Page | 1

PROCEEDINGS – Thematic Seminar on

INTANGIBLE HERITAGE

Cahul, Sept.2012

Within the framework of the project VIVA EASTPART -Valorisation

and ImproVing of mAnagement of Small Historic Centres in the

EASTern PARTnership region (DCI-HUM/2010/135)

Organisers: ACTIE - Cross-Border Cooperation and European

Integration Agency, Cahul, Republic of Moldova

Page | 2

Contents

VIVA EASTPART Consortium ......................................................................................................... 3

ABOUT THE SEMINAR PROCEEDINGS ..................................................................................... 4

SEMINAR FRAMEWORK ......................................................................................................................... 4

SUMMARY OF THE SEMINAR ............................................................................................................... 5

AGENDA .................................................................................................................................................. 6

PRESENTATIONS AND ARTICLES ................................................................................................ 8

Page | 3

VIVA EASTPART Consortium

Project Coordinator:

ATU - Association for Urban Transition, Bucharest, Romania

Project Partners:

ARMECAS – Armenian Ecotourism Association, Yerevan, Armenia

ACTIE - Cross-Border Cooperation and European Integration Agency, Cahul, Republic of

Moldova

DICAR - Architecture and Civil Engineering Department of the Polytechnic University of Bari,

Bari, Italy

For more information contact: Ioana.ivanov@atu.org.ro

Page | 4

ABOUT THE SEMINAR PROCEEDINGS

The thematic seminar on Intangible Heritage was held in Cahul, Republic of Moldova, on September 7th

and 8th.

In order to make the information and ideas presented at the seminar promptly and widely available, participants in the seminar were invited to submit written papers based on their presentations for inclusion in refereed conference proceedings to be published on the wb.

SEMINAR FRAMEWORK

The project organises 4 Thematic Seminars on the following topics Minor Historic Centre’s Intangible heritage (antique and modern art, artistic craftsmanship, popular traditions, and food and gastronomic culture; etc). Moldova – Cahul

I. Seminar on Methodology on Territorial Cultural Systems. Italy – Bari. II. Minor Historic Centre’s Tangible heritage (archaeological sites, monuments, museums,

expositions, etc), Armenia – Yerevan. III. Spatial planning and Landscape: environmental landscape, rural landscapes, natural parks,

habitat, conservation areas and historic centres, etc. Romania – Sibiu.

These seminars will produce a mapping of the available and potential cultural and touristic assets and a

Methodology on Territorial Cultural Systems for establishing a framework in each of the areas. These will

be of use to the decision-makers and public administrators in planning cultural heritage enhancement

processes, based on the integrated territorial approach.

Following the UNESCO Convention on Intangible Cultural Heritage that subdivides it in 4 categories:

Oral traditions and expressions: language and communication, mainly if considered as means to express or transmit intangible cultural heritage.

Performing arts; music (instrumental and human voice), dance and theatre in their traditional, classical, ethnographic, or other forms.

Social practices: social intercourse, corresponding to day-to-day life activities, rituals (religious or non-religious) and festive events that mark the way of life of a certain human group; under this topic gastronomy will also have a place

Traditional craftsmanship: various forms of material production, having in mind that all material culture has an intangible meaning and that the "know-how" is it-self intrinsically intangible.

Page | 5

SUMMARY OF THE SEMINAR

The thematic seminar on Intangible Heritage was the first of the four seminars planned within the

framework of VIVA EASTPART. It was held in Cahul, Republic of Moldova, on September 7th and 8

th.

The next seminars will take place in Bari, Italy, in October, in Tavush (Armenia) and Valea Hartibaciului

(Romania) in 2013.

The seminar aimed to:

Analyse the present situation of Intangible Heritage in the Eastern partnership area.

Identify available and potential intangible cultural and touristic assets in the implementation areas (mapping)

Identify and analyse examples (local and international best practices) of Intangible Heritage’s contribution to minor historic centres and territorial cultural systems.

The thematic seminar covered the following topics:

Context/State of Art /present situation of Intangible Heritage, with particular attention to minor historic centres in the Eastern partnership area.

Challenges and conservation of Intangible Heritage in minor historic centres and territorial cultural systems in the areas involved.

Examples on Intangible Heritage’s contribution to minor historic centres and territorial cultural systems.

Furthermore, the thematic seminar on Intangible Cultural Heritage included two workshops on traditional

performing arts and gastronomy, promoting hands-on experience to all participants, who had the

opportunity to learn traditional know-how from its owners and practitioners.

The seminar benefited from a strong support at the local level, bringing together representatives of: Cahul

District Council, Cahul City Hall, Town Halls of Colibasi, Valeni, Slobozia as well as other villages in the

area, Cahul State University, Vinia Traian Winery, local craftsmen and other service providers in Cahul,

local mass media and local NGOs.

Page | 6

AGENDA

FRIDAY 7TH SEPTEMBER

08:30-09:00 – Registration of participants

09:00-09:30 - Welcome speeches

09:30-11:00 – Session A: part 1 (Chair by Mr. AJDER)

'Intangible Cultural Heritage: Context of Moldova', Mr. Ghenadie IVAŞCENCO, VIVA EASTPART

International Expert.

“Context and State of art of Intangible Heritage in the Cahul Region with particular attention to small

historic centres”, Mr. Veaceslav GARNET, Professor, Cahul State University

11:00-11:30 - Coffee break

11:30-13:00 – Session A: part 2 (Chair by Ms. GALYAN)

“Context and State of Art of Intangible Heritage in Armenia with particular attention to minor historic

centres”, Mr. Sarhat PETROSYAN, VIVA EASTPART International Expert.

