Lecture No. 12

Cultural landscape.

History of ideas about the cultural landscape.

The concept of cultural landscape was actively advocated by a number of prominent naturalists:

Lev Semenovich Berg (1876 – 1950) - the goal of geographical research is the study and description of landscapes, both natural and cultural.

A cultural landscape is a landscape in which a person and the works of his culture play a decisive role.

A city, a village, a park, a pond, a forest strip are components of a cultural landscape.

The concept of cultural landscape is reflected in the works of domestic landscape scientists:

Alexander Ivanovich Voeikov (1842 – 1916);

Sergei Semenovich Neustruev (1874 - 1928);

Veniamin Petrovich Semenov-Tyan-Shansky;

Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky;

Fedor Nikolaevich Milkov;

Anatoly Grirorievich Isachenko;

V. A. Nikolaev.

In the 20s of the 20th century, the German school of cultural landscape was formed (O. Schlüter). Since then, in Western Europe, and especially in Germany and France, the study and design of the cultural landscape has been given exceptional importance.

In the definition of Yu. G. Saushkin, “Cultural landscape” is a landscape in which the direct application of the labor of human society to it has so changed the relationship and interaction of objects and natural phenomena that the landscape has acquired new, qualitatively different features compared to its previous, natural condition.

At the same time, the cultural landscape has not ceased to be natural. It continues to develop according to laws of nature".

So, the concept of “cultural landscape” until the mid-20th century applied to any landscape changed by purposeful economic activity.

Subsequently, after the works of F.N. Milkov, the term “cultural landscape” in the above understanding was replaced by the term “anthropogenic landscape”.

“Anthropogenic landscapes mean those complexes in which, over the entire or larger area, any of the landscape components, including vegetation, has undergone a radical change under human influence.”

Among anthropogenic landscapes, according to the socio-economic functions they perform, they are distinguished as resource-producing (agricultural, industrial, forestry), environment-forming (residential, recreational), environmental, etc.

The formation and functioning of a cultural landscape is based on two main factors:

1. Human economic activity;

2. Initial natural conditions.

Geoecological concept of cultural landscape

Currently, not all anthropogenic landscapes are commonly called cultural, but only those that truly meet the high environmental requirements of rational environmental management. The explanatory dictionary “Landscape Protection” provides the following definition:

“A cultural landscape is a landscape consciously changed by human economic activity to meet its needs, constantly maintained by man in the state he needs, and capable of simultaneously continuing to perform the functions of reproducing a healthy environment.”

A similar definition is given by N.F. Reimers: “A cultural landscape is a purposefully created anthropogenic landscape that has a structure and functional properties that are appropriate for human society and.”

A cultural landscape must have two main qualities:

1) high productivity and economic efficiency;

2) an optimal environment for people’s lives, conducive to maintaining health, physical and spiritual development of a person “[Isachenko, 16, p. 349].

Modern anthropogenic landscapes may include landscapes of varying degrees of ecological perfection. Only a small part of them are truly cultural. Anthropogenic landscapes that require optimization of environmental management predominate. Sometimes among anthropogenic landscapes there are acultural landscapes that arise as a result of irrational single activities, degraded landscapes, collectively called anthropogenic badlands. These are anthropogenic wastelands, eroded, deflated, saline and wetlands, polluted by industrial and household waste, which have lost their ecological potential.

So the concepts of “cultural landscape”, “acultural landscape”, “degraded landscape” are geoecological concepts that speak about the culture of environmental management. Transforming most anthropogenic landscapes into truly cultural landscapes is one of the most important tasks facing us.

Characteristic features of the cultural landscape

I. Harmony of natural, social and production subsystems

The cultural landscape, like other natural-anthropogenic geosystems, includes three main components, three subsystems:

1. Natural;

2. Social;

3. Production.

The named components interact with each other through direct and feedback connections:

1. Real;

2. Energy;

3. Informational.

The harmony of the cultural landscape is determined primarily by the anthropogenic factor, the ability and desire of man to conduct rational environmental management.

It follows that in the cultural landscape the social component must have a high ecological culture.

II. Optimal and sustainable performance.

No matter how perfect the agricultural landscape is created by land reclamation experts, if the user has not learned to truly work in it culturally, land degradation is inevitable. The same can be said about urban, recreational and other cultural landscapes, the exploitation of which is not only a lot of physical, but also intellectual and spiritual work.

The cultural landscape must optimally fulfill its inherent socio-economic functions:

1. Resource-reproducing;

2. Environment-forming;

3. Environmental protection, etc.

In this regard, it is necessary to constantly maintain socio-ecological balance.

Social-ecological balance is determined by the fact that “Society develops until and to the extent that it maintains a balance between its pressure on the environment and the restoration of this environment...”.

Maintaining the sustainable functioning of a cultural landscape, be it agricultural, urban or recreational, is impossible without organizing constant monitoring of its condition.

Under natural conditions, the regulation of all processes is carried out by mechanisms developed during the long evolution of the landscape sphere. The biogeochemical cycle of matter and energy is the main factor of its self-regulation. In anthropogenic landscapes, it is impossible to avoid transformation and often complete destruction of this whirlpool. Lost self-regulation is replaced by anthropogenic control. Without it, the cultural landscape cannot exist. In the event of cessation or weakening of human management, care and protection, the cultural landscape degrades, losing the ability to perform its assigned socio-economic functions. This happens with abandoned arable lands that turn into weedy fallows, gardens and parks that run wild without proper care, settlements, roads and bridges that have lost routine and major repairs, etc.

There are two main types of management of anthropogenic landscapes, which are some of the characteristic features:

1. "Soft control."

2. “Hard management.”

III. Minimizing destructive processes;

"Soft Control"

Soft management aims to mobilize the natural forces of the landscape itself to maintain its sustainability. It is produced by affecting mainly biota and natural waters. These landscape components are more easily amenable to artificial changes than others and serve as effective levers of soft control.

