest),  of  the  County  Directorate  for  culture  and  national  heritage,  of  the  County  Council,  of  the 
specialized structure within the Romanian  Police, of the local community and the monument coordinator 
(nominated by the County Council).  
It  was  assumed  that  the  Committee  will  be  set  up  and  a  letter  of  intent  will  be  signed  during  2018.  The 
regulations for the operation of the Committee will be drawn up and agreed at the first meeting.  
The working group will comprise representatives of the owners, of local authorities, of heritage protection 
services and other public authorities as well as other stakeholders, as NGOs, various experts and members 
of the community. On the first meetings, the group will establish detailed principles of cooperation and a 
distribution of responsibilities, in regard of the law.  
Other taskforces will be appointed on a summary basis.  
 103 

Table 12. Site management – legal frame 
Protection Coordinator
Ministry of Culture and National Identity 
through 
National UNESCO – WHL Protection Coordinator: Local UNESCO – WHL coordinator: 
World Heritage Unit at the National Institute for Heritage (INP)  UNESCO Organising Committee, linked to the County Council 
(COU) 
Professional and Scientific  Technical Coordination Independent, local focus‐point 
Coordination  Protection and Management Service 
International Scientific  Technical support team ‘Partnership for Roșia Montană in the World Heritage List’ 
Committee  Local authorities dedicated persons (local experts) 
WORKING GROUP
in charge of ongoing conservation, presentation and management 
Owners/administrators  Local authorities  Heritage protection  Other public  Other stakeholders
services   authorities 
Ministry of Economy  Roșia Montană Local  Ministry of Culture and  Ministry of Regional  NGOs 
(ME)  Council  National Identity  Development and  Community/residents  
Ministry of National  Alba County Council  (MCIN)   Public Administration 
(MDRAP)  Experts 
Education (MEN)    County directorate in 
Ministry of  charge with Culture  County Directorate in 
Environment (MM)   (DPCN)  charge with Building 
  Control (ISC) 
Local (Roșia Montană 
Commune)  Ministry of Economy 
(ME) 
Private owners 
(investors, common  National Agency for 
properties,  individuals)  Mineral Resources 
(ANRM) 
Ministry of 
Environment (MM) 
 
 
Site management – legal frame ideogram 
 

 
 104 

Monitoring and Evaluation 
 
The  function  of  monitoring,  beyond  its  immediate  usefulness  to  site  management  (reviewing  progress  of 
meeting  stated  objectives),  is  also  a  mandatory  requirement  under  the  terms  of  the  World  Heritage 
Convention. The UNESCO Periodic Reporting requirement stipulates that all Sites around the world submit 
State of Conservation reports on a six‐yearly basis, and as part of a group submission of similar reports from 
other Sites in the same geographical world region.  
Roșia Montană (Romania) is located within the Europe and North America region, where the next Periodic 
Reporting exercise is due in 2019. 
 
 
 
Legal Provisions 
 
Monitoring represents the complex of activities that periodically assess the results of protection measures 
on historical monuments inscribed in the World Heritage List and which, in Romania, is done according to 
legal regulations granted with the requirements of the World Heritage Convention. 
According  to  these,  monitoring  is  incumbent  to  the  local  public  administration  authorities  and  to  the 
Ministry of Culture by the National Heritage Institute. 
According  to  the  Law  no.  564  of  19  October  2001  for  the  approval  of  the  Government  Ordinance  no. 
47/2000  on  establishing  measures  for  the  protection  of  historical  monuments  inscribed  in  the  World 
Heritage List, Art. 15, ‘special measures for the protection of historical monuments included in the World 
Heritage  List  will  also  apply  to  the  historical  monuments  for  which  Romania  submitted  to  the  World 
Heritage Committee of UNESCO the file for their inclusion in the World Heritage List.’ 
Therefore,  the  monitoring  of  the  Roşia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  will  follow  the  Methodology  of  the 
monitoring of the historical monuments inscribed in the World Heritage List, approved by the Government 
Decision no. 493 of 1 April 2004, Annex 1:  
Art. 2 
(1)The  monitoring  of  the  historical  monuments  inscribed  in  the  World  Heritage  List  is  carried  out  in 
accordance  with  UNESCO  regulations  in  the  field,  with  the  provisions  of  Government  Ordinance  no. 
47/2000 on establishing certain measures for the protection of historical monuments that are part of the 
World Heritage List, approved with amendments and completions by Law no. 564/2001, and the provisions 
of the present methodology. 
(2)  The  monitoring  of  the  historical  monuments  inscribed  in  the World  Heritage  List  is carried  out  by the 
local  public  administration  authorities  through  specialists  with  studies  in  the  field  and  accredited  by  the 
Ministry  of  Culture  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  art.  9  lit.  f)  of  the  Government  Ordinance  no. 
47/2000,  approved  with  amendments  and  completions  by  Law  no.  564/2001,  and  by  the  World  Heritage 
Committee to UNESCO. 
Art. 3 
For  the  purpose  of  this  methodology,  monitoring  designates  the  action  that  periodically  evaluates  the 
results of protection measures on historical monuments inscribed in the World Heritage List. 
Art. 4 
Monitoring by the World Heritage Committee of UNESCO is a regular, five yearly review of compliance with 
the obligations undertaken by Member States. 
Art. 5 
(1)The monitoring carried out by the local public administration authorities comprises two stages: 
(a) assessment of the conservation status; 
(b) the plan of measures to be taken following the assessments referred to in point a). 
(2)The  assessments  provided  for  in  paragraph  (1)  lit.  a)  is  also  carried  out  on  the  protected  area  of  the 
historical monument or, as the case may be, on the protected area 
Art. 6 
(1)The  evaluation  is  carried  out  twice  a  year  by  the  representatives  of  the  local  public  administration 
authorities, based on a Monitoring Schedule, unitary for all the historical monuments listed on the World 
Heritage List. The model of the monitoring chart is set out in Appendix B to this methodology. 
 105 

(2)In the case of major degradations of the historical monuments registered in the World Heritage List, the 
representatives of the local public administration authorities shall carry out the assessment provided for in 
Art. 5. 
(3)The evaluations are included in the monitoring sheets attached to the file of the historical monument. 
The model of the monitoring record is set out in Appendix C to this methodology. 
(4)Following  the  evaluations  provided  for  in  paragraph  (1)  and  (2),  the  local  public  administration 
authorities  shall  draw  up  the  plan  of  measures  provided  for  in  Art.  5  par.  (1)  lit.  b),  which  establishes 
responsibilities, deadlines and financial resources, in order to protect the respective historical monument. 
(5)The  plan  of  measures  provided  for  in  paragraph  (4)  is  an  integral  part  of  the  Annual  plan  for  the 
protection and management of historical monuments registered in the World Heritage List. 
 
 
 
Monitoring Status 
 
Appendices B and C to the Methodology are presented below, including the actual status of the monitoring 
activity, started in Roşia Montană after inclusion in the Tentative list.  
Table 13. Monitoring schedule of the conservation status of the site listed on the World Heritage List and of 
the protection and management plan (OG 493/2004, annex B) 
No.  Activity – to be fulfiled by the local authorities (through hired specialists) Responsible Proposed deadline 
1  Activity – to be fulfiled by the local authorities (through hired  DCPN  Initial record INP 2017/2018 
experts/contractors)  for the nominated site 
Existing records for the 
historical monuments 
Updated record – 1yr 
2  Drafting of the Conservation Sheet  DCPN Initial record INP 2017
Updated record – 1yr 
3  Initiation  of  the  Historical  Monument  File,  in  duplicate,  at  the  County  DCPN/INP Existing record  
Directorate for  Culture that  fils  it  with up‐to‐date information,  which  it  Update needed – 1yr 
also communicates to the National Institute of Heritage (INP) 
4  Handing over the listed buildings enforcement notices to the owners or  DCPN Existing record  
holders of other ownership rights  Update needed – 1yr 
5  Diagnosis  of  the  historical  monument  – establishment  of  the  Annual  MCIN Each year 
Action Plan. Inspection at the start of the actions foreseen in the Annual  CJ/experts 
Action Plan 
6  Inspection  at  completion  of  the  actions  foreseen  in  the  Annual  Action  MCIN Each year 
Plan  CJ/experts 
7  Regular inspections twice a year to check the conservation status of the  INP/COU Each year 
monument – Reporting 
8  Extraordinary inspections in case of Disaster ‐ Reporting ISU/COU/INP When necessary 
9  Preparation of  expert  analysis sent to the World  Heritage  Committee – INP/COU When necessary 
complete activity files 
10  Visit of World Heritage Committee experts – assistance According to UNESCO/ICOMOS practice
11  Analysis of the Visit Report and the preparation of a Plan of Measures as  INP/COU When necessary 
a result of the visit and of the ones discussed on the spot 
12  Insertion  in  the  following  Annual  Plan  (by  the  County  Council)  of  the  CJ/hired  When necessary 
results and recommendations of the World Heritage Committee  experts 
13  Annual  publication  of  monitoring  results  in  the  “Historical  Monuments  INP Each year 
Bulletin” 
 
 
 106 

Table 14. The monitoring sheet for the historical monuments included on the World Heritage List 
(OG 493/2004, appendix B) 
 
I  Name of the historical monuments proposed  Roşia Montană Mining Landscape
for inscription on the World Heritage List 
II  Code  in  the  List  of  Historical  Monuments  in  AB‐I‐s‐A‐00065 (AB‐I‐m‐A‐00065.01; AB‐I‐m‐A‐00065.02; AB‐I‐m‐A‐
Romania  00065.03; AB‐I‐m‐A‐00065.04; AB‐I‐m‐A‐00065.05); AB‐I‐s‐A‐20329 
AB‐II‐s‐B‐00270; AB‐II‐m‐B‐00271; AB‐II‐m‐B‐00269; AB‐II‐m‐B‐00272; AB‐II‐
m‐B‐00273; AB‐II‐m‐B‐00274; AB‐II‐m‐B‐00275; AB‐II‐m‐B‐00277; AB‐II‐m‐B‐
00278;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00279;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00280;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00281;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐
00282;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00283;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00284;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00285;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐
00286;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00287;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00288;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00289;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐
00291;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00292;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00293;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00294;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐
00295;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00296;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00297;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00298;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐
00299;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00300;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00301;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00302;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐
00303;AB‐II‐m‐B‐00304;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00305;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00306;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐
00307;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00308;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00309;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐00310;  AB‐II‐m‐B‐
00311; AB‐III‐m‐B‐00417. 
III  Code on World Heritage List (Ref.)  6082
Date of Submission: 18/02/2016 
Criteria: (ii)(iii)(iv)(v)(vi) 
Category: Cultural  
Submitted by: Permanent Delegation of Romania to UNESCO  
Coordinates: 46.307025, 23.129894 
IV  Location  County: ALBA
Commune/town: Roşia Montană, Abrud 
Villages: Bălmoșești, Blidești, Bunta [abandoned], Corna, 
Roşia Montană, Țarina 
V  Address  ‐
 
