Content uploaded by Alula Tesfay Asfha
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Alula Tesfay Asfha on Jun 01, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Appraisal of Heritage in Mekelle City, Ethiopia
Alula Tesfay ASFHA1) .
1) World Cultural Heritage Studies,
Graduate School of Comprehensive Human Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Japan
Abstract: The rapid urbanization of the city of Mekelle and the need to accommodate
infrastructure development has put an immense amount of pressure on heritage. Many of the
heritage sites in Mekelle are not registered and have been left out due to the heritage-making
process’ top-down approach. Registered heritage sites are those that highly-centralized
administrations deem significant to the national narrative. The urban planning process in Mekelle
evolved from traditional to master plan and has now become structure planning. This trend went
from an expert-oriented centralized approach to a bottom-up approach. Structure planning entails
strong public participation in decision making based on community priorities. However, since few
heritage sites have been researched and identified, many potential sites are left out of the proposed
structure plans. In this paper, the different types of urban plans that have been made for Mekelle
throughout its history are discussed in relation to heritage. This article appraises and identifies
potential heritage sites in Mekelle. Most of these sites were first identified by the author and
proposed for government registration to obtain legal protection. Therefore, this research
aims to trigger further research on these elements as well as consideration of their registration
and inclusion in the Mekelle structure planning process. These heritage components are clustered
into meaningful groups. The heritage components are placed on a map to facilitate future
community mapping and heritage-making within the Mekelle structure plan.
Keywords: Urban Heritage, Urban development, Structure plan, Mekelle.
1. Introduction
Mekelle is the second largest city in Ethiopia and the capital of the northernmost Tigrai state.
Oral history states that Mekelle existed as a settlement since the 13th century (Tadesse, 2001).
However, it became a proper town after Emperor Yohannes IV (1837–1889) decided to build his
palace there and make it the capital of Ethiopia. The emperor constructed his palace amongst the
previously existing clusters of villages and monasteries. The construction of the palace was
followed by churches, markets, and residences. The city was shaped when the emperor's subjects
started residing around the palace, which saw the construction of traditional Tigraian house
complexes (Hidmos). These clustered stone masonry complexes emerged as stone cities. Much of
this architectural heritage remains today. Many historical construction trends used stone as the
main construction material, continuing the preexisting masonry tradition.
With the relocation of the capital to Addis Ababa following the emperor’s death, Mekelle has
passed through different periods of stagnation and development. Although Mekelle is young in
age relative to other towns in the region, it is significant due to the concentration of heritage
there as a result of its past and present political significance. Architectural heritage dating back
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
18
Refere as:
Asfha, A.T. Appraisal of Heritage in Mekelle City, Ethiopia.
Journal of World Heritage Studies. Vol. 8, 2022. Pages 18-39
to 19th century Ethiopia is uniquely clustered in the Mekelle area. With rapid urbanization, the
city has become an important cultural, economic, and political center in the northern part of the
country.
Currently, Mekelle is one of Ethiopia’s rapidly growing cities. According to the demographic
report of the Structure Plan Preparation body, Mekelle’s population grew by 9.8% between 1991
and 1994. This was followed by 6.9% growth between 1995 and 2007 and 4.13% growth for the
period 2008–2013, excluding the annexed village population from measures of spatial expansion
(MU, 2016). If the present situation continues along this trend, the city’s population will double
in the next eleven to twelve years. The city has expanded extensively in terms of coverage
area. During the periods 1984–1994, 1994–2004, and 2004–2014, the built-up area increased by
10%, 9%, and 8%, respectively. The city expanded from 531 ha in 1984 to 3,524 ha in 2014 (Fenta
et. al, 2017). This break-neck speed has created enormous challenges in the overall management
of the city. The city administration’s primary focus is on infrastructure projects that can
accommodate the public’s ever-growing demands. Urban heritage that maintains the city’s
character and livability is a big threat to this goal.
It is evident that a city’s unique character and competitive advantage lie in its heritage.
However, many of the urban development works in Mekelle have failed to acknowledge this. This
is primarily because Mekelle does not have a comprehensive heritage management plan. There is
no consistent heritage registration platform in the city or in the Tigrai state where Mekelle is
located. The heritage-making process has been highly centralized nationally, so it has thus far
focused on major landmarks with national importance and left out several other heritage sites.
Therefore, the heritage in Mekelle has been easily targeted for destruction to accommodate the
development activities in the city. The urban plan is a major legal document that regulates the
development activities in Mekelle. However, since many of the heritage sites are not identified
and registered, they are simply left unrecognized in the urban plans. There have been six main
urban plans throughout Mekelle’s history, and all of them have left out several of the city’s
heritage sites. The loss of heritage in Mekelle continues at an alarming rate. This could result in
the loss of the city’s character in the future.
This article identifies the major heritage in Mekelle for the use of the public, urban planners,
and the city’s administration. The identification of heritage in Mekelle is very limited. The
researcher attempted to identify as many heritage sites within the city as possible by making a
rational decision based on the available historical and cultural studies. However, very few
heritage elements in Mekelle have been researched. The decision was based on local values drawn
from the heritage-making tradition.
2. Methods
In order to define Mekelle’s urban heritage, the author used a heritage appraisal method based on
primary and secondary sources. The author conducted two field visits to Mekelle in October 2018
and February 2020 as part of doctoral research at the University of Tsukuba, funded by a MEXT
scholarship from the Japanese government. Data were collected using observation, photography,
and interviews with stakeholders. In addition, the researcher worked at Mekelle University, where
he had a chance to participate in the early phases of the 2015 Mekelle structure plan preparations
and other academic activities.
