Belgium did not understand the remark by Afghanistan because even as a referral, it was up to the submitting State – as a sovereign State – to decide if it wished to resubmit its nomination file. In the current wording, the Committee was almost forcing the reformulation of the nomination upon the State. The delegation supported the original language, as it provided valuable feedback by the Subsidiary Body. Nevertheless, it also agreed to its deletion, even though it preferred to maintain the original text.
786.The delegations of Namibia and Tunisia supported the modification of paragraph 5 with the amendment by Brazil.
787.The delegation of Turkey remarked that R.5 in paragraph 2 had already been adopted. It thus supported Brazil’s proposal to resubmit the file with the required elements.
788.The delegations of Congo and India supported the amendment by Brazil in paragraph 5.
789.The delegation of Ethiopia also supported Brazil’s amendment. With regard to the remark by Belgium, the delegation explained that the Committee wished to encourage Saudi Arabia to resubmit its nomination, as they had yet to inscribe an element. Moreover, Saudi Arabia had made it known that they have a strong will to resubmit.
790.The delegations of Peru, Uganda, Bulgaria and Greece supported Brazil’s revision of paragraph 5.
791.The Chairpersonthen turned to the adoption of the wording of paragraph 5, as proposed by Brazil, which was duly adopted. With no objections to the adoption of the decision as a whole, the Chairperson declared adopted Decision 9.COM 10.38 to refer Alardhah Alnajdiyah, Saudi Arabia dance, drumming and poetryto the submitting State for additional information.
792.The delegation of Saudi Arabia thanked the Subsidiary Body, the States Parties, and the Committee for their understanding of the situation in Saudi Arabia. On behalf of the Head of the Saudi Foundation for the Preservation of Heritage, the delegation and all its members assured the Committee that it would revise its nomination for it to be successful when presented next year. The delegation assured the Committee that it would not provide an inaccurate picture of its history, although it acknowledged that there were swords in this art, and that the element was a symbol of peace and unity whose symbolism had changed over the last three centuries.
793.The Secretary announced the NGO working group meeting and the information session on the capacity-building programme for Electoral Group IV that would take place over lunch.
794.The Chairperson adjourned the session.
[Thursday 27 November, afternoon session]
795.The Chairperson introduced the session by turning to draft decision 9.COM 10.39.
796.The Chairperson of the Subsidiary Body turned to the next nomination on Slava, celebration of family saint patron’s day [draft decision 9.COM 10.39] submitted by Serbia. In Serbia, Orthodox Christian families celebrate an important holiday in honour of the patron saint, Slava, A specially designed candle is lit in the family home, then wine is poured over a Slava cake, which is then cut crosswise, rotated and broken into four parts and lifted up. Women play an important role in transmitting knowledge concerning the performance of the rituals, their meaning and purpose. The Slava feast reinforces social relations and maintains dialogue in multi-ethnic and multi-confessional areas. In its evaluation, the Subsidiary Body found that all the criteria were satisfied. Indeed, the Body found that the detailed nomination clearly demonstrated that Slava is transmitted from generation to generation, enjoying broad support among the Orthodox Christian families in Serbia and affording its practitioners a sense of belonging and continuity. The Body particularly appreciated the important role played by women in the transmission of knowledge related to the practice within families. Similarly, the nomination demonstrated that the inscription of Slava could contribute to greater awareness of the ability of intangible cultural heritage to encourage both dialogue and reconciliation between communities, promoting an open and respectful community, illustrating the creative potential of traditional celebrations. However, in criterion R.2, the Body noted the use of certain words that were not in conformity with the spirit of the Convention, as shown in paragraph 4 of the draft decision. The proposed safeguarding plan was considered by the Body as realistic, well-designed and demonstrating respectable efforts to promote the element and safeguard its practice both in its traditional form and in all its variants. In addition, the Body was of the view that the nomination satisfactorily demonstrated the participation of the representative groups and a number of public institutions in the elaboration of the nomination, having provided their free, prior and informed consent. The Body also found sufficient evidence of the inscription of Slava in the national inventory of intangible cultural heritage in accordance with Article 11 and Article 12 of the Convention. The Subsidiary Body thus concluded by recommending the inscription of Slava, celebration of family saint patron’s day on the Representative List.