No.  Activity  Responsible/Date
1  Filling the Record File (1)  County Directorate for Culture (DPCN) 
Updated whenever needed, depending on the 
enrichment or changes to existing information 
2  Filling the Conservation File   To  be  completed  with  the  record  sheet  or  shortly 
thereafter  by  the  specialists  of  the  County 
Directorate for Culture 
3  Updating the Conservation Sheet when starting the implementation  To be completed annually
of the Annual Protection and Management Program  
4  Follow‐up of the implementation of the measures of the Annual Plan  The plan or extract of the Annual Plan of Protection 
of Protection and Management   and Management of a Monument / Ensemble / Site 
is attached to the Monument's File 
5  Entry in the Historical Monument File of all information regarding the  Essential  project  data,  endorsements  for  design 
beginning of a restoration process   and  execution  phases,  work  schedule,  partial  and 
final receptions 
6  Follow‐up of the implementation of solutions and methodology  For  each  verification,  a  record  shall  be  drawn  up, 
prescribed in the Conservation Project ‐ periodic reviews   which  shall  be  attached  to  the  Monument's  file, 
and the date and subject of the verification shall be 
entered in the monitoring record 
7  Mentioning the current maintenance actions in the Historical  Periodical review/DCPN, INP 
Monument File  
8  Mentioning in the Historical Monument File of the approved actions  Periodical review/DCPN, INP after APL 
in its buffer zone  communication 
9  Half‐yearly  checks  of  the  conservation  status  of  the  monuments,  The minutes are communicated to the Directorate 
mentioning the measures taken   of Historical Monuments of the Ministry of Culture 
and the National Institute of Heritage 
10  Visit of the World Heritage Committee's rapporteurs ‐ mention their  The report of this visit is attached to the 
comments and recommendations (8)  Monument's file 
11  Measures  taken  following  the  recommendations  of  the  World  Taken by the Ministry of Culture together with the 
Heritage Committee's rapporteurs (9)  County Council concerned 
 
 
 

Inventory and Site Diagnosis 
 
The  site  diagnosis  and  primary  inventory  have  been  realised  in  the  2016‐2017  period  (See  Conservation 
status  for  detailed  issues),  in  order  to  fulfil  the  WHL  nomination/potential  inscription.  It  comprised  site 
surveys,  data  gathering  and  analysis,  interrelated  inventory,  in  order  to  make  possible  the  monitoring 
process and the protection and management process.  
The resulted database – under continuous updating –  is presented in the following chapter. 
 107 

Dedicated database fields 
 
_attributes 
CODE 
CATEGORY 
NAME 
 
_location 
UATB (administrative territory – municipality) 
VILLAGE  
SIRUTA CODE 
NEIGHBORHOOD 
POSTAL NO 
LOCATION 
UTR (territorial reference unity) 
UTR NAME 
 
_property 
OWNER 
PROPERTY SURFACE 
CADASTRAL NUMBER 
LAND REGISTRY NUMBER 
EASEMENTS 
LISTED BUILDINGS ENFORCEMENT NOTICES (OF) 
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE SURFACE 
COORDINATES 
 
_protection status 
_Historical Monument (MI) 
LMI CODE (i)‐(iv) 
LMI CHAPTER (I‐IV) 
LMI CATEGORY (M, A, S) 
LMI VALORIC GROUP (A, B) 
_MI Protection Area 
_Built Heritage Values of National Interest 
VPCIN CODE  
_VPCIN Protection Area (ZPIN) 
_National Archaeological Registry 
RAN (i) 
RAN (ii) 
RAN (iii) 
RAN (iv) 
 
_dating 
LMI Dating  
RAN Dating 
Dating following detailed studies (updated) 
 
_conservation status 
LMI Conservation Status 
OF Conservation status  
EVOLUTION [by year] 
2017 EVALUATION 
NOTES AND REMARKS 
INTERVENTION MEASURES 
 
_description 
CURRENT DENOMINATION 
SHORT DESCRIPTION  
(shape, dimensions, urban planning indicators etc.) 
HISTORICAL INFORMATION (SUMMARY) 
 
_links 
RAN – Archaeological record; archaeological files 
INP – Record Sheet; Conservation Sheet; 
INP – Historical Monument File  
MCIN/DCPN – listed buildings enforcement notices 
Architectural surveys  
Archaelogical reports 
Historical documentation  
Pictures and other documents 
Conservation Projects 
Other projects 
Building permits 
Archaeological permits 
 
  Dedicated database (excerpt) 
 108 

Evaluation of Results 
 
The monitoring indicators set out below have been grouped under four headings:  
 Protection of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV)  
 Protection of the associated attributes 
 People and the prospective World Heritage Site  
 Landscape quality  
WHS Management Plan policies have been quoted in respect to each monitoring subheading to aid cross‐
referencing  of the  respective  themes  and  the  attendant  management  objectives.  In  addition to  providing 
descriptive  information  relating  to  the  indicators,  the  monitoring  status  is  also  given  for  each  monitoring 
theme or topic indicator, and an explanation of data gaps where these exist. 
Monitoring is a key responsibility of guardians of World Heritage sites. One of the key actions over the life 
of the Management Plan is to develop a useful and comprehensive set of monitoring indicators, including a 
measurement of the objectives and the impact of the action plan (effects).  
These indicators can be divided into two categories: 
 Quantitative indicators, 
 Qualitative  indicators  (often  through  evaluation  studies  which  interpret  the  quantitative  data  in  the 
context of our stated Vision, Mission and Aims). 
For some straightforward short timescale objectives both types of measurement will be reported, annually. 
For longer term objectives or initiatives the qualitative performance measuring and reporting intervals may 
have  to  be  longer,  perhaps  as  part  of  the  5  yearly  World  Heritage  Site  Management  Plan  review.  The 
process for collecting qualitative data could be based on a system of annual returns, where the Coordinator 
circulates pre‐agreed forms to stakeholders and key agencies, which are returned and then analysed by the 
Coordinator and published in an annual report to the Steering Committee. 
In  relation  to  visitors  and  users  of  the  Site,  the  RMMP‐linked  Marketing  Strategy  will  establish  current 
baseline  of  performance,  which  can  then  be  used  to  set  targets  and  compare  subsequent  performance 
figures. 
Progress and performance with this Management Plan will be reviewed annually using the indicators and 
coordinating mechanisms. This Management Plan has a life of five years and will require a complete review 
in 2023. This process will involve public consultation and lead to the adoption of a new or amended Plan for 
a further five‐year cycle. 
Principal monitoring levels and key indicators related to measuring conservation status of the property have 
been  established  with  regard  to  international  norms  and  identified  risks.  The  coordinator  and  specialist 
units  and  authorities  will  play  a  key  role  in  the  monitoring  process.  Apart  from  monitoring  selected 
problems, the coordinator’s task will be to meet monitoring deadlines, organise work of persons and units 
physically performing certain inspections as well as to store relevant protocols and reports. 
The final list of proposed indicators will be the subject of wider consultation, organised by the Coordinator. 
Table 15. Key indicators related to measuring conservation status of property 
Monitoring  Indicators  Measurement method Frequency Main competent unit
Protection of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV)  
Mining ‐  Galleries protection  Quantitative Annually ME / MCIN / INP / COU 
– length of protected sections   / SGP 
underground 
‐ number of galleries declared out of 
risk / secured  
Qualitative – non‐invasive solutions  
Ongoing research  Quantitative Annually  MCIN / INP / COU / 
results  – number / length of galleries  MCI 
researched and resulting studies 
‐ number of articles and scientific 
paper published on Roșia Montană 
Accessible galleries ‐  Quantitative 5 years ME / MCIN / INP / COU 
extension  – length of new opened sections   / SGP 
Qualitative  
– non‐invasive solutions for 
protection and accessibility  
 109 

Monitoring  Indicators  Measurement method Frequency  Main competent unit

Archaeology ‐  Research of known  Quantitative – number of sites  Annually  MCIN / INP / COU / 
sites  researched / number of new  MCI / MNIR 
surface 
discoveries on sites  
Qualitative ‐ research scientific 
results 
Opening and  Quantitative – number of protected  5 years MCIN / INP / COU / 
protection of known  accessible sites for visitors   SGP / MNIR 
sites – mise en valeur  Qualitative – protection projects 
and visit infrastructure design  
Discovery of new sites Quantitative – number of new  5 years MCIN / INP / COU / 
discovered sites  MCI / MNIR 
‐ number of new sites and elements 
inscribed in LMI / RAN  
Qualitative  
– research scientifically results  
Protection of the associated attributes 
Mining ‐ surface  MINVEST  Quantitative – number of building  5 years ME / COU / SGP 
administration   and other features rehabilitated / 
number of new functionalities  
Qualitative – comfort in utilisation / 
quality of design 
Header ponds   Quantitative – number of  5 years MCIN / INP / COU / 
researched ponds for specific issues  SGP  
‐ number of protected and 
accessible ponds for visitors  
Qualitative – protection projects 
and visit infrastructure design 
Urban features –  Buildings within Roșia  Quantitative – number of restored /  Annually  MCIN / INP / COU / 
Montană  rehabilitated buildings   SGP 
historical 
‐ number of buildings with new, 
monuments  adapted functions 
Qualitative – design quality, 
comfort in utilisation / function  
Public spaces  Quantitative – number of restored /  5 years  MCIN / INP / COU / 
rehabilitated public spaces   SGP 
Qualitative – design quality, 
comfort in utilisation  
Vernacular  Buildings in rural areas  Quantitative – number of restored /  Annually  MCIN / INP / COU / 
and traditional houses  rehabilitated buildings   SGP 
architecture 
in Roșia Montană  ‐number of buildings with new, 
adapted functions 
Qualitative – design quality, 
comfort in utilisation / function 
People and the prospective World Heritage Site  
Local community  Public / public access  Quantitative – number of new  Annually  APL / SGP / IMM / local 
services  public services or public access  population 
development 
  opened in Roșia Montană 
Qualitative – diversity and quality of 
services  
Economy   Quantitative – number of new small  Annually APL / SGP / IMM / local 
or medium enterprises opened in  population 
Roșia Montană  
‐ number of new work places 
Qualitative – diversity of 
occupations  
Cultural diversity  Quantitative – number of cultural  Annually APL / SGP / IMM/ local 
activities related to local  population  
communities 
Qualitative – relevance of cultural 
activities 
Tourism activities   Tourism objectives Quantitative – number of tourism  Annually APL / SGP / MT 
objectives connected by dedicated 
trails  
‐ number of tourism programs  
Qualitative – diversity of objectives 
and related activities 
Tourism services  Quantitative – number of tourism‐ Annually APL / SGP / MT 
related services (accommodation, 
info centres, public alimentation)  
Qualitative – diversity of services, 
quality of interpretation, quality of 
marketing  
Tourism economy  Quantitative – number of work  Annually APL / SGP 
places in tourism related activities 
Qualitative – diversity of 
qualifications in tourism activities  
 110 

Monitoring  Indicators  Measurement method Frequency Main competent unit

Landscape quality  
Landscape  Landscape evaluation,  Quantitative – landscape plans and  Annually /  APL / MMSC / MCIN / 
classification and  their integration in PUG  5 years   COU / SGP 
conservation  
assessment   Qualitative – landscape planning 
and design projects 
Nature monuments  Quantitative – number of protected  Annually  MMSC / MCIN / COU / 
and landscape features  elements and features (ponds,  SGP 
protection    maurs – dry stone walls, limits’ 
signalisations etc)  
Qualitative –landscape protection 
and mise en valeur projects 
Landscape  Quantitative – traditional activities  Annually APL / MMSC / MCIN / 
conservation by  encouraged  / recovered /supported  COU / SGP 
traditional activities   in situ  
Qualitative – accessibility to 
products from traditional activities  
Landscape  design  Touristic trails  Quantitative – lengths of trails and  Annually APL / MT / COU / SGP
connected heritage and leisure 
and planning  
objectives  / interpretation, 
alternative accessibility  
Qualitative – quality of design, 
quality of settings, diversity of 
objectives, quality of interpretation, 
alternative accessibility 
Landscape design and  Quantitative – number of setting of  Annually  APL / MMSC / MCIN / 
planning –  projects for OUV and associated  COU / SGP 
enhancement of OUV  attributes 
and associated  Qualitative – quality of design, 
attributes   quality of settings, diversity of 
objectives 

According  to  Romanian  legislation,  the  Monitoring  program  concerning  the  Protection  and  Management 
implementation results is to be drawn following monitoring indicators (HG 1268/2010, update in course): 
Assessment of the state of conservation: 
a) number of objectives belonging to the site, subject to risks; 
b) number and results of the inventory of historical monuments; 
c) conditions fulfiled by the preservation of the site; 
d)  number  and  size  of  the  impact  of  the  urban  planning  activities  and  the  control  over  the  urban 
development in the site’s buffer zone. 
Assessment of promotional and rewarding measures:  
a) number of national projects – exhibitions, advertising materials and other products on cultural heritage 
that promotes the site, per year; 
b) number of international projects through which the site image is capitalized; 
c) number of national and international projects implemented (annual / multiannual) in connection with the 
site; 
d) number of ongoing projects; 
e) partnerships with other ministries in order to establish common programs for the integration of the site 
into national or international thematic cultural routes 
Assessment of tourism impact: 
a) number of visitors per year; 
b) number of site museums; 
c) number of events organised; 
d) number of educational visits; 
e) number of cultural actions and events involving the local community. 
Equally, annual evaluation on the  implementation of the  Protection and Management Program has to be 
performed. 
 111 

Interpretation and Presentation Brief  
 
The current Brief aims to outline key measures to be undertaken in communicating the significances of the 
proposed Roşia Montană Mining Landscape. The Brief inventories existing resources, identifies interpretive 
themes, and outlines recommendations for future actions to be undertaken. 
Interpretation in the nominated property will not only serve tourists. Through communicating the meaning 
and  values  of  both  cultural  and  natural  heritage,  interpretation  will  support  community  recognition  and 
foster a wider understanding of the history and significance of the Roşia Montană Mining Landscape.  
 