Secondary sources were collected based on the research conducted on the identification of
Mekelle’s urban heritage and history. The most important resource was Tadesse Sequar’s Amharic-
language book Mekelle City’s Establishment and Development (የመቐለ ከተማ ኣመሰራረትና እድገት). Other
important sources are Keio University’s Rumi Okazaki’s MSc. and PhD research outputs, which
provided important data on the identification of heritage in the inner quarter of Mekelle. Nobuhiro
Shimizu, Keita Aoshima, and Richii Miyake’s study on the vernacular of city making and built
heritage in Mekelle and the surrounding area was also helpful. Richard Pankhurst’s History of
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
19
Ethiopian Towns from the Mid-Nineteenth Century to 1935 was another important source for
understanding the nature of towns in Ethiopia, specifically Mekelle. An Ethio-Swedish Institute
(which later became the Ethiopian Institute of Architecture and Building Construction (EiABC)
under Addis Ababa University) study on vernacular architecture in Mekelle, conducted in 1967
and published in 1971, was also an important resource.
2.1 Data Analysis
The heritage elements were collected and placed on a map based on their cluster to produce a
heritage map of Mekelle. Many of the heritage elements in this article are not registered and do
not have legal protection. All the elements were located on the map of Mekelle using Arc GIS.
Heritage sites were grouped into a meaningful cluster to simplify future management. In particular,
close elements were grouped through GIS to propose a conservation area in the city. The lack of
quality data makes it challenging to provide accurate georeferenced data. The author identified
several new heritage sites and organized documents on the properties to facilitate the initiation
of registration through community mapping.
3. Defining Mekelle’s Heritage
The process of defining Mekelle’s heritage began with an attempt to understand the city’s
urbanization trend and how it developed through history. Since the city is predominantly
populated by Orthodox Christians of the Tigraian ethnic group, the major landmarks and civic
spaces are related to the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. Orthodox Christianity was introduced in the
area since the 4th century as a state religion and has a stronghold represented through space
allocation and much of the intangible heritage. Muslim minorities in the city are historically
active in the commerce area, which gave rise to notable neighborhoods.
The abundance of stone in the area created a long tradition of masonry construction. The
vernacular construction techniques of Hidmo are very common to most of the built heritage in the
city. The city is mainly characterized as an imperial town that was a favorite destination among
nobles and later, in the 19th century, as the capital of Ethiopia.
3.1. Urban Development Trends in Mekelle City
Urban development in Mekelle has followed six major trends since the 19th century. Heritage
management at these developmental stages also differed. During the imperial period, up until
1974, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church was the official government religion. As a result, many of
the major landmarks in the city were either churches or nobles’ residences. After 1974, modern
civic and commercial buildings emerged on Mekelle’s urban landscape.
In brief, since its establishment, Mekelle has seen the following five different major urban
plan types.
(a) The early “associated Hidmo” plan: an indigenous urban plan based on house compounds (the
1860s to the 1880s) following the construction of Yohannes IV’s palace (1864–1876) after the
emperor allocated land around the palace to his subjects. Planning is usually characterized by
large compounds of traditional masonry residences (Hidmos), each of which had walls and
several houses inside. Paths and alleys between these compounds served as roads. Hundreds
of compounds and their connecting paths were arranged radially around the palace. This urban
planning concept is characterized as “associated Hidmo,” which is different from the
“Cartesian grid system in Europe and [the] self-dividing system in [the] Middle East”
(Okazaki, 2009).
Land in Mekelle was allocated according to rank. The Emperor allocated a large portion of the
land to the churches and the nobility, who allocated or sold some of the land to the public. This
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
20
Figure1. Major Events in Urban Development of Mekelle. (By Author)
was usually done by a traditional professional with special skills in measuring and allocating
lands. The divided lands were usually fenced in by a stone wall called a hatsur (ሓጹር) using a
technique called qhuana (ዃና), which refers to the construction of a simpler wall made by layering
stone and requiring little skill. In some cases, the elevation of the lands would be separated to
create space definition called deret (ደረት). Deret can also be accomplished using natural features,
such as trees and rocks. It is important for people to plant trees to allocate on their land properties.
Land division was done on large preexisting compounds, as demonstrated below.
Figure 2. Quana Fences and Hidmo walls illustration. (By Author)
(b) The Italian Occupation Master Plan (1935–1936): Piano Regolatore
The Italian fascist army invaded Ethiopia in 1935. During the 5 -year occupation, the Italians
tried to transform the major Ethiopian cities into European-style colonial cities. Consequently,
Mekelle underwent new city planning. Land was allocated for a new town that was planned
with an iron grid system, wide streets, and land use. The introduction of zoning for historical
places was an opportunity for heritage development. Major landmarks were connected and
emphasized through streets, specifically avenues. Although this plan was not fully
implemented give the Italian army’s 1941 defeat, it left a permanent mark on Mekelle’s
development, since the government elected to follow a similar trend.
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
21
(c) The Raesi Mengesha Master Plan (1966)
Following the Italians’ retreat, a municipality was established: Mekelle’s urban development
progressed during Prince Raesi Mengesha’s rule with the establishment of the first formal
municipality of Mekelle in 1934 EC. Some basic infrastructure was beginning to be realized,
although progress was very slow. In the 1960s, the prince, as the governor of Tigrai,
commissioned another master plan to Italian architect Arturo Mezzedimi (1922–2010). Having
travelled to Europe at a young age, Raesi Mengesha had a keen interest and unique skill in
urban works, and he planned many parts of the town. The 1960 master plan included
expansion to the northern part of the city. This plan focused on the city’s physical aspects and
emphasized connecting the governmental office building, major monuments, and allocation of
land to different services. This plan shaped Mekelle’s future significantly. There were two
engineers working in the municipality during the early period: Grazmach Asoli Ayano and the
Itallian Signor Maskaro measured and allocated land in the city (Tadesse, 2001).