Natural and cultural vegetation and water bodies are the main elements of the ecological framework of cultural landscapes, the purpose of which is to maintain the sustainable functioning of natural production geosystems.

Soft regulation of the landscape includes hydromelioration, aimed at optimizing the water regimes of lands through drainage, irrigation and watering. Oases created on irrigated lands in desert areas have been functioning for thousands of years. Already in the Bronze Age, there were Samarkand, Bukhara and Khorezm oases in Uzbekistan, Murghab and Tejen - in Turkmenistan, as a result of artificial drainage, the previously wetlands of Colchis were transformed into flowering gardens and plantations, and the swamps of Polesie were developed for agricultural land. Only with the help of “soft” regulation (protective forest plantations, ponds and reservoirs) was a cultural agricultural landscape created in the Kamennaya Steppe in the south of the Voronezh region according to the project of V.V. Dokuchaev.

Landscapes of soft anthropogenic management include:

1. Protective forest plantations;

2. Arrays of artificial tinning;

4. Forest parks;

5. Ponds, etc.

IV. Anthropogenic regulation, protection and care.

"Tight management"

“Rigid” landscape regulation is carried out, as a rule, by creating engineering structures:

1. Waterworks;

2. Plotinus;

3. Gateways;

4. Channels;

5. Protective structures (dams, breakwaters, drainage systems, supporting walls, drainage trays, etc.).

Engineering and technical structures are capable of protecting cities, towns, railways and highways, industrial and energy facilities, recreational complexes, etc. from destructive natural processes.

For example, protecting the South Kazakhstan city of Almaty from catastrophic mudflows. Since its founding in the mid-19th century, the city has been repeatedly subjected to their destructive effects. Mudflows flow down from the Trans-Ili Alatau mountains along the valleys of the Malaya Almaatinka and Bolshaya Almaatinka rivers. In the 60s, high in the mountains, in the Medeo tract, a grandiose anti-mudflow dam with a height of about 300 m was erected. Since then, it has been saving the city from catastrophic mudflows.

Engineering and technical structures introduced into the landscape are an alien formation in it. They age quickly, are destroyed by natural processes and themselves need constant care and protection. Their environmental and economic efficiency decreases over time. Often, maintaining decaying engineering structures is more expensive than building new ones. Technogenic changes can cause adverse chain reactions. For example, the disruption of the water balance of the Aral Sea as a result of excessive water intake from the Amudarya and Syrdarya rivers.

Rigid landscape management comes at a high economic cost and often has adverse side effects. Before resorting to it, it is necessary to mobilize all the reserves of natural regulation of the landscape through a “soft” restructuring of its structure and functioning. This requirement primarily concerns cultural landscapes.

V. Healthy, environmentally friendly living environment.

The cultural landscape must be unsuitable for normal, safe human habitation. No matter how landscaped the urban landscape is, if its air basin is saturated with vehicle exhaust gases, emissions from industrial and energy enterprises, it cannot be classified as a cultural landscape. No matter how effective crop production is, if it is accompanied by the accumulation of pesticides (pesticides) and nitrogen compounds in the lower parts of the agricultural landscape catena, then this landscape cannot be called cultural.

VI. High artistic merit of the landscape appearance.

Special requirements are also imposed on the external appearance of the cultural landscape - its landscape. In French geographical literature, the terms "landscape" and "landscape" are used interchangeably. In domestic science they are not identical. The perception of the cultural landscape must satisfy high aesthetic requirements. The cultural landscape must be beautiful.

The benefit of an aesthetic landscape lies not only in maintaining the physical and spiritual health of its inhabitants, but also in its educational potential. A beautiful landscape can raise an ecologically and ethically perfect person.

So, the main features of the cultural landscape from a geo-ecological position are expressed in the following:

I. Harmony of natural, social and production subsystems;

II. Optimal and sustainable performance;

III. Minimizing destructive processes;

IV. Anthropogenic regulation, protection and care;

V. Healthy living environment;

VI. High artistic merit of the landscape appearance;

VII. Availability of constant monitoring.

Special notes awaken beautiful views of nature in a person. After all, we are a part of it. Flowering trees, sunshine, green spaces, and murmuring water make a unique impression on us. Residents of the metropolis, immersed in the frantic rhythm of the city, desperately need peace. Very often, peace is found by admiring cultural landscapes. This is the space of the earth, formed by the conscious, purposeful work of man himself. Over the past decades, interest in developed landscape objects has increased. It is studied by the science of geography. The cultural landscape is one of its leading leitmotifs. Well, let's talk about this concept and introduce you to examples of similar domestic and foreign landscapes.

What is a cultural landscape?

It is not entirely easy to define a cultural landscape. This is most likely an earthly relief that appeared after the transformative activities of people to satisfy certain spiritual and practical needs. What is the idea of ​​cultural space? For many, the cultural landscape is a continuous multi-layered fabric in the form of a complete carpet that combines natural and cultural components. All objects and places on the earth's surface are knots of landscape fabric with a holistic pattern.

We can conclude that a cultural landscape is an earthly space that is integral and structured, it contains natural and cultural elements. Man himself influenced many earthly spaces, supplementing them with artifacts. It was human activity that influenced the dynamics of natural states. Such altered landscapes are also called anthropogenic landscapes. They will be discussed further in the article.

The concept of anthropogenic landscape

This concept means a natural-cultural territorial complex that human society has mastered. Anthropogenic (cultural) landscape is the components of culture on a natural basis. Such a cultivated territory preserves and inherits its natural basis. Anthropogenic particles tactfully complement natural foundations and follow their patterns. An example is a rural settlement.

The concept of anthropogenic landscapes refers to individual high-status cultural elements in a continuous natural area. The anthropogenic landscape is a type of cultural landscape. This is a territory changed by man. The famous Russian landscape scientist F. N. Milkov called anthropogenic territories newly created by man, as well as natural complexes that have undergone changes as a result of his activities. Vegetation and fauna can change. Most modern territories are anthropogenic because they have been changed to some extent by people. The most noticeable transformations of nature by man are deforestation and the formation of artificial embankments - waste heaps. There is also such a thing as anthropogenic relief.