“Context and State of Art of Intangible Heritage in Romania, with particular attention to minor historic

centres”, Josefina LÓPEZ GALDEANO, VIVA EASTPART Project Manager.

13:00-14:30 – Lunch

14:30-16:00 – Session B (Chair by Ms. Josefina LÓPEZ GALDEANO)

Challenges and conservation of Intangible Heritage in minor historic centres: cases studies in Italy and

Spain, Mr. Federico SALMERON ESCOBAR, VIVA EASTPART International Expert, Mr. Giovanni

MANCO, VIVA EASTPART International Expert.

16:00-16:30 - Coffee break

16:30-17:30 – Session C (Chair by Ms. ADJER)

Examples on Intangible Heritage’s contribution to territorial cultural systems: EU practices, Mr. Francesco

ROTONDO, Local Coordinator Scientific partner.

18:30 - Plenary session - final discussion

20:00 h - Workshop* on Social practices: “Winery of Vinia Traian”, organised by: ACTIE and Vinia Traian

Winery; coordinator: Mrs. Maria Ajder

Page | 7

ABSTRACT: Viticulture and wine production has a millenary tradition in the southern part of Moldova.

This traditional occupation was always an integral part of the local culture and had a profound impact on

the lifestyle in the region. It also constitutes an important resource for tourism development.

21.30 - Social Dinner

SATURDAY 8TH SEPTEMBER

09.30-13:30 h – Workshop* on performing arts: “folks dances and music of Craitele folk group” and visit to

“traditional art and crafts”, organised by: Valeni Town Hall, coordinator: Mrs. Maria Ajder

ABSTRACT: Thanks to the rural character of the region, many traditions in either folk music and dances

or traditional craftsmanship were preserved in the district's villages. They constitute an important part of

the cultural heritage of the region and efforts have been made to preserve, develop and capitalize this

heritage.

14:00-15:00 - Lunch

15:00 Closing Ceremony

*Workshops are organised by selected institutions that acts on the preservation and disclosure of different

manifestations of the Moldavian intangible heritage and traditions.

All workshops promoted a broad discussion on each subject, encouraging the share of experiences and

cultures and promoting some hands-on experience to all participants who will have the opportunity to

learn traditional know-how from its owners and practitioners.

The workshops took place in Valeni and Vinia Traian on 7th and 8th of September and are organised in 2

main subjects: performative arts and on social practices.

Page | 8

PRESENTATIONS AND ARTICLES

1. Intangible Cultural Heritage: CONTEXT OF MOLDOVA, Ghenadie IVAŞCENCO

Intangible Cultural Heritage: CONTEXT OF MOLDOVA

BAKGROUND: Towards Recognizing ICH

INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE (ICH) IN MOLDOVA

Historical & Geographical Context

Legal Framework

The Law on ICH

Institutional Framework

Key Lessons

Page | 9

BAKGROUND: Towards Recognizing ICH

Generally, heritage is defined as ‘what we value’ or ‘what we wish to pass on to future

generations’. Heritage resources provide living communities with a sense of community with

previous generations. They are important to cultural identity as well as to the conservation of the

cultural diversity and creativity of humanity.

In 1972 has been adopted the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, that constituted a crucial

moment in designing the global architecture of studying and safeguarding of the heritage

places. There has been established the Word Heritage Committee to guide the process.

Currently, the World Heritage List includes almost 800 places of international significance in

approximately 30 countries.

Up to the beginning of 21st century, built heritage almost totally dominated international heritage

lists as an icon of civilization, permanence and modernity. Traditional assessments of heritage

value have emphasized high culture and monumental forms (e.g. cathedrals) over other

heritage forms. Consequently, for long time, the intangible values have been often neglected

in both national and international mechanisms for safeguarding.

The intangible heritage is generally defined as those aspects of the heritage that, unlike places

or objects, are ephemeral: these include oral traditions, languages, traditional performing arts,

knowledge systems, values and know how.

The current interest in intangible heritage is rooted in the late 20th century tendency to re-

evaluate the benefits of modernity, express a fear of the effects of globalization and search for

smaller-scale local identities. Globalization is feared as a cultural bulldozer capable of

flattening marginal cultural forms in the same way as Hollywood flood the local film market.

In 1989, the General Conference of UNESCO adopted a ‘Recommendation on the

Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore’. Despite the fact that only few member

states have adopted it, the Recommendation encouraged the emerging of very important

safeguarding outputs (e.g. UNESCO Red Book of Languages in Danger of Disappearing,

Traditional Music of the World Collection, etc.)

In Stockholm in 1998, the Intergovernmental Conference on Cultural Policies for Development

recognized that the world’s intangible heritage was at risk and needed to be properly managed

and safeguarded as part of the development agenda. The Conference suggested UNESCO to

develop new and more appropriate instruments for safeguarding the intangible heritage. Three

years later, in 2002, in Istanbul/Turkey, representatives from 110 countries adopted the

‘Istanbul Declaration 2002’, in which they recognized the value on intangible cultural heritage

and voiced their full support for effective measures at all levels, from international to local, to

safeguard intangible cultural heritage. Most important – the Declaration proposed the adoption

Page | 10

of a new Convention recognizing the complex nature of intangible heritage and its need for

protection.

As result of numerous efforts, debates and recommendations, in 2003 in Paris UNESCO

adopted a new Convention to safeguard intangible heritage, along the lines of the World

Heritage Convention for Places from 1972. UNESCO decided to develop a separate

Convention for intangible heritage (and not just extend the 1972 Convention) for two main

reasons: (i) the difficulty of redrafting of narrow definition of cultural heritage in the WHC, which

refers only to monuments, buildings and places; and (ii) difficulty of revising the criterion of

outstanding universal value for inscription in the World Heritage List. Nevertheless, the debates

related to the inter-correlation between ‘tangible’ and ‘intangible’ heritage are continuing to

challenge the researchers and specialists in the field. They are two parts of the same coin, or

they are two levels of heritage: a primitive one, and a civilized one?