797.The delegation of Brazil congratulated Serbia for the inscription of its first element on the Representative List, remarking on Serbia’s long cultural tradition of the Orthodox Church.
798.The delegation of Hungary expressed its sincere support of Serbia’s nomination, a young State Party to the Convention, adding that this first inscription was a milestone. It appreciated Serbia’s efforts and wished the country well in its valuable work of safeguarding its rich and diverse cultural heritage.
799.The delegation of Greece congratulated Serbia, a neighbouring country, on the inscription of its element, which manifested the wealth of intangible cultural heritage in south-eastern Europe. It hoped that its inscriptions would multiply to demonstrate the wealth that was still very much alive in the region. It also thanked the Secretariat and the Subsidiary Body for their work.
800.The delegation of Algeria congratulated Serbia for the quality of its nomination and its first inscription.
801.The delegation of India congratulated Serbia on its first nomination, which it supported.
802.With no objections to the adoption of the decision as a whole, the Chairpersondeclared adopted Decision 9.COM 10.39 to inscribe Slava, celebration of family saint patron’s day on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.
803.The delegation of Serbia expressed its sincere gratitude to the Committee, the Subsidiary Body and the Secretariat for supporting Serbia in its very first nomination to the Representative List. It was a great honour, but at the same time it was a reminder to States Parties to create the necessary conditions for safeguarding intangible cultural heritage on their territory. In Serbia, families celebrate Slava in honour of the patron saint who is believed to be their protector and provider of welfare. This centuries-old tradition is passed down through generations within families. It promotes dialogue among communities and encourages creativity, reinforcing social relations and playing an important role in establishing and maintaining dialogue in multi-ethnic and multi-confessional areas. The delegation was proud to be a part of the UNESCO’s lists, and hoped to enrich them with new nominations in the future.
804.The Chairpersoncongratulated Serbia on its first inscription.
805.The Chairperson of the Subsidiary Body turned to the next nomination of Tamboradas drum-playing rituals [draft decision 9.COM 10.42] submitted by Spain. Tamboradas are festive events of drum-playing held each year in Spain during the Catholic Holy Week. Over several days and nights, thousands of drummers simultaneously beat drums, creating a festive, liberating atmosphere. The drums and the costumes are made by local craftspeople. Any person can participate in the Tamboradas, regardless of gender, age or socioeconomic level. It is the drum community as a whole, through verbal codes and specific gestural patterns, who transmit the instructions needed in order to achieve a synchronized performance. In its evaluation, the Subsidiary Body found that the nomination demonstrated that criteria R.4 and R.5 were satisfied, but that it lacked the technical details to enable it to position itself on criteria R.1, R.2 and R.3. It found that the submitting State had sufficiently demonstrated how the communities had been involved throughout the nomination process and had given their free, prior and informed consent (R.4). The nomination also demonstrated that Tamboradas was included in the inventories of various autonomous communities of Spain where it is practised, and that this had been carried out with the active participation of the communities (R.5). Conversely, criteria R.1, R.2 and R.3 raised many questions, particularly owing to a constant shift in the nomination between the characterization of the element as a ‘ritual’ or a ‘festival’. The Body was aware that there was no question of attempting to establish a definite distinction between these two terms from the scientific point of view, but it agreed that the information provided to characterize the proposed element was unclear. Moreover, the Body felt that more information was needed to understand the nature and scope of the element in order to evaluate whether the element did indeed constitute intangible cultural heritage, as defined in Article 2 of the Convention. For example, the nomination did not provide information about the components of the element as presented, such as the manufacture of drums or costumes, or on its social function or cultural meaning. In addition, the nomination consistently brought together Tamboradas with the celebration of the Catholic Holy Week, suggesting that this association was integral to the nature of the element, but this link was not clearly stated or explained in the nomination. For all these reasons, the Body concluded that the nomination should be referred on criterion R.1. Logically, this would have a cascading effect because in the absence of a clear definition of the element, the Body was unable to pronounce on criterion R.2 on the potential contribution of inscription of the element to a greater visibility of cultural heritage intangible in general. Similarly, the Body was faced with the challenge of positioning itself in relation to criterion R.3, as the relevance and timeliness of the many proposed safeguarding measures could not be seen in relation to an element that had been inadequately characterized. The Body therefore concluded that criterion R.3 be referred so that the effectiveness of the proposed safeguarding measures could be evaluated once the element had been appropriately defined. The Subsidiary Body therefore recommended to refer the nomination to the submitting State for additional information on these aspects for resubmission in a subsequent cycle.
