MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI

ՄՇԱԿՈՒԹԱՅԻՆ ԺԱՌԱՆԳՈՒԹՅՈՒՆ Փորձ և հեռանկարներ միջազգային համատեքստում

CULTURAL HERITAGE Experience & Perspectives in International Context

ROCHEMP CENTER FOR CULTURAL HERITAGE

1 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

ՀԱՅԱՍՏԱՆԻ ԱԶԳԱՅԻՆ ՊԱՏԿԵՐԱՍՐԱՀ

ԲՈԼՈՆՅԱՅԻ ԱԼՄԱ ՄԱՏԵՐ ՍՏՈՒԴԻՈՐՈՒՄ ՀԱՄԱԼՍԱՐԱՆԻ ՄՇԱԿՈՒԹԱՅԻՆ ԺԱՌԱՆԳՈՒԹՅԱՆ ԲԱԺԻՆ

ՄՇԱԿՈՒԹԱՅԻՆ ԺԱՌԱՆԳՈՒԹՅՈՒՆ Փորձ և հեռանկարներ միջազգային համատեքստում

ՌՕՔԵՄՓ ԿԵՆՏՐՈՆԻ ՄԻՋԱԶԳԱՅԻՆ ԳԻՏԱԺՈՂՈՎԻ ՆՅՈՒԹԵՐԻ ԺՈՂՈՎԱԾՈՒ 2020, հունվարի 23 - 24

Երևան 2020

2 MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI

NATIONAL GALLERY OF

ALMA MATER STUDIORUM – UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL HERITAGE

CULTURAL HERITAGE Experience & Perspectives in International Context

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROCHEMP CENTER INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE 23rd - 24th of January 2020

Yerevan 2020

3 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

ՀՏԴ 008:06 ԳՄԴ 71 Մ 840

ՄՇԱԿՈՒԹԱՅԻՆ ԺԱՌԱՆԳՈՒԹՅՈՒՆ. Փորձ և հեռանկարներ Մ 840 միջազգային համատեքստում: ՌՕՔԵՄՓ 1-ԻՆ ՏԱՐԵԿԱՆ ՄԻՋԱԶԳԱՅԻՆ ԳԻՏԱԺՈՂՈՎ: 2020, hունվարի 23-24 / Խմբ.` Անի Ավագյան.- Եր.: ՀԱՅԱՍՏԱՆԻ ԱԶԳԱՅԻՆ ՊԱՏԿԵՐԱՍՐԱՀ, 2020.- 124 էջ:

CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experience & Perspectives in International Context. ROCHEMP 1st ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE. 23-24, January, 2020 / Editor Avagyan. . NATIONAL GALLERY OF ARMENIA, 2020.- pp. 124.

ՀՏԴ 008:06 ԳՄԴ 71

Խմբագիր՝ Անի Ավագյան Editor: Ani Avagyan

Կարծիքներն ու արդյունքները, որոնք արտահայտված են այս հրատարակության հոդվածներում, պատկանում են առանձին հեղինակներին։ Տեքստերի և լուսանկարների հեղինակային իրավունքը © պատկանում է հեղինակներին:

The views and findings as expressed in the contributions to this publication are those of individual authors. Copyright of texts and photos ©with the authors.

© ՀԱՅԱՍՏԱՆԻ ԱԶԳԱՅԻՆ ՊԱՏԿԵՐԱՍՐԱՀ, 2020 ISBN 978-99941-79-34-3

Cover image: Aghjots Vank or Saint Stephen Monastery of Goght, 13th c. Կազմի նկարը՝ Աղջոցի կամ Գողթի Սբ. Ստեփանոս վանք, 13-րդ դ.

4 MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI CONTENTS

About ROCHEMP Center / ՌՕՔԵՄՓ կենտրոնի մասին ���������������������� 7

From Editor �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������8 Խմբագրի կողմից ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10

CULTURAL HERITAGE PROJECTS IN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXTS

MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI () The ROCHEMP Project: Regional Office for Cultural Heritage Enhancement, Management and Protection ������������������������������������������������� 14

ARTUR PETROSYAN, ROBERTO DAN, BORIS GASPARYAN (Armenia, Italy) Good Practices for Collaboration in the Identification, Study and Protection of Cultural Heritage: The Armenian - Italian Archaeological Expeditions in Kotayk and Vayots Dzor (Armenia) �����������������������������������������23

PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI (Italy) Fifteen years of Iranian-Italian Collaboration in the Field of Archaeology and Conservation: a Study Case ���������������������������������������������� 38

SHAHRZAD AMIN SHIRAZI (Islamic Republic of ) Iranian Experience in Research, Management, and Training in the Field of Conservation �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 50

FROM THE PAST TO THE FUTURE: TRAINING OF THE PROFESSIONALS IN THE FIELD OF CULTURAL HERITAGE

LAURA BARATIN (Italy) Higher Education in Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage in the Euro Mediterranean Area: a Model and an Opportunity for Young People �������������������������������������������� 60

5 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

JOSEPH ZAAROUR (Lebanon) Conservation, Restoration of Cultural Property Program: the Experience in Lebanon ������������������������������������������������������������������������� 71

HAMLET PETROSYAN (Armenia) Ethnocide in Artsakh: The Mechanisms of ’s Usurpation of Indigenous Armenian Cultural Heritage ���������������������������������������������������77

ԳԱՅԱՆԵ ԷԼԻԱԶՅԱՆ (Հայաստան) Գ­րա­վոր ժա­ռան­գութ­յան պահ­պան­ման ո­լոր­տում մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րի վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման անհ­րա­ժեշ­տութ­յու­նը և խնդ­րի լուծ­ման ու­ղի­նե­րի ո­րո­նու­մը ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 89

CULTURAL HERITAGE FOR PUBLIC: HOW TO COMMUNICATE AND ENGAGE THE PUBLIC?

MICHAEL BADALYAN (Armenia) Karmir Blur Historical & Archaeological Museum-Reserve and the Community: a Successful Practice in Revitalization of the Historical Site �������� 98

MUSTAFA GONEN (Turkey) Cultural Heritage Preservation Through Training Programs: Practices in Turkey ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 107

Programme of the Conference ����������������������������������������������������������116 Photo gallery ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������119

6 MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI About ROCHEMP Center

ROCHEMP Center is the result of the ROCHEMP project developed by the University of Bologna and the Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sport of the Republic of Armenia, with the support of AICS – Italian Agency for Development Cooperation. The project was aimed to establish a “competence Centre” to provide assistance and support in future activities related to management, conservation and enhancement of cultural heritage in Armenia and the surrounding Region. The goal of the Centre is to support the progress in both tangible and intangible cultural heritage protection, management and enhancement, such as archaeological objects, historical architectural structures, decorative surfaces, paintings, sculpture, traditions, music, folklore etc. The project acts in the five key areas: Management, Training, Regulations, Communication, and Regional Hub. All works are implemented in close collaboration with the professors, researchers and technical staff from four involved structures of the University of Bologna, under the leadership of the Department of Cultural Heritage of the Campus of Ravenna. The Center was inaugurated on 31st of July, 2018 at the presence of the President of the Republic of Armenia Mr. Armen Sarkissian, and the President of the Italian Republic Mr. Sergio Mattarella, in the premises of the National Gallery of Armenia in the heart of Yerevan.

ՌՕՔԵՄՓ կենտրոնի մասին

ՌՕՔԵՄՓ կենտ­րո­նը հիմ­ ադր­վել է ­Բոլոնյա­յի հա­մալ­սա­րա­նի և ՀՀ կրթութ­յան, գի­տութ­յան, մշա­կույ­թի և ս­պոր­տի նա­խա­րա­րութ­յան կող­մից մշակ­ված ՌՕՔԵՄՓ ծրագ­րի արդ­յուն­քում, Զար­ ­գաց­ման ի­տա­լա­կան գոր­ծա­կա­լութ­յան ա­ջակ­ցութ­յամբ (AICS): ­Նա­խագ­ծի նպա­տակն է ստեղ­ծել «մաս­նա­գի­տաց­ված կենտ­րոն», ո­րը կա­ ջակ­ցի Հա­յաս­տա­նում և ­րա տա ­ծաշր­ջա­նում մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան կա­ռա­ վար­ման, պահ­պա­նութ­յան և ­զար­գաց­ման գոր­ծըն­թաց­նե­րին։ ­Կենտ­րո­նի նպա­տակն է ա­ջակ­ցել նյու­թա­կան և­ ոչ նյու­թա­կան մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ ռան­գութ­յան բո­լոր տե­սակ­նե­րի պաշտ­պա­նութ­յան, կա­ռա­վար­ման և­ արժ­ևոր­ման գոր­ծըն­թաց­նե­րի կա­տա­րե­լա­գործ­մա­նը, ինչ­պի­սիք են հնա­գի­տա­կան ​​ա­ռար­կա­նե­ րը, պատ­մա­կան ճար­տա­րա­պե­տա­կան ​​կա­ռույց­նե­րը, դե­կո­րա­տիվ մա­կե­րես­նե­րը, կտավ­ ե­րը, քան­դակ­նե­րը, ա­վան­դույթ­նե­րը, ե­րաժշ­տութ­յու­նը, բա­նահ­յու­սութ­յու­նը և ­ այլն: ­Նա­խա­գի­ծը գոր­ծում է հինգ ­ ա հիմ ­կան ո­լորտ­նե­րում։Բո­ ­լոր աշ­խա­տանք­ներն ի­րա­ կա­նաց­վում են Բոլոնյա­ ­յի հա­մալ­սա­րա­նի չորս ներգ­րավ­ված կա­ռույց­նե­րի դա­սա­ խոս­նե­րի, հե­տա­զո­տող­նե­րի և ­տեխ­նի­կա­կան անձ­նա­կազ­մի հետ սերտ­մա հա ­գոր­ ծակ­ցութ­յամբ՝ ­Ռա­վեն­նա­յի հա­մալ­սա­րա­նի մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան բաժ­նի ղե­կա­վա­րութ­յան ներ­քո: ­Կենտ­րո­նի պաշ­տո­նա­կան բա­ցու­մը տե­ղի է ու­նե­ցել 2018թ. հու­լի­սի 31-ին՝ ­Հա­յաս­ տա­նի ­Հան­րա­պե­տութ­յան նա­խա­գահ պրն. Ար­մեն ­Սարգս­յա­նի և Ի­տա­լիա­յի ­Հան­ րա­պե­տութ­յան նա­խա­գահ պրն. Սեր­ ­ջիո Մատ­ ­տա­րել­լա­յի ներ­կա­յութ­յամբ` Եր­ևա­նի սրտում գտնվող­Հա ­յաս­տա­նի ազ­գա­յին պատ­կե­րաս­րա­հում։

7 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Dear Reader,

In your hands are the proceedings of the RՕCHEMP International Conference 2020 with a general theme of “Cultural Heritage: Experience and Perspectives in International Context”. The conference took place from 23rd to 24th of January in Yerevan, at the Conference Hall of the Mesrop Mashtots Research Institute for Ancient Manuscripts. This scientific event, organized by the ROCHEMP Center with the support of the Department of Cultural Heritage of the University of Bologna, the Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sports of the Republic of Armenia and AICS – Italian Agency for Development Cooperation, brought together around 150 local, regional and international experts in an exchange of experiences and points of view 1) on international cooperation in the conservation, management and enhancement of cultural heritage, 2) on the training of professionals working in various fields and 3) on community involvement in the protection and preservation of the local cultural heritage. The Conference became a wonderful opportunity for sharing and dialogue among experts coming from Armenia, Iran, Italy, Lebanon and Turkey, fostering the development of new studies and perspectives for the enhancement of cultural heritage as a leading actor for social, economic growth and sustainability. Experienced experts in the field of restoration, conservation, archaeology, museology, cultural studies, community development, and public affairs presented their research and experience. During the opening session the conference participants were welcomed by the speeches of respectful representatives of all authorities and institutions involved; the Ambassador of Italy in Armenia His Excellency VINCENZO DEL MONACO delivered a speech by underlining the role of ROCHEMP project in the cultural diplomatic relationships between Armenia and Italy. The Deputy Minister of Education, Science, Culture and Sport of RA NARINE KHACHATURYAN mentioned about the opportunity of improving the protection, management and enhancement of cultural heritage in Armenia through the work of ROCHEMP Centre. The representative of AICS - Italian Agency for Development Cooperation PIETRO PIPI, talking about the project as a good example of international cooperation between the two countries, stressed on the importance of efficiency and future sustainability of the project. The Director of Department of Cultural Heritage at the University of Bologna Dr. LUIGI CANETTI presented the long history of Italian-Armenian relationships putting the ROCHEMP project in the same line with other historically important partnerships. The Director of the National Gallery of Armenia, ARMAN TSATURYAN, spoke about the establishment of

8 MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI

the ROCHEMP Centre as an institutional branch of the NGA and expressed gratefulness of cooperation within the project. The Session was moderated by the Director of the ROCHEMP Centre ANI AVAGYAN. During the three Thematic Sessions fifteen distinguished scholars and officials presented their work and research. The scientific initiative was concluded with a round table-discussion titled “Implementation of ROCHEMP goals in 2020: training, filed activities, future projects”. The participants representing prestigious institutions, shared considerations and points of view on the topics of the two days conference in particular, complex issues related to the professional development, restoration, interdisciplinary collaboration, cross institutional cooperation for the benefit to the cultural heritage. The papers of conference presentations gathered in this publication are addressed to cultural heritage professionals, conservators, restores, archaeologists, art historians, museum professionals, academics, professors, students, and in general to those who are interested in the topics presented by the authors of the papers. We express our deep and sincere gratitude to the partners, participants, contributors and the volunteers. A particular thanks to H.E. Vincenzo Del Monaco, Mariangela Vandini, Tania Chinnie and the staff of the ROCHEMP Centre for their help in organizing the Conference. For preparing this publication and editing the Armenian texts we are thankful to the National Gallery Publication department in the face of Ara Khachikoghlyan. A particular gratitude is addressed to the leadership of Matenadaran for providing us with the beautiful premises, where for two days the participants had fruitful and efficient discussions. We truly believe that the contributions published in these proceedings will be a useful source in terms of experience exchange, discussion of field issues, proposal of relevant solutions and set-up of quality criteria in various areas of cultural heritage. Ani Avagyan

9 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Սիրելի ընթերցող,

Ձեր ձեռքում է ՌՕՔԵՄՓ մշակութային ժառանգության կենտրոնի «Մշակութային ժառանգություն. Փորձ և հեռանկարներ միջազգային համատեքստում» թեմայով տարեկան գիտաժողովի նյութերի ժողո­ վածուն։ Գիտաժողովը տեղի ունեցավ 2020թ․ հունվարի 23-ից 24-ը Երևանում, Մատենադարան Մեսրոպ Մաշտոցի անվան հին ձեռագրերի գիտահետազոտական ինստիտուտի նիստերի դահլիճում: ՌՕՔԵՄՓ կենտրոնի կողմից Բոլոնյայի համալսարանի մշակութային ժառանգության բաժնի, ՀՀ կրթության, գիտության, մշակույթի և սպորտի նախարարության և Զարգացման իտալական գործակալության AICS-ի աջակցությամբ կազմակերպված այս գիտաժողովը մեկտեղեց ազգային, տարածաշրջանային և միջազգային շուրջ 150 փորձագետների, որոնք իրենց փորձն ու տեսակետները փոխանակեցին հետևյալ ենթա ­ թեմաների շուրջ՝ 1) մշակութային ժառանգությունը միջազգային­ համա գործակցության համատեքստում, 2) մշակութային ժառանգության ոլորտի մասնագետների պատրաստում, 3) տեղական համայնքի ներ­ գրավումը­ մշակութային ժառանգության պաշտպանության ևպան­ պահ ­ ման գոր­ծում: Համա­ ժո­ ղո­ վը­ հրաշալի­ առիթ դարձավ Հայաստանի և Իրանից, Իտալիայից, Լիբանանից և Թուրքիայից ժամանած փորձագետների միջև փորձի փոխանակման և երկխոսության համար՝ խթանելով մշակութային ժառանգության ամրակայման նոր ուսումասիրությունների և հեռանկարների ձևավորմանը որպես սոցիալական և տնտեսական առաջընթացի և կայունության կարևոր գործոն: Վերականգնման, պահպանության, հնագիտության, թանգարանա ­ գիտության, մշակութային ուսումասիրությունների, համայնքների հետ տարվող աշխատանքի և հանրայնացման փորձառու մասնագետները ներկայացնում էին իրենց ուսումասիրություններն ու փորձը: Բացման նստաշրջանում ողջույնի խոսքով հանդես եկան ներգրավված գերատեսչությունների և հաստատությունների հարգարժան ներկայա­ ցուցիչները:­ Ելույթ ունեցավ Հայաստանում Իտալիայի դեսպան Գերաշնորհ ՎԻՆՉԵՆՑՈ ԴԵԼ ՄՈՆԱԿՈՆ՝ ընդգծելով ՌՕՔԵՄՓ նա­ խագծի­ դերը Հայաստանի և Իտալիայի միջև մշակութային դիվանա­ գիտական­ հարաբերություններում: ՀՀ կրթության, գիտության, մշակույթի­ և սպորտի փոխնախարար ՆԱՐԻՆԵ ԽԱՉԱՏՈՒՐՅԱՆԸ նշեց ՌՕՔԵՄՓ կենտրոնի աշխատանքի միջոցով Հայաստանում մշակութային­­ ժառանգության պաշտպանության, կառավարման և արժևորման­­ ոլորտների զարգացման հնարավորության մասին: Համա­ գործակ­­ցության իտալական գործակալության ( AICS) ներկայացուցիչ ՊԻԵՏՐՈ ՊԻՊԻՆ, խոսելով ծրագրի մասին` որպես երկու երկրների միջև միջազգային համագործակցության լավ օրինակ, շեշտեց գրիծրա­ արդյունավետության և շարունակական գործունեության կարևորու­ թյունը: Բոլոնյայի համալսարանի մշակութային ժառանգության բաժնի

10 MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI

տնօրեն դոկտոր ԼՈՒԻՋԻ ԿԱՆԵՏՏԻՆ ներկայացրեց հայ-իտալական հարաբերությունների երկարամյա պատմությունը` ՌՕՔԵՄՓ նախա­ գիծը նշելով պատմական այլ համագործակցությունների շար­քում: Հայաստանի ազգային պատկերասրահի տնօրեն ԱՐՄԱՆ ԾԱՏՈՒՐ­ ՅԱՆՆ իր ելույթում ներկայացրեց ՌՕՔԵՄՓ կենտրոնի՝ որպես ՀԱՊ-ի մասնաճյուղ ստեղծելու գործընթացը: Նիստը վարում էր ՌՕՔԵՄՓ կենտրոնի տնօրեն ԱՆԻ ԱՎԱԳՅԱՆԸ: Երեք թեմատիկ նիստերի ընթացքում տասնհինգ փորձառու գիտնական­ ներ և պաշտոնյաներ ներկայացրեցին իրենց աշխատանքներն ու հետազոտությունները: Գիտա­կան ​​նա­խա­ձեռ­նութ­յունն ­վարտ ա ­վեց կլոր սե­ղան-քննարկ­մամբ, ո­րը կրում էր «ՌՕՔԵՄՓ-ի ­տակ նպա ­նե­րի ի­րա­կա­նա­ցու­մը 2020թ.» խո­ րա­գի­րը։ Հե­ղի­նա­կա­վոր մի շարք ­տահաս ­տութ­յուն­ներ ներ­կա­յաց­նող մաս­նա­կից­նե­րը մտքեր և տե­սա­կետ­ներ փո­խա­նա­կե­ցին գի­տա­ժո­ղո­վի թե­մա­նե­րի, մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան վե­րա­կանգն­ման մաս­նա­գետ­ նե­րի պատ­րաստ­ման, մի­ջա­ռար­կա­յա­կան, մի­ջինս­տի­տու­ցիո­նալ հա­մա­ գոր­ծակ­ցութ­յան և­ այլ հրա­տապ հար­ցե­րի շուրջ: Սույն ­ղոժո ­վա­ծո­ւ ում հրա­տա­րակ­ված նյու­թե­րը հաս­ցեագր­ված են մշա­ կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան ո­լոր­տի մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րին՝ ամ­րա­կա­յող­նե­րին, վերականգ­նող­նե­րին, հնա­գետ­նե­րին, արվեստաբաններին, թան­գա­րա­ նա­գետ­նե­րին, հե­տա­զո­տող­նե­րին, դա­սա­խոս­նե­րին, ու­սա­նող­նե­րին և, ընդ­հա­նուր ­մամբ,առ նրանց, ով­քեր հե­տաքրքր­ված են հե­ղի­նակ­նե­րի կող­մից ներ­կա­յաց­ված թե­մա­նե­րով: Մեր խո­րին ե­րախ­տա­գի­տութ­յունն ենք հայտ­նում գոր­ծըն­կեր­նե­րին, մաս­նա­կից­նե­րին, բա­նա­խոս­նե­րին և կա­մա­վոր­նե­րին: Ա­ռանձ­նա­հա­ տուկ շնոր­հա­կա­լութ­յուն Մա­րիան­ջե­լա Վան­դի­նիին, Տա­նիա Քին­նիին և ՌՕՔԵՄՓ կենտ­րո­նի անձ­նա­կազ­մին՝ ­տագի ­ժո­ղո­վի կազ­մա­կերպ­ման գոր­ծում ­ցացու ­բե­րած ա­ջակ­ցութ­յան հա­մար: Այս հրա­տա­րա­կութ­յան նա­խա­պատ­րաստ­ման, հա­յե­րեն տեքս­տե­րի խմբագր­ման հա­մար շնոր­ հա­կալ ենք Ազ­գա­յին պատ­կե­րաս­րա­հի հրա­տա­րակ­չա­կան բաժ­նին՝ ի դեմս վա­րիչ Ա­րա Խա­չի­կօղլ­յա­նի։ Հա­տուկ շնոր­հա­կա­լութ­յուն ենք հայտ­ նումՄա ­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի ղե­կա­վա­րութ­յա­նը գի­տա­ժո­ղո­վի աշ­խա­տանք­նե­ րը կազ­մա­կեր­պե­լու նպա­տա­կով դահ­լիճ տրա­մադ­րե­լու ­մար,հա որ­տեղ եր­կու օր ­նամաս ­կից­նե­րը արդ­յու­նա­վետ քննար­կում­ եր ու­նե­ցան։ Լիահույս ենք, որ սույն ժողովածուում հրատարակված նյութերը­ օգտա կար կլինեն փորձի փոխանակման, մի շարք ոլորտային խնդիրների քննարկ­ ման,­ դրանց լուծումերի առաջադրման և չափորոշիչների ձևա­ վորման գործում։

Անի Ավագյան

11 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

12 MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI

CULTURAL HERITAGE PROJECTS IN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXTS

13 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context THE ROCHEMP PROJECT: REGIONAL OFFICE FOR CULTURAL HERITAGE ENHANCEMENT, MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION

MARIANGELA VANDINI scientific director of the ROCHEMP Project, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna – Italy / [email protected]

TANIA CHINNI project manager of the ROCHEMP Project, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna – Italy / [email protected]

ԱՄՓՈՓԱԳԻՐ Հա­յաս­տա­նը աշ­խար­հի ա­մե­նա­հին քրիս­տոն­յա երկր­նե­րից է, ո­րը շնոր­հիվ իր ազ­դե­ ցիկ ճար­տա­րա­պե­տա­կան, պատ­մա­կան, ազ­գագ­րա­կան, գե­ղար­վես­տա­կան, գրա­կան ժա­ռան­գութ­յան՝ դա­րե­րի ըն­թաց­քում ­ջոհա ­ղութ­յամբ պաշտ­պա­նել ու պահ­պա­նել է ազ­ գա­յին ինք­նութ­յու­նը։ Այ­սօր ­Հա­յաս­տա­նը երկ­րի տնտե­սա­կան նե­րու­ժի և ­կա­յուն զբո­ սաշր­ջութ­յան զար­գաց­ման նպա­տա­կով ներդ­րում­ ե­րի ներգ­րավ­մամբ մեծ կար­ևո­րութ­ յուն է տա­լիս մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յա­նը՝ գի­տակ­ցե­լով ազ­գա­յին ա­վան­դույթ­նե­րի և ստեղ­ծա­գործ ար­տադ­րան­քի պահ­պան­ման կար­ևո­րութ­յու­նը։ Այ­դու­հան­դերձ, մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րի տեխ­նի­կա­կան հա­տուկ հմտութ­յուն­նե­րը նո­րաց­նե­լու և ­կա­տա­րե­լա­գոր­ծե­լու հնա­րա­վո­րութ­յուն­նե­րի պա­կա­սը այ­սօր կրի­տի­կա­կան գոր­ծոն է այս հիա­նա­լի մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան պահ­պան­ման, կա­ռա­վար­ման և­ արժ­ևոր­ ման հա­մար: ­Մաս­նա­վո­րա­պես, անհ­րա­ժեշ­տութ­յուն կա ­ղայ տե ­նաց­նե­լու ­րավե ­կանգն­ման և պահ­ ­ պան­ման ո­լոր­տի մի­ջազ­գա­յին փոր­ձը ա­մե­նա­ժա­մա­նա­կա­կից չա­փա­նիշ­նե­րի հա­մա­ ձայն, ինչ­պես նաև խրա­խու­սե­լու կար­գա­վոր­ման հստակ շրջա­նակ­նե­րի ա­դապ­տա­ցու­ մը մի­ջամ­տութ­յան լա­վա­գույն փոր­ձի և ­հա­տուկ հմտութ­յուն­նե­րի սահ­ման­ման գոր­ծում: ՌՕՔԵՄՓ նա­խա­գի­ծը` մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան պահ­պա­նութ­յան, կա­ռա­վար­ման և­ արժ­ևոր­ման տա­րա­ծաշր­ջա­նա­յին կենտ­րո­նը, ստեղծ­վել է երկ­րի տնտե­սա­կան զար­ գաց­ման նպա­տա­կով ՀՀ կա­ռա­վա­րութ­յան սահ­մա­նած ա­ռաջ­նա­հեր­թութ­յուն­նե­րից եր­կու­սին ար­ձա­գան­քե­լու, ­րավե ­կանգն­ման աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րում ­րա ո ­կի ա­պա­հով­ման հա­մա­կար­գը բա­րե­լա­վե­լու և­շա մ ­կու­թա­յին ծրագ­րե­րի հան­րահռ­չակ­մա­նը նպաս­տե­լու հա­մար։ Key words - Cultural Heritage, international cooperation, Armenia, Italy, ROCHEMP ­Բա­նա­լի բա­ռեր - մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յուն, մի­ջազ­գա­յին հա­մա­գոր­ծակ­ցութ­յուն, ­Հա­յաս­տան, Ի­տա­լիա, ՌՕՔԵՄՓ

14 MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI The general context and the Italian-Armenian cooperation on Cultural Heritage

Settled down on the plateau, Armenia is today a small Christian Republic with a great amount of tangible and intangible cultural heritage. From the remains of the ancient Urartian Kingdom (8th-7th century BC), to the monasteries of early Christianity, up to uses and traditions that still echo today in the habits of the local population, the Armenian cultural heritage assumes unparalleled uniqueness and relevance. The local population is sensitive to the importance of this heritage and, over the centuries, has relied on it to affirm and keep their cultural identity alive, even outside national borders. In fact, the Armenian community has often integrated peacefully in other Countries, without renouncing its own history and traditions: this has determined the presence of a consistent Armenian cultural heritage spread in the world. Today, the value of cultural heritage is not limited to the identity of the population, but has also an economic relevance for the Country: the attractiveness in terms of domestic and international tourism is widely recognized for the approximately 30.000 monuments surveyed on the territory of the Republic of Armenia and they are considered today one of the main growth factors. Despite these positive premises, the Armenian cultural heritage appears to be extremely vulnerable and subject to numerous critical factors: from the instability generated by a highly seismic territory, to the lack of opportunities for updating and deepening for professionals in the cultural sector. To deal with some of these critical issues, the Governmental Authorities have repeatedly supported cooperation policies with European Countries, thanks to projects for increase skills and update the regulatory frameworks. Since the 1960s Armenia and Italy are involved in cooperation projects on this subject. The first experience is related to two exponents of the Armenian Diaspora in Italy, who funded the restoration of the Church of S. Hripsimè. We also remember the important work of Adriano Alpago Novello (1932-2005), architect and architectural historian at the Politecnico di Milano, who, in 1976, founded and directed the Centro Studi e Documentazione della Cultura Armena (CSDCA), and published two series of studies dedicated to Armenian architecture1. Between 1999 and 2011, the Italian commitment on the Armenian cultural heritage was made explicit through a pilot project, directed by the Centro Studi e Documentazione della Cultura Armena (CSDCA) and the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Between 2011 and 2014, the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Politecnico di Milano funded the project “Formazione in Armenia: sostegno alle istituzioni locali per la tutela e la conservazione del patrimonio culturale”, for the establishment of a multidisciplinary training activity in the field of cultural heritage. In 2016, the Republic of Armenia was involved in the Erasmus+ CBHE “HERITAG” project (Higher Education interdisciplinary Reform In Tourism management and Applied Geoinformation curricula), coordinated by the University of Valencia, where Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna participated through the Center for Advanced Studies for Tourism (CAST - Campus of Rimini), with the aim of promoting the development of new professional profiles capable of using GIS technology for the tourist enhancement in historical sites.

1 Documenti di Architettura Armena e Ricerca sull’Architettura Armena. 15 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Armenia has therefore embarked on a virtuous process to achieve a more conscious and effective conservation of its heritage, however the path is not complete. Despite the improvements achieved, the Government Authorities still record a lack of specific technical knowledge in the field of conservation and enhancement of cultural heritage. The approach to restoration by local experts and operator often refers to outdated traditions based on the restoration of artefacts and reconstruction of monuments, subordinating the principle of authenticity to the reading of the object itself. The numerous experiences carried out in the field have highlighted the great potential of the Armenian experts, who however underline the need for further opportunities of exchange and discussion, as well as for new training paths which envisage the conservation and restoration of cultural heritage as the main focus. Although some important experiences have been started in Armenian Universities and Institutions, there is no specific training path that offers students the opportunity to train in restoration of pictorial and sculptural works, archaeological objects or decorated surfaces. The interventions are mostly carried out by professionals who have acquired their skills in post-graduate courses, provided in other Countries. It should be noted that in Armenia there are many important cultural realities, with many good professional and amateur researchers, whose work could certainly benefit from a greater openness to dialogue and sharing with different professionals. Extremely aware of the needs of the cultural heritage sector, the Republic of Armenia has signed all the most important international Conventions in the sector, thus groups of local professionals has favoured the birth of local representations of international Associations, such as ICOM and ICOMOS, and has done its utmost to promote the protection of Armenian monuments within and outside its borders. The “ROCHEMP Project: Regional Office for Cultural Heritage Enhancement, Management and Protection” was created with the aim of supporting Armenia in this difficult process of modernization, through specific actions in which Italy intervenes through its expertise in management, conservation and enhancement of cultural heritage.

The ROCHEMP project and its actions

The “ROCHEMP Project: Regional Office for Cultural Heritage Enhancement, Management and Protection” is a capacity building project with the aim to create in Yerevan an office that can serve as reference for the exchange of experiences between different experts in the field of cultural heritage. It is not just a physical place where these meetings can be possible, but a proper structure fully supportive in the opening and consolidation of the dialogue between Armenian and international experts and technicians, stimulating the developments of new collaborations and projects. The project partnership is constituted by the former Ministry of Culture (now the Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sport), Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna and AICS - Agency Italian for Development Cooperation of the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation.

