The Authenticity of the Hidden Christians’ Villages in Nagasaki: Issues in Evaluation of Cultural Landscapes

: Located in the north-western part of Kyushu, “Hidden Christians Sites in the Nagasaki Region” were designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2018. This serial property consists of twelve sites, including the Christian villages that bear unique testimony to a cultural tradition nurtured under a long period of religious prohibition. Based on ﬁeldwork research at Kirishitan villages in Hirado City, this paper shows how the global conservation strategies affect the local people and the sustainability of their cultural tradition. Comparing UNESCO and Japanese cultural landscape protection policies, I argue that the evaluation and selection of sites that begin at the local authorities and stakeholders’ level, is eventually reduced to tangible properties ready-made for tourist consumption. Here, the evaluation subsides under the UNESCO authenticity criteria and narrow governmental interests towards the cultural tradition it is supposed to protect. Therefore, for the protection of cultural landscapes and the living traditions, the decisions by cultural heritage protection authorities should be carefully made, based on scientiﬁc research of a cultural tradition, and in the interest of the tradition’s living successors.


Introduction
Compared to many other places around the world known for Christian persecution, the Japanese case is unique in that despite the cruelty of the persecution, which included the closure of the country and the expulsion of all foreigners, the Japanese Christians maintained their faith underground for more than two hundred years without the help of missionaries. The will to preserve the faith was so strong that it continued after the ban was lifted. This is most notable in the Nagasaki area, on Ikitsuki Island in particular, where communities of the so-called Kakure Kirishitan (the Hidden Christians) have, until today, handed down rituals and prayers combining Latin, Portuguese, and Japanese words. Researchers from Japan and elsewhere have cautioned since the 1950s to record this remarkable heritage. This was finally addressed when Japan decided to nominate the "Churches and Christian sites in Nagasaki" for the World Heritage Site.
This article discusses the nomination process and investigates primary and secondary UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) and Japan Agency for Cultural Affairs (ACA) sources to show reasons for excluding the Kakure Kirishitan from Japan's nomination of the "Hidden Christian Sites in Nagasaki region" for WHS. Some authors have already pointed out the "unfairness" of the nomination, which "erased faith" from Japan's history [1]. Based on an analysis of the prefectural government's actions, the Catholic Church of Nagasaki, and tourist associations, Yamanaka [2] claims the Catholic Church and Prefecture's interests dominated the nomination process from the very beginning. In the heritage-making process, the Catholic Church tended towards re-establishing its long history in Japan, thus focusing on numerous churches built during the persecution era [2]. Previous research focused on commodification of Churches and Christian sites as tourism resources [3], sharing Christian heritage as an honourable identity [3,4], the issues of separating churches and sites from their local religious to regional historic heritage context and commodification of rural spaces in Nagasaki [5], and consuming religion as culture [2,4,5].
However, my intention in this study is not to address the tourism interests and the motives of the Catholic Church in the process, but the official global and local criteria by which the value of the Hidden Christians' villages was determined. The study contributes to previous research by providing a detailed analysis and discussion of criteria applied in evaluations of heritage. With this, it intends to identify the weak points in the currently existing official criteria of the International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and ACA Cultural Property Protection Acts and suggest additional precautions when dealing with so-called "difficult heritage".
Christian villages were evaluated and selected using authenticity and integrity criteria in the category of cultural landscape. The concept of cultural landscape, focusing on the outstanding interaction between people and their environment, was recognised in the 1992 UNESCO World Heritage Convention. UNESCO is the first international legal instrument to protect cultural landscapes in times of rapid demolishing of natural habitats. Cultural landscapes represent the "combined works of nature and of man", as designated in Article 1 of the Convention [6]. Cultural landscapes "are a symbol of the growing recognition of the fundamental links between local communities and their heritage, humankind and its natural environment" [7]. The current Operational Guidelines for the World Heritage Convention propose that cultural landscapes reflect techniques of sustainable land-use, and a specific spiritual relation to nature [8]. Hence, the protection of cultural landscapes can contribute to modern sustainable land-use techniques and can maintain or enhance natural values in the landscape. The continued existence of traditional forms of land-use also supports biological diversity in many regions of the world. Therefore, the protection of traditional cultural landscapes helps maintain biological diversity [8].
The concept of authenticity, as the transmitter of the values and significance of cultural landscape, together with the concept of integrity, has played a significant role in the process of registration, conservation, and management of cultural landscapes [9]. Authenticity was first used as the initial criterion for assessment of property in the World Heritage List [10], while the ICOMOS Committee [11] had introduced the measure of integrity as a key criterion for registration. Obtaining the integrity criterion and preserving it are considered the purposes of heritage conservation and management [9]. The more the measure of authenticity is capable of transmitting values and significance of the heritage, and the stronger the measure of integrity for maintaining them over time, the more likely a property will last.
In this paper, I examine how these concepts are defined in UNESCO, ICOMOS, and ACA documents, and how they were applied within the heritage-making/nomination process. Based on a case study of the World Heritage Site "Hidden Christian sites in Nagasaki region", I analyse and compare UNESCO and ACA selection criteria and show their perspectives on the sites and tradition. The results show that they differ significantly in the aspect of the intangible living community. The analysis of documents and interviews with local officials illustrates that despite Japan's proclaimed high value [12,13] of the intangible and living heritage, in practice, the state party selected "unchanged", historic, tangible, and easy-to-manage sites to maximise their potential for inscription on the World Heritage List (WHL).

Conceptual Framework
Three concepts informed the data analysis in this study: Cultural landscape, authenticity, and integrity. As the definitions and conceptualizations of these three concepts have changed over time and show cultural differences, this section looks at how they are defined by the main authorities (UNESCO and ACA) involved in the nomination process.
Clarifying this will help us understand how the different perspectives of cultural landscapes and of their maintenance affect the selection of candidates and how the authorities negotiate a common understanding in preparing the nomination dossier.