Aims and Themes 
 
The  aim  of  the  interpretation  brief  is  to  outline  an  integrated  approach  so  that  interpretation  providers 
within the nominated site may: 
A1  Ensure  the  appropriate  presentation  of  comprehensive  themes  and  topics  that  are  interlinked  in  a 
coherent and compelling story; 
A2  Follow guidelines, principles and best practices; 
A3  Engage  and  motivate  target  audiences  so  that  the  visitor  experience  is  worthwhile,  satisfying  and 
enjoyable; 
A4  ‘Educate’ audiences in a way that meets their range of learning needs, increases their knowledge and 
understanding,  and  influences  their  attitudes  and  feelings  in  a  way  that  positively  contributes  to  the 
safeguarding of the Outstanding Universal Value; 
A5  Identify opportunities for greater cooperation and networking among existing interpretation providers, 
thus maximizing resources and preventing duplication and effort; 
A6  Encourage the involvement of the local community in safeguarding the values of the site. 

As follows, interpretation will play a key part in communicating the vision and mission of the Management 
Plan and achieving its objectives: 
Vision  Enhancing  the  outstanding  international  value  of  the  site  as  fundament  for  comprehensive, 
sustainable local development in the interest of the States’ community. 
Mission  To  insure  the  identification,  protection,  conservation,  presentation  and  transmission  to  future 
generations of the cultural and natural heritage of the Roşia Montană Mining Landscape, as pre‐
eminent  example  of  land‐use  and  resource  exploitation  continuity,  technical  innovation  and 
territorial consequent development. 

Preliminary research for the Interpretation Brief has identified the following issues: 
 The  existing  mining  heritage  attraction  gives  a  limited  overview  of  the  Roman  mining  and  regional 
mining history; 
 The  existing  mining  heritage  attraction  focuses  only  on  mining  aspects,  without  touching  on  other 
valuable landmarks in the area such as built heritage features – habitation; 
 The area lacks coherent interpretation, and the quality of existing interpretation varies substantially; 
 Interpretation for international audiences is scarce; 
 Thorough audience analysis throughout the whole property has not been undertaken in the last years. 

The story of the Roşia Montană Mining Landscape should be told in its regional, national and international 
context. The multiple values of the site should be transmitted through a hierarchy of themes, and should 
offer  an  integrated  message.  Themes  should  connect,  not  segment,  key  aspects  of  the  Roşia  Montană 
Mining  Landscape,  while  subsuming  to  the  overarching  master  theme  –  the  statement  of  Outstanding 
Universal Value (OUV): 
‘Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  contains  the  most  significant,  extensive  and  technically  diverse 
underground Roman gold mining complex currently known in the world’ 
 112 

This overarching master theme can be further developed into two major themes, the first one addressed to 
the OUV and the second one to the associated values, linked by remarkable continuity in mining activities 
and territorial specific development: 
 Roșia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  contains  the  most  significant,  extensive  and  technically  diverse 
underground Roman gold mining complex currently known in the world; 
 Mining within the property, altogether, spans more than two millennia, with all phases having left their 
mark, both underground and surface, an evolution almost exclusively determined by people’s quest for 
gold. 
The  nominated  property  contains  a  vast  inventory  of  interpretive  resources.  From  tangible  resources  ‐ 
Roman  galleries  to  modern  industrial  heritage,  vernacular  architecture  dating  from  the  18th  century, 
historical  and  commemorative  landmarks,  natural  monuments  and  landscape  features  ‐  to  intangible 
resources such as literature, stories, legends and folklore, all these assets intertwine to tell the remarkable 
story of the place.  

 
Overview of Existing On‐site Interpretation 
 
The  existing  interpretation  infrastructure  is  scarce  and  does  not  meet  the  needs  of  the  audiences. 
Landmarks  or  points  of  interest  are  not  sufficiently  signalized  and  visitors  encounter  difficulties  both  in 
identifying the more notorious ones (Mining Museum with the Roman Galleries) in the field or reaching less 
known landmarks like traditional houses, header ponds, and other built heritage features.   
The Roşia Montană Mining Museum is located inside the State Mining Company Headquarters and run by 
Minvest  Deva.  It  includes  one  of  the  buildings,  an  open‐air  display  of  several  valuable  artefacts  and  the 
Roman  Mining  Galleries  that  have  been  open  to  the  public.  This  is  the  main  attraction  of  the  nominated 
property  and  offers,  through  its  two  guides,  quality  interpretation  of  all  mining  heritage  (Roman  to 
contemporary).  Currently,  the  museum  has  more  than  4000  visitors  /,  the  majority  being  peak  season 
visitors. For the Roman Galleries, the main attraction inside the museum, the number of visitors is limited 
to 4 groups (20 people) / day due to conservation and safety reasons. Also, the galleries are not accessible 
for  visitors  with  disabilities.  Physical  and  intellectual  access  will  be  promoted,  sustainable  and  consistent 
with the values of the site. Expanding the museum and increasing the quality of interpretation will improve 
the  number  of  visitors,  and  off  site  promotional  activities  will  also  attract  more  tourists  outside  peak 
season.  
Also, the only attractions offering interpretation for international audiences are the Roşia Montană Mining 
Museum  (guidance  in  English)  and  the  Heritage  Interpretation  Centre  run  by  the  ARA  Association  in  the 
Unitarian Parish House (bilingual exhibit).  
The  above  overview,  linking  existing  attributes  with  on‐site  interpretation  reveals  there  is  a  significant 
potential for improvement. The panels installed by RMGC on their properties, although visible, do not meet 
the requirements of efficient interpretation, serving only for marketing purposes. The ‘Gold of the Apuseni 
Mountains’  Museum,  set  up  by  RMGC  in  the  main  square to  showcase the  findings  of the  archaeological 
digs,  is  now  closed.  Several  panels  have  been  placed  throughout  the  property,  marking  built  heritage 
features that have been included in the Adopt a House Programme, developed by A.R.A.  
Apart from physical on site interpretation, there are also efforts made by locals, NGOs and action groups. 
Locals  offering  accommodation  also  act  as  guides  and  storytellers,  NGOs  and  action  groups  have  set  up 
thematic  trails,  organized  workshops,  summer  schools  and  events.  The  range  of  activities  offered  can  be 
found on several websites advertising cultural tourism in the area. These activities however lack continuity 
throughout the year and are not communicated throughout the nominated property.  
Four thematic trails developed by Trai cu Rost, that extend over the boundary of the Nominated Property, 
covering a wide range and variety of landmarks: 
 Header Pond Trail 
 Detunata Goală through the Abruzel Valley  
 The Natural Monuments Trail 
 The Corna Valley Trail 
A specific mention must be given to FânFest (Fân ‐ Hay), a festival organized by volunteers between 2006 
and 2015. During its history, the festival gathered almost 50.000 participants, while also building the base 
for  today’s  cultural  offer  in  the  area  and  establishing  Roşia  Montană  as  a  landmark  for  civil  society  and 
activism. The festival is expected to restart in the following years.  
 113 

Current on site presentation: 
 

1.  MINING EXPLOITATION: UNDERGROUND AND SURFACE 
  1.1.  Mining Exploitation: Underground 
    1.1.4.  Orlea Roman Galleries 
      Roşia Montană Mining Museum 
      Author: MINVEST 
      Obs: accessible to visitors 
    1.1.7.  Cătălina Monulești Early Modern Galleries 
      Author: RMGC 
      Obs: inaccessible to visitors 
  1.2.  Mining exploitation: Surface  
 

2.   ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREAS 
  2.1.  Roman Archaeology 
    2.1.5.  Hop Necropolis 
      The Circular Funerary Monument; panels 
      Author: RMGC 
      Obs: the monument is conserved but inaccessible to visitors 
 

3.  BUILT HERITAGE FEATURES 
  3.1.  Modern town / Village [Roşia Montană/Modern] 
    3.1.1.   Square 
`      1.  Information panel  
        Authors: CJ Alba 
        Obs: poor state of conservation 
      2.  Mining Museum created by RMGC 
        Authors: RMGC 
        Obs: closed 
      3.  Cultural Heritage Interpretation Centre in the Unitarian Parish House  
        Authors: ARA 
        Obs: open during summer and upon request over the rest of the year 
    3.1.2.   Brazi 
    3.1.3.  Ieruga 
    3.1.5.  Văidoaia 
    3.1.6.  Berk 
    3.1.7.  Sosaşi 
    3.1.8  Orlea (centre and 3.1.8.c ‐ The administrative centre. Town Hall) 
    3.1.10  Vercheş (3.1.10.b – State school and kindergarten; no. 274) 
      Information panels on several houses. 
  3.3.  Ţarina (modern) (3.3.1. – Traditional farmhouse (19th century), Ţarina no. 1248 
      1.  Information panel 
        Authors: ARA 
 
4.   NATURAL HERITAGE AND LANDSCAPE 
  4.1.   Several  trails  have  been  set  up  by  Trai  cu Rost,  allowing  visitors to  enjoy  the  various  landscape 
features.  Information  about  the  trails  is  available  online  and  on  a  panel  located  in  the  Main 
Square 
  4.2.  Panels related to natural heritage (installed by RMGC) – 4.1.4.1 and 4.1.4.2, Piatra Despicată and 
Piatra Corbului 

 
 114 

     
Examples of inappropriate panels 

     

     
Examples of panels installed by RMGC  

   
Images from the Rosia Montana Mining Museum exhibit 

The Cultural Heritage Interpretation Centre in Roşia Montană historical center ‐ created 2018 by Alburnus 
Maior and ARA associations in the Unitarian Parish House – develops site‐related interpretation actions.  

 
Flyer edited by ARA highlighting themes and main attractions of the site.  
115 

 
 116 

Resources and Audience 
 
Apart from the built heritage attributes, which can be used to tell significant stories about the history and 
significance of the property, there is a vast amount of research and art (film, literature, photography) that 
can be used to construct and document sub‐themes. To name just a few:  
 Films and documentaries: 
 Stone Wedding (Nunta de piatră, 1973) and Gold Spirit (Duhul Aurului, 1974): shot in Roşia 
Montană during the 70s, feature many of the locals. 
 The New El Dorado (Noul El Dorado, 2004): documentary on the mining project and on the local 
resistance 
 Classic Literature 
 Geo Bogza – Land of Stone 
 Jókai Mór – Man of Gold 
 The Basil Roman photographic collection – displayed inside the Roşia Montană Mining Museum 
 The Bocaniciu Photographic Archives – photographs taken throughout Roşia Montană at the beginning 
of the 20th century by Mr Bocaniciu, one of the local merchants 
 Significant research from the Alburnus Maior Programme 
 Research on modern built heritage undertook by the ARA Association 

Neighbouring  sites  can  also  offer  resources  for  interpretation.  Apart  from  the  Roşa  Montană  Mining 
Museum, there are also two other relevant museums dedicated to mining in the Apuseni Mountains: 
 Gold Museum in Brad (45 km from Roşia Montană)  
 Mining Museum in Bucium (20 km from Roşia Montană).  

