logo
Volume 46, Issue 108 (6-2025)                   Athar 2025, 46(108): 149-170 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Abbasi J, Samanian K. (2025). Community-Oriented Conservation and Restoration (Case Study of Negel Qurans). Athar. 46(108), 149-170. doi:10.22034/Athar.1628
URL: http://athar.richt.ir/article-2-1628-en.html
1- PhD in restoration of historical cultural objects, Department of Restoration of Historical Cultural Objects, Faculty of Conservation and Restoration, University of Arts, Tehran, Iran (Corresponding Author). , javad_abbasi1991@yahoo.com
2- Associate Professor, Department of Restoration of Historical Cultural Objects, Faculty of Conservation and Restoration, University of Arts, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract:   (3401 Views)
Abstract
The review of international conservation and restoration documents shows a gradual change in conservation and restoration approaches. Until now, there have been different approaches in the conservation and restoration of cultural heritage and these approaches have influenced the methods and sciences used in conservation and restoration. The top-down approach prevailed before the Burra charter and many restorations have been based on this approach. In this approach, positivist methods are dominant, which emphasize the body and matter that make up the cultural historical object. The result of a positivist system will miss many of the rich meanings associated with heritage, including people’s feelings and emotional attachments associated with the work. After the Burra Charter, with the spread of cultural relativism, the approach has changed and the bottom-up approach, i.e. the active participation of the people in conservation, restoration, and “community-oriented” conservation, has become the rule. The important point is that in practice, these cases have been addressed less. Many factors are involved in the conservation and restoration process, and the community where the work is located is an important factor in the conservation and restoration process. People, as an important part of the stakeholders related to historical cultural monuments, should be considered in the process of conservation and restoration. The purpose of this research is to deal with the conservation and restoration process and the effects of social factors involved in it. One of these cases is the conservation and restoration of the Negel Quran in Sanandaj city. The type of writing and the thickness of its paper have led people to believe that it is one of the early versions of the Qur’an. In this research, the process of conservation and restoration of Negel Quran was investigated and analyzed with a qualitative method (case study). The results show that the process of conservation and restoration of the Negel Quran, since it is a “community-oriented” conservation based on soft and hard sciences and with a bottom-up approach; a conservation and restoration has been completely different and special and is important in all these aspects.
Keywords: Negel Qurans - People’s Participation in Conservation & Restoration- the Approach of International Documents.

Introduction
In the past few decades, there has been a growing call to change the ontological perspective of heritage conservation so that it can accommodate a wider range of socio-cultural and experiential values (Wells, 2015). Utilizing the participation of community members in advancing affairs and solving community problems is one of the concepts whose importance has become more and more clear in the contemporary era. Community-centered conservation is a concept that is fully applicable in urban landscape restoration and fabric restoration. However, in the process of preserving and restoring historical and cultural objects, the role of society as the beneficiaries of preservation and restoration has received less attention.
In fact, public participation in conservation and restoration is a highly debatable issue, and people should be considered as the main stakeholders in the conservation and restoration process.
The restoration of the Negel Quran, which was completed in December 2017 (B. Shokri, personal interview, November 29, 1403; A. Karimi, personal interview, November 7, 1403; H. Malekian, personal interview, March 10, 1401), is one of the restorations that should not be ignored in the area of public participation and intervention in conservation and restoration. The Negel Quran is one of the important manuscript Qurans written in Iranian Kufic script. The type of script and the thickness of its paper have led people to believe that it is one of the earliest copies of the Quran (Zarei, 2014).
But what is important from the authors’ point of view is the approach and process of conservation and restoration of the Negel Quran. An interesting incident in the conservation and restoration of this exquisite work was that the people of Negel village prevented the Quran from being transported to Tehran for necessary conservation and analysis, until finally the conservation team from Tehran left for Negel village and this valuable work was restored in the village and under the care of the people (B. Shokri, personal interview, November 29, 1403; H. Malekian, personal interview, March 10, 1401). An approach that has been widely discussed in international conservation and restoration documents and conservation and restoration approaches in the contemporary era (Vinas, 2012), but is rarely seen in practice (real examples of conservation and restoration).