16 MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI

The Armenian Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sport is directly involved in the project and receive support from local institutions and universities, which collaborate in different activities. Among them, it is to be mentioned the important role of National University of Architecture and Construction of Armenia (NUACA) and Yerevan State Academy of Fine Arts (YSAFA), as representative of the Armenian higher educational institutions. In the ROCHEMP Project Alma Mater Studiorum Univerity of Bologna get involved with the competences of four its Departments: the Department of Cultural Heritage, the Department of Architecture, the Department of History and Cultures and the Center of Advanced Studies for Tourism (CAST). The project is focused on five specific thematic areas (management, training, legislation, communication and regional hub) and is divided into six main actions, identified as follows: - Action A: creation of the Center; - Action B: training of the staff of the Center and the local and regional experts; - Action C: definition of quality criteria for the realization of the restoration interventions;

- Action D: definition of criteria for planning at least one course for restorers of cultural heritage;

- Action E: supply of cultural services for the Region; - Action F: communication and publicity. Each of these actions has been properly designed to intervene on the priorities identified by the Armenian Ministry itself, and they are carefully monitored and controlled by three important committees, created for this purpose: - the Steering Committee; - the Scientific Committee; - Coordination groups.

The Steering Committee is composed by high government and university representatives of the two Countries involved in the Project (Italy and Armenia) and is chaired by H.E. the Italian Ambassador in Armenia, Vincenzo Del Monaco. The Steering Committee has the task of directing and monitoring the activities of the Center, so that it responds to the requests of the Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sport and can therefore produce benefits for the Country and the Armenian community in the world. The Scientific Committee is composed by technical and scientific experts and has the role of implementing the Center’s activities from a scientific point of view, ensuring the quality of the contents of the all activities. The Coordination Groups represent instead the operational units of local and international experts and technicians, specifically involved in achieving the goals of individual actions. For each activity, therefore, a specific coordination group was set up, able to provide operational 17 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context support in critical situations. They are dynamic groups in which, time to time, different experts can be invited as consultants. Action A Action A includes all the preliminary identification and placement phases of the Center itself. The space intended to house the Center has been identified by the Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sports within the prestigious building of the National Gallery of Armenia, where it is currently located at the top floor. The office were inaugurated on 31st July 2018, at the presence of the President of the Republic of Armenia, Armen Sarkissian, and the President of the Italian Republic, Sergio Mattarella, during his official visit in the Country (Figg. 1, 2). From an institutional point of view, the Center is now a branch of the National Gallery itself, a condition that makes it recognizable despite its very recent establishment. Action A does not only include the physical identification of the Center, but also its operational constitution, through the recruitment of qualified personnel. The staff with Armenian nationality and coming from educational path related to cultural heritage, is an integral part of both the Scientific Committee and the various Coordination Groups. Action B Action B has its direct aim in the training of local experts in Armenia. It consists in two main aspects: the training of the Centre’s staff and the creation of a permanent training course, opened to local and regional experts. In this action Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna intervenes by offering skills and competences of its teaching and technical staff. The action takes place in the invitation, at the structures of University of Bologna involved in the project, of two figures involved with the ROCHEMP Center: a managerial figure (the Director of the Center) and a technician with knowledge in the use of diagnostic equipment (selected internally at NUACA). The training experience, offered by the project itself for a total period of three months, aims to provide both figures with an overview on working and studying issues of cultural heritage adopted in Italian universities. The action also involves the creation of a permanent training course, held in Armenia and offered to all the staff of the Center and to a selected group of local and regional experts2 (Fig. 3). The participants, selected through a public call, are involved in frontal training activities and practical exercises, which will be conducted on a site selected by the project Steering Committee3. Action C Action C has a more structural aim, proposing to deepen the state of the art of Armenian legislation in reference to restoration works (Fig. 4). The action, which has an exploratory

2 As consequence of the global health emergency due to COVID-19, the training course was held online, through the institutional channels of Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna. 3 The site, selected after careful technical-scientific evaluation and in compliance with the priorities of the Country, was identified in the Basilica of Ererouyk. 18 MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI function, takes place through a systematic collection of regulations that control work contracts and execution thereof, without neglecting the role of any monitoring bodies. Within the same action C, a similar research will also be carried out within the Italian legislation. The comparison between Armenian and Italian models may provide, as final outcome, considerations and suggestions for a future rearrangement of the legislation currently in force in the Country. Action D In the same way of action C, action D also has a structural purpose, focused on the possibilities available in Armenia for the training of professionals in the cultural heritage sector. To achieve its goals, action D provides a research of training opportunities, currently active on the national territory and accessible to future restorers of cultural heritage. At the same time, an in-depth study will be realized on the definition, also at a regulatory level, of the restorer of cultural heritage and the procedure necessary for the establishment of a specific training course. The data collected will be compared with the guidelines available at European level4 and their specific applications in the Italian legislation. In Italy, in fact, the figure of the restorer was identified from a regulatory point of view in 2011, establishing by law what are the skills and knowledge necessary for carrying out this job, as well as what are the training courses that can release this specific qualification. Similarly to action C, the outcome of action D will be suggestions and advice, available for a future redefinition of this professional figure. Action E Action E has the task to offering to Armenian professionals the opportunity to get in touch with international colleagues and companies, thus guaranteeing opportunities for updating and sharing. Furthermore, it aims to provide support to associations, institutions and experts for finding collaborations, funding and international missions active in Armenia. To achieve the first goal, the project aims to organize opportunities for meetings and exchanges between international professionals from different fields of cultural heritage, promoting the widest participation of Armenian experts (Fig. 5). The realization of these events in public form (conferences, seminars, round tables,..) 5 will also allow the participation of non-professional audience, fostering a social debate on the issues addressed. The second aim of action E is realized though a sort of census of the opportunities to which Armenian researchers, institutions and associations can access for collaborations and funds for further cultural activities: this is a sort of meeting between “demand” and “supply” in which the ROCHEMP Center will act as intermediary and support. Action F Action F is entirely dedicated to communication. Communication has fundamental importance in the contemporary world and is an essential element to increase social awareness in the

4 For example the guidelines produced from E.C.C.O (European Confederation of Conservator-Restorer’s Organizations), international association with more of 6000 professionals, that promote high-level training and legal recognition of a professional statute, or ENCoRE (European Network for Conservation-Restoration Education), international network of higher educational institutions in the field of conservation- restoration, which follow the E.C.C.O’s guidelines. 5 As consequence of the global health emergency due to COVID-19, some of these public activities were converted in webinars. 19 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context field of cultural heritage. For this reason, action F is transversal to the whole project. Within action F, numerous activities are planned to keep high attention on issues and activities related to Armenian cultural heritage and the Center itself. This includes, for example, the communication plan for the ROCHEMP Center website (www.rochemp.org) and social channels (facebook, instagram and youtube). Action F not only advertises the Center, but also gives visibility to many cultural activities taking place on the Armenian territory, thanks to an updated blog.

Expected results and conclusions

The great attention that Armenian community have towards their culture has allowed the survival of one of the oldest and richest cultural heritages in the world, made of ancient archaeological remains, magnificent examples of religious architecture and unique traditions. However, the Armenian heritage is today very vulnerable, threatened by several factors. Particularly varied and widespread, this heritage is often affected by traditional and outdated intervention methods, entrusted to workers who, although efficient, have no specialized competence to intervene. The lack of funding stands as another crucial issues to be faced, in order to support restoration campaigns and new opportunities for increasing skills and competences of the professionals. The Armenian Government is deeply aware of the importance of this immense cultural heritage and, for many years, has pursued a virtuous path of modernization, relying on international advice and support. Italy promptly responded to these requests, proposing targeted intervention programs, in particular for young professionals. The ROCHEMP project is therefore part of this long tradition of collaborations that get involve Armenia and Italy for several decades. The main aim of the project is to provide the Republic of Armenia an institutional structure as reference in the field of conservation and enhancement of cultural heritage, able to providing assistance both to operators and experts (hosting opportunities for international exchange and debates) and Local Authorities themselves (acting as consultant for the updating of the regulatory framework). Working on skills, neglecting the updating of the regulatory context in which local experts usually operate, create an inequality between theory and practice, which therefore becomes a limit in the field application and, therefore, in an effective conservation of cultural heritage. In the international practice of restoration, in recent decades, there has been a notable effort to define and systematize the skills and abilities required of the professional figure of the restorer. The development of up-to-date critical knowledge, the application of tailor-made best practices and the internationalization of skills and competences are essential elements to ensure innovative management and conservation of cultural heritage. The positive effects of the project also have an economic dimension. It is widely known that cultural heritage can generate an economic value in terms of new jobs and sustainable tourism, if well managed and enhanced. In this perspective, becomes essential the development of new contents and innovative forms of communication. The new digital methodologies, as well 20 MARIANGELA VANDINI, TANIA CHINNI as the principals of storytelling, can be successfully applied at the field of cultural heritage, in which knowledge are combined with each other in an unprecedented narratives for an experience both immersive and philologically informative. Properly protected and contextualized from a socio-cultural and regulatory point of view, Armenian cultural heritage can therefore be one of the main elements of the economic recovery in the Country. In this, the ROCHEMP Center can act as referring point, not only for the renewal process, but also for the development of an Armenian model for conservation and enhancement of cultural heritage, generating benefits for the entire Region.

21 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Fig. 1 – Opening day of the ROCHEMP Office (31st July 2018, Fig. 2 - Opening day of the ROCHEMP Office (31st July Yerevan, Republic of Armenia). Professor Luigi Tomassini 2018, Yerevan, Republic of Armenia). The President of the (delegate of the Rector of Alma Mater Studiorum University Republic of Armenia, Armen Sarkissian, and the President of of Bologna) introduces the ROCHEMP Project to President the Italian Republic, Sergio Mattarella, uncover the plaque at of Republic of Armenia, Armen Sarkissian, and President of the entrance of the office, in the National Gallery of Armenia. Italian Republic, Sergio Mattarella.

Fig. 3 – Moments from the pilot training course Fig. 4 – Technical round table “Quality principles: from “ROCHEMP2020: training for cultural heritage experts”. The the first drawings to the building site” (17th December training course, launched on February 2020 at the NUACA 2019, ROCHEMP Office, National Gallery of Armenia). University in Yerevan, was concluded in June 2020, using The public meeting was an occasion to discuss with digital platforms for facing the international emergency due Armenian Institutions, experts and operators about the to COVID-19. need in the field of architectural heritage.

Fig. 5 – Public events promoted by ROCHEMP Project. Upper side: the round table “Promotion of Armenian Cultural Heritage Knowledge in Europe and the Role of ROCHEMP Project”, dedicated to establish a dialogue on the promotion of Armenian culture aboard (17th December 2019, National Gallery of Armenia). Lower side: public webinars dedicated to the Basilica and archaeological site of Ererouyk (27th May 2020) and to reflect on the preservation of historic districts in the contemporary global cities (4th September 2020).

22 ARTUR PETROSYAN, ROBERTO DAN, BORIS GASPARYAN GOOD PRACTICES FOR COLLABORATION IN THE IDENTIFICATION, STUDY AND PROTECTION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE: THE ARMENIAN - ITALIAN ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXPEDITIONS IN KOTAYK AND VAYOTS DZOR (ARMENIA)

ARTUR PETROSYAN Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, «-1 Cave» Consortium / [email protected]

ROBERTO DAN International Association of Mediterranean and Oriental Studies (ISMEO), Tuscia University / [email protected]

BORIS GASPARYAN Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia / [email protected]

ԱՄՓՈՓԱԳԻՐ Հոդ­ ­վա­ծում ներ­կա­յաց­ված է ­Հա­յաս­տա­նի եր­կու՝ ­Կո­տայ­քի և ­Վա­յոց ­Ձո­րի մար­զե­րում, հայ-ի­տա­լա­կան հնա­գի­տա­կան ար­շա­վախմ­բի կա­տա­րած աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րի ամ­փոփ նկա­րա­գի­րը: ­Կո­տայ­քի հե­տա­խու­զա­կան ծրա­գի­րը (KSP) մեկ­նար­կել է 2013 թ.-ին, ո­րի նպա­տակն է ստեղ­ծել Հ­րազ­դան գե­տի վե­րին հո­սան­քը և Մար­ ­մա­րիկ գե­տի հո­վիտն ընդգր­կող հատ­վա­ծի հնա­գի­տա­կան քար­տե­զը: Աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րի արդ­յուն­քում ­սում ու ­ նա­սի­րութ­յուն­ներ են կա­տար­վել 174 հնա­վայ­րե­րում (նկ․ 1):­Մի քա­նի հնա­վայ­րե­րում ­ժա մա­նա­կագ­րութ­յու­նը հստա­կեց­նե­լու ­ անև ­խա­թար հնա­գի­տա­կան շեր­տեր հայտ­նա­բե­րե­ լու նպա­տա­կով կա­տար­վել են հե­տա­խու­զա­կան պե­ղում­ եր (նկ․ 2), իսկ Սո­ ­լակ-1/­Վար­ սակ հնա­վայ­րում 2014 թ-ից­տար կա ­վում են ­տեսիս ­մա­տիկ պե­ղում­ եր, ո­րի արդ­յուն­քում ար­ձա­նագր­վել է բազ­մա­շերտ (պա­լեո­լիթ - միջ­նա­դար) հնա­գի­տա­կան հա­մա­լիր, որն ընդգր­կում է­րար ու ­տա­կան պա­լա­տը, բա­զալ­տի հան­քա­վայ­րը, բնա­կե­լի հատ­ված­նե­ րը և­ եր­կու պատ­վար ու­նե­ցող ջրամ­բա­րը (նկ․ 4): Աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րի արդ­յուն­քում հայտ­ նա­բեր­ված կար­ևոր հնա­վայ­րեր են նաև Հ­րազ­դան գե­տի դա­րա­վան­դին տե­ղա­կայ­ված Սո­ ­լակ-1 վե­րին պա­լեո­լիթ­յան բա­ցօթ­յա կա­յա­նը (նկ․ 2), Քաղ­ ­սի գյու­ղում վաղբ­րոն­զե­ դար­յան հնա­վայ­րի, ինչ­պես նաև ­Մար­մա­րիկ գե­տի հով­տումՄեղ­ ­րա­ձոր գյու­ղում ­ձաար ­ նագր­ված ­Բեր­դի Գ­լուխ և ­Գո­գո­լի քա­րեր կոչ­վող վայ­րե­րում ­րակու ­րաքս­յան մշա­կույ­թի երկ­րորդ փու­լին պատ­կա­նող հնա­վայ­րե­րի հայտ­նա­բե­րու­մը: Վա­ ­յոց Ձոր­ ծրագ­րի (VDP) աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րը մեկ­նար­կել են 2016-ից: Աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րի արդ­յուն­քում հայտ­նա­բեր­վել և փաս­ ­տագր­վել են 80 հնա­վայ­րեր: Մի­ քա­նի հնա­վայ­րե­րում ­տարկա ­վում են ­տեսիս ­ մա­տիկ հնա­գի­տա­կան պե­ղում­ եր: Ա­մե­նա­կար­ևոր ձեռ­բե­րում­ ե­րից է Ա­րե­նի-2 քա­րայ­ 23 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

րում in situ ստորին­ պալեո­ ­լիթ­յան (նկ․ 7), նեո­լիթ­յան և­ ուշ ­նեո է ­լիթ­յան շեր­տե­րի ար­ձա­ նագ­րու­մը: ­Տիգ­րա­նա­շեն-1 հնա­վայ­րում ­ցաբա ­հայտ­վել է ե­զա­կի բազ­մա­շերտ հնա­վայր, ո­րը թվագր­վում է­ջին մի բրոն­զի դա­րով: Ե­ղեգ­նա­ձո­րում գտնվող­յոշկ Ք հնա­վայ­րը (նկ․ 8) հա­վա­նա­բար հան­դի­սա­նում է­մե ա ­նա­կար­ևոր ու­րար­տա­կան վար­չա­կան կենտ­րո­նը Ար­փա գե­տի հով­տում, ­տեղոր պահ­պան­վել են եր­կա­թե­դար­յան ճար­տա­րա­պե­տութ­յան տպա­վո­րիչ մա­ցորդ­նե­րը: Ել­փին-1 ժայ­ռա­փոր հա­մա­լի­րում ­ձաար ­նագր­վել են հնա­գի­ տա­կան շեր­տեր, ո­րոնք թվագր­վում են վաղ ­զիբրոն դա­րից մինչև ­նամիջ ­դար: ­Հե­տաքր­ քիր արդ­յունք­ներ են գրանց­վել նաև ­Մոխ­րոտ հնա­վայ­րում, իսկ­նի Գ ­շի­կա­ձո­րի միջ­նա­ դար­յան հա­մա­լի­րը (նկ․ 9), ո­րը գտնվում է­նի Գ ­շիկ գե­տի ա­փին, ­Նո­րա­վանք տա­նող ճա­նա­պար­հին, ե­զա­կի հնա­վայր է, որ­տեղ ար­ձա­նագր­վել են հնա­գույն ­գե այ ­գոր­ծութ­ յա­նը վե­րա­բե­րող տվյալ­ներ: ­Հոդ­վա­ծում ներ­կա­յաց­ված են ար­շա­վախմ­բի կա­տա­րած աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րը և­ ա­պա­գա ռազ­մա­վա­րութ­յու­նը։

Key words - Armenia, Kotayk Survey Project, Vayots Dzor Project, Armenian – Italian Cooperation, future activities

Բանալի բառեր – Հայաստան, Կոտայքի հետախուզական ծրագիր, հայ-իտալական համագործակցություն, ապագա ծրագրեր

Introduction

This article outlines the results and future perspectives of the activities of the Armenian - Italian expedition in Armenia led by the authors of this article. The projects are underpinned by a scientific cooperation agreement between the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the National Academy of Sciences, Republic of Armenia (IAE NAS RA) and International Association of Mediterranean and Oriental Studies (ISMEO). The activities have been developed thanks to financial support from ISMEO1, IAE NAS RA, the Gfoeller Renaissance Foundation, the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation (MAECI) and private funding. A series of operations aimed at investigating two regions, Kotayk (Kotayk Survey Project - KSP) and Vayots Dzor (Vayots Dzor Project - VDP), have been underway since 2013, and other activities which involve the territory of the entire Republic of Armenia. In the following pages, a brief account of the results accomplished and the planned future developments are presented. Both missions have common scientific objectives which are summarized below:

1) Creation of the first archaeological maps of these regions, which include sites occupied from prehistoric times to the medieval period. 2) Analysis of the settlement models and material culture of the prehistoric and protohistoric communities of these regions. 3) Understanding the impact of the state of on local populations and local cultural trajectories starting from an examination of changes in material culture and settlement patterns from the Late Bronze/Early Iron Age to the Middle Iron Age.

61Project of the Ministry of Education, Universities and Research of the Italian Republic (MIUR), entitled ‘Studi e ricerche sulle culture dell’Asia e dell’Africa: tradizione e continuità, rivitalizzazione e divulgazione’. 24 ARTUR PETROSYAN, ROBERTO DAN, BORIS GASPARYAN

4) Study of the characteristics and spread of settlements linked to the rise of the oldest local Armenian dynasty (Orontid period/Achaemenid and Hellenistic periods). 5) Investigation of Middle Ages heritage, characterised by an impressive number of important archaeological sites (monasteries, churches, cemeteries, khachkars, , etc.).

History of the Armenian – Italian archaeological collaboration

The beginning of Italian archaeological activities in Armenia dates back to 1994, just three years after the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Armenia signed on August 23 of 1990; independence was established on 21 September 1991 upon dissolution of the . This was the second research project ever developed in the Republic of Armenia after the (slightly earlier) investigations at Horom. The first Armenian - Italian archaeological expedition was directed by Raffaele Biscione (ICEVO-CNR) and Simon Hmayakyan (IAE NAS RA) between 1994 and 2014 around the south and western shores of (Biscione et al. 2002). The project started after the signing of a cooperation agreement between the Institute of Aegean and Near Eastern Studies of the National Research Council (ICEVO-CNR) as part of the “Urartu Program”, a wide-ranging scientific expedition involving philological, historical and archaeological research under the coordination of Mirjo Salvini, at that time director of ICEVO. The program in Armenia started in connection with the idea of developing a new general topographic map of Urartu that would update the 1976 Topographische Karte von Urarṭu (Kleiss - Hauptmann 1976). The project area was chosen for its characteristics favourable to human settlement and for its potential, shown by previously published archaeological work (Bobokhyan et al. 2015: 344). The main goal of the Armenian – Italian expedition was to record all the archaeological monuments dating to a period between the Early Bronze Age and the Arsacid period. The survey activities were aimed at studying the relationships between territory and human activities in the Armenian highlands, and were focused on analysis of settlement organization and territorial control in both in the pre-Urartian and Urartian periods. This attempt to reconstruct the settlement pattern and population distribution has provided important information on the social structure, state formation processes, and the dialectic between main centres and villages and between Urartians and dominated peoples. In the meantime, test excavations were conducted in the sites of Mtnadzor (1995-1996), Al (1995-1996), Airk (1997), Kra (1997-1998), Lchashen (2004-2006) and Tsovinar (2013). The survey activities have led to the identification of a complex system of pre-Urartian date with three hierarchical levels, a circumstance that suggests the existence of a “complex chiefdom”. Currently, the project may be considered concluded and the second final monograph devoted to the sites located on the western shore of the lake is under preparation. The second project involved a collaboration between the University of Florence and ; it started in 2013 and is still in progress, with the aim of investigating medieval cultural landscapes in Armenia, with a focus on the region of Vayots Dzor. The project includes a survey of the most significant Middle Ages sites and monuments, with a particular focus on architectural studies (Nucciotti et al., 2015). The third Armenian 25 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

– Italian archaeological project, with respect to its starting date, was the “Dragon Stones Archaeological Project” developed by IAE NAS RA in collaboration with Freie Universität Berlin and Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, co-directed by Arsen Bobokhyan (IAE NAS RA), Alessandra Gilibert (Ca’ Foscari University) and Pavol Hnila (Freie Universität) (Gilibert et al. 2012; Bobokhyan et al. 2018). This was the first expedition devoted to investigating the Vishaps, a distinctive group of decorated megalithic steles. The survey activities began in 2012 and are still in progress. The first excavation was started in 2013, in Karmir Sar on the southern slope of Mt Aragats (about 2900 m above sea level), where 12 Vishshaps have been found, as well as burial mounds of the 3rd and 2nd millennium BC and rock engravings. The goal is to identify the original chronological horizon of the artefacts in order to establish their archaeological and landscape context. Six of these mounds connected with the Vishaps have been excavated. According to C14 determinations, the archaeological complex dates mainly to the Middle Bronze Age (late 3rd - first half of the 2nd millennium BC), with a possible beginning in the Chalcolithic (5th – 4th millennia BC) and further use until the Early Iron Age (late 2nd millennium BC). The fourth Armenian – Italian project, the Kotayk Survey Project, the subject of this article, started in 2013 with a new cooperation between IAE NAS RA and ISMEO, under the direction of Artur Petrosyan (IAE NAS RA) and Roberto Dan (ISMEO). The activities conducted in the Kotayk region were designed to fill gaps in knowledge about Urartian expansion and the settlement pattern illustrated by prehistoric to Middle-Ages sites. The Vayots Dzor Project was the last to be developed; it began in 2016 and still underway. It is directed by Boris Gasparyan (IAE NAS RA), Artur Petrosyan and Roberto Dan, and its purpose is to comprehend the archaeological heritage of the Vayots Dzor region – which shows a great potential, with important discoveries such as the Areni-1 Cave and the presence of the Urartians as testified by the Fortress of Getap.

Kotayk Survey Project – KSP (2013-in progress)

The Kotayk Survey Project (KSP) started in the summer of 2013 and involves the study of the and Marmarik river valleys, both areas located in the northern part of the Kotayk region in the Armenian Republic. Some areas and sites in the Gegharkunik region have been included in our project, selected in geographically neighbouring areas and in geomorphological and environmental continuity with the primary area of investigation. The Kotayk region is located in the upper part of the River Hrazdan Valley (average altitude 1700- 1800 m a.s.l.), in a fertile volcanic plateau formed during the Quaternary Era by eruptions in the Gegham mountains, and includes the administrative regions of Hrazdan, and the former Nairi region. The area is characterized by volcanoes, several gorges, valleys and plateaus. The territory is home to the Gegham mountains, the Tsaghuniats mountain range and Mount Guthanasar. Major and minor rivers flow there, the longest of which are the Marmarik, the Tsakhadzor, the Arai, the and the Hrazdan (ex Zangu), one of the tributaries of the River Araxes (141 km long), which has 340 tributaries, 25 of which are more than 10 km long. The administrative area includes parts of the historic Armenian region of Ayrarat, where the provinces of Kotayk, Mazaz, Nig, Varazhnunik and Aragatsotn are located. According to the Urartian cuneiform inscriptions, this area was probably part of a territory called Etiuni. The region includes an important road system that connects 26 ARTUR PETROSYAN, ROBERTO DAN, BORIS GASPARYAN the developed area of the Ararat Valley with the basin of Lake Sevan, and is an important area for the production of minerals and stone, including gold mines and sources. Our initial activities are focused on an extensive and intensive field survey of the Kotayk region, which to date has led to the identification of 174 archaeological sites Fig.( 1), mostly previously unknown (Castelluccia et al. 2012: 28-35; Petrosyan et al. 2015: 58-68). The survey activity is aimed at the production of an archaeological map of the entire Kotayk Region and surrounding areas. The archaeological sites recorded and studied range in date between the Palaeolithic and the Middle Ages. Systematic regional investigations conducted by the KSP began in the summer of 2013, including a preliminary analysis of LANDSAT satellite images and a review of the previous scientific literature, for which the State List of Monuments of the Republic of Armenia was widely used. All the surveyed sites were studied by means of a survey conducted on foot, which enabled the collection of surface finds, mostly potsherds and obsidian fragments, and the examination of architectural remains. The area has been largely deforested and is still used today for pasturing and transhumance activities, which probably make use of the paths employed in antiquity for the same purposes. Where it is possible to observe architectural remains, in addition to the use of GPS and the compilation of recording sheets, a topographical survey was carried out utilizing images and measurements taken from drones. Various types of archaeological sites have been found: open-air sites, mainly dating back to the Palaeolithic; fortresses, settlements and Bronze and Iron Age burial grounds; some sites were registered only for the presence of surface finds, in the absence of visible architectural remains, and several that are clearly of ancient date were also registered, without however an exact chronology. Churches, chapels, mills, cemeteries and khatchkars are attributable to the medieval period, during which, as in many other regions of Armenia, previous remains and settlements were widely reused, in particular from the 10th to 14th centuries AD. The finds collected on these sites are currently being studied and the general results of the survey will be described in a specific paper (Petrosyan et al. forthcoming). Most of the archaeological sites are distributed along the valleys of the River Hrazdan and its main tributary, the River Marmarik. The archaeological situation is interesting, especially regarding the period of Urartian domination of these lands. Although the Hrazdan Valley was under the direct control of the Urartians and some northern areas seem to have been under forms of indirect control, the Marmarik Valley – on the basis of the types of sites and finds recorded there – seems to have been beyond the control, or even influence, of Urartu. This situation will be investigated in greater detail in the next few years. Some sites of particular interest have been selected for further investigations and test excavations have already been carried out at the following: Solak-1, an Upper Palaeolithic open-air site (KSP039, Fig. 2), Kaghsi-2 (KSP046), the fortress of Berdi-Dar (KSP025), the fortress of Tghit (KSP036, Fig. 3), and Meghradzor (KSP059). Among these, of particular note was the identification in 2011 of Solak-1/Varsak (KSP016), a 20-hectare site, discovered using a predictive archaeology model developed with G.I.S. software, a project that was awarded in 2019 the Europa Nostra/European Heritage Award in the Research Category (Dan – Petrosyan 2017: 294-317; Petrosyan et al. 2019: 391-400). This is a multi-period site established during the Late Bronze/Early Iron Age and then conquered by the Urartians, probably by Argišti I, during the opening of the road to Lake Sevan. A Urartian palace was built on an (apparently uninhabited) hill belonging to the site, in proximity to a (probably abandoned) earlier city (Fig. 4). The fortress established was enlarged in a later period and then abandoned at some time in the 7th century BC. The archaeological area consists of a

27 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Urartian fort, an extensive settlement which covers a series of hills and a flat area in front that is home to an impressive artificial lake created by the construction of two dams, with several channels that brought water to the settlement and the surrounding area (Fig. 5). Unfortunately, a burial ground directly connected to the site has not yet been found; its identification will be one of the goals of the next seasons. The discovery of the site of Solak-1 constitutes a remarkable advance in our knowledge of the Urartians in Armenia. Indeed, this is the first Urartian site discovered in the middle part of the Hrazdan Valley, which fills an important gap in the known Urartian settlement pattern in this part of the state. It shows a remarkable resemblance to other similar structures located in different parts of the state - in areas currently situated in Turkey and Iran – that are unfortunately not known in any detail. This is the first Urartian structure with the precise characteristics of a road-station, a forerunner of the medieval , to be investigated extensively. Solak is also one of the few archaeological sites in the entire Armenian Highlands that may be attributed with some degree of certainty to the Achaemenid/Orontid period. In the following years we are planning to complete the excavations of the Urartian fort and the surrounding structures and also investigate wide areas of the pre-Urartian/Urartian settlement, to try to understand from an archaeological perspective the cultural impact of the state of Urartu and its structures on the local communities. The final goal of our activities in Solak-1/Varsak, contemporary with the continuation of the scientific investigations, will be the creation of an eco-archaeological park designed for the protection and the appreciation of this unique archaeological context, together with its natural landscape, still almost untouched by human activity. The project is aimed at the conservation of cultural heritage and the strengthening of the local economy through the creation of an Eco-Archaeological Park for the conservation of the extensive pre-Urartian, Urartian and post-Urartian antiquities. The project’s main activities may be summarized in five main points: 1) documentation of archaeological and architectural remains 2) enhancement of the archaeological complex 3) training of local staff with regard to conservation work and archaeological investigation 4) design of park infrastructures and facilities 5) drafting of a sustainable tourism plan A Museum Centre located in the area of the site will have the task of managing the Archaeological Park and allowing visitors to observe the heritage not only of the site, but also of the entire region. The protection and enhancement of this heritage could be a significant source of development for local communities from cultural and economic perspectives.

Vayots Dzor Project –VDP (2016-in progress)

The Vayots Dzor Project (VDP) is an Armenian – Italian archaeological project based on contemporary survey and excavation activities (Gasparyan et al. 2020: 143-183). The project started in summer 2016, after a preliminary visit to the region in 2015. Its objective is the

28 ARTUR PETROSYAN, ROBERTO DAN, BORIS GASPARYAN archaeological exploration of the area (known today for its vineyards and for the production of high-quality ), with a particular focus on investigation of the area surrounding the Valley and its branches. The Vayots Dzor region has a strategic position. On one hand it constitutes the route which – from the Autonomous Republic of Nakhichevan, through the mountain pass of Selim – is the main way of reaching the southern shore of Lake Sevan. On the other side, it is crossed by the most important road that winds between the mountainous area of ​​Syunik and the Araxes Valley, following the course of the River Arpa. One of the most renowned international routes, the Silk Road, passed through here during the Middle Ages. Its strategic location, good climate compared to the surrounding mountainous area, abundance of watercourses and fertile volcanic soils make this area particularly suitable for the development of human settlements and agriculture. In fact, one of the oldest signs of wine production was discovered here, in the Areni-1 cave (VDP027), and is dated to the late Chalcolithic; wine is still produced today (among other things). Despite the richness of the archaeological heritage, the region has been little explored to date; we now know that it was already inhabited in the Palaeolithic era. One of the main objectives of the expedition is to understand the extent of human presence here from prehistoric times up to the Middle Ages, wit h particular attention to the Urartian domination of the area. In the middle of the last century, some Urartian belts were discovered in two different burial grounds, in (VDP006) and (VDP023). Recent archaeological excavations have been conducted in the Fortress of Getap I, which finally confirm the presence of the Kingdom of Urartu in the Middle Iron Age (Melkonyan et al. 2010). The Vayots Dzor region has not yet been the subject of systematic investigations focusing on pre-medieval sites, except for in 2011, when a preliminary project, co-directed by B. Gasparyan and K. Martirosyan- Olshansky, investigated an area of 40 square km in the Arpa Valley. During the activities, 38 archaeological sites were identified, mostly concentrated in the and Chiva area, with a chronological span from the Lower Palaeolithic to the Early Medieval period. The survey activities of the first four years were mainly concentrated along the course of the River Arpa. To understand in depth the settlement pattern of the area, that constitutes the gateway to the mountainous region of Vayots Dzor, it was also necessary to study the western part of the Ararat region. Currently 80 archaeological sites, ranging from the Palaeolithic to the Middle Ages, have been studied in this area. A small number of sites, currently dated only to the Middle Ages, have been added to our list. These are mostly located on an important road network, or are fortresses or necropolises – which, judging from their strategic positions and certa i n specific characteristics, may also have been occupied in previous periods; subsequent excavation seasons will throw more light on the situation. The chronologies of the identified sites will be established through test excavations in a series of selected sites. Over the years, a number of archaeological excavations have been carried out in the region. Extensive excavations have been conducted recently to understand the occupation phases of the Areni-2 cave (VDP028), Yelpin-1 (VDP004), Mokhrot-1 (VDP010) and Gnishikadzor (VDP029), and test trenches dug to reveal the archaeological potential and chronology of the Kyoshk-1 (VDP026), Tigranashen-1 (VDP053) and Rind Water Mill (VDP072) sites. Yelpin-1 (VDP004) is one of the most striking sites in Vayots Dzor (Fig. 6), comprising an impressive necropolis and a rock-cut complex with the presence of terraces, stairways and a rock-cut chamber. This is one of the key sites in the region; survey and excavation work have documented its occupation from the Early Bronze Age to the Middle Ages, with some interruptions (Dan et al. 2018: 59-82).

