The early history of the Nagas is shrouded in obscurity and many theories abound of their origin  and  migration.  How  and  when  they  came  to  settle  in  the  north‐eastern  region  of India is an unsettled question. \nSeveral  traditions  exist  within  the  multi‐ethnic  Naga  communities  on  their  origins. \nAccording to the oral traditions passed down through songs, folklore and word of mouth the Ao emerged from six stones at Long‐terok, which exists to this day near Chungliyimti, the first legendry settlement of the Ao. ‘Long’ meaning stone and ‘Terok’ six, refers to the six stones from which emerged three pairs of male and female progenitors whom the Ao claim  to  be  their  ancestors.  The  Ao  is  distinguished  with  two  phratries  –Chongli  and Mongsen. The Chongli claim  that the  three males and  females who emerged at Longtrok were Tongpok and his sister Lendina, Longpok with his sister Yongmenala and Longjakrep with  his  sister  Elongshe.  They  were  the  first  human  beings  who  emerged  at  Longtrok. \nEach  male  member  along  with  his  sister  formed  the  three  phratries  of  the  Chongli. \nTongpok founded the Imsong‐Pongen clan, Longpok the Longkumer clan and Longjakrep with  his  sister  founded  the  Jamir  clan  respectively.  The  three  siblings  intermarried  and through  these  marriages,  the  Ao  clans  came  into  existence  and  a  well‐  knitted  clan exogamy marriage evolved that is followed to this day. 

East Asian region is developed a rich of variety in the intangible heritage manifests, from oral traditions, performing arts, customs, and rituals to festivals, clothing, crafts, and food throughout the centuries. However, as with other counties in the Asia-Pacific region, which is a treasure house of ICH, traditional cultural heritage of East Asia was in a crisis of extinction due to shifts in industrial structures and the population outflow of younger generations to urban areas. In response, the Republic of Korea and Japan introduced the concept of intangible cultural heritage in policies related to safeguarding cultural heritage more than fifty years ago. Mongolia, with the support of its respective government, followed suit by establishing an institutional foundation for national ICH inventory making and ICH safeguarding after ratifying the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003). Moreover, in relation to ICH safeguarding activities, UNESCO Category 2 Centres, which support ICH safeguarding activities, have been simulataneously going through the establishment process in the Republic of Korea, China, and Japan. As a well-intentioned objective for the future activities, the three centres are making efforts to build a cooperative mechanism among themselves. Another effort made in the region is the establishment of the ICH safeguarding system in Mongolia. The government of Mongolia has drawn up a national ICH inventory and identified bearers as well. The countries in East Asia have been very active in safeguarding, and their participation at regional and international levels. Therefore, countries in the region need to build trust and collaborative relationships while safeguarding ICH at national, regional, and international levels.\n\n- Ratified the ICH Convention in 2005; conducted survey in 2009 and updated in 2016.\n- As of March 2018, has 7 ICH elements on the RL, 7 elements on the USL, and 1 accredited NGO.

ICHCAP published the book Living Heritage Series – Traditional Martial Arts in collaboration with UNESCO International Centre of Martial Arts (ICM). The Living Heritage Series is a serial publication on regional/national transmission and safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage elements. It focuses on a different topic each time, discussing the relevant intangible cultural heritage of various regions to raise the visibility of cultural diversity emphasized by the UNESCO.\n\nLiving Heritage Series-Traditional Martial Arts showcases creative and historical traditional Martial Arts from around the world through contributions from 19 writers in various countries.

The 2016 Sub-Regional Meeting for Intangible Cultural Heritage Safeguarding in Northeast Asia: The Role of the Media in Raising Awareness about Intangible Cultural Heritage, jointly organized by ICHCAP and the UNESCO Beijing Office and hosted by the Mongolian National Commission for UNESCO, was held on 10 and 11 October 2016 in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.\n\nThis report is composed of country reports and case studies discussed at the meeting and generated participation from five Northeast Asian Member States—namely DPRK, Japan, Mongolia, China, and ROK—and international experts from the Asia Broadcasting Union. In addition, a recommended action document was prepared by the country representatives and experts.