This article attempts to analyze and examine the process of preserving and restoring the Negl Quran, and also to address the importance and position of the role of people in preserving and restoring historical and cultural objects. For this purpose, the important issue of involving people in preserving and restoring and the importance of local communities and people’s participation in preserving and restoring will be analyzed and evaluated from the perspective of international documents and approaches to preserving and restoring.

Discussion 
In fact, addressing the process of conservation and restoration the Negel Quran carries many implications; including the issue of using hard and soft sciences in conservation and restoration and the difference they make in the conservation and restoration process, or paying attention to the dominant approaches in different time periods conservation and restoration. 
The dominant approach in the conservation and restoration of the Negel Quran has been a “bottom-up” approach. This is a theme emphasized in paragraph 4 of the Florence Declaration. One of the most important new concepts in this document is “community-based conservation” and the devolution of power to local residents. The document believes in a bottom-up approach to the effective conservation and management of heritage; that is, starting with the people, and proposes a practical and transparent approach to designing the right relationship between conservators and communities; that is, recognizing an active role for communities in formal management planning structures by giving them a voice and input in conservation decision-making processes. The role of heritage experts as those who provide technical advice and when the presence and role of the community in dealing with fragmented heritage should be recognized as a facilitator (Florence Declaration, 2014). An issue that is clearly seen in the conservation and restoration of the Negel Quran. The people of the region and the village believed that the Quran should not be moved from the village mosque and transferred to another location (Zarei, 2014). This issue had made the conservation and restoration of this work difficult for the authorities and the government.
The important point in the restoration of this work is that it is one of the few historical and cultural objects that people have direct intervention in its conservation and restoration. So, the participation of the people is an active participation and the conservation/restoration of this work is considered a community-based conservation/restoration. The requirement of this type of approach and type of conservation and restoration is that the scope of the sciences used in this conservation and restoration also expands and goes beyond the focus on hard sciences and includes soft sciences.

Conclusion 
Public participation in conservation and restoration is a colorful perspective in international documents. The results of this research show that people and their role in conservation and restoration have been considered since the earliest charters, but their approaches have been different, and concepts such as public access, awareness and education of the public about the importance of protecting cultural heritage, encouraging the protection of historical monuments, and the participation of indigenous people in conservation have been considered in most international documents, and the common theme of most of these documents is that they have all been examples of a top-down approach to conservation and restoration. Also, with the passage of time, new approaches have been introduced in this field. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, new approaches can be seen in the field of public and community participation in the protection of cultural heritage. The most important dominant approach in this period is to pay attention to conservation and sustainable development through public participation in the conservation process. In general, the dominant approach in international documents is participatory approaches that, along with the spread of cultural relativism - which began with the Bura Charter - are based on a bottom-up approach to conservation and restoration. Recently, there has been a lot of emphasis on “community-based conservation” and “intercultural dialogue.” It is important to note that although public participation in conservation and restoration has been emphasized and there are even examples of it, this participation and intervention has not been in the field of restoration of historical and cultural objects. For this reason, the restoration of the Negel Quran is a completely special and unique issue. Since people have had direct and indirect intervention in the conservation and restoration process of this work, it shows the trustworthiness of the work in society, which in itself will be a reason for the permanent conservation of the work in society. Since the conservation and restoration process of the Negel Quran was a “community-based” conservation and restoration based on soft and hard sciences and carried out with a bottom-up approach, it has been a completely different and special conservation and restoration, and it is important in all these respects.