The Convention entered into force on April 20, 2006 for the thirty states that had ratified it. It is

important to mention that less than 9 years after its adoption by the General Conference of

UNESCO in November 2003, this Convention has already gained the adhesion of 144 Member

States. In comparison, it took 23 years for the 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of

the World Cultural and Natural Heritage to achieve the same quantum of ratifications.

One of the key issues addressed to instruments to safeguard intangible heritage is the question

about the community rights. These is because the necessity to support people who will maintain

intangible heritage forms as part of the safeguarding them. There are a number of international

organizations working in the area or ‘intangible heritage rights protection’, led by WIPO. The

interventions in the field started in ’60s last century. In 1967 has been revised Berne Convention

in order to provide some intellectual property protection for expression of folklore. In 1982

UNESCO jointly with WIPO adopted the ‘Model Provisions for National Laws on the Protection

of Expressions of Folklore against illicit exploitation’. WIPO has later developed a draft toolkit

and a practical guide on the protection for traditional cultural expressions. Technical

requirements for database or registers have been drafted, including the need for appropriate

security mechanisms and access limitations. Nevertheless, many countries consider intangible

heritage to be in the public domain and do not have legislative protection for expressions of

folklore. Certain countries, however, have laws aimed specifically at safeguarding the cultural

heritage legislation of their native people.

Generally speaking, while the continuing development of the international legislation in the field,

there persists a strong criticism that it is not ‘erga omnes’, as the international conventions

on human rights and environment. The key critics is, therefore, that it do not oblige states to

implement proactive mechanisms, and that it is failing to ensure that control over intangible

heritage management and benefits remained with the communities which owned that heritage.

Despite this fact, since the Convention has been adopted in 2003, many things has been

changed both at the international and national levels.

Page | 11

INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE (ICH) IN MOLDOVA

Historical & Geographical Context

The Republic of Moldova is a small country with a controversial history and very specific human

settlements networking. Several historical and geographical factors had (and still have) a crucial

influence on the preservation, safeguarding and promotion of the Moldovan intangible cultural

heritage.

1. Moldova – is still a predominantly rural country. In the strongly urbanized world,

Moldova presents itself as the most rural country in Europe. Moreover, the country is

facing a process of ruralization and des-urbanisation. According to population census

data, the share of rural population increased from 52.3% in 1989 to 61% in 2004

(nevertheless, if taking into consideration the rural characteristics of many small taowns,

the share of rural population is about 70%). Except 4 cities (Chisinau, Balti, Tiraspol and

Bender), no one Moldovan urban settlement has a population higher than 30-35,000

inhabitants. In fact, the strong rurality of the country (over 50% of urban population is

born in rural area) is an encouraging factor in insuring the sustainability of intangible

cultural heritage. Nevertheless, the mass emigration abroad and the globalization trends

have a tough impact on new generations. The rurality of the country is losing its

traditional characteristics.

2. Historically, ethnically, linguistically and culturally, Moldova and Moldovans are part of

the bigger Romanian area. In fact, generally, Moldova and Romania are sharing the

same intangible cultural heritage. This is an important factor for mutual collaboration

for joint safeguarding and promotion of the common cultural intangible heritage.

3. After 200 years of Russian dominance (inclusive 50 years of Soviet policy of des-

nationalization), the identity of Moldovan people is still a (politically) controversial

issue. The people are still dividing themselves in two groups: (i) ones, which are

considered themselves as Bessarabian Romanians with the same cultural identity as

their neighbors, and (2) the second group (much more numerous) wich are considering

themselves as Moldovans, which are different from Romanians. This aspect should be

taken into consideration especially within the process of capitalizing the ‘intangible

heritage’ at the local level.

4. Moldova is a country with important minority groups. An important aspect to be taken

into consideration is that, in comparison with Moldovan population, the absolute majority

of minority groups are more urbanized. Additionally, while considered ‘Russian

Page | 12

speakers’, 75% of the ‘minoritarians’ are Ukranians, Gagauzians and Bulgarians which

do not use more their own language and cultural habits. The safeguarding of the

intangible heritage specific to these groups should be specifically approached.

Legal Framework

Moldova is considered to be among the countries with advanced legislative development in

the field of intangible heritage safeguarding.

On March 24, 2006 the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova ratified the UNESCO

Convention regarding the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage, adopted in Paris on

17 October, 2003 (in fact, Moldova ratified the Convention one month before the Convention

entered into force, being among the first 30 countries that ratified the Convention).

On March 29, 2012 the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova adopted the Law on

Safeguarding the Intangible Cultural Heritage.

On the same time, several legal acts are regulating directly and indirectly the cultural intangible

heritage:

Law on Culture from 27.05.1999 is determining the free access to culture. Law on Museums from 27.12.2002 is regulating the system of evidence and protection

of the heritage owned by the museums. Law on Archive from 22.01.1992 is regulating the mechanisms of archiving of the

cultural and artistic objects. Law on Traditional Craftsmanship from 20.03.2003 is regulating the activity of craftsmen,

aiming to protect the popular crafts.

The Law on ICH

The Law is determining the general legal framework for identification, protection, transmission,

promotion, revitalization and exploring of the cultural intangible heritage of the Republic of

Moldova. According to the Law, the owner of the intangible cultural heritage is the people of

Moldova. The registration of intellectual/property rigths on any part of intangible heritage is

prohibited to any legal entity or private person.