Who gave rise to the concept of "cultural landscape"?

The first to speak about this concept was the German scientist Oto Schlüter. By it he meant the unity of natural and cultural things that are accessible to human perception. The word “landscape” itself is of German origin and consists of two words. The first part of the word means “country”, the second - “type of area”. This suggests the conclusion that by this concept Schlüter meant a territory modified by man - anthropogenic. The transformation and evolution of this concept was also considered by the following scientists:

1. American geographer who defined the cultural landscape as the result of human interaction with nature, Karl Sauer.
2. Alexander von Humboldt.
3. V. I. Vernadsky.
4. Russian scientist, who also defined the cultural landscape as a result of the interaction between man and nature - V.P. Semenov-Tyan-Shansky.

To determine certain geographical locations that are recognized as objects of cultural heritage of humanity, this concept is used by UNESCO.

How to approach landscapes?

Domestic science approaches the study of this concept very carefully. There are three main approaches to it:

1. From an information-axiological point of view. The landscape is considered as a component bearing spiritual and intellectual value, which is influenced by material components.
2. From the ethnocultural side. The landscape is considered in the form of a natural-cultural complex that appeared under the influence of nature and ethnic groups.
3. From a phenomenological point of view. Cultural space means the living area of ​​a large group of people who have remade nature for themselves.

Under what conditions does such a space form?

A cultural landscape is formed under certain conditions:

• It is important to rationally use natural resources and natural diversity.
• The natural resources of the landscape area should be reproduced and protected.
• Construction or engineering work is not carried out in opposition or contradiction to nature.
• Careful consideration is given to optimizing sanitary and hygienic conditions.

Norms of the concept

Geolocations that qualify to fall under the definition of “cultural” must meet the following requirements or standards:

• There should be no monotony in them.
• Anthropogenic wastelands (wastelands, landfills, quarries) should be absent.
• Such an area must be protected.
• Work must be constantly carried out to improve and preserve the facilities.

List of categories and types of anthropogenic landscapes

Cultural spaces can be divided into several main categories:

Scientists have also identified 5 main types of anthropogenic spaces:

1. Forest. Associated with forest plantings and artificial forests.
2. Water. Includes reservoirs and artificial lakes.
3. Agrarian or agricultural. Associated with the cultivation of fields.
4. Industrial. Includes roads, factories, factories.
5. Urban landscape or residential. This is infrastructure from small villages to large cities.

Cultural and historical landscapes

Purposeful landscapes include the famous palace and park ensemble of Peterhof. It was created during the time of Peter I. The city is located on the shores of the Gulf of Finland and is part of St. Petersburg. It was with this ensemble that Peter the Great wanted to eclipse the French Versailles. This is a collection of beautiful palaces and unique fountain complexes. Today there is a state museum-reserve here. The Peterhof park with extraordinary green alleys represents a single composition.

The Kulikovo Field museum complex will help you immerse yourself in the history of battles and plunge into the era of the 14th century. It was located directly next to the battlefield of 1380. The museum project was developed by Honored Architect of Russia S. V. Gnedovsky. The complex is made in the style of Russian postmodernism and betrays the specifics of the landscape. Viewers observe here the new Russian style in modern architecture, forest and steppe territories and the site of the battle.

Panorama of a village near Nizhny Novgorod

People continue to change the landscape for the better, building it with new villages and cities, parks and other structures. As an example, I would like to cite a new village near Nizhny Novgorod - “Russian Open Spaces”. This cottage community is located in the Bogoroditsky district and has beautiful landscapes intertwined with modern buildings. Here you can see the magnificent landscapes of your native nature. "Russian spaces" are intended for permanent residence. The infrastructure of the village is carefully thought out. A common recreation area, playgrounds, shops, and pharmacies are being built here. On one side of the village there is a forest, on the other there is a lake with a sandy beach.

From this we can conclude that the natural and cultural landscape are different things, but they are combined with each other. Thus, the UNESCO convention also considered the taiga a cultural landscape.

The problems of preserving valuable natural and historical-cultural territorial complexes remain relevant for many years. The preservation of such territories becomes an alternative to active economic transformations of the environment and urbanization processes, which do not always take into account historical, cultural and environmental priorities. Since the early 1990s, the world has begun to pay special attention to cultural landscapes as a special type of heritage that ensures interaction, interpenetration and interdependence of natural and cultural components of heritage. In the UNESCO guidelines for the application of the World Heritage Convention, the definition of “cultural landscape” appears and its place in the typological series of heritage sites is established. Cultural landscape is understood as the result of joint work, joint creativity of man and nature, a product of man and nature.

In a geographical sense, a cultural landscape is not just the result of the co-creation of man and nature, but also a purposefully and expediently formed natural-cultural territorial complex, which has structural, morphological and functional integrity and develops in specific physical-geographical and cultural-historical conditions. Its components form certain characteristic combinations and are in a certain relationship and interdependence.

In the domestic scientific and geographical vocabulary, the concept of “cultural landscape” partly corresponds to the understanding of the anthropogenic landscape and is largely synonymous with the concept of “historical landscape”.

Let us dwell in more detail on the classification of cultural landscapes in Russian geographical science. There are three main approaches to defining and understanding the cultural landscape:

• classical landscape geographical approach,
• ethnological-geographical approach,
• information-axiological approach.

The differences between them, at first glance, are not particularly great, but upon closer examination and, most importantly, when using these approaches in the practice of preserving cultural landscapes as heritage objects, significant methodological differences in the understanding of this problem are possible.

Application classical geographical approach allows us to consider the cultural landscape as a special case of the anthropogenic landscape, namely a comfortable, historically adapted to natural conditions, purposefully and expediently formed anthropogenic landscape. In turn, an anthropogenic landscape is a natural-territorial complex (NTC) changed under the influence of anthropogenic impact and anthropogenic loads. Accordingly, the operational units of research can be PTCs of various ranks. The priority object of research, as a rule, is agricultural cultural landscapes.