Full-Text [PDF 860 kb]   (1109 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research Article | Subject: Conservation and Restoration
Received: 2024/02/8 | Accepted: 2024/06/2 | Published: 2025/06/20

References
1. - احمدی، احسان، و آفتابی، پگاه، (1401). «بررسی جایگاه مشارکت اجتماعی در فرایند سیاست‌گذاری حفاظتی و مدیریتی شهرهای میراث جهانی». باغ نظر، 19 (115): 69-80. https://doi.org/10.22034/bagh.2022.306349.5010
2. - حبیبی، محسن، و مقصودی، ملیحه، (1390). مرمت شهری: تعاریف، نظریه‌ها، تجارب، منشورها و قطع نامه‌های جهانی، روش‌ها و اقدامات شهری. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
3. - حسینی، سید یاسین، محدثی گیلوائی، حسن، و تاج‌الدین، محمدباقر، (1400). «دین و تضاد اجتماعی در کردستان ایران: نیمقرن اخیر». مطالعات میان فرهنگی، 89-132. https://journals.iau.ir/article_690668.html
4. - حسینی، سید یاسین، محدثی گیلوائی، حسن، و تاج الدین، محمد باقر، (1401). «مطالعه کیفی تضادهای اجتماعی مرتبط با دین (میدان مطالعه: استان کردستان)». جامعه‌شناسی فرهنگ و هنر، 4(3): 16-39. https://doi.org/10.34785/J016.2022.028
5. - رضائی، نعیمه، و فرجی، فرناز، (1397). «ارزیابی نقش سازمان های غیردولتی در حفاظت از میراث معماری و شهری؛ مطالعۀ تطبیقی ایران و فرانسه». هویت شهر، 12(1): 27-36. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.17359562.1397.12.1.3.2
6. - زارعی، محمدابراهیم، (1393). «بررسی و تحلیل نسخه خطی قرآن نِگِل». نگارینه هنر اسلامی، 4-15. https://doi.org/10.22077/nia.2014.543
7. - رضایی‌کلانتری، مرضیه، (1388). «جایگاه هویت انسان به ویژه زنان در دنیای پست مدرنیسم». مدیریت فرهنگی، 3 (4: پیاپی 6): 123-136. https://sanad.iau.ir/Journal/jcm/Article/818480
8. - سنندجی، شکرالله، (1375). تحفه ناصری در تاریخ و جغرافیای کردستان. چاپ دوم.امیر کبیر.
9. - غنمی، امید، صمدی، یونس، و چراغچی، سوسن، (1386). مجموعه قوانین، مقررات، آئین‌نامه‌ها و معاهدات سازمان میراث‌فرهنگی صنایع‌دستی و گردشگری. تهران: سازمان میراث‌فرهنگی کشور، اداره کل امور فرهنگی.
10. - کیهانپور، محسن، (1397). «فرهنگ تخریب یا تخریب فرهنگی!... بررسی نمونه‌هایی از رفتارهای فرهنگی به‌عنوان عوامل مخرب در آثار تاریخی فرهنگی ایران». باغ نظر، 41-52. https://doi.org/10.22034/bagh.2018.69479
11. - متقی، طاهره، رفیعیان، مجتبی، و صارمی، حمیدرضا،(1400). «واکاوی تعارض ذی‌نفعان در نواحی تاریخی شهری مورد پژوهی طرح حریم حفاظتی محلۀ سنگلج تهران (علمی پژوهشی)». مطالعات معماری ایران، 9(17): 197-218 https://doi.org/10.22052/9.17.197
12. - مومنی‌راد، اکبر، علی‌آبادی، خدیجه، فردانش، هاشم، و مزینی، ناصر، (1392). «تحلیل محتوای کیفی در آیین پژوهش؛ ماهیت، مراحل و اعتبار نتایج». اندازه‌گیری تربیتی، 4: 187-222. https://jem.atu.ac.ir/article_92.html
13. - میرمحمدی، مهدی، (1391).«اطلاعات به مثابه علم». مطالعات راهبردی، 15 (2: 56): 7-41. DOR: 20.1001.1.17350727.1391.15.56.1.0
14. - Appelbaum, Barbara, (2010). Conservation treatment methodology.
15. - Amsterdam, (1975). The Declaration of Amsterdam.
16. - Athens. (1931). The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments.
17. - Ahmadi, E. & Aftabi, P., (2022). “Examining the Position of Community Participation in the Process of Conservation and Management Policymaking of World Heritage Cities”. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar, 19(115): 69-80. https://doi.org/10.22034/bagh.2022.306349.5010.