During the establishment of the municipality, Mekelle’s population was around 12,000, and it
occupied 6 gasha of land (1 gasha is 80 to 100 acres) An aerial photo from the 1950s shows that
both the traditional Hidmo cluster and the iron grid were used in the city’s development.
All the spaces between the new and old town, according to the Italian plan, were settled. Iron
grid planning persisted, overtaking traditional planning in all new developments.
(d) Municipality Action Plan (1991)
Mekelle’s action plan was prepared immediately after the end of the Socialist Military Dergue
regime in 1991. After the fall of the empire by military coup in 1974, the city suffered
developmental stagnation because it was a stronghold in the opposition insurgencies against
the central government. The northern part of the country was liberated from the military
regime in 1991, which is around the time the city municipality prepared the action plan. This
plan extended the Italian master plan’s grid pattern. Although the action plan introduced
natural and agricultural reserves, it did not consider the historical aspects. There are no
documents that record the action plan; however, the city’s condition can be seen on the map
that the National Urban Planning Institute (NUPI) prepared as part of the development plan.
Land use is divided into residential, administrative, commerce and trade, service,
manufacturing and storage, transportation, recreation, agriculture, forest, and special functions.
Although there are special functions, such as restricted, reserved, and conservation areas, most
of the historical areas and the national monuments were included in administration and
commercial areas due to their reuse as offices and hotels, etc. This also included natural heritage
in protected forests, environmental protected zones, waterbodies, and marshland. However, there
was no follow-up or institutional capacity to protect the existing land uses.
(e) NUPI’s Development Plan (1993)
Following the fall of the military government in 1991, a development plan was prepared by
the state agency NUPI in 1993. The plan mainly focused on the outward expansion of the city
area rather than intervention in the city. Specifically, the focus was on accommodating the
population boom, which was a direct result of soldiers returning from the armed struggle. Site
expansion extended into the less fertile agricultural lands on the periphery.
The development plan’s major intervention was the relocation of the St. George C hurch from
Adi Haki for the construction of a memorial center to honor the 60,000 people who died during
the struggle against the socialist government. This complex includes a 51-meter-high statue,
meeting halls, and large museums. A radial axial street runs from this compound into different
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
22
parts of the city. This has become one of Mekelle’s most important cultural elements and sites of
memorial celebration.
(f) Structure Plan (2005, revised 2015)
The structure plan is a complex socio-economic and spatial plan formulated through public
participation. As the development of Mekelle started to expand, the administration needed to
meet public demand. Legally, the planning team needed to consist of urban planners,
geographers, economists, sociologies, historians, GIS experts, and other experts. The structure
plans are later detailed in the local development plans.
In 2006, the Mekelle City Plan Preparation Project Office (MCCPPO) prepared a structure
plan that emphasized social and economic issues in line with the spatial conditions (MCPPPO,
2005). Heritage, history, and culture were studied separately, and the planning team produced
related reports. However, this did not have a significant impact on the plan because the content
was not prioritized for action. In addition, few heritage elements were identified for inclusion.
Experts from Mekelle University revised the structure plan in 2015.
Ta ble 1 . Planning Development trends of Mekelle
Urban Development
Stages
Discussion
(a)
The early ‘ associated
Hidmo’ plan
The development of associated Hidmo
traditional planning system (Okazaki,
2009). An arial image (Unknown source)
from 1920 shows Areal Picture of Mekelle
in the 1920s. Here the demarcation of the
compounds can be visible. The Emperor
Yohannes IV palace and Teklehaimanot
Church show settlements that have been
densified by in comp
ound split. While
other areas that hasn’t been divided yet.
Adi Islam is also one of the existing areas
from this time. Almost all of the buildings
are vernacular Hidmo architecture.
(b)
The Italian Occupation
Master Plan (1935-36)
Piano Regulatore
Piano Regolatore (Master Plan) of
Mekelle, 1937, (Gli Annali dell’Africa
Italiana, Numero 4, 1939) .
The illustration from a magazine is the
only existing document of the Italian
planning in Mekelle. The plan introduced
a new expansion of Mekelle in an iron
grid shape that later dominated the
planning style in Mekelle. Kedamay
Woyane Market, St. Mary Catholic
Church, Italian Administration Building
are one of the remains of this
development. This building continued the
masonry construction of the Hidmo
vernacular with a blend of concrete.
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
23
The Raesi Mengesha
Master plan (1966)
Areal from 1960s (Picture collection of
Abreha Castle Hotel)
This shows that the Italian plan was
implemented by the local planning and
extended in the Raesi Mengesha master
plan. The old area in the top of the picture
maintained the associated Hidmo trend.
Many modern buildings were developed
during this area including Market,
municipality and a Hidmos residence of the
Raesi Mengesh.
Action Plan by
Municipality (1991)
Blue Print of Existing Land use plan
from National Institute of Urban Planning.
1993
Shows the Action plan of
Municipality in 1991 with an expansion of
territory following similar planning trend
for residential areas.
Development plan by
NUPI (1993)
Blue Print of Proposed Land use of
development plan by NUPI 1993. This
mainly focused on the expansion of the city
territory outward areas. The main
intervention is the inclusion of provision of
lands for Hawelti Semaetat memorial center
which later become the Major landmark of
Mekelle.
Structure Plan (2006):
Revised in 2016
Proposed Land use of Mekelle by Structure
Plan Preparation Project 2006. In this
proposal major sites are zoned as historical
place. These include Yohannes IV palace
and Abreha Castle. Many of the old sites
are put in the religious institution zoning
as they belong to the churches. The green
area is expanded widely to incorporate
forests, parks and botanic gardens. The
proposed plan is to interconnect all the
greenery to create one large network of
natural environment.