The Concept of Cultural Landscape in UNESCO
Based on case studies of World Heritage cultural landscapes from all regions of the world, Rössler highlights the novelties in the UNESCO Convention's implementation through the landscape approach [7]. The most evident results of the landscape approach are the shift from exceptional natural sites and national parks without people to designated natural heritage sites in a landscape with people and communities [7]. This shift motivated State Parties around the world to identify their rural landscapes as new potential WHS. The inclusion of cultural landscapes substantially impacted the ways of implementing the World Heritage Convention, including the State Parties and their selection processes [7]. Extensive changes were made to property's management, so that legal provisions and the involvement of local people in the nomination process became necessary [14][15][16]. Accordingly, changes were introduced in the Operational Guidelines. UNESCO divided cultural landscapes into three categories: Landscapes designed and intentionally created by man; organically evolved landscapes, further split into: (i) A relict or fossil landscape in which an evolutionary process has come to an end, but where its distinguishing features are still visible; and (ii) a continuing landscape which retains an active social role in contemporary society associated with a traditional way of life and in which the evolutionary process is still in progress and where it exhibits significant material evidence of its evolution over time; and associative cultural landscapes: The inclusion of such landscapes is justifiable by the powerful religious, artistic, or cultural associations of the natural element rather than the material cultural evidence.
The category of associative cultural landscape has been vital for recognising intangible values and the heritage of local communities and indigenous peoples and their relationship with the environment [7]. There are many places and sacred sites with associative cultural values embedded in cultural tradition and practice. Indigenous peoples had protected their sacred sites and woods long before the categorisation into natural parks and landscapes. With their means of protection, they contributed to preserving these unique sites, biological diversity, and culture transmitted to further generations [7]. Unique land-use systems and the continued work of people over centuries to adapt to the natural environment were also recognized as enriching biological diversity. Furthermore, "the introduction of cultural landscapes into the World Heritage field made people aware that sites are not isolated islands. They have to be seen in the ecological system and with their cultural linkages in time and space beyond single monuments and strict nature reserves" [7,17].
The concept of cultural landscape represents an evolution in protected area thinking and heritage conservation. The introduction of the cultural landscape category in general and the intangible have also influenced Japan's cultural heritage evaluations, such as the rural landscape and even historical buildings, which are now more confidently approached from a wider cultural landscape perspective.

The Concept of Cultural Landscape in Japan
In Japan, the cultural properties protection system has been significantly expanded in recent years, with more diversified measures to accommodate the lifestyle and daily work in communities [18]. Recently, more emphasis has been given to promoting cultural tourism and local industries to facilitate economic development and local sustainability. The promotion, dissemination, protection, and utilisation of cultural properties in Japan has been handled by the Agency for Cultural Affairs (ACA) since 1968. As the ACA worked with a limited budget, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, and others later also became involved in the promotion of culture to provide additional funding [18]. However, their focus is on urban planning, agriculture, and local revitalization, not culture per se. To provide a more holistic approach instead of such "categorial protection" [18], in 2008, the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Historic Landscape in a Community was enacted under multiple governmental sections responsible for cultural promotion, tourism, and agriculture. This act stipulates various measures to support the historic atmosphere conservation by extending financial support and tax incentives [19]. The historic landscape was defined as a landscape with mixed components of historic buildings and daily operations of people, reflecting the local history and tradition [19]. With this act, a more comprehensive approach to heritage protection which integrates tangible and intangible heritage protection, was established (e.g., improvement of old buildings, utilization of historic buildings through promoting traditional festivals, and human resources development). This new approach shows that "the cultural properties protection system has evolved from a top-down system to a more flexible bottom-up system with consideration of local demands" [18]. This development indicates a closer integration of cultural properties with local daily life and a stronger inclusion of cultural properties of local importance into the overall protection system projects.
It could be stipulated that the earlier 1996 amendment to the Law for the Protection of Cultural Property, introduced as the system of "Registered Cultural Properties of Japan", provided an important basis for the treatment of cultural heritage related to land and lifestyles. This system was created to pass on to future generations the large number and variety of modern cultural properties which, due to the development of national land, urban planning, and lifestyles changes, were in danger of disappearing before they could be appreciated by society. It was intended to complement the existing designation system, which was based on a system of notification, guidance, and advice. Municipalities could establish and promote their own plans, such as repair and enhancement of the residents' daily life, while preserving the historic landscapes. The national government classified important preservation districts for groups of historic buildings after receiving the applications from municipalities (ACA). This amendment shows that at the national level, there have been policies providing protection for intangible cultural elements, such as lifestyles and preservation of environment, even before the category of cultural landscape was officially introduced in 2005.
The Japanese government formulated its own cultural landscape preservation policy based on two driving forces [20]: The UNESCO' growing demands for adding cultural landscapes to the World Heritage List, and the national movement to preserve satoyama (areas surrounding villages for common use). Much of the land formerly described as satoyama was redeveloped for residential or industrial use due to rampant urbanization of Japan after the Second World War. To promote satoyama conservation, environmentalists and ecologists claimed the satoyama as a part of the rural setting that should be conserved. Gradually, the term has come to refer to almost every element of the rural setting, including mountains, forests, residential space, paddy fields, and rivers [21][22][23].
The two aforementioned forces influenced the definition of cultural landscapes in the Japanese Law for the Protection of Cultural Property, where it is defined as "landscape areas that have developed in association with the modes of life or livelihoods of the people and the natural features of the region, which are indispensable for an understanding of our people's modes of life and livelihoods" (Article 2, Paragraph 1, Item 5 of the Law for the Protection of Cultural Property) [20]. The ACA emphasised that the "of the region" part is important, as "the law is intended to actively protect the unique features left behind in the region, not just those that have been highly evaluated at the national level, such as scenic spots" [24]. In addition, "the law itself does not protect the livelihoods of the people who live in the area, but it does protect the landscapes that have been created as a result of their livelihoods" [24]. This new law was established to protect scenic areas, such as terraced rice paddies and satoyama. Specifically, the Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) selects and supports "Important Cultural Landscapes" based on requests from prefectures or municipalities in areas where landscape planning areas or landscape districts have been designated. This protection system is less restrictive than that of designated cultural properties, and it is locally driven. As many areas with cultural landscapes face depopulation and ageing, management entities must be developed and utilize the cultural landscapes to protect them. Among the three kinds of cultural landscapes as defined by UNESCO mentioned above, the second one, "organically evolving landscapes," is said to have the greatest impact on Japan's cultural landscape protection system, as it is in the vicinity of agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and archaeological sites, and together with these, it represents a nationally designated "Important Cultural Landscape" [24].
Although the system of protecting cultural landscapes focuses only on tangible objects [20], it is created and maintained through local people's intangible activities. Therefore, it is very important to show how people maintain such cultural properties. Landscapes that are already protected in Japan, either as "tangible cultural properties" or "monuments", emphasize the continuity of local peoples' livelihoods and daily lives. Thus, the definitions of cultural landscape in Japanese law and the World Heritage Convention's definition differ in a significant point. The Convention includes the past "relict landscapes in which an evolutionary process came to an end at some time in the past" as fossil cultural landscapes (see UNESCO Operational Guidelines [25]) whereas the Japanese law defines cultural landscapes only as those that are currently engaged in and maintained and nurtured by people. The law is designed to protect the (living) cultural landscape (Article 2, Paragraph 1-5 of the Law for the Protection of Cultural Property) (Law for the Protection of Cultural Property 2007). Therefore, to protect the cultural landscape, the whole system needs to be protected and made sustainable. In other words, the natural environment and the lives of the people who live in it are all essential for the maintenance of the cultural landscape [20]. The living aspects in cultural landscapes have been assessed with authenticity measures often modified to address the dynamism and evolving nature of the living heritage [14].

