Photo: Korrespondent

Prior to World War II, the Jewish community of Lviv was one of the largest and most vibrant urban populations in Eastern Europe. Historically, this community emerged from the suburban Jewish settlement, which traced its origins back to the 13th century, and the community of the "royal" city, which was self-governing and administratively distinct from the surrounding territory since 1356.

The site now known as the Space of Synagogues was once the center of religious life in the Jewish quarter within the city walls. Occupying the southeastern section of predominantly Christian Lviv, this area included the Old Synagogue (replaced by the Great City Synagogue in 1801), the Nachmanovich Synagogue (also known as the Golden Rose and Turei Zahav, built in 1582), and the Beit Midrash, which was rebuilt multiple times between the 18th and 20th centuries.

Additionally, the community maintained a yeshiva, a mikveh, a hospital, a slaughterhouse, and kosher butcher shops located near the Space of Synagogues. The Jewish population of Lviv was annihilated by the Nazis, and all of the aforementioned houses of worship—the Great Synagogue, the Golden Rose, and the Beit Midrash—were desecrated and destroyed between 1941 and 1943. None of these structures were rebuilt after World War II. The ruins of the Great Synagogue and the Beit Midrash were leveled by the Germans, while the ruins of the Golden Rose—a prominent monument of late Gothic and Renaissance architecture—were twice stabilized under Soviet authority, in the 1950s and during 1988–1989.

Reclaiming Historic Jewish Space

Although this site belongs to Lviv’s urban core and has been under UNESCO protection since 1998, it differs significantly from neighboring, non-Jewish quarters. Starting in the 2000s, the absence of physical Jewish landmarks, otherwise well-documented in literature and memoirs, caused distress and disappointment among Jewish tourists searching for their roots. According to Harald Binder, founder of the Lviv Center for Urban History, "From the perspective of a city dealing with tourists from the US and Israel, the ruins [of the Golden Rose] were an embarrassment"[1]. This discomfort prompted the municipal administration to initiate the rehabilitation of the Jewish quarter.

In November 2008, the City Council and the Center for Urban History of East Central Europe (an independent research institution) convened an international conference dedicated to the future of Lviv's Jewish heritage. The forum brought together directors and curators of Jewish museums, scholars of Jewish and urban history, heritage preservation experts, and civic activists[2]. The participants reached a consensus on the necessity of bridging the gap between Jewish and Ukrainian collective memories, acknowledging the historical Jewish presence in Ukraine's urban landscape. The need for visual forms of expression that align with Jewish commemorative culture and differ from the figurative, representational language of Lviv's existing memorials was also evident. Another question arose: who holds the authority to decide on the transformation of Jewish historical sites—the mayor of Lviv, the rabbi, or the expert community? The conference called for an open international architectural competition for the synagogue complex and two other sites of Jewish memory (parts of the Janowska concentration camp and the Old Cemetery). The majority of participants deemed this proposal appropriate and reasonable. However, Meylakh Sheykhet—head of the Ukrainian representation of the US-based Union of Councils for Jews in the Former Soviet Union (UCSJ), who also considers himself the leader of Lviv's Orthodox community—characterized the initiative as the theft of Jewish memory and heritage[3].

In 2010, the competition was launched by the City Council, the Center for Urban History, and the German Agency for International Cooperation (GIZ, formerly GTZ), which possessed prior experience in integrating destroyed Jewish heritage into urban spaces (the Mizrach project, Regensburg, 1997–2005). The organizers outlined requirements for specific planning zones: the ruins of the Golden Rose Synagogue; the Beit Midrash site; the territory of the Great Synagogue; and the adjacent streets. From 35 submissions, an international jury awarded the first prize to a design by Berlin landscape architects Franz Reschke and Frederik Springer. Reschke explained his concept as follows:

Even today, the gravity and sorrow of this site are palpable. The project design proposes three distinct approaches to memorializing the area. The solution for each zone is dictated by its spatial and atmospheric qualities, yet all three are unified into a triad: the authentic, the living, and the abstract. Authenticity is represented by preserving and visually exposing the ruins of the small yet highly significant Golden Rose Synagogue. Liveliness is introduced to the former Beit Midrash, which will become a green space with informational elements, re-establishing it as a place for gathering and study. Abstraction defines the footprint of the Great Synagogue, which will remain unbuilt—its former structure outlined solely by a distinct paving pattern. The emptiness and simplicity of this section contrast with its surroundings, serving as a reminder of an irreplaceable loss[4].