18. - Adibzadeh, S. Khaleghian, S. & Saedvandi, M., (2021). “Cultural And Social Factors Influencing The Historical Participation Of The Isfahan People In The Preservation Of The Isfahan Jade Mosque”.Journal of Architectural Thought, 4(8): 29-39. https://doi.org/10.30479/at.2020.11706.1337
19. - Barcelona Declaration, (2018). Barcelona Declaration.
20. - Budapest Declaration, (2002). Budapest Declaration on World.
21. - Charter, T., (1976). Cultural Tourism Charter.
22. - Convention, (1970). Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit, ImportExport and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property.
23. - Convention, (1972). Onvention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage.
24. - Copsey, N. & Rowe, C., (2011). The Preservation and Enhancement of Cultural Heritage in Mediterranean. Birmingham: European :union:.
25. - Dublin Principles, (2011). Principles for the Conservation of Industrial Heritage Sites, Structures, Areas and Landscapes, (The Dublin Principles).
26. - Dümcke, C. & Gnedovsky, M., (2013). “The social and economic value of cultural heritage: literature review”. EENC paper, 101-114
27. - Diamond, J., (1987). “Soft sciences are often harder than hard sciences”. Discover, 34-39.
28. - Faro Convention, (2005). Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society (Faro Convention).
29. - Florence, (1982). Charter of Florence Historic Gardens.
30. - Florence declaration, (2014). The florence declaration on heritage and landscape as human values.
31. - Fortmann, L., (2009). Participatory research in conservation and rural livelihoods: doing science together. John Wiley & Sons.
32. - Geneva Declaration, (2018). Geneva Declaration.
33. - Ghanami, O., Samadi, Y. & Cheraghchi, S., (2007). Collection of laws, regulations, bylaws and treaties of the Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization. Tehran: National Cultural Heritage Organization, General Directorate of Cultural Affairs. (in Persian)
34. - Hardy, M., (2008). The Venice Charter Revisited. Modernism، Conservation and Tradition in the 21st Century. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
35. - Habibi, M. & Maghsoudi, M., (2011). Urban Restoration: Definitions, Theories, Experiences, Charters and Global Resolutions, Urban Methods and Actions. Tehran: Tehran University Press. (in Persian)
36. - Hosseini, S. Y., Mohaddesi, H. & Tajoldin, M. B., (2022). “Religion and Social Conflicts in Iranian Kurdistan: over the Past Half Century”. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 16(49): 89-132. (in Persian). https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.17358663.1400.16.49.4.8
37. - Hosseini, S. Y., Mohaddesi, H. & Tajoldin, M. B., (2022). “Qualitative study of social conflicts related to religion (Kurdistan province)”. Journal of Sociology of Culture and Art, 4(3): 16-39. (in Persian). https://doi.org/10.34785/J016.2022.028
38. - Hoi An Declaration, (2003). The Hoi An Declaration on Conservation of Historic Districts of Asia.
39. - ICOMOS, (1992). A Preservation Charter for the Historic Towns & Areas of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
40. - ICOMOS, (1999). Charter on the Built Vernacular Heritage.
41. - ICOMOS, (1999). B). Principles For The Conservation of Wooden Built Heritage.
42. - ICOMOS, (1999). C). International Cultural Tourism Charter.
43. - ICOMOS, (2003). Principles for the Preservation and Conservation/Restoration of Wall Paintings.
44. - ICOMOS Charter, (2008). The ICOMOS Charter On Cultural Routes.
45. - ICOMOS, A., (1979-99). The Burra Charter.
46. - Kyoto, (1967). Kyoto American Criteria.
47. - Keyhanpoor, M., (2018). “The destructive Culture or destructed by culture...! A study on cultural practices and expressions as the primary causes for damages in historic-cultural properties? A case study of Iran”. Bagh-e Nazar, 15(64): 41-52(in Persian). https://doi.org/10.22034/bagh.2018.69479
48. - Lausanne Charter, (1990). Charter for the Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage.