Although a detailed analysis of audiences is still to be done, several key aspects can be outlined: 
 The main audience for the Roşia Montană Mining Museum are school children from the neighbouring 
areas or from the county. They only visit the museum. 
 High media coverage in the last decades has led to an increase in the number of visitors. These tourists, 
both national and international, can be segmented into two categories:  
 Cultural tourists ‐ informed on the natural and cultural heritage of the area, looking for experiential 
holidays ‐ they usually spend more than one night in the area and immerse themselves in all it has 
to offerș 
 Mass tourists – travelling either on organized tours or on their own, looking to find out more about 
the site ‐ they usually only visit the museum.  
 There is still a relevant percent of the local population that is unaware of the significance of the natural 
and cultural heritage of the property. 
A  thorough  detailed  analysis  of  the  audiences  will  reveal  more  information  on  the  needs  of  different 
categories of visitors. These needs will be addressed through an Audience Development Plan and through 
the Interpretation Plan. 

 
 
 117 

Visual Identity Standards 
 
It  is  important  to  establish technical  and  professional standards  for  heritage  interpretation,  and maintain 
consistency.  A  first  step  in  the  creation  of  the  Roşia  Montană  Mining  Landscape  identity  was  the 
development of the website (RoşiaMontană.world) dedicated to the nomination process, and of the logo. 
Efforts will be continued with the entire Graphic Identity Manual. Panels and other interpretation materials 
as such will follow the guidelines of the manual. 

 
 
 118 

Recommendations 
 
Improving existing interpretation to broaden understanding and responsibility: 
 Interpret  Roman  archaeology  throughout  the  nominated  property  ‐  set  up  trails,  panels  to  guide 
visitors  to  other  archaeological  features  that  can  be  open  to  the  public  (The  Circular  Funerary 
Monument for example); 
 Set up markings and bilingual panels in key points throughout the property, to guide visitors towards 
other  attributes  of  the  site  (modern  galleries,  historical  urban  landmarks,  header  ponds,  industrial 
landscape, natural landmarks); 
 Mark listed buildings and set up small billboards to interpret them as part of local history; 
 Involve the local community in interpretation through storytelling events, workshops and trainings, to 
foster accountability and responsibility, and to establish relevant sub‐themes to be interpreted; 
 Transform  the  existing  Roşia  Montană  Mining  Museum  and  Roman  Galleries  into  a  Heritage 
Interpretation Centre by restoring the existing buildings of the complex and expanding the exhibit to 
touch  on  the  whole  range  of  natural  and  cultural  heritage  of  the  nominated  property.  After 
remodelling, the Museum should act as a key centre and first destination for visitors. Centred around 
the Master Theme, the centre should offer a detailed overview of all significant values. 

The further research directions are the following: 
 Thorough visitor analysis on local and regional level to identify existing and upcoming trends; 
 Link results to existing strategies for audience development and create an Audience Development Plan 
for the nominated property; 
 Thorough assessment of the human resource available to establish capacity building requirements for 
local interprets; 
 Develop  a  detailed  Interpretation  Plan  together  with  the  local  community  and  relevant  stakeholders 
throughout the area.  
 119 

 
 

Images from the Basil Roman collection  
 
 120 

Action Plan 
Action Plan – Summary 
 
As mentioned above, the Roşia Montană Protection and Management Plan is developed by the Ministry of 
Culture and  National  Identity,  through the  National Institute of  Heritage (INP)  and  contains  the  following 
actions, detailed in the Action plan. 
 
Table 17. Action Plan – summary 
No  Action  Responsibilities 5yr  More
1  Defining 

Improvement 
local management structures 

Preliminary 

program 
ME, MAI, ISU, MDRAP, MM, SGP, owners 

actions 
1.1  Prevention measures, avoiding catastrophic events 
1.2  Preserving the values and authenticity of the site  MCIN, ME, APL, COU, SGP, MDRAP, 
MM, owners 
1.3  Conservation state preservation and improvement  ME, MDRAP, MCIN, SGP, owners
1.4  Contributing to site’s recognition  SGP, COU, MCIN
1.5  Promotion, interpretation and education  SGP, COU, MCIN
2  Defining objectives for management and protection
and subsequent programs 
2.1  Preserving OUV and supporting attributes ME / MCIN – INP / APL / COU / SGP / 
owners  

Periodical reviewing 
Permanent actions 
2.1.1  Increasing the knowledge about the site’s attributes  MCIN – INP / COU
2.1.2  Appropriate site administration and utilisation ME / COU / SGP / APL / owners
2.2  Preserving site’s authenticity and the integrity MCIN – INP / APL / COU / SGP / 
owners 
2.2.1  Prevention measures, avoiding catastrophic events  ME, MAI, ISU, MDRAP, MM, SGP, owners 
2.2.2  Preserving the values and authenticity of the site  MCIN, ME, APL, COU, SGP, MDRAP, 
MM, owners 
2.2.3  Conservation state preservation and improvement  ME, MDRAP, MCIN, SGP, owners
2.3  Contributing to site’s recognition  SGP, COU, MCIN
2.3.1  Promotion, interpretation and education  SGP, COU, MCIN
2.4  Permanent protection and management update MCIN
2.4.1  Protection and management quality control  MCIN, UNESCO
3  Defining 
  priority actions 
3.1  1. MINING EXPLOITATION: UNDERGROUND AND SURFACE
3.1.1  1.1. Mining exploitation: underground
3.1.1.1  a. Conservation of the Roman underground  ME, MCIN, SGP
3.1.1.2  b. Secure visiting infrastructure and strict access control ME, MCIN, SGP
3.1.1.3  c. Research continuation   MCIN, INP, COU
3.1.1.4  d. Future enlargement of the visiting area ME, MCIN, SGP
3.1.2  1.2. Mining exploitation: surface 
following schedule (Annual plans; specific plans) 
3.1.2.1  a. Conservation of the Roman surface exploitations MCIN, INP, SGP
3.1.2.2  c. Secure visiting infrastructure   MCIN, APL, SGP
3.1.2.3  d. Research continuation   MCIN, INP, MNIR Periodic reviewing (5 years programs) 
Long‐term actions continuation 

3.1.2.4  e. Protection and maintenance of the ore‐processing  MCIN, MM, SGP, APL

features 
Specific timeframe  

3.1.2.5  f. Restoration process of the mining administration and  ME, MCIN

creation of the visiting core‐structures (physical/virtual) 
3.2  2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREAS 
3.2.1  a. Presentation of the in situ structures  MCIN, MNIR
3.2.2  b. Conservation/protection measures SGP, APL, MCIN
3.2.3  c. Research continuation  MCIN, INP, MNIR
3.2.4  d. Future enlargement of the visiting area MCIN, SGP, APL
3.3  3. BUILD HERITAGE FEATURES 
3.3.1  3.1. Modern town [Roşia] 
3.3.1.1  a. Restoration and revitalisation of the built heritage APL, SGP, MCIN, owners
3.3.1.2  b. Development scenarios analysis and implementation MCIN. SGP
3.3.2  3.2‐3.4 [other villages] 
3.3.2.1  a. Community’s rehabilitation measures APL, SGP, owners
3.3.2.2  b. Support for traditional land‐use and activities ME, MM, APL, SGP, owners
3.3.2.3  c. Protection and conservation of the vernacular  MCIN, APL, SGP, owners
architecture 
3.4  4. NATURAL HERITAGE AND LANDSCAPE
3.4.1  a. Biodiversity and natural heritage conservation  MM, APL, SGP, owners
3.4.2  b. Landscape conservation and integrated enhancement  MM, MCIN, MDRAP, APL, owners
measures for cultural and natural heritage 
3.4.3  c. Specific priority measures correlated with the local   MM, MCIN, MDRAP
typology and preliminary interdisciplinary studies  
3.4.4  d. Urban and territory planning issues assessment MDRAP, MCIN, MM
 121 

4  Defining    

Improvement 
Preliminary 
financing policies 

program 
actions 
4.1  Estimating the financial current and exceptional needs MCIN, COU, SGP  
4.2  Budgeting priority actions  COU, SGP  
4.3  Integrating national and international available funds for various  SGP  
activities (such as research, protection, prevention, development) 
in a dedicated, accessible, local‐dedicated fund. 
5  Refining legal and regulatory framework necessary for   

Periodical 
reviewing 
Permanen
t actions 
protection 
5.1  Contributing to the refining of the legal protection and regulation  MCIN, MM,   
framework (integrating archaeological, heritage, environment and  MDRAP 
resources issues) in the benefit of the local site’s protection 
6  Defining principal management directions/programs  
6.1  Knowledge development   MCIN, INP, MCI  
  Inventory and documentation  INP, COU  
  Preparation of the site’s documents COU, SGP  
Control and periodical updating 
  Data archiving and computerization  INP, COU, SGP  
  Research (linked with the archaeological, historic and urban,  MCIN (INP); COU   
vernacular and industrial heritage and to the cultural landscape)  Scientific Committee 
6.2  Property‐use management    
  Approving the Protection and Management Plan; sharing  MCIN (INP); after   
responsibilities; public information and participation; PMP finalisation,  2019: involving APL, 
endorsement and approval; elaboration and approval of the specific  COU and SGP) 
protection plans (on‐going; estimated completion – beginning of 2019) 
  MCIN (INP); after   
S.G.P. creation/consolidation; partnerships; scientific committee etc.; 
2019: involving APL, 
contracts with the owners   COU and SGP
  Elaboration and approval of the Annual plans COU/SGP  
  Current management problems  COU/SGP  
  Communication  COU/SGP  

(see timeframe in Principal management directions/programs) 

(see timeframe in Principal management directions/programs) 
  Utilisation  – principal activities   COU, APL, owners  
  Utilisation – related activities  COU, APL, owners  
  Economic activities and fundraising  COU, APL, owners  
  Policies for the site’s presentation and interpretation; cultural and  COU, APL, owners  
educational activities in the benefit of the site 
6.3  Natural and anthropic risks’ management   
  ME; MAI, ISU,   
Prevention measures in case of fires, earthquakes, floods  MDRAP; MM;  COU, 
SGP, APL, owners

Periodical reviewing 
Permanent actions 
  Technical measures to reduce technological risks COU, SGP, ISU, ME  
  Raising population’s risk awareness / Changes in patterns of human  COU/SGP; MAI, ISU  
behaviour and perception 
6.4  Monitoring and priority measures program  
  Initial inspection  MCIN  
  Current inspections   APL, COU, SGP  
  Major problems inspections  APL, COU, SGP  
  Priority assessment:  COU, SGP  
6.5  Regulatory and technical framework   
  Development strategy of the area  MDRAP, ME  
  Elaborating urban and territory regulations for the site’s territory MDRAP  
  Detailing the listed buildings enforcement notices for the site’s territory MCIN (DCPN)  
  Establishment, contracting, elaboration, project financing (consolidation,  MCIN, ME, SGP,   
rehabilitation, restoration etc., including tourist infrastructure)  Owners 
  MCIN, MDRAP,   
Approval and execution of projects 
MM, ME, SGP 
  Financial and technical control of the executed works MCIN, ME, SGP,  
  S.G.P. specialists’ training  INP, SGP  
  Craftsmen’s training  SGP  
  Actions’ control to review the annual management plan SGP  
6.6  Interpretation and presentation    
  On‐site and off‐site interpretation and presentation infrastructures  SGP, COU, MCIN  
creation and maintenance 
  Specific research and documentation SGP, COU, MCIN  
  Communication policy and actions   SGP, COU, MCIN  
  Staff (employed/volunteers) activity and training  INP, SGP  
  Evaluation process/contents’ review; archiving issues MCIN  
6.7  Evaluation of results and reporting    
  Control of the behaviour of materials and structures MCIN  
  Control; evaluation, monitoring and reviewing of the RMMP and of the  MCIN  
other strategic documents 
  General finance control  MCIN  
  Control of the economic impact of the protection and management  MCIN, MFP  
actions 
  Control of the general conservation status MCIN  
122 
Protection and Management Directions / Operational Programs