Ethno-geographical approach considers the cultural landscape as the sum of interacting subsystems, namely the natural landscape, settlement systems, economy, community, language (especially toponymy), spiritual culture (mainly folklore). The basic concepts are “natural landscape” and “ethnicity”. A cultural landscape is a natural landscape mastered by an ethnic group. The main type of cultural landscape being studied is rural, since it best reflects the ethnic and national aspects of the interaction between man and nature.

Information-axiological approach is to study the cultural landscape as a joint product of man and nature, which is a complex system of material and spiritual values ​​with a high degree of ecological, historical and cultural information content. A cultural landscape is a natural-cultural territorial complex formed as a result of the evolutionary interaction of nature and man, his sociocultural and economic activities and consisting of characteristic combinations of natural and cultural components that are in a stable relationship and interdependence.

The author in this work used the second and third approaches in analysis of cultural landscapes of the Kholmogory district. It should also be emphasized that the concept of “cultural landscape” is not limited to its material content. The determining factor and leading component of its formation is the system of spiritual, religious, ethical, aesthetic, intellectual and other values, on which the direction of creative landscape-forming processes largely depends.

Picture 1.

Ideas about the cultural landscape as a heritage phenomenon are becoming very attractive for the development of methodology for the formation and development of systems of specially protected areas - natural and historical-cultural. A cultural landscape is a complex complex formation not only in connection with its internal system structure, but almost always in connection with management, since within its boundaries various subjects of law exist and interact - users, owners, owners of lands, natural resources, buildings and others engineering structures, other real estate. Therefore, the preservation of the basic values ​​of the cultural landscape is directly related to the settlement of relationships between all these entities and the involvement of the local population in the work to maintain the functions of the cultural landscape. The preservation and integrity of the cultural landscape with its key attributes and components often determines whether a particular site will be classified as cultural or natural heritage.

The author of this work adheres to V.L.’s point of view Kagansky, which considers as a cultural landscape any earthly space that a certain group of people has mastered utilitarianly, semantically and symbolically. Indeed, a person, inhabiting a certain territory (space), “interprets” it, endowing it with a system of local geographical names, symbols, local folklore, etc. At the same time, the meanings assigned to different places (landscapes) are not always of a purely positive nature.

Currently, increasing attention is being paid to the protection of integral historical, cultural and natural territorial complexes, including: individual monuments and their ensembles; historically characteristic types of development and objects of landscape architecture; various forms of engineering development of the territory; natural-technical systems; biocenoses adapted to traditional environmental management; other objects demonstrating the interaction and interdependence of natural and cultural objects, events and phenomena. It is these formations that constitute one of the most complex objects of historical and cultural heritage, belonging to the category of “cultural landscape”.

National parks of Russia are one of the main organizational forms of protection of cultural landscapes - natural and cultural territorial complexes formed as a result of the evolutionary interaction of nature and man, his sociocultural and economic activities and consisting of characteristic stable combinations of natural and cultural components that are in a stable relationship and interdependence .

According to the typology adopted in the Guidelines for the Application of the World Heritage Convention, all cultural landscapes are divided into three main categories:

• Clearly defined, purposefully formed, to which in the Russian language the concept of “man-made” is most appropriate;
• Naturally formed, or evolved, landscapes, among which there are subcategories of relict or “fossil” and continuing progressive development, or developing landscapes;
• Associative landscapes.

Man-made landscapes are characterized by a clear spatial organization and in their development are subordinated to the goal setting of their creators. They, as a rule, have a landscape-forming center; they have many artificial objects created on the basis of the transformation or replacement of natural complexes. Man-made landscapes are of the greatest interest in the cultural aspect, since their appearance is maximally subordinated to creative design. The purely functional purpose of an individual landscape element is always consistent with its overall aesthetics. These are landscapes of settlements, gardens, parks, various natural and technical systems, created according to projects or in accordance with an artistic or engineering idea.

IN naturally formed (evolved) landscapes as a result of long-term targeted and spontaneous anthropogenic influences, natural processes have been somewhat changed and adjusted. The natural components of the landscape adapt to these influences, resulting in the formation of a landscape complex where the processes of natural evolution and the results of creative goal-setting are intricately intertwined. This type includes many rural, certain ethnic, and partly historical industrial and reclaimed landscapes.

TO associative landscapes may include natural landscapes that have cultural value, as well as developed landscapes, in which the nature of development is of secondary importance, and the primary one is the connection with historical events, personalities, and works of art. In associative landscapes, the cultural component is often presented not in material, but in mental form, through the association of a natural object with some cultural phenomenon. Thus, natural complexes are included in the historical and cultural space without changing their natural rhythm and evolution, often indirectly, as memorable places, places of creativity, sacred places, etc. It should be said that the author of the work considers the cultural landscapes of the Kholmogory region specifically in the concept of associative landscapes.

In the system of concepts used in the Guidelines, naturally formed landscapes are distinguished relict , synonymous with “fossil” landscapes. This refers to landscapes that have stopped in their development because the society that created them is absent, but their external forms and structures are inertly preserved.

In order to have a clear understanding of a particular cultural landscape, it would be useful to consider it according to various classification, or typological, criteria. Each landscape can be characterized by a set of typological categories. In particular, cultural landscapes can be distinguished by the types of historical activities, or the main historical functions that determined the specific sociocultural features of the landscape. Landscape typology:

• rural (agricultural activities);
• residential (creation of settlements and their landscape arrangement);
• sacred (conducting religious ceremonies, worshiping objects of worship, sacred rites);
• recreational (obtaining aesthetic pleasures, cultivating a sense of beauty, acquiring peace of mind and inner harmony);
• commercial (hunting, fishing, harvesting sea animals and aquatic invertebrates, procurement of food, medicinal, and industrial plants, logging and afforestation, reindeer husbandry);
• historical industrial (creation of quarries, dumps, mine workings in the process of extracting various minerals, creation of engineering structures commensurate with the landscape for the use of its energy, placement of engineering systems and production complexes in the landscape);
• reserve (preservation of the natural information content of the landscape, conducting scientific research work);
• memorial (preserving the memory of important historical events and outstanding personalities, preserving attributes associated with them, broadcasting legends and historical narratives, celebrating memorable dates), etc.