Authenticity and Intangible Heritage in Cultural Landscapes
The former Operational Guidelines defined authenticity in broad terms but suggested that cultural values must be "truthfully and credibly expressed through a variety of attributes" to maintain authenticity [26]. These attributes included form and design, materials and substance, and location and setting. Adding to these rather tangible attributes in the heritage protection system, the intangible notions were introduced in the Nara Document on Authenticity [27] which was later integrated into the Operational Guidelines (Annex IV of the Operational Guidelines of 2005). The Nara Document stated that authenticity of cultural heritage must be judged in its own cultural context and that the cultural heritage diversity demands respect for different cultures and their belief systems. Authenticity also included the use of original objects (Annex IV: 93-107; Annex VI: 113-119). The use of original objects can be considered authentic if made, produced or enacted by the local people according to customs and traditions and has meanings of traditional origin [27]. The intangible notions of use and function, spirit, traditions, techniques, and management systems were now considered important [28]. The Nara Document (1994) [27] focused on notions like "cultural diversity" and "indigenous culture" and established the "socio-cultural values" as a main criterion for explaining authenticity and the process of conservation [29].
Another document particularly relevant for cultural landscape is the 2003 UN Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Heritage, which emphasises the intangible cultural heritage or living heritage as a basis for cultural diversity and its maintenance as a guarantee for continuing creativity [30]. Later, the 2005 World Heritage Convention included those criteria for "test of authenticity" in the operational guidelines (paragraph 82) to assess the measure of authenticity [31]. Based on the definition provided in the Operational Guidelines of the World Heritage in 2005, the concept of authenticity refers to a property's capability to transmit the cultural significance of a place. The raised ideas on the meaning of authenticity show the importance of the concept and a global consensus its role in in the heritage sites conservation process [9]. However, due to differences among cultures, it is not possible to judge authenticity based upon fixed criteria.
Respect for all cultures requires cultural heritage to be identified and assessed in its own cultural context and in a flexible structure [9]. For instance, according to the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Heritage, the intangible cultural heritage, besides preserving and perpetuating tradition and adhering to fixed principals over time, continually finds new shapes and is reproduced. Hence, the evolution and dynamism in the nature of intangible cultural heritage and cultural landscapes, which have tangible and intangible aspects, have complicated redefining authenticity concepts [32]. Some experts have, thus, not been successful in redefining authenticity in a flexible framework, because of not paying enough attention to the dynamic nature of intangible heritage and its great role in explaining cultural landscape [30]. Review of literature and perspectives relevant to authenticity reveals that "social-cultural authenticity", besides "material change" and "considering the creativity aspect while maintaining its continuity over several generations", has been effective in designating authenticity [33] and highlights the importance of conservation and durability of the intangible aspect besides the tangible aspect of authenticity [9,33,34].
In the following, I show, based on a concrete evaluation process, how the authenticity criteria were used and what impact they had on the evaluation of heritage at the local level, in the context of the Hidden Christian sites in the Nagasaki region in Japan.

Case Study of the "Hidden Christians Sites in the Nagasaki Region"
Located in the Nagasaki and Kumamoto Prefectures in the north-western part of the Kyushu Island of the Japanese archipelago, "Hidden Christians Sites in the Nagasaki Region" (Nagasaki to Amakusa chihō no Senpuku Kirishitan kanren isan) were designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2018. The site consists of twelve locations: one castle remains, one cathedral, and ten villages (see Figure 1). The sites reflect the earliest activities of Christian missionaries and settlers in Japan, including the earliest phase of the encounter, a subsequent era of prohibition and persecution of the Christian faith and settlers, and the final phase of the revitalization of Christian communities after the official lifting of the prohibition [35]. The Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property is that these sites bear testimony to Hidden Christians, who secretly practiced their faith despite a ban on Christianity from the 17th to the 19th century, and their unique cultural tradition in the Nagasaki region [35].
The Hidden Christians' sites, however, were not initially nominated, as the UNESCO Tentative list from 2007 shows. Japan's nomination firstly aimed at the conservation of Catholic churches in remote villages of Nagasaki. Based on frequent discussions between the Nagasaki Prefectural Government and ICOMOS, the representation of Christian heritage in the nomination dossier shifted its focus several times, including some new elements and excluding others.
The heritage-making process formally took off with the insertion of the "Churches and Christian Sites in Nagasaki" into the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List in 2007. Multiple actors participated in this process: Nagasaki Prefecture, municipalities, tourism industry, non-profit organizations, mass media, Catholics, priests, and local residents [36]. Primarily, however, the effort for World Heritage listing did not come from Nagasaki Prefecture or the tourism industry, nor was it driven to benefit the local economy. It was a grassroots movement to preserve the churches in villages far from Nagasaki [4]. In September 2001, a citizen's voluntary group called "The World Heritage Association" was formed with the aim of promoting the registration of the churches as WH sites [5]. The group consisted of about 80 members from churches, local businesses, and related municipalities. At the beginning, Nagasaki Prefecture took a distant position towards this religiously motivated movement. However, after listing the churches and Christian heritage in Nagasaki as a candidate for the UNESCO WHL in 2007, the Nagasaki Prefectural Government became actively involved in the campaign to promote its designation [36,37]. The name of the nominated properties in the original nomination dossier of 2015 was "Churches and Christian Sites in Nagasaki", which described fourteen components reflecting the initial orientation of the nomination movement (see Figure 2 reflecting the 13 sites on the Tentative List of 2014).  Comparing the component parts of the initial Tentative file (see Figure 2) with those in the Nomination File approved by UNESCO (see Figure 1), a radical shift of attention from Churches to Christian villages becomes clear. The villages were chosen as they bear testimony to Hidden Christians and their unique cultural tradition.

