Scientific
meeting of the International Committee on Cultural Routes (CIIC) on “THE
CONCEPTUAL AND SUBSTANTIVE INDEPENDENCE OF CULTURAL ROUTES IN RELATION
TO CULTURAL LANDSCAPES”
(Madrid,
4 de diciembre, 2002)
CONSIDERATIONS
AND RECOMMENDATION
Submitted
to the ICOMOS 13th General Assembly at its plenary session
held on 5 December 2002, morning.
Presentation:
The ICOMOS
International Scientific Committee on Cultural Routes was officially
created in 1998 and its Statues were adopted according to the Eger
Principles. Its 65 members are from the different regions of the world
(53 voting members and 12 associate members). For the last 6 years the
CIIC has organised and held 8 international seminars and conferences
and their conclusions and other working documents have been put on the
ICOMOS website (see pages devoted to ISCs at www.icomos.org)
At the same time, the CIIC has achieved the publication of several
books[i].
A part of the doctrinal principles, conceptual aspects, studies and
projects carried out until now by the CIIC are described in its last
publication, entitled “The
Intangible Heritage and other aspects of Cultural Routes”.
This book has been freely
distributed to participants at the ICOMOS 13th General
Assembly in Madrid (copies were available at the stand of Navarra in
the exhibit on cultural heritage held on the first floor). On December
4th, elections for the CIIC new Board of Directors were
held (see attached document), as well as a scientific meeting, with
presentations followed by discussion, on “The conceptual and
substantive independence of Cultural Routes in relation to Cultural
Landscapes”.
Actual
context and position:
As it has been made evident in numerous scientific meetings of the
CIIC, a conceptual and operative vacuum exists regarding the essence,
significance and scope of cultural routes, which tend to be
erroneously confused with something so different, comparatively static
and small in scale as cultural landscapes. The magnitude of this
misconception is evidenced by the
fact that even now cultural routes are referred to as “linear
cultural landscapes” in official nomenclature, a term which is both
an “immobilist” or tradition-bound negation of their true nature
and a fundamental conceptual mistake.
Thus,
taking into account that cultural
routes encompasses diverse significant interventions in time,
in space, and in the landscapes that are valued as cultural
landscapes, the following conclusion was adopted at the
international congress of the ICOMOS CIIC on “The Intangible
Heritage and other aspects of Cultural Routes”(Pamplona, Navarra,
Spain. June, 2001):
“1.3. Cultural
routes and cultural landscapes are different scientific concepts.
Cultural routes are characterised by their mobility and involve
intangible and spatial dynamics not possessed by a cultural landscape,
which is more static and restricted in nature, although it also
possesses characteristics that develop over time. A cultural route
usually encompasses many different cultural landscapes. A cultural
landscape is not dynamic in a geographical context as vast as that
which may potentially be covered by a cultural route. A cultural route
may have generated and
continue to generate cultural landscapes, but the opposite does not
occur.”
Considerations:
With the aim of implementing the ICOMOS scientific work and also to
inform the General Assembly on the progress made by the CIIC in the
development of conceptual aspects and doctrinal principles,
the following considerations were taken into account and a
final recommendation adopted at the CIIC scientific meeting
held in Madrid on 4 December 2002, and presented to the Assembly on
the next day:
1.
Cultural routes reveal a new conceptual approach to cultural heritage
and entail an immaterial and dynamic dimension, which largely exceeds
their material contents.
2.
Cultural routes can not be generated nor defined through the cultural
elements included in their way –such as monuments, historic towns,
cultural landscapes, etc.- but
instead, they are the dynamic motor whose movement or historic thread
has generated – or continues to generate- those cultural elements.
3.
Thus, from a logical and scientifically rigorous point of view, it can
not be admitted that cultural routes are “linear” or “not
linear” cultural landscapes, which even when are located within the
path of a cultural route, may be completely different or
geographically isolated and very distant from each other.