29 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

In Areni-2 cave since 2016 an area of around 25 m2 has been opened, with excavations inside the cave and on the platform in front (Fig. 7). The layers containing cultural remains were mainly present close to the cave entrance and on the front platform. Observations revealed a series of deposits; Neolithic and Chalcolithic finds come from Units 4 to 7, which were partly destroyed by later occupations. Neolithic period finds are limited, consisting of the complete skull of a goat, a bone dagger and a human rib bone. Notwithstanding their mixed deposition, all of the finds have been directly 14C dated and lie in the range late 8th – first half of the 7th millennium Cal BC. These finds may be interpreted as evidence of ritual activities conducted by local Early Holocene populations in the caves, showing that they were used as ritual localities long before the Chalcolithic inhabitants’ similar behaviour in Areni-1. The most interesting finds from Chalcolithic Areni-2 are a large amount of grinding stones and agricultural stone tools. The cave was probably used as a base by a small group of people involved in processing harvested crops, since the area near the cave is a flatland formed by low-energy river flow and is suitable for local agriculture and horticulture (and is occupied by vineyards and orchards nowadays). It is clear that caves played a very important role in the region throughout prehistory – and indeed later, remaining an essential part of the local historical-cultural landscape even during the medieval period. In Tigranashen-1 (VDP053) the field survey led to the identification of one of the few Middle Bronze Age settlements in the region. The preliminary excavations carried out in 2018 uncovered at least three different Middle Bronze Age occupation layers. Kyoshk (VDP026) is an impressive fortress (Fig. 8) located in the area of the modern city of Yeghegnadzor; it was established in Urartian times and used also in Late Iron Age and Hellenistic periods, up to the Middle Ages. The Urartian occupation there is contemporary with that in Yelpin and dates to the 8th and 7th centuries BC. At Mokhrot-1 (VDP010), work on an Early Bronze Age site from which a notable amount of surface pottery was excavated previously has led to the discovery of a possible Late Iron Age complex, which is still under investigation. Gnishikadzor (VDP029) is another very interesting multi-period site where the most important remains currently identified date to the Middle Ages Fig.( 9). Its use during the Middle Ages is clearly related to the sizeable monastery of , which was established in 13th century AD. This site has been the focus of excavations and a conservation programme aimed at attracting visitors who come to see the famous sites of Noravank and Areni-1; Gnishikadzor is located about halfway between them. The conservation project, in addition to the investigation and consolidation of the structures, has seen the creation of walkways that allow the excavation area to be visited safely, together with the creation and installation of multilingual panels (Armenian, English and Russian). This is only the first of a series of attempts to enhance and make accessible to the local community and tourists the region’s rich archaeological and historical heritage. Some of the sites under investigation, such as Yelpin-1 – despite their evident importance and the spectacular nature of the archaeological finds – are not yet included in the State List of Monuments and therefore not subject to protection. We are trying to remedy this situation with the competent authorities. As part of the activities carried out in Vayots Dzor, a collaboration was also started with the Yeghegnadzor Regional Museum for the study and publication of material kept in the museum. Some of these finds come from sites excavated in the past and others were collected in various ways over the years. In particular, our attention is focused on the study and publication of an important group of Urartian period bronze objects from a tomb or a deposit found during construction work in the city of Yeghegnadzor.

30 ARTUR PETROSYAN, ROBERTO DAN, BORIS GASPARYAN

Other activities

In addition to the activities outlined above, the Armenian-Italian expedition is concerned with the study of certain archaeological situations of particular interest, on both regional and national scales. These include a wide-ranging study and documentation project of the extensive rock-cut architecture patrimony, so far only rarely studied. This is being recorded, drawn, studied, and compared with features identified in neighbouring countries. Other activities concern the systematic study of hydraulic works over the centuries and their impact on the territory, as well as the study of the interrelations between the creation of sanctuaries and important water sources, evidence for the existence of a widespread ‘water cult’. An extensive nationwide study program concerning Urartian antiquities is also underway. Besides the documentation of known sites throughout the country, archaeological studies and analyses have been conducted on objects found during important excavations conducted during the Soviet era. These include archaeobotanical analyses on organic materials (seeds and wood) from Karmir-blur and Erebuni (Dan et al. 2019a: 141-164) as well as archaeometrical analyses carried out on the famous paintings of Erebuni, which led to the identification – for the first time in Armenia – of the use of Egyptian blue Dan( et al. 2019b: 171-186).

Future projects

In future seasons, excavation and reconnaissance activities are expected to continue in both regions. In Kotayk, in addition to the extensive excavation of Solak-1/Varsak, where museum and enhancement projects aim at creating an archaeological park, small excavations will be conducted in a series of sites so as to better identify their occupation levels. The excavation of some cemeteries will also be started, with the dual aim of better understanding their phases of use and the evolution of material culture in the different eras - and also to document them before the unfortunately continual illegal excavations completely destroy them. In Vayots Dzor, alongside survey activities, the excavation of Areni-2, Yelpin-1 and Mokhrot will proceed and investigations will be resumed in Kyoshk and Tigranashen-1. We will continue to work in collaboration with the local authorities for the safeguarding and protection of archaeological heritage, through the inclusion of new sites on the National List of Monuments and via proposals for restructuring the management system of this important tool2. Among the goals that we would like to accomplish in future are those listed below, some of which are already in course: - Collaboration with local authorities for the protection of historical and archaeological heritage. - Collaboration with schools, to raise awareness of the importance of the historical and archaeological heritage.

2 In this regard, we want to propose a general reorganization of the State List of Monuments, checking thoroughly the data already present, much of which is incorrect or partial. A network should be created between the ministry and the archaeological missions operational in the area to guarantee the constant updating of information. It is necessary to simplify the process of adding new archaeological sites to the list of monuments, after verification by a scientific committee. 31 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

- Coordination between archaeological missions and the local institutions and museums in which scientific activities are carried out in order to enable the development and reorganization of small museums located in the area. - Help and coordination by archaeological missions in the study of finds and the reorganization of objects already present in the storerooms of the various museums in order to improve them. - Creation of temporary exhibitions related to archaeological activities with the aim of attracting local and foreign visitors. - Training of local staff and university students, through theoretical training courses and involvement in field activities.

Acknowledgements

Our sincere thanks to Pavel Avetisyan, Director of the IAE NAS RA, Michael Gfoeller and to the Gfoeller Renaissance Foundation, Adriano V. Rossi, President of ISMEO, and the Italian ambassadors in Armenia who have supported over the years, Bruno Scapini, Giovanni Ricciulli and Vincenzo del Monaco. We would like also to thank everyone who has been involved in the projects.

32 ARTUR PETROSYAN, ROBERTO DAN, BORIS GASPARYAN Bibliography

Biscione, R., Hmaya kyan, S., Parmegiani, N. (eds.), 2002. The North-Eastern Frontier. Urartians and non- Urartians in the Sevan Lake Basin. I, The Southern Shores, Documenta Asiana VII, Rome.

Bo bokhyan, A., Gilibert, A., Hnila, P., 2018. Karmir Sar: new evidence on dragon stones and ritual l andscapes on Mount Aragats, Armenia, in Batmaz, A., Bedianashvili, G., Michalewicz, A., Robinson, A. (eds.), Context and connection. Studies on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East in Honour of Antonio Sagona, 255-270.

Castelluccia, M., Dan, R., La Farina, R., Petrosyan, A., Raccidi, M., 2012. The First Season of the Kotayk Survey Project: Preliminary Report, AJNES/Aramazd VII/2, 28-35.

Dan, R., Petrosyan, A. 2017. The Kot ayk Sur vey Pr oject . Prel iminary Repor t on 2015 Fiel dwor k Act ivit ies, Annal i, Sezione Orientale 77, 294-317.

Dan, R., Ga sparyan, B., Vitolo, P., Petrosyan, A., Saccone, T., Nahapetyan, S., Adigyozalyan, A., Moradi, G., Zecchi, C., 2018. The rock-cut archaeol ogical c o mp l e x of Yel pin-1, Vayot s Dzor Province, A r me n i a , AJNES/Aramazd XII, 59-82.

Dan, R., Delle Donne, M., Ba dalyan, M., Petrosyan, A., Ga sparyan, B., Vitolo, P., Moradi, G., Milanesi, C., Costantini, L., 2019a. Production and Storage of Food Plants in Armenia during the Iron Age: the Evidence from Karmir-blur/Teišebai URU, Arin-berd/Erebuni and Solak-1, in Baldi, M., Dan, R., Delle Donne, M., Lucarini, G., Mutri, G. (eds.), Archaeology of Food New Data from International Missions in Africa and Asia Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on the Archaeology of Food Rome, 26 May 2016, Roma, 141-164.

Dan, R., Keheyan, Y., Hovhannisyan, N., Petrosyan, A., Atoyants, Y., Vitolo, P., Ga sparyan, B., 2019b. A New Painting Fragment from Erebuni and an Overview of Urartian Wall Paintings, in Avetisyan, P., Dan, R., Grekyan, Y. (eds.), Over the Mountains and Far Away Studies in Near Eastern history and archaeology presented to Mirjo Salvini on the occasion of his 80th birthday, Oxford, 171-186.

Ga sparyan, B., Dan, R., Petrosyan, A., Vitolo, P., 2020. The Vayot s Dzor Pr oject (VDP): a prel iminary overview of the first three years’ activities (2016-2018), in Kosyan, A., Avetisyan, P., Bobokhyan, A., Grekyan, Y. (eds), Armenian Archaeology. Past experiences and new achievements, Aramazd/AJNES X/1-2, 143-183.

Gilibert, A., Bo bokhyan, A., Hnila, P. 2012. Dragon St one in Cont ext . The Discover y of High-Altitude Burial Grounds with Sculpted Stelae in the Armenian Mountains. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient- Gesellschaft zu Berlin 144, 93-132.

Nucciotti, M., Petrosyan, H., Luschi, C., Cheli, M., Somigli, L., Vardanesova, T., The Making of t he Sil k Road in Armenia (cc. 7th-14th): Vaiots Dzor and Monastery, in Arthur, P., Leo Imperiale, M. (eds.), VII Congresso Nazionale di Archeologia Medievale, Lecce, 9-12 settembre 2015, 493-498.

Petrosyan, A., Dan, R., Vitolo, P., Meli kyan, V., Nahapetyan, S., Moradi, G., 2017.e Th Kotayk Survey Project (KSP): Preliminary Report on 2016 Fieldworks Activities, in Readings 1, 149-162.

Petrosyan, A., Dan, R., Vitolo, P., 2019. Sol ak 1. Una f or t ezza ur ar t ea nel l a valle del Hrazdan, A r me n i a , in Avetisyan, P., Dan, R., Grekyan, Y. (eds.), Over the Mountains and Far Away. Studies in Near Eastern history and archaeology presented to Mirjo Salvini on the occasion of his 80th birthday, 391-400.

Petrosyan, A., Dan, R., La Farina, R., Raccidi, M., Castelluccia, M., Ga sparyan, B., Ba bajanyan, A., 2015. The Kotayk Survey Project (KSP): Preliminary Report on 2014 Fieldwork Activity, AJNES/Aramazd 9/1, 58-68.

33 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Fig. 1 - Aerial photo taken from the top of Mount Hatis, showing the River Hrazdan Valley and some of the sites identified during the survey (Kotayk Survey Project Archive).

Fig. 2 - Aerial view of Solak-1 open- air site (KSP039) located on the margin of Hrazdan gorge (Kotayk Survey Project Archive).

Fig. 3 - Aerial view of the Tghit fortress (KSP036), with in the background the Hrazdan and Ararat Valleys (Kotayk Survey Project Archive).

34 ARTUR PETROSYAN, ROBERTO DAN, BORIS GASPARYAN

Fig. 4 - Aerial view of the Urartian palace in Solak-1/Varsak (KSP016) at the end of 2019 season (Kotayk Survey Project Archive).

Fig. 5 - Aerial view of the Urartian palace, settlement and artificial lake with two dams

Fig. 6 - Aerial view of the rock outcrop on which the Yelpin-1 site stands (VDP004; Vayots Dzor Project Archive).

35 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Fig. 7 - Aerial view of the Areni-2 cave (VDP028; Vayots Dzor Project Archive).

Fig. 8 - Aerial view of the Kyoshk-1 site (VDP026), with the Urartian fortifications on the slope in the foreground (Vayots Dzor Project Archive).

36 ARTUR PETROSYAN, ROBERTO DAN, BORIS GASPARYAN

Fig. 9 - Gnishikadzor Archaeological complex (VDP029), schematic plan (Vayots Dzor Project Archive).

37 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context FIFTEEN YEARS OF IRANIAN-ITALIAN COLLABORATION IN THE FIELD OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND CONSERVATION: A STUDY CASE Assessment of the activities and future opportunities of the Iranian-Italian Joint Archaeological Mission in Fars (Research Institute for Cultural Heritage and Tourism, Islamic Republic of Iran - University of Bologna and ISMEO - University)

PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna – Italy / [email protected]

ԱՄՓՈՓԱԳԻՐ ­­Մի­ջազ­գա­յին հա­մա­գոր­ծակ­ցութ­յան թե­ման այս զե­կույ­ցում ներ­կա­յաց­ված է որ­պես մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան ո­լոր­տում ­տա ի ­լա-ի­րա­նա­կան ա­մե­նաեր­կա­րատև, ա­նընդ­ հատ հա­մա­գոր­ծակ­ցութ­յան ու­սում­ ա­սի­րութ­յուն, ­րի ո 15-ամ­յա­կը լրա­նում է 2020թ․: Ի­տա­լա-ի­րա­նա­կան հա­մա­տեղ հնա­գի­տա­կան ա​​ ­ռա­քե­լութ­յան գոր­ծո­ղութ­յուն­նե­րի հա­ մա­ռոտ նկա­րագ­րութ­յու­նը ­Ֆար­սում մի­մից` կող ընդգ­ծում է խոր­հա և ­վաս­տի գի­տա­կան հա­մա­գոր­ծակ­ցութ­յան կար­ևո­րութ­յու­նը, մյուս կող­մից՝ մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան պահ­պա­նութ­յան գոր­ծում ներդ­րու­մը որ­պես հրա­տապ անհ­րա­ժեշ­տութ­յուն: Հոդ­ ­վա­ծը եզ­րա­փակ­վում է ­մառազ ­վա­րութ­յա­նը, բո­վան­դա­կութ­յա­նը, մե­թոդ­նե­րին և ն­պա­տակ­նե­րին առնչ­վող ո­րոշ մե­թո­դա­բա­նա­կան նկա­տա­ռում­ ե­րով, ընդգ­ծում է ­մշա կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան ի­րա­զեկ­ման կար­ևո­րութ­յու­նը` մշա­կու­թա­յին և­ աշ­խար­հա­ գրա­կան բազ­մա­զա­նութ­յանն ա­ռե­րես­վե­լիս։

Key words - Archaeology, Iran, Italy, Collaboration Fars Բանալի բառեր - Հնագիտություն, Իրան, Իտալիա, Համագործակցություն Ֆարս

The Italian-Iranian Joint Archaeological Mission in Fars took shape in 2005 when the Italian team was invited by Dr. Mohammad Hasan Talebian, then director of the Parsa-Pasargad Research Foundation, and the late Dr. Mas‘oud Azarnoush, then director of the Iranian Center for Archaeological Research (ICAR), to participate in the international rescue excavation project organized after the construction of a on the /Polvar river, c. 20 km downstream of , which should have led in two years to the submersion of the wide

38 PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI valley of Tang-e Bolaghi, not far from the Achaemenid dynastic centre: the tomb of was the main monument that Iranian public opinion feared could be submerged. The Achaemenid site in fact would have remained totally safe, thanks to its height, but the area of Tang-e Bolaghi was condemned to be flooded by the artificial lake created by the Sivand dam: thus ICAR promptly organized an archaeological survey of the area, conducted by M.T. Atayi and F. Zare‘: the result of this survey provided information on about 200 sites that were dated on the basis of the surface findings. Thanks to the availability of French, German, Italian, Japanese and Polish archaeologists, several joint teams were formed, led by an Iranian archaeologist with the collaboration of a foreign colleague. Each joint team selected one or more sites with the aim of investigating a period of the cultural sequence in the area. The Italian team of the University of Bologna, which was able to accept the invitation of ICAR thanks to the far-sightedness of the then Rector, Prof. Pierugo Calzolari, and the Pro-Rector of the Economic Affairs Division, Prof. Diego Bruggi, had the opportunity to collaborate in archaeological investigations specifically aimed at the post-Achaemenid period with Dr. Alireza Askari Chaverdi, then a young researcher at the ICHHTO in Fars (Fig. 1). The result was the excavation of some trenches in a rural settlement founded in the Achaemenid period, which lived also in the centuries following the end of the Persian Empire. For the archaeology of the it was the first opportunity to investigate a rural settlement, and the unforeseen continuity in the post-Achaemenid period was also extremely important as a first contact with the material culture of this era. The results of this short excavation, which lasted only three seasons in 2005 and 2006, were published in a volume of the BAR International Series, which represents one of the few published studies on historic ceramics of Fars, in particular on the Late Plain Ware considered the specific ceramics of the Achaemenid period in Fars. The dam was never in operation in the end, due to the infiltration of water under the dam, but the program of the development project forced the archaeologists to leave the area to the engineers. The mission, therefore, in order to continue the study of ceramics, which had proved to be particularly productive, was forced to find a new digging objective. A brief reconnaissance of the options identified the Tall-e Takht of Pasargadae as one of the few sites that attested to a continuity of frequentation from the early years of the Achaemenid to the post-Achaemenid period. The site had been extensively excavated by a team of the British Institute of Persian Studies led by D. Stronach from 1961 to 1963, and the final published report showed that the excavations had not been carried out using a stratigraphic methodology: the definition of the cultural periods and the proposed historical interpretation were based on very limited and subjective evidence. The site therefore presented itself as an ideal place to study the ceramic sequence of the period between the 6th and 1st century BC. And the first excavation campaign in 2006 offered the possibility to define a sequence of as many as 9 structural phases in the chronological span that according to the English team had been defined in only two periods (Fig. 2). Unfortunately, with the completion of the trench in the second campaign in 2007 it was impossible to find other unexcavated and preserved areas. On the other hand, the study of the ceramic material of the excavated trench showed its shortcomings from the point of view of the low quantity of material, which unfortunately limits the statistical value of the results in other precious and fundamental ways, which are in preparation for publication.

39 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

For these reasons, as well as to support the Parsa-Pasargad Research Foundation in its effort to preserve the vast area of c. 600 hectares in the plain at the foot of the Terrace of , the Iranian-Italian Joint Archaeological Mission presented to ICAR a new project, called “From Palace to Town”, to demonstrate that the focus of activity in Persepolis was moved from the Terrace (the Palaces) in search of information about the daily city mentioned in the elamite administrative tablets discovered on the Terrace and Greek written sources. However, the name of the project also included the word “Palace” because the project wanted to continue the commitment to conservation that in the years 1960-1970 characterized the activity of IsMEO-Istituto Italiano per il Medio e l’Estremo Oriente - the institution where P. Callieri was trained in the field. The project, therefore, began in 2008 with a dual objective. The archaeological work team would focus on the investigations of the town of Parsa, the Persian named of Persepolis, based on the results of geophysical investigations carried out by an Iranian and a Franco-Iranian team since 2003 on the initiative of Dr. M.H. Talebian. A second team would have collaborated with the conservation department of the World Heritage Site of Persepolis to update the intervention methodologies established between 1964 and 1979 by the Italian restorer G. Tilia, who had directed the restorations in Persepolis thanks to the agreement of IsMEO with the Iranian government. A first season of diagnostic studies on the state of conservation of the monuments of the Achaemenid Terrace was carried out in 2008 by a joint group led by G. Guidi (formerly ENEA). This activity was integrated by the study of the ancient quarries and by sampling for mineralogical, minero-petrographic and chemical analyses, which were carried out in Italy. In May 2009 the architect G. Morganti, of the Italian Ministry of Cultural Heritage, who had been sent to Persepolis with the task of preparing an updated intervention of reconstruction of two architraves of the Hundred Column Hall, drew attention to the serious problems that the stone of the monuments on the Terrace presented, suggesting to abandon the methodology of reconstructive restoration and to shift the attention to the conservation of the stone. A key step for Persepolis was the workshop organized in November 2009 by Dr. M.H. Talebian, in which the proposal to focus on stone conservation was accepted by the Iranian authorities (Fig. 3). As a further step in this direction, in November 2010 M. Laurenzi Tabasso, a chemist specialising in stone conservation formerly member of ICR and ICCROM, carried out a survey of the areas investigated during the 2008 diagnostic season in order to identify the nature of stone decay and to draw up the first season of tests on specific problems. A series of analyses on new samples was able to identify the origin of the stone decay in the nature of the clay present in the limestone used, influenced by atmospheric agents and the wide temperature variation. Following the results of the diagnostic activities, a practical educational workshop on diagnostics and conservation was set up in November 2011 as a contribution to the planning of operational protocols for stone conservation on the Persepolis Terrace. The conservation part of the workshop, directed by the Italian conservator P. Pastorello, was realized on a window on the Hadish, S side, badly preserved and never restored, with the participation of

40 PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI

8 Iranian specialists coordinated by H. Rahsaz and Sh. Rahbar. Although short, the workshop was successful, showing the advantages of a “light” conservative approach. It also allowed the use of new Italian mortars: their performance in the Iranian environment, different from that of Italy, could be tested so that in 2019 they could be used on a large scale in the PIMCP (see below). As far as the archaeological focus of the project is concerned, it was dedicated to the search of the ancient city of Parsa, whose existence is included in the Elamite and Greek texts, and which so far had been investigated only through surface and geophysical investigations. This investigation has a particular importance for the knowledge of society, economy and craftsmanship of the Achaemenid and post-Achaemenid period, as well as for the study of the historical development of the settlement in the area of Persepolis. In the 2008 and 2009 seasons, excavations were concentrated in the site known as Persepolis West, lying to the north-west of the Achaemenid Terrace, and aimed at providing archaeological information on the most significant places evidenced by the geophysical surveys. Their results were twofold. On one side they have shown the appropriateness of the methodology adopted, since stratigraphic excavation has allowed checking many of the inferences deriving from geophysical investigations. On the other side they have produced the first actual evidence of the existence of an inhabited settlement at the foot of the Persepolis Terrace. As regards the aspect of verification of the hypotheses issued out of the geophysical surveys, it is particularly the results of excavations in Trenches Tr. 7 and Tr. 8 that have shown their importance, overcoming the doubts on the interpretation of the regular grid pattern in the area to the north-west of the Terrace: the excavation of a section of a well-preserved ditch in Trench Tr. 7 and of remains of a small built canal in Trench Tr. 8 helped to better define the interpretation by disclaiming the presence of streets. In its turn this evidence confirms the fact that the part of the plain nearest to the Terrace was not occupied by a neighborhood of the inhabited settlement but by orchards. That these orchards were surrounded by a wall is also suggested by the structure in pressed earth (chineh) on stone foundation brought to light in Trench Tr. 3, which seems to correspond with one of the long linear anomalies appearing along the north-east limit of the same area. On the other hand, an actual evidence of the inhabited settlement is represented by an area of craft activities: the kiln and the dump emplacements next to it confirm that the dense pattern of point-shaped geophysical anomalies represent a dense emplacement of craft activities, at a distance of c. 1.5 km from the Terrace, i.e. far enough to avoid that smoke and noise could reach the imperial citadel, but at the same time within the settled area, as is usually the case for workshops. The fact that the most probable function of the kiln was linked to the production of a component used on the monuments of the Terrace, despite the gap in chronological evidence, adds interest to this discovery and allows to propose that some of these craft activities were finalized to be used on the Terrace. An important information deriving from the excavation concerns the diachronic view of the settlement in the plain: as also Radiocarbon datings confirm, in many trenches there is evidence which from the Achaemenid period reaches into the Post-Achaemenid period, 41 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context without any interruption linked to the political changes following the arrival of the Macedonian army. This continuity only apparently contrasts with the destruction of the town mentioned by Diodorus of Sicily, which would have not concerned the green areas between built-in areas; it also recalls the situation evidenced by the Iranian-Italian Joint Archaeological Mission in the trial trench excavated on the Tall-e Takht of Pasargadae. Given that it concerns one of the few stratigraphic excavations to have been carried out in the area of Persepolis for the historic period, the published report on the 2-year work has allowed a comprehensive and fundamental study of the pottery as well as of the other classes of materials recovered for the historic period from the Achaemenid through the Islamic periods, and thus has brought a relevant contribution to the knowledge of everyday life in ancient Fars, albeit quantitatively limited. Indeed, the excavations at Persepolis West lasted only two seasons, because in 2011 due to a chance situation the activity was displaced into the area of Bagh-e Firuzi, 3.5 km to the NW of the Terrace - where previous studies had evidenced the existence of isolated buildings also characterized by architectural elements in stone typical of . Work in the site known with the name of Tol-e Ajori, in Persian meaning “the hill of fired bricks”, brought to the discovery of an exceptional building, a monumental gate entirely built in bricks with the same plan of the Ishtar Gate of Babylon nowadays partly reconstructed in the Pergamonmuseum of Berlin. The exceptional quality of this building forced the Mission to set aside the work at Persepolis West and concentrate on its exploration, which lasted until the 2018 season: about a half of the original surface of the Gate was brought to light, unfortunately damaged by an ancient earthquake and then heavily pillaged in Middle Ages for reuse of its fired bricks. The Gate is rectangular in plan, and two corridors opening in its short sides gave access to an elongated central room, where low benches flanked the long walls, leaving in the middle a free space probably dedicated to a special function (Fig. 4). The plan of the Tol-e Ajori Gate differs from that of the Babylon Ishtar Gate only in few elements, among which the dimensions, which are slightly larger, the core of the walls in mud-brick and the benches along the walls of the inner chamber. For the rest, both architecture and glazed decoration belong so faithfully to a Babylonian tradition that it is possible to hypothesize a direct participation of Babylonian masons and craftsmen. The faces of the walls above the projecting foundations in unglazed bricks were decorated with glazed bricks, which in the lower section composed geometrical and floral motifs of flat glazed bricks: the same patterns seem to be evidenced in the outer as well as in the inner walls. On the basis of fragments of relief glazed bricks found in the collapse layers, both inside and outside the Gate, it is also possible to reconstruct figural panels representing mythological creatures belonging to the same decorative scheme as displayed by the Ishtar Gate and which probably, as in the case of that monument, decorated the parts of the walls above the geometrical and floral patterns (Fig. 5). The decoration scheme of flat glazed bricks of Tol-e Ajori corresponds precisely with that of the Babylon Ishtar Gate too: the only difference is that in Babylon below the band of flat glazed bricks found also at Tol-e Ajori was the section with unglazed relief figures of the previous phase. Above the band of flat glazed bricks was the section with the panels made up

42 PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI with the relief figural glazed bricks, which were found in large quantity in the collapse layers. The Iranian draughtsman A. Esnaashari traced the drawing of four reconstructed panels from the Babylon Ishtar Gate with the representation of the bull and of the snake-dragon mushkhushshu, both in right and left profile, and tried to insert the Tol-e Ajori fragments in it: astonishingly, each brick from Tol-e Ajori fit exactly in the scheme of those compositions, also thanks to the fact that they have the same dimensions of 32.5-33 x 32.5-33 x 7.5-8 cm as the Babylonian bricks. Among the recovered fragments of glazed bricks, noteworthy are 12 fragments with cuneiform signs: only Babylonian and Elamite characters are present, while to date no Old Persian was found, a fact which supports a pre-Darius I dating. With its glazed facing mirroring one of the most celebrated monuments of the Ancient World, the Gate was a building that stood out prominently in its landscape: being a gate, it was in planimetric link with a huge architectural complex with row of stone basements for columns, identified in the site of Firuzi 5. This building and the Tol-e Ajori Gate represent an evidence of an official complex of the Early Achaemenid period built in the area of Bagh-e Firuzi according to a Mesopotamian building tradition with a strong Mesopotamian component before the construction of the Persepolis Terrace, as all the archaeological, architectural and epigraphical evidence point out. To understand the original topographical context of the complex to which Tol-e Ajori Gate belonged in the area of Parsa and the relationship of Tol-e Ajori-Firuzi 5 with the other buildings known at Bagh-e Firuzi, the Iranian-Italian Joint Archaeological Mission has started in 2019 the project “Landscape of Persepolis”. Given the extraordinary quality of the Tol-e Ajori Gate, the Persepolis UNESCO World Heritage Site has decided to create a site museum and allow visitors to enjoy this newly excavated monument. Thus a permanent shelter is being built, which will allow emptying the backfilled trenches and organizing a comprehensive conservation intervention on the site. The original figurative panels of relief glazed bricks will be reassembled in the Persepolis Museum according to a more update system than that used at the Berlin museum for the Ishtar Gate. In 2019 the Joint Italo-Iranian Archaeological Mission also started a new activity that originated in the process of registration of the Sasanian site of Firuzabad in the UNESCO World Heritage List within the serial site “Sasanian Archaeological Landscape of the Fars Region”. The project, called “From Firuzabad to the Persian Gulf: Man and the environment in the south of Fars during the Early Sasanian period”, aims to study the areas where Ardashir I, the first Sasanian king, began his career and which are considered the core of the Sasanian region in written sources, i.e. the area of Fars centred on the ancient district of Ardashir Khwarrah. Here the main archaeological evidence is represented by the city, identifiable with the first city built by Ardashir, which is characterized by an extraordinary planimetry on the ground surface, with a perfectly circular walled perimeter and an inner subdivision based on three concentric bands and twenty radial sectors. The site has never been thoroughly investigated in order to understand the true nature of the lines visible on the surface: a programme of geophysical surveys will offer a set of valuable information, which will be complemented by a complete graphic survey of the wall structures emerging on the surface.

