SITE-MUSEUMS IN ARMENIA: PROBLEMS AND PERSPECTIVES Davit A. Poghosyan ICOM National Committee of Armenia ABSTRACT The traditional form of “in situ” musealisation or musification in Armenia is the process of creation museums near the archeological sites or architectural monuments. Though such kind of museums are called and adopted as Historical and Cultural Museum-Reserves in the country but they can wholly be integrated under the ICOM definition of “Site-Museums”. The initial practices of creation of archeological site-museums in Armenia are being dated back to first decade of last century and now by their general feature are the same. Post-Soviet period socio-economic and political changes influenced the development of state network of site-museums. Though some archeological museum-reserves and memorial museums still had state’s support, but less than a dozen of Armenian site-museums mainly located in the regions face different problems. The efforts of effective management of the vast historical and cultural heritage in the territory of Republic of Armenia, sustainable and balanced development of different regions of the country are an accordant base for further development of site- museums as a local tourism attractions and cultural-educational powerful resources. SHORT BIOGRAPHY As a museum specialist I am interested in museum communication and heritage management. I have worked in the practical field for 8 years after graduating the faculty of Museum Work and Monuments’ Preservation of Armenian State Pedagogical University after Kh. Abovyan. As a researcher I have started my career from the “Service for the Protection of Historical Environment and Museum-Reserves” NCSO. Beginning in the early stage of my career I have participated in the activities of ICOM National Committee of Armenia and many international and local trainings and workshops. As a lecturer it’s already 4 years that I have different courses on Museum Studies in the same university and I am also an author of a dozen scientific papers and a monograph. Now I am working on a special research program in the above mentioned state heritage management institution on the new strategy of the museum-reserves (site-museums) of Armenia. ICOM definition of “site-museum” (archeological site-museum) opens a wide museological context for further preservation of vast cultural and natural heritage in South Caucasus region. According to Kenneth Hudson, one of the renowned researchers in the museum world, the main four ON TOP OF HISTORY - SITE MUSEUMS ICAMT Conference in Tbilisi, 22-24 Sept. 2014 types of site-museums (Ecological, Ethnographic, Historical and Archeological) give us a right to consider a great amount of museums as “site-museums” [5, Hudson K.,1987, pp.129-130]. As it is obvious from the concept given in the definition and included in the background of this actual conference the main components of such kind of museums are the “in situ” and completely preserved and interpreted heritage (movable and immovable, tangible and intangible), related site or environment, landscape with its peculiar features and attractions among which is the classical type of museums and collections. In the centre of such kind of musealisation is not the collection-centered, but the heritage site-centered (sometimes with the community living on the area as in the case of ecomuseum) processes that today have a big educational, spiritual potential as well as perspectives of sustainable development and growing cultural and especially heritage tourism. The traditional form of “in situ” musealisation or musification in Armenia is the process of creation of classical museums near the archeological sites or architectural monuments or the organization of exhibitions inside the monumental constructions. Though such kind of museums are called and adopted as “ Histotical and Cultural Museum-Reserves”, memorial museums and complexes in the country, but they can wholly be integrated under the ICOM definition of “Site- Museums” [10, Poghosyan D., 2013, pp.24-25]. Specially protected nature areas (state reserves, state reservations, national parks) can be described as another big group of site-museums covering more than 12 percent of the territory of the country [12, p. 30]. Recently the issues of protection of the intangible heritage and new concept of “Cultural territory’’ also can be shaped by the principles of the “Site-Museums”: now there are already two living historical settlements adopted by state as a cultural territories (village Areni and Gyumri city) in Armenia[1]. Following the classification of the main types of site-museums we’ll have a kind of scene in the republic as follows: 1. Less than 15 archeological, historical and cultural museum-reserves and reservations can be considered as archeological and ethnographic site-museums 2. More than 30 memorial museums and complexes generally refer to historical site-museums 3. For ecological site-museums match more than 30 specially protected nature areas (the monuments of nature are not included). However, I am going to speak about process of creation of Archeological and Historical- Cultural Museum-Reserves based on archeological sites and group of architectural monuments preserved in their historical environment, as well as on the collections excavated or discovered, systematized and exhibited in them. This kind of open-air museums are the classical manifestation of the site-museum in Armenia and are in the professional sphere considered as a special type of “in situ” musealisation and preservation of historical-cultural monuments. Beginning from the last century the main principles of “in situ” musealistion we can see during the second archeological mission (1904-1917) to Ani, the historical capital of Armenian Bagratuni kingdom (now in the territory of Turkey). Under the supervision of prominent orientalist and linguist Nicholas Marr during the excavation of medieval Armenian city ruins the archeological findings were gathered in one of the monument-buildings called “Minuchihr Mosque”, which was arranged as an archeological museum. The second museum in the historical 2 ON TOP OF HISTORY - SITE MUSEUMS ICAMT Conference in Tbilisi, 22-24 Sept. 2014 environment was built by the support of Armenian community donations (1908), which was followed by the third one organized in the “Bolorak Prkich (Redeemer)” church. Scientific researches and some exhibiting activities were conducted in these archeological museums. However these three museums were not enough to keep, investigate and exhibit all the excavated artifacts. By the opinion of Hovsep Orbeli, one of the participant of the scientific mission, outstanding Armenian orientalist and academician, the archeological researches must be continued to discover and reconstruct the city as it had been [8, Orbeli H., 1911, p.53]. Unfortunately this archeological site with its museums was destroyed during Turkish invasion (1918) and only a small part of collections were survived and now is under the protection of History Museum of Armenia. Nevertheless the experiences gained in Ani were not lost and during the soviet period it was actively used in the process of transformation the former churches and other spiritual constructers into the “enlightenment” organizations in the framework of Soviet state cultural policy and ideology. Particularly, two models of “in situ’’ musealisation of the historical monuments and museum collections were put in practice: 1. In the monumental complexes that had been officially proclaimed as “archeological areas” there were organized thematic exhibitions on the base of near found specimens and scientific- supporting materials. This model started to be realized by organizing an archeological museum in the building of St. Hripsime (VII century) in 1930s [6,Ghafadaryan K., 1939, pp.1-11]. 2. Second model of site-museums influenced by the 1904-1912 musefication experiences of Ani’s scientific mission, was the building of classical type of museums near the excavated archeological site. The artifacts excavated from their historical placement and supported by scientific and educational materials were collected, systematize and exhibited in such kind of museums. One of the first examples of this model was the special museum built near the ruins of Zvarnots or St. Grigor Cathedral (VII-X cc.) and opened to the public in 1937. In 1939 Karo, Ghafadaryan, one of the distinguished Armenian archeologists, while describing the first scientific exhibition in this museum, emphasized the fact that the Zvartnots museum had been organized in such way that inside the its walls the visitors could find all the answers about the excavated and open-air preserved ruins of Zvartnots cathedral after looking at them in their historical environment [7,Ghafadaryan K., 1939, p.2]. These two models were prevailing type of musealisation of historical and cultural monuments during all soviet period. However, in honor of the 2750th anniversary of Yerevan the creation of the Yerevan Foundation Museum on October 19, 1968, near the excavated and partly restored Urartian Erebuni fortress (782 BC) was crucial for the acting site-museums before. This Archeological museum with the special architecture and the vast collection from the near Archeological sites shortly became the scientific-methodical centre with its branch-museums established around the historical environment [9, Piliposyan A., 1987, pp.114-116]. In 1970 another archeological museum based on the excavations of “Metsamor” archeological site opened