The table summarizes the actions and responsibilities of the involved authorities/stakeholders.
The schedule has to be agreed with all the stakeholders. Detailed schedules have to be created for each principal management direction; the estimated costs will result after this consultation stage. Date of drafting: February, 2018

Nr. Specific management Principal management Executant Estimated Terms planning (semesters)
Dedicated measures/actions Resulting documents
crt. and protection objectives directions/programs cost of works
Activity Control* 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Increasing the Inventory and documentation Studies, research; legal inventory documents MCIN (INP) /COU MCIN
knowledge about the Preparation of the site’s documents Site documents (identification, environmental, legal,
site’s attributes policy COU/SGP MCIN; MDRAP; MM, MAP, etc.
Control and periodical updating technical and historical synthesis documents )
Data archiving and computerization Documents / data bases INP/COU/SGP MCIN
KNOWEDGE
DEVELOPMENT Research (linked with the archaeological, historic and urban, vernacular and MCIN (INP); COU
Documents / data bases MCIN
PROGRAM industrial heritage and to the cultural landscape) Scientific Committee
Approving the Protection and Management Plan; sharing responsibilities; public MCIN
Management and protection plans on long and MCIN (INP); (after 2019: involving APL,
information and participation; PMP finalisation, endorsement and approval; Several endorsements needed
medium term COU and SGP)
Preserving OUV elaboration and approval of the specific protection plans Public consultation needed
1. and supporting Appropriate site
SGP creation/consolidation; partnerships; scientific committee etc.; contracts
Contracts, partnerships, other legal acts
MCIN (INP); (after 2019: involving APL, MCIN
with the owners COU and SGP)
attributes administration and
Elaboration and approval of the Annual plans Management and protection plans on short term COU/SGP MCIN
functions
Current management problems Management documents COU/SGP MCIN
PROPERTY-USE Communication Several media issues COU/SGP MCIN Permanent activities.
MANAGEMENT Use according to the Listed buildings enforcement notices – principal activities Contracts, inspection reports, other documents COU, APL, owners MCIN The MCIN involvement is strong at
PROGRAM the beginning of the process and
Use according to the Listed buildings enforcement notices – related activities Contracts, inspection reports, other documents COU, APL, owners M.C; MDRAP, APL etc.
will become lighter when the
Economic activities and fundraising Viability Plan COU, APL, owners MCIN system starts its functioning.
Policies for the site’s presentation and interpretation; cultural and educational
Specific management plans; specific documents COU, APL, owners MCIN
activities in the benefit of the site

Prevention measures, Studies ME; MAI, ISU, MDRAP; MM; SGP owners MCIN coordination and control
Prevention measures in case of fires, earthquakes, floods
avoiding catastrophic Projects / Norms ISU, COU/SGP, APL; owners MCIN control Permanent activities; reporting and
events policy Technical expertise Specialists hired by SGP, ISU ME; MDRAP; MM, MAI, MAP control following the law.
Technical measures to reduce technological risks
Projects COU/SGP/owners/ME MAI; MDRAP, MM, MAP; MCIN, ME MCIN involvement (priorities assessment,
NATURAL AND
ANTHRPIC RISKS’ endorsement, control).
Raising population’s risk awareness / Changes in patterns of human behaviour
MANAGEMENT Intervention scenarios COU/SGP; MAI, ISU MAI/ISU
and perception
PROGRAM
Initial inspection Monitoring report MCIN MCIN
Preserving the values Current inspections Monitoring reports APL/COU/SGP MCIN
and authenticity of the Major problems inspections Monitoring reports APL/COU/SGP MCIN
site policy Priority assessment: Urgent action plan COU/SGP MCIN
- Problems posing a potential hazard Studies and projects MCIN; MDRAP, MM etc. MDRAP, MAI, MCIN
MONITORING AND Technical survey/expertise Specialists hired by SGP MCIN, MDRAP
PRIORITARY MEASURES - Urgent problems
Intervention projects COU/SGP MCIN
Preserving site’s PROGRAMS
- Priority interventions necessary for regular/safe use Projects for new functions settings COU/SGP; MCIN, owners MCIN
2. authenticity and - Utilities and infrastructure maintenance Plan of permanent measures COU/SGP; owners SGP
Development strategy of the area Specific strategic documents creation and updating MDRAP, ME MDRAP; MCIN, APL, COU
integrity Urban planning documents and regulations for the
Elaborating urban and territory regulations for the site’s territory MDRAP MDRAP; MCIN, APL
site’s territory (PUZ) and for Roşia Montană (PUG)
Detailing the Use Obligations for the site’s territory Rules for intervention and use, according to the OUV MCIN (DPCN) MCIN, MDRAP
Establishment, contracting, elaboration, project financing (consolidation, Studies and research; feasibility studies MCIN, ME/SGP/owners MCIN
Conservation state rehabilitation, restoration etc., including tourist infrastructure) Technical projects Specialists hired by SGP, ME MCIN Permanent activities; reporting and
preservation and Approval MCIN, MDRAP, MM, ME MCIN control following the law.
improvement policy Approval and execution of projects Organisation of works SGP, ME MDRAP; MCIN
Execution of works Executants hired by SGP, ME MCIN MCIN involvement (priorities
REGULATORY AND Validation report MCIN, ME MCIN assessment, endorsement, finance,
TECHNICAL FRAMEWORK Financial and technical control of the executed works control).
Financial report SGP, ME MCIN
PROGRAM
Technical Support Team from the INP MCIN (INP) The MCIN involvement is strong at
SGP specialists’ training Courses, workshops
SGP (external experts) SGP the beginning of the process and
Craftsmen’s training Courses, workshops SGP (external experts) MCIN, SGP will become lighter when the
system starts its functioning.
Technical and financial reports SGP MCIN
Actions’ control to review the annual management plan
Proposals for review SGP MCIN

Promotion, On-site and off-site interpretation and presentation infrastructures creation and
Projects/other specific documents SGP/COU/MCIN MCIN
interpretation and maintenance
Contributing to education policy Specific research and documentation Studies, research SGP/COU/MCIN MCIN
3. Communication policy and actions Publications, reports etc. SGP/COU/MCIN SGP
site’s recognition INTERPRETATION AND Technical Support Team from the INP
PRESENTATION Staff (employed/volunteers) activity and training Courses, workshops MCIN
SGP (external experts)
PROGRAM Evaluation process/interpretive contents’ review; archiving issues Verification reports; documents; data-bases MCIN UNESCO

Protection and Expertise reports Experts hired by MCIN MCIN

Control of the behaviour of materials and structures for the previous works
management quality Verification reports MCIN MCIN
Permanent control policy Control; evaluation, monitoring and reviewing of the PMP and of the other
protection and Report on annual management plans’ review Experts hired by MCIN MCIN
strategic documents
4.
management EVALUATION OF General finance control Financial control report Entitled bodies MCIN
update RESULTS AND Control of the economic impact of the protection and management actions Expertise reports Experts hired by MCIN MCIN
REPORTING
PROGRAMS Control of the general conservation status Periodic synthesis and report for UNESCO MCIN UNESCO

N.B. The control activity is decentralized and is carried out by the public services of the ministries at the level of the counties
 125 

Appendices  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Appendix 1 
ICOMOS Resolution 18GA 2014/26 – Rescue of the Roșia Montană mining landscape and 
promotion of a sustainable development model108  
 
 
 
The 18th General Assembly of ICOMOS,  
 
Recalling resolution 13GA 2002/20 of the 13th General Assembly (Madrid, 2002), resolution 14GA 2003/1b 
of the 14th Extraordinary General Assembly (Victoria Falls, 2003), the resolution of the ICOMOS Conference, 
held in Pécs, Hungary, 22‐27 May 2004, the ICAHM Statement on the mining concept at Roșia Montană, 
issued in Lyon, France, at the European Archaeological Association Conference on 9 September 2004, 
resolution 15GA 2005/8 of the 15th General Resolutions of the 18th ICOMOS General Assembly 14 Assembly 
(Xi’an, 2005), resolution 16GA 2008/4 of the 16th General Assembly (Quebec, 2008) resolution 17GA 
2011/22 of the 17th General Assembly (Paris, 2011) and the resolution of the ICOMOS Executive Committee 
(San José, 2013);  
 
Recalling all actions undertaken by ICOMOS and its Romanian National Committee to bring a resolution to 
this conflict and an international recognition of this exceptional archaeological and cultural landscape 
associated to historical mining activities;  
 
Taking into consideration that additional statements of concern have been issued by official, scientific and 
professional institutions and bodies, and by several NGOs and religious communities;  
 
Noting the lack of reaction by the Romanian Government with respect to the above mentioned repeated 
calls issued by international and Romanian professionals and civil society;  
 
Noting with satisfaction that in 2013 the Romanian Parliament rejected, by an enormous majority, the bill 
on the mining project at Roșia Montană as proposed by the Romanian Government;  
 
Considering that this democratic reaction opens the way for a new approach to the recovery of the socio‐
economic conditions in the area, based upon the protection, rehabilitation and enhancement of the natural 
and cultural heritage of the locality and of the region of Roșia Montană;  
 
Taking into account the decision of Europa Nostra to include Roșia Montană in the list of Europe's most 
endangered monuments and sites and, consequently, its commitment to contribute to a new development 
paradigm for the area, whereby organizations such as ICOMOS can fully participate in the elaboration 
process;  
 
Affirming once more the outstanding significance of Roșia Montană – the ancient Alburnus Maior, a cultural 
landscape which evolved over two millennia, from the unique vestiges of the Roman underground mining 
system, to those of the Middle Ages, Renaissance and Modern times, together with the traditional mining 
town, inherited from the Habsburg times;  
 
Reiterating its deepest concern about the planned mining operations which, after over a decade of 
repeated high profile international calls of warning and messages of support for heritage protection as well 
as national actions in defence of heritage, still threaten Roșia Montană and its surroundings;  
 

108
   https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Secretariat/2015/GA_2014_results/ 
GA_2014_Resolutions_EN_20150109_finalcirc.pdf 
 126 

 
 
 
 

Recognising the necessity to launch emergency measures for the salvaging, conservation and restoration of 
the heritage features of Roșia Montană and for the promotion of a viable, sustainable development model 
based on the rich cultural and natural heritage resources of the area;  
 
Considering the worldwide relevance of the case of Roșia Montană for so many other historical sites and 
landscapes under threat from contemporary, large scale, open‐cast mining;  
 
Calls again upon all the authorities in charge of the management, protection and conservation of Romania’s 
heritage to reinforce their commitment and ensure that precedence is given to the protection, conservation 
and enhancement of cultural heritage over industrial and construction pressures, and consequently to 
implement policies and best practices, in accordance with the provisions of all relevant international 
charters and international conventions adopted by Romania;  
 
Expresses again its willingness to collaborate with the above authorities and offers them the availability of 
its professional network to assist them in this work so as to make Roşia Montană a model for the 
development and application of appropriate policies and practices to the conservation of historic places;  
 