43 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

The study will then be extended to a very important aspect, that of the connection of the city with the southernmost part of the district including the region of Southern Fars and its coast on the Persian Gulf, nowadays part of the provinces of Bushehr and Hormozgan. This is an area which written sources indicate as extremely important for Ardashir. On the coast of Fars, the main known port is that of Siraf, well known thanks to the activity of a British mission in the 1970s: however, despite the related excavations and surveys, no archaeological evidence has ever been found in Siraf prior to the late Sasanian period: the new project therefore intends to study the stretch of coast from Nayband to Jazzeh, to verify the possible existence of late arsacid and protosasanid coastal sites where Ardashir may have created a harbour for the military campaigns that gave him control of the sea. The funds of a national project of the Ministry of University will add resources for this project to the usual funds that Italian team receive annually from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ISMEO and the University of Bologna. 2019 was also an important year because it saw the realisation of the first major conservation project for Persepolis stone monuments, Persepolis International Monuments Conservation Project-PIMCP, a direct result of the first pilot project of the Joint Mission in 2011 (see above). Being a major conservation operation, the 2019 project was carried out thanks to the collaboration of the Italian association Restauratori Senza Frontiere Italia with the Iranian Research Centre for the Conservation of Cultural Relics and World Heritage in Persepolis, and thanks to the generous patronage of the Fondation Evergète in Geneva (Switzerland). The purpose of this intervention, carried out in two campaigns, was the south façade of the and the east portal of the Tripylon with its two jambs. The Italian-inspired methodology starts with a phase of careful investigation of the state of conservation of the reliefs, on the basis of which the subsequent phases consist in the reconstitution of surfaces free from those fractures, however small, from which the process of degradation of the stone begins: in the different variants studied for the different types of degradation of the stone, non-aggressive mortars were used, specifically designed for the restoration of limestone artefacts. The effects of the aggression of lichens and other micro-organisms have also been studied, for which different methods have been tested, all inspired by the principle of limiting the use of toxic agents as much as possible. This quick review of the most long-standing Italian-Iranian collaboration in the cultural heritage sector, which in 2020 will celebrate 15 years of uninterrupted activity, also allows me to return to a more general theme, that of international collaborations, of particular, importance for a project like ROCHEMP. They always focus on a specific geographical area (country, region, site); occasionally they focus on a specific chronological range; rarely they focus on a broad thematic field. This is mainly due to the fact that Western teams working in Asia receive their support from the Ministries of Foreign Affairs rather than from the Ministries of Culture, and therefore they are still linked to their country’s interest in a cultural foreign policy with a specific Asian state. This also implies that usually the prevailing organisational model is a bilateral collaboration between a European and an Asian country. There are very few cases of inter-European

44 PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI collaboration (such as the examples of collaboration between French and Italian projects in Fars). Fortunately, after several decades of “unaware” excavations, this highly destructive activity is currently carried out only when necessary. Great importance is now rightly attached to non- destructive investigations of various kinds. Today field work in archaeology is necessarily multidisciplinary: there is therefore always collaboration between the humanities and hard sciences (archaeology and archaeometry). But the main success of the 21st century is that the principle that the conservation of cultural heritage is a necessary part of field work in archaeology is becoming increasingly widespread. The steps that I would support are: - in strategy: to encourage international collaboration in projects in Asia, despite the still predominantly “national” nature of many projects; - in content: giving priority to the dark areas of the past; - in methods: using knowledge from the state of the art, as well as multidisciplinary methods; attaching the same importance and documenting all periods with the same care, despite the main chronological focus of a project; - in the objectives: not to stop at compilations, but to attempt explanations, through archaeological constructions. The most important thing is the awareness that cultural heritage is one of the best channels to deal with cultural and geographical diversity.

Credits: Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna; Fondation Evergète, Genève; Fondazione Flaminia, Ravenna; Iranian Centre for Archaeological Research, Tehran; ISMEO, Roma; Lighthouse-Group, Bologna; Ministero degli Affari Esteri, Roma; Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca, Roma; Parseh-Pasargad Research Foundation, Persepolis; Persepolis World Heritage Site; Research Centre for Conservation of Cultural Relics, Tehran; Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Tehran; Shiraz Universityì; Shiraz University of Arts

45 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Bibliography

Tang-e Bolaghi: Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, A Rural Settlement of the Achaemenid Period in Fars. Journal of Inner Asian Art and Archaeology, 1, 2006, pp. 65-70; Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, Tang-e Bolaghi Site TB 76. 3rd Excavation Season (Ordibehesht-Khordad 1385). Preliminary Report. Archaeological Reports 7. On the Occasion of the 9th Annual Symposium on Iranian Archaeology, Tehran 2007, vol. 2, pp. 97-124; Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, Achaemenid and Post Achaemenid Remains at Sites TB76 and TB77. Tang-i Bulaghi Reports, ed. R. Boucharlat & H. Fazeli Nashli (ARTA 2009.004), pp. 1-35; Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, Sokunatgâhhâ-ye rustâ’i az dowrehâ-ye haxâmaneshi ve farâhaxâmaneshi. Mohavvate-ye 76 va 77 Tang-e Bolâghi, Pâsârgad, Shiraz 2014; Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, Tang-e Bolaghi (Fars), Sites TB76 And TB77: Rural Settlements of the Achaemenid and Post-Achaemenid Periods. Report of the archaeological rescue excavations carried out in 2005 and 2006 by the joint Iranian-Italian mission of the Iranian Center for Archaeological Research and the University of Bologna, with the collaboration of IsIAO, Italy (BAR International Series 2799), Oxford 2016; Pasargadae Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, Preliminary Report on the Stratigraphic Study of the Toll-e Takht, Pasargadae. Investigations on the Material Culture of the Achaemenid and Post-Achaemenid Periods. Archaeological Reports 7. On the Occasion of the 9th Annual Symposium on Iranian Archaeology, Tehran 2007, vol. 1, pp. 5-23; Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, Preliminary Report on the Irano-Italian Stratigraphic Study of the Toll-e Takht, Pasargad. Investigations on the Material Culture of the Achaemenid and Post-Achaemenid Periods in Fars. Ancient and Middle Iranian Studies. Proceedings of the 6th European Conference of Iranian Studies, held in Vienna, 18-22 September 2007, ed. M. Macuch, D. Weber & D. Durkin-Meisterernst, Wiesbaden 2010, pp. 11-28; Persepolis West Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, The Activities of the Iranian-Italian Joint Archaeological Mission at Persepolis West (Fars, Iran). First Results of the Studies on the Pottery of Achaemenid and Post-Achaemenid Age. Dariosh Studies II. Persepolis and its Settlements. Territorial system and ideology in the Achaemenid State, ed. G.P. Basello & A.V. Rossi (Series minor, LXXVIII), Napoli Università “L’Orientale”, 2012, pp. 225-240; Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, In Search of the Elusive Town of Persepolis. Studies on the Iranian World I. Before Islam, ed. A. Krasnowolska & R. Rusek-Kowalska, Jagiellonian University Press, Krakow 2015, pp. 239-251; Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, Persepolis West (Fars, Iran): Report on the field work carried out by the Iranian- Italian Joint Archaeological Mission in 2008-2009 (BAR International Series 2870), Oxford 2017; Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, eds, From Palace to Town. Report on the multidisciplinary project carried out by the Iranian-Italian Joint Archaeological Mission on the Persepolis Terrace (Fars, Iran), 2008-2013, 1. Topography, Diagnostic and Conservation, BraDypUS, Roma 2017;

46 PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI

Askari Chaverdi & P. Callieri, eds, From Palace to Town. Report on the multidisciplinary project carried out by the Iranian-Italian Joint Archaeological Mission on the Persepolis Terrace (Fars, Iran), 2008-2013, 4. Science for Archaeology, BraDypUS, Roma 2017. Tol-e Ajori Askari Chaverdi, P. Callieri & S. Gondet, Tol-e Ajori, a new monumental building in Parsa. Preliminary cross interpretations from recent surveys and excavations works around Persepolis (2005-2012). ARTA, 2013, www.achemenet.fr; Askari Chaverdi, P. Callieri & E. Matin, Tol-e Ajori: a Monumental Gate of the Early Achaemenian period in the Persepolis Area. The 2014 excavation season of the Iranian-Italian project ‘‘From Palace to Town’’. AMIT, 46, 2014 (2016), pp. 223-254; Askari Chaverdi, P. Callieri & E. Matin, The Monumental Gate at Tol-e Ajori, Persepolis (Fars): New Archaeological Data. Iranica Antiqua, 52, 2017, pp. 205-258;

47 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Fig. 1 - Start of collaboration at Tang-e Bolaghi (2005-2006): Sivand Dam rescue excavation.

Fig. 2 - Continuation of the collaboration at Pasargadae, Tall-e Takht (2006-2007).

48 PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI

Fig. 3 - Activities at Persepolis (2008-2013): first step of Project “From Palace to Town”.

Fig. 5 – Tol-e Ajori. Possible original position of the panels in relief grazed bricks with the motifs of the bull and of the mushkhushshu on the inner room of the Gate of Tol-e Ajori, reconstructed on the basis of a comparison with the Ishtar Gate of Babylon (Elaboration: S. Tilia, A. Eghra).

Fig. 4 - Tol-e Ajori. 3D graphic reconstruction. Dark yellow: mud-brick core; light yellow: baked bricks section; blue: glazed bricks facing (Elaboration: S. Tilia).

49 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context IRANIAN EXPERIENCE IN RESEARCH, MANAGEMENT, AND TRAINING IN THE FIELD OF CONSERVATION

SHAHRZAD AMIN SHIRAZI Research Center for Conservation of Cultural Relics (RCCCR), Research Institute for Cultural Heritage and Tourism (RICHT) ֊ Iran / [email protected]

ԱՄՓՈՓԱԳԻՐ Այս հոդ­վա­ծով նպա­տակ ու­նենք ներ­կա­յաց­նե­լու պահ­պա­նութ­յան ո­լոր­տի հե­տա­զո­ տութ­յան և ­քա­ղա­քա­կա­նութ­յան մշակ­ման մաս­նա­գի­տաց­ված պե­տա­կան շրջա­նա­կը։ Մ­շա­կու­թա­յին մա­սունք­նե­րի ամ­րա­կայ­ման հե­տա­զո­տա­կան կենտ­րո­նը (RCCCR) Մ­շա­ կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան և զ­բո­սաշր­ջութ­յան գի­տա­հե­տա­զո­տա­կան ինս­տի­տու­տի (RICHT) կենտ­րոն­նե­րից մեկն է,­րի ո ա­ռա­քե­լութ­յունն է ­կումշա ­թա­յին ար­տե­ֆակտ­նե­ րի և ­թան­գա­րա­նա­յին հա­վա­քա­ծու­նե­րի ամ­րա­կայ­մանն ուղղ­ված հե­տա­զո­տութ­յուն­նե­րի ի­րա­կա­նա­ցում ու ­փոչա ­րո­շիչ­նե­րի մշա­կու­մը։ RICHT-ի հա­մա­ռոտ նկա­րագ­րութ­յու­նից հե­տո զե­կույ­ցում խոս­վում է ­մանսահ ­ված նպա­ տակ­նե­րի ուղ­ղութ­յամբ RCCCR-ի կող­մից ­րա ի ­կա­նաց­վող գոր­ծու­նեութ­յան մա­սին։

Key words - Cultural Heritage, conservation, RCCCR, RICHT, Iran­ Բա­նա­լի բա­ռեր - մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յուն, ամ­րա­կա­յում, RCCCR, RICHT, Ի­րան

1) Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism (RICHT)

Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism (RICHT) is affiliated to Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism of I.R.Iran. It was established in 2005 under the supervision of Ministry of Science, Research and Technology. RICHT was formed based on experience and research capacities by then Cultural Heritage Organization of Iran (established in 1985). RICHT is the most reputable scientific and specialized center in this area in Iran. It plays a pivotal role not only in sustainable development of the country but also assumes governance responsibilities 1) to meet the research needs of research and technology in the field of cultural

50 SHAHRZAD AMIN SHIRAZI heritage and tourism in line with restoration and documentation of historical buildings and artifacts to preserve their quality and 3) to reveal the cultural, historical and natural missing links 4) to pave appropriate grounds to motivate and support research and technological activities and 5) to promote their relative applications are among the main objectives of the RICHT. The institute is by nature an academic entity that is governed by the same laws that rule over other Iranian universities and research centers. According to the statute, RICHT is responsible for the below mentioned mandates both on national and international level. In addition to the Research Center for Conservation of Cultural Relics (RCCCR), RICHT with 156 specialists and research fellows, comprises of 5 other research centers and 1 research group to cover all and diverse fields related to cultural heritage studies, as follows those, which have close cooperation with the executive bodies and making use of scientific capabilities of other educational, scientific research entities in Iran and abroad: 1-1) Iranian Center for Archaeological Research (ICAR)

The ICAR is the supreme authority for archaeological excavations and studies in Iran. Besides to the field activities, the center is responsible for the Comprehensive Archaeological Map of Iran in which all the data of the archaeological sites in Iranian plateau is visualized based on all kind of related scientific facts and features. 1-2) Anthropological Research Center (ARC)

The Anthropological Research Center (ARC) conducts researches on traditional knowledge, human relationship with the environment, indigenous beliefs and religions, mythology and folklore, rituals and costumes, traditional clothing of different ethnic groups, Iranian traditional cuisine, and traditional medicine. 1-3) Research Center for Linguistics, Inscriptions and Texts (RCLIT)

The scientific board and researchers of RCLIT conducting researches and documentation of written and verbal intangible cultural heritage. The research subjects and materials consists a vast number of different objects from manuscripts, seals, bas-reliefs, coins to gravestones. Linguistic studies perform the investigating, analyzing and documenting of common languages and dialects as well as endangered languages. 1-4) Research Center for Conservation of Buildings & Fabrics (RCCBF)

Architectural heritage is the main research area for RCCBF. Conducting research on history of Iranian architecture, historic cities, capacity-building in historical urban texture, preservation of historical sites and cultural landscapes, and crisis management are the main research interests of the center. 1-5) Research Center of Iranian Traditional (National) Arts (RCTA)

Identifying and documenting traditional arts, identifying and documenting forgotten traditional arts, documenting patterns of traditional arts are among the objectives of the Research Center of Iranian Traditional Art (RCTA). To conserve the traditional arts and to revive them, this center has different active workshops where masters of traditional arts and 51 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context crafts who still create artifacts by using traditional methods and materials, pass the knowledge to the new generation of artists and craftsmen. The active workshops of the RCTA consist of: Pottery and Ceramics, Carpet and Kilim, Brocade and Velvet, Etching, Vitreous enamel, Persian Miniature, Illuminated manuscripts, Traditional Design, Musical Instruments, Wood Carving and Marquetry, Reverse Painting on glass and Mirror works.

1-6) Independent Research Group of Tourism (RGT) Surveying the status of tourism in accordance to development of political, economic, social and cultural relations, local touristic accommodations, researches on environmental – friendly touristic residences and sustainable tourism are the research objectives for the Research Group of Tourism (RGT). In addition to the specialized research centers to fulfil the mandates and duties, RICHT beneficiates of different departments and resources including:

1-7) Policy and Future Study department The department of Futurology tries to adopt all the activities of RICHT to the national upstream documents and bylaws. Identification of needs and requirements of cultural heritage and tourism in the future, most effective methods for sustainable development of cultural heritage and creative tourism, monitoring and analysis of effective events on cultural heritage and tourism are executed under supervision of the Policy and Future study department.

1-8) Technology and Versatility deputy Conducting researches on increasing the efficiency and application of new technologies in favor of conservation of cultural heritage and tourism, knowledge management, cultivation and development of local and traditional technologies, networking and synergy of knowledge based enterprises active in the field of cultural heritage and tourism, finding new ways for practical application of cultural heritage and tourism in the present life style of the nation and supporting the start up atmosphere based on the cultural heritage and tourism are the main activities of Technology and Versatility deputy .

1-9) Library and Archive Center The library and Archive Center (LAC) of RICHT is one of the unique centers in terms of categories and varieties of documents concerning cultural heritage of Iran. LAC has collaboration with UNESCO and many library and archives in Iran. Containing a significant number of books, journals, reports, images, photos, negatives, films, audio tapes, maps and etc., aiming at making these data and sources accessible and up to date needed by researchers and users, LAC renders in person and online services at its library, paper documents and audio-visual department. There are more than 50,000 book titles and journals in Persian, English, French and German together with 40,000 historical documents, 100,149 images, 3,228 film reels, and 20,107 maps in LAC. Expanding domestic and foreign cultural exchanges, enriching other libraries related to cultural heritage of Iran, holding exhibitions, and digitalization of documents are among the other activities of LAC. 52 SHAHRZAD AMIN SHIRAZI

1-10) Management of International and Legal Affairs (ILA) It acts in compliance with the policies approved by RICHT and in line with its overall objectives in communication and collaboration with universities, higher education research centers, prominent Iranian and foreign researchers regional and international specialized entities. ILA is engaged with collecting necessary scientific and research data, attracting collaboration on different scopes of research, technology and exchange scientific–educational services in the field of cultural heritage, tourism and related studies. Other activities and duties of ILA include monitoring indicators for improving RICHT in international policies, reviewing international conventions as well as legal rules and regulations in the field of cultural heritage, tourism and planning the scientific meetings upon request of research centers. RICHT has concluded the research, scientific and educational Memorandum of Understandings with non-Iranian research centers, universities in some countries such as , Italy, Spain, Denmark, Austria, , , China, , Bulgaria, Russia, Armenia, India, England and Georgia as shown in Fig-1. It also has many educational and cultural joint collaborations with international and regional entities such as UNESCO, E.C.C.O., ICOM, ICOMOS and ICROM.

1-11) Center of Cultural Promotion (CCP) In the field of cultural heritage, each related specific subject is to be researched in order to be recognized as cultural heritage and to be promoted in order to be conserved by people and owners of these properties. Introducing the cultural heritage researchers is made via books, films, photos, slides, posters and so forth. CCP at the RICHT not only presents research products and achievements but also supports miscellaneous activities pertaining to cultural heritage and researches conducted outside the RICHT. Presentation of the results of the cultural heritage researches is undertaken through books, films, photos, slides, posters, etc. In this line CCP has produced lots of cultural products including more than 250 book titles so far and it has held various annual national and international cultural and scientific events such as lectures, conferences, exhibitions and commemorations. RICHT has currently 18 journals and quarterlies in Persian as well as 2 journals in English that publish researches in the field of tourism, archaeology, anthropology, dialectology, conservation and restoration of properties, conducting researches on historic monuments and fabrics and one newsletter releases news about RICHT’s activities.

1-12) Office for Children and Cultural Heritage One of the main target groups interacting with cultural heritage are kids who are defined by UNESCO as children between 7 to 17 age group. RICHT has performed some educational activities appropriate for this age group to make them familiar with the accustomed to cultural heritage. Over the recent years, various programs have been made for them through holding educational workshops, communication via media, publication, books and promoting culture of reading books.

53 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context 2) Research Center for Conservation of Cultural Relics (RCCCR)

The first academic restoration workshop in Iran was organized by the French archeological excavation campaign in Susa, Khuzestan Province in 1879. About 100 years later, the first conservation laboratory was established within the Iranian Archaeological Center (ICAR) in 1972. In 1990 the laboratory developed to the central research laboratory for conservation and restoration of cultural properties within the Iranian Cultural heritage organization with the aim of undertaking scientific investigations, conservation and restoration projects on histo-cultural materials as well as offering high level training courses to conservators and conservation scientists. Since its establishment, the activities of the laboratory expanded considerably and accordingly in order to fulfill its responsibilities. It was reorganized and renamed as the research Center for Conservation of Cultural relics (RCCCR) in 1997. Presently RCCCR consists of 4 research group, each of them comprising of several departments. These groups are: Conservation Department, Material Science and Technology, Dating and Environmental Studies and Archaeometry. In these departments not only laboratory studies on historical antiquities and works of art as well as archaeological and interdisciplinary studies are carried out to fulfill the objectives of conservation and restoration but also laboratory and consultation services are presented to other scientific and executive centers particularly to universities. 2-1) RCCCR’s Mandates

As the main research center in Iran, the mandates for RCCCR are as follows: • Conducting pure and applied research on conservation. • Investigations on ancient technology. • Promotion and development of conservation practices. • Conducting research on ancient materials (monuments and museum objects). • Development of preservation and maintenance methods for cultural collections, archaeological sites and artifacts. • Providing scientific information and data to the network of conservation laboratories and workshops throughout the country. • Conservation and restoration of selected museum objects and architectural decorations with distinguished international and national values. • Regional and international cooperation in the field of conservation, conservation science and archaeometry.

54 SHAHRZAD AMIN SHIRAZI

2-2) Activities RCCCR achieves its goals through different activities. The annual executive plan of RCCCR consists of a variety of programs which can be categorized as follows.

2-2-1) Research RCCCR is the sponsor of nearly 30 research projects based on the annual budget plan. This projects are proposed by the departments as well as researchers from other institutions and universities. The projects are mainly in the field of material science (both antiquity and modern materials), history of technology (raw materials, production process and final product), Decay mechanisms (deterioration factors, deterioration process, improving environmental conditions and preventing measures).

2-2-2) Training Training activities in RCCCR shape through publication, conferences and symposiums, courses and workshops and co-operation with academic institutions and universities. The target groups for these activities are both national and regional.

2-2-3) Management Managing the conservation projects and conservators network are always highly demanded from RCCCR. Therefore, a main part of the RCCCR is dedicated to supervising and managing conservation and research projects nationwide. Also we give advices to the conservators and collectors from private sectors on how to take care of objects and collections in hand.

2-2-4) Conservation Conservation projects in RCCCR are concentrated on the unique objects and collections with highly distinguished values that need special treatments and resources. There is always an attempt to work directly on the objects and collections with close cooperation of local conservators to exchange the experiences and knowledge. The conservation projects in RCCCR also provide the students and young conservators opportunity to learn more and improve their skills.

2-2-5) International Co-operations RCCCR is highly active in joint projects with international partners. Different projects are conducted internationally in scientific research, disaster management and preparedness, capacity buildings as well as joint conservation projects.

2-3) Facilities and Equipment Each RCCCR’s departments benefit from specialized laboratories specialized in research of cultural heritage. The situated laboratories in RCCCR are as follows:

55 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

• Thermoluminescence dating • Biodeterioration • Optical Microscopy • Metallugraphy • Petrography • Building Materials Analysis • Gemology and Crystalography • Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (XRD) • X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) • Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) • Gas Chromatography (GC) • Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FT-IR) • Raman Spectroscopy • Electrochemical analysis and corrosion studies • X-Ray Imaging • Chemistry Laboratory • Dyes and Fibers Laboratory

Also as the RCCCR is actively involved in conservation projects of highly valued objects and collections of museums and cultural institutions, the conservation department has its own proficient workshops to do the conservation practice as well as training conservators and students of higher education. The different workshops of conservation department are: • Textile, • Metal, • Paintings, • Pottery and Ceramics, • Glass • Paper and Manuscripts • Leathern Objects • Wood and Bone • Architectural decorations • Carpet • Documentation

56 SHAHRZAD AMIN SHIRAZI

Fig. 1 - International co-operation map of RICHT

Reference: A brief introduction to research institute of cultural heritage and tourism (RICHT), RICHT, 2020, Tehran

57 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

58 SHAHRZAD AMIN SHIRAZI

FROM THE PAST TO THE FUTURE: TRAINING OF THE PROFESSIONALS IN THE FIELD OF CULTURAL HERITAGE

59 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context HIGHER EDUCATION IN CONSERVATION AND RESTORATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE IN THE EURO MEDITERRANEAN AREA: A MODEL AND AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOUNG PEOPLE

LAURA BARATIN Scuola di Conservazione e Restauro, DiSPeA, Università di Urbino / laura.baratin@ uniurb.it

ԱՄՓՈՓԱԳԻՐ

Մ­շա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յու­նը հա­մընդ­հա­նուր ար­ժեք է յու­րա­քանչ­յու­րիս, հա­մայնք­նե­ րի և ­հա­սա­րա­կութ­յուն­նե­րի հա­մար։ ­Կար­ևոր է պահ­պա­նել այն և ­փո­խան­ցել ա­պա­գա սե­րունդ­նե­րին: ­Մենք կա­րող ենք ժա­ռան­գութ­յու­նը հա­մա­րել «անց­յա­լի մի ինչ-որ բան» կամ որ­պես տարր, սա­կայն ի­րա­կա­նում նա զար­գա­նում է մեր վե­րա­բեր­մուն­քի հա­մա­ ձայն։ Ա­վե­լին, մեր մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յու­նը կար­ևոր դեր ու­նի Եվ­րա-մի­ջերկ­րա­ ծով­յան տա­րած­աշրջանի ընդ­հա­նուր ա­պա­գա­յի կերտ­ման գոր­ծում: Այս կա­պակ­ցութ­յամբ մտա­դիր ենք խո­սել մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան պահ­պա­նութ­ յան, վե­րա­կանգն­ման և­ արժ­ևոր­ման ո­լոր­տում ­րա ի ­կա­նաց­վող դա­սըն­թաց­նե­րի մա­սին՝ հա­մա­տե­ղե­լով ա­կա­դե­միա­կան աս­պեկտ­նե­րը շու­կա­յա­վար­ման և ­հա­ղոր­դակ­ցութ­յան ո­լորտ­նե­րի հետ: Հե­ ­տա­զո­տութ­յու­նը, ու­մը և ­փոր­ձը պետք է լիար­ժեք ին­տեգր­ված լի­նեն տե­ղա­կան ձեռ­նե­րե­ցութ­յա­նը և ­պաշտ­պա­նեն մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յու­նը նոր տեխ­ նո­լո­գիա­նե­րի կի­րառ­մամբ։ Եվ­րա-մի­ջերկ­րա­ծով­յան երկր­նե­րը ստիպ­ված կլի­նեն անդ­րա­դառ­նալ ի­րենց ու­սում­ ա­ կան ու­ղուն՝ ­ռե ա ­րես­վե­լով պահ­պա­նութ­յան, վե­րա­կանգն­ման և­ արժ­ևոր­ման խնդիր­նե­ րին՝ ռիս­կե­րին, կա­ռա­վար­մա­նը և հ­րա­տապ մի­ջամ­տութ­յուն­նե­րին: Գլ­խա­վոր նպա­տա­կը մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան ամ­րա­կայ­ման և ­վե­րա­կանգն­ման ո­լոր­տի դա­սըն­թաց­նե­րի ար­դիա­կա­նա­ցում է, մաս­նա­վո­րա­պես` ներ­կա­յաց­նե­լով մի նոր ու­սում­ ա­կան ծրա­գիր, որը­ թույլ կտա՝ - նույ­նա­կա­նաց­նել նոր ու­սում­ ա­կան ծրագ­րում ընդգրկ­վե­լիք դի­դակ­տիկ նյու­թը, ո­րը կընդգրկվի նոր օ­րա­կար­գում, - զար ­գաց­նել դա­սա­վան­դող­նե­րի և տեխ­ ­նի­կա­կան անձ­նա­կազ­մի նոր հմտութ­յուն­ներ, - զար­գաց­նել ցանց, ո­րը կկա­րո­ղա­նա ա­ջակ­ցել ու­սում­ ա­սի­րութ­յուն­նե­րի նոր փու­լին,

60 LAURA BARATIN

- փո­խան­ցել բազ­մա­գի­տա­կարգ մո­տե­ցում, - ար­դիա­կա­նաց­նել դա­սա­վանդ­ման մե­թոդ­նե­րը՝ խրա­խու­սե­լով նոր տեխ­նո­լո­գիա­նե­րի օգ­տա­գոր­ծու­մը, - ներ­դաշ­նակ դարձ­նել ­Մի­ջերկ­րա­ծով­յան երկր­նե­րի և ԵՄ-ի ծրագ­րե­րը, մաս­նա­վո­րա­ պես ո­րա­կա­վո­րում­ ե­րի հեշտ հա­մա­տեղ­վող հա­մա­կարգ որ­դեգ­րե­լու նպա­տա­կով: ­Վե­րա­կանգ­նում ու դրա վերապատրաստումը­րող կա են դառ­նալ պատ­մա­կան, գի­տա­ կան ​​և ­տեխ­նի­կա­կան բա­ղադ­րիչ­նե­րի կա­մուրջ, որն­նակ ու է ար­տադ­րե­լու ­տագի ­կան ի­մա­ցութ­յուն և ­պահ­պա­նե­լու ­րայու ­քանչ­յուր երկ­րի պատ­մա­կան հի­շո­ղութ­յունն ու­ ժա ռան­գութ­յու­նը: Այս­տեղ ներկա­ ­յաց­ված է TEMPUS INFOBC-ի (L’innovation dans la formation pour les biens culturels: un nouveau curriculum euro-méditerranéen pour la préservation de biens culturels) փոր­ձը: Եվ­րա­միութ­յան կող­մից ­նանֆի ­սա­վոր­վող այս ծրագ­րի շրջա­նակ­նե­րումԹու­ ­նի­սի կրթա­ կան հա­մա­կար­գում ­ռա ա ­ջին ան­գամ նե­րառ­վեց ամ­րա­կայ­ման և ­վե­րա­կանգն­ման ե­ռամ­ յա դասըն­ թաց­ (Licence Appliquée en Conservation et Restauration des biens culturels), որն ամ­փոփ­վում է ­գիստ մա ­րո­սա­կան եր­կամ­յա դա­սըն­թա­ցով՝ եվ­րո­պա­կան և ­թու­նիս­ յան հաս­տա­տութ­յուն­նե­րի և ­հա­մալ­սա­րան­նե­րի միջև ­տեգի ­լի­քի, մե­թո­դա­բա­նութ­յան և ­տեխ­նո­լո­գիա­նե­րի փո­խանց­ման մի­ջո­ցով: ­Դա­սըն­թա­ցի այս մո­դե­լը, հա­մա­գոր­ծակ­ցութ­յան ծրագ­րի մի­ջո­ցով, ի­րա­կա­նաց­վել է նաև ­Լի­բա­նա­նում, ­րը ո ֆի­նան­սա­վոր­վել է Ի­տա­լիա­յի կրթութ­յան, հա­մալ­սա­րա­նի և ­հե­ տա­զո­տութ­յան նա­խա­րա­րութ­յան և USEK հա­մալ­սա­րա­նի կող­մից: Գլ­խա­վոր նպա­տակն էր նաև այս­տեղ սկսել մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան պահ­պան­ման և ­վե­րա­կանգն­ման դա­սըն­թաց­ներ` եվ­րո­պա­կան հաս­տա­տութ­յուն­նե­րի ECCO-ENCORE-ի կող­մից նշված ­փո չա ­րո­շիչ­նե­րի հա­մա­ձայն, որ­պես­զի այս դիպ­լո­մը հա­մա­տե­ղե­լի լի­նի նաև եվ­րո­պա­կան կրթութ­յան հետ: ­Թու­նի­սի նա­խա­գի­ծը ի­րա­կա­նաց­վել է ե­ռամ­յա ու­սում­ ա­կան ծրագ­րով, յու­րա­քանչ­յուր վայ­րում ­խանա ­տես­ված թվով ու­սա­նող­նե­րի հա­մար (10-ից 15)` հա­մա­ձայն տար­բեր հա­ մալ­սա­րան­նե­րում ­վերդի ­սի­ֆի­կաց­ված վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման պրո­ֆիլ­նե­րի մաս­նա­գի­ տաց­ման և­ այդ տա­րած­քում ­դենար առ­կա ակ­տիվ­ ե­րի բնու­թագ­րե­րի դի­տարկ­ման: Ու­սա­նող­նե­րի հա­մար նա­խա­տես­ված վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման այս դա­սըն­թաց­նե­րը մշակ­ վել են ու­սու­ցիչ­նե­րի և ­տեխ­նի­կա­կան անձ­նա­կազ­մի նոր հմտութ­յուն­նե­րը զար­գաց­նող վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման դա­սըն­թա­ցին զու­գա­հեռ: Ծ­րա­գի­րը նե­րա­ռում էր ­րա վե ­կանգն­ման լա­բո­րա­տո­րիա­նե­րի ստեղ­ծում ­լորբո վայ­րե­ րումև ­վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման` հա­տուկ ­ղատե ­վայ­րե­րում, ինչ­պես նաև պրակ­տիկ դա­սըն­ թաց­ներ ո­ւ ու­ցիչ­նե­րի և ու­սա­նող­նե­րի հա­մար Իս­պա­նիա­յում և­տա Ի ­լիա­յում։ Ծ­րա­գի­րը ­Լի­բա­նա­նում ­նարմեկ ­կեց 2018-2019 ու­սում­ ա­կան տա­րում փաս­տաթղ­թե­րի, ձե­ռագ­րե­րի, գրքե­րի և­ ար­խի­վա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան ամ­րա­կայ­ման ո­լոր­տում ­դենար գո­ յութ­յուն ­նե ու ­ցող մեծ փոր­ձի հի­ման վրա, վե­րա­պատ­րաս­տե­լով նոր վե­րա­կանգ­նող­ներ լի­բա­նան­յան ժա­ռան­գութ­յան հիմ­ ա­կան մա­սը կազ­մող մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան այլ տե­սակ­նե­րի՝ քա­րի, կտավ­ ե­րի, որմ­ ան­կար­նե­րի վե­րա­կանգն­ման գծով։ 61 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