This concept was developed into a working design with the involvement of GIZ and the second-prize winner, Lviv architect Yuriy Stolyarov. An analysis of the design reveals a conceptual element titled the "Quote Installation." The creation of an "atmosphere through quotes and raster images" corresponds to the "living" section of the original design. It is located north of the Beit Midrash foundations, in a courtyard bordered to the north by the Golden Rose. Historically, this area housed latrines accessible to visitors of the three nearby synagogues, as well as a library, though the architects chose not to physically represent these historical utilities.

The first phase of the project was executed in 2015–2016 under the supervision of the City Council, the Department for the Preservation of the Historic Environment, the Center for Urban History, and GIZ. The budget totaled 295,000 euros, funded by the city budget, a GIZ grant, and donations from private individuals and organizations. As noted by the Kyiv-based newspaper "Den," this marked the first time in Ukraine that a site of Jewish memory was memorialized by a municipal government and its partners, rather than by public organizations and foundations[5]. This served as a practical answer to the question raised at the 2008 conference regarding who makes decisions about the transformation of Jewish historical assets.

The first phase of the project was officially inaugurated on September 4, 2016, receiving extensive coverage in both local and international media[6]. Al Jazeera shared its impressions as follows:

The thoughtfully designed memorial is built around the ancient foundation and the surviving wall of the synagogue, which had lain in ruins for years. Over the decades of Soviet rule following the victory over the Nazis, little was done to commemorate the Jewish community, causing many sacred sites to fall into decay. The open-plaza memorial, featuring quotes from prominent local Jewish figures, encourages visitors to reflect on the human element—the very element that Sofia Dyak, director of the Center for Urban History of East Central Europe, who participated in the project, notes is so lacking today[7].

The opening ceremony was attended by German and Israeli diplomats, the mayor, local residents, tourists, and Lviv émigrés living in Israel. An eyewitness to those events, Leszek Allerhand (1931–2018)—grandson of the prominent jurist Maurycy Allerhand—recounted the dramatic story of the synagogue being set on fire in the summer of 1941. The religious ceremony was conducted by Rabbi Siva Fainerman of the progressive "Teiva" congregation[8].

One of the key achievements of the project was the stabilization of the ruins of the Golden Rose, preserving the possibility of its reconstruction in the future. This aspect of the project was executed by the specialized institute "Ukrzakhidproektrestavratsiya" (hereinafter UZPR), incorporating recommendations from the Center for Jewish Art at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Preserving the physical fabric of the synagogue proved challenging, as its condition prior to the works was critical: the structure was being degraded by weather exposure, temperature fluctuations, freezing and thawing cycles, and water infiltration from worn municipal utility networks. During the restoration, an interior design element previously hidden under layers of plaster was uncovered: a verse from Psalm 29:1—a fragment of the liturgical song accompanying the welcoming of Shabbat and the Torah scroll procession during Saturday morning services. The spread of this prayer under the influence of Lurianic Kabbalah was documented in Poland at the end of the 16th century, and the Lviv inscription likely dates to this period[9]. Originally inscribed inside the synagogue, the devastation and subsequent architectural changes left the inscription on what is now an exterior wall facing the Space of Synagogues. This occurrence is a striking example of the outward exposure of a once-contained liturgical space, turning it toward a contemporary, urban, and secular audience. The conservation process inevitably raised multiple questions: what should be done with this inscription, how to protect it from the elements, whether it should be exhibited despite the risks, and how to make the text accessible to visitors.

The Beit Midrash is presented in a more minimalist manner: the footprints of its walls and four interior pillars are demarcated by slabs of modern Venetian terrazzo. In this way, the architect outlined the typical Galician synagogue layout featuring four central pillars and nine vault fields. The interior space is planted with grass, symbolizing the emptiness of the site abandoned by the community. In Jewish tradition, this design choice can be associated (regardless of the architect's intent) with the prohibition of weeding a ruined synagogue, as the sight of weeds is meant to evoke grief (Megillah 3:3). The raised perimeter of the foundations serves as seating, inviting contemplation and reflection.