Figure 2.

The mechanisms of self-maintenance of the landscape, the attitude towards the bearers of cultural traditions, and the ways of development of the landscape in the absence of a reproducing culture will depend on belonging to the type of culture.

Along with culturological foundations, typologies of a cultural landscape must also include natural ones. The hypsometric level and relief (landscapes are low-lying, flat, hilly, ridged, mountainous, upland, etc.), the nature of the vegetation (forest, steppe, meadow, swamp, etc.), the relationship to watercourses and water areas (seaside) is usually important. , lakeside, riverine), genesis and morphology (fluvio-glacial, dune, terrace, valley landscapes, etc.). Less often they turn to latitudinal zonality or altitudinal zonality, geological structure, and relief formation processes, the types of which are often correlated with categories of natural landscape.

The most important part of the cultural landscape is cultural heritage, preserved in the form of embodied objects, traditional human activities or information. In some cultural landscapes, heritage is dominant, determining the course of all social processes occurring on their territory. These are, first of all, complex historical, cultural and natural formations that are carriers of historical memory, associated with places that store material and intangible evidence of historical memory.

To summarize, it should be recalled again that the cultural landscape is understood as the result of the joint creativity of man and nature. It illustrates the processes of evolution of society under the influence of environmental conditions and social, economic and cultural processes. As a heritage object, it must be representative of the corresponding geocultural region and demonstrate with a sufficiently high degree of expressiveness the distinctive features of such a region, including the traditional technologies of sustainable land use for this region, taking into account environmental features and limitations. Cultural landscapes that contain the semantics of a special spiritual relationship to nature are quite widespread. Cultural landscapes have become one of the main recreational and tourist resources, so necessary for the development of ecological and educational tourism within our country. The concept of cultural landscape brings together many problems of conservation of natural and cultural heritage. “Society is increasingly aware of the shortcomings of sectoral principles and approaches in the field of environmental protection and territorial management and is naturally trying to compensate for them by returning to a holistic, systemic, integrated and territorially harmonious perception and structure of the surrounding space, whose name is the cultural landscape.”

Alexander Lyzhin. 2010

Currently, there are several classification characteristics of cultural landscapes:

• 1. According to the degree of cultural transformations and the viability of the landscape (purposefully created, naturally formed and associative landscapes)
• 2. According to the historical function of the landscape (agricultural, commercial, sacred, protected, memorial landscapes, etc.). In this case, the historical functions of the landscape determine its specific features. The functional orientation of landscapes indicates the reproducing processes and actions necessary to maintain them in a “working” state.
• 3. By type of culture (landscapes of estates, palaces and parks, monasteries, mining, military-historical, rural and urban). In this case, the types of culture have or had their own “handwriting” of landscape development. In accordance with these types of cultures, clearly defined types of landscape are formed: estate, palace and park, monastery, mining, military-historical (battlefield landscapes), archaic or traditional rural (peasant culture), urban (historical neighborhoods).
• 4. According to natural characteristics. In the system of cultural landscape typologies, along with culturological foundations, natural ones must also be present, since the cultural landscape is the result of the co-creation of man and nature. These grounds must be significant from the standpoint of the relationship between man and nature. Among such bases, the following are most often mentioned: hypsometric level and relief (landscapes low, flat, hilly, ridge, mountain, upland, etc.), the nature of vegetation (forest, meadow, swamp, steppe, etc.), relation to watercourses and water areas (seaside, lakeside, riverine), genesis and morphology (aquaglacial, dune, terrace, valley landscapes, etc.). As a rule, those characteristics are selected that are most significant in the process of creating a cultural landscape.

UNESCO documents use a typology of cultural landscapes to assess cultural landscapes, based on classification criteria such as the degree of cultural transformation and the vitality of the landscape. According to it, there are three main categories of cultural landscapes:

• 1. Purposefully created (man-made) landscapes. This category primarily includes landscape architecture objects - parks and gardens. They are created according to the artist’s plans and their characteristic feature is a certain planning composition. In their development, these objects are subordinated to goal-setting human activity, and therefore are of greatest interest in the cultural aspect. The purely functional purpose of individual elements of the cultural landscape of gardens and parks is always consistent with their aesthetic qualities. There are three subcategories of purposefully created landscapes:
• 1.1 Fossils - as a rule, they contain monuments of archaeological or paleontological heritage. These may be the remains of ancient cities, mound complexes, oases of ancient cultural communities that have changed their geographical area, shaped the appearance of the landscape, but are irretrievably gone or have lost their functions as bearers of cultural tradition. For example Muchu - Picchu.
• 1.2 Relict - in Russia these are estate, palace and park landscapes and some monastery landscapes.
• 1.2 Developing - landscapes that continue to exist thanks to human activity aimed at restoring, preserving and developing its objects and functions.
• 2. Naturally formed landscapes. In landscapes of this type, natural processes undergo certain changes as a result of long-term, targeted impacts. Natural components of the landscape adapt to these changes, resulting in the formation of a landscape complex where the processes of natural evolution and purposeful activity are intertwined in a complex way. Many rural and historic industrial landscapes provide examples. Such landscapes are most often formed thanks to aboriginal (indigenous) ecophilic extensive cultures that are in harmony with their surrounding nature and identify their world as part of nature. There are three subcategories of landscapes:
• 2.1 Fossils are archaeological landscapes that contain evidence of history, revealed through excavations, and are currently the exhibition space of a kind of “open-air museum”, i.e. pulled out of active socio-economic life.
• 2.2 Relict - unlike fossils, such landscapes continue to live and develop, but their heyday is already in the past. Basically, these are “fading” landscapes that find themselves surrounded by a cultural environment alien to them or under the influence of changed natural conditions.