The Law is defining the intangible heritage, as – the totality of elements of traditional authentic

heritage, valuable from cultural and historical perspective, transmitted in oral form from

generation to generation, expressed in literal, musical, choreographic or theater form, practices,

representations, expressions, knowledge, skills, as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts

Page | 13

and cultural spaces associated therewith – that communities, groups and, in some cases,

individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage.

According to the Law, there are five distinctive characteristics of the intangible heritage:

Anonymous character Transmitted in oral form from generation to generation Specific from point of view of territory, ethnicity, religious Considered to be very important for the identification of specific communities or groups (re) Produced and Performed in the traditional technique of the specific community or

group. The cultural intangible heritage is applied to the following domains:

Oral expressions Music Choreography Social practices (ritual, festive events, customs) Cosmology and spiritual beliefs Traditional craftsmanship Gastronomy Traditional cultural institutions (‘claca’, ‘şezătoarea’) Material meaning for transmission of intangible heritage.

The Law is determining the following management instruments:

Scientific Research (identification, documentation, drafting dossiers) Codifying (preparatory work for the registration of the particular element of intangible

heritage in the national/international registry) National Registry for Intangible Cultural Heritage (procedures of registration of the

elements and its management) Honorific Title of ‘Treasure Carrier Alive’ Safeguarding and revitalization (measures to support the protection: education and

awareness, specialized specialists, audio-visual production, etc.) Financing (in responsibility of the State Budget (through Ministry of Culture) and budgets

of local governments). The law is encouraging the private financing (grants, international programs, donations, etc.).

The National Registry on Intangible Heritage is under elaboration and is expected to be approved and published during the year of 2012. There are planned 2 volumes: (1) ICH related to Moldovans/Romanians and (2) ICH related to the minority ethnic groups. The first volume will contain over 400 elements.

Page | 14

Institutional Framework

The main national institutions involved in the process of safeguarding of the intangible cultural

heritage in the Republic of Moldova are the following:

Ministry of Culture is the main state institution responsible to formulate and implement the policy

related to the intangible cultural heritage.

Main responsibilities

Elaborate and implement state policies in the field of intangible heritage (concepts,

strategies, plans, regulations)

Establish the National Commission for Intangible Heritage

Manage the National Register for Intangible Heritage

Approve (at the recommendation of the Commission) the decision for including in the

National Register

Monitor and support methodologically the activities of local governments in the field

Formulate and submit roposals to include the elements of national intangible heritage

in the UNESCO List of World Heritage

Note: The Ministry of Culture is intending to initiate the elaboration of the National Strategy for Safeguarding the Intangible Heritage in 2013.

National Commission for Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage. Specialized scientific

body, subordinated to the Ministry of Culture, which is coordinating the national policy for

safeguarding the intangible heritage.

Main responsibilities:

Prepare dossiers of elements to be included in National Register Consultative support to the ministry Endorsement of the national policy documents in the field

National Centre for Safeguarding and Promotion of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Dedicated

executive institution, responsible to implement the specific practical activities related to the

intangible cultural heritage.

Main responsibilities:

Methodological support to national and local public bodies

Inventory of the elements of cultural intangible heritage

Practical activities in the field

Note: The establishment of the National Centre for Safeguarding of the Intangible

Cultural Heritage is requested by the Law and is currently under consideration by the

Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Moldova. It is expected that the Centre will be

established in 2013.

Page | 15

Local Governments are, generally, responsible for the social and economic development of their

communities. Regarding the intangible cultural heritage, the local authorities have been

delegated with the following particular responsibilities:

Ensure the viability of the traditional local folklore and spiritual culture

Support the ‘depositary’ and ‘trasmissioners’ of the intangible cultural heritage.

Cooperate with central public authorities for mapping, inventory and safeguarding of

the intangible cultural heritage.

Initiate and support community initiatives to safeguard and promote the local

intangible cultural heritage elements.

Generally speaking, as communities are those who created intangible cultural heritage and

keep it alive, local governments should have a privileged place in safeguarding it.

Moldova jointly with Romania are preparing the dossier to include in the UNESCO World

Intangible Heritage List - ‘colindatul in ceata barbateasca’ – a social practice during the

Christmass. Previously, Romania already succeeded to include in the UNESCO list 2 other

elements – ‘Doina’ (traditional song) and ‘Dansul calutului’ (traditional dance), which are also

part of Moldovan intangible cultural heritage.

Key Lessons:

The international legislation in the field of ‘intangible cultural heritage’ is not ‘erga

omnes’ (has a recommendation and not obligatory approach), in comparison with

international conventions on human rights and environment. Therefore, in order to be

more effective, the efforts of involved institutions should be more pro-active.

Cultural policy can contribute to social and economic development by growing

communities/national cultural capital, promoting local identity and promoting global

cultural diversity. Intangible heritage form a crucial part of this cultural capital and need

to be safeguarded. It is important to consider ‘intangible heritage’ – as a ‘development

factor’.

The legal and institutional framework related to ICH in Moldova is at its incipient phase.

In order to make the process more efficient and resultative, it is necessary to initiate and

promote few very successful case studies/practices. An important and extensive

awareness raising activity is to be promoted.

The Moldovan Local Authorities are delegated by the Law with responsibilities to

safeguard and promote the local intangible heritage. It is important to support local

Page | 16

authorities and advocate them to plan the financial resources in local budgets for

this objective.