The most verbose element of the Space of Synagogues—the "Eternal Memorial" situated between the Golden Rose and the Beit Midrash—consists of the aforementioned "Quote Installation." The composition, developed by artist Sofia Janke in collaboration with Franz Reschke, features 39 vertical polished black stone slabs containing ten engraved photographs and 21 textual excerpts. Eight of the slabs are left blank, symbolizing the voices that will never be heard, and serving as a reminder that any historical evidence is inherently incomplete and subjective. The texts were initially selected by experts and subsequently discussed within both the Jewish community and non-Jewish circles, representing a form of collective editing. One-third of the excerpts relate to the Holocaust and the war, while the remainder depict pre-war life. The adjacent quotes are arranged neither linearly nor chronologically; rather, the narratives focus on the authors, their group identities, life paths, inclusion, and exclusion.

These quotes represent ego-documents—excerpts from memoirs, diaries, and statements by rabbis, intellectuals, and prominent Lviv residents, such as the philosopher Martin Buber, the city's vice-president Viktor Chajes, and the poet and writer Debora Vogel. The installation aims to reflect the diversity of Jewish cultures and identity. These passages were written by leftist poets and conservative citizens, men and women, the elderly and the young. The diary entries of teenagers—Lili Tau, Inka Katz, and Leszek Allerhand—help tour guides establish an emotional connection with visiting school groups. The designers and content curators sought to demonstrate that the Holocaust unfolded in a major urban center rather than in a vacuum. In their view, it is crucial to address the indifference of ordinary citizens to the Jewish Catastrophe or their complicity in the destruction of their neighbors. The texts prompt reflection on the consequences of social exclusion and discrimination. The conceptual framework of the project is partially explained on plaques installed within the Space of Synagogues.

Apologia, Criticism, and Condemnation

According to the press, the designers, and the project managers, the Space of Synagogues has become a milestone for Lviv's municipal policy. Iris Gleichmann, who then headed the GIZ office in Lviv, summarized: "It is gratifying that this site has finally been returned to the public sphere"[10]. Sofia Dyak, academic director of the Center for Urban History and one of the initiators of the Space of Synagogues, believes the project will stimulate discussions regarding shared and contested memories:

The Ukrainization of post-war Lviv was built upon a rewriting of history that left almost no room for Poles and Jews. The official history of Soviet Lviv clearly established priorities—there is a dominant group, the titular nation, the indigenous Ukrainians, while others are seen as newcomers—the ethnic minorities, who in reality had recently constituted the majority. At the level of public consciousness, we continue to operate within these frameworks and categories. Today, the Jewish and Polish histories of Lviv... may persist in family stories and biographical interviews... but this remains private memory; it is rarely called upon and has little chance of entering official history. I believe it is time to abandon this hierarchical structure where Ukrainians occupy the top tier of the pyramid. When discussing heritage, it is vital to learn to see people, not just architectural monuments; to see the lives lived, not just the buildings. ...There are many questions to which we will not find answers immediately. While those answers are being sought, it was decided to transform this wasteland (and the current Space of Synagogues indeed looked like a wasteland) into a place of memory, a prominent point on the map of Lviv that is difficult to bypass[11].

Like many others, Ruth Gruber, who has covered Jewish heritage issues in Eastern Europe for over three decades, believes that without Ukrainians acknowledging responsibility for the murder of Jews during the 1941 pogroms, the Space of Synagogues does memory a disservice. Gruber advocates for a more comprehensive representation of the Holocaust and additions to the texts used in the memorial: "Otherwise, we are whitewashing history, turning it into a narrative with which one would not want to be associated"[12].

Sociological studies indicate significant public interest in the Space of Synagogues. Visitors study the texts carefully; some, following Jewish custom, place small stones, while others leave flowers, candles, apples, rosaries, or sweets. Many understand the core concept of the project—the desire of the creators to express displacement, to outline and emphasize the void left in the urban fabric, the space, and its inhabitants. People who previously walked past now stop, many visit intentionally, and parents bring their children. Official guests of the city are regularly guided to the memorial; for instance, in May 2018, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier visited the Space of Synagogues accompanied by the Governor of the Lviv Oblast, Oleh Synyutka, and Mayor Andriy Sadovyi[13]. One cannot ignore that in the summer of 2017, the memorial was targeted by several acts of vandalism, with teenagers spray-painting provocative graffiti on the slabs. Since then, the situation has deteriorated, prompting the municipality to consider installing a perimeter fence around the site[14]. There is also a visible disregard for the memorial by those seeking basic tourist entertainment in Lviv.