ICHCAP published a book in collaboration with banglanatak dot com, an UNESCO accredited NGO, about ICH NGOs’ contribution to sustainable development. The 29 NGOs’ story showcase us how intangible cultural heritage can drive, enable, and guarantee achieving SDGs along each of its three dimensions –the economic, social, and environment-underpinned by peace and security as fundamental prerequisites for sustainable development.\n\n

“Without memory, there is no culture. Without memory, there would be no civilization, no society, no future.” — Elie Wiesel.\nAs a living heritage, intangible cultural heritage means that memories you hold and memories I hold represent shared and penetrating history. Contemporary society has experienced a loss of intimacy among people and has seen the environment of transmission changed beyond recognition. However, intangible cultural heritage reveals its presence, quietly saying, “I am still here next to you.” Let’s visit Kyrgyzstan, Bhutan, Laos, and Samoa to see what kind of voice they give us.

This Promotional book is a result of researches done by researchers of the Research Institute of Culture and Information and it was published by finance assistance of the International Information and Networking Center for Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Asia-Pacific Region under auspices of UNESCO (ICHCAP). The Promotional book contains of elements of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Tajiks described in seven chapters with fresh and colorful illustrations.

Kathakali (lit. story- play) is a highly sophisticated and stylized semi-classical dance drama prevalent all over Kerala. It evolved amalgamating features from all folk and classical performing art forms of Kerala. \nKathakali as a performing art evolved from Ramanattam. The King of Kottarakkara adapted eight episodes from the Ramayana as Ramanattam. However, in the 17th century, the King of Vettathu Nadu modified Ramanattam to develop a classical dance-drama, the Kathakali.\nKathakali derives its themes from the Indian epics, the Ramayana, the Mahabharata and the Bhagavata Purana. The language used for the songs in Kathakali is a mixture of Malayalam and Sanskrit (manipravalam). For theatric communication, the actor uses dance movements, a codified language of gestures and facial expressions. Kathakali displays great dexterity and potential for the actor to show his histrionic and interpretative skills through resorting to an elaborate method of acting.\nThe performance of Kathakali follows a particular sequence. At dusk, the percussionists play their instruments to announce the event (keli). The traditional lamp is lit in front of the performing area (vilakku veppu). The horizontal drum is played to signal the commencement (arangu keli or suddha manddalam), and singers recite the invocation (sloka). \nTwo performers dance a ritual invocation behind the curtain, salute the deities. \nAnother prayer dance is performed in front of the curtain, followed by the ensemble of the drums (chenda, maddalam, chengila, elathalam). The actual story (katha) begins only after these preliminaries. \nIn Kathakali, the make-up and costume represent different traits of character. The colours are symbolic; green represents satwik (pious and virtuous characters); red patch on a green face to represent rajasi’(valorous characters); and a thadi (beard) is added to represents tamasic (evil traits of a character). Elaborate costumes and intricate face make-up In Kathakali is done to mask the human face and invest it with super-human characteristics. \nKathakali has transformed over the recent years from all-night performances in temples and other sites, to three-hour presentations in contemporary settings. The plays have become abridged to suit the tastes of a new audience.