Requests the Executive Committee to establish a working group on Roșia Montană within ICOMOS, formed 
by representatives of its relevant International Scientific Committees (e.g. Vernacular Architecture ‐ CIAV, 
Historic Towns and Villages ‐ CIVVIH, Archaeological Heritage Management ‐ ICAHM, Cultural Landscapes ‐ 
ISCCL), with the task of proposing a plan and a roadmap for the elaboration of a set of principles for the 
sustainable development of the Roșia Montană area based upon the rehabilitation and enhancement of its 
cultural and natural assets; such working group will be open to collaborate with and receive contributions 
from other organizations such as, among others, Europa Nostraand The International Committee for the 
Conservation of the Industrial Heritage (TICCIH) 
 127 

Appendix 2 
Site’s Description – Roșia Montană Built heritage features (3.1) brief presentation109 
 

     I 

       II 

       III 

     IV 
th th
3.1.1.a . Townhouses with commercial ground floors (late 18  – early 19  cenuries) 
(Roşia Montană 324, 325, 326, 326A, 327A, 327B, 328, 388, 389, 392) 
I – 326(r)‐328(l), 323(r)‐326(l), 321; II – 323, 324, 325, 326; III – 327, 328, 388, 388; IV – 389, 392, 392 (Hungarian school) 
 

   I  V 

       V 
th th
3.1.1.b . ‘Sicilian Street’ (late 18  – early 19  cenuries) 
(Roşia Montană 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 402, 403, 404) 
IV – 393 (collapsed), 394(r)‐395(l), 396; V – 397(l)‐398(r), 399, 400 (Protestant church), 404 

      VI 
th th th
3.1.1.c . Roman‐Catholic Church and parish ensemble (18  – middle 19 , early 20  centuries) 
(Roşia Montană 317, 319, 320, 549, 549A) 
VI – 549 (Roman‐Catholic church), 549 A (Roman‐Catholic chapel, 320 (Rom.‐Cath. teachers’ house) 

       VII 
th th
3.1.1.d. Unitarian Church and parish ensemble (1796, 18  ‐ middle 19  cent, 1933) 
(Roşia Montană 390, 391, 528, 530, 552, 553) 
VII – 390 (Unitarian cantor’s house), 391 (Unitarian parish house), 528, 530 (Unitarian church) 

109
   2017 survey: Ina Postăvaru, Irina Lecca (INP) 
 128 

 
 
 

       VIII 

       IX 
3.1.1.e . The Casino (1880‐1900), no. 329, and Summer Garden 
(Roşia Montană 329, 331, 331B, 332, 334, 340, 341, 342, 343, 374, 375, 376, 377, 377B, 378) 
VIII – 329 (Casino), 331, 331, 334; IX – 340; 341; 342; 343 

       X 
3.1.1.f . The former Administrative Palace (1896) 
(Roşia Montană 310) 
X – 301; 308(r)‐310(l); 310 (The Administrative Palace); 551 (Protestant parish house) 

       XI 
3.1.2. Brazi  
(Roşia Montană 453‐473; 484‐511; 513‐526; 531, 532, 536) 
XI – 484, 491, 492, 516 

       XII 

     XIII 
3.1.3. Ieruga 
(Roşia Montană 387, 405‐411, 414‐416, 505, 507, 508, 512) 
XII – 405, 406, 407, 409; XIII – 411, 416, 512 

   XIV 
3.1.4. Tăul Brazi  
(Roşia Montană 475‐477, 479‐483, 483B) 
XIV – 483, x 
 129 

 
 
 
 
 

       XV 

        XVI 
3.1.5. Văidoaia 
(Roşia Montană 418‐423, 427, 429, 430, 432, 433, 435‐444, 446‐448, 450‐452) 
XV – 419, 437, 442, 450?; XVI – 446, 450, 450, 451 

        XVII 
3.1.6. Berk 
(Roşia Montană 344‐353, 354A, 354B, 355, 356, 359‐373) 
XVII – 344, 353, 366, 372‐373 

       XVIII 
3.1.7. Sosași 
(Roşia Montană 277, 278, 278A, 279‐291, 294, 296, 296A, 297‐303) 
XVIII – 283, 284, 291, 299 

       XIX 
3.1.8.a. Orlea – Greek‐Catholic Church (1741) and parish ensemble (1815, 1854) 
(Roşia Montană 135, 136, 137) 
XIX – 135 (Greek‐Catholic Church); 135 (Simeon Balint’s tomb); 133‐135; 137 (Greek‐Catholic parish house) 

 XX 
3.1.8.b. Orlea ‐ Orthodox Church and parish ensemble  
(Roşia Montană 175, 177) 
XX – 175 

       XXI 
3.1.8.c.The administrative centre. Town Hall 
(Roşia Montană 179‐180, 182‐197, 207, 208) 
XXI – 184 (town Hall), 185, 186, 191 
 130 

     XXII 
3.1.9. Gura Minei neighbourhood  
(Roşia Montană 45, 47, 47A‐C, 48‐51, 51B, 52, 54, 56‐59, 59A, 60‐67) 
XXII – 54, 54, 62 

       XXIII 
3.1.10.a. Vercheş – Aitaj House, Maternity ward, Gritta House, Miner households 
(Roşia Montană 251, 252, 254‐260, 260A, 261, 263, 264, 267, 269A, 269‐272) 
XXIII – 252 (Aitaj House, later Miners’ Club), 251 (Maternity ward), 258 (Gritta house), 269 

     XXIV 
3.1.10.b. Vercheş – State school and kindergarten; no. 274 (1905‐1915) 
(Roşia Montană 273‐275) 
XXIV – 273, 274 (State school), 275 

 XXV 
3.1.10.c. Blocks of flats 
(Roşia Montană – 213‐226, 228‐241, 243, 244) 
XXV – x 

       XXVI 
3.2. Corna 
(Corna 707; 692; 678, 679, 679B, 679C, 682, 682A, 683‐689, 689A, 690, 691, 695, 697‐699, 966A, 701, 702, 704, 706, 708, 709, 709A, 
710, 710A, 712‐716, 716A, 717, 731, 737, 739, 741‐745, 747, 749, 749A, 750‐752, 754‐757) 
th
XXVI – 3.2.1 Orthodox Church (1719) – 707; 3.2.2 Greek‐Catholic Church (19  century) – 692; 3.2.3. Miners Households 

       XXVII 
3.3. Ţarina 
(Ţarina 1248, 1254, 1231, 1233‐1247, 1250‐1252, 1252, 1255, 1257, 1258, 1260, 1262, 1263, 1269, 1270, 1271, 1271A, 1271C, 1272, 
1273, 1273C, 1274A, 1274, 1276A, 1278, 1283, 1286, 1288, 1293, 1299, 1300, 1302) 
XXVIII – 3.3.1 Traditional farmhouse, Țarina – 1248; 3.3.2 Traditional farmhouse, with poligonal stable, Țarina– 1254; 1248, 1248  

3.4.1. Bălmoşeşti 
(Bălmoşeşti 588, 592, 593) 

3.4.2. Blideşti 
(Blideşti 571C) 
 
Other properties are included in the site’s territory (extra‐clusters): Roşia Montană 474, 478, 11, 12, 15, 21‐23, 26, 28‐31, 33, 35, 35A, 
36‐42, 74, 75, 76A, 76B, 77‐85, 85A, 92, 92C, 93‐97, 99A, 101, 181, 198, 199, 201, 202, 204, 233, 248, 249, 265, 680, 681, 729‐724, 728, 
728A, 729, 740, 740A, 745, 748, 753; Bălmoşeşti 584‐587, 590, 594, 594A, 595, 596, 596A, 597, 599, 601, 603, 604, 609, 615‐617, 617A; 
Blideşti 557, 560, 562‐564. An exhaustive list will be made after cadastre complete survey. 
 131 

Appendix 3 
Territorial development: relevant archaeological and historical information110 

I. Areas with archaeological potential within the Roşia Montană Mining Landscape territory 
After  more  than  15  years  of  archaeological  research  in  Roşia  Montană,  the  results  are  more  than 
impressive111.  From  the  14  archaeological  areas  identified  and  excavated  within  the  Alburnus  Maior 
program,  the  complex  findings  in  Roşia  Montană  confirm  the  outstanding  importance  of  the  site,  as 
resulted  from  ancient  sources.  Further  systematic  research  has  to  be  done,  the  great  archaeological 
potential of the site justifying the continuation of a national or international research program.  

1. Habitat types  
For the Roman period, there is one main type of archaeological habitat in the Roşia Montana area: specific 
mining  settlements  (along  the  Roşia,  Corna,  Nanului  valleys  etc.)  and  possibly  a  second  type,  of  fortified 
inhabited areas, located on the higher points (such as Bălmoşeşti‐Islaz vicus).  
The sacred areas are situated mostly on the left bank of the Roşia valley, in higher positions. The discovered 
necropoleis may give a dimension of the local communities in the Roman period (ca. 6 generations for ca. 
170  years):  over  1000  funerary  complexes  and,  indirectly,  to  the  great  amount  of  unrevealed  material 
traces, especially concerning the settlements. 
Along  the  Roşia  river  valley,  medieval  mining  settlements,  roads  and  stamp  mills  are  highly  probable; 
fortified areas may be found in higher points, dating from this period or superposing older structures (as in 
the Bălmoşeşti‐Islaz case112).  
As  the  location  of  the  necropoleis  and  of  the  sacred  areas  are  difficult  to  link  to  the  discovered  housing 
areas,  a  specific  research  direction  has  to  be  set  up  in  this  issue.  The  main  discoveries  –  sacred  areas, 
habitat  structures,  necropoleis  –  are  not  characterising  only  one  Roman  settlement,  but  several;  in 
consequence, the systematic research must, as objective, understand these various settlements in all their 
dimensions.  

2. Road system; other technical infrastructure  
Particularly, the road system has to be better understood. The tradition of a ‘golden road’ from Alburnus 
Maior to Alba Iulia, together with several archaeological discoveries should guide the research, in order to 
reveal the main roads’ course and also the secondary (local) network. 
Understanding the relationship between the road system, following the different historical periods, and the 
structure and locaton of dwellings is a main research issue. At least for medieval and early modern periods, 
the roads system has followed the highest positions, the valley roads being consolidated during the strong 
administration times. The complementary high south‐oriented slopes and ridge pastoral traditional housing 
are linked by secondary roads, visible in the precise late 18th century maps, starting with the First Imperial 
Survey (1769‐1773). 
The existent water supplies open the perspective to another specific research, aiming to reveal the surface 
mining activities – working points and water management system. This point targets Roman period as well 
as medieval and early modern periods.  

3. Archaeological potential – conclusions 
The  higher  points,  compatible  with  survey  or  fortification  systems,  together  with  the  valley  areas 
compatible  with  habitat  structures  have  been  identified  in  the  archaeological  potential  map;  the  areas 
mentioned  represent  suggestions  for  priorities  in  further  research  –  See  Plate  1Rev.  Archaeology  in 
Appendix 4 (site boundaries; relevant archaeological discoveries and archaeological potential). 
We  shall  mention,  as  example,  one  potential  area  situated  near  the  Meteorological  Station  (one  of  the 
highest points on the site); in this area, the proposed potential perimeter is justified by aerial photography 
interpretation. 
A LIDAR survey has been ordered by INP; the contract will be finished during the following months, after 
the  finalisation  of  preparatory  administrative  steps.  Based  on  LIDAR  images,  a  refined  overview  of  the 
archaeological potential of the site will be possible. 