Who Are the Hidden Christians?
Even though Christianity is a minority religion in Japan, since its inscription on the World Heritage Tentative List in 2007, Christian heritage has become an object of regional, national, and international interest. In the history of Christianity in Japan and Asia, the negative aspects, such as expulsion of missionaries and persecution of Japanese Christians, are emphasized. However, the movement for WHL aimed to draw attention to the universal positive value of the Christian heritage in Nagasaki.
The history of Christianity in Japan began in 1549, with the Jesuit missionary Francis Xavier's (1506-1552) arrival in Kagoshima. The mission was a great success, with about 300,000 people becoming Christians by 1600. However, in 1597, the persecution of Christian missionaries began. By order of the imperial regent of the time, Toyotomi Hideyoshi (1537-1598), twenty-six men and boys were crucified. Less than twenty years later, the powerful centralized military government, the Tokugawa shogunate (1600-1868), banned Christianity and deported all missionaries. Some of the Japanese Christians who survived the repression of the 16th century did not abandon their faith. In some villages and on the islands of Nagasaki and Kumamoto, people secretly continued the prayers taught by the missionaries and hid Christian items in their homes at the risk of their lives. As they continued to practice Christianity despite the ban, they were referred to by authorities as Senpuku Kirishitan. The term translates as "secret Christians", "illegal Christians" or "underground Kirishitan" [39] and describes Christian believers, their faith and organization in the period of prohibition of Christianity [3]. Kirishitan comes from the Portuguese word Christão and referred to the Catholic religion or the followers of the Catholic religion after Xavier's arrival in Japan until the government's prohibition of the Kirishitan religion was abolished in 1873 [39].
After the country's reopening to the West in the middle of the 19th century, the missionaries returned to Nagasaki. In 1864, some Christians appeared in the newly built Oura Cathedral, after two and a half centuries in hiding. To confess their faith, they whispered in the ears of the French missionary Father Bernard Petitjean, "We are all of the same heart as you (Our faith is the same as your faith)" [40]. However, even though the country had opened to the outside world and accepted freedom of religion, further hardships arose. Prior to the formalization of religious freedom in 1873, thousands of Christians were found in hiding in Nagasaki and elsewhere, which caused further killings and expulsions of more than 3000 Christians to various parts of Japan.
When the prohibition of Christianity was finally lifted, the long-lasting suppression of Christianity came to an end. It is noteworthy, however, that about half of the Christians in hiding, more than 35,000, refused to reunite with the Catholic Church. They refused to join because they would have had to adjust or abandon many of their rituals and religious objects. They instead chose to continue the rituals and prayers they had been taught since childhood. The researchers called them Kakure Kirishitan (Hidden Christians), to distinguish them from the Senpuku Kirishitan of the Tokugawa (Edo) period-prohibition (1600-1673) ( Figure 3). Some researchers claim that the contemporary Kakure Kirishitan are the historical Senpuku Kirishitan [41], as they continue to follow the rituals passed on to them from their Senpuku Kirishitan ancestors. Others argue that they were estranged from Christianity, becoming one of the amalgamates of Japanese folk religions [42,43]. The distinction was relevant in the context of Japan's nomination dossier to UNESCO WHL, as it wanted to focus on the historical cultural tradition of the Senpuku Kirishitan only [44]. The Nomination File for UNESCO WL (http://whc.UNESCO.org/en/list, accessed on 20 March 2021 [45]), which the ACA prepared, concerns only the historical Senpuku Kirishitan tradition and some transitional forms that terminated eventually, while the regional and national listings of the Kirishitan villages as "Important Cultural Landscapes" importantly refer to the living communities of the so-called Kakure Kirishitan. For this paper, I follow the Nomination File to avoid confusion and use "Hidden Christians" to refer to the historical "Senpuku Kirishitan" (the same language as used in the official Nomination File) and "Kakure Kirishitan" for their descendants after the ban on Christianity was lifted (see Delakorda Kawashima, [44,46] for more detailed information on the meaning and practice of Kakure Kirishitan and their relevance in the protection strategies).

Materials and Methods
In this study, I analyse secondary (scholarly) as well as primary national and international sources to show how authorities define concepts such as cultural landscape, authenticity, and integrity. It is based on these concepts that these authorities select the candidate sites for the WHS Nomination File. The official documents consist of Nomination File, Advisory Body Evaluation (ICOMOS), Executive Summary, and Supplementary Material, State Party (ACA) Status Report, etc. This study investigates a particular decade-long nomination process of Christian heritage in the Nagasaki region, focusing on authenticity measures taken by national authorities to designate Kirishitan villages and sacred sites as Important Cultural Landscapes. After designating them at a national level, the State Party nominated them as candidates for WHS. Among all Kirishitan villages listed on the Nomination File throughout the Nagasaki region, I focus on Hirado City's villages, which were characterized as preserving the traditional practice at sacred sites [45] and as exceptional as they link to the cultural tradition developed in the open space during the earliest stages of the "Christian century" (from the beginning to the end of the 16th century) before the prohibition [46]. I analyse ACA documents and interviews with local Hirado City officials and other inhabitants to understand their perspectives on the Christian heritage eventually evaluated in the category of "Important Cultural Landscape".
On-site qualitative research was conducted during various stages of the selection processes (from initial to final nomination), most intensively between April 2016 and August 2019. This fieldwork included a series of in-depth structured and open-ended interviews with the local administration officials in Hirado, cultural heritage officials, stakeholders, such as (former) Hidden Christian practitioners, local community members, and community leaders. Some interviews were conducted during local community events when almost all representatives of a community gathered. Informal and formal documentation and reports related to nomination were collected on-site and online throughout the decade-long heritage-making process resulting in UNESCO WHS designation.

