著者

筬島 大悟

出版者

文化資源学会

雑誌

文化資源学 (ISSN:18807232)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.15, pp.49-59, 2017 (Released:2018-07-11)

参考文献数

28

---

現在、UNESCOの世界遺産条約と無形文化遺産条約では、それぞれ遺産リストへの登録に必要とされる価値が異なっているが、その価値の解釈において両者は混同され、その結果条約の運用に混乱をもたらすようになっている。今後の両条約の円滑な履行のため、両条約の関係を明らかにして論点を整理することは重要となるが、本稿では、この価値規定とその解釈の変遷に焦点を当て、両条約の現在の履行の問題点を整理し、両条約の現在の履行の関係性について分析を行った。その結果、世界遺産条約では、資産の多様性を重視する方策を各国が政治的に利用した資産の登録を行うことで世界遺産としての価値の逓減を招き、条約の精神が無形文化遺産条約化していることが、またその一方で、無形文化遺産条約では、地域比不均衡問題の発生や価値の顕著性の付与など、その履行が世界遺産条約化してきており、両条約の精神や制度が相互に交錯している現状にあることが明らかになった。

著者

筬島 大悟 真鍋 沙由未

出版者

日本建築学会

雑誌

日本建築学会計画系論文集 (ISSN:13404210)

巻号頁・発行日

no.751, pp.1801-1808, 2018-09

---

&nbsp;Legal protection of tangible cultural property was established in Europe from the mid-19th century to the beginning of the 20^th century, and in Japan in 1897. Intangible cultural heritage on the other hand, received legal protection in Japan in 1950, making it the earliest establishment of formal legal protection for intangible cultural heritage in the world. Under international law, UNESCO established the Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention in 2003, approximately 50 years after the intangible heritage legislation was established in Japan. The Cultural Properties Protection Law was created under the occupation of GHQ, but it has not been proved why such extensive laws, including intangible cultural property, were developed in Japan under occupation.<br>&nbsp;Before WWII, the Imperial Household in Japan played an important role in the protection of intangible cultural properties, for example by granting subsidies to the arts under its patronage, and employing performers of classical arts and rituals. Therefore, in this paper, while focusing on the changes the Imperial Household went through following the end of the war, we analyzed the process of the intangible heritage protection system shifting from the patronage of the Imperial Household before WW II to the legal protection after WW II, following a decision made by the Diet.<br>&nbsp;First, we analyzed the discussion in the Diet concerning Gagaku, which was the responsibility of the Imperial Household before WW II, and therefore treated as public affairs. The problem of the future protection of Gagaku, due to the change in the political position of the Emperor of Japan and the dissolution of Kunaifu (Imperial Household Agency), was raised at two times during the Diet discussion. Although the Ministry of Education recognized the importance of the protection of classical arts, such as Gagaku, the proposed method of protection was not legal protection, but rather promotion or documentation.<br>&nbsp;Regarding intangible cultural heritage that was not treated as public affairs before WW II, the necessity of the protection Nohgaku was also discussed in the Diet. Since Nohgaku has influenced many classic Japanese arts, it was recognized as a &ldquo;dynamic national treasure&rdquo;, as opposed to tangible cultural properties which were recognized as &ldquo;static national treasures&rdquo;, for example architectural and art works. At that time, the idea of tangible and intangible cultural properties being equal, was born. Although the Ministry of Education confirmed the importance of Nohgaku, it only insisted on an individual subsidy system and documentation. After this, voices were raised for the protection of folk cultural heritage as well, such as festival events and local arts, which brought a new perspective on heritage protection, widening the view from classical arts to local arts. But in terms of protection, the Ministry of Education only proposed for the creation of local promotion councils.<br>&nbsp;The creation of the Cultural Property Protection Law was triggered by the fire of Horyu-ji temple kondo mural paintings. In the creation of this Law, legislators considered the protection of intangible cultural properties as being parallel with the protection of tangible cultural properties. The adopted protection methods included subsidies and the requirement to hold performances open to the public, but the designation system was not introduced until later. Therefore, it is necessary to proved the process leading to the introduction of the designation system of Living National Treasure in 1954 and intangible folk-cultural properties in 1974.