Meylakh Sheykhet, director of the representation of the Union of Councils for Jews in the Former Soviet Union, remains an uncompromising opponent of the project. He demands that the Lviv City Council annul the competition results and dismantle all newly installed landscaping elements, filing numerous lawsuits and conducting campaigns in the media. In his view, the root of the issue lies in the competition brief, wherein all projects "were designed to demonstrate the complete erasure of the Jewish presence in Lviv"[15]. A proposal commissioned by Sheykhet, which envisions the comprehensive restoration of the entire Jewish quarter, was conceived as an alternative to the Space of Synagogues. The document, prepared by UZPR in 2013, covers virtually all sites in the Jewish quarter, focusing on archaeological excavations, the museumification of findings in the form of an archaeological theater, gradual stabilization, and eventual complete reconstruction of the Golden Rose "as it was" (in Sheykhet's words) in the 18th century. The primary shortcoming of this proposal is its total disregard for property rights over individual plots and buildings, as well as highly uncertain funding and timelines. Experts also view the complete reconstruction of a destroyed monument with skepticism—international charters generally advise against the total rebuilding of lost architectural monuments[16]. Nevertheless, this document was hastily approved by the Ministry of Culture of Ukraine, serving in Sheykhet's view as a counterweight to the project developed by the City Council and its partners. However, the proposal by the UCSJ representative was ignored by the opposing side.

As noted in Foreign Policy by Alex Ulam, a journalist, architectural critic, and descendant of one of Lviv's most respected families[17]:

Rather than a memorial and public plaza, Sheykhet... wants to rebuild the Golden Rose Synagogue as an active house of worship. "It looks like a cemetery, it looks like tombstones," he says of the first phase of the Space of Synagogues. "When they represent this as a place of death, it is a desecration." Sheykhet has found unusual allies in his campaign against the Space of Synagogues. One is Yuriy Shukhevych, a member of parliament from Ukraine's right-wing Radical Party. Shukhevych—the son of the OUN leader Roman Shukhevych—insists that hostile intent lies behind the foreign backing of the memorial. "It's political influence," he says in Ukrainian, translated by Sheykhet. "The Germans would like to shift responsibility [for the Holocaust] onto other ethnic groups, so they put money into this"[18].

To date (2021), the Space of Synagogues project remains incomplete: it has yet to incorporate the site of the Great Synagogue—an open area currently occupied by an outdoor restaurant terrace. As Dyak suggests,

The next phase presents its own challenges: additional archaeological excavations and project adjustments. While the Golden Rose primarily expressed absence, the site of the Great Synagogue will represent presence. There, the liturgical order and its spatial components will become clear. ...Educational programs developed by school teachers and guides will be adapted to this change. ...The project will offer Lviv a new space of memory: one that does not lecture, but rather encourages a personal relationship with the past. It will not be a "pleasant place," but it will be a welcoming one that invites visitors to linger. The idea is to move away from a narrow ethno-national narrative in Ukraine... to foster horizontal communication in discussions about the past, and to depart from post-Soviet, top-down memory politics. This is an opportunity for Ukraine to utilize local diversity and progress toward an open society. This is an highly ambitious task, particularly during wartime[19].

The municipality received a European Union grant to fund the reconstruction of the Great Synagogue site and training programs for school teachers and tour guides. In 2019, the project appeared close to completion, but for various reasons—largely due to the risk of litigation initiated by Meylakh Sheykhet—the final phase was suspended[20]. Meanwhile, the City Council decided to renovate another square in the Jewish quarter, historically known as Jewish (Zhydivska) Square, Weksliarska Square, and—in Jewish vernacular—Chalfunim-platz, and renamed Koliivshchyna Square in 1950 (commemorating the 1768 Haydamak rebellion). However, the discussion surrounding the renovation and anticipated renaming of this square falls outside the scope of this article.

Conclusion

At this stage, we can observe the interim success of the Space of Synagogues project and the favorable reception of its "thoughtful" design, noted by most reviewers. On the other hand, we encounter total opposition to the concept by one of the actors, who alleges sacrilege, desecration, and the further destruction of Jewish space. To date, three primary approaches to the issue can be identified. The first is maintained by the City Council, which distributed responsibility for urban planning decisions to avoid a zero-sum game surrounding group memories. Meylakh Sheykhet pursued a different trajectory, focusing solely on the reconstruction of Jewish sacred space, which the UCSJ representative regards as his personal heritage. He also commissioned the UZPR institute, which, despite the secondary role assigned to it by Sheykhet, advances a third approach: that only an authorized expert body should make decisions regarding city assets and urban planning methods, regardless of the complex web of property rights and interests on the site. This strategy is rooted in the Soviet past with its centralized approach to urban planning, which sought to distribute resources administrative-style in accordance with building codes and regulations (often without financial backing). This mechanism, flawed even during the Soviet era, lacks practical utility in contemporary reality. As a result of the clash of these approaches, the City Council succeeded in executing the project according to its own scenario, consolidating its partners and marginalizing its opponents.