110
  Raluca Iosipescu, Sergiu Iosipescu (INP), mss., 2018. 
111
   The 2008 report of the coordinating team from the MNIR presents the situation. See Paul Damian, Corina Borş, «Consideraţii 
privind managementul arheologic în contextul proiectului minier Roşia Montană. Programul Naţional de Cercetare „Alburnus 
Maior” (2001–2006)», in Cercetări Arheologice, XIV–XV, Bucureşti: MNIR, 2007‐2008, pp. 481 sq. 
112
  Cristina Crăciun, Vasile Moga, „Cercetări de teren şi sondaje arheologice”, in Paul Damian (coord.), Alburnus Maior, I, 2003, 
pp. 37‐39. 
 132 

II. Relevant Medieval territorial aspects 
The  archaeological  researches,  both  the  oldest  and  the  ones  that  took  place  during  the  Alburnus  Maior 
program, have shown the fall of the Roman gold exploitation, the abandon of the settlements, the temples 
and the other cultic places in the second half of the 3rd century.  
The  invasion  period  which  also  determined  the  hiding  of  the  coated  tablets  in  the  Roman  galleries  –  the 
definitive  abandonment  was  proved  by  this  –  made  the  settlement  unsuitable  for  living.  In  early  Middle 
Age, none of the state authorities which followed the retreat of the Roman administration and army, the 
th
Gepidic kingdom for example (6‐8  centuries), was able to restart the exploitation of the gold mines. The 
analyses made on some gold thesaurus found in Romania, dating from this period, were not able to confirm 
the provenience of the gold from the Apuseni Mountains. Probably, the climate transformations from the 
second  part  of  the  first  millennium  have  influenced  the  landscape,  once  dominated  by  the  forests,  that 
disappeared in the modern era, mainly because of the fact that the mining exploitation was resumed and, 
also, due to the needs of the local population.  
However, the survival of the Romanic and Romanian population, proven by the archaeological excavations 
from Tara Haţegului, has perpetuated the tradition of a ‘golden road’ from Alburnus Maior to Alba Iulia. It is 
possible  that the  gathering  of  gold  from rivers  like  the  Roşia was practiced  by  the  Romanian  inhabitants. 
This  practice  must  have  attracted  for  the  exploration  of  the  ‘golden  road’  from  Apuseni  Mountains,  the 
‘hospites/guests‘,  the  Saxon  colonists  from  Cricău  (Krakkó  /Karakó)  and  Ighiu  (Krapundorf/Igen),  in  the 
second half of the 12th century. They reached Cârnic and started the gold exploitation. Significant for the 
importance of this new exploitation made by the ‘hospites/guests‘ from Ighiu and Cricău is the fact that in 
1206 King Andrew the IInd gives them privileges similarly like those of urban settlements.  
In  1271,  Mathew  from  the  Csak  family,  the  voivode  of  Transylvania,  confirmed  the  fact  that  the  Abrud 
possession (‘posessio Obruth’) situated near Ampoi river was given by King Stephen V (1270‐1272) to the 
bishopric of Alba Iulia. Before that, the Abrud possession belonged to Jula ban and then to Zubuslaus the 
Szekler, which means that the region was part of the feudal organization of Transylvania in the first decades 
of  the  13th  century,  before  the  Mongol  invasion.  This  evolution  was  destroyed  by  the  great  Mongolian 
invasion in 1241‐1242 which violently stroke the Alba district.  
The status of ‘hospites/guests’ from Cricău and Ighiu was connected to the gold and silver exploitation from 
Zlatna and ‘Chernech‘ (the actual Cârnic). Their privileges were confirmed on the 12th of February 1238 by 
King Bela IV, with the mention regarding the „precursors of the king. In 1327–28, under King Carol Robert, 
the mining law was changed: previously, when a gold or silver mine was discovered on private property, the 
king took the land into his possession, giving the owner other estates in exchange, and taking 1/8 of gold 
and 1/10 of silver.  
In a diploma from 1320 Zlatna was included in ‘terra Obluth’ (‘the land of Abrud’) and the possessions from 
Ampoita and Abrud (‘Ompeicha et Obrudbania’) were confirmed as belonging to the diocese of Alba Iulia. 
The ‘Obrudbania’ (‘Abrud Mine’) name reflects the existence and the exploitation of mines in Abrud. In an 
act from 1347 given by King Louis I of Anjou there are evident mentions of the ‘Zlatna and Chernech mines’, 
in other words the gold exploitation in the Cârnic massif in Rosia Montana. 
In other way the Slavic‐Romanian name Zlatna means gold and moreover the presence of the gold gathered 
in the Ampoi River. A diploma from 1366 refers to the gold and silver mines in exploitation in ‘the district of 
Abrud possession’, which also includes Zlatna and the villages from that district.  
This  mention  covers  gradually  discovered  realities,  among  them  the  medieval  archaeological  traces  from 
the SSE side of Săliște hill. The discovery of a spur so named ‘German‘, widely used in 14th century as part of 
a  medieval  horse‐kit,  proves  the  surveillance,  if  not  the  presence  of  the  inhabitants  in  the  area  in  the 
Middle Age.   
 
III. Relevant historical cartography 
From  1769  to  1773,  the  Geographic  Service  of  the  Habsburg  Imperial  Army  developed  the  map  of 
Transylvania, where, for the first time, the entire territory of the Great Principality was represented in detail 
–  The  Josephine  map.  The  representation  of  the  Roşia  Montană  area  is  very  important  for  the  historical 
landscape  at  the  end  of  Early  Modern  Times  (second  half  of  the  18th  century),  with  Middle  Ages 
reminiscences.  
The entire toponimy of the Roşia river basin recorded by the cartographers was Romanian. The main two 
roads linking Roşia Montană with Abrud are situated on the hills, probably a survival of the ancient Roman 
way direction. Almost all the river valleys of the Roşia river basin are occupied by stamp mills. 
 133 

 
First Imperial Survey (1769‐1773) 
(https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GrandDuchyOfTransylvania_Josephinische_Landaufnahme.jpg) 

An  important  part  (Eastern  part)  of  the  Roşia  Montană  settlement  presents  a  regular  street  pattern,  a 
development to urban planning, elsewhere in the middle of the 19th century, due to the gold boom of the 
time.  We  mention  the  fact  that  in  some  documents  the  place  was  named  ‘the  town  of  Roşia  Montană’ 
(‘Verespatakváros’). In the Josephine map, two churches in the center of the locality and another down in 
the  valley  can  be  observed.  The  first  two  were  the  Roman‐Catholic  and  probably  the  first  Unitarian  or 
Reformed churches and the last the Greek‐Catholic church (founded after other sources in 1741). 
For the 19th century evolution of Roşia Montană, the Second (1806‐1869) and Third Imperial Surveys (1867‐
1869) of Transylvania, as well as a comparison with the actual satellite view are relevant. 
Owing to the Josephine imperial mapping it is possible to sustain that the Middle Ages mining village was 
covered  by  the  Early  Modern  settlement,  which  offer  a  great  opportunity  for  future  archaeological 
research.  

 
Up left: First Imperial Survey (1769‐1773); Up right: Second Imperial Survey (1806‐1869); Down left: Third 
Imperial Survey (1867‐1869); Down right: Actual map (HERE Maps).  
(commons.wikimedia.org; mapire.eu) 
 134 

IV. Detailed presentation of the archaeological areas 
Ancient archaeological monuments have been grouped into three typologies: 
 Residential areas with accompanying infrastructure (Hop‐Găuri, Hăbad, Tăul Țapului, Carpeni Hill; 
 Sacred areas with temples (Hăbad, Nanului Valley and possibly Carpeni); 
 Funerary  areas  (cremation  necropolises  ‐  Hop,  Tăul  Corna;  Jig‐Piciorag,  Țarina,  Pârâul  Porcului,  Tăul 
Secuilor and groups of graves in the Nanului Valley and Carpeni Hill). 
The  funerary  practices  of  the  ancient  populations  that  were  colonised  at  Alburnus  Maior  by  the  Romans 
feature strongly in archaelogical discoveries: notably 7 necropolises (Hop Găuri, Tăul Corna, Țarina, Pârâul 
Porcului/Tăul Secuilor, Jig Piciorag, Carpeni and Szekely) and an oustanding Roman funerary precinct at Tăul 
Găuri, with more than 1450 cremation graves. 
Apart from significance conferred upon individual archaeological sites, the characteristics and distribution in 
the landscape of necropolises on the slopes and plateaus, as well as habitation and sacred places, provides 
data  to  help  reconstruct  an  ancient  local  topography  that  was  intimately  associated  with  ancient  gold 
mining  and  processing  areas.  Remains  of  habitations,  sacred  areas,  necropolises  and  funerary  areas, 
together  with  evidence  of  ore‐processing  activities  integrated  within  dwellings,  and  paved  Roman  roads, 
are buried beneath a shallow earth veneer and are well preserved. Artifacts discovered (particularly during 
preventive archaeological campaigns) include an astonishing more than 70 votive altars in 2001‐02, alone. 
The  artifact  collection  also  includes  everyday  Roman  pottery  and  pieces  of  funerary  architecture  –  over 
10,000  items,  their  conservation  undertaken  by  specialized  staff  in  the  laboratories  of  a  number  of 
Romanian  museums.  Much  has  been  published,  and  new  interpretations  that  have  emerged  from  the 
discoveries at Roșia Montană have laid foundations in defining new directions for the research of Roman 
Dacia. 
The mining exploitation, consisting of 70 km of underground works have so far been surveyed during recent 
investigations  (out  of  150km  estimated),  with  archaeologist  assigning  a  time  bracket  in  the  following 
approximate proportions: 
 7 km (10%) Ancient workings excavated by hand with iron tools and/or fire; 
 10 km (14%) Modern workings excavated by blasting with black powder; 
 53  km  (76%)  Recent  works  (19th  and  20th  centuries)  excavated  by  dynamite  and  modern  powered 
equipment. 
The Roman workings recorded are not a single network but a total identified across all the targeted massifs 
(with greatest emphasis placed on the investigation of Cârnic and Cetate Massifs). All such workings were 
encountered in a condition described as back‐filled, a common mining practice that indeed has aided the 
structural preservation of certain features and artefacts. Such backfill, however, was commonly not ancient, 
most  ancient  workings  having  been  reopened  by  subsequent  generations  of  miners  during  the  medieval 
and modern periods (Roman miners were heavily selective of the highest‐grade ores, leaving a resource of 
profitable  values  exposed  and  in  situ  for  later  miners).  Most  roman  workings  are  therefore  commonly 
intersected by later workings, inevitably leading to a loss of integrity. What survives – and indeed what is 
recorded  so  far  –  still  means  that  Roșia  Montană  represents  the  most  extensive  and  technically  diverse 
underground Roman gold mining complex currently known in the world.. 
Based on a meticulous inter‐diciplinary approach, and some modern technology – including 3D scanning – 
the broad layout of the Roman mining works could be reconstructed. This revealed a systematic consistency 
in shape and distribution of uniform, highly engineered, workings – all likely made within the space of a 
little over 60 years. 
We  are  presenting  below  the  14  archaeological  areas  composing  the  Alburnus  Maior  –  Roșia  Montană 
archaeological  site  (LMI  code:  140‐AB‐I‐s‐A‐00065),  protected  by  the  inscription  in  the  National  Historical 
Monuments’ List since 1992 and listed as historical monument of national relevance. 
The site has been defined in terms of limits and attributes during 2016; this process – undertaken in parallel 
with the UNESCO nomination document – ensures the effective protection of the site, under Romanian law, 
of all archaeological evidence found in the Roşia Montană area. Its territory, together with its buffer zone, 
covers the essential part of the nominated property. 
 