As the intangible characteristic of the heritage is given by the community rather

than the expert, it implies a new ‘contact’ between civil society and the state. In the

practice of safeguarding intangible heritage, we constantly need to ask ourselves (i)

whose voices are heard, and (ii) whose interests are ultimately served. This requires

sensitivity on the part of the governmental entities (both central and local) towards the

relationship between heritage ‘experts’ and community representatives and recognition

of the need to manage the distribution of potential benefits in the most equitable and

appropriate way.

Intangible heritage should not always be celebrated uncritically. Recording what we

know of the past (whatever its moral status) and using it to inform the present is helpful

and valuable, but uncritically accepting utopian versions of the past or perpetuating

damaging aspects of the past is not. We cannot, for example, condone the physical

abuse of women, because it is ‘traditional’ in many communities.

Notes:

This is not a Scientific Report.

The Author does not have intention to present the full information on the subject.

Page | 17

2. Intangible Heritage in Armenia, Sarhat PETROSYAN

Contents

LEGISLATION ON INTANGIBLE HERITAGE

International responsibilities

National Legislation

Action Plans on National level

LISTED ELEMENTS

Representative list

Urgent Safeguarding

UNESCO Representative List

INTANGIBLE TAVUSH

Folklore

Local cults

Food

Fests

SUMMARY

REFERENCES

Page | 18 LEGISLATION ON INTANGIBLE HERITAGE

International responsibilities

The Republic of Armenia 15 years after its independence in March 20, 2006 signed UNESCO’s

Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage which was approved by

1441 countries in Paris on year 2003. The same year (2006) on October 17th National Assembly

of Armenia approved the Convention after which the Convention became accepted by Armenia.

On October 23, 2006 Republic of Armenia signed UNESCO’s Convention on the Protection and

Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, which was approved by National Assembly

on May 27, 2007. Starting from that day Government of Armenia, in particular Ministry of Culture

(then Ministry of Culture, Sport and Youth Affairs) became responsible for implementation of

recommendations of two conventions and preservation of Intangible Cultural Heritage.

National Legislation

On November 20, 2002 National Assembly of Armenia approved the Law on the Basics of

Cultural Legislation. Based on this Law the Republic of Armenia assigns the direction towards

which cultural policy has to be developed by defining the role of the Government on National

level as well as the roles of local authorities.

On October 7, 2009 National Assembly of Armenia approved the Law on Intangible Cultural

Heritage. The law defined the procedures and importance of identification, documentation,

classification, implementation, restoration 2 of intangible cultural heritage of Armenia and

responsibilities of the parties.

Action Plans on National level

On November 23, 2006, the same year when the Republic of Armenia officially signed

UNESCO’s Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage, Government

approved the Strategy on Safeguarding and Preservation of Intangible Cultural Heritage.

1 Figures of July 17, 2012. Source: www.unesco.org

2 www.mincult.am/intangible_cultural_heritage.html

Page | 19

On May 3, 2007 Government of Armenia approved the Work Plan and Schedule for

Safeguarding and Preservation of Intangible Cultural Heritage.

Based on these two decrees Government developed actions that were needed for safeguarding

the intangible heritage. Development of National legislation, definition of criteria’s on preparing

the lists, preparation of the lists were among the activities.

The first List of Elements of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (hereafter: Representative list) and

the criterias of shaping it was approved by the Government of Armenia on March 11, 2010.

Some 18 elements were represented in that list, including different types of intangible heritage,

e.g. food, folklore, dance and music, etc.

Few months later, on January 20, 2011 Government approved the Decree on Criteria’s for

Shaping the Urgent Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage Lists and the List of the Urgent

Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage. More 7 elements were added to the previously

approved list.

Started from year 2011 each year Government of the Republic approved the Annual Programs

for the Preservation, Protection, Promotion and Implementation of Intangible Cultural Heritage.

This document defines short term tasks and responsibilities of the parties in duty, e.g. Ministry

of Culture and its bodies.

LISTED ELEMENTS

There are 18 Intangible Cultural Heritage elements listed in Representative list and 7 elements

in the list of intangible heritage elements under the consideration of being urgent. Two elements

are listed in the UNESCO’s World Intangible Heritage List, from which one is added also in the

list of Representative list of Armenia.

Page | 20

Illustration 1: Illustrations of Sasna Tsrer by H. Kojoyan

Representative list

1. Sasna Tsrer, Mythological poetry [See Illustration 1];

2. Kochari, Traditional dance;

3. Yarkhushta, Traditional dance;

4. Krunk, (transl.: Crane) type of song and singing, symbolism of migration and Diaspora;

5. Gatsek – Tesek, (transl.: Go and See) Song;

6. Batola, Dance music;

7. Armenian traditional wedding ceremony, 3-7 days long event;

8. St. Sargis Fest, Armenian “Valentine Day”, in January-February;

9. Trndez, Fire jumping [See Illustration 2], in February;

10. Vardavar, Water throwing day, each year second (in some places last) Sunday of July;

11. St. Tevatoros, Local cult for remedies;

12. Tukh Manuk, Local cult for remedies;

13. Katiki bardzratsum (transl.: Throat lifting), type of singing and massage of throat of child;

14. Khavits, Food boiled flour, good for young mother after giving birth;

15. Decoration of Tari hats (transl.: “Tari” means Year, Hats means bread), Mythological and

religious ornamental decoration of traditional Tari bread during cooking process;

16. Traditional forging (blacksmith);

17. Traditional Khachkar (Cross-stone) making [See Illustration 3];

18. Family (lineage) tree.

Page | 21

Illustration 2: Fire jumping Festival in Lovers’ Park Yerevan, photo by V. Abgaryan

Urgent Safeguarding

1. Karose Khache, Mythological poetry;

2. Vijak (transl.: Condition), Song for selection for games;

3. Avetis (transl.: Good news), Type of song and/or singing;

4. Khachbure (transl.: Cross smels), Local cult for protection;

5. Barekendan, Armenian “Halloween”;

6. Tightrope dance (Rope walker);

7. Fancywork

UNESCOS Representative List

1. The Duduk and its Music

Presented on 2005, included in the list on 2008

2. Armenian Khachkar (Cross-stone) art, its symbolism and craftsmanship3

Presented on 2005, included in the list on 2010 [See Illustration 3]

3 It is included in the Representative list

Page | 22

Illustration 3: Khachkar (Cross-stone) in Haghartsin Monastery Complex, photo by S.