3.2 Appraisal of Heritage in Mekelle
The heritage-making process in Mekelle was challenging because of the centralized approach to
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
24
heritage-making in Ethiopia that was taken in the past. This approach has left several important
heritage sites off the registration list because of their importance to the national narrative. This
paper lists potential heritage sites for public and administrative use in the heritage-making
process.
The understanding of heritage has been widening in scope in the last half century, notably
expanding from monuments and single structure sites to the wide environment and landscape
affected by human interaction (United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization
[UNESCO] et al., 2013). One of the earliest documents that provide definitions and guidelines on
heritage conservation is the 1964 Venice Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of
Monuments and Sites (International Council on Monuments and Sites [ICOMOS], 1965). As stated
in the name, the Venice Charter focused on monuments and sites. Urban heritage has been
squeezed into this framework. Urban heritage can incorporate a wide range of disciplines and
activities. Although it is difficult to find an agreed upon global definition of urban heritage,
heritage professionals have continued to structure urban heritage conservation. The 1987
ICOMOS Washington Charter for the Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban Areas provides
a definition and conservation guidelines for the historic urban areas that complement the Venice
Charter.
The 2011 Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape is also an important document
containing a set of concepts for urban heritage. The historic urban landscape is defined as “an
urban area resulting from historic layering of cultural and natural values and attributes.” This
definition has extended beyond the confinement of the “historic center,” including the wider urban
area. The identification, assessment, conservation, and management of urban heritage is put in
the context of wider urban development (UNESCO, 2011).
The Ethiopian law Proclamation to Provide for the Research and Conservation of Cultural
Heritage (Proclamation No. 209/2000) defines cultural heritage as:
Anything tangible or intangible which is the product of creativity and labor of man
in the pre-history and history times, that describes and witnesses to the evolution
of nature and which has a major scientific, historical, artistic and handicraft
content.
In the Ethiopian context, although the laws have changed to accommodate current thoughts on
heritage protection, research and conservation activities still focus on grand monuments, while
the conservation of urban heritage in cities like Mekelle is still in need of more work. This
research fills this gap by defining Mekelle’s urban heritage to encourage further heritage research
and conservation. Specifically, new elements are identified for registration and further research.
Table 2. List of existing and potential heritage in Mekelle city, conditions and stakeholders.
a) Tangible heritage
N
o
Name
Year of
Constr
uction
Origi
nal
Use
Cu
rre
nt
Use
Registrati
on
Own
er
Major Stakeholders
Heritage Cluster
recommended
1 Hatsey
Yohan
nes IV
Palace
App.
1864-76
Palace Mus
eum
Federal
Heritage
Natio
nal
Palac
es
Admi
nistr
ation
Tigrai State, Kedamay
Weyane area residents,
Yohannes IV imperial town
(1867-89)
2 De jat
Abreh
a
Castle
Hotel
App
1910
(Reconst
ructed in
1960s
Castle Hot
el
Regional
Heritag e
Sur
Cons
truct
ion.
Tigrai Stat e, Sur
construction, Local castle
area administration and
residents
Dejat Abreha’s Alternative
city center
(app. 1900s-1914)
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
25
3
Hawelt
i
Semae
tat
1992 Memo
rial
center
compl
ex
Me
mor
ial
cent
er
com
ple
x
Regional
Heritag e
Tigra
i
state
Tigrai State, Mekelle city
administration, TPLF head
quarters
Heritage from the Dergue
Regime and Tigrai Struggle
(1974-91)
4
Enda
Eyesus
Churc
h
App 13th
C.
(Main
building
Under
reconstr
uction)
Churc
h
Chu
rch
Not
registered
EOT
C
EOTC, Mekelle University,
Local residents
Establishment of Mekelle and
earlier settlements (13th c-
1867);
Kedamay Woayane (1943)
5 Adi
Islam
Mosqu
e
App
1860s-
Mosqu
e
Mos
que
Not
Registered
Tigra
i
Islam
coun
cil
Tigrai Islam Council,
Local Adi Islam area
residents
Yohannes IV imperial town
(1867-89)
6
Medha
ni
Alem
Churc
h
App
1864-
1876
Churc
h
Chu
rch
Not
registered
EOT
C
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Yohannes IV imperial town
(1867-89)
7 Kidane
Mihret
Churc
h
App
1864-
1876
Churc
h
Chu
rch
Not
registered
EOT
C
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Yohannes IV imperial town
(1867-89)
8 Tekleh
aiman
ot
church
App
1864-
1876
Churc
h
Chu
rch
Not
registered
EOT
C
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Yohannes IV imperial town
(1867-89)
9 Enda
Gebre
menfes
kidus
Chuch
App 13th
C
Main
church
reconstr
ucted in
1950s
Churc
h
Chu
rch
Not
registered
EOT
C
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Establishment of Mekelle and
earlier settlements (13th c-
1867);
1
0
Sewhi
Nigus
Field
- Grazin
g,
Timke
t
festiv
al,
Meske
l
festiv
al
Tim
ket
fest
ival
Not
registered
EOT
C
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Establishment of Mekelle and
earlier settlements (13th c-
1867);
Yohannes IV imperial town
(1867-89;
Intangible Heritage
1
1
Chome
a
- Meske
l
celebr
ation
Mes
kel
cee
brat
ion
Not
registered
Publi
c
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration, Mahiber
Chomea (Association)
Establishment of Mekelle and
earlier settlements (13th c -
1867);
Yohannes IV imperial town
(1867-89);
Intangible Heritage
1
2
Kedam
ay
Woyan
e
Market
Open
market
since
1860s
Difeo
part in
1960s
Commer
cial
Center
1999
Open
market
Co
mm
erci
al
cent
er
Not
registered
Trad
e
Coop
erati
ves
Tigrai state, Trade
cooperative, Kedamay
Woyane area residents and
administration
Kedamay Woyane (1943)
1
3
Djibro
uk
Area
- Salt
Storag
e,
Servic
es
Co
mm
erci
al
cent
Not
registered
Priva
te
Local residents and
administration
Remains of the Salt trade route
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
26
er
1
4
Blata
Welde
mikae
l
Resid
ence
(Old
hospit
al
Quarte
r)
1920s Reside
nce
Res
ide
nce
Not
Registered
Priva
te
Local residents and
administration
Raesi Gugsa Period
(1918-33)
1
5
Liquor
factor
y/cine
ma
Adwa
1920s Liquor
factor
y
Cin
ema
Not
registered
Priva
te
Local residents and
administration
Raesi Gugsa Period
(1918-33)
1
6
Menen
house
1930s Reside
nce
Co
mm
erci
al
Not
registered
Priva
te
Local residents and
administration
Raesi Gugsa Period
(1918-33)
1
7
St.