Based on the ICHCAP Field Survey on Intangible Cultural Heritage Safeguarding Efforts in some South-East Asian countries (2009-2012), this summary provides a brief overview on the ICH situation in Cambodia, Thailand, Viet Nam, Indonesia, the Philippines, Laos, and Myanmar . The summary focuses mainly on ICH safeguarding systems, safeguarding policies, and ICH inventories as well as on pending issues and the urgent safeguarding needs of these countries. Moreover, information on the main entities in charge of ICH safeguarding and opinions of each country on the issue of community involvement are provided. To give a quick overview these countries’ participation in ICH safeguarding at the international level, some additional information related to UNESCO is specified as well. Apart from the main topic, information on the situation of intellectual property related to ICH safeguarding in each country is included. This survey report offers a large sample of the diverse ICH situations in South-East Asian countries. Each country has a different background on the issue of intangible heritage. \n\nFor instance, Indonesia is the only country participating in the field survey that has a programme in the Register of Best Practices. Viet Nam developed ICH-related definitions in its Law on Cultural Heritage; whereas the Philippines has a strong legislative background and solid network of public structures protecting cultural heritage. Cambodia recognises the link between cultural heritage and development of national economy and runs relevant activities on promoting traditional culture while maximizing its economic benefits to the country. For Laos, training local artists rather than researchers in ICH safeguarding, including IPR, is deemed to be essential, as the artists are the important resources that master their arts. Among the South-East Asian participants, Thailand and Myanmar are the newest to approach ICH safeguarding. Although all countries are concerned about the threats ICH faces, most countries participating in the survey haven’t defined ICH and haven’t established national ICH lists. Meanwhile, drawing up an inventory of traditional cultural expressions in different forms—register, cultural map, or database—is a common activity in these countries. Moreover, each country expresses a high degree of motivation and encouragement for safeguarding ICH, sharing experiences, and promoting international cooperation.\n\n- Ratified the ICH Convention in 2006; conducted survey in 2009.\n- As of June 2013, has two elements on the RL and one accredited NGO.

In 2011 and 2012, field surveys were conducted to examine the intellectual property issues that could arise in the process of ICH information building and sharing. The survey was conducted in eleven countries—Cook Islands, Fiji, India, Kazakhstan, Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Viet Nam. The purpose of the surveys was to highlight the IP-related problems that ICH-related organisations may encounter while conducting ICH information–related activities, such as identification, documentation, digitisation, etc., and promoting the groundwork for a guide to protect IP-related aspects of ICH in the process of information building and sharing.

Based on the ICHCAP Field Survey on Intangible Cultural Heritage Safeguarding Efforts in some South-East Asian countries (2009-2012), this summary provides a brief overview on the ICH situation in Cambodia, Thailand, Viet Nam, Indonesia, the Philippines, Laos, and Myanmar . The summary focuses mainly on ICH safeguarding systems, safeguarding policies, and ICH inventories as well as on pending issues and the urgent safeguarding needs of these countries. Moreover, information on the main entities in charge of ICH safeguarding and opinions of each country on the issue of community involvement are provided. To give a quick overview these countries’ participation in ICH safeguarding at the international level, some additional information related to UNESCO is specified as well. Apart from the main topic, information on the situation of intellectual property related to ICH safeguarding in each country is included. This survey report offers a large sample of the diverse ICH situations in South-East Asian countries. Each country has a different background on the issue of intangible heritage. For instance, Indonesia is the only country participating in the field survey that has a programme in the Register of Best Practices. Viet Nam developed ICH-related definitions in its Law on Cultural Heritage; whereas the Philippines has a strong legislative background and solid network of public structures protecting cultural heritage. Cambodia recognises the link between cultural heritage and development of national economy and runs relevant activities on promoting traditional culture while maximizing its economic benefits to the country. For Laos, training local artists rather than researchers in ICH safeguarding, including IPR, is deemed to be essential, as the artists are the important resources that master their arts. Among the South-East Asian participants, Thailand and Myanmar are the newest to approach ICH safeguarding. Although all countries are concerned about the threats ICH faces, most countries participating in the survey haven’t defined ICH and haven’t established national ICH lists. Meanwhile, drawing up an inventory of traditional cultural expressions in different forms—register, cultural map, or database—is a common activity in these countries. Moreover, each country expresses a high degree of motivation and encouragement for safeguarding ICH, sharing experiences, and promoting international cooperation.\n\n- Ratified the ICH Convention in 2013; conducted survey in 2016.\n- As of March 2018, has 1 ICH element on the RL and no accredited NGOs.