49. - Lima Declaration, (2010). Lima Declaration on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage.
50. - Lagnesjö, G., (2015). “Shifting the focus to people: Global societal priorities and the contribution made by conservation science”. Studies in Conservation, 14-19.
51. - Mexico City Declaration, (2000). Mexico City Declaration.
52. - Mottaqi, T., Rafieian, M. & Saremi, H., (2020). “Stakeholder Conflict Analysis in Urban Historic Areas: Sangelaj Buffer Zone Plan in Tehran as a Case Study”. Journal Of Architecture Studies, 9(17): 197-218. (in Persian). https://doi.org/10.22052/9.17.197
53. - Masjed Jamei, A., (1998). “Cultural Participation and the Culture of Participation”. Peywand Magazine, 231: 14. (in Persian).
54. - Momeni rad, A., (2013). “Qualitative content analysis in research tradition: nature, stages and validity of the results”. Quarterly of Educational Measurement, 4(14): 187-222. (in Persian). https://jem.atu.ac.ir/article_92.html?lang=en
55. - Mirmohammadi, M., (2012). “Information as Science. Strategic Studies Quarterly”. 15 (2: 56). (in Persian). https://doi.org/10.22034/srq.2023.177555
56. - Moffett, L, Viejo, R. D. & Hickey, R., (2020). “Shifting the paradigm on cultural property and heritage in international law and armed conflict: time to talk about reparations?”. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 619-634. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3603192
57. - Nara Document. (1994). Japan Nara Document.
58. - Nizhny Tagil Charter, (2003). Nizhny Tagil Charter For The Industrial Heritage.
59. - Nam, N. T. & Thanh, N. N., (2024). “The role of local communities in the conservation of cultural heritage sites: A case study of Vietnam”. Journal of Asian Scientific Research, 14(2): 179-196. https://ideas.repec.org/a/asi/joasrj/v14y2024i2p179-196id5057.html
60. - Paris Declaration, (2011). The Paris Declaration On heritage as a driver of development.
61. - Pouliosi, (2014). “Discussing Strategy in Heritage Conservation: Living Heritage Approach as an Example of Strategic Innovation”. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 4(1): 16-34. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCHMSD-10-2012-0048
62. - Pourbahador, P. & Fadaei Nezhad Bahram Jerdi, S., (2018). “Recognition of the theoretical framework of the Historic Urban Landscape Approach”. Journal of Studies On Iranian - Islamic City, 8(31): 63-74.
63. - Quebec, (2008). ICOMOS Charter for the Interpretation and Presentation of Quebec-Canada Cultural Heritage Sites.
64. - Quebec Declaration, (2008). Declaration on the Preservation of the Spirit of Place.
65. - Recommendation of Folklore, (1989). Recommendation on the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore.
66. - Recommendations, (1960). Recommendations for the most effective museum presentation tool for everyone.
67. - Rosilawati, Y., Rafique, Z., Habib, S. & Nurmandi, A., (2020). “Cultural Psychology, Social Identity, and Community Engagement in World Heritage Conservation Sites”. Utopía y Praxis Latinoamericana, 25(7): 81-93. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.400960
68. - Rezae, N. & Faraji, F., (2018). “An Evaluation of The Role of NGOs in Heritage Conservation; A Comprative Study on Iran and France”. Hoviate shahr, 12(33): 27-36. (in Persian). https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.17359562.1397.12.1.3.2
69. - Rezaei Kalantary, M., (2010). “Human Identity Particularly Woman In Post-Post Modernism”. Journal Of Cultural Management, 3(6): 123-136. (in Persian). https://sanad.iau.ir/Journal/jcm/Article/818480
70. - Sarfo-Mensah, P., Owusu-Bi, A., Awuah-Nyamekye, S. & Amisah, S., (2014). “Environmental conservation and preservation of cultural heritage: Assets for tourism development in the Akyem Abuakwa traditional area of Ghana”. Worldviews: Global Religions, Culture, and Ecology, 18: 30-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685357-01801003
71. - Sanandji, Sh., (1996). Nasseri's Gift in the History and Geography of Kurdistan. Second edition. Amir Kabir. (in Persian).