The architectural expressiveness of the Space of Synagogues was achieved through an ideologically bold, yet architecturally restrained decision to bisect the layered archaeological strata with the horizontal plane of the present day. This limits vertical movement down the axis of time, hindering immersion into history—the "well of depth untold," in the words of Thomas Mann. The sole exception is the floor of the Golden Rose, which is significantly lower than the contemporary pedestrian level, whereas the predominantly two-dimensional, technically precise, and stylistically modern composition represents the history of the quarter. Linear movement along a historical axis is replaced by the far more complex narrative of the "Eternal Memorial." Consequently, the creators of the Space of Synagogues have established a dramatic, artistically articulate contrast between this space and the historic urban core, where buildings of various eras and styles continuously proclaim the past through their meticulously restored facades. In contrast, the Space of Synagogues speaks of destruction, inviting reflection on history, memory, and both restorable and irreplaceable losses.

1 | Cited in: Alex Ulam, “What Went Wrong at the Golden Rose Synagogue”, Foreign Policy, December 1, 2016. https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/12/01/what-went-wrong-at-the-golden-rose-synagogue/.

2 | The conference was attended by Omer Bartov, Chaim Gertner, Barbara Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, Ruth E. Gruber, Samuel Gruber, Rudolf Klein, Cilly Kugelmann, Anna Lipphardt, Felicitas Heimann-Jelinek, Ostap Sereda, Thomas Hubka, Leonid Finberg, Alti Rodal, and others.

3 | It should be noted that in addition to the "Turei Zahav Jewish Religious Community of Lviv," led by Sheykhet, the city is home to the "Beis Aharon ve-Yisrael" Jewish community, led since 1993 by Rabbi Mordechai Shlomo Bold, representing the Karlin-Stolin Hasidim. Rabbi Bold rarely shares his views on matters not directly related to religious life. There is also the progressive Jewish congregation "Teiva," led by Adele Dianova.

4 | “The Space of Synagogues / Franz Reschke Landscape Architecture”, ArchDaily, April 08, 2017, https://www.archdaily.com/803732/the-space-of-synagogues-franz-reschke-landscape-architecture. Accessed August 1, 2021; “Gedenkort Synagogenplatz, Beth Hamidrash und ‘Goldene Rose’, Lviv/Ukraine,” https://www.franzreschke.de/arbeiten/the-space-of-synagoges-11/. Accessed August 9, 2021; The Space of Synagogues: Jewish History, Common Heritage and Responsibility (Lviv: Lviv City Council, 2016); Franz Reschke’s project was featured in the German press: Architektur Berlin (2018), Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Stadtgeschichte als Gegenwart (2018), DETAIL (2013). In 2017, the project was nominated for the prestigious Mies van der Rohe Award.

5 | “Space of Synagogues opened in Lviv,” Den, September 4, 2016, https://day.kyiv.ua/ru/news/040916-vo-lvove-otkryli-prostranstvo-sinagog.

6 | See among others: Jason Francisco, “A New Day for the Golden Rose in L’viv”, Jewish Heritage Europe, August 23, 2016, https://jewish-heritage-europe.eu/have-your-say/a-new-day-for-the-golden-rose-in-lviv/. Accessed August 9, 2021; “Space of Synagogues opened in Lviv”; Daniel Hoffman and Dustin Christensen, “Why an Orthodox Jew is Fighting the Construction of a Holocaust Memorial in Ukraine — Jewish World News,” Haaretz May 24, 2016, https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/.premium-why-is-a-jew-fighting-to-stop-a-ukraine-memorial-1.5386165; Cnaan Lipshiz, “Lviv opens Jewish memorial on former historic synagogue”, JTA, September 5, 2016, https://www.jta.org/2016/09/05/global/lviv-opens-jewish-memorial-on-former-historic-synagogue; “Lviv Remembers Its Jewish Past,” Deutsche Welle, September 5, 2016 https://www.dw.com/en/lviv-remembers-its-jewish-past/a-19527000; “Ukraine: Inauguration of Space of Synagogues in L’viv”, Jewish Heritage Europe, September 5, 2016, https://jewish-heritage-europe.eu/2016/09/05/ukraine-inauguration-of-space-of-synagogues-in-lviv/.