Petrosyan

INTANGIBLE TAVUSH

Based on the site visits and interviews with state officials (Dilijan, Teghut and Hovk), individuals

in charge of preservation of cultural heritage (Gosh), elder residents (Gosh and Dilijan) and

based on some published researches above mentioned intangible elements on local (regional)

level in Tavush has been discovered which are worth to be mentioned.

Folklore

There is a legend about white buffalos living deep under the water in Gosh Lake. There are

different stories about beautiful women kept by those buffalos; some corner stone’s protected by

them, etc.

Page | 23

Illustration 4: Gosh lake, photo by S. Petrosyan

Goshavank monastery situated in central part of Gosh village is dated back to 12th-13th

centuries. The name of the complex comes from Mkhitar Gosh, who is author of first Armenian

criminal code and some other fables. The monastery complex has one of the only remaining

book depositories of that period and a ruined school. It means that it was an important

educational and religious center. Based on one of the stories that were told for centuries, in 14th

century after one of the Tatar Mongolian invasions the burning process of more than 10’000

copies of books took one week.

Local cults

The tomb of Mkhitar Gosh which is located not far from Monastery complex for many years was

a local cult. There was a belief that it had spiritual energy and remedies impotency.

Food

Dolma (stuffed vegetable dishes, which is as well a common dish for the habitants of Balkans and Middle East) is considered a local dish. They wrap it with leaves of Koli tree.

Page | 24

There are variety of marinated (pickled) greens, e.g. Asparagus (in Armenian Tsnebek), Portula (in Armenian Dandur), Okra (in Armenian Bamia), Liliy (in Armenian Shoushan), Beet (in Armenian Jakndegh), etc.

Ghaurma is another dish which is very popular in all parts of Armenia. It is cooked beef meet with butter, that is kept in the same butter for quite long period. Most commonly they keep it in earthen pots. In this region they keep in “Tik”, which is a bag made from beef’s skin.

Illustration 5: Traditional Vardavar fest at Haghartsin Monastery, photo from

touradvice.am

Fests

From festives the most common one is Vardavar. In this region of Armenia they celebrate it last

Sunday of July, but in other parts of Armenia and also Armenian Apostolic Church celebrates

Vardavar second Sunday of July.

For celebration they used to play Horse-ride (collecting food sitting on a horse) and Snow

collection (in Teghut village) for deep caved gorges of mountains, also tightrope dancers mostly

from Ararat Valley (Central part of current Armenia), dances and music.

Page | 25

The most famous and traditional food is Sali (Flour, Butter, Sour Cream, etc.). There were

habits of also preparing Konchogh (Bread, Onion, Oil, Butter and Egg), Lambs Blood (Fried

Lamb’s blood, Onion and Oil), and traditional Armenian dishes, such as Khorovats (Barbeque),

Khashlama (lamb stew), etc.

SUMMARY

This very quick study was done by mapping and discovering the intangible cultural heritage of

Tavush region more substantially and understandably. Even from the first insights we

discovered that there is a strong need of doing/re-doing such research for studying the local

traditions deeper and in more detail.

Despite the fact that the region is popular travel destination in Armenia for its climate and

cultural heritage, it is important to develop some unique traditions for developing of new types of

tourism and attracting newcomers.

One of the recommendations can be to design and establish a platform for sharing traditions

and developing a network for connecting the local people holding traditions with the people with

entrepreneurial ideas.

REFERENCES (Based on alphabetical order)

Law on Basics Cultural Legislation, www.laws.am

Law on Intangible Cultural Heritage, www.laws.am

List of Elements Intangible Cultural Heritage of Armenia, www.mincult.am

List of Urgent Safeguarding Elements Intangible Cultural Heritage of Armenia,

www.mincult.am

Strategy on safeguarding and preservation of Intangible Cultural Heritage, www.gov.am

UNESCO’s Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage,

www.unesco.org

Work plan and schedule for safeguarding and preservation of Intangible Cultural Heritage,

www.gov.am

Notes This is not a Scientific Report.

The Author does not have intention to present the full information on the subject.

Page | 26

3. Challenges and conservation of Tangible and Intangible heritage in historic

center: cases studies in Andalusia (Spain).

Challenges and conservation of Tangible and Intangible heritage in historic

center: cases studies in Andalusia (Spain)

1. Introduction. Andalusia

2. Diffuse city versus compact city. Concepts

3. Why to rehabilitate the historic city?

4. Urbanism, heritage, culture and sustainable development. Tangible and intangible heritage

5. Sustainable Development Strategies

6. A new model of urban management

Page | 27

1. Introduction. Andalusia

Andalusia is located in southern Europe and it is a bridge between the European and the African Continent its situation is therefore strategic and this product has a rich urban and heritage culture, thanks to a multitude of factors that have shaped the history of Andalusia, where Islamic traits persist in our cities both in urban and in many cultural aspects and lifestyles associated with the Mediterranean. Andalusia’s very balanced city system is based on a network of unpolarize cities, and one or two major urban centers as in other regions of Europe. This situation gives Andalusia, a variety of urban environments very rich and varied. Andalusia has nine sets urban regional center level, complemented by a system of medium-sized cities and networks of towns in rural areas that ensure a stable settlement distributed throughout its territory. This system of cities, represents one of its main social and economic heritage. At the same time, it has some defining characteristics that give it an unique position to adapt its structure to the requirements of sustainability, such as its polycentricity, social and functional diversity and compactness.