­Վե­րա­կանգ­նու­մը, իր մի­ջա­ռար­կա­յա­կան աս­պեկտ­նե­րով, կա­րող է դառ­նալ ժա­մա­նա­ կա­կից հա­սա­րա­կութ­յան և դ­րա փո­փո­խութ­յուն­նե­րի կար­ևոր ար­տա­հայ­տութ­յու­նը, իսկ տար­բեր երկր­նե­րի տնտե­սութ­յուն­նե­րի ա­ճի հա­մար լի­նել հա­վել­յալ ար­ժեք: Այս աշ­խա­ տան­քը նպա­տակ ու­նի ամ­րա­կայ­ման և ­վե­րա­կանգն­ման ո­լոր­տում, 2011 թ.­րե բա ­փո­ խում­ ե­րից ի վեր Ի­տա­լիա­յում անց­կաց­վող դա­սըն­թաց­նե­րի մի­ջո­ցով, հա­մա­ռոտ ներ­ կա­յաց­նե­լու ­ջազ մի ­գա­յին հա­մա­գոր­ծակ­ցութ­յու­նը և ­խո­սե­լու ­րա-միԵվ ­ջերկ­րա­ծով­յան տա­րա­ծաշր­ջա­նի եր­կու կար­ևոր ո­լորտ­նե­րում փոր­ձարկ­ված ու­սուց­ման մո­դե­լի մա­սին` որ­պես հնա­րա­վո­րութ­յուն ­րի ե ­տա­սարդ սե­րունդ­նե­րի հա­մար։

Key words - Conservation, Restoration, Training, Cultural Heritage, Euro-Mediterranean Region­ Բա­նա­լի բա­ռեր - ամ­րա­կա­յում, վե­րա­կանգ­նում, վե­րա­պատ­րաս­տում, մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յուն, Եվ­րա-մի­ջերկ­րա­ծով­յան տա­րա­ծաշր­ջան

A brief overview of training in Italy for the cultural heritage

The centrality of culture is unequivocally underlined in Article 9 of the Italian Constitution: “The Republic promotes the development of culture and scientific and technical research. It protects the landscape and the historical and artistic heritage of the Nation”, but also because creativity and innovation are key factors in the economic development of modern production systems and a hope for future generations. The professional figures directly involved in cultural heritage from an educational point of view are schematically: the conservator, the conservator scientist, the cultural heritage manager and the restorer (fig.1). The Conservator performs coordination and organisational functions in the field of the protection and enhancement of historical-artistic works. His coordination activity consists in the preparation and organisation of the work to be carried out by the other subjects working in this field. The training of this professional figure is developed in the faculties of literature and/or humanities and provides for a 3-years course plus 2-years course of specialisation. The Conservator Scientist is an expert who applies scientific methodologies and technologies to the cultural heritage sector to know, preserve and enhance the historical and artistic heritage. He is trained in the faculties of science, with a 3-years course plus 2-years course of specialisation. The Cultural Heritage Manager works in the field of cultural heritage and territory enhancement through the planning and implementation of cultural events and initiatives; he develops entrepreneurial skills and moves in compliance with the regulations on Cultural Heritage. He collaborates in the protection and enhancement of heritage, with museums, public and private bodies and with companies in the cultural and tourism sector. The training

62 LAURA BARATIN of this professional figure is developed in the faculties of economics and can be 3-years plus 2-years course of specialization. Finally, the Restorer is a professional figure who has a theoretical background in the historical- artistic, technical-scientific and practical fields related to restoration work for different types of artefacts. He carries out multidisciplinary work that also involves art historians, architects and archaeologists, conservation scientists and other professional figures. The training in the field of conservation and restoration of cultural heritage, after the new Italian reform, started in 2011-2012 in different training institutions, providing a 5-years single-cycle course. A short history, however, I believe is most opportune, to allow everyone to understand the complexity of the issue and the value of the new provisions, which for the first time define the methods and training path to qualify the restorer for the profession and, consequently, provide a key role in the protection and conservation of cultural heritage. The problem of the restorer’s training was raised many years ago in Italy when the Cultural Heritage and Landscape Code (D.L. n.42 of 22nd January 2004) was issued, which indicated that the profession of restorer of cultural heritage would follow a course of study leading to a 5-years single-cycle degree. Subsequently, the training of the Cultural Heritage Restorer in Italy, in implementation of art. 29 of the Cultural Heritage Code, was identified through two national Decrees in the 2009 (D.L. n.86 and n.87 of 26 May 2009), as regulations concerning the definition of the profiles of competence of cultural heritage restorers and the definition of criteria and quality levels to which the teaching of restoration should be adapted. After several years of work and long debates on the methods, contents and subjects involved in the future training, within a technical table composed by members of the Ministry of University and Research (MUR) and the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities and Tourism (MiBACT), in March 2011 the Interministerial Decree defined the class of the single- cycle Master’s Degree in Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage and regulated the starting methods of the courses (G.U. n.139 of 17 June 2011). The new Decree implements all the provisions of the 2009 regulations with regard to both basic and specific scientific and historical-artistic training activities, and with regard to the professional training courses to be carried out in laboratories and educational sites. It regulates the criteria and quality levels of restoration teaching, the accreditation procedures and the minimum organizational and functional requirements for institutions that intend to start this type of training courses. The training of restorers, therefore, is no longer only linked to the Schools of Advanced Training (SAF), which historically prepared restorers in Italy, the Istituto Superiore per la Conservazione e il Restauro (ISCR) and the Istituto Centrale per la Patologia del Libro (ICPAL) in Rome and the Opificio delle Pietre Dure (OPD) in Florence, but also to the Universities and Academies of Fine Arts and other public and private entities accredited by a MiBACT-MIUR Interministerial commission. The MiBACT-MIUR Interministeral commision is the body appointed to verify the characteristics of the proposed training course; the organisational, technical and economic-financial skills of the structures which submitted the proposal; their technical-scientific equipment and facilities; the suitability of restoration laboratories and educational sites, to be developed especially in collaboration with public bodies; the characteristics of the teaching and technical staff; the methods of recruitment of students and the availability of original artefacts for the

63 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context practical teaching activities. The School of the Central Institute of Restoration (today ISCR) was established in 1939 with the Law of 22 July, n.1240, at the Ministry of National Education. Art. 9 outlined the institution of a 3-years course for acquiring professional qualification as a restorer, following an examination test. The training course was improved by an annual advanced training course with a final certificate. Art. 10 defined both theoretical and practical teaching subjects. Theoretical subjects were: art history, restoration techniques, chemistry, physics, natural sciences, drawing and painting techniques, antiquities legislation and fine arts. The practical lessons consisted in the execution of restoration and the application of scientific procedures. With the establishment of the Ministry of Cultural and Environmental Heritage (D.L. 657/74 converted into Law no. 5/1975) and Law no. 44 of 1 March 1975, the Opificio delle Pietre Dure (OPD9) wass also defined as “a specialised institute for the restoration of works of art operating throughout Italy”. The direction of OPD was entrusted to an Art History Superintendent with competence in teaching restoration, in coordination with the ICR. With the law n.57 of 20/01/1992 the School of Restoration was established, then regulated by various regulatory measures. The Restoration School active at the OPD in Florence started its courses in 1978, regulated by the subsequent Presidential Decree 294/1997, and became the School of Advanced Training and Study in 1998 (Legislative Decree 368/1998 art. 9). Finally, in 2004, the Mosaic Restoration School of Ravenna became a branch of the OPD, integrating one of the Institute’s historical sectors. In 2007, the Central Institute for Book Pathology (ICPL) and the Centre for photo reproduction,binding and restoration of State Archives (CFLR) merged into the new Central Institute for the Pathology of Archives and Book (ICPAL), which inherited the functions of the two institutes for the description of their archives, the enhancement of studies and research in the field of protection, conservation and restoration of archival and book materials belonging to the State and other public bodies and the training of specialised personnel. Access to these schools has always been established by means of a competition for titles and examinations with a “closed number”, consisting of a maximum of 10 to 20 pupils per year. The admission examination consisted of an oral test of art history, a linear stroke-drawing test and a practical experiment in which the candidate had to demonstrate knowledge of the main procedures of painting and sculpture techniques, as well as an oral test on scientific subjects. Over time an opening to foreign citizens had also begun. In 1997 courses were held for the first time for four years, divided into three teaching areas: a) wall paintings, stuccoes, paintings on canvas, paintings on wood, leather, fabric, paper and polychrome wooden sculptures; b) metals, ceramics, glass, enamels, jewellery, ivory, amber bone; c) mosaic, natural and artificial stone materials. Based on these experiences and in anticipation of the new training path, from 2001 some Universities started a 3-years degree in Technologies for the restoration and conservation of cultural heritage and, in 2004, the specialist course in Conservation of historical-artistic heritage for the training of restorers. University of Urbino was the first Institution to start this course, followed by Turin, Naples, Palermo and Rome Tor Vergata. From the very beginning, these courses were characterised by a consistent laboratory activity (about 50%) to guarantee training of the same level as that provided by the SAFs, according to a model later implemented in the Interministerial decree. Hence the possibility, with the new Decree, 64 LAURA BARATIN to transfer the training path pursued so far, in the new 5-years single-cycle course, subject to accreditation. For the sake of clarity, it should be pointed out that also the Academies of Fine Arts have historically played a role in the training of Italian restorers, with a 3-years diploma. For this reason, also these institutions can refer to various Interministerial Decrees (n.302 of 30/12/2010 and subsequent n.81 of 23/06/2011), for the starting of 5-years second-level academic diploma course, for acquiring professional qualification as “restorer of cultural heritage”. The new course of study, provided by the university system, is a 5-years single-cycle course with 300 training credits, which more than one third is dedicated to laboratory activities. In fact, a fundamental element is the manual component required by this profession which, in order to achieve a degree of excellence, requires a high amount of laboratory hours to be carried out as continuously as possible, from the first year of the course. Naturally, this activity must not be separated from theoretical teachings, but must take place in close comparison with what has been learnt in the classroom. Access to the training course is through a preliminary selection consisting of two aptitude tests and a theoretical test. The disciplinary areas are divided into: scientific training, historical and artistic-historical training, science and technology for conservation and restoration, cultural heritage, legal, economic and management training and technical restoration disciplines. Moreover, on the basis of the experiences developed by the ISCR, the OPD and the IC-RCPAL, the offer of training courses has been reformulated by grouping the types of artefacts according to the similarities of the constituent materials. This articulation allows the student to have, during the 5 years of study, a homogeneous and conscious acquisition of the different conservation problems for the specific area chosen. In this way, six professional training courses have been identified, grouping together different classes of cultural heritage for the specific teaching of restoration: 1) Stone materials and derivatives; decorated surfaces of architecture. 2) Artefacts painted on wooden and textile supports. Wood carved artefacts. Wooden furniture and structures. Manufactures in worked, assembled and/or painted synthetic materials. 3) Textile and leather materials and articles. 4) Ceramic, glass and organic materials and articles. Materials and manufactured articles in metal and alloys. 5) Book and archival materials. Paper and parchment artefacts. Photographic, cinematographic and digital material. 6) Musical instruments. Scientific and technical instruments (fig.2). Today, there are 27 accredited institutions, in addition to the 3 Higher Education Schools (ISCR, OPD and ICPAL). A branch of the ISCR’s Roman headquarters was opened in Matera, and 10 Fine Arts Academies are distributed between Bologna, Milan, L’Aquila, Naples, Vibo Valenzia, Como, Verona, Macerata, Brescia and Palermo. Finally, 10 Universities (from North to South: in Turin, Pavia, Bologna, Urbino, Viterbo, Rome, Naples, Bari, Cosenza and Palermo) and 3 private Institutions (inFriuli, Tuscany and Lombardy) offer official training courses for restorers.

65 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context Some training models on heritage conservation

In the world for conservation and restoration there are two types of training: • short training for professionals and public administration; • long-term training included in the national educational system of each individual country: first experiences in Lebanon and Tunisia. Training is a core area of ICCROM’s activities. Our high quality courses are aimed at mid- career professionals and are designed taking into account our long experience while at the same time innovating and exploring new ways to deliver results. Course content and pedagogy incorporate new knowledge and skills, and illustrate a diversity of approaches and methodologies found around the world. In addition to formal resource persons, participants are also considered key resources and thus share their own knowledge and experiences, presenting case studies, participating in course discussions, and participating in group work and hands-on exercises (fig.3). Funded by Italian Ministry of Culture, were launched in 2016 for the International Courses for the countries that apply for it in the bilateral agreements. Courses are developed: In Rome, ISCR has activated 30 specialized courses in the fields of restoration of archeological, architectural, stone and wooden artifacts, new technologies for conservation and restoration, 3D documentation and relief, and underwater archeology. Countries involved: Bulgaria, Iran, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Libya, Pakistan, South Korea. In Florence the OPD has activated 13 basic and / or advanced level courses that take into account the level of knowledge declared by the participants and on the basis of the training acquired at the training institutions of their country of origin. The duration of courses varies from one week to a maximum of six weeks. 15 Practical and operational stage, five weeks, within the 11 restoration areas, collaborating on conservation and restoration activities under the guidance of a teacher. The internships are particularly suitable for those who are doing or have been running a first training course in their own country (fig.4). The training of restorers will increasingly have to refer, with a view to European integration, to processes that require a superior training system able to respect professional qualifications known and accepted beyond national borders, and of which Italy should be the main spokesperson on the wave of a tradition that has been consolidated for decades, the expression of a real “made in Italy” that is gradually fading. Therefore, the evaluation and accreditation of courses of study must now be observed and interpreted from the point of view of an international movement to describe, train, certify skills as also referred to in the Framework of Competences for Acces to the Profession of Conservation-Restoration signed in Brussels at the last General Assembly of the E.C.C.O. (Competences for Access to the Conservation- Restoration Profession - Final Version adopted by the E.C.C.O. General Assembly on 13 June 2010) where a conceptual model for a correct training of the conservative-restorer according to different European qualification levels is proposed. The training in Europe for restorers goes through three levels:

66 LAURA BARATIN

- level 6 corresponds to the site worker with basic skills. - level 7 corresponds to the restorer - level 8 corresponds to the restorer specialized in cultural heritage research The skills required to undertake conservation and restoration work are enhanced by regular professional practice and access to the profession begins at level 7 and the title of conservator- restorer is reserved at this level and beyond. Inspired by this approach the TEMPUS INFOBC - L’INNOVATION DANS LA FORMATION POUR LES BIENS CULTURELS : un nouveau curriculum euro-méditerranéen pour la préservation de biens culturels – project was developed. INFOBC funded by the European Union led for the first time training in conservation conservation within the Tunisia’s training system with a three-year Licence Appliquée en Conservation et Restauration des biens culturels which will be completed with another 2-year Master’s degree through a transfer of knowledge, methodologies and technologies between European and Tunisian universities and institutions. This training model was also launched in Lebanon through a cooperation project funded by the Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research and the USEK University The general objective is to start training in conservation and restoration of cultural heritage in These countries according to the parameters indicated by the ECCO-ENCORE European institutions to make these diplomas comparable to the European training (fig. 5). The project in Tunisia was developed with the start of a first three-year education cycle for a programmed number of students from 10 to 15 in each location, according to professionalizing training profiles diversified in the different Universities based on the characteristics of the assets present in the territory. These training courses for students were developed in parallel with the formation of new skills for the teachers and for the technical staff involved. The project involved the installation in each location of its own restoration laboratories and specific training in the sector and internships in Spain and Italy for students during the route. In addition to the University of Urbino - which played the lead role - other projects were involved in the project eleven institutions: two Italians the Union of Mediterranean Universities in Rome - UNIMED and the University Institute of Architecture in Venice with the MELA Multimedia Laboratory; a Spanish University of Barcelona; a French the Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Arts et Métiers Paris Tech ENSAM-ARTS; six Tunisian state universities: the Université de Tunis, the Université de la Manouba and the Université Zitouna in Tunis, the Université de Sousse and the Université de Sfax in the center of the country and the Université de Gabés in the south; finally, the Ministère de l’Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche Scientifique of Tunisia. During the course of the project, the training for teachers was divided into the following themes: Theory and history of restoration and digital documentation (Atelier 1); Survey, representation and communication of cultural heritage (Atelier 2); Restoration (Atelier 3); Diagnostics and scientific analysis (Atelier 4). A Moodle online platform for sharing teaching materials has also been built. Among the most important results achieved, restoration workshops have been designed and set up with state-of-the-art equipment for each Tunisian 67 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

University, according to the different specificities: paintings on wood (Université de Tunis); stone materials (Université de Tunis and Université de Gabès); paintings on canvas (Université de la Manouba); carved stone, mosaic and decorated surfaces (Université de Sousse); fabrics and leather (Université de Sfax); paper supports (Université de la Ezzitouna). The project also developed in terms of mobility in the field of restoration for students and some teachers, through exchanges with the Universities of Barcelona, Urbino and Bologna at the Ravenna Campus, as well as with the Istituto Superiore per la Conservazione e il Restauro and the Istituto Centrale per il Restauro e la Conservazione del Patrimonio Archivistico e Librario in Rome. In addition to the training, there are important agreements signed between the Ministère de l’Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche Scientifique and the Institut National du Patrimoine, the Bibliothèque Nationale and les Archives Nationales to offer students the opportunity to study and work directly on the works preserved in these institutions, as well as to carry out training courses there (fig.6). In the light of these positive experiences, the general objective, of interest and value recognised by the European Union, is to extend the project to other countries of the Euro-Mediterranean area, in particular North Africa and the Middle East, to foster dialogue and exchange on the issues of conservation and transmission of cultural heritage and memory. Among the specific objectives: to complete the training courses with Master’s courses lasting two years, referring to the Erasmus Plus project in order to have access to joint European degrees; to start relationships with private companies working in the different countries in the field of heritage restoration, in order to favour the practical-applicative experiences of students and young graduates; to develop parallel projects, in order to support the activities started, through: - setting up additional ateliers to meet the specific needs of each Licence; - the technical and theoretical in-depth study for the trainers; - the mobility of teachers and students in European partner countries; - the identification of works of art as an object of study for further study and internships. All these projects are aimed, through specific actions, at the dissemination of a culture that is not exclusively technical in terms of conservation, restoration and enhancement of cultural heritage. The relationship between universities and local institutions is very important to guarantee young people the opportunity to practice and give work continuity on their territory.

Fig.1 - Outline of the professional figures in the field of conservation and restoration of cultural heritage.

68 LAURA BARATIN

Fig.2 - Outline of Professionalizing Training Courses for Restorers in Italy

Fig.3 – Short training for professionals and public administration by ICCROM

Fig.4 – International Training Projects a short training for professionals and public administration by MiBACT

69 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Fig. 5 – Competences for aces to the Conservation-Restoration Profession by European Confederation of Conservator-Restorer’s Organisations (ECCO-ENCORE)

Fig.6 – Tempus-INFOBC Project in Tunisia

70 ARCH. JOSEPH ZAAROUR

CONSERVATION, RESTORATION OF CULTURAL PROPERTY PROGRAM: THE EXPERIENCE IN LEBANON

ARCH. JOSEPH ZAAROUR School of Architecture and Design Architecture Department, HOLY SPIRIT UNIVERSITY OF KASLIK / [email protected]

ԱՄՓՈՓԱԳԻՐ ­Կաս­լի­կի ­Սուրբ ­Հո­գու ­մալհա ­սա­րա­նը (USEK) ստեղ­ծել է ու­սում­ ա­կան ծրա­գիր, ո­րի նպա­տակն է պահ­պա­նել և ­վե­րա­կանգ­նել Լի­ ­բա­նա­նի բազ­մա­զան մշա­կու­թա­յին, կրո­ նա­կան և ­պատ­մա­կան ժա­ռան­գութ­յու­նը: Հա­ ­մալ­սա­րա­նը վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման ծրագ­րի ի­րա­կա­նաց­ման հա­մար բախ­վեց մի ­քա նի խո­չըն­դոտ­նե­րի, ինչ­պի­սիք են ո­լոր­տում ­ղատե ­կան մաս­նա­գի­տաց­ված դա­սըն­թա­ ցա­վար­նե­րի բա­ցա­կա­յութ­յու­նը, հաս­տա­տութ­յան հա­մար ներդ­րում­ ե­րի ցածր մա­կար­ դա­կը և­ ու­սա­նող­նե­րի հա­մար հա­տուկ ­բոլա ­րա­տո­րիա­նե­րի ստեղծ­ման մեծ ծախ­սե­րը: Ի հե­ճուկս դժվա­րութ­յուն­նե­րի, հա­մալ­սա­րանն այժմ ու­նի ե­ռամ­յա կուրս և լի­ ­բա­նան­յան մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան պահ­պա­նութ­յան և ­վե­րա­կանգն­ման մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րի մա­ գիստ­րո­սա­կան ո­րա­կա­վոր­ման ծրա­գիր։ Վե­ ­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման ծրա­գի­րը մեկ­նար­կել է Ուր­բի­նո­յի հա­մալ­սա­րա­նի (Ի­տա­լիա), Ի­տա­լիա­յի կրթութ­յան, հա­մալ­սա­րա­նի և ­հե­տա­զո­տութ­յուն­նե­րի նա­խա­րա­րութ­յան (MIUR), Բեյ­ ­րու­թում ­տա Ի ­լիա­յի դես­պա­նութ­յան և Ի­տա­լիա­յի մշա­կույ­թի ինս­տի­տու­տի հետ հա­մա­տեղ ծրագ­րի շնոր­հիվ: Այս զե­կույ­ցը լու­սա­բա­նում է USEK-ի ­մից կող ­ռա ա ­ջար­կած վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման դա­սըն­ թա­ցը, ո­րի ըն­թաց­քում ­սա ու ­նող­նե­րը մաս­նա­գի­տա­նում են ­րե քա նմուշ­նե­րի, որմ­ ա­ նկար­նե­րի, խճան­կար­նե­րի և ճար­ ­տա­րա­պե­տա­կան դե­կո­րա­տիվ մա­կե­րես­նե­րի, կտա­վի և փայ­ ­տի վրա նկար­նե­րի, փայ­տե աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րի, փայ­տե կա­հույ­քի և­ ար­վես­տի գոր­ ծե­րի, ժա­մա­նա­կա­կից ար­վես­տի և գր­քե­րի, ձե­ռագ­րե­րի, թվա­յին ար­խիվ­ ե­րի և լու­ ­սա­ ն­կար­նե­րի ամ­րա­կայ­ման և ­վե­րա­կանգն­ման գծով: ­Զե­կույ­ցում խոս­վում է ­նամաս ­վո­րա­ պես մեր ­սա ու ­նող­նե­րի կող­մից ­վածար եր­կու ­րի օ ­նակ­նե­րի մա­սին: Key words –­New program, conservation, restoration, USEK, Lebanon Բա­ ­նա­լի բա­ռեր -­ նոր ծրագիր, ամրակայում, վերականգնում, ԿՍՀՀ, Լիբանան

71 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

With conservation and restoration projects being carried out in a haphazard and unprofessional manner by unspecialized individuals in the region, the Holy Spirit University of Kaslik (USEK) launched a project to preserve, digitize and revive the diverse and valuable cultural, religious, historic, and ethnic heritage of Lebanon. This is even more true after the devastating blast that hit Beirut on August 4, 2020, in an area very rich in cultural heritage property which is now in need of immediate intervention. In 2002, the USEK Library established the Conservation and Restoration Center to oversee the up-keep of the conservation and restoration of heritage collections including manuscripts, rare and valuable books, archives, maps, photos, etc. In 2016, the Department of Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Properties and Sacred Arts in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences decided to initiate a program that would allow the dissemination of the skills required to preserve and conserve the “rich” heritage of the Middle East. The University was able to overcome obstacles to establishing the program such as the lack of specialists in the filed in the Arab world who would be able to teach; the low return on investment to the institution; and the cost of establishing the required laboratories is too high. As such the University of Urbino was chosen, because it is one of the most renowned schools of conservation and restoration in Europe. Moreover, it has integrated this form of training in other settings, such as in Tunisia and Albania, for the first time, in the training mechanism of each country. Furthermore, this project is supported by the Ministry of Education, Universities and Research (MIUR), the Italian Embassy, and the Italian Cultural Institute. The 3-years bachelor program followed by a master’s program accepts only 10 students in each specialization for a double degree with the University of Urbino. To graduate, students need to complete 96 credits. Part of it is devoted to general education courses, such as the History of Lebanon, History of Art, Social Sciences, or the introduction to artistic expression, etc. The second part is related to common core courses, such as digital graphics, drawing techniques, documentation and representation, theory and techniques of restoration I and II, chemistry and physics applied to cultural heritage, as well as the Italian language. Specialization capstone: all Artwork Lab + Internship. Electives: Museography, Science &Technology of Materials, History of Cinema & Photography, etc. In the first year, students will choose one of the three areas of specialization in the form of workshops that will allow them to manipulate the material: 1. Stone materials, murals, mosaics, and decorated architectural surfaces; 2. Paintings on canvas and table, wooden works, wooden furnishings, and contemporary artwork; 3. Books, manuscripts, digital archives, and photographs. Throughout the programme, students will have the opportunity to work on various materials such as paintings, mosaics, frescoes, archives, manuscripts, textiles, etc. The programme does not deal with the conservation of sites and buildings, but with artifacts, cultural heritage objects (manuscripts, rare books, photos, paintings on canvas and wood, wooden works, murals, mosaics) found in certain contexts: places of worship (churches, convents, mosques, ...), museums and private houses. For example, students would only turn to sculptures and frescoes on a site, but they would not deal with the architecture of the site.

72 ARCH. JOSEPH ZAAROUR

At the end of the third year, students will present a final project of knowledge and the various phases of intervention on a work of art in their field of specialization. With the BA in hand, graduates will be able to complete their course at the University of Urbino and Italian institutions with different specializations. However, at USEK, a master’s programme is being prepared to complete the training, which requires a 3-years +2 course at the European level. Some of the activities carried out by the students during their studies are presented below: – the first orkw is an oil on canvas of 1887 by J. Gilbert “Notre Dame de La Deliverance”, 73.3x103.3 cm, from the Église Notre Dame de la Deliverance in Ain el Rihani; – the second is an oil on canvas of 1905 by Ibrahime Khalil El-Jer “Saint Antoine le Grand”, 145x95 cm, from the Église de Saint Antoine le Grand in Niha.

Notre Dame de la Delivrance

The work was in a discreet state of conservation. In proximity to the Virgin’s head there were consistent, tenacious deposits, well adhered to the pictorial film below and of medium thickness. They can most probably be identified as residues of glue, as a crown had been applied in the past in relief above the Virgin’s head. During the first half of the year, the work was disassembled from the wooden frame and, following cleaning tests, it was removed from the painted surface from the consistent and inconsistent deposits present. A first consolidation was carried out near the glue residues, where there were also gaps in the pictorial film and the preparatory layers, of small dimensions. Subsequently, the cleaning was further mechanically finished in the vicinity of the glue residues. They were softened using suitable solvent mixtures and removed mechanically with extreme caution using a scalpel. The work was then subjected to a strip lining with a canvas similar to the original applied with Beva Film. The painting was then reassembled on a wooden frame made ex-novo extensible with biette. During the second half of the year, the small flakes and lifts still present were fixed by localized injections of minimum quantities of 15% Plexsisol P550. By interposing Melinex, controlled pressure and heat were applied using a thermocautery to obtain optimal adhesion of the raised areas. The work was then subjected to an initial intermediate coating applied with a brush. The small gaps, mainly on the Virgin’s head, were filled with Bologna plaster and Lapin 1:8 glue in water. Once dried, the excess grout was removed, shaving the grouts to level. For the localization and extension of the gaps, the watercolor retouching was carried out with the mimetic technique. Afterward, a further intermediate brush painting was carried out. The retouching was then completed by using varnish paints, rebalancing and perfecting the watercolor retouching and the original paint film, where necessary. The work was completed by applying a final varnish with 15% Regalrez (fig.1, 2, 3).

73 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context Saint Antoine le Grand

Preliminary investigations and related photographic documentation have been carried out. The general state of conservation of the painting on canvas was discreet; it showed some gaps in the pictorial film and the preparatory layers, a tear of medium size, and some minor deformations of the support. The work was first of all removed from the wooden frame as it no longer provided adequate tension. The canvas was cleaned from the front from consistent and inconsistent deposits by controlled suction with medium-hard brushstrokes. Cleaning tests were then carried out to identify the most suitable method for removing the slightly oxidized paint. After cleaning, a first intermediate coating applied with a brush was carried out. Once the slight deformation of the substrate had been removed and smoothed out, the strip lining was applied along the perimeter of the canvas. For this operation, cotton canvas with reinforcement and reduction similar to the original support was chosen. The same canvas was used for the patch applied on the back of the painting near the tear. Both the strip lining and the patch were adhered using a Beva Film. Once the edge lining was finished, it was possible to reassemble the work on a wooden frame built from scratch as the previous one no longer fulfilled its support functions. Subsequently, the gaps were carefully filled with Bologna plaster and Lapin glue, used in proportions of 1:8 in water. The grouts were shaved level, removing the excess grout with a scalpel and the use of buckskin for the complete removal of any minimum halos and residues of the grout. The pictorial retouching with watercolours was carried out, by localization and extension of the gaps by camouflage technique, followed by an intermediate painting applied with a brush. Then varnish colours were used to finish and complete the pictorial reintegration. As the last operation, the final protection of the paint film was carried out by applying a final 15% Regalrez varnish (fig.4, 5). To provide the students with the required experience and training, as well as a variety of options for experimental learning: in-class projects, and internships, the University has dedicated its facilities and building. One such premise is the USEK Library which has long- established state-of-the-art centers in preservation and digitization with experienced staff. Additional facilities such as the chemistry and physics laboratories are already available on campus, in addition to a specialized laboratory that serves the three specializations. Students, in USEK and Urbino, will also have the possibility to exchange experiences and enrich their training not only on a technical and scientific level but also through socio- cultural dialogue between different cultures. As for job opportunities, graduates with an MA could become trainers or establish a private specialized studio in the field. They can also benefit from the possibility of collaboration with the Lebanese Directorate General of Antiquities, as well as with museum curators, archive centers, private collectors. The Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Properties Program is at the core of the University’s mission to play a fundamental role in preserving the endangered cultural, historic, and ethnic heritage of Lebanon for future generations. 74 ARCH. JOSEPH ZAAROUR

Fig.1 - Notre Dame de la Delivrance, oil on canvas of Fig.2 - Notre Dame de la Delivrance, detail of the thick 1887 by J. Gilbert, before restoration. The activities were layer of glue on the Virgin’s head conducted by the restorer professors of the University of Urbino (Agnese Maltoni and Monia Antonini) and the students of the second year of the course.

Fig.3 - Notre Dame de la Delivrance, detail of the Virgin during the grouting phase and after the intervention

75 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Fig.4 - Saint Antoine le Grand, Fig.5 - Saint Antoine le Grand, Photography for diagnostics oil on canvas of 1905 by Ibrahime in particular UV fluorescence. The activities of digital Khalil El-Jer, before restoration. documentation and photography for diagnostics were conducted by the professors of the University of Urbino (Laura Baratin and Paolo Triolo).