The carriers of culture who created this landscape have already disappeared, but the landscape itself is preserved in its previous forms and palliative functions through the efforts of representatives of another culture, using it for their own purposes.

• 2.3 Developing - such landscapes may be associated with geographically determined indigenous cultures, such as the cultures of American Indians, African tribes, and northern Eurasian peoples. These cultures are vulnerable due to their dependence on the natural properties of the landscape, and its conservation is the most important condition for their existence.
• 3. Associative landscapes. This category includes landscapes with strong religious, artistic and cultural associations, as well as purely natural landscapes without any material objects of cultural heritage - memorial landscapes that preserve the memory of important events or great personalities, landscapes reflected in the works of outstanding artists, and sacred landscapes. Associative landscapes can be included in the historical and cultural space without changing their natural rhythm and evolution, as memorial places, places of creativity, sacred places, etc. At the same time, the cultural component is often presented not in material, but in mental form, by association of the object with some cultural phenomenon. In general, for a more complete description of the landscape, it is better to typology it according to several classification criteria. Thanks to this, it will increase

The level of systematization of landscape heritage and new ways to solve problems in landscape management will be outlined.

Currently, increasing attention is being paid to the protection of integral historical, cultural and natural territorial complexes, including: individual cultural monuments and their ensembles; characteristic types of historical buildings; landscape architecture objects; elements of engineering development of the territory; natural-technical systems; biocenoses adapted to traditional environmental management; other objects demonstrating the interaction and interdependence of natural and cultural objects, events and phenomena.

Such formations, constituting one of the most complex objects of historical and cultural heritage, belong to the category of “cultural landscape”. This is a specific category of cultural heritage objects.

The cultural landscape became the focus of scientific interests of both “naturalists” and “humanists.” Today, three main approaches to the interpretation of this concept are being developed:

● Classic geographical approach. A cultural landscape is considered as a special case of an anthropogenic landscape, purposefully and expediently formed in accordance with a specific program, historically adapted to natural conditions and possessing high aesthetic and functional qualities.

● Ethno-geographical approach. Representatives of this direction consider the cultural landscape as a certain area, which is the habitat and activity of a certain group of people - bearers of their specific cultural values. This is a natural landscape mastered by a certain ethnic group or religious community. A certain system of settlement and economic management, language (toponymy, first of all), spiritual culture (folklore, first of all) of this group were formed in the conditions of this area. Thus, the landscape is filled with cultural meaning.

● Information-axiological approach, characteristic of the concepts of the Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage, understands the cultural landscape as a joint product of man and nature, as a complex system of material and spiritual values ​​with a high degree of ecological, historical and cultural information content. A cultural landscape is a natural-cultural territorial complex formed as a result of the evolutionary interaction of nature and man, his sociocultural and economic activities and consisting of characteristic combinations of natural and cultural components that are in a stable relationship and interdependence. This approach takes into account the active role of intellectual and spiritual activity in shaping the cultural landscape. Cultural spiritual and intellectual values, stored and passed on from generation to generation, not only determine the formation and development of the cultural landscape, but are also part of it and are influenced by other material components. Cultural heritage, preserved in the form of material objects, traditional activities or information, is the most important part of the landscape, and in some cases the dominant one, determining all social processes in the territory. When “reading” a cultural landscape, it is necessary to focus on the cultural component, which must be considered together with the primacy of the territory itself and its natural component in particular.

An encouraging fact is that the category “cultural landscape” is highlighted and legally enshrined in both domestic and foreign practice. In one of UNESCO's guiding documents, the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (November 16, 1972), Article 1 also defines cultural landscapes as places of interest - “joint creations of man and nature.” The status of the cultural landscape as a heritage site was recorded in UNESCO documents in 1992, although trends towards its appearance arose already 20 years ago. UNESCO specialists have also developed and enshrined in a number of conventions and agreements a system for classifying various places of interest as “cultural landscapes”. The concept itself "cultural landscape" they defined it as the result of joint creativity between man and nature and reflecting the processes of evolution of society, occurring under the influence of natural, social, economic and cultural processes.

Procedures for the protection of cultural landscapes also provide for the compilation of their cadastre (or certification), the determination and approval of modes of use (similar to the determination of modes when allocating zones for the protection of monuments), and the registration of legal relations with the main users and owners within the boundaries of the landscape complex.

Each landscape can be characterized by a set of classification characteristics and typological categories, which will make it possible to create a formalized image of it in order to systematize the heritage. Based on the typology adopted in the UNESCO World Heritage guidelines, all cultural landscapes are divided into three main categories: man-made (purposefully created), evolved and associative.

Certain types of cultural landscape may coincide with other types of immovable historical and cultural monuments (museum-reserves, estate museums, palace and park ensembles); in other cases, its identification as a heritage object is an independent task. The main categories of the cultural landscape reflect the degree of participation of cultural processes in the formation of its morphostructures, and subcategories reflect the degree of its viability. For example, in the Kenozersky National Park, where cultural landscapes are recognized as one of the leading values ​​of the territory, they are classified as evolved relict ones and, as such, represent not only national but also global significance.

The formation of a cultural landscape is “a historical process that can be presented as the cultivation of a living space. By influencing nature, a person reproduces the cultural landscape as a symbol expressing his feelings, beliefs and values; therefore, the history of the cultural landscape is the history of spiritualization, or, according to Georgy Gachev, “domestication” by an ethnic group of the “variant of nature” given to it.”

Thus, the most important characteristics of a cultural landscape include its historical functions and the type of culture that determine the appearance of the landscape. These characteristics are the key to understanding the structure of the landscape, and, therefore, to managing it. For applied purposes, it is more convenient to use schemes where these characteristics serve as the logical basis for the division, since the development of management decisions involves actions, and actions will be determined by the function and type of culture.