2. Diffuse city versus compact city. Concepts.

The compact city, complex, efficient, cohesive is where we meet the parameters of environmental sustainability, energy and economic exploitation of its natural resources. Sustainability must be not just environmental but democratic. Democracy is based on the active participation of the population. In order for neighborhoods to be regenerated, they should be full of life.. The metabolism of the city should be driven by its inhabitants. This Mediterranean city model has been transformed in the last 25 years, embracing another model imported from other cultural areas, based in the creation of a diffuse city and that functionally separates and segregates the population into the territory based on their economic capacity. The dispersion causes an unsustainable growth model that creates the following negative impacts: To reduce natural spaces, to break the proximity trading system, a detachment towards everyday spaces, a loss of social cohesion, increased mobility needs or increased energy expenditure, water consumption or rate of generation of waste. This type of city provokes increased consumption of resources: land, materials, water and energy. This is a trend that continues as the opposite path to urban sustainability. Currently our historic districts and neighborhoods in the Andalusia cities have different challenges that need to be redirected, especially in these times of economic crisis. The rehabilitation and renovation projects in cities are the best stimulus to create micro job but at the same time, consolidate the compact city as living space.

Page | 28

The regeneration of the built city, its neighborhoods and historic centers, must recover the level of quality that it once had, because only then it will regain its status as a city, according to the Mediterranean tradition, meaning, compact, functional socially and economically diversified cities, which contribute avoid indiscriminate expansion processes and consumption of our natural resources and heritage. Intervention is a process that have as principle to keep the resident population as the best way to preserve its condition of city, by urban and social rehabilitation improves quality of life, mobility, employment and business opportunities, coexistence, integration social in equal opportunities, etc. And in this sense, the rehabilitation of historic centers is part of a sustainable growth model, because it ensures urban development that preserves the environment and provides quality of life to its inhabitants, leveraging existing resources in our cities and recovering their spaces so that all citizens can live with dignity from equity and social justice. The urban and social rehabilitation of our cities aims to create a more livable city model, with services, facilities and quality public spaces, which ultimately define a more welcoming and nice city.

3. Why to rehabilitate the historic city?

Historic cities of Andalusia, generally share the same problems in terms of urban, economic and social degradation such as: Housing and historic residential typologies have undergone numerous transformations because they have been busy courtyards and galleries, and so have increased the number of housing with little or no maintenance, physical degradation, loss of habitability. This causes a migration of the native population. Nearly empty buildings coexist with others with real situation of overcrowding, both with a high physical and social deterioration. Depopulation: Urban centers have some of the lowest densities throughout the city. Hosting an increasing aging population, the representatives of the residents themselves have noted the shift that is occurring in the population of these neighborhoods to other areas of the city, especially the new urban development or metropolitan area. (gentrification processes) The difficulty of access and mobility, and lack public facilities that meet the current needs of the population such as senior centers, day care centers, sports facilities, local shops etc.

4. Urbanism, heritage, culture and sustainable development. Tangible and

intangible heritage.

The intervention model to regenerate the historic centers must have a comprehensive and inclusive approach where urban strategies are measured in relation to the social, economic, heritage and functional usage... We are convinced that the first challenge is to give life to

Page | 29

historic cities and activities in order to improve economic development. Joining heritage conservation measures and economic activities in relation to its population. The revitalization of the city should be made based on searching a critical reconstruction of the city considering the improvement of urban living, integration and social cohesion and sustainable development, through participatory processes involving the whole city.

The critical reconstruction of the city is paradoxically to accept the ability to evolve and to change, from which the city life depends, and to ensure the viability of its conservation. To admit intelligent transformation which preserve their values does not mean the extreme conservation. Restoration can be understood in its broadest sense, as an instrument capable of updating the original creative act and to create a city to live, to use for leisure of those who visit us, aiming to revitalize the company and to provoke synergies. The heritage of a city is not only tangible values such as its buildings, facades, urban space, landscape, building types... but also it is linked to lifestyles, traditions, folklore, customs, cultural values, it is to say: Intangibles values To regenerate residential buildings respecting their typological values such as neighboring houses, courtyard houses, etc., is at the same time to protect lifestyles associated with those buildings. If older people who have historically lived in these buildings are protected and they continue to live in these buildings, this is somehow to continue the social and historical memory of the city. The arrival of new families with children will enable the transmition of this knowledge from generation to generation. Sustainable development in the historic city is often associated with tourism. This discussion of the historical cities and tourism is a hot topic for several reasons. Firstly because it is a negligible source of income in historic cities. Tourism has become a promoter of the economy, and without these resources many of them would be to seriously damage their waterline. On the other hand, to take over this market it is needed to compete for it, and to define strategies for this means to design complex projects to materialize the physical structure, heritage, economic and social bases of the cities. The questions are simple to ask: What type of tourism do we want to capture?. What should we offer?. How can we make the most of this potential?. The answers are complex and must be adapted to the circumstances of each city with validated methodologies for the experiences and best practices of other cities. Cultural-heritage-tourism can be a good combination to revalue the city, although we should target a tourism that looks for the quality and authenticity, which is called motivational tourism, and which is quantitative smaller than the one generated by the tour-operators. However this kind of tourism-cultural that interests us make our historic cities attractive because it puts into value their greater spending power and lower environmental impact, and targets a visitor who is an experienced traveler and who demands quality and authenticity. The historic city wants this cultural tourism, which is outside of the big tour-operators, and which is based on autodidactic approach, and which investigates the city and its cultural events. It is

