Contemporary Issues of the Cultural Heritage Protection in the Republic of Crimea

The Crimean Peninsula has combined within its borders more than 130 ethnic groups with their specific cultural traditions. For historical reasons, the process of formation of the Crimean culture passed through the contact of different ethnic groups, assimilation of their traditions, and, as a result, their mixing. This fact enabled the development of the unique Crimean identity and creation of the cultural heritage which stands on the crossroad of cultures. This raises the following question: is it possible to keep the cultures in their original forms? On the one hand, the contact of cultures is a unique phenomenon, on the other - it comes more difficult to highlight and protect the places which must be put in the list of cultural heritage. The article deals with the above mentioned problems and presents a comprehensive study of the problem of the cultural heritage protection in the present world. The basic point is that without past there is no future. The research deals with the specifics of protection of the Material Cultural Heritage and Intangible Cultural Heritage of the Crimea. It is the author’s opinion that the special attention should be given to the problem of depoliticization of the cultural heritage protection in the Republic of Crimea. These problems are really important in terms of the specific acts of the international society, caused by the integration of the Crimea to the Russian Federation, and the necessity of support of the vanishing nationalities, such as the Karaites and the Krymchaks, whose cultures are considered to be unique on the Crimean Peninsula.

culture, the Material Cultural Heritage and Intangible Cultural Heritage, the Republic of Crimea, cultural heritage conservation, dialogue of cultures, the Karaites, the Krymchaks

1. Krasilnikova M., Sevastyanova S. K voprosu o sovremennykh podkhodakh k opredeleniyu ponyatiya «kul’tura» [The Issue of Modern Approaches to the Definition of “Culture”], Observatoriya kul’tury [Observatory of Culture], 2015, no. 4, pp. 98—103.

2. Federal’nyi zakon N 73-FZ ot 25.06.2002 “Ob ob’ektakh kul’turnogo naslediya (pamyatnikakh istorii i kul’tury) narodov Rossiiskoi Federatsii” [The Fede­ral Law on Cultural Heritage Sites (Historical and Cultural Monuments) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation]. Available at: http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_37318/ (accessed 04.02.2016).

3. Nematerial’noe kul’turnoe nasledie. Cooperation Russia — Europe in the field of culture. The Ministry of Culture of Russia. Available at: http://www.rus-euculture.ru/610/integibile/ (accessed 04.02.2016).

4. Masson V.P. Pul’siruyushchie ritmy kul’turogeneza i kul’turnoe nasledie. Al’manakh Nauchno-obrazovatel’nogo kul’turologicheskogo obshchestva Rossii, 2015, no. IV, pp. 108—136.

5. Nuruzade Sh. Sokhranenie nematerial’nogo kul’turnogo naslediya v Azerbaidzhane v usloviyakh globalizatsii [Preservation of intangible cultural heritage in Azerbaijan at a time of globalization], Etnodialogi [Etnodialogues], 2015, no. 2 (49), pp. 75—82.

6. Konopleva A.A. Determinanty mezhkul’turnykh vzaimodeistvii v Respublike Krym [Determinants of cross-cultural interactions in the Republic of Crimea], Istoricheskie, filosofskie, politicheskie i yuridicheskie nauki, kul’turologiya i iskusstvovedenie. Voprosy teorii i praktiki [Historical, Philosophical, Political and Law Sciences, Culturology and Study of Art. Issues of Theory and Practice], 2015, no. 8 (58), pp. 118—123.

7. Krymskii Vavilon. Available at: http://www.rg.ru/2015/05/21/narodi.html (accessed 04.02.2016).

8. Bakhtin M.M. Problemy poetiki Dostoevskogo. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1972. 364 p.

9. Astafyeva O. Kul’turnaya politika Rossii: teoriya — real’nost’ — perspektiva [Theory and Practice of Cultural Policy: senses — images — actions], Gosudarstvennaya sluzhba [Public Administration], 2014, no. 1, pp. 68—73.