806.The Chairperson thanked the Vice-Chair for the clear and detailed explanations of the various issues, and opened the floor for comment.
807.The delegation of Egypt thanked the Subsidiary Body for its clear and specific assessment of the nomination file. It had personally attended the rituals and festive seasons that occurred every year in Spain, remarking that thousands of Spaniards and foreigners attended. In Seville, for instance, the streets were very busy during these events, and hotels had to be booked well in advance of the Holy Week. Having carefully reviewed the nomination, the delegation understood that the element was clearly intangible cultural heritage and that the file provided sufficient information on all the criteria. Moreover, the social and cultural elements related to this element were very clearly stated in the nomination file, as were the skills and knowledge, and its transmission from generation to generation. It thus believed that the link between Tamboradas and Holy Week was very clear and properly explained, as was the accompanying video, particularly with respect to criterion R.1. The delegation therefore considered that R.1 was fully satisfied, as was R.2. It also believed that R.3 was satisfied, but that others might have divergent views due to the Subsidiary Body’s observations in R.1. The delegation therefore asked the submitting State to take the floor so as to respond to the questions raised by the Subsidiary Body.
808.The delegation of Bulgaria accepted the decision, proposal and the remarks of the Subsidiary Body. At the same time, it considered that the additional information required by the Subsidiary Body was in fact contained within the nomination file albeit not necessarily in a lengthy or detailed way. It therefore wished to invite the nominating State to provide some explanations to R.2 and R.3.
809.Having carefully read the file, the delegation of Greece remarked on this popular cultural expression of religiosity that distinguished the notion of rituals within a vibrant tradition in the urban space. It sought the opinion of Spain on the definition of the element in criterion R.1, while expressing its great respect for the opinions of the Subsidiary Body and its work.
810.The delegation of Republic of Korea appreciated the Subsidiary Body’s evaluation, noting that the nature and the scope of these rituals were the main obstacles in the inscription of this file under criteria R.1 and R.3. After analysing Spain’s nomination, the delegation was under the impression that the specific activities, timeframe and craftsmanship of the element were sufficiently described in the nomination, and as such, the nature and scope of the element was easily definable. It was noted that the Subsidiary Body highlighted the issue of nomenclature between ‘festival’ and ‘ritual’, and the delegation questioned whether the nomenclature of the element should be a deciding factor for inscription. With regard to criterion R.2, the delegation understood that the file had failed to demonstrate how the drum-playing culture could contribute to the visibility and awareness of intangible cultural heritage in general. In this regard, the delegation invited Spain to provide more information.