72. - Son, L. M. & Dang, L. N., (2019). “Preserving and promoting colonial architecture: heritage conservation and the challenge of urban development in Da Nang city”. Culture and Local Governance/Culture et gouvernance locale, 6(2): 135-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.18192/clg-cgl.v6i2.4755
73. - Sofia Charter. (1996). Sofia Charter.
74. - Spiridon, P. & Sandu, I.. (2015). “Conservation of cultural heritage: from participation to collaboration. ENCATC”. Journal of Cultural Management and Policy, 5: 43 (1)-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/ejcmp.2023.v5iss1-article-4
75. - Sun, S. & Nakajima, N., (2023). “Community Co-Creation in Living Heritage Conservation–From Object-Centered To People-Centered Planning For The Ancient City Of Pingyao”. ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing And Spatial Information Sciences, 253-262.
76. - The Valletta Principles, (2011). The Valletta Principles for the Safeguarding and Management of Historic Cities. Towns and Urban Areas.
77. - Turyahikayo, E., (2021). “Philosophical paradigms as the bases for knowledge management research and practice”. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal, 209-224.http://www.kmel-journal.org/ojs/index.php/online-publication/article/view/476
78. - UNESCO, (2003). Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage.
79. - UNESCO Convention, (2005). Convention on the Preservation and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions.
80. - UNESCO Declaration, (2003). UNESCO Declaration Concerning the Intentional.
81. - UNESCO Museums, (2015). Recommendation concerning the Protection and Promotion of Museums and Collections. their Diversity and their Role in Society.
82. - Vancouver Declaration, (2012). Vancouver Declaration.
83. - Venice, (1964). The Venice Charter – International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites.
84. - Vinas, M. S., (2012). Contemporary theory of conservation. Routledge.
85. - Van Oers, R. & Haraguchi, S., (2013). “Swahili Historic Urban Landscapes”. Report on the Historic Urban Landscape Workshops and Field Activities on the Swahili Coast in East Africa 2011-2012, UNESCO: Paris.
86. - Warsaw Declaration, (2011). Warsaw Declaration.
87. - Washington, C., (1987). Charter for the Protection of Cities and Urban Areas (Washington Charter).
88. - Wells, J., (2015). “In stakeholders we trust: Changing the ontological and epistemological orientation of built heritage assessment through participatory action research”. How to assess built heritage, 249-265. https://cpcrs.upenn.edu/resource/stakeholders-we-trust-changing-ontological-and-epistemological-orientation-built-heritage
89. - Wells, J. C., (2007). “The plurality of truth in culture, context, and heritage: a (mostly) post structuralist analysis of urban conservation charters”. City & Time, 1-14. https://docs.rwu.edu/saahp_fp/19
90. - Wells, J. C., (2017). “Are we “ensnared in the system of heritage” because we don’t want to escape?”. Archaeologies, 26-47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-017-9316-8
91. - Wilson, T. D., (2012). ‘Soft’ sciences don't deserve the snobbery. The Los Angeles Times.
92. - Zancheti, S., Hidaka, L., Ribeiro, C. & Aguiar, B., (2009). “Judgement and validation in the Burra Charter Process: Introducing feedback in assessing the cultural significance of heritage sites”. City & Time, 47-53.
93. - Xi’an Declaration, (2005). The Xi’an Declaration on the Conservation of the Setting of Heritage Structures. Sites and Areas.
94. - Yazdani Mehr, S., (2019). Analysis of 19th and 20th century conservation key theories in relation to contemporary adaptive reuse of heritage buildings. Heritage(in Persian). https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage2010061
95. - Zarei, M. E., (2014). “Analysis of the Quranic Manuscript of Negel”. Journal of Negarineh Islamic Art, 1(2): 4-14. (in Persian). https://doi.org/10.22077/nia.2014.543
96. - https://irantourismonline.com/detail.aspx?id=11108

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.