76 HAMLET L. PETROSYAN

ETHNOCIDE IN ARTSAKH: THE MECHANISMS OF AZERBAIJAN’S USURPATION OF INDIGENOUS ARMENIAN CULTURAL HERITAGE1

HAMLET L. PETROSYAN Yerevan State University, Armenia

ԱՄՓՈՓԱԳԻՐ Մ­շա­կու­թա­յին էթ­նո­ցիդն Ար­ցա­խում. Ադր­բե­ջա­նի կող­մից հայ ­կումշա ­թա­յին ժա­ռան­ գութ­յան բռնա­յու­րաց­ման մե­խա­նիզմ­ ե­րը: Ար­ցա­խի հայ մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան բռնա­յու­րա­ցում Ադր­բե­ջա­նի իշ­խա­նութ­ յուն­նե­րի հա­յա­հա­լած քա­ղա­քա­կա­նութ­յան բաղ­կա­ցու­ցիչ մասն է: Այն ըն­թա­նում է ­ ար տաք­նա­պես խճող­ված, բայց ներ­քուստ ճկուն­խա մե ­նիզմ­ ե­րի մի­ջո­ցով: ­Հոդ­վա­ծում ա­ռանձ­նաց­վում և ­նարկ քն ­վում են հետև­յալ մե­խա­նիզմ­ ե­րը. ա) բռնա­յու­րա­ցում ­տերին ­նա­ցիո­նա­լիզ­մի և ­ժո­ղո­վուրդ­նե­րի ի­րա­վա­հա­վա­սա­րութ­յան քա­րո­զի ներ­քո, բ) ար­ցա­խա­հայ մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան վե­րագ­րում ­վանաղ ­նե­ րին, իսկ աղ­վան­նե­րից էլ՝ ադր­բե­ջան­ցի­նե­րին, գ) վե­րան­վա­նում, ­րօգվե ­տա­գոր­ծում, ձևա­փո­խում, դ) ­զի ֆի ­կա­կան ոչն­չա­ցում: Key words - Ethnocide, Armenian cultural heritage, Artsakh, atheistic propaganda, renaming, reuse, Albanization, physical destruction ­Բա­նա­լի բա­ռեր - էթ­նո­ցիդ, հայ մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յուն, Ար­ցախ, ա­թեիս­տա­կան քա­րոզ, վե­րան­վա­նում, վե­րօգ­տա­գոր­ծում, աղ­վա­նա­կա­նա­ցում, ֆի­զի­կա­կան ոչն­չա­ցում

It appears that scholars no longer doubt that the Azerbaijani identity was constructed during Soviet years. It was created on the territory of Soviet Azerbaijan, legalized through the Soviet policy of defining ethno-national identity, and legitimized through the myths of antiquity at the expense of distorting and destroying the histories and cultures of ancient Media, Atropatene, Caucasian Albania (Aluank), and Armenia’s historical northeastern regions of Utik, Artsakh, and Nakhichevan.

1 This text was translated from Armenian into English by Simon Maghakyan and copy edited by Sarah Pickman. The author expresses his gratitude to them. 77 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Since the people of the territory of Soviet Azerbaijan included not only the newly-named Azeri ethnos, this created expansionist opportunities and ambitions (including over the Armenian regions of Syunik and Gegharkunik), if not a self-righteous license, to assimilate ethnic and religious minorities, including the majority of Kurds, Udis, Lezgis, and Tats. It is impossible to even imagine better circumstances for such designs. It is widely-documented, if not outright apparent, that this policy’s ultimate political goal was to present Azeris as indigenous and heir to the ancient peoples who had lived in what Azerbaijani nationalists refer to as ‘Northern Azerbaijan’ (which is the constituent state of Soviet Azerbaijan) and ‘Southern Azerbaijan’ (northern Iran), namely: the Caucasian Albanians, Medians, and Atropatenians. Medians have long vanished along with advocates for their ‘historical rights’, Atropatenians were outside the Soviet border with no opportunity to effectively protest the process of history revisionism, and the true heirs to the territory’s history and culture, of the Caucasian Albanians, were few in number, divided along linguistic and religious lines, and legally and politically weak, if not impotent. Subsequent developments demonstrated that the Armenians, who were historically, religiously and culturally close to the Caucasian Albanians, did not fight for the cultural rights of their near-vanished neighbors, even when Caucasian Albanian identity had been arguably a part of Armenian history and culture. The biggest hurdle to Azerbaijan’s policy of constructing a historical memory and ancestral homeland were the large number of Armenians and their cultural monuments, which were dispersed across the territory of Azerbaijan, with a significant concentration in Artsakh, Utik, and Nakhichevan. This paper attempts to clarify and classify Azerbaijan’s political and scientific mechanisms employed at the systematic expense of Armenian history and culture. Specifically, it will seek to highlight those factors that enabled, interfered with, or prevented this revision and usurpation. In general, cultural heritage is best preserved and enjoyed when it is perceived as a socially, economically, and politically critical component of the present and the future. Under such use, cultural heritage functions not merely aesthetically or symbolically, but coalesces into ethno-national identity, which makes the misattribution of this highly-integrated heritage by another collectivity difficult at best. As a result of sovietization, which included forced annexation to Azerbaijan and government- sanctioned atheism, the indigenous Armenian population of Artsakh loosened its grip on its cultural identity (save for the more secular practices of a distinct dialect, ceremonial rituals, traditions, and imaginations). In other words, heritage was no longer functioning as an agent of identity-preservation. Under those circumstances, Azerbaijan’s aggressiveness toward Armenian heritage was met with no serious resistance. The forced misattribution was, at first, conducted through the official process of propagating atheism, where propaganda and deliberate destruction went hand-to-hand. The nomadic Muslim population, who were the base for the developing Azerbaijani identity, suffered few cultural losses as opposed to the indigenous 78 HAMLET L. PETROSYAN and agriculturalist Christian populace, whose material heritage could be physically reduced to match the limited number of Islamic monuments. While the societal side of official atheism amounted to denying a deity and suppressing superstitions, the scientific application of godlessness often targeted folk culture so that the latter would not contain religiosity. The most visual and dangerous outcome was the downgrading of immobile heritage to something unworthy of protection, translating official atheism to anactive campaign against the existence of cultural monuments. First and foremost, this policy entailed the destruction, deformation, and re-adaptation of Armenian architectural structures, inscriptions, khachkars and tombstones (Fig. 1-3) by Azerbaijani outhorities. As a result, churches in hundreds of Artsakh villages were usually converted to storage areas or, in the best case scenario, ‘cultural centers.’ For instance, the monastery in Charektar, at least since the 1960s, was functioning as a house and barn for an Azerbaijani family (Fig. 4,5). Nevertheless, the demolition of hundreds of churches and khachkars, sometimes for use as construction material, was an extreme material, but most importantly moral, blow to Armenian heritage. It must be noted that we, Armenians, also participated in this destructive campaign in the name of atheism. On one hand, destroying and mistreating cultural monuments reduces their value to simple decorations and takes sacredness out of them. On the other hand, this campaign eliminates the irreplaceable scientific and documentary value that all historical monuments possess. As noted, one of the methods used to institute atheism was to target ‘folk’ culture and scientifically ‘recover’ its traditional roots: redefining cultural identity without official religion. The classic example of such policy is the ethnographic book by Dr. Petrushevskiy, with a self-evident Russian title: “О дохристианских верованиях крестьян Нагорного Карабаха” (“About the pre-Christian beliefs of the villagers of Nagorno-Karabakh”). Notably, “Armenians” have been replaced with “villagers,” perhaps suggesting that non- indigenous Muslims also had pre-Christian roots in the region. Anti-Christian atheism is what primarily compels Petrushevskiy to secularize sacred Christian heritage. For instance, he claims that “folk wedding traditions have survived. In particular, before leaving for her new house, the ritual of the bride’s worship of her paternal house’s ground oven – tonir – which, villagers say, is more sacred and important than the church itself. For the Armenian villager, the wedding ritual is essentially the worshipping of the oven [the source of survival] than a Christian rite”.2 In truth, ‘oven-worshipping’ was usually

2 Петрушевский И. О дохристианских верованиях крестьян НагорногоКарабаха (About the pre-Christian beliefs of the villagers of Nagorno-Karabakh, in Russian) – Reports of State Research Institute of History, vol. 1, issue 5, Baku, 1930, p. 4. The state-perpetuated thesis of ‘cultural commonality’ between Armenians and Azeris being stronger than among other ethnic groups in Soviet Azerbaijan has been recently analysed in Сафарян В. А. Освещение древней и средневековой культуры Арцаха в Азербайджанской исторической науке (Safaryan V. А. Interpretation of ancient and medieval culture of Artsakh in Azerbaijani historical science, Russian. PhD Thesis in History), Yerevan, 2009, p. 17. 79 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context practiced in villages without churches, and the worship of sacred oven in Artsakh, as we have argued in a separate publication, contained an administrative-political context.3 Let’s also note the factual errors of the Russian researcher. Petrushevskiy, for instance, considers ojakh and tonir, creating the combined term of ojakh-tonir, as one and the same, when, in the case of Artsakh, ojakh was the oven inside the house while tonir was the outdoors cooker. The scholar’s statement implies that he hasn’t categorized holy ojakhs among sacred sites, even though he has encountered them. Such negligence doesn’t seem bothersome to the author, however, as long as his scholarship could downplay and downgrade the inconvenient role of Christianity. In addition to the secularization of Christian traditions, another mechanism that neutralized Armenian identity was the discovery of overlapping histories. Since Christian Armenian and Azeri Muslim cultural differences were apparent, a mechanism of cultural usurpation – under the guise of internationalism and the brotherhood of nations – was the construction of cultural ‘kinship,’ ‘common roots,’ and ‘similarities.’ For example, Petrushevsky attempts to prove, at every cost, that for Karabakh Armenians, the Christian holy sites and rituals were considered less valuable than pre-Christian folk traditions. Stretching this convenient argument even further, the scholar also argued that, as far as pre-Christian/folk traditions are concerned, Armenians and Tatars [Azeris] have almost the same cultural pillars. To demonstrate this, Petrushevsky argues that the legends and worship of Christian sacred sites (at their core) are the same for both Armenians and Azeris: “It must be noted that Turkish [Azeri] and Armenian villager beliefs show more similarity and closeness to each other than with the beliefs of the elite Muslims and Christians.”4 Not surprisingly, the same mechanism was utilized by Azeri scholar Zia Buniatov, but for the purpose of arguing for common ancestry. According to Buniatov, the rituals and customs of Armenians from various regions (Artsakh, Syunik, Gardman, Kutkashen, Ismail, etc.) were surprisingly similar to the customs of their Azeri neighbors; which supposedly demonstrates that modern Armenians and Azerbaijanis descend from Caucasian Albanians, some of whom have joined the Armenian Church and assimilated, while others have become Muslim.5 This same mechanism was utilized to equate Armenian architectural culture to late medieval Islamic architecture in Azerbaijan by noting random similarities. As we can see, the next step isn’t that far: if the cultures are so interrelated, then we can assume that the creators of these cultures were the same. The next mechanism, which has an administrative angle, is what may be called a state monopoly over studying cultural heritage. This meant that the history and culture of territory of Soviet Azerbaijan, including Artsakh, could only be studied by Azerbaijani academic institutions. Such studies were under the strict review of the Communist Party apparatus. Local Armenian scholars were persecuted and even deported for attempting to study their own history and culture. I recall, for instance, a 1977 research trip to Artsakh villages for the purpose of documenting khachkars; in some villages, school principals would

3 Պետրոսյան Հ., Քարաբլուրի նորագյուտ սրբարանը և «սուրբ օջախների» պաշտամունքն Արցախում (Petrosyan H. The newly discovered sanctuary in Karablur and worship of a sacred fireplaces in the Artsakh-Kharabag region, in Armenian) - Armenian Saints and Sanctuaries, Yerevan, 2001, p. 347-356. 4 Petrushevsky, Op. site, p. 2. 5 Буниятов З. М. Азербайджан в VII-IX вв. (Buniatov Z.M. Azerbaijan in VII-IX cc, in Russian), Baku, 1965, p. 100. 80 HAMLET L. PETROSYAN refuse to support my research, arguing that I would need to have a written permit issued by the local Communist authorities in order to be able to photograph khachkars. My PhD chair and academic advisor, academician Babken Arakelyan, once commented that all of his initiatives to establish cooperation with the Azerbaijani Academy of Sciences had been fruitless. In his eyes, the only success was the 1960s agreement that allowed Armenian researchers to document medieval Armenian inscriptions in Artsakh-Karabakh under the leadership of S. Barkhudarian, while also allowing Azerbaijanis to document Arabic- script inscriptions in Armenia under the leadership of M. Neymatova. Interestingly, both Barkhudaryan’s and Neymatova’s books were published somewhat later, in the early 1980s.6 While the first research had only documented Armenian inscriptions, Neymatova’s findings also included inscriptions of tombs of Islamized Armenians, including descendants of the famed Orbelyan clan, presenting the latter as Azerbaijani. These Moscow-backed policies hindered the training of Armenian specialists in the field. For instance, Armenian studies departments were unable to train specialists in the Caucasian Albanian alphabet, yielding the field entirely to neighboring Georgia. The recent discovery of Caucasian Albanian manuscripts in the Saint Catherine monastery of Sinai, Egypt, has revolutionized the history of this culture, since, for the first time, it became possible to read several partial texts. Nonetheless, after reviewing publications on the topic, - specifically those authored by renowned linguist academician Zaza Aleksidze, from the National Academy of Georgia - it becomes obvious that author tends to highlight the Georgian influence in the creation of the Caucasian Albanian alphabet and on Albanian literature.7 Let us acknowledge the role of ‘Albanophobia’ in Armenian academic circles. An entire generation of scholars was attempting to separate Caucasian Albanian culture from Armenian culture; as if, from the beginning, agreeing to the Azerbaijani thesis that ‘Caucasian Albanians’ were to some extent ‘Azeri.’ To concede this academic point, however, meant accepting the political undertones of the proposed thesis; indeed, this is one of the victories of Azerbaijani historiography’s usurpation. Armenian studies were compelled, on one hand, to counter the direct connection of Azerbaijanis and Caucasian Albanians, and, on the other hand, to separate Caucasian Albanian culture from Armenian heritage. It is a pity that Armenian efforts to distance ourselves from any Caucasian Albanian characters had its contributions to Armenians cultural losses. The next Azerbaijani step was to construct terminology that supported revisionism – usurpation through relabeling. Azerbaijanis were ridiculously proclaiming Azerbaijan’s entire Armenian heritage – famous people, nobilities, the entire people, the entire material heritage, as Caucasian Albanian-Azerbaijani; and now Armenian scholars are passionately trying to counter these baseless misattributions. This process surely even confused Armenian scholars, since another usurpation mechanism was soon developed. The classical founder of this practice was again Buniatov. Instead of

6 Դիվան հայ վիմագրության, պր. 5. Արցախ (Archives of Armenian epigraphy, vol 5, Artsakh, by Barkhudaryan S. G., in Armenian), Yerevan, 1982. 1982. Нейматова М. С. Мемориальные памятники Азербайджана: XII-XIX века (Neimatova M. S. Memorial monuments of Azerbaijan: XII-XIX centuries, in Russian), Baku, 1981. 7 The Albanian Script. The Process - How Its Secrets Were Revealed by Zaza Aleksidze and Betty Blair - http://azer.com/aiweb/ categories/magazine/ai113_folder/113_articles/113_zaza_aleksidze_secrets.html. It is noteworthy that further investigations led to the conclusion that the new Albanian originals appear closest parallels at first with old Armenian and then with Georgian, see: The Caucasian Albanian Palimpsests of Mt. Sinai, vol. 1, Turnhaut, 2008, pp. XXIV, I-34. 81 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context discourse, documentation, and demonstration of evidence, all that was needed was relabeling of the existing record. Armenian historical sources have been proclaimed Caucasian Albanian, Armenian historians – Albanian historians, and even Armenian-lettered names have been written in Russian and Azerbaijani adaptations. Ironically, even the most outspoken representatives of the ‘Caucasian Albanian thesis’ did not know Armenian; this despite the fact that many of the ‘Albanian’ documents were written in the Armenian script. It makes one laugh to read Azerbaijani scholars Buniatov’s or Mamedova’s citations of early medieval Armenian historian Movses Kaghankatvatsi’s work. The Azerbaijani scholars present the original Armenian text in semi-educated, Cyrillic-font, classical Armenian, in a failed attempt to demonstrate the mastery of the primary sources. Yet the most amusing antics come from two other Azerbaijani scholars, D. Akhundov and N. Rzayev. In one photo-documentation of Christian monuments in Soviet Azerbaijan, Akhundov lists every item as being of Caucasian Albanian-Azerbaijani heritage. In doing so, he fabricates Azerbaijani nomenclature for Armenian khachkars, renaming them “Nishandash,” “khachdash,” etc.8 Rzayev, on the other hand, goes even further, calling Caucasian Albanians Turks and arguing that they are as Turkish as Azerbaijanis are. He keeps reiterating this bizarre theory in almost every page of his book, as if fearing that the reader is going to forget this new invention. Moreover, demonstrating a complete lack of understanding regarding the area’s historical timeline, he repeatedly mentions that this or that monument - through ‘the decorative motif’ - belongs to the Caucasian Albanian era. The same zeal is seen in the contradictory classification of Caucasian Albanian and Oghuz-Turkish in the 18th-19th century tombstones of Avetaranots, Armenian village in Artsakh, which demonstrates a lack of knowledge regarding the monuments’ dates and deliberately ignores the monuments’ expansive inscriptions in the .9 For instance, the following epitaph was inscribed on the 1736 tombstone of Melik Shahnazar, son of Melik Hise (Fig. 6, 7):

«Այս է տապան մէլիք Շահնազարի Որդի Մելիք Յիսեին. թվ :ՌՃՁԵ: (1736): Ոգեմ զբանս գովեսդի Ի վերայ Մէլիք Հուսեյնի, Զոր գրեցի այս տապանի: Սա էր տէր երկրին Վարանդայի :ԼԵ: (35) մասն գեղի. Սայ էր հացով, սեղանով լի, Ողորմէր ամեն ազգի. Կերպարանօքն էր գովելի,

8Ахундов Д. Архитектура древнего и раннесредневекового Азербайджана (Akhundov D. Architecture of ancient and early medieval Azaerbaijan, in Russsian), Baku, 1986, pp. 236-252. 9 Рзаев Н. И. Искусство Кавказской Албании: IVв. до.н.э. -УПв. н.э (Rzaev N. I. Art of Caucasian Albania: IVc. BC – УПc. AD, in Russian), Baku, 1976. 82 HAMLET L. PETROSYAN

Թագ պարձանք Հայոց ազգի, Յոյժ կոդորեաց ազգէն դաջկի, Պատերազմեաց յետ օսմանցի, Սա ոչ ետ հարկ թագաւորի, Ամուր պարիսպ էր աշխարհի: Որ է եաշն թվին :ՌՃԾԸ: (1709)»: 10

(“This is the gravestone of Melik Shahnazar’s Son, Melik Hisein in year 1736. I am weaving words of praise About Melik Husein And ascribing [them] into this tomb. He was Varanda land’s lord, With thirty five villages. His table was always full [with food], And [he] had mercy on everyone. [He] had commendable character And was the crown and pride of the Armenian nation. He killed many Tajiks [i.e Turks], And fought against the Ottomans [i.e. Turks] Paid no tax to kings. Was the strong [castle] wall of our world, And was born in year 1709”).

Would the historical Oghuz-Turks – the actual forefathers of today’s Azerbaijanis – forgive their Azeri descendant, Rzayev, for classifying someone as Oghuz whose tombstone venerates him as the pride of the Armenian nation, killer of Turks? In the past two decades, parallel to the Karabakh liberation movement, Artsakh Armenians have rediscovered their connection to their cultural heritage; in other words, this heritage is reemerging as an inseparable part of their identity. The first signs of this rebirth became apparent in the beginning of the Artsakh movement. The All Saviour Ghazanchetsots church of Shushi (Fig. 8), for instance, inspired many to seek liberation and then came

10 Archives of Armenian epigraphy, vol 5, Artsakh, p. 149. 83 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context to represent that freedom. In the besieged Karabakh capital, Stepanakert, which is not far from Shushi, locals would ask each other when they would be able to light candles, referencing the liberation of Shushi from Azerbaijani forces. During the movement, legends spread (as far as Los Angeles) about another sacred site – the monastery of Gandzasar (Fig. 9) – and its minister Father Hovhannes. Even today, people visit the monastery to see the missile that hit the monastery but didn’t explode. A few years ago, factual and not-so-factual information emerged about finding remains of Saint Dadi at his namesake monastery (Fig. 10); and today many stories have spread about the recent discovery of Tigranakert, a 2,000-year-old Hellenistic city built by Armenian emperor Tigranes the Great, in Karabakh (Fig. 11-13). These are just a few examples of hundreds of similar stories. The organic rejuvenation of cultural stories and rites is a testament to the natural function of cultural heritage – the process of fostering cultural identity. Perhaps ethnographers and specialists of Armenian studies should pay more attention to the mechanisms of reclaiming culture in order to understand and cultivate the process. Under the conditions of such a renaissance, the above-mentioned mechanisms of cultural heritage usurpation should backfire on the fabricators themselves. This is expressed in Azerbaijan’s new obsession for antique roots, as well as the country’s systematic and systemic hostility toward the cultural heritage of indigenous Armenians. The physical destruction of the historical record through the targeting of cultural monuments – such as the complete destruction of the medieval Jugha (Djulfa) cemetery in 2005 – has reached its zenith (Fig. 14). The Azerbaijani approach to Armenian cultural heritage and their heirs is an unwavering and unremorseful example of their animosity and obsession for obliteration. This sad reality is an outright demonstration that the Azerbaijani identity has been comprehensively constructed by means of deliberately misattributing the rich heritage of their indigenous neighbors. In this light, expecting Azerbaijan’s authorities and official academia to show flexibility towards, let alone respect and care for, the Armenian people and culture of Artskah-Karabakh– the living opponents of the foundational myths of Azeri identity – is, at best, shortsighted. This provision finds its full proof in our days, when Azerbaijan, with the support of Turkey and with its direct participation, unleashed a large-scale war against the Artsakh Republic. The shelling of civilian buildings is accompanied by the ruthless destruction of cultural heritage. This is witnessed by the shelling of the Holy Savior Ghazanchetsots Church in Shushi, the destruction of the museums of Hadrut and Martakert, the desecration of the Talish Memorial, the destruction of the Tigranakert archeological camp. Every day new facts of the destruction of the Armenian cultural heritage of Artsakh are registered. And this is happening in the 21st century under the indifference of international humanitarian and cultural organizations.

84 HAMLET L. PETROSYAN

Fig. 1, 2 - Fragmented cross-stones (khachkars) (12th -13th centuries) inserted in the wall of the Azerbaijani school, Tsar.

85 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Fig. 3 - A cross-stone (khachkar) fragmented by Fig. 4, 5 - The monastery of Charektari (10th-14th the Azerbaijani people (12th-13th centuries), centuries) transformed into a barn, Karvachar. Handaberd monastery.

Fig. 6, 7 - The gravestone of Hise, 1736, Avetaranots.

86 HAMLET L. PETROSYAN

Fig. 8 - The Church of Holy Saviour Ghazanchetsots in Fig. 9 - The (12th-17th centuries). Shushi before the destruction by Azerbaijani side.

Fig. 10 - (12th-17th centuries). Fig. 11 - TIgranakert, the general view of the central part of the city.

Fig. 12 - Tigranakert, the towers of the fortified district Fig. 13 - Tigranakert, the early Christian square (beginning of the 1st century BC). (5th-6th centuries).

87 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Fig. 14 - Poster, showing the annihilation of Julfa’s cemetery, https://blog.amnestyusa.org/djulfa-cemetery-destruction-timeline/ .

Fig. 15 - The Church of Holy Saviour Ghazanchetsots Fig. 16 - Field Camp of the Tigranakert archaeological in Shushi after the Azerbaijani missile attack expedition after the Azerbaijani missile attack. (the photograph: https://m.armeniasputnik.am/ photo/20201025/25060044/arajnagcic-uxix-ekexeci- adrbejani-sanzazercac-apterazmin-i-patasxan-harsaniq- enq-anum.html).

88 ԳԱՅԱՆԵ Է­ԼԻԱԶ­ՅԱՆ Գ­ՐԱՎՈՐ­ ԺԱ­ՌԱՆ­ԳՈՒԹ­ՅԱՆ ՊԱՀ­ՊԱՆ­ՄԱՆ Ո­ԼՈՐ­ՏՈՒՄ ՄԱՍ­ՆԱ­ԳԵՏ­ՆԵ­ՐԻ ՎԵ­ՐԱ­ՊԱՏ­ՐԱՍՏ­ՄԱՆ ԱՆՀ­ՐԱ­ԺԵՇ­ՏՈՒԹ­ՅՈՒ­ՆԸ ԵՎ ԽՆԴ­ՐԻ ԼՈՒԾ­ՄԱՆ ՈՒ­ՂԻ­ՆԵ­ՐԻ Ո­ՐՈ­ՆՈՒ­ՄԸ

ԳԱՅԱՆԵ Է­ԼԻԱԶ­ՅԱՆ Մ.­Մաշ­տո­ցի անվ. ­Հին ձե­ռագ­րե­րի գի­տա­հե­տա­զո­տա­կան ինս­տի­տուտ ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րան, Հայաստան

ABSTRACT One of the most important factors in terms of adapting the preservation of written heritage to modern requirements is the clarification of training methods for specialists in the field and the organization of courses. The Matenadaran’s Department of Restoration, with years of professional experience, plays the role of a training center, organizing trainings and bringing together specialists from the region and from abroad. It is suggested that a center be set up to address these issues, which will help restorers with training.

Key words - Written Heritage, Manuscripts, Training, Restoration, Preservation Բանալի բառեր - գրավոր ժառանգություն, ձեռագրեր, վերապատրաստում, վերա­ կանգ­նում, պահպանություն

Գ­րա­վոր ժա­ռան­գութ­յու­նը հա­մաշ­խար­հա­յին մշա­կու­յթի կար­ևոր և թերևս­ ա­մե­նա­խո­ցե­ լի մասն է: Մա­ ­տե­նա­դա­րա­նը ձե­ռագ­րե­րի, վա­վե­րագ­րե­րի և հ­նա­տիպ գրքե­րի ա­մե­նա­ հարուստ­ կենտ­րոնն է համար­ վում,­ ուր պահպան­ վում­ են շուրջ 23000 ռա­ձե գիր­ մատ­ յան­ներ, ա­վե­լի քան 300000 ար­ժե­քա­վոր վա­վե­րագ­րեր և մոտ­ 2300 հնա­տիպ գրքեր: ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգն­ման բա­ժի­նը գո­յութ­յուն ­նի ու ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի ստեղծ­ ման օր­վա­նից: ­Բա­ժի­նը կա­տա­րում է ­լոր բո տե­սա­կի ձե­ռագ­րե­րի, ար­խի­վա­յին փաս­ տաթղ­թե­րի, ման­րան­կար­նե­րի, գրա­ֆի­կա­կան աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րի, թղթյա և մա­ ­գա­ղաթ­ յա նյու­թե­րի խո­նա­վութ­յան, ջեր­մաս­տի­ճա­նա­յին տա­տա­նում­ ե­րի, սնկե­րի, ման­րէ­նե­րի, կրծող­նե­րի և ­մի­ջատ­նե­րի վա­սա­կար ազ­դե­ցութ­յա­նը են­թարկ­ված նմուշ­նե­րի վե­րա­ կանգ­նում ­ ամև ­րա­կա­յում:

89 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Ինչպես­ աշխար­ հի­ բոլոր­ երկրնե­ ­րում, այնպես­ էլ ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նում, ­ռագձե ­րա­կան հա­ վա­քա­ծու­նե­րի պահ­պան­ման աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րը տար­վում ենվան­ ա ­դա­կան ե­ղա­նակ­նե­րով, ինչ­պես նաև պահ­պա­նող-վե­րա­կանգ­նող­նե­րի Եվ­րո­պա­կան կազ­մա­կեր­պութ­յուն­նե­րի դաշ­ նութ­յան (E.C.C.O.) կող­մից ­րաշ ե ­խա­վոր­ված նո­րա­գույն տեխ­նո­լո­գիա­նե­րի կի­րառ­մամբ: 2003թ. ճա­պո­նա­կան դրա­մաշ­նոր­հի շրջա­նակ­նե­րում ­ժիբա ­նը լիո­վին վե­րա­զին­վել է և ­միակն է ­րա տա ­ծաշր­ջա­նում, ուր­տար կա ­վում է ­րահան ­պե­տութ­յան թան­գա­րան­նե­րի և գ­րա­դա­րան­նե­րի հա­վա­քա­ծու­նե­րի վե­րա­կանգ­նում, նաև ­դիհան ­սա­նում է ­մա հա ­կար­գող և ­փոր­ձա­գի­տա­կան կենտ­րոն: ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգն­ման բա­ժի­նը, ու­նե­նա­լով մաս­նա­գի­տա­կան մեծ փորձ, ու­սու­ցո­ղա­կան կենտ­րո­նի դեր է կա­տա­րում, պար­բե­րա­բար կազ­մա­կեր­պե­լով վար­պե­ տութ­յան դա­սըն­թաց­ներ: Նշ­ված մի­ջո­ցա­ռում­ ե­րին, տա­րա­ծաշր­ջա­նի թան­գա­րան­նե­րի և գ­րա­դա­րան­նե­րի մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րից բա­ցի, ներգ­րավ­ված են նաև ար­տա­սահ­մա­նից ժա­մա­նող վե­րա­կանգ­նող­ներ (Շ­վեյ­ցա­րիա, Ֆ­րան­սիա, ԱՄՆ, ­Ռու­սաս­տան և­ այլն): ­Քա­նի որ գրա­վոր ժա­ռան­գութ­յան ամ­րա­կա­յու­մը և ­հե­տա­գա վե­րա­կանգ­նու­մը, պայ­մա­ նա­վոր­ված ձե­ռագ­րա­յին հա­վա­քա­ծու­նե­րի բնա­կան ծե­րաց­ման գոր­ծո­նով, այժմ դար­ձել է չա­փա­զանց կար­ևոր, ա­պա մաս­նա­գի­տա­կան վե­րա­պատ­րաս­տում­ ե­րի անհ­րա­ժեշ­ տութ­յու­նը դի­տարկ­վում է ­պես որ գե­րա­կա խնդիր: ­Պար­բե­րա­կան վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման կա­րիք ու­նեն ինչ­պես սկսնակ մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րը, այն­պես էլ ո­լոր­տի եր­կա­րամ­յա փորձ ու­նե­ցող վե­րա­կանգ­նող­նե­րը: ­Դա­սըն­թաց­նե­րը կա­յա­նում են հետև­յալ հի­մունք­նե­րով.