References:
See
below[ii]
Recommendation:
It
is therefore recommended that the ICOMOS 13th General Assembly
recognises that a cultural route is not just a sum of its many
elements, i.e., historic towns, cultural landscapes, sites, etc., but
really incorporates the intangible historic spirit that ties these
elements into a single whole.
María
Rosa Suárez-Inclán
President
of the ICOMOS CIIC
Madrid,
5 December 2002
ELECTION
OF THE ICOMOS CIIC OFFICERS FOR 2003-2005
[i]
The Government of La Rioja published the complete proceedings of
the seminar on C.R of Vine and Wine held in Santo Domingo de La
Calzada (1999): “Actas de las I Jornadas Internacionales de
Expertos en Protección y Promoción de Bienes Culturales sobre el
Itinerario Cultural de la Vid y del Vino en los Pueblos del
Mediterráneo ». The Xunta de Galicia also published a
book on historic public works in the Camino de Santiago, which
includes an introduction with the CIIC history and philosophy
(2000): “Obras Públicas en Galicia al servicio del
Camino”. Another book including the complete scientific
proceedings of the seminar held in Pamplona in 2001 was published
by the Government of Navarra and distributed to participants at
the 13th GA (2002): “The Intangible Heritage and other
aspects of Cultural Routes”.
“In
addition to a material reality, cultural routes act as a channel
through which the communicating vessels of the civilizing process
have flowed. Multiple back and forth flows issuing from different
points along its path have taken place over the course of history,
which have provided enriching contributions for the whole. This
vital fluid of culture is manifested in the spirit and traditions
making up the intangible heritage of cultural routes. Hence,
together with material or tangible heritage items, these routes
make up a melting pot of immaterial items that explain the soul of
peoples. If through the study and promotion of a cultural route we
can make that deep essence serve as a space for reencounters, we
will have made a fundamental contribution to overcoming some of
the great scourges that continue to plague humanity: racism,
segregation, discrimination, isolationism, lack of solidarity,
barriers to information and knowledge, etc. Through cultural
routes understood as dynamizing elements of society, historic
heritage may be considered in its living dimension,
as a pillar of comprehensive and sustainable development.”
“The
new concept encompassed by cultural routes may provide
conservation policy with a territorial breadth, cultural integrity
and harmonization of actions and contents that has seldom been
accomplished up to now.
The
first consequence of this greater scale is a cultural linking
between peoples, cities, regions and continents. This breadth of
scale is important from the point of view of the territory and
comprehensive management of the diverse heritage items included in
it, but also constitutes an alternative to a process of cultural
homogenization. From this perspective, cultural routes become a
potential means for reencountering a history and geography whose
content has been weakened, a way to recover the time and spaces
characteristic to each culture. They also provide the opportunity
of sharing a common cultural space and linking the territory with
an intangible heritage dear to the traditional life of the
communities along its route.
Each
and every people has contributed
knowledge and culture which, owing to the multiplying
effect of exchanges, have gradually been introduced to the rest of
humankind, adopting its own forms and characteristics in each
case. Analysis and interpretation of these cross-fertilizations
allows our particular traits and characteristics to be affirmed,
while simultaneously providing us with a more comprehensive image
of ourselves.”
“The
status of the cultural heritage of many cultural routes today is
worrying. Their cultural integrity has been destroyed, their
common heritage has been fragmented into closed national systems,
and most are little known in the world. No coordinated policies
for protection and promotion of heritage exist. Economic crises,
obsolete legislation in countries in transition, military and
ethnic conflicts, and natural catastrophes do not only affect
negatively but also pose a serious hazard for cultural heritage,
which is highly vulnerable. Identification, study and promotion of
cultural routes should help to put an end to this state of affairs
by disseminating this new role for cultural heritage and defining
for the first time ever the macrostructure of heritage within
regional and international cultural routes. Heritage should be
identified as a system, a united community having its own
infrastructures, networks of cells, zones and centers, and not
only as a mere sum of isolated national systems.”
|