Results
In the following, the document analysis' findings highlighting the main shifts in the nomination process are introduced.

The Shift from Catholic Churches to the Hidden Kirishitan Cultural Tradition
The analysis of documents showed that in selecting the component sites of the serial property intended for a WHS nomination, actors originally focused on tangible cultural heritage, such as the architectural value of the 19th century Catholic churches in Nagasaki Prefecture. However, according to the Nagasaki Prefecture's World Heritage Registration Division, following the advice of a committee of outside experts and scientists [43], in August 2016, Japan withdrew the entire application and submitted a new one under the title "The Hidden Christian sites in the Nagasaki Region". The nomination focus thus shifted from the acceptance and evolution of Christianity in Japan seen in revival of churches after the prohibition, to the cultural tradition of Hidden Christians during the prohibition.

From the Present to the Past
Although the ICOMOS suggested to reorient the focus from acceptance and revival of Christianity in Japan to the unique cultural tradition of the Hidden Christians in 'hiding', the new Nomination File emphasised the termination of the cultural tradition. With a new title and subdivision, the new proposal resulted in twelve components demonstrating the beginning and end of the cultural tradition of the Hidden Christians (see Figure 4). Hirado sites did not reunite and continued until today. However, their cultural tradition was determined to have ended in the past [44].
The official brochure in English (Figure 4) differs from the one published in Japanese. In the English one, "end" refers to the "End of Hidden Christians' hiding", while in the Japanese brochure, and in the official UNESCO documentation, "end" refers to the "End of the cultural tradition of the Hidden Christians". While all the stages are different in the Nomination File and the Japanese brochure, there is a lot of overlap in Stages I-III. However, there is a striking difference in Stage IV: The event that triggered the new phase and the transition and the ultimate end of the religious tradition [48].

Broadening the Context of Each Component
Japan published a supplementary material on the nomination which explains the background of the revised nomination and the improved points from the original nomination dossier [48]. According to the supplementary material, the frequent conversations between ICOMOS experts and Japanese representatives (experts from ACA and other government officials) led to an agreement to focus only on criterion (iii): "to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared" [26]. This criterion represents the strongest area for demonstrating the Outstanding Universal Value of the nomination associated with the historical period of "hiding" for Japanese Christians in the Nagasaki Region (the period spanning four stages from introduction of Christianity to discovery of the Hidden Christians and building Catholic churches; see Figure 4). Given the new focus on the period in which Christians lived in "hiding" in Japan, ICOMOS advised Japanese authorities "to strengthen demonstrations that there are specific sites, buildings, areas, landscapes or settlements where this experience can be tangibly demonstrated" [48].
Since the beginning of its campaign for World Heritage listing in Nagasaki Prefecture, the Japanese World Heritage Association had emphasized in several documents the importance of the landscape surrounding the inscribed churches and the difficulty of preserving it [5]. In the Nomination File, Nagasaki Prefecture, being aware of the critical population decline in remote islands such as Hirado and Gotō, emphasised the potential of eco-tourism in these areas for revitalization of the rural economy [49]. Based on an ACA Status Report [50], the Nagasaki Prefectural Government proposed that the critical issue of depopulation and revitalization of local economies in Nagasaki should be linked to potential impacts of WHL on revitalizing economies [50].
The new focus of the bid was highlighted in the supplementary material stating that ICOMOS suggested including heritage that would better connect the past mission with the present [48]. ACA first aimed to protect all villages of the Hidden Christians, which preserve material evidence from the period of hiding, like worship objects received from the missionaries (goshintai) [51]. According to the ICOMOS Midstream Report [52], besides the worship objects, the attributes of the Kirishitan villages were relics from the transitional phase and the final phase of the unique cultural tradition, such as settlements, houses, graveyards, agricultural lands and landscapes, churches and places of secret worship, venerated objects, coastal scenery, forests, topographical features, visual setting, continuing use of agricultural lands, and ongoing worship at sacred places (e.g., shrines and within church buildings) [35]. In the selection process, the Japanese officials chose those among the 214 Hidden Christian villages in the Nagasaki region that met the authenticity criteria.

The National-Level Evaluation of Villages
According to UNESCO Supplementary material [48], the Japanese officials evaluated each individual village in Hirado City using the same criteria.
Hirado City consists of several inhabited islands, Hirado Island, Ikitsuki Island, Ooshima, Takushima, and Takashima islands, as well as the Tabira area and surrounding islands. According to the ACA's description of the state-designated "Important Cultural Landscape of Hirado", it was recognised as "a unique cultural landscape composed of terraced rice fields, pastures, and human settlements formed by continuous cultivation and production activities while continuing the tradition of the Kakure Kirishitan under the restricted conditions of the islands" [53]. In the official documents of ACA, we see that the value of the cultural landscape in Hirado was justified based on the continuing (Kakure) Kirishitan organisations.
In Hirado, many settlements can be identified by their churches and mercy groups' names in the letters of Jesuit missionaries written between the mid-16th and early 17th centuries. In addition, the religious organization that originated in the Christian faith before the Tokugawa period and went into hiding during the period of suppression, continued their practices of enshrining the sacred Nandogami (lit. "the gods of the storage closet") in traditional houses and worshiping sacred mountains, islands, and martyrdom sites (Japan's Cultural Properties database) [54].

Consideration of Global-Level Criteria
Although the above-mentioned ACA documents describe the authenticity and integrity of Hirado's cultural landscape referring to several islands and villages, including the living Kakure organisations on Ikitsuki Island, the authorities claimed only one village on Hirado Island met the UNESCO criteria, namely, Kasuga ( Figure 5). village was the most representative from the viewpoint of authenticity [45]. The official document states that some significant villages located on Ikitsuki Island, such as Ichibuzai, worship at the same sacred site as Kasuga (e.g., the ritual Omizutori (waterdrawing ceremony) on Nakaenoshima Island), but unlike in Kasuga, from the viewpoint of authenticity, here the structure of the village during the ban and a system to preserve the land-use pattern of the village in the future are not clear [45]. According to the ICOMOS explanation, in an authentic landscape most of the constituent assets need to retain their original materials, and a high degree of authenticity regarding the attributes of "shape/design" and "materials" must be maintained. Unavoidable replacements due to age-related changes need to be carefully examined and kept to a minimum. For the nominated villages in Nagasaki, the ICOMOS states that in each village, some dwellings have been updated, but the historical land-use pattern has been continued, and the identity of the topography, land layout, and other elements that represent the overall landscape of the village or surrounding area has been maintained, and thus has not affected the authenticity of the material [44].