811.The delegation of Brazil deeply appreciated the recommendations by the Subsidiary Body, and from its own examination, could only see a problem in R.1, adding that the comments made about criteria R.2 and R.3 were consequences of those observations made in R.1. With regard to R.2, it argued that this element could promote dialogue among communities, not only in Andalusia and southern Spain but also all over the Iberian Peninsula, the Mediterranean basin, the Christian world, and even with the Muslim world. With regard to criterion R.3, it was noted that the Subsidiary Body mentioned that several safeguarding measures had already been proposed, and with clarifications from Spain, the delegation was sure that these measures were sufficient. Thus, it was necessary to clarify whether the nomination file contained sufficient information to satisfy R.1, after which a decision could be taken. It therefore asked Spain to clarify where the information could be found in the nomination file, and to further comment on the nature of the element. The delegation commented on the strong link between the Holy Week, Holy Friday and the Tamboradas, in which the Gospels speak of when Lord Jesus Christ died on the cross and darkness covered the earth, the earth shook, and the veil that covered the holiest of temples was torn down. The delegation remarked that the Tamboradas represented the earth-shaking thunder covering the earth, as well as the sadness of the people of the region preparing for Holy Week. The sounding of drums was as if the earth was awakening and crying. Thus, it believed that there was a strong link, and it is clear that the element was solid and integrated.
812.The delegation of Algeria echoed the remarks by Egypt, Brazil and others, arriving at the conclusion that criteria R.1 and R.3 were satisfied. However, it recognized the relevance of the Subsidiary Body’s recommendations, and was grateful for the quality of its work, which sought to improve the quality of the file, though it wished to hear from Spain on these issues. Regarding R.2, it recognized from previous debates that clarifications were required from all delegations in order to address this particular criterion more satisfactorily, which was thus not just a problem for Spain, and it wished to hear from Spain in this regard.
813.After examining the nomination file, the delegation of Ethiopia found that the element constituted intangible cultural heritage as defined in Article 2 of the Convention, noting Spain’s presentation of multifaceted elements of intangible cultural heritage. It was noted that Tamboradas is a festive event as well as a collective drum-playing ritual. The drums and the traditional clothes were made and maintained by local craftsmen, and as such there was also a component of traditional knowledge and craftsmanship. In this regard, and unlike the recommendation of the Subsidiary Body, the delegation felt that the nomination had sufficient information on the nature and scope of the element, as well as the cultural and social functions of the element. It was further noted that the Subsidiary Body recognized that the element represented a component of cultural identity, and the nomination also identified other social and cultural functions. It therefore found that the nomination satisfied criterion R.1. As for R.2 and R.3, the delegation understood the decision of the Subsidiary Body, which resulted from a cascading effect that led to a negative decision in these criteria, as explained by the Vice-Chair of the Subsidiary Body. It therefore believed that if the Committee decided that R.1 was met then this would also reverse the decisions on the remaining two criteria. It asked Spain to clearly explain these issues, especially R.1.
814.The delegation of Uganda appreciated the comments by the Subsidiary Body, remarking that the nomination clearly explained the festival of drums that were performed during the Holy Week, whose activities related to the drum-playing festival, which were clearly articulated in terms of its social and cultural functions within the community, related to criterion R.1. With regard to R.2, the delegation noted the viability of the element and its awareness raising aspect as it was passed on to the younger generation and others through the public and private space through documentation and studies related to the element. The delegation requested the State Party to elaborate further on R.3 for a better appreciation of the criterion.