Mary
Gugsa
Churc
h
1930s Churc
h
Chu
rch
Not
registered
EOT
C
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Raesi Gugsa Period
(1918-33)
1
8
St.
Gebrie
l
Churc
h
13th C
Reconst.
1950s
Churc
h
Chu
rch
Not
registered
EOT
C
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Establishment of Mekelle and
earlier settlements (13th c-
1867);
1
9
Balam
baras
Getahu
n
Hailu
Reside
nce
1880s Reside
nce
Res
ide
nce
Not
registered
Priva
te
Local residents and
administration
Yohannes IV imperial town
(1867-89)
2
0
St.
Mikael
Churc
h
1910s Reside
nce
Chu
rch
Not
registered
EOT
C
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Not specified
2
1
Old
Munici
pality
Buildi
ng
1960s Munic
ipality
hall
Offi
ces
and
hall
Not
Registered
Meke
lle
city
admi
nistr
ation
Raesi Mengesa Period
(1960-74)
2
2
Raesi
Gugsa
Leisur
e
Reside
nce
1920s Reside
nce
Hot
el
Regional
Heritage
Tigra
i
state
gove
rnme
nt
Raesi Gugsa Period
(1918-33)
2
3
St.
Mary
Cathol
ic
Churc
h
1930s Churc
h
Chu
rch
Not
registered
Ethio
pian
Cath
olic
churc
h
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Italian Invasion (1894-96) and
Occupation (1936-41)
2
4
Major
Gallia
no
Fort
1894 Milita
ry
fortifi
cation
Ope
n
mus
eum
Not
registered
Publi
c
Tigrai State, Italian
embassy in Ethiopia, Local
residents
Italian Invasion (1894-96) and
Occupation (1936-41)
2
5
Italian
Fascist
Admin
istrati
on
Buildi
ng
1930s Admin
istrati
on
office
Cou
rt
hall
Not
registered
Tigra
i
state
Tigrai state, Tigrai
supreme court, local
residents and
administration
Italian Invasion (1894-96) and
Occupation (1936-41)
2
6
Italian
Cemet
1930s Cemet
ery
Ce
met
Regional
heritag e
Publi
c
Tigrai state, Italian
embassy, Mekelle
Italian Invasion (1894-96) and
Occupation (1936-41)
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
27
ery er y University, local residents
and administration
2
7
Menge
sha
Leisur
e
House
1960s Reside
nce
Art
gall
ery
Regional
heritag e
Tigra
i
Wom
en’s
assoc
iatio
n
Tigrai state, Tigrai
Women’s association,
descendants of the family,
local residents and
administration
Raesi Mengesa Period
(1960-74)
2
8
Edaga
Kedam
- Marke
t
Mar
ket
Not
registered
Publi
c
Tigrai state, business
associations, local people
and administration
Dejat Abreha’s Alternative
city center (app. 1900s-1914)
2
9
Enda
Selassi
e
Churc
h
1900s Churc
h
Chu
rch
Not
registered
EOT
C
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Dejat Ab reha’s Alternative
city center (app. 1900s-1914)
3
0
Raesi
Siyou
m
Leisur
e
Reside
nce
1910s
Reside
nce
Offi
ce
Not
registered
Meke
lle
Instit
ute
of
Tech
nolo
gy
Tigrai state, Mekelle
Instituute of Technology,
Aynalem area residents and
administration
Raesi Siyoum Period (1914-
1919)
3
1
Assefa
’s
House
1914-
1919
Reside
nce
Res
ide
nce
Not
registered
Priva
te
Tigrai state, local
administration and
residents
Raesi Siyoum Period (1914-
1919), Remains of Salt Route
3
2
St.
Mary
Churc
h
Quiha
13 C
Reconst.