Cultural landscapes can be distinguished by types of historical activity that determine sociocultural characteristics: rural (agricultural activities); residential (creation of settlements and their landscape arrangement); sacral; recreational; commercial (hunting, fishing, harvesting sea animals and aquatic invertebrates, procurement of food, medicinal, and industrial plants, logging and afforestation, reindeer husbandry); historical industrial (creation of quarries, dumps, mine workings in the process of extracting various minerals, creation of engineering structures commensurate with the landscape for the use of its energy, placement of engineering systems and production complexes in the landscape); reserve (preservation of the natural information content of the landscape, conducting scientific research work); memorial (preserving the memory of important historical events and outstanding personalities, broadcasting legends and historical narratives, celebrating memorable dates), etc.

Estate landscapes were formed under the influence of noble estate culture. The main morphostructures of such a landscape are a manor house with outbuildings, a park and/or gardens, ponds, alleys, a temple, functionally connected rural settlements, adjacent agricultural and forest lands.

The estate is an original and multifaceted phenomenon that has focused all the socio-economic, historical and cultural processes of Russia, and occupies a special place in the cultural heritage of our country. Among the main directions of studying this phenomenon are historical, genealogical, architectural, and art history.

The noble estate is a special cultural environment of Russia in the 18th-19th centuries. The phenomenon is complex, multidimensional. The whole world. The estate was a social-administrative, economic, architectural, park and cultural center; it synthesized the traditions of family and clan, noble and peasant culture, city and province, the culture of Russia and the West.

The estate’s contribution to the diversity and structure of the Russian landscape is no less valuable. The ancient manor is both a cultural and natural phenomenon. Even today, when many estates have been completely destroyed or are on the verge of destruction, fragments of estate complexes form an integral part of the landscape and create the historical background of the modern landscape. During the construction of the estate, not only the landscape image changed, but also the cultural center of the territory appeared. Estate complexes are located in the most picturesque places, and the establishment of parks predetermined an increase in biological diversity and, due to introduced species, formed the landscape diversity of the adjacent territories. The manor park is not only part of the natural complex, it carries a huge semantic load. The layout, shapes of ponds, selection of plants, design of alleys, architectural and sculptural elements - all this is a reflection of the philosophy of creating the park.

Today in Russia there is an intensive restoration of monasteries, monastery landscape. The endangered relict landscape is returning to a normal rhythm of life. Monasteries, as carriers of a certain culture, restore their architectural forms, interiors, and the nature of the development of historical monastic lands. The revived monastery begins to structure the surrounding space in a certain way, forming a monastic cultural landscape. At the same time, contradictions inevitably arise between the tasks of preserving cultural heritage and ensuring its accessibility and the tasks of functional rehabilitation of the monastery, therefore it is necessary to jointly develop measures to prevent possible conflict situations.

In addition to the architectural ensemble, which is the center of the monastery’s cultural landscape, its structure is complemented by monasteries, holy springs and wells, protected groves and other memorable places, functionally interconnected rural settlements (in the historical past assigned to the monastery - “monastery”), adjacent agricultural land and forest dachas.

In relation to such a category of cultural landscapes as urban landscape, a unanimous decision has not yet been made. The urban environment is a complex heritage site, and the natural component in it is not always clearly expressed. The historical appearance of famous urban-type settlements is largely distorted and changed by modern development, and only some of their fragments, but not the urban landscape as a whole, preserve the historical memory of the place.

Brief descriptions of city nominations classified as World Heritage sites demonstrate that city sites are far from equal. Some of them are outstanding architectural ensembles and striking examples of historical buildings, and some of them are urban landscapes. Among the Russian sites that have long been on the World Heritage List as architectural complexes and ensembles, one can name St. Petersburg, Novgorod, Suzdal, which are of unique value precisely as urban landscape complexes. But the patriarchal landscapes of the district towns of Russia also have undoubted value as heritage objects.

Some heritage sites have not yet been identified in terms of their historical and cultural value, and their protection has not been properly formalized. The landscapes of past wars, especially the Second World War, require awareness and development as a resource of cultural heritage. Particular attention should be paid to areas with well-preserved “war relief” - with systems of trenches and firing points, dugouts, shell and bomb craters. These objects need protection from the barbaric “black archeology” of seekers of military attributes, weapons and ammunition, as a result of which the microrelief changes and the landscape is distorted.

Practice shows that the mechanisms for protecting archaeological monuments are not sufficiently developed. Designation as a heritage site becomes relevant archaeological landscape. Development and plowing of land lead to the loss of archaeological monuments, the study of which would provide unique information. In many cases, the developer or land user does not even know about the existence of the archaeological site in need of protection or does not understand its value. Educational work will play a decisive role here. But destruction can also occur intentionally, consciously and professionally: “black archaeologists” extract valuable evidence of history for the purpose of selling them.

The cultural landscape is understood as the result of joint work, joint creativity of man and nature. This is a purposefully and expediently formed natural-cultural territorial complex. It has structural, morphological and functional integrity and develops in specific physical-geographical and cultural-historical conditions. The cultural landscape is a historically balanced system in which natural and cultural components form a single whole; they are not a background or factor in the influence of one element of the system in relation to another.

Man-made landscapes have a clear planning composition and spatial organization with the identification of a system-forming (landscape-forming) center or centers. Their appearance is maximally subordinated to the creative intent of their creators. This type of cultural landscape includes a large number of man-made elements that have changed or replaced natural formations. The functional purpose of individual elements always correlates with the overall aesthetics. These are landscapes of settlements, gardens and parks. Such landscapes are especially interesting from a cultural aspect.

Natural processes in evolved landscapes have been changed as a result of long-term, targeted human impacts. Natural components of the landscape adapt to anthropogenic influences. As a result of the evolution of nature and human creative activity, a landscape complex is formed. This type includes rural, individual ethnic, partly historical industrial and reclaimed landscapes. Evolved landscapes, in turn, are divided into subcategories: sustainable landscapes and fossil and relict landscapes that have become vulnerable in modern conditions.