815.The delegation of Spain thanked the Chairperson for the opportunity to clarify the questions raised by the Subsidiary Body and Members of the Committee. Regarding criterion R.1, and specifically its nature and scope, it was noted that the information was addressed in parts of the paragraphs in section 1(i), which read: ‘A Tamboradas is a collective ritual consisting in the simultaneous, intense and seamless beating of thousands of standard brass drums. Everyone competes against each other, in a public space during Easter Week. The drums create an individual and collective backdrop of sound. The standard drums and bass drums used are indigenous to the area, and a local industry of craftsmen and craftswomen make them and look after their maintenance. The ritual is part of a visual language and it has a symbolic significance. It is made mainly by local craftswomen, and varies according to the area. This social ritual is characterized by the fact that it goes on continuously for several days and nights, even up to four days. During the ritual everybody enjoys having something to eat and drink together in certain places especially prepared for this purpose, such as clubs, private homes and brotherhood and headquarters’, as was shown in the video. In section 1(iii), it was stated: ‘It is the drum community through verbal codes and a specific gestual patterns which transmits the behaviours needed in order to achieve mass performance so anybody wishing to join it is well received.’ With regard to the many social and cultural functions, the delegation explained that the following aspects could also be found in the nomination form, which included: the integration of individuals in the community, for example, the immigrants; initiation into the community’s social and cultural rituals; the creation of a link between the community and land; the development of creativity linked to crafts and musical language; the promotion of values like brotherhood, solidarity and collective happiness; identification with the ritual, creating the so-called drum villages; the safeguarding of associated cultural spaces, i.e. the historic downtown of drum villages; and finally, generating and creating a peaceful and harmonious social atmosphere. With regard to its place within the celebration of Catholic Easter, the delegation further explained that the first image of the video demonstrated the association between the Tamboradas and Easter, adding that it was a special and temporary inter-relationship with both elements occurring at the same time and in the same place. Thus, this element had its own character that was integrated with the Easter rituals, as described in R.1. Furthermore, the inventories of the regions, in criterion R.5, reinforced the fact that these were two distinct elements that converged in time, but with their own characteristics. Moreover, the inventories catalogued Tamboradas under its name, and there were specific museums and interpretation centres focusing on the Tamboradas. This implied that for the communities concerned and the institutions represented by them, the Tamboradas have their own identity, as well as a timeless space relationship with Easter, coexisting in harmony.
816.With regard to specific techniques and knowledge associated with the element, the delegation of Spain referred to the nomination form where it was stated that the standard brass drums were indigenous to the area and were made and maintained by local craftsmen and women according to the area. The ritual represented a visual language with symbolic significance. People cover their heads with helmets and pointed hoods and they wear tannic dress coats, trousers and scarves. The video from minute 4.30 to 5.13 clearly showed the different aspects of the specific techniques associated with this element. With regard to knowledge and the role of the family, formal and non-formal education was said to be fundamental to its transmission. At home, boys and girls were initiated into the tradition and thus there were whole generations of families of drummers. The delegation therefore believed that criterion R.1 was clarified, and that criterion R. 2 was satisfied. It was also stated that the inscription of the element would bring to the forefront those civilizations where percussion was the main creative element used to express emotions such as fear or happiness. Finally, once R.1 was clarified, the delegation believed that the safeguarding measures set out in R.3 were adequate and were reinforced by the on-going involvement of local communities, as set out in R.4, which was approved by the Subsidiary Body. The delegation hoped to have properly answered the questions required by the Committee.
817.The delegation of Belgium remarked that previous Committee meetings had never taken into account personal experiences of its Members who had visited a ritual or a festival, and thus it should not begin to do so, particularly as it was not evaluating the ritual itself but the information contained in the nomination file. It thanked Spain for the interesting explanation and new information, and it looked forward to its inclusion in the right places in a resubmitted nomination file, as proposed by the Subsidiary Body. The delegation spoke of its surprise at the introduction of a new way of evaluating, the so-called cascade effect, where as soon as criterion R.1 was satisfied then automatically R.2 and R.3 were satisfied. If this was the case, then only R.1 would need to be satisfied, and the remaining criteria would be automatically approved. It therefore questioned this line of reasoning, adding that its own understanding relied on the evaluation being conducted on a criterion-by-criterion basis on information contained in the file and in the right place. This was especially the case for R.3 in which information should be clearly stated so as to understand how it would effectively ensure the viability of the nominated element once its nature and scope were clearly identified. The delegation explained that R.3 was not clear from the information provided in the file, just as it was unclear for the six Members of the Subsidiary Body. Moreover, even if R.1 was clear to a number of Members, the delegation was unable, based on the information in the file, to ascertain how criterion R.3 could be met.
818.Having carefully listened to the explanations, the delegation of