2014
Churc
h
Chu
rch
Not
registered
EOT
C
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Establishment of Mekelle and
earlier settlements (13th c-
1867);
3
3
Cherq
os
Churc
h and
Archae
ologic
al site
5th C Churc
h,
Archa
eologi
cal
site
Chu
rch,
Arc
hae
olo
gica
l
site
Federal
heritage
EOT
C
EOTC, Local areas
residents and
administration
Establishment of Mekelle and
earlier settlements (13th c-
1867);
3
4
Enda
Meske
l
Hidmo
Vernac
ular
Cluste
r
- Reside
ntial
Neigh
borho
od
Res
ide
ntia
l
Nei
ghb
orh
ood
Not
registered
Priva
te
Tigrai state, Local
residents and
administration
Establishment of Mekelle and
earlier settlements (13th c-
1867);
Groups of traditional houses
3
5
Debri
Hidmo
Vernac
ular
Cluste
r
- Reside
ntial
Neigh
borho
od
Res
ide
ntia
l
Nei
ghb
orh
ood
Not
registered
Priva
te
Tigrai state, Local
residents and
administration
Establishment of Mekelle and
earlier settlements (13th c-
1867);
Groups of traditional houses
3
6
Feleg
Daero
Hidmo
Vernac
ular
cluster
- Reside
ntial
Neigh
borho
od
Res
ide
ntia
l
Nei
ghb
orh
ood
Not
registered
Priva
te
Tigrai state, Local
residents and
administration
Establishment of Mekelle and
earlier settlements (13th c-
1867);
Groups of traditional houses
3
7
Roman
at
Hidmo
Vernac
ular
cluster
- Reside
ntial
Neigh
borho
od
Res
ide
ntia
l
Nei
ghb
orh
ood
Not
registered
Priva
te
Tigrai state, Local
residents and
administration
Establishment of Mekelle and
earlier settlements(13th c-
1867);
Groups of traditional houses
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
28
b) Intangible heritage
No Nam
e
Year
of
Con
stru
ctio
n
Orig
inal
Use
Cur
rent
Use
Registration Owner Major
Stakeholders
Heritage
Cluster
recommende
d
1 Mesk
el
celeb
ratio
ns
- Relig
ious/
Cultu
ral
festiv
al
Relig
ious/
Cultu
ral
festiv
al
Federal heritage
(UNESCO Intangible
Representative list)
EOTC and public EOTC and
followers, Mahber
Chomea
association, local
residents and
administration
Intangible
heritage
2 Timk
et
Festi
val
- Relig
ious/
Cultu
ral
festiv
al
Relig
ious/
Cultu
ral
festiv
al
Federal heritage
(UNESCO Intangible
Representative list)
EOTC and public EOTC and
followers, local
residents and
administration
Intangible
heritage
3 Ashe
nda
- Relig
ious/
Cultu
ral
festiv
al
Relig
ious/
Cultu
ral
festiv
al
Federal Heritage EOTC and public EOTC and
followers,
Women’s
association, local
residents and
administration
Intangible
heritage
4 Lekat
it 11
- Politi
cal
Politi
cal/c
ultur
al
Regional Heritage Tigrai State/T PLF
office/ Public
Tigrai state,
Several
associations of
veterans, youth
and women, local
residents and
administration
Intangible
heritage;
Heritage from
the Dergue
Regime and
Tigrai Struggle
(1974-91)
As shown in Table 2, many of the heritage sites related to the Orthodox Church were
maintained in good condition and in their original use because the religion has active followers.
However, many of these sites have also recently undergone major reconstruction. Since these sites
are not registered as heritage, their reconstruction is subject to the will of the local church
administration.
These churches were not registered as heritage sites because they were not considered
independently important given the long history of church construction in the Tigrai region and
the national policy, wherein the centralized heritage registration system only registered sites with
national significance. The Tigrai region and the administration of Mekelle did not have a heritage
registration system before 1991. The idea of putting these churches in a cluster communicates
that they belong to a wider context in the city’s urban fabric. Heritage registration also means
financial responsibility for the government; hence, major elements are prioritized. Effective
heritage management requires a partnership among the stakeholders, who are key in creating
public–private partnerships in heritage management.
Although most heritage sites maintain their original use, some sites’ change of function
severed their connection with the neighborhood. For example, Yohannes IV’s palace was
connected to the neighboring Teklehaimanot church; however, this connection was severed when
the palace was converted to a museum under the federal government. In addition, the lack of
coordination between the managing bodies of adjacent heritage elements poses a challenge. In
some cases, adaptive reuse resulted in the commercialization of heritage sites, to the detriment
of the original use. Many of the area’s rulers’ second residences are now adapted to other functions.
Some of these structures have been affected by the auxiliary structures built around them to serve
new functions, for example, the Raesi Gugsa residence is now a hotel, at the expense of the
original building and garden. Similarly, Abreha Castle Hotel is also being developed (2020),
following privatization by the Tigrai government. Major ownership shifts in heritage properties
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
29
occurred after 1974 when the socialist administration expropriated all excess lands, houses, and
other properties, including many nobles’ and wealthy people’s residences in Mekelle. Most were
returned to the original owners, but their functions were converted, mostly to hotels.
The consistency of material and the local construction tradition can be observed over several
of Mekelle’s development stages. Most residences, including Yohannes IV’s palace, Dejar Abreha
Castle, Raesi Mengesha’s residence, Reasi Siyoum, and Raesi Gugsa a re vernacular Hidmo stone
architecture structures. Although there has been extensive reconstruction of the churches using
concrete, the older structures are Hidmo vernacular. The Italian structures built during the
occupation also followed this fashion of using stone. Given the introduction of cobbled stone
pavements all over the city, the masonry tradition is a unifying characteristic of Mekelle as a
stone city. The author hopes that listing these heritage elements will trigger a deeper study on
each one to acknowledge heritage value and develop management tools.
The heritage elements identified above are shown on the map below (Fig. 3) with the goal of
specifying intangible heritage elements. The schematic map is useful for further community
mapping, urban planning, and the heritage-making process. This is an especially important input
for the structure planning process. The structure plan team has sub-research pertaining to the
heritage sites, so that they can be included in the urban plan proposal; however, this mostly
depends on secondary sources.
3.3 Heritage Clusters in Mekelle
Heritage clusters are useful for systematic research and the management and development of
heritage in Mekelle. These are the urban layers in Mekelle. The heritage elements were identified
separately in the previous section. Managing these elements will be a daunting process if they are
not clustered. The main challenge with management in light of the lack of heritage registration
in Mekelle is the absence of a meaningful heritage arrangement. Heritage elements are arranged
by age of establishment, character, and value. Additional elements can be added to these clusters,
simplifying future research. Heritage management with public participation can be initiated using
these elements. The author proposes that the heritage elements be grouped into 12 clusters:
a) Establishment of Mekelle and earlier settlements (13th c .–1867) — The elements in this cluster
are related to the pre-imperial township of Mekelle. Included elements are Enda Eyesus, Enda
Meskel, Gonay Daero, Mai Degene, Mai Liham, Chomea, Enda Gabir, Enda Aba Anenia, Adi
Gafuf, Mai Gifaf, Aynalem, and Quiha. Detailed traces of these settlements need further
investigation.