 135 

 
General map (INP, 2016) 

The 14 areas are the following (See Plate 1Rev ‐ Archaeology):  
1.  Găuri – Hop – Hăbad – Tăul Ţapului; 
2.  Nanului Valley  
3.  Carpeni 
4.  Cârnic Cârnicel Massif 
5.  Cetate Massif  
6.  Roşia Montană Historic Area 
7.   Coș Lety Massif 
8.   Jig – Văidoaia Massif  
9.   Ţarina 
10.  Orlea Massif 
11.  Pârâul Porcului – Tăul Secuilor 
12.  Corna Centre 
13.  Tăul Cornei – Corna Sat zone 
14.  Bălmoşeşti – Islaz 

Detailed infomation is presented for the following sites: 
1.  Găuri – Hop – Hăbad – Tăul Ţapului; 
Roman Site Roșia Montană ‐ Hop‐Găuri: RAN 6770.02 
Site 1A: Hop Găuri; 
2.1.2 Găuri Habitation, roman period 
Roman Site Roșia Montană ‐ Hop‐Găuri: RAN 6770.02 
Site 1B: Hop Botar; 
2.1.2 Găuri Habitation 
 136 

Roman Site Roșia Montană ‐ Hop‐Găuri: RAN 6770.02 
Site 1C: Hop Necropolis; 
2.1.5 Hop Necropolis 
Roman Site Roșia Montană ‐ Hăbad: RAN 6770.08 
Site 1D: Sacred Hăbad; 
2.1.1 Sacred Hăbad. 
2.1.3 Hăbad Habitation 
Roman Site Roșia Montană ‐ Hăbad: RAN 6770.17 
Site 1E: Tăul Țapului; 
2.1.4 Tăul Țapului 

2.  Nanului Valley 
Roman Site Roșia Montană ‐ Dalea Site: RAN 6770.16 
Site 2a: Dalea Site; 
2.1.6 Nanului Valley Sacred Place 
Roman Site Roșia Montană ‐ Dalea Site: RAN 6770.15 
Site 2B: Perimeter I,II and III; 
Building T I 
2.1.6 Nanului Valley Sacred Place 
Roman Site Roșia Montană ‐ Dalea Site: RAN 6770.15 
Site 2B: Perimeter I,II and III; 
Building T II 
2.1.6 Nanului Valley Sacred Place 
Roman Site Roșia Montană ‐ Dalea Site: RAN 6770.15 
Site 2B: Perimeter I,II and III; 
Building T III 
2.1.6 Nanului Valley Sacred Place 

3.  Carpeni 
Roman Site Roșia Montană ‐ Carpeni: RAN 6770.05 
Site 3A: Carpeni Bisericuța; 
2.1.7 Carpeni Zone 
Roman Site Roșia Montană ‐ Carpeni: RAN 6770.05 
Site 3B: Carpeni Funerar; 
2.1.7 Carpeni Zone 

8.   Jig – Văidoaia Massif 
Jig ‐ Văidoaia Massif: RAN 6770.03 
Site 8C 
2.1.8 Jig ‐ Piciorag Area 

9.   Ţarina 
Țarina: RAN 6770.04 
2.1.9 Țarina Necropolis 

11.  Pârâul Porcului – Tăul Secuilor 
Pârâul Porcului ‐ Tăul Secuilor: RAN  6770.06 
2.1.10 Pârâul Porcului ‐ Tăul Secuilor 

13.  Tăul Cornei – Corna Sat zone 
Roman Necropolis from Alburnus Maior, Tăul Cornii RAN 6770.12; RAN 6832.01 
2.1.11 Tăul Cornii, Corna Village Zone 

14.  Bălmoşeşti ‐ Islaz 
Roșia Montană Bălmoșești ‐ Gura Minei RAN 6770.09 
Roșia Montană Islaz, Zănoaga Hill, RAN 6770.10 
2.1.12 Bălmoșești ‐ Islaz Area 

 
 137 

   

 
 138 

   

 
 139 

   

   
 140 

   

   
PLATE 02
PLATE 03
 3.3

3.3

601

3.3

3.3

1258
1273

3.3
597 1271

596596A 1255
594A

594 1260

3.3

3.4.1
1252
1251
1250

3.3.1 3.1.6
1247
3.1.3
3.1.5

3.1.1.e

1239 1241
42 3.1.8.a 3.1.1.a 3.1.1.b
39 47A 3.1.1
3535A 47B 51B 143 152
47C 50 136 146 148 151 3.1.8 1234
26 1236
38 45 47 48 4952 134
145 149 153 3.1.1.f
36 3.1.1.d
40 134A 154 157 171
160155 172
156 3.1.10.b 3.1.1.c
41 57 3.1.9 129A 3.1.2
127 128 130
59A 131 163
164
5960
6163 3.1.8.b
64 67
70 109 3.1.10.c 3.1.10.a 3.1.7
69 7173 107 237
74 72 84 101 108 3.1.8.c 238
89A 231235 252
260A
80 85 100 228 232 3.1.4
77
81 219 230233
215 217
78 194 218 243
3.4.2 79 84 192 244
82 193
265
83 196
96 95
201

93
3.4.2

92C

563

562

753

752
754 750
748
749A
747
3.2.1751 743 745

741742

737

722
721

697

724
699A 728A
699
3.2 728
717
701 729
695 3.2.1
691
690 712

689A
689 709A
709710
708
684
682 686
682A 685 3.2.2

683

680

679
678

PLATE 04 000
DEMOLISHED PROPERTIES = 206 Clusters from nomination document
ROȘIA MONTANĂ = 112
ȚARINA = 30 Historic Monuments
CORNA = 43
BALMOȘEȘTI = 16 Properties undergoing listing procedures
BLIDEȘTI = 5
 Nr. 192 Nr. 678 Nr. 073 Nr. 683 Nr. 699

Nr. 108 Nr. 196 Nr. 079 Nr. 682 Nr. 1234

Nr. 096 Nr. 194 Nr. 115A Nr. 590 Nr. 722

Nr. 193 Nr. 052 Nr. 110 Nr. 689 Nr. 701

PLATE 05
 01

03

02

04

PLATE 06 01 Selection of conservation works carried out as part of the Adopt-a-House at Roșia Montanăprogramme; source: www.entopiaproject.eu
02 Maintenance and repair works carried out by the owners, in the cases of homesteads kept in traditional ownership; INP survey.
03 Restoration works carried out by the mining company; INP survey.
04 Temporary works on buildings in peril owned by the mining company; INP survey.
 153 

Acronyms List  
 
ANCPI  Agenția Națională pentru Cadastru și Publicitate Imobiliară / National Agency for Cadastre and 
Land Registration  
ANDR  Agenția Națională pentru Dezvoltare Rurală / National Agency for Regional Development  
ANRM  Agenția Națională pentru Resurse Minerale / National Agency for Mineral Resources  
APL  Administrația Publică Locală / Local Public Administration  
ARA  Asociația “Arhitectură. Restaurare. Arheologie” / ‘Architecture. Restauration. Archaeology’ 
Association  
BNR  Biblioteca Națională a României / National Library of Romania 
CIAV  International Committee on Vernacular Architecture / Comitetul Internațional pentru 
Arhitectura Vernaculară 
CIVVIH  Comité International des Villes et Villages Historiques / International Committee on Historic 
Towns and Villages / Comitetul Internațional pentru Orașele și Satele Istorice 
COU  Comitetul de Organizare UNESCO / UNESCO Organising Committee 
CNMI  Comisia Națională pentru Monumente Istorice / National Historic Monuments’ Commission 
CPUN  Consiliul Provizoriu de Uniune Națională / Provisional Council of National Union 
CPPCN  Centrul de Proiectare pentru Patrimoniul Cultural Naţional / Planning Centre for National 
Cultural Heritage 
DCPN  Direcţia pentru Cultură şi Patrimoniu Naţional / Directorate for Culture and National Heritage 
EIA  Environmental Impact Assessment / evaluarea impactului de mediu  
GA  General Assembly / Adunarea Generală  
GO  General Objective / Obiectiv General  
HG  Hotărâre de Guvern / Government Decision  
ICAHM  International Scientific Committee on Archaeological Heritage Management / Comitetul Științific 
Internațional pentru Managementul Patrimoniului Arheologic 
ICME  International Council on Metals and the Environment / Consiliul International pentru Metale și 
Mediu  
ICOMOS  International Council for Monuments and Sites / Consiliul Internațional pentru Monumente și 
Situri 
ICSID  International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes / Centrului Internațional de 
Soluționare a Disputelor Relative la Investiții 
ISC  Inspectoratul de Stat în Construcţii / Office of the State Building Inspector 
ISCCL  International Scientific Committee on Cultural Landscapes / Comitetul Științific Internațional 
pentru Peisajele Culturale 
IUCN  International Union for Conservation of Nature / Uniunea Internațională pentru Conservarea 
Naturii 
INMI  Institul Național al Monumentelor Istorice / National Institute for Historical Monuments 
INP  Institutul Național al Patrimoniului / National Institute for Heritage 
L  Legea / Law 
LMI  Lista Monumentelor Istorice / List of Historic Monuments 
MADR  Ministerul Agriculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale / Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development  
MAI  Ministerul Afacerilor Interne / Ministry of Internal Affairs  
 154 

 
 
MAP  Ministerul Apelor și Pădurilor / Ministry of Waters and Forests  
MCIN   Ministerul Culturii și Identității Naționale / Ministry of Culture and National Identity 
MDRAP  Ministerul Dezvoltării Regionale şi Administrației Publice / Ministry of Regional Development and 
Public Administration  
ME  Ministerul Economiei / Ministry of Economy  
MEN  Ministerul Educației Naționale / Ministry of National Education  
MFP  Ministerul Finanțelor Publice / Ministry of Public Finance  
MI   Monument istoric / Historic Monument 
MLPM  Monumente înscrise în Lista Patrimoniului Mondial / Monuments inscribed on the World 
Heritage List 
MM  Ministerul Mediului / Ministry of Environment 
MMJS  Ministerul Muncii și Justiției Sociale / Ministry of Labour and Social Justice (MMJS) 
MNIR  Muzeul Național de Istorie a României / National Museum of Romania’s History 
MT  Ministerul Turismului / Ministry of Tourism  
MTr   Ministerul Transporturilor / Ministry of Transport  
MTCT   Ministerul Transporturilor, Construcțiilor și Turismului / Ministry of Transport, Constructions and 
Tourism  
NGO  Non‐Governmental Organisations / Organizații Non‐Guvernamentale 
OF  Obligaţie de folosinţă / Listed Building Enforcement Notice  
OG  Ordonanță de Guvern / Government Ordinance  
OUV  Outstanding of Universal Value / Valoare Universală Excepțională 
PNDR  Programul Național de Dezvoltare Rurală / National Program for Rural Development  
PUG  Plan Urbanistic General / General Urban Plan 
PUZ  Plan Urbanisitic Zonal / Zonal Urban Plan  
RAN  Repertoriul Arheologic Naţional / National Archaeological Register 
RMGC  Roşia Montană Gold Corporation  
RMMP  Roșia Montană Mining Landscape Protection and Management Plan / Planul de Protecție și 
Management pentru Peisajul Minier Roșia Montană 
SGP  Serviciul de Gestiune și Protecție / Management and Protection Service 
SO  Specific Objective / Obiectiv Specific 
SSC  Secretariatul de Stat pentru Culte / State Secretariat for Cults  
TICCIH  The International Committee for the Conservation of the Industrial Heritage / Comitetul 
Internațional pentru Conservarea Patrimoniului Industrial 
UGAT  Unitate Guvernamentală de Asistență Tehnică / Technical Assistance Governmental Local Units 
UNESCO  United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation / Organizația Națiunilor 
Unite pentru Educație, Știință și Cultură 
VPCIN  Valori de patrimoniu construit de interes naţional / Built Heritage Values of National Interest 
WCPA  World Commission on Protected Areas / Comisia Mondială a Ariilor Protejate 
WHL  World Heritage List / Lista Patrimoniului Mondial 
ZCP  Zone Construite Protejate / Protected Built Areas 
ZPIN  Zonă Protejată de Interes Național / Protected Area of National Interest  
→

→
→