1. Ար­տա­սահ­մանյան­ հե­ղի­նա­կա­վոր կենտ­րոն­ներից հրա­վիր­ված մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րի կող­մից անց­կաց­վող վար­պե­տության­ դա­սեր

2000 թվա­կա­նից ցայ­սօր ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի գեր­մա­նաբ­նակ բա­րե­կամ­ եր՝ պ­րոֆ.­ Ռո­ բերտ Շ­թեհ­լեն և ­Մարգ­րեթ ­Յաշ­կեն, ով­քեր զբաղ­վում ­Մա են ­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի ձե­ռագ­րե­րի մե­տա­ղա­պատ կազ­մե­րի վե­րա­կանգն­ման աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րով, յու­րա­քանչ­յուր ­րիտա ­Հա­ յաս­տան այ­ցե­րի շրջա­նակ­նե­րում անց են ­նում կաց ­միսե ­նար-պա­րապ­մունք­ներ հետև­յալ թե­մա­նե­րով. - ­Դա­սա­կան կազ­մե­րի ձևա­վոր­ման հի­մունք­ներ (ղե­կա­վար՝­ Մարգ­րեթ ­Յաշ­կե): Մաս­նա­կից­ներ՝­ Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի ե­րի­տա­սարդ և Եր­ևա­նի թան­գա­րան­նե­րի ու գրա­դա­րան­նե­րի վե­րա­կանգ­նող­ներ: (Նկ.1) - ­Մե­տա­ղա­պատ կազ­մե­րի մաս­նիկ­նե­րի պատ­րաստ­ման հի­մունք­ներ (ղե­կա­վար՝ պ­րոֆ.­ Ռո­բերտ Շ­թեհ­լե): ­Մաս­նա­կից­ներ՝­ Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգն­ման բաժ­ նի ե­րի­տա­սարդ մաս­նա­գետ­ներ: - «­Հի­շո­ղութ­յան կեր­պա­րանք­նե­րը» ա­մե­նամ­յա մի­ջազ­գա­յին գի­տա­կի­րա­ռա­կան սե­մի­նա­րի շրջա­նակ­նե­րում (2011-2019 թթ.) ­պե վար ­տութ­յան դա­սեր և ­պա­րապ­ մունք­ներ (յու­րա­քանչ­յուր ­րիտա 3-4 դաս):

90 ԳԱՅԱՆԵ Է­ԼԻԱԶ­ՅԱՆ

Ինչ­պես ցույց տվեց ­կար եր տա­րի­նե­րի փոր­ձը, ա­ռա­վել արդ­յու­նա­վետ են շա­րու­նա­կա­ կան բնույ­թի դա­սըն­թաց­նե­րը, ո­րոնք հնա­րա­վո­րութ­յուն են ­լիս տա ներ­կա­յաց­վող նյու­թը ամ­րապն­դել և տե­ ­ղում ստա­նալ ա­ռա­ջա­ցող հար­ցե­րի պա­տաս­խան­նե­րը: Այդ օ­րի­նակ­նե­րից է ­Սանկտ Պե­տեր­բուր­գի Ռոս­ ­ֆո­տո կազ­մա­կեր­պութ­յան մաս­նա­գետ Ան­նա Ա­սե­ևա­յի «­Լու­սան­կար­նե­րի նույ­նա­կա­նա­ցում» վար­պե­տութ­յան դա­սե­րը, ո­րոնք անց են կաց­վել նշված սե­մի­նա­րի շրջա­նակ­նե­րում ­ և ու­նեն շա­րու­նա­կա­կան բնույթ: (Նկ.2) Էր­մի­տա­ժի վե­րա­կանգ­նող-կազ­մա­րար Սեր­ ­գեյ ­Լո­տո­վի գե­ղար­վես­տա­կան կազ­մե­րի կա­ռուց­վածք­նե­րին նվիր­ված վար­պե­տութ­յան դա­սե­րի արդ­յուն­քում նույն­պես ար­ձա­ նագր­վեց մեծ ­ռա ա ­ջըն­թաց: (Նկ.3) «­Հի­շո­ղութ­յան կեր­պա­րանք­ներ» մի­ջազ­գա­յին գի­տա­կի­րա­ռա­կան սե­մի­նա­րը իր աշ­ խար­հագ­րութ­յամբ միա­վո­րեց աշ­խար­հի վե­րա­կանգ­նող­նե­րին և ­դար­ձավ մաս­նա­գի­տա­ կան կար­ևոր հար­թակ, ո­րի մի­ջո­ցով հնա­րա­վոր դար­ձավ քննար­կել բազ­մա­թիվ խնդիր­ ներ ոչ միայն կոն­ֆե­րան­սի օ­րե­րին, այլև ա­ռօր­յա գոր­ծու­նեութ­յան ընթ­քաց­քում: (Նկ.4) Այ­սօր վե­րա­կանգ­նո­ղա­կան թղթե­րի բազ­մա­զա­նութ­յու­նը հնա­րա­վո­րութ­յուն է ­լիս տա կա­տա­րել բարդ աշ­խա­տանք­ներ, արդ­յուն­քում ­րածնվե ­վում են խիստվ աս­ված նյու­թեր՝ թղթ­յա և ­մա­գա­ղաթ­յա բազ­մա­թիվ ձե­ռագ­րեր և ­վա­վե­րագ­րեր: ­Վե­րա­կանգ­նո­ղա­կան թղթե­րի պատ­րաս­տու­մը ու­նի իր բար­դութ­յուն­նե­րը, ո­րոնք պայ­ մա­նա­վոր­ված են հա­տուկ ­ռածա ­տե­սակ­նե­րի և թ­փե­րի առ­կա­յութ­յան հետ: Այդ պատ­ճա­ ռով վե­րա­կանգ­նո­ղա­կան կենտ­րոն­նե­րը ստիպ­ված են լի­նում ներկ­րել թղթե­րը ­Ճա­պո­ նիա­յից կամ ­Կո­րեա­յից: ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի նա­խա­ձեռ­նութ­յամբ 2017-2018 թթ. կազ­ ­մա­կերպ­վեցին վե­րա­կա­նգնո­ ղա­կան թղթե­րի նույ­նա­կա­նաց­ման և ­պատ­րաստ­ման դա­սըն­թաց­ներ, ո­րոնք վա­րում էր գեր­մա­նաբ­նակ հայտ­նի մաս­նա­գետ Գան­գոլֆ Ուլբ­րիխ­տը: ­Դասն­թա­ցը բա­ժան­ված էր եր­կու ­սի.մա թղթե­րի նույ­նա­կա­նաց­ման տե­սութ­յուն ­պատև ­ րաստ­ման տեխ­նո­լո­գիա­նե­րը: Նշ­ված դա­սըն­թա­ցի մաս­նա­կից­նե­րը ծա­նո­թա­ցան վե­րա­կա­նգնո­ղա­կան թղթե­րի տե­ սակ­նե­րի հետ, ին­չը կար­ևոր գոր­ծոն է վե­րա­կանգն­ման աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րում թղթե­րի ճշգրիտ ընտ­րութ­յան հա­մար, և ­ձեռք բե­րե­ցին չա­փա­զանց ար­ժե­քա­վոր գի­տե­լիք­ներ թղթի պատ­րաստ­ման տեխ­նո­լո­գիա­նե­րի աս­պա­րե­զում: Ինչ վե­րա­բե­րում է ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կա­նգնող­նե­րին, նշված պա­րապ­մունք­նե­րի ըն­թաց­քում ­ցաբա ­հայտ­վեց, որ ճա­պո­նա­կան թղթե­րի հիմ­ ա­կան հումք հան­դի­սա­ցող ծա­ռա­տե­սակ­նե­րի և թ­փե­րի կա­ռուց­ված­քը գրե­թե հա­մընկ­նում է ­Հա­յաս­տա­նի թթազ­գի ծա­ռե­րի կա­ռուց­ված­քի հետ: Այժմ ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգն­ման բաժ­նում ­տարկա ­վում են ­խա նա ­պատ­րաս­ տա­կան աշ­խա­տանք­ներ տե­ղա­կան հում­քի հի­ման վրա վե­րա­կանգ­նո­ղա­կան թղթե­րի պատ­րաստ­ման ուղ­ղութ­յամբ, ին­չը կնպաս­տի ­Հա­յաս­տա­նի վե­րա­կանգ­նող­նե­րի աշ­խա­ տան­քի ո­րա­կի բարձ­րաց­մա­նը` հա­մաշ­խար­հա­յին պա­հանջ­նե­րին հա­մա­հունչ: ­Շա­րու­նա­կա­կան բնույթ են կրում­Մա ­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի և ­Բեռ­լի­նի Ազ­գա­յին գրա­դա­րա­նի միջև ­մահա ­գոր­ծակ­ցութ­յան շրջա­նակ­նե­րում ­վան ա ­դույթ դար­ձած վար­պե­տութ­յան դա­ 91 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

սե­րը, ո­րոնք վա­րում են նշված ­դա գրա ­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգն­ման բաժ­նի բարձր ո­րա­կա­վո­ րում ու­նե­ցող մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րը: ­Դա­սըն­թաց­նե­րի ժա­մա­նա­կա­ցույ­ցը կազմ­վում է ­հա միա ­մուռ ­ժե ու ­րով՝ ընդգրկ­վում են նեղ մաս­նա­գի­տա­կան ուղ­ղութ­յուն­ներ, և, չնա­յած այն հան­գա­ման­քին, որ դա­սե­րը տևում են մեկ­բաթ, շա արդ­յունք­նե­րը տե­սա­նե­լի են ինչ­պես վե­րա­կանգն­ման, այն­պես էլ թան­գա­րա­նա­յին նմու­շե­րի ցու­ցադ­րութ­յան աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րում: ­Հատ­կան­շա­կան է նաև այն փաս­տը, որ գեր­մա­նա­ցի մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րի հա­մար ­Մա­տե­ նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգ­նող­նե­րի փոր­ձը նույն­պես շատ կար­ևոր է, և ս­տեղծ­ված մաս­նա­ գի­տա­կան հար­թա­կը շո­շա­փե­լի արդ­յունք է ­լիս տա թե՛­ Հա­յաս­տա­նի վե­րա­կանգ­նող­նե­ րի, և ­թե՛­ գեր­մա­նա­ցի գոր­ծըն­կեր­նե­րի աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րում: Այժմ մշակ­վում է ­պեվար ­տութ­յան դա­սե­րի եր­րորդ փու­լը, ո­րը կկա­յա­նա նոր ձևա­չա­փով:­ Դա­սըն­թաց­նե­րին կհրա­վիր­վեն նաև մաս­նա­գետ­ներ ­Հա­յաս­տա­նի թան­գա­րան­նե­րից և գ­րա­դա­րան­նե­րից:

2. ­ Մա ­տե­նա­դարա­ ­նի վե­րա­կանգ­նող­նե­րի կող­մից կազմա­ ­կերպ­վող դա­սըն­թաց­ներ և ­վար­պե­տութ­յան դա­սեր

Ինչ­պես հայտ­նի է, ­Հա­յաս­տա­նի հե­ռա­վոր վայ­րե­րի մշա­կու­թա­յին կենտ­րոն­նե­րը կա­րիք ու­նեն մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րի վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման, ըստ ո­րում, տար­րա­կան գի­տե­լիք­նե­րի բա­ցա­կա­յութ­յան պատ­ճա­ռով, տե­ղե­րում կան լրջա­գույն բաց­թո­ղում­ եր: «­Հա­յաս­տան»­ հիմ­ ադ­րա­մի մշա­կու­թա­յին ծրագ­րե­րի շրջա­նակ­նե­րում Մա­ ­տե­նա­դա­րա­ նի վե­րա­կանգ­նող­նե­րի ջան­քե­րով կազ­մա­կերպ­վել է հա­տուկ դասըն­թաց­նե­րի շա­բաթ, ո­րի ըն­թաց­քում մար­զա­յին գրա­դա­րան­նե­րի և ­թան­գա­րան­նե­րի աշ­խա­տա­կից­նե­րը ծա­ նո­թա­ցել են հա­վա­քա­ծու­նե­րի պահ­պան­ման, ախ­տա­հան­ման և ­դա­սա­կան վե­րա­կանգն­ ման հի­մունք­նե­րին: «­Հի­շո­ղութ­յան կեր­պա­րանք­նե­րը» մի­ջազ­գա­յին գի­տա­կի­րա­ռա­կան սե­մի­նա­րի շրջա­ նակ­նե­րում ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգ­նող­նե­րի կող­մից անց են ­վել կաց հետև­յալ վար­պե­տութ­յան դա­սե­րը` միջ­նա­դար­յան կազ­մե­րի կա­ռուց­վածք և ­վե­րա­կանգ­նում, ­հայ կա­կան ձե­ռագ­րե­րի եզ­րահ­յու­սե­րի ձևա­վո­րում, ­նոծա ­թա­ցում ­րավե ­կանգն­ման սար­քա­ վո­րում­ ե­րի աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րի հետ և­ այլն: ­Վար­պե­տութ­յան դա­սե­ր են անց­կաց­վել նաև ­Հա­յաս­տա­նի տար­բեր գրա­դա­րան­նե­րի և ­թան­գա­րան­նե­րի վե­րա­կանգն­ման բա­ժին­նե­րում, ­րի օ ­նակ՝ Ազ­գա­յին գրա­դա­րանի, Ազ­ գա­յին ար­խիվի և­ այ­լն: 2015 թ. Ի­տա­լիա­յի Թղ­թի Պա­ ­թո­լո­գիա­յի ինս­տի­տու­տի (IGPAL) հետ հա­մա­գոր­ծակ­ցութ­ յան շրջա­նակ­նե­րում ­ և ի­տա­լա­ցի­նե­րի հրա­վե­րով ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգն­ման բաժ­նի վա­րիչ Գ.Է­լիազյա­ ­նը և­ ա­վագ վե­րա­կանգ­նող Ս.­Բար­սեղ­յա­նը վա­րել են ե­ռա­շա­ բաթ դա­սըն­թաց «­Միջ­նա­դար­յան հայ­կա­կան կազ­մե­րի ձևա­վո­րում» ­մաթե ­յով: Անհ­րա­ ժեշտութ­ յու­ ­նը ծա­գել է այն պատ­ճա­ռով, որ նշված ինս­տի­տու­տը ստացել­ է 14-րդ և 15-րդ

92 ԳԱՅԱՆԵ Է­ԼԻԱԶ­ՅԱՆ

­դա­րե­րի եր­կու ­ժեար ­քա­վոր հայ­կա­կան ձե­ռա­գիր, և ­մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րը, չտի­րա­պե­տե­լով հայ­կա­կան կազ­մար­վես­տին, ցան­կութ­յուն էին հայտ­նել ու­սում­ ա­սի­րելու այն: ­Դա­սըն­ թաց­նե­րի արդ­յուն­քում նշված ­ռագ ձե ­րե­րը նո­րոգ­վել են ի­տա­լա­ցի գործ­ըն­կեր­նե­րի մաս­ նակ­ցութ­յամբ, և­ այժմ ևս ­մի հաս­տա­տութ­յուն ­րատի ­պե­տում է ­կա հայ ­կան կազ­մար­վես­ տի հի­մունք­նե­րին: 2018-2019 թթ. Գ­յում­րիում գոր­ծող հայ-ա­մե­րիկ­յան կա­նանց միութ­յան նա­խա­ձեռ­նութ­ յամբ բաժ­նի ա­վագ վե­րա­կանգ­նող Մա­ ­րիա ­Քե­շիշ­յա­նի դասըն­թաց­նե­րը «­Հա­յ­կական կազ­մար­վես­տի հի­մունք­նե­րը» խո­րագ­րով ստա­ցել են մեծ ­վահա ­նութ­յուն, ­ այժմև պատ­ րաստ­վում է ­սըն դա ­թա­ցի նոր ծրա­գիր: 2018 թ. UNESCO-ի նա­խա­ձեռ­նութ­յամբ ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգն­ման բաժ­նի վե­ րա­կանգ­նող­նե­րը «Emergency safeguarding of the Syrian cultural heritage» շրջա­նակ­նե­ րում անց են կաց­րել գի­տա­կի­րա­ռա­կան սե­մի­նար-պա­րապ­մունք «Ար­խի­վա­յին փաս­ տաթղ­թե­րի և ձե­ ­ռագ­րե­րի կոն­սեր­վա­ցում ու­րա վե ­կանգ­նում» ­րագխո ­րով: ­Դա­սըն­թա­ ցին, ո­րի հիմ­քում դրված է­ղել ե ­Սի­րիա­յի և ­Լի­բա­նա­նի գոր­ծըն­կեր­նե­րի հետ վաս­ված ժա­ռան­գութ­յան պահ­պան­ման ռազ­մա­վա­րութ­յան մշա­կու­մը, մաս­նակ­ցել են 8 վե­րա­ կանգ­նող: Հն­գօր­յա սե­մի­նար-պա­րապ­մունք­նե­րի ժա­մա­նակ տե­ղի է ու­նե­ցել նաև մտքե­րի փո­խա­ նա­կում, ­ ևա­ռա­ջա­ցած նոր հար­ցադ­րում­ ե­րն ընդգրկ­վել են ա­ռա­ջի­կա­յում ­յակա ­նա­լիք սե­մի­նար­նե­րի ծրագ­րե­րում: ­Հե­տա­գա­յում ­խանա ­տես­վում է ­լայընդ ­նել դա­սըն­թաց­նե­րի աշ­խար­հագ­րութ­յու­նը և տ­ևո­ղութ­յու­նը: ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգն­ման բաժ­նում պար­բե­րա­բար վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­վում են տար­բեր երկ­րնե­րից (ԱՄՆ, Շ­վեյ­ցա­րիա, Անգ­լիա, Ֆ­րան­սիա, ­Ռու­սաս­տան և­ այլն) ան­ հատ վե­րա­կանգ­նող­ներ, ո­րոնց հա­մար Հին ձե­ռագ­րերի ինս­տի­տու­տը մաս­նա­գի­տա­ կան գի­տե­լիք­նե­րի կար­ևոր հար­թակ է: ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նում ստեղծ­ված են լայն հնա­րա­վո­րութ­յուն­ներ` ծա­նո­թա­նա­լու ­ռագձե ­րե­ րի և ­միջ­նա­դար­յան վա­վե­րագ­րե­րի վե­րա­կանգն­ման և ­կոն­սեր­վաց­ման աշ­խա­տանք­նե­ րին, ին­չը դյու­րին չէ ի­րա­գոր­ծել ու­րիշ հան­գա­մանք­նե­րում, մաս­նա­վո­րա­պես ու­սում­ ա­ կան հաս­տա­տութ­յուն­նե­րում: ­Քա­նի որ ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կան­գնող­նե­րը ար­դեն եր­կար տա­րի­ներ կա­տա­րում են Սփյուռքի ­ռագձե ­րե­րի կոն­սեր­վաց­ման աշ­խա­տանք­ներ, այժմ ա­ռա­վել քան երբ­ևէ անհ­րա­ժեշտ է կազ­մա­կեր­պել մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րի պատ­րաստ­ման հե­ռան­կա­րա­յին գոր­ծ­ ըն­թաց: Ա­ռա­ջին փոր­ձը, ո­րը հա­ջող­վեց ի­րա­գոր­ծել, Ե­րու­սա­ղե­մի ­Պատ­րիար­քա­րա­նին կից վե­ րա­կանգն­ման բաժ­նի ստեղ­ծում է, ին­չը հնա­րա­վո­րութ­յուն տվեց ­յալմիաց ու­ժե­րով կա­ հա­վո­րելու ­մաժա ­նա­կա­կից վե­րա­կանգն­ման բա­ժին և տե­ ­ղում անց­կաց­նելու գործ­նա­ կան դա­սըն­թաց­ներ: Այժմ Ե­րու­սա­ղե­մի ­ժիբա ­նը գոր­ծում է, ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգ­նող­նե­րը պար­բե­ րա­բար այ­ցե­րի ըն­թաց­քում, ­ցիբա հիմ­ ա­կան աշ­խա­տանք­նե­րից և ­խորհր­դատ­վութ­յու­ նից, անց են կաց­նում ­սընդա ­թաց­ներ և հս­կում ­խաաշ ­տանք­նե­րի ըն­թաց­քը:

93 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

3. ­Վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման դա­սըն­թաց­ներ մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րի փո­խա­նակ­ման հի­մունք­նե­րով

­Հայտ­նի է, որ մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րի վե­րա­պատ­րաս­տու­մը կազ­մա­կեր­պե­լու ­մե ա ­նա­կար­ևոր խնդիր­նե­րից են ֆի­նան­սա­կան բար­դութ­յուն­նե­րը, այն պատ­ճա­ռով, որ բազ­մա­թիվ հիմ­ նարկ­նե­րում դա ­մար հա ­վում է ­րովճա ­վի ծա­ռա­յութ­յուն: ­Վեր­ջերս Ռու­ ­սաս­տա­նի հայտ­նի վե­րա­կանգն­ման կենտ­րոն­նե­րի հետ կնքված հա­մա­ձայ­ նագ­րե­րի շրջա­նակ­նե­րում ­Ռու ( ­սաս­տա­նի Ազ­գա­յին գրա­դա­րան, Սանկտ­ ­Պե­տեր­բուր­գի ­Ռոս­ֆո­տո կենտ­րոն, ­Ռու­սաս­տա­նի Գ­րա­բա­րի ան­վան ­Գի­տա­կան վե­րա­կանգ­նո­ղա­կան կենտ­րոն, Էր­մի­տաժ) ակ­տի­վո­րեն կա­տար­վում է ­նամաս ­գետ­նե­րի վե­րա­պատ­րաս­տում փո­խա­դարձ այ­ցե­րի ձևա­չա­փով: Նշ­ված նա­խա­ձեռ­նութ­յու­նը թեթ­ևաց­նում է ­նան ֆի ­սա­կան բե­ռը և հ­նա­րա­վո­րութ­յուն է տա­լիս ի­րա­գոր­ծելու անվ­ճար ու­սու­ցում: Օ­րի­նակ՝ 2018 թ. ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի 3 վե­րա­կանգ­նողներ գոր­ծուղ­վե­ցին ­Մոսկ­վա­յի Գ­րա­բա­րի ան­վան գի­տա­կան վե­րա­կանգ­նո­ղա­կան կենտ­րոն, որտեղ երկ­շա­բաթ­յա դա­ սըն­թաց­նե­րն ուղղ­ված էին գրա­ֆի­կա­յի և ­մա­գա­ղաթ­յա ձե­ռագ­րե­րի վե­րա­կանգն­ման ա­ռանձ­նա­հատ­կութ­յուն­նե­րի ու­սում­ ա­սիր­մա­նը: Նշ­ված կենտ­րո­նից 3 մաս­նա­գետներ ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նի վե­րա­կանգն­ման բաժ­նում ­ան ցան ման­րան­կար­նե­րի ամ­րա­կայ­ման և ­հայ­կա­կան կազ­մե­րի վե­րա­կանգն­ման դա­սըն­ թաց­ներ: 2019 թ.­ եր­կու մաս­նա­գետներ վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­վե­ցին ­Ռու­սաս­տա­նի ­Պե­տա­կան գրա­ դա­րա­նում «Իս­լա­մա­կան ձե­ռագ­րե­րի կազ­մեր» ­մաթե ­յով: Եվս 2 մաս­նա­գետներ նշված հաս­տա­տութ­յու­նից ­Մա­տե­նա­դա­րա­նում ­նոծա ­թա­ցան հայ­ կա­կան կազ­մար­վես­տի հի­մունք­նե­րին և­ ան­ցան երկ­շա­բաթ­յա գործ­նա­կան դա­սըն­թաց­ ներ: Այժմ ա­ռա­վել, քան երբ­ևէ կար­ևոր է շեշ­տը դնել այն հանգա­ ­ման­քի վրա, որ վե­րը նշված հար­ցե­րի կար­գա­վոր­ման հա­մար անհ­րա­ժեշտ է ստեղ­ծել հա­մա­կար­գող մար­մին, ­րը ո կա­ջակ­ցի մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րին կա­տա­րելու ­րավե ­պատ­րաստ­ման թե­մա­նե­րի և­ ու­սու­ցո­ղա­ կան կենտ­րոն­նե­րի ճիշտ ընտ­րութ­յուն: Վե­ ­րա­կանգ­նող-մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րի վե­րա­պատ­րաս­տ­ման հար­ցը ցան­կա­լի է դի­տար­կել որ­պես գրա­վոր ժա­ռան­գութ­յան պահ­պան­ման կար­ևո­րա­գույն խնդիր, ­չը ին պա­հան­ջում է մաս­նա­գետ­նե­րի հա­մախմ­բում և ­ֆի­նան­սա­կան հար­ցե­րի լուծ­ման ու­ղի­նե­րի ո­րո­նում:

94 ԳԱՅԱՆԵ Է­ԼԻԱԶ­ՅԱՆ

Նկ. 1 - Կազմերի ձևավորում (Մարգրեթ Յաշկե, Գերմանիա)

Նկ. 2 - Լուսանկարների վերականգնում (Աննա Ասեևա, Ռուսաստան)

95 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Նկ. 3 - Գեղարվեստական կազմերի վերականգնում (Սերգեյ Լոտով, Ռուսաստան)

Նկ. 4 - Միջնադարյան թանաքների կառուցվածքները (Պատրիցիա Ենգել, Ավստրիա)

96 ԳԱՅԱՆԵ Է­ԼԻԱԶ­ՅԱՆ

CULTURAL HERITAGE FOR PUBLIC: HOW TO COMMUNICATE AND ENGAGE THE PUBLIC?

97 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context KARMIR BLUR HISTORICAL & ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM-RESERVE AND THE COMMUNITY: A SUCCESSFUL PRACTICE IN REVITALIZATION OF THE HISTORICAL SITE

MIQAYEL BADALYAN “Erebuni” Historical & Archaeological Museum-Reserve / [email protected]

ԱՄՓՈՓԱԳԻՐ ­Հոդ­վա­ծում ներ­կա­յաց­վում են այն խնդիր­նե­րը, ո­րոնց ­Խորհր­դա­յին ­Միութ­յան ան­կու­ միցհե ­տո բախ­վել էր տա­րա­ծաշր­ջա­նա­յին կար­ևո­րա­գույն ­շարհու ­ձան­նե­րից մե­կը՝ Կար­ ­ միր բլու­րը: ­Վեր­ջին մի ­նիքա տա­րի­նե­րի ըն­թաց­քում ­ղիտե բնակ­չութ­յան, ինչ­պես նաև՝ բազ­մա­թիվ ան­հատ­նե­րի և կազ­ ­մա­կեր­պութ­յուն­նե­րի ա­ջակ­ցութ­յան շնոր­հիվ Է­րե­բու­նի պատ­մահ­նա­գի­տա­կան ար­գե­լոց-թան­գա­րա­նը կա­րո­ղա­ցավ մի շարք ­ջո հա ­ղութ­յուն­ներ գրան­ցել հու­շար­ձա­նի վե­րարժ­ևոր­ման հար­ցում: Այս ­մա հա ­տեքս­տում խիստ ­ևորկար են ­Կար­միր բլու­րը հսկա­յա­ծա­վալ շի­նաղ­բի կույ­տե­րից մաք­րե­լու գոր­ծըն­թա­ցը, ի­րա­կա­նաց­ ված կրթա­կան ծրագ­րե­րը և­ այլ մի­ջո­ցա­ռում­ եր: Key words - Karmir Blur, Erebuni, Urartu, Yerevan, Educational Programs Բանալի բառեր - Կարմիր բլուր, Էրեբունի, Ուրարտու, Երևան, կրթական ծրագրեր

Karmir Blur is situated on the north-western outskirt of Yerevan, the capital of the Republic of Armenia, on the left bank of the river Hrazdan. It is the branch of the “Erebuni” Historico- Archaeological Museum Reserve of Yerevan Municipality. Because of the reddish color of the earth (as a result of burning of the mud-brick superstructures during an attack) the local people called the hill Karmir blur (Red hill). Systematic excavations of the settlement started in 1939 and with some intervals (1941-45) they continued until 19711. The excavations and success of archaeological research at the site are associated with the famous Soviet archaeologist, former director of the “Hermitage” museum, Boris Borisovich Piotrovskiy. The archaeological site of Karmir Blur consists of the fortress, an outer town, and a necropolis. The Urartian settlement was built in the first half of the VII century B.C. by the last powerful monarch of the state Rusa II (ca. 685-645 B.C.) who made it the northern

1 For a history of Karmir blur investigations, see, Avetisyan H., Bobokhyan A. 2010, Urartui hnagitut‘yun (Amroc‘-bnakavayrer ev dambanayin hamalirner)/Archaeology of Urartu (Fortresses-Settlements and Burial Complexes), Yerevan (in Arm.), pp.,72-84. 98 MIQAYEL BADALYAN center of his empire. The territory of the fortress occupies almost 4 hectares. As a result of the excavations it became clear that the fortress is a two-story monumental complex. The upper floor contained administrative structures, as well as the Susi temple devoted to the Urartian supreme god Haldi. On the lower floor the excavations unearthed about 150 halls with Urartian pithoi, which were used as cellars and granaries. The discovery of an Urartian inscription on a bronze door bolt with a ring revealed that the name of the Urartian city built by Rusa II was . The Urartian monarch founded the settlement in honor of the weather god Teisheba of the state’s pantheon. A bronze figurine of the god was also found at the site. The outer town was uncovered on the south-western part of the fortress. The results of excavations showed that at least one part of the outer town was built on the foundations of the pre-Urartian settlement. The necropolis of the settlement is situated to the south-east of the outer town. Here during the 2013-2016 seasons hundreds of burials were excavated. The research at Karmir Blur is an important contribution not only for Urartian but also for Ancient Near Eastern Archaeology. During excavations very important structures (such as storerooms with pithoi, etc.) and vast number of artifacts (stone inscription, cuneiform clay tablets, metal objects, vessels for beer, burnt cores, and textiles, thousands of Urartian jars, etc.) were discovered. The well-preserved mud-brick walls preserved to such height are rare in the Republic of Armenia. The area of Karmir Blur has also been inhabited during the medieval period, which is evidenced by the numerous fragments of glazed pottery found scattered throughout the site. There was also a chapel at the top of the fortress. Karmir Blur is considered one of the most famous Urartian historical sites and provides important information not only about the Armenian Highlands, but also about the archaeology of the Ancient Near East. Preventive excavations, carried out in 2013-2016, under the leadership of archaeologist, Doctor of Arts Hakob Simonyan, within the framework of the construction of the North-South highway Shirak Street-Argavand roadway through the Karmir Blur area are very valuable. As a result of the project, about 300 tombs were excavated. The rich archaeological material found there, can greatly enrich the future museum of Karmir Blur.

KARMIR BLUR: PROBLEMS AND CHALLENGES

It must be noted that Karmir Blur was one of the most visited and famed historical sites during the Soviet Union years. The tree-lined, verdurous monument with its beautiful lights, walkways, and fences was one of the most beloved places of the locals. They came here with families, and on May holidays, Karmir Blur with its green areas became the most important gathering place of the local population. But the situation changed after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Karmir Blur, like many monuments, was abandoned and became ownerless. During the post-Soviet economic recession, there was no electricity and gas. The picturesque tree-lined area of Karmir Blur became baren as the trees were cut down, the fence of the monument was removed, and until mid-2015 Karmir Blurwas was filled with about four and half hectares of construction waste.

99 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

I have to mention sorrowfully, that Karmir Blur was most often identified either as a cemetery a famous Armenian TV series. Many times, when I asked taxi drivers to drive me to Karmir Blur, they took me to the cemetery near the site, without even knowing about the historical site. In 2005, the roof of the small museum located on the territory of Karmir Blur collapsed. But instead of fixing the roof the leadership of the “Erebuni” Historical and Archaeological Museum-Reserve’s leadership made the strange decision to transfer all the artefacts of the Karmir Blur museum to “Erebuni”. This decision put an end to the future prospects of bringing to the monument different groups, especially schoolchildren and students. After the abandonment of the museum, the monument became a haven for drug addicts and then pastures for cows and sheep. Discarded syringes could be seen everywhere. We presented a special photo showing the lead excavator of the Karmir Blur necropolis Hakob Simonyan “accompanied’’ by cows during an interview (Fig. 1). The cows were often seen near the entrance of the citadel and the Urartian fence and caused a great amount of damage to the monument2.

KARMIR BLUR AFTER 2015

In mid-August of 2015, I was appointed as director of the “Karmir Blur” branch of the “Erebuni” Historical and Archaeological Museum-Reserve and I served in this position until 2019. At the time of my appointment, the site did not have a regular guard service. During this period the “Erebuni” Museum allocated 20.000 AMD annually to Karmir Blur. For example, in 2018 that index was 17.000 AMD. One of the first problems we addressed was the installation of a metal barrier to regulate entry into the site by car. Next was the installation of metal fences leading to the monument, this was done through my personal connections and kind mediation of my colleague archaeologist Arthur Petrosyan. The locals were surprised that after so many years of abandonment something positive was happening at Karmir Blur. Valuing the importance of working with locals, we started communicating with them regularly by them that Karmir Blur is not just a hill, as many of them were convinced, that it’s one of the most important historical sites in the region and that they are the first stewards of the site. Those contacts gave positive results. Now, we also get promotions from locals. Afterwards, in a rather difficult struggle we managed to eliminate the entry of cows and sheep to the monument. Even the security guards of that time claimed that it would be impossible. Without receiving any support from “Erebuni” Historical and Archaeological Museum-Reserve, I decided to confiscate one of the sheep and keep it in the former museum building. As a result, after negotiating with the owners of the sheep, a condition was set that whenever any sheep entered the area, they would be confiscated and not returned. After long negotiations, we came to a decision, that the sheep would be returned, and after it such animals would not be allowed to enter the monument anymore. This tactic proved to be successful and today there are no cows or sheep on the territory of the monument.