Discussion
In this following section, the document analysis results are discussed to show the vital steps in the nomination process. After that, the section focuses on interviews to show the local perspectives on how the heritage was evaluated.

The Shift to the Unique Cultural Tradition
The analysis of documents showed that in selecting the appropriate sites for the World Heritage status, actors initially focused on tangible cultural heritage, such as the architectural value of the nineteenth-century Catholic churches scattered throughout Nagasaki Prefecture. These were acceptable candidates for the UNESCO World Heritage Sites recommended by the Japanese government because they were already listed as national treasure (one site), government-designated important cultural properties (eight sites), national historic sites (six sites), and prefecture-designated cultural properties Once a Kirishitan village, Kasuga is a small village lying on the western coast of Hirado Island. Based on a comparison of the Kirishitan villages in the light of the authenticity, integrity, management, and buffer zone criteria, officials judged that Kasuga village was the most representative from the viewpoint of authenticity [45]. The official document states that some significant villages located on Ikitsuki Island, such as Ichibuzai, worship at the same sacred site as Kasuga (e.g., the ritual Omizutori (water-drawing ceremony) on Nakaenoshima Island), but unlike in Kasuga, from the viewpoint of authenticity, here the structure of the village during the ban and a system to preserve the land-use pattern of the village in the future are not clear [45].
According to the ICOMOS explanation, in an authentic landscape most of the constituent assets need to retain their original materials, and a high degree of authenticity regarding the attributes of "shape/design" and "materials" must be maintained. Unavoidable replacements due to age-related changes need to be carefully examined and kept to a minimum. For the nominated villages in Nagasaki, the ICOMOS states that in each village, some dwellings have been updated, but the historical land-use pattern has been continued, and the identity of the topography, land layout, and other elements that represent the overall landscape of the village or surrounding area has been maintained, and thus has not affected the authenticity of the material [44].

Discussion
In this following section, the document analysis results are discussed to show the vital steps in the nomination process. After that, the section focuses on interviews to show the local perspectives on how the heritage was evaluated.

The Shift to the Unique Cultural Tradition
The analysis of documents showed that in selecting the appropriate sites for the World Heritage status, actors initially focused on tangible cultural heritage, such as the architectural value of the nineteenth-century Catholic churches scattered throughout Nagasaki Prefecture. These were acceptable candidates for the UNESCO World Heritage Sites recommended by the Japanese government because they were already listed as national treasure (one site), government-designated important cultural properties (eight sites), national historic sites (six sites), and prefecture-designated cultural properties (seven sites). In addition to these already listed sites, the initial proposal included other sites, such as churches and church remains that were not designated as cultural heritage, bringing the total number of sites to thirty-five in the initial proposal. Later, ACA reduced the number of sites and compiled a list of thirteen churches and church-related sites, including one site "The Sacred Places and Villages of Hirado" (see Figure 2) in the category of "cultural landscape" to be entered in the UNESCO Tentative list as sites intended for nomination [48]. Although the Kirishitan villages of Hirado were included early on in the process, it is clear from the documents that at this stage the emphasis was on Christianity and Catholicism in Japan [48].
In August 2016, the Japanese government decided to withdraw the entire application and submit a new one under the title "The Hidden Christian in the Nagasaki Region". According to the Nomination File this choice was made following the advice of a committee of outside experts and scientists [45]. Indeed, in the ICOMOS Midstream Report [52], ICOMOS advised to reorient the focus of the nomination from churches to the earlier period of prohibition and the religious tradition that developed under such conditions [52]. The nomination focus thus shifted from the acceptance and evolution of Christianity in Japan seen in revival of churches, to cultural tradition of Hidden Christians "in hiding".

Argumentation on the End of Cultural Tradition
The heritage-making process discussed here concerns a national history of persecution of Christians that can be perceived as troubling for contemporary identity and may be viewed as "difficult heritage" [4,54]. The heritage-making process was led by the interests of the so-called heritage "producers", i.e., the Catholic Church and the Nagasaki Prefectural Government [37]. Yamanaka argued that in the process, efforts were made to make the primarily marginal Christian heritage accessible to a non-believing majority in Japan. At the same time, due to new research, the sensitive historical places of martyrdom buried in the Christian villages were exposed (see Yamanaka's discussion on the Kirishitan village of Neshiko, [4,5,37]). These new findings caused the Nagasaki Prefecture and the Catholic Church to re-evaluate the previously disregarded heritage as a constituent of the "mainstream culture" in the Nagasaki Prefecture [37]. Following the nomination, the Catholic Church in Nagasaki approved pilgrimage to churches across the Nagasaki re-gion, including the sacred sites of the Hidden Christian [46]. This shows that the Catholic Church seized and emphasized its relation to the martyrdom sites in the guardianship of the Kakure Kirishitan.
According to the ICOMOS Midstream Report, the ICOMOS Advisory Mission noticed that "the intangible heritage associated with the Hidden Christians appears to be most clearly documented in the case of the Kakure Kirishitan". Their argument was based on extensive anthropological documentation of the intangible heritage of the Kakure conducted from the 1950s, which was presented to the Advisory Mission during the on-ground investigation. Hence, the ICOMOS suggested to more fully incorporate the anthropological findings on the intangible heritage of the Kakure Kirishitan in the revised nomination as part of the justification for criterion (iii) (b) [52]. This suggestion was not directly addressed by Japan's side, but they explicitly state in Response to Midstream Report that their nomination for WHL does not deal with any particular religious identity choice taken after the ban on Christianity was lifted, e.g., by Kakure Kirishitan, Catholics, Buddhists, or Shintō practitioners, but rather with the traditional culture of the Hidden Christians during the ban on Christianity and the short subsequent period of religious identity changes (Appendix 1B [52]). They added that Kakure Kirishitan manners and customs have come to completely differ from those of the Hidden Christians (Senpuku Kirishitan), and that Kakure Kirishitan are not the sole successors of the tradition [50].