7 | Dan Peleshchuk, “Lviv, Ukraine’s tourist gem unearths its tragic past,” AL JAZEERA, October 11, 2016, https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2016/10/11/lviv-ukraines-tourist-gem-unearths-its-tragic-past.

8 | Olesia Yaremchuk, “The Space of Synagogues: A Story of How a Shared Historical Heritage Became a Shared Responsibility,” The Ukrainians, January 23, 2017. https://theukrainians.org/prostir-synagog/; “Absence and Presence — The Space of Synagogues in Lviv”, Nash Holos, March 28, 2018. https://ukrainianjewishencounter.org/en/nash-holos-absence-presence-space-synagogues-lviv/.

9 | The author is deeply grateful to Dr. Tamar Shadmi for her analysis of the archaeological findings.

10 | Olesia Yaremchuk, “The Space of Synagogues”

11 | Gold M., “Sofia Dyak: Lviv is Ours. From a Wasteland to a Jewish Place of Memory,” Khadashtot, December 22, 2018. http://hadashot.kiev.ua/content/direktor-centra-gorodskoy-istorii-lvova-sofiya-dyak-evreyskaya-sostavlyayushchaya.

12 | Cited in: Alex Ulam, “What Went Wrong at the Golden Rose Synagogue”, Foreign Policy, December 1, 2016. https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/12/01/what-went-wrong-at-the-golden-rose-synagogue/.

13 | “Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Oleh Synyutka, and Andriy Sadovyi,” UNIAN, May 30, 2018, https://photo.unian.ua/photo/837547-frank-valter-shtaynmayer-oleg-sinyutka-ta-andrey-sadovyy.

14 | Shiyan O., “The 'Space of Synagogues' Memorial in Central Lviv Defaced with Swastika,” ZAXID.NET, March 26, 2021. https://zaxid.net/prostir_sinagog_u_lvovi_obmalyuvali_svastikoyu_n1516421; Karina Lyashenko, “The Space of Synagogues in Lviv: Will the City Regulate Leisure at the Memorial Site,” GALNET, January 27, 2021, https://galnet.fm/prostir-synagog-u-lvovi-chy-kontrolyuvatyme-misto-gulyanky-na-mistsi-pam-yati/.

15 | Letter to the Mayor of Lviv, Mr. A. Sadovyi (November 14, 2010), copy in the author’s archive. The letter was signed by Rabbi Meshulem Polatshek, Judge of the Rabbinical Court of North America and Canada; Oleksandr Nazar, Chairman of the Lviv Sholem Aleichem Society; Vitaliy Nakhmanovych, Leading Researcher at the Museum of the History of Kyiv; Anatoliy Podolskyi, Senior Researcher at the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine; and Meylakh Sheykhet, Director of the Representation of the Union of Councils for Jews in the Former Soviet Union and head of the "Turei Zahav" religious community.

16 | International Charter for The Conservation And Restoration Of Monuments And Sites (The Venice Charter 1964), https://www.icomos.org/charters/venice_e.pdf; Principles for Conservation and Restoration of Built Heritage (The Charter of Krakow 2000), http://smartheritage.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/KRAKOV-CHARTER-2000.pdf.

17 | On the history of the Ulam family, see: Stanisław Ulam, Adventures of a Mathematician (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1983).

18 | Alex Ulam, “What Went Wrong at the Golden Rose Synagogue,” Foreign Policy, December 1, 2016.

19 | Bezruk T., “Sofia Dyak: History is Broader than a Narrow Ethno-National Framework.” Korydor, October 3, 2016. http://www.korydor.in.ua/ua/stories/sofija-diak-istorija-shyrsha-nizh-etnichno-nazionalna-ramka.html.

20 | Kublikov V., “‘It shouldn't be a Jewish initiative, because this is a war.’ Lviv's Jewish Heritage: Conflicts over Heritage Sites,” ZAXID.NET, December 17, 2020. https://zaxid.net/to_ne_maye_buti_initsiativa_yevreyiv_bo_tse_viyna_n1511975.