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
30
Figure 3. Location of potential and actual heritage sites in Mekelle.
(R): Registered Heritage, (NR): Non registered Heritage. (By author)
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
31
Figure 4. Map of Early Settlement of Mekelle pre-Imperial township. (By Author).
b) Emperor Yohannes IV’s imperial capital of Ethiopia (1867–1889) – These heritage elements
are related to the late 19th century imperial era. Included elements are Emperor Yohannes IV’s
palace compound, TekleHaimanot Church, Medhane Alem Church, Kidane Mehret Church,
Balambaras Getahun Hailu’s residence, Adi Islam, Sewhi Negus, Mai Liham River, and Enda
Meskel residences (Imal House and Gebrehiwot House).
Figure 5. Map of potential heritage Emperor Yohannes IV’s Imperial Capital cluster.
(By author)
c) Dejar Abreha’s alternative city center ( approx. 1900s–1914)— T his is a new city ward
established on the southern side of Yohannes IV’s town during the early 20th century. The
heritage included in this cluster are Dejar Abreha Castle, Sillasie Church, Edaga Kedam, and
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
32
Figure 6. Map of potential heritage sites from the Dejat Abreha’s alternative city center.
(By author)
Mai Tsaeda Egam River.
d) Raesi Siyoum period (1914–1919)— This is the era of another early 20th century administrator.
Heritage included in this cluster are Siyoum Aynalem Leisure Residence, Abune Gebremenfes
Kidus, Mekelle Hospital, Aynalem Farmer House, and Sewuhi Raesi.
Figure 7. Map of potential heritage sites for Raesi Siyoum Period cluster.
(By Author)
e) Raesi Gugsa period (1918–1933) – Raesi Gugsa is a third early 20th century leader, and this
cluster encompasses heritage from that era. Included elements are Raesi Gugsa Leisure
Residence, St. Mary Gugsa Church, the liquor factory, Melkam House, Kegnazmach Mekonen
Tsegay Residence, and Old Hospital (Blata Weldemikael Residence).
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
33
Figure 8. Map of potential heritage sites for Raesi Gugsa Period cluster.
(By Author)
f) Italian invasion (–1894–1896) and occupation (1936–1941) — This cluster contains heritage
sites related to the Italian army, which occupied Mekelle on two occasions, in the late 19th century
and again in the 1930s. The elements included in this cluster are Major Galliano Fort,
Administration Building, Catholic Church, the hospital expansion, and the Italian cemetery.
Figure 9. Map of potential heritage sites for Italian invasion and
Occupation Periods cluster in Mekelle.
(By Author)
g) Kedamay Woyane (1943) –– This cluster contains heritage related to the Kedamay Woyane
rebellion; a farmers’ resistance against the imperial government, the conflict has historical
significance in Mekelle. The elements included in this cluster are Kedamay Weyane Market and
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
34
Figure 10. Map of potential heritage sites for Kedamay Woyane cluster in Mekelle.
(By Author)
Enda Eyesus.
h) Raesi Mengesha period (1960–1974) – This cluster refers to the later period of the imperial
regime, shortly after WWII up to 1974. The heritage elements in this cluster include
Mengesha’s residence and municipality hall.
Figure 11. Map of potential heritage sites for Raesi Mengesha Period cluster in Mekelle.
(By Author)
i) Heritage from the Derg regime and the Tigrai Struggle (1974–1991) –– This cluster contains
heritage related to the Tigrai people’s struggle against the military administration; this conflict
has historical significance in Tigrai. Some of the heritage elements in this cluster include
Wetaderawi Commisarat Building, Ageazi Operation Site (Mekelle Prison), and Hawelti
Semaetat.
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
35
Figure 12. Map of potential heritage sites for Dergue Regime and
Tigrai Struggle cluster in Mekelle.
(By Author)
j) Remains of the salt route — This cluster contains heritage related to the ancient trade routes
that connected salt mines and facilitated the transport of salt and other goods through Mekelle.
This cluster includes Djibrouk Markets Storage. Further research is necessary to identify the
potential constituents of this important heritage cluster.
k) Natural heritage –– This cluster contains rivers, forests, mountains, and other important natural
heritage sites in Mekelle. Further investigation by specialized professionals is needed with regard
to these sites. The map shows major potential natural heritage components in Mekelle.
Figure 13. Map of potential natural heritage in Mekelle city. By author
l) Intangible heritage and sites — This cluster contains intangible heritage in Mekelle and
associated sites. Intangible heritage event sites are not registered and protected. The map shows
the major sites for the Ashenda, Timket, and Meskel celebrations.
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
36
Figure 14. Map showing place of events for Intangible heritage in Mekelle. By Author
Essentially, the above 12 heritage clusters encompass possible heritage sites in Mekelle. Although
the author tried to exhaust all the heritage elements in Mekelle, heritage making is a continuous
process to be conducted in consultation with the public. Therefore, the purpose of these clusters
is to facilitate the participatory heritage-making and management process in Mekelle.
4. Conclusion
Mekelle’s urban planning and development have shifted throughout the city’s history, mainly after
it was established as a proper town in the late 19th century. The last decade has been characterized
by an economic boom and fast development, endangering heritage. The immense pressure on
heritage is now being felt by the public and the administration, and it has been discussed in urban
plan reports. However, no concrete solution has been provided regarding heritage protection. The
major challenge is the failure to assess heritage values. Furthermore, most of the heritage
elements are not registered. Therefore, they are subsumed in urban plans’ land use delineations,
such as religious, commercial, and administrative. Land zoning is also problematic in that it
determines function and dictates management.