Broad Context and the Background of the Revised Nomination
In this section, the steps taken by authorities to select the sites are analysed, reflecting the national developments in cultural protection strategies discussed above to see the impact of national developments on the selection process.
The results highlight that the Prefecture realized that churches and whole surrounding areas needed support for protection and sustainability. Such discussions triggered extensive research of Kirishitan villages done by historians, archaeologists, geographers, and town planners, organised by the Nagasaki Prefecture. In the research report initiated by the Prefectural Government [51], one can find detailed research data on numerous Kirishitan villages on the western coast of Nagasaki: From Hirado Island to Amakusa peninsula and Gotō archipelago.
The comparative analysis of all villages indicated that ten areas, included in the nominated property, represent the contribution to the proposed Outstanding Universal Value and the state of protective measures being implemented. The authenticity criteria related to cultural landscape were particularly suitable for the villages in Hirado where the Krishitan worship focused on the sacred sites. The largest populations of Hidden Christians lived in Ikitsuki, a small island in Hirado, Gotō archipelago, and Sotome, near Nagasaki City, and on the islands off the Amakusa coast in Kumamoto Prefecture. Researchers acknowledged two fundamentally different groups of villages according to their material evidence: Based on ritual objects (Sotome, Urakami), and based on sacred sites (Hirado, Ikitsuki). Nakazono [45] explains that this difference comes from different styles in the organization of the hidden communities. In the case of Hirado and Ikitsuki, organizations and practices developed before the prohibition of Christianity, in the so-called Christian century (from the beginning to the end of the 16th century); thus, their Christian rituals included publicly open spaces and worship at sacred sites of their martyred ancestors. In the case of Sotome and Urakami, however, a special style of Christianity developed under circumstances of severe persecution in the period of prohibition (beginning from the 17th century); thus, almost all practices remained hidden and transmitted through objects [45].
Reviewing the Nomination File shows that most of the villages considered as component sites were those surrounding the Catholic Churches already included in the initial Nomination File (compare both files in Figures 1 and 2). As discussed above, it was in the interest of the Prefectural Government to preserve the rural villages surrounding the churches through ecotourism, which led to the decision to designate the surrounding villages as "cultural landscapes under the new Protection Law". The sites designated on the national level could now be nominated as candidates for the WHS.
For example, in Hirado City, the cultural heritage officials had to choose among the villages with well-preserved sacred sites candidates suitable for designation as a cultural landscape, based on the UNESCO's test of authenticity, the test of integrity, the management plan, and the buffer zone. In doing so, they aimed at selecting only one village that would satisfy most of the UNESCO criteria (personal communication with the city official Mr. Ueno, July 2013).

National-Level Evaluations
The ACA database on Cultural Properties links the landscape with the living "Kakure Kirishitan" organisations that originated before the ban on Christianity, and states that they helped retain the unique aspects of the sites. The Kakure Kirishitan organisations mentioned here are located on Ikitsuki Island, which in the document is described as a part of the whole of the "Hirado Domain": "From the middle of the Edo period onward, Ikitsuki Island played an important role in supporting the Hirado Domain's finances as a major whaling centre, and more than 3000 people were involved in the whaling industry at its peak. However, the topography of the island limited the amount of farmland available, and the extraction of whale oil required a large amount of fuel (firewood), so it is highly likely that the island's abundant forest resources and farmland were used to supply food and fuel" (Japan's Cultural Properties database [53]).
In the above, it is claimed that the necessary aspects for integrity and authenticity of the cultural landscape have been maintained by complementing each other and combining various islands of the "Hirado Domain". Ikitsuki with whaling and Kakure Kirishitan communities constitute a crucial part of the cultural landscape. However, compared with the small remote villages of Hirado Island, the farmland and forests in Ikitsuki did not preserve their traditional appearance.

Applying the Global Criteria to Maximise Inscription Opportunities
To identify how the Japanese officials evaluated the landscape, the official documents published by ACA were analysed. Reviewing the criteria officials applied to the cultural landscape of Kasuga, the adaption to UNESCO suggestions becomes apparent. Education Board Cultural Heritage Division explained that they selected Kasuga because it: • Justifies most criteria of authenticity and integrity; • could be provided protection by the buffer zone (a national park); • could be maintained through ecotourism.
Here, I do not discuss the buffer zone aspect, but focus on the application of the authenticity and integrity criteria in the ACA documents. I then turn to the analysis of the management plan for the site and illustrate that Kasuga was chosen because the village can be maintained by promoting ecotourism.
Regarding the authenticity and integrity criteria, Japanese officials pointed out that UNESCO puts much emphasis on tangible, immovable property. Due to this emphasis, the Japanese side most highly evaluated missionary accounts that point to the historic origin of this Kirishitan village and the land maintaining the "visual integrity" from the time of the Christian mission. Kasuga was selected as a component site based on its mention in a missionary's diary. During the Sengoku period, Kasuga was converted to Christianity, and the Jesuit missionary Luis de Almeida (1525-1583), who visited Hirado in 1561, stated in his records that there was a "church on the top of the mountain". According to accounts written by the missionaries of the time, the cross was erected before the church was built. The church location is presumed to be Maruoyama hill, which remains in the centre of the rice-terraces today. On its top, the excavations uncovered a grave ( Figure 5).
According to officials' reports, Kasuga passes the test of authenticity and integrity because the landscape in this area has remained virtually unchanged from the time when Christianity was first introduced to Hirado in the mid-16th century [55,56]. The ACA database on Cultural Properties [51] explains that, "Based on a text published in 1803 (based on Kiyoshi Tabata's records from 1656), one can see that the Kasuga area and the scope of rice fields remained almost unchanged from the early Tokugawa period".
Kasuga village has two main settlements, one of which consists of terraced rice fields spread out around the base of Mt. Yasumandake (venerated as a sacred mountain by the locals, Figure 6), and the other which involves two areas of lowland facing the sea. Kasuga village contains early Japanese Christian cemetery remains that the residents treat as sacred sites, ancient terraced rice fields, houses where Nandogami are enshrined, tombstones and small stone shrines built in the Shintō and Buddhist traditions during the era of Christianity's prohibition, as well as old trails that connect these various artefacts [56]. Tangible elements in the village landscape related directly to the Senpuku Kirishitan tradition are: Figure 6. The Hidden Christians' shrine at the sacred Mt. Yasumandake. Mt. Yasumandake is an important sacred place that was shared by Buddhist, Shintō, and Kirishitan communities during the ban on Christianity. The mountain is still venerated.