Page | 30

also mixed in its activities (gastronomic, entertainment, folklore, cultural), and sets its own routes and heritage itineraries of those who are eager for knowledge... It is the visitor who will spend the night in the city, with high purchasing power, respectful with city, and probably will repeat visits and thus can become a frequent regular temporary citizen. If we know our ideal tourist profile, we have to ask ourselves what must we do to attract him?. Each city must give the right answer to this question, as we have commented, by applying quality criteria based on diversity, authenticity, sustainability, which are necessary and essential to not break values and to allow the city the balance between economic development and the active protection of its heritage and urban activity that occurs on a day to day of a pulsating city living.

5. Sustainable Development Strategies

The city must build projects and actions related to urban sustainability. This means among other things to build a new approach for integrating deep-urban policies and route. Cities have been formed over time so it is impossible to use short term schedules to create regeneration strategies. .In short, they must be actions schedules on a medium-long term which in many cases will take over 10 years (They are projects that exceed the 4-year term, so the haven´t immediate electoral returns). At the same time we want to insist on a concept that is not easily understood when you have the responsibility to change the reality of a neighborhood or a city's urban center. The weakness (problems) of a city or an urban area, are both an opportunity to turn problems-weaknesses into opportunities, living a new approach to our actions, strategies and projects. The problems are not unique to a single discipline, and we explain the physical degradation of an urban area, as is the loss or destruction of buildings of great historical value, not only with solving the rehabilitation of those buildings, but assuming that there are other problems behind such as: social, under the area's economic development, insecurity, urban decay, gentrification, loss of resident population, emigration and / or eviction of the population to other areas etc. Therefore an urban regeneration project has to take into account all the multiple actions of the various measures that have to be made, while striving at the same time create in the city the following:

Changing mindsets both citizenship and in local government and civic organizations

Generate active knowledge about the values of the city (tangible and intangible).

Innovate urban management

Active Participation and responsible citizenship and their organizations

Rediscover neighborhoods / historic centers, key elements of a Living City

Page | 31 6. A new model of urban management. We must build a management model based on:

Integrality: Addressing jointly coordinated and planned the necessary actions to address the problems of the city, looking for the potential of the city and the people.

Territoriality: Having the territory. Generate solutions adapted to the territory both in the organizational model, resources and methodology.

Participation: It is necessary the presence and involvement of the residents to decide what neighborhood/city want.

Integral Rehabilitation thus becomes one of the priority objectives of any urban sustainability project on the conviction that, creating new neighborhoods (with criteria environmental/ecological), is as important as recovering the existing ones. In the following scheme you can see what we are discussing:

Actions

Improvement of urban Pedagogy of habitat Integral Rehabilitation Actions of social community Objective live in a Historic Center and to value the urban heritage more habitable city Neighbourhoods Cultural Tourism

Sustainable development. Other Actions

Public management. Participation. Cooperation between administrations

This project is integral and integrated in order to regenerate the city. Integral in the sense of the confluence of the actions described above. Integrated because we address the problems with perspective and interdisciplinary methodology, aiming at solving the problem... In short, the comprehensive rehabilitation project aims to define a new way of doing and understanding the city, from cohesion, sustainability and urban and social integration. We intend to define a participatory way with the new intervention strategies in the city, that suit the current urban, social and economic requirements: the rights of citizens and the city. To make this "urban challenge", you need to modify the background and the way to act. This is a new and most innovative model/type of urban management, which should be always alive and evolving, adapting to a problem that it is real and complex, our actions should be aimed at solving the problems: physical, economic and social aspects of the city. So this new urban management should be: flexible, adapted to the specific needs of each region and neighborhood, acting from knowledge, having critical vision (learning from mistakes), agility in managing rehabilitation programs and their financing allowing be efficient and effective ...

Page | 32

Action Programs (Strategic Plan, Development Plans, Urban Plans...) are the required documents for planning actions that would be carried out in building the city. The intervention in an urban area as complex and difficult is being done through deep knowledge of the urban, social, and economic heritage. We need to "know" in order to diagnose and plan the necessary solutions that enable the city to recover fully with the active participation of residents, enterprises and social collectives. The methodology is based on a comprehensive intervention in which neighbors and citizen participation are the protagonist. The intervention, is therefore defined as the ability of these to influence the design, implementation and evaluation of public policies aimed at improving their life conditions. We have several reasons for doing so, the neighbors are the ones who know the reality and the problems of the neighborhood, moreover while taking part in decisions and their implementation, residents also are responsible for the intervention project, increasing their self-esteem and project ownership and then it is possible between all to improve the neighborhood. This contributes to the reinvention of local identity, something very complex in these neighborhoods, and to convert weakness into strength. Unlike during the 80’s, today it is unthinkable acting in these areas in a disaggregated or partial way, and the concept of Living City and/or Integrated City is gaining ground in all forums and professionals, based on the pillars of, rehabilitating peripheral neighborhoods and urban centers (historical), through public management which integrates all agencies or departments, (whether municipal, regional or central), with responsibility in these areas: urban, social, security, is the way to actions continue to be sustainable over time. Definitely urban regeneration is: Comprehensiveness, Territoriality and Participation is a new tool available to create new opportunities in the city, and this way to recover: the city for citizens.

Notes This is not a Scientific Report.

The Author does not have intention to present the full information on the subject.