2 About these problems see, Badalyan M., Karmir blur: Risks, Challenges and Perspectives, pp., 46-47, “From Khosrov Kotak to Karo Ghafadaryan”: Papers dedicated to the memory of the Armenian famous archaeologist Karo Ghafadaryan, Yerevan, 2017. 100 MIQAYEL BADALYAN

We have put great emphasis on planting trees around the territory of Karmir Blur in 2017- 18, which was carried out by Yerevan Municipality and many representatives of various diplomatic mission present at the time in the Republic of Armenia took part in the project. The security of the historical site is very important. In that matter, the former museum building was quite far from the fortress and exercising control was difficult. It should be noted that the monument was guarded by a police officer. As a result of mutually beneficial cooperation with proffesional guard organization, Karmir Blur has a new and modern guard post. Due to the donation of my friends, the guard post was appropriately furnished. The policemen were given lampshades and binoculars for making the patrol and protection of the site more effective. Lampshades were also placed around the guard post last year, whereas formerly the policeman had to guard the monument at night in complete darkness. In the winter of 2019, the guard post was also equipped with a modern heater. The popularization of the historical site has become one of the most important tasks. Karmir Blur began to be regularly covered by the press, including numerous popular science programs. I started visiting nearby schools and organizing free lectures for local schoolchildren for the role and significance of Karmir Blur, afterwards we organized excursions for them within the area of the monument. The schoolchildren became so interested in the site that on a number of occasions the site was visited by schoolchildren who ran away from their classes and came to Karmir Blur to learn about the ancient site and history of Urartu. Regular site clean-ups are organized on Sundays. It is gratifying that hundreds of volunteers continue to join our efforts. We also started working with different hiking clubs. The number of visitors has increased considerably, these visits include not only locals but also tourists. In the table below you can see the visitors’ statistics. By the way, the number of visitors continues to increase year to year, if in 2015 Karmir Blur had 300 visitors, in 2019 it had 1901 visitors. According to our preliminary estimates, the monument would have about 3,000 visitors in 2020. However, due to the pandemic, the state of emergency and the Artsakh war, we will naturally have a much lower number of visitors this year than last. On the other hand, Karmir Blur had 678 visitors, which can be considered a very successful result.

KARMIR BLUR. STATISTICS OF VISITORS 2015-2020 Year Number of Visitors 2015 300 2016 456 2017 630 2018 1207 2019 1901 2020 678

Archery event that has become another interesting tradition, which is held in collaboration with the Armenian Archery National Federation near the fortification walls of Teishebaini fortress. Thousands of years later, the sound of the flying arrows was symbolically heard again in the Teishebaini. This event proved to be successful now. Hundreds of children visit Karmir Blur 101 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context with their parents in order to participate in the archery event (Fig. 2). After the event, there is always a free excursion around the historical site for all the participants. The second important step was the making of informative leaflets about Karmir Blur in English, Russian, and Armenian, which we provide to our visitors for free. Now about one of our most important achievements. Very often we Armenians feel proud that we are the heirs of the powerful Urartian kingdom, but we should note that the heir of Urartu can be considered the one who best preserves and cares for the Urartian monuments, presents and popularizes them, as well as establishes schools for the study of Urartology. Our first task was to clean the historical site from construction refuse. It was a shame and disgrace, and, of course, it could not bring honor. The visitors of the historical site always felt disappointed looking at the endless piles of trash all around the site. In this regard, with a few friends we started a youth initiative in February 2019 called “Let’s clean Karmir Blur from construction waste”. A Facebook page was created immediately, and we informed about our goals through a video message. Then the awareness process started, and Karmir Blur was covered by almost all the leading media in Armenia. Thanks to this initiative, many people learned about Karmir Blur. A special short video was made about Karmir Blur and its problems. This video received thousands of views. I can assure that after Armenia gained its independence from Soviet rule, Karmir Blur was never as popularized as it is today. I remember when I took a taxi and told the driver to drive to Karmir Blur, he looked at me and said, “Brother, you are the man who is fighting to clean Karmir Blur. I saw you on TV yesterday. We did not know that there was such an important place in Yerevan. We need to help you too.” This incident was evidence that we are on the right path. We created a donation campaign for Karmir Blur and all the contributions to the campaign were immediately posted onto the Facebook page created for the event. The issue of our initiative to clean Karmir Blur was raised in the Council of Elders of Yerevan. At that time, we were warmly received by the Deputy Mayor of Yerevan Mr. Tigran Virabyan. He personally visited the ancient site and assured that as much as the area will be cleaned due to the donation, the rest of the area will be completely cleaned by the Yerevan Municipality. During the donation campaign, public lectures were also held in different centers of Yerevan. The cleaning works began in April of 2019, as a result of which about one tenth of the construction waste was removed. Then the Municipality of Yerevan undertook the unprecedented process for the development of monuments in Armenia and Karmir Blur began to get rid of construction refuse. Today we can say that the work is nearly done. Let us just mention that so far more than 4.2 hectares have been cleared at Karmir Blur (Fig. 3). More than 1,200 truck loads, each composed of approximately 20 cubic metres of construction waste, has been removed from the ancient site. This process is very important for us. This is one of those steps that the true heir of Urartian kingdom would hold. Another important step was the resumption of scientific research activities at Karmir Blur. In this regard, an agreement was signed with the Department of Ancient Oriental Studies at the University of Innsbruck. Being against large-scale excavations in Karmir Blur, we decided to conduct geophysical studies in the historical site. It resulted in the scanning of several unexcavated areas of the historical site. In addition, two archaeological test trenches were placed in the area outside the citadel and the fortress. Due to the pandemic, archaeological 102 MIQAYEL BADALYAN excavations were not carried out this year in order to continue them next year. It is very important that since the 1970s archaeological research have been carried out in the area of the fortress, as well as around it. These works created a bond between Armenian and Austrian specialists, including young researchers. Another important step in promoting Karmir Blur was the printing of the leaflets in Armenian, Russian and English. They are composed with using different artefacts found from Karmir Blur, as well as with different 3D reconstructions, which make the site more attractive for visitors and travel agencies. There were carried out numerous online lectures and educational programs about Karmir Blur, which are available on the YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram pages of the “Erebuni” Historical-Archaeological Museum-Reserve. The process of three-dimensional reconstructions by the architect and 3D reconstructor of the “Erebuni” Historical & Archaeological Museum- Reserve R. Sargsyan, which we started last year, is also very important (Fig. 4). In this regard, next year it is planned to install 5 explanatory panels in the area of the monument. They will be in four languages, full of photos and three-dimensional reconstructions. A similar signboard has already been installed at our “Shengavit” branch. One of the signboards will be dedicated to Boris Piotrovsky. The visit of the Mayor of Yerevan Hayk Marutyan and the Director of the State Hermitage on October 19th, 2019, was a turning point for Kamir Blur. On that day, Karmir Blur was the first topic of discussion in the Armenian media. It is important to record that the Mayor of Yerevan Hayk Marutyan started his report from Karmir Blur and its construction works. We consider it very important to participate in the conference organized in honor of the prominent archaeologist Boris Piotrovsky on February 14, 2020 at the St. Petersburg State Hermitage, where the events held in Karmir Blur and the prospects of the monument were presented. Filling the museum with professional and dedicated staff is very important for the policy adopted by the “Erebuni” Historical and Archaeological Museum-Reserve. I should happily mention that now the “Karmir Blur” branch is headed by V. Sargsyan, one of the young and promising Urartologists of Armenia, who will soon be defending his dissertation. Arman Yeghiazaryan, a master student of the Department of Archaeology and Ethnography of YSU, has also joined the branch. Additional staff of laborers has been created for the branch. In this context, it should be noted that due to the structural changes implemented by the “Erebuni” Historical and Archaeological Museum-Reserve, the salary of the employees of “Karmir Blur” branch have been significantly increased. Active cooperation has started with different schools (Fig. 5). In this regard, in the last few months I must mention the numerous meetings and master classes held by Vahe Sargsyan, the head of the “Karmir Blur” branch, in different schools of the capital Yerevan, which significantly contributed to the flow of students to the monument. We work intensively with both Armenian and foreign tour operators. An agreement was reached with Armenian and Russian organizations, various educational programs for teachers and students, 20 Russian school programs will be implemented at Erebuni and Karmir Blur. Due to the pandemic, this program was moved to April 2021. I am glad to note that on September 24th of this year, as a result of cooperation with 103 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

“Hayasa” tour, Karmir Blur, Erebuni, and Shengavit were included in the new tour package of Yerevan. On that day only more than 30 tour operators visited Karmir Blur and took part in an archery master class organized jointly with the Armenian Archery National Federation. This event alone notably added to the budget of the “Erebuni” Historical and Archaeological Museum-Reserve.On September 27th of this year it was planned to organize a bicycle tour along the Shengavit-Karmir Blur-Erebuni route, together with the International Federation of Cyclists, Amateur Cycling and Sport Tourism. However, due to the war, it was decided to postpone the bicycle tour. By June of 2021 we plan to build an artificial educational excavation area at Karmir Blur for schoolchildren. The “Erebuni” Museum has a minibus, the location of which was not known for the past 8 years. With some effort we have discovered the location and returned the vehicle to the balance of the “Erebuni“ museum. Now, probably from mid-December, the car will be taken to the center of Yerevan, two days a week, in the Republic Square, and will provide free passenger transportation, once to Erebuni and once to Shengavit-Karmir Blur. Next year it is planned to create an above-ground winepress, where visitors wearing Urartian clothes will have the opportunity to make wine themselves, then that wine will be poured into the duplicates of the Urartian jugs found from Karmir Blur and served to them, becoming a marketing product. In the “Active Citizen” competition implemented by the Municipality of Yerevan, the improvement program of Karmir Blur also won, as a result of which about 30 million AMD will be allocated for the improvement of the monument and the creation of infrastructure, arround it. There are also large-scale projects planned by the Yerevan Municipality, including the fencing of the entire territory of the monument and the construction of a new museum building. Every mentioned activity will be implemented in stages. In conclusion, I would like to note that at Karmir Blur the successes and achievements listed above have become possible due to the dedicated and purposeful work of the employees of the “Erebuni” Historical and Archaeological Museum-Reserve and “Karmir Blur” branch. I would like to express my deep gratitude to all the individuals, volunteers, and organizations who have supported us in this difficult process. There is a lot to do, but we believe that step by step, stage by stage we will manage to realize our goals and tasks set before us.

Fig. 1

104 MIQAYEL BADALYAN

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

105 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

106 MUSTAFA GÖNEN CULTURAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION THROUGH TRAINING PROGRAMS: PRACTICES IN TURKEY

MUSTAFA GÖNEN Global Heritage Fund, Turkey Heritage Program

ԱՄՓՈՓԱԳԻՐ ­Պատ­մամ­շա­կու­թա­յին վայ­րե­րը ոչ միայն մշա­կու­թա­յին ակ­տիվ­ եր են, այլև` տնտե­ սութ­յան: Այս­պի­սով, դրանք վեր­ջին մի ­նիքա տաս­նամ­յակ­նե­րի ըն­թաց­քում դար­ձել են ազ­գա­յին, տա­րա­ծաշր­ջա­նա­յին և ­տե­ղա­կան տնտե­սութ­յան զար­գաց­ման շար­ժիչ­ներ։ Բ­նա­կա­նա­բար, հնա­րա­վո­րութ­յուն­ներն ու մար­տահ­րա­վեր­նե­րը սկսել են ա­վե­լի շատ կենտ­րո­նա­նալ այս ո­լորտ­նե­րում։ ­սօր Այ մար­տահ­րա­վեր է ոչ միայն ­րատի ­պե­տել դրանց պահ­պա­նութ­յա­նը, այլև՝ կա­ռա­վա­րել դրանց արդ­յու­նա­վետ օգ­տա­գոր­ծու­մը ի նպաստ կա­յուն պահ­պա­նութ­յան ա­պա­հով­ման։ ­Պատ­մամ­շա­կու­թա­յին վայ­րե­րում արդ­յու­նա­վետ աշ­խա­տե­լը պա­հան­ջում է ­տուկ հա ­տեմո ­ցում, ­րի ո նպա­տակն է, օգտ­վե­լով զգա­լի նե­ րու­ժից, նվա­զեց­նել խնդիր­նե­րը: ­Մի կող­մից` դա կփրկի մեր­հա ընդ ­նուր պատ­մութ­յան գան­ձե­րը, մյուս կող­մից` այս ­տե մո ­ցու­մը կօգ­նի ստեղ­ծել անվ­տանգ, կա­յուն, նոր ­յուարդ ­ նա­բե­րութ­յուն, ­րը ո տե­ղա­կան հա­մայնք­նե­րին դուրս կբե­րի աղ­քա­տութ­յու­նից: Այս հոդ­վա­ծը ներ­կա­յաց­նում է Թուր­ ­քիա­յում մշա­կու­թա­յին ժա­ռան­գութ­յան պահ­պա­ նութ­յան հա­մար ի­րա­կա­նաց­վող ո­րոշ փոր­ձեր, ո­րոնք կա­տար­վել են նշված հա­տուկ մո­տեց­մամբ վե­րա­պատ­րաստ­ման դա­սըն­թաց­նե­րի մի­ջո­ցով։ Key words - Cultural Heritage Preservation, Heritage Management, Heritage Economics, Community Development, Empowerment Բանալի բառեր - Մշակութային ժառանգության պահպա­նու­թյուն, ժառանգության կառա­­ վա­րում, ժառանգության տնտեսագիտություն, համայնքների զարգացում, ցում­հզորա

Global Heritage Fund (GHF) is an international non-profit founded on the premise that cultural heritage protection can catalyze responsible social and economic development. Through creative collaborations and grassroots partnerships, GHF initiates and supports projects that adapt cultural heritage to address contemporary needs and connect communities, build resilience, create opportunity, and foster innovation and sustainability. Since 2002, Global Heritage Fund has helped local communities to save 28 sites in 19 countries with over 100 partner organizations. Using its Preservation by Design® methodology of planning, conservation science, community development, and strategic partnerships, Global Heritage Fund has invested over $30 million and secured $25 million in co-funding to ensure sustainable preservation and responsible development. 107 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Global Heritage Fund is an international conservancy formed to preserve and protect humankind’s most important archaeological and cultural heritage sites. GHF’s timely investments, global network of experts, and advanced Preservation by Design® methodology work together to create a ‘cycle of success’ for Global Heritage sites, threatened by neglect, destruction, mass tourism, and urban sprawl which have high potential for sustainable preservation, tourism and economic development. GHF has focused its efforts in developing countries and regions on preservation and responsible development of the most important and endangered global heritage sites. GHF projects are selected using strict criteria developed by its Board of Trustees and Senior Advisory Board, and its work on each project follows a methodology termed Preservation by Design®. GHF’s goals are to preserve structures and physical evidence of cultural heritage, advance education about, and protection of, endangered heritage sites, advance community involvement and benefits from preservation and build a major international conservancy to save our global heritage. GHF’s strategies are to: • work with community participation on world-class conservation projects, selected through a disciplined selection process, • promote internationally GHF’s Preservation by Design® methodology as a recognizable and replicable approach to project design, management, monitoring and evaluation, • engage the world’s leading archaeological conservation and community development experts in planning, projects, and programs, • develop a strong, stable, and growing global network to support GHF through guidance and advice to management, generous and sustained funding and advocacy, leadership, and best practices in governance, • continue to build a committed and effective Board of Trustees and Senior Advisory Board with diverse expertise, • advocate on behalf of significant and endangered cultural heritage sites in developing countries.

GHF’s Preservation Methodology: Preservation by Design® Preservation by Design® is Global Heritage Fund’s integrated conservation and development methodology - a living framework that combines long-range planning, conservation science, community engagement and monitoring and evaluation. Led by its Senior Advisory Board and supported by its experts and GHF Project Directors, Preservation by Design® incorporates the latest methods and technologies, combined with a partner-driven conservation strategy to increase the prospects for long-term successful and sustainable conservation efforts. GHF’s mission is to provide projects with financial and technical resources, and to assist with the building of a conservation and economic basis for sustainable development. The

108 MUSTAFA GÖNEN combination of these factors catalyzes the participation of other organizations as partners in a scalable model. GHF’s strategic early stage investment and de-risking of cultural heritage assets prepares communities for the next stage of significant growth. The core elements of GHF’s Preservation by Design® methodology are: 1) Planning and Increased Site Protection 2) Conservation Science 3) Community Development 4) Partnerships Preservation by Design® also provides critical information for site assessment and selection and identification of key stakeholders and partners. It provides a foundation for efficient project investments that maximize local community participation and transparency, while simultaneously identifying and minimizing project risk. This methodology is replicable and scalable, catalyzing participation and partnership from other organization and institutions. Finally, it allows complementary funding to be leveraged from national and international stakeholders and partners to prepare the sites and communities for the larger more long- term investment opportunities. 1) Planning and Increased Site Protection: A master plan is prepared for each project to define the objectives, priorities and specific steps required for its successful completion. These plans carefully consider scientific conservation needs, local community needs and formal partnerships for financial and management support. The other three components of Preservation by Design® - to define measures of project success including long-term and short-term site preservation, enhanced legal protection, excellence in science and transfer of responsibility. Developed in concert with local, national, and international partners, the master plans incorporate adaptive management, risk assessment, quality assurance, progress assessment and monitoring after project completion. Adoption of the master plan itself is one measure of success. 2) Conservation Science: Drawing on its expert staff and Senior Advisory Board for guidance, GHF seeks assistance from leading experts to ensure appropriate scientific methodologies, timely sharing of data and results and compliance with the highest international standards in conservation, technology, training, and interpretation. This expertise also serves as a foundation for local community capacity building. 3) Community Development: The majority of inhabitants in developing nations, particularly in rural areas, are often directly dependent on natural or cultural resources for their livelihood. The realities of everyday life preclude long-term and sustainable investments in the future, including the preservation of cultural or natural assets. Growing global concern over poverty has increased pressure on preservationists to find ‘win-win’ solutions for preserving cultural assets without ignoring the plight of nearby communities. For preservation projects to succeed, it is imperative to address the root social and economic factors that frame human relationships with cultural heritage sites. Global heritage sites are threatened by a host of factors. Chief among these threats are the lack of economic opportunities for the local population. The daily struggle for existence leads 109 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context to looting, poaching, logging, and slash and burn agriculture which threaten the integrity of these unique and irreplaceable cultural resources. Each time a cultural heritage site is lost, so too is a piece of humanity - and an economic opportunity. In saving these treasures, we not only restore part of our shared history but also create a safe, sustainable new industry that can lift local communities out of poverty. To be successful, sustainable preservation must be grounded in community-based conservation. Community development seeks to empower both individuals and groups by providing them with the resources they need to effect change in their own communities by instilling local stakeholders with a vested interest in the long-term preservation of a site. Therefore, GHF’s community development work aims to utilize community engagement and development to support project sustainability and thus utilize the economic value of cultural heritage sites to contribute to the development potential of local communities. 4) Partnerships: Finally, GHF secures in-country and international funding and in-kind support from partner programs for site infrastructure, community development and social programs. Areas for complementary in-country funding and programs depend on each project’s unique situation. Where appropriate, local organizations are established for individual projects to oversee and advance long-term site protection, funding needs, business development and training. Finally, GHF seeks visionary projects that are models for sustainable development, add value to communities, and leverage significant funding from others. Projects should be assessed in terms of risks as well as opportunities for success.

Practices in Turkey:

Generally, the culture and heritage issues are considered as a burden in terms of the public funds. This can easily be understood, because many initiatives in Turkey up to now were not financially consistent and applicable. For this reason, any social development-oriented projects to be conducted in this field should not be designed as depending on external financial support. One of the biggest handicaps of the projects to be realized is the initial investment and the other one is the operating cost which is not covered in the short term. The seed money in the projects should be considered so as to solve these two and these funds should be phased as to prompt the process and thus the process can be made independent of the external financial support. The application process should be launched under the guidance of the civil society organizations and also transferred to the community-based organizations in the medium term. For this, such organizations not yet available in the settlements should be promoted. The formation of a community-based organization will remove the biggest obstacle to the projects to be conducted. The sustainability will be provided, and the productivity will be increased in the project through the above-mentioned formation. The most essential thing required to focus on is the consciousness-raising. Primarily, it is necessary to be organized the introductive events and tours with guides in order that the 110 MUSTAFA GÖNEN cultural heritage consciousness and awareness be formed in the long term in the settlements nearby the cultural heritage sites. Global Heritage Fund has different practices and experiences both in the completed and on- going projects in Turkey, which are; • Kars Revitalization of The Ottoman Historic District Project (2003-2007) • Ani Scientific Investigation Project (2006-2007) • Catalhoyuk Research Project (2003-2010) • Gobeklitepe Archaeological Research Project (2011-2017) • Sagalassos Archaeological Research Project (2013-2022)

Kars Revitalization of The Ottoman Historic District Project (2003-2007)

Global Heritage Fund prepared The Kars Master Conservation Plan which helped to transform the perception and image of Historic Kars. During the project, GHF worked on the institutional assessment of Kars Municipality and afterwards a capacity building program was launched within the municipality. Regarding the conservation, two Turkish bath houses were cleaned, and their domed roofs were repaired. Great effort was also put in to restore Namik Kemal Community Center, the one-time home of famed Turkish poet Namik Kemal, for use as a community center. The projects have employed over 120 Turkish professionals and workers. During the project, GHF made partnerships with Kars Municipality, Anadolu Kultur and Turkish Cultural Foundation. Ani Scientific Investigation Project (2006-2007)

Global Heritage Fund made an agreement with Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism to do the lidar scanning for the city walls and six different monuments at the site. First stage of the mapping of the whole site was completed. Moreover, the mapping for the visitor’s center was provided. These efforts and deliverables were also used during the preparation of the nomination dossier for the inscription of the site to the World Heritage List in 2016. Catalhoyuk Research Project (2003-2010)

The Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism worked with the Catalhoyuk Research Project to revise the existing site management plan, which is being used as a model for other sites in Turkey. On the basis of this plan, the Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism has put the site forward for World Heritage status and the site was inscribed on World Heritage List in 2012. Global Heritage Fund has funded the design and construction of a state-of-the-art site conservation shelter structure, visitor center and interpretative panels to allow touristic access to the site. Additionally, members of the local community have gained training in the

111 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context conservation and treatment of wall paintings. During the project, GHF made partnerships with Stanford University and Turkish Cultural Foundation. Gobeklitepe Archaeological Research Project (2011-2017)

Global Heritage Fund made partnerships with German Archaeological Institution (DAI) and Koc Foundation in order to provide the following achievements. Gobeklitepe Site Management Plan was prepared by BTU Cottbus and Global Heritage Fund by the request of Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism. Afterwards, the plan was evaluated, revised, and used for the UNESCO World Heritage List nomination and the site was inscribed in 2018. After an 18-month long monitoring to diagnose the deterioration of the stone and earth walls, Global Heritage Fund prepared Gobeklitepe Site Conservation Plan in 2015, which also occurs a comprehensive conservation approach for the whole site. In 2013, GHF also provided a temporary shelter for the main excavation area which was planned to be used as a scaffolding during the construction of the permanent shelter. Global Heritage Fund worked on a social baseline survey for the settlements around the site to understand the demands, problems and potentials of the people that is to be used for a further community driven development program nearby Gobeklitepe. Afterwards, GHF gave the opportunity to the local workmen to generate income during the implementation of the six-kilometer fence around the site.

Sagalassos Archaeological Research Project (2013-2022)

Global Heritage Fund has been making cooperation with Sagalassos Archaeological Research Project (SARP) Team since 2013. The initial work for the preparation of the Site Management Plan has started in 2016 under the collaboration of SARP Team, GHF and KU Leuven. An 18-month long monitoring and data collection for the conservation work started in 2015. After data collection, a series of meetings among the conservation experts have been held and Sagalassos Site Conservation Plan was produced. Urgent interventions for Roman Baths have been done, together with the anastylosis work at the Upper Agora including the gates and honorific columns. Regarding the community development program, Global Heritage fund has been running a series of different projects in Aglasun which is the nearest settlement to Sagalassos.

112 MUSTAFA GÖNEN

Stone Conservation Training Program (2018): The program aimed to increase the number of workers who will have the knowledge and skills in traditional and vernacular architecture. The goal was to provide a much skilled team to Sagalassos Archaeological Research Project for the conservation work at Sagalassos including the Roman Imperial Baths. The training program had an aim to have an outcome after the training. In this perspective, the trainees worked on revitalizing an abandoned children playground with the materials and techniques they learnt during the training.

Mudbrick Architecture Program (2019-2020): In Aglasun there are many mudbrick buildings which are in poor condition. After empowering the workers in stone architecture in 2018, Global Heritage Fund continued to train the workers in mudbrick techniques. This was Atraditional and vernacular architecture. The program helped Aglasun town to provide a much skilled team in protecting and repairing its mudbrick houses.

Handicrafts Training Program (2018-2021): Global Heritage Fund launched a women handicraft project together with Sagalassos Foundation and Aglasun Municipality. The goal was not only to train women in handicrafts for income generation, but also providing world-class quality products for Aglasun’s sustainable tourism development. Well-known designers have held different workshops which immediately improved women’s existing skills and knowledge. They started to be able to earn money from handicrafts.The next step was to establish a women handicraft cooperative to protect Aglasun’s traditional and local handicrafts and help them to have a long-term achievement independently from the historic preservation project.

Fig. 1 - Implementation of the Fence, by Mustafa Gönen (2014)

113 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Fig. 2 - Sagalassos Upper Agora, by Mustafa Gönen (2016)

Fig. 3 - Trainees Preparing Masonry Blocks from Volcanic Tuff, by Mustafa Gönen (2018)

114 MUSTAFA GÖNEN

Fig. 4 - Trainees Preparing Mudbricks, by Mustafa Gönen (2019)

Fig. 5 - Women of Aglasun are given a ceramic training by a well-known designer, by Mustafa Gonen (2019)

115 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

PROGRAM OF THE CONFERENCE Cultural Heritage: Experience and Perspectives in International Contexts 23rd and 24th January 2020 Yerevan (Armenia)

23rd January 2020, MATENADARAN CONFERENCE HALL

13:30 - Registration of participants

14:30 - Welcome Speeches Chairperson: Ani Avagyan

H.E. AMBASSADOR VINCENZO DEL MONACO, Embassy of Italy to Armenia D.M. NARINE KHACHATURYAN, Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sport of RA PIETRO PIPI, AICS - Italian Agency for Development Cooperation LUIGI CANETTI, Director of Dept. of Cultural Heritage, University of Bologna ARMAN TSATURYAN, Director of National Gallery of Armenia

Cultural Heritage projects in international contexts Chairperson: D.M. Narine Khachaturyan 15:00 – MARIANGELA VANDINI Scientific Director of the ROCHEMP Project - Department of Cultural Heritage, University of Bologna (Italy) The ROCHEMP Project: Regional Office for Cultural Heritage Enhancement, Management and Protection

15:20 - ARTUR PETROSYAN, ROBERTO DAN, BORIS GASPARYAN National Academy of Science of Republic of Armenia A, Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography University of Tuscia (Italy) – ISMEO (Italy) Good practices for collaboration perspectives for identification, research and protection of Cultural Heritage: the cases of Armenian - Italian archaeological expedition in Kotayk and Vayots Dzor (Armenia)

15:40 - PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI Department of Cultural Heritage, University of Bologna (Italy) Fifteen years of collaboration in the field of archaeology and conservation: assessment of the activities and future opportunities of the Iranian-Italian Joint Archaeological Mission in Fars (Research Institute for Cultural Heritage and Tourism - University of Bologna and ISMEO - Shiraz University)

16:00 – SHAHRZAD AMIN SHIRAZI Conservation and Restoration of Historical Relics of RCCCR - Research Institute for Cultural Heritage, Islamic Republic of Iran

116 PROGRAM OF THE CONFERENCE

Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism and its Research Center for Conservation of Cultural Relics, Iranian experience in research, management and training in the field of Conservation

16:20 – Conclusions

24th January 2020, Matenadaran Conference Hall

From the past to the future: training of the professionals in the field of Cultural Heritage Chairperson: Mariangela Vandini 10:00 - ARAM ISABEKYAN Rector of Yerevan State Academy of Fine Arts (Armenia) Prospects for training specialists for the restoration of decorative surfaces of historical monuments

10:20 - LAURA BARATIN University of Urbino (Italy) Higher education in Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage in the Euro- Mediterranean area: a model and an opportunity for young people

10:40 - EMMA HARUTYUNYAN National University of Architecture and Construction of Armenia Education in Architectural Heritage: NUACA achievements and challenges

11:00 – JOSEPH ZAAROUR Holy Spirit University of Kaslik (Lebanon) Conservation, Restoration of Cultural Property program: the experience in Lebanon

11:20 - Discussion 11:35 – Coffee break

12:00 – PAVEL AVETISYAN National Academy of Science of RA, Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography Importance of scientific research in conservation and restoration of historical-archaeological monuments: from the Educational Curriculum to Research

12:20 – HAMLET PETROSYAN Yerevan State University (Armenia) Cultural heritage in the conflict zone. Identity, preservation and professional experience

12:40 – VEHANUSH PUNARJYAN National Gallery of Armenia The challenges and some pecularities in preservation and conservation of museum items in Armenia

117 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

13:00 – GAYANE ELIAZYAN Matenadaran Research Institute for Ancient Manuscipts (Armenia) The need to train specialists in the field of written heritage protection and to look for ways to solve the problem

13:20 - Discussion 13:35 - Lunch break

Cultural Heritage for public: how to communicate and engage the public? Chairperson: Tania Chinni 15:00 - ROBERT GUKASYAN Advisor of the Prime Minister of Republic of Armenia The role of the Local Community in preservation and protection of the Cultural Heritage: the practice in Kalavan Community

15:20 - MICHAEL BADALYAN Erebuni Historical and Archaeological Museum-Reserve (Armenia) Karmir Blur Archaeological Museum-Reserve and the Community: a successful practice in revitalization of the historical sight

15:40 – MUSTAFA GONEN Turkey Heritage Program, Global Heritage Foundation (Turkey) Cultural Heritage preservation through training programs

16:00 - Discussion 16:15 - Coffee break

16:30 - Round table: Implementation of ROCHEMP goals in 2020: training, filed activities, future projects. Chairpersons: Pietro Pipi (Italian Agency for Cooperation Development) Marco Abbiati (Department of Cultural Heritage, University of Bologna)

Invited speakers: Mkrtchyan Hayk (Ministry of Education, Science, Culture, Sports of Republic of Armenia - consultant for ROCHEMP Center) Ashughatoyan Narek (LegalLab Boutique Armenia) Haroyan Marine (ICOM Armenia) Gyurjyan Gagik (ICOMOS Armenia) Grigoryan Seda (Creative Europe Desk – Armenia)

17:00 – NARINE KHACHATURYAN, MARIANGELA VANDINI Conclusions

118 PHOTO GALLERY

119 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

120 PHOTO GALLERY

121 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

122 PHOTO GALLERY

123 CULTURAL HERITAGE: Experiences & Perspectives In International Context

Հրատարակիչ՝ ՌՕՔԵՄՓ մշակութային ժառանգության պահպանության, կառավարման և արժևորման տարածաշրջանային կենտրոն Վերստուգիչ՝ Հայաստանի ազգային պատկերասրահի Հրատարակչական բաժին Խմբագիր՝ Անի Ավագյան Սրբագրիչ՝ Գոհար Հովակիմյան Դիզայներ՝ Ժասմենա Հակոբյան Տպագրիչ՝ Ասողիկ հրատարակչություն ՍՊԸ

Published by: ROCHEMP Regional Center for Cultural Heritage Protection, Management and Enhancement Reviewed by: Publishing Department of National Gallery of Armenia Editor: Ani Avagyan Proof reading: Gohar Hovakimyan Layout & Design: Zhasmena Hakobyan Prepress and print: Asoghik Publishing LLC

National Gallery of Armenia Regional Center for Cultural Heritage Str. Aram 1, Yerevan 0010, Armenia Enhancement, Management & Protection (+37410) 580812 (+37499) 540005 [email protected] [email protected] www.gallery.am www.rochemp.org

PRINTED IN ARMENIA

124