Fossils are understood as landscapes that have stopped in their development due to the absence of the society that created them. They retain their external forms and structures by inertia. These are the landscapes of ancient cities, mound complexes, and other objects of ancient cultures that disappeared or changed their area.

Relict landscapes are fading landscapes. Although they continue to live and develop, adapting to new conditions, finding themselves surrounded by an alien cultural environment or changed natural conditions, their heyday is in the distant past. The bearers of the culture that shaped this landscape are often absent, but it continues to live, preserved by representatives of another culture. A relict landscape can retain its forms and functions if they are suitable for the purposes of the new population. This category of heritage is very vulnerable. Many of these landscapes were preserved because they had a sufficient “margin of safety.” These include estate, palace and park landscapes and some monastery landscapes.

TO associative landscapes may include natural or developed landscapes that have cultural value. The nature of development in this case is not decisive. These landscapes are included in the historical and cultural space indirectly, as sacred or memorable places, places of creativity. Their cultural component is often presented not even in material, but in mental form, through the association of a natural object with some cultural phenomena - historical events, personalities, works of art. The cultural and historical object that formed the core of the formation of the object may be lost or in a ruined state (an estate or a temple), but, nevertheless, the phenomenon of “memory of place” is preserved, the landscape remains semantically rich. In some cases, it is advisable to memorialize the landscape by conveying the historical content of the heritage in material symbols - memorial signs, reconstructions, etc.

The functional orientation of landscapes indicates the processes that reproduce them and the types of actions necessary to maintain them in a “working” state. For example, when developing a program for the preservation of cultural landscapes of the Borodino Field museum-reserve, they were identified as associative and as memorial exhibition. Subsequent differentiation was carried out according to their individual functional characteristics (museum, recreational, agricultural, etc.), which determined the structure of the main landscape values ​​and the actions planned for their conservation.

The type of culture is also of great importance for management purposes, if it had its own principles of landscape development and determined the appearance of the landscape (for example, we can distinguish estate landscapes, palace and park landscapes, monastery landscapes, mining landscapes, landscapes of battlefields (military culture), archaic rural landscapes (peasant culture ), urban (historical quarters), historical and archaeological). These types of landscapes determine the internal specialization of museum-reserves and national parks. Belonging to a type of culture determines the mechanisms of self-maintenance of the landscape, the role of bearers of cultural traditions, and possible ways of developing the landscape in the absence of a reproducing culture. Thus, in the Ugra National Park, all of the above-mentioned cultural types were represented to one degree or another, and each of them should have its own action strategy.

Certain types of cultural landscape completely coincide with other types of immovable historical and cultural monuments (museum-reserves, estate museums, palace and park ensembles); in other cases, its identification as a heritage object is an independent task.

The background type of cultural landscape is peasant rural landscape, the basis for the formation of which are historically interconnected rural settlements with adjacent field, meadow, forest and water lands. Its functional centers are historical settlements with preserved traditional building plans, economic, everyday and spiritual way of life. The core of such a settlement, as a rule, was the temple.

The traditional peasant landscape is now almost everywhere under threat and may be lost in the near future. In most regions of European Russia, peasant economic culture is losing its functions, rural settlements are turning into dacha settlements, therefore, the type of development is changing, the areas of cultivated land are being reduced, and they are also being populated. Particularly vulnerable are the relict archaic peasant landscapes of the European North, where a very high degree of sacralization of space, the traditional development of villages with their archaic artistic decor, a specifically structured planning organization of the territory, and a high mosaic nature of the land have been preserved.

A living cultural landscape must reproduce itself and needs to maintain its traditional types of activity - economic and/or sociocultural. In addition, along with the material component in the cultural landscape there is always a mental one. It is determined by folklore traditions, religious beliefs, attitude to historical events, that is, the presence of living culture. The state of the entire heritage complex often depends on the preservation of various forms and manifestations of this culture.

To assess a cultural landscape, it is necessary to take into account both its cultural and natural advantages, in particular the harmonious interaction of the creative forces of nature and man, aesthetic and associative values, representativeness and diversity, authenticity and landscape integrity, the presence of all key elements, processes, technologies that determine the appearance and landscape functions. UNESCO experts are considering the possibility of combining these two groups of criteria and creating a single system. As a heritage site, additional requirements are placed on the cultural landscape. Thus, it must representatively represent the corresponding geocultural region and demonstrate with a high degree of expressiveness the distinctive features of such a region, including the nature of the relationship between man and nature, for example, traditional environmental management technologies that take into account local environmental features and limitations. In addition, many cultural landscapes contain the semantics of a special spiritual (sacred) relationship to nature.

The process of urbanization is an objective reality that has to be taken into account, but it is possible and necessary to preserve the appearance of the most representative and expressive rural settlements in landscape terms, influencing the formation of the image of perception of the landscape. In this regard, the role of national parks, which include this category of cultural landscape, is important. The historical appearance of the rural landscape and the image of the Russian village in many cases are an integral part of the perception of the nature of Russia, for the preservation of which national parks are created. In order to prevent the destruction of the historically authentic environment, it is necessary to identify villages with relatively well-preserved historical buildings or fragments thereof and introduce a special urban planning regime for them. There are not many such sites left, and giving them a special status will enhance the recreational attractiveness of the territory and stimulate its development while preserving the architectural appearance and economic structure. The practice of the Kenozersky National Park is indicative, which acquires objects that do not have the status of monuments, for example, peasant huts, for its main funds. They house various park services, guest houses, and host environmental camps. Preference is given to the restoration of the existing housing stock rather than the construction of new buildings, which is economically unprofitable, but ensures the authenticity and preservation of the historical layout and development of the northern Russian village, which here serves as the center of the cultural landscape and is of particular ethnographic value.

Related information.