•
Grave on the Maruoyama hill; • stone structures associated with the area; • a cave called "San-nin-gakure" on the shoreline where Senpuku Kirishitan used to hide; • Mt. Yasumandake, a sacred place of worship (the summit of the mountain was secretly used also as a Kirishitan place of worship).
Kasuga's cultural landscape, however, compared with other cultural landscapes designated on the WH List, has little tangible material heritage (e.g., church, ritual objects). There are no buildings that symbolize the history of the Kirishitans in hiding, only rice terraces. Thus, the city officials claimed it difficult to convey to visitors the significance of the living cultural landscape in terms of Senpuku Kirishitan heritage (current absence of Kirishitan rituals and beliefs). According to interviews with local city officials and based on their reports, because the landscape lacks the tangible elements related to the Kirishitan tradition, officials were advised to demonstrate the hidden meanings in the environment. To claim the significance of the cultural landscape of Hirado and to justify its preservation, the officials had to uncover the hidden Kirishitan beliefs and rituals in the existing visible environment.
First, the officials demonstrated that instead of churches, the Kasuga villagers worshiped the natural mountains and islands as sacred sites and martyrdom sites, which supported the Hidden Christians' faith. As there are no written records of such practice, they based them on interviews with the locals. In Kasuga, the Kirishitan organisation dissolved a long time ago. However, as Mr. Terada, a formal representative of the Kasuga village, mentioned during the interview, there is an organization of residents, the so-called Kasuga-kou, based on the formally existing Kirishitan-kou, which was established in April 2011, and all 17 households (about 70 people) are its members (personal communication, 5 April 2017). The organisation, or at least the representatives, participated in interviews and decision-making processes related to the nomination, which made Kasuga a very cooperative partner to the city officials.
Second, the ritual places were shown to be located within the villagers' private spaces. During the prohibition of Christianity, Senpuku Kirishitan performed their rituals inside houses so that everyday places, such as the living room or the immediate garden, were used for rituals and prayers. The sacred objects, e.g., Nandogami, were usually hidden within Shintō and Buddhist altars. The living room in the village's main building (omoya) turned in to a church-like place for rituals [56].
Third, based on mappings and interviews with the locals, the officials showed that the Hidden Christians' ritual space was also in places and routes of their everyday occupations. According to villagers, the stone monument enshrined on the top of Maruoyama hill, for instance, acted as the pivotal point for the annual traditional ceremony called Mushiokuri to ward off harmful insects from the paddy rice fields, which was performed in the village (see Figure 5). However, the actual sacred place laid hidden in a nearby rice field. Mapping the ritual routes between the Maruoyama hill and the rice fields, the officials showed that the ritual routes led to a graveyard from the 16th century, which was recently discovered in the rice paddy. In addition, from interviews with villagers the officials found that the place was mentioned in their prayers [56].
According to villagers, due to persecution in the past, there were certainly no visible signs of Kirishitan presence in the environment, except for the trees, but later shrines and other buildings were added at several places (personal communication with villagers, June 2016). The shrines we can see today are simple structures of natural stone arranged to shape an "open-fronted box", before which candles may be lit, and offerings made ( Figure 6). Villagers' description of their attitude towards the shrines is much like it was noticed by researchers in some other Kirishitan villages, where memorialization is carried out by preservation of the site as a shrine and shared with the non-Kakure people of the locality [57]. The villagers take the memorisation of the shrines seriously as the fresh flowers put there show. According to their experience, people would get ill if they would cut a tree on the grave.
Finally, to pass the tests of authenticity and integrity, the officials had to demonstrate that the ritual space found in the environment remained much the same since the distant past. The official ACA document states: "The distribution of the cultivated land, the residential areas, and the routes (in Kasuga) remained almost the same on the maps of 1866 and 1872. All constituting elements-the traditional houses that form the residential area, stonewalls, Buddhist temples and Shintō shrines, peoples' occupation indicated in terrace rice fields, and the meaning of sacred places preserved in Mt. Yasumandake and Nakaenoshima Island-have continued with integrity to shape the cultural landscape supported by various intangible customs" [53].
The document shows that the emphasis was on tangible and static aspects of the past, although the Japanese officials had to clarify local intangible aspects and activities that have sustained such aspects in the landscape (e.g., the ritual of Omizutori on the sacred island of Nakaenoshima continues to be carried out). To justify the selection of the specific components (sites) that comprise the serial property, regional comparison analyses between hidden Christian villages were conducted by the State Party. The Party argued that, compared to other villages, e.g., Ichibuzai on Ikitsuki with the living Kakure Kirishitan, only Kasuga retains an environment allegedly intact from the time of the Senpuku Kirishitan in hiding ( [49], Appendix 3b-1/2 List of Hidden Christian villages used for comparative analysis).
In addition to the authenticity and integrity criteria, the possibility to successfully manage and maintain Kasuga village influenced the selection process. ICOMOS Midstream report [52] recommends legal, technical, and professional support systems necessary to maintain the high level of authenticity. Concretely, the ICOMOS refers to the past origin of the existing landscape, maintenance of the historical land-use pattern, the identity of the topography, land layout, and other elements of the overall landscape of the village. The UNESCO Convention acknowledges the recognition of a traditional management system, customary law, and long-established customary techniques and knowledge to protect the cultural and natural heritage. Through these protection systems, WHS contribute to sustainable local and regional development [7,58]. However, such focus on the maintenance of the tangible property can lead to underestimation of intangible resources.
In the case of Kasuga village, the review and comparison of national and international documents and conventions on the role of authenticity in evaluation, registration, and management of cultural landscapes show that, in theory, tangible and intangible values of authenticity have both been considered for natural and cultural heritage. Moreover, the conventions state that the authenticity and integrity standards combined with the management system promote sustainability of heritage [7,20]. However, this focus on sustaining traditional management system for local and regional development seems insufficient in the case of isolated villages (like Kirishitan villages on Hirado) because the management system, instead of considering sustaining the ever-changing local