Considering that the urban planning process in Mekelle has shifted dramatically from
centralized to participatory, the heritage-making process has stagnated in the traditional highly-
centralized approach. Therefore, Mekelle’s registered heritage sites are major monuments with
national importance. The heritage of Mekelle’s people has been left out, and little related research
has been done. This paper could pave the way by providing basic information about potential
heritage sites in Mekelle. Mekelle now follows a structure plan that places major emphasis on the
compressive approach to socio-economic and spatial issues. There is an opportunity for heritage
to be included in this type of planning. However, this can only be done with expert support to
show how the heritage in Mekelle can be utilized as an enabler and driver of urban development.
Many of the heritage components identified in this paper could be registered imminently. The
local administration should initiate heritage management through the coordination of the
stakeholders identified in this paper. A public–private partnership can be initiated by involving
important stakeholders. When it is time to prepare for the next structure plan, these heritage
components can be regularized using the provided map. The map can also be used as a prototype
for community mapping. Auxiliary or physically proximate sites can be grouped into conservation
areas.
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
37
The elements identified in this research need further research to be registered as heritage sites.
The 12 clusters discussed constitute Mekelle’s urban layers. Since new layers are added with each
new development, the older layers need to be considered and strengthened in the interest of rich
urban character.
6. Acknowledgements
My sincere gratitude goes to professor Nobuko Inaba and Professor Yasufumi Uekita. I worked
my doctoral study under their laboratory. I would like to thank Japanese Government-MEXT for
funding my doctoral study in Japan.
7. Literature Cited
Alula T.A., Shimizu, N. 2019. Transformation of Urban Landscape of Mekelle City in relation to
Yohannes IV`s Palace and Abreha`s Castle. Fortification and Defensive City: Conference
Papers for ICOFORT International Conference in Hikone. ARCHI-DEPOT Corporation. ASIN :
B07RW4SPRJ.
Fenta, A., Yasuda, H., Haregeweyn, N., B elay, A., Sibhat, Z., Gebremedhin, M. and Mekonnen,
G. 2017. The dynamics of urban expansion and land use/land cover changes using remote
sensing and spatial metrics: the case of Mekelle City of northern Ethiopia. International
Journal of Remote Sensing. 38. 4107–4129. 10.1080/01431161.2017.1317936.
FDRE. 2000. Proclamation No. 209/2000 Research and Conservation of Cultural Heritage
Proclamation. Negarit Gazette.
ICOMOS. 1965. International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and
Sites. (The Venice Charter1964) Accessed from
[https://www.icomos.org/charters/venice_e.pdf]
ICOMOS. 1987. The Washington Charter: Charter on the Conservation of Historic Towns and
Urban Areas (1987). Accessed from: [https://www.icomos.org/charters/towns_e.pdf]
MCPPPO. 2005. (Mekelle City Plan Preparation Project Office). Executive summary for city
development plan Mekelle (2005-2015). Mekelle, Tigrai, Ethiopia.
MU. 2016. Mekelle City Structure Plan Revision: Final Framework Plan Report, Mekelle
University.
MU. 2016. Mekelle City Structure Plan Revision, Mekelle University.
Niall F. (2013) Lucy to Lalibela: heritage and identity in Ethiopia in the twenty-first century.
International Journal of Heritage Studies, 19:1, 41-61
[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13527258.2011.633540?scroll=top&needAcc
ess=true]
Okazaki, R. 2009. Study on the Urban Formation and Activity of the Central District in Mekelle,
Ethiopia: Appraisal of Historical Quarters and Inner-City Problems. Master`s thesis. Keio
University.
Pankhurst, R. 1982. History of Ethiopian Towns: From Middle Ages to the Early Nineteenth
Century. Wiesbaden: Steiner.
Pankhurst, R. 1985. History of Ethiopian Towns: From Mid-Nineteenth Century to 1935. Stuttgart:
Steiner.
Tadese S. Mekelle City’s Establishment and Development. (የመቐለ ከተማ ኣመሰራረትና እድገት) (Amharic
Language)
Shimizu, N., Ephrem T.W., Alula T.A., Miyake, R. 2019 “Traditional” Technique and Local
Knowledge on HÏDMO HOUSE Construction in Tigrai, Ethiopia. A retrospective study on
building construction process from the perspective of tools and materials. Journal of
Architecture and Planning (Transaction of AIJ) Volume 84 Issue 758 Pages 1017-1027
https://doi.org/10.3130/aija.84.1017
Shimizu, N., Alula T.A., Okazaki, R. Ephrem T.W., Miyake R.2019 How Has a Local Settlement
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
38
Urbanized in Mekelle, Ethiopia? Case of Ïnda Mesqel’s Development as One of the Aspects
of Urbanization Process. Annales d’Éthiopie No.32. ISBN : 978-2-7018-0571-9
Solomon G. B. 2010. A History of Cultural Heritage management in Ethiopia (1944-1974).
Published by VDM Verlag. ISBN 10: 3639310497
UNESCO. 2011. Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape. Accessed from:
[https://whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-638-98.pdf]
UNESCO, ICCROM, ICOMOS, IUCN.2013. Managing Cultural World Heritage. World Heritage
Manual. ISBN 978-92-3-001223-6
(Corresponding Author)
Name: Alula Tesfay Asfha
Address: 305-0006 Tennodai1-1-1, Ichinoya37-107, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
Email：alulatesfay@mu.edu.et
（2020. 09. 30.）
論説/ Original Article
世界遺産学研究 No. 8 (2020)
39
