MESA Banner
The International Cultural Heritage Regime and Armenian Churches in Turkey: The Medieval Ghost City of Ani on the UNESCO World Heritage List
Abstract
How do states treat the artistic legacy of despised or persecuted minority groups? While such sites or objects can be neglected, destroyed, or appropriated, they also prompt critical questions about the theory and practice of cultural heritage, historic preservation, as well as the international cultural heritage regime. These questions appear saliently in the case of the medieval ghost city of Ani. Located on the border between Turkey and Armenia, Ani was inscribed by Turkey on the prestigious UNESCO World Heritage List In July 2016. Once one of the Silk Road’s capitals, Ani’s ruins feature remarkable monuments from many historical periods. However, the site is most closely associated with its Christian Armenian layer, and features some of the most iconic Armenian churches. For Armenians worldwide, Ani is an architectural masterpiece, a cultural touchstone, and a sacred site. Yet official Turkish discourse only rarely acknowledges the Armenian layer of the site’s history or its importance for the Armenian Church, just as it does not acknowledge the state-sponsored violence against Armenian citizens. Long neglected and even vandalized, Ani became the focus of a new preservation campaign in the last decade. Highly publicized as well as politicized, the preservation campaign is spearheaded by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism of Turkey in association with international heritage organizations such as the World Monuments Fund in New York, culminating in the inscription of the site on the highly prestigious World Heritage List. Many questions remain about the site’s physical integrity and its interpretation. UNESCO’s discourse celebrates cultural diversity. Reflecting this view, official Turkish discussions of Ani extol it as a multicultural site that bridges cultures and symbolizes tolerance, yet they rarely acknowledge the cultural groups that made up this diversity of cultures. What will the UNESCO inscription mean for the ongoing interpretation of the site, and how will that reflect the vexed relationship of the Turkish state with its own minority communities?
Discipline
Art/Art History
Geographic Area
Anatolia
Sub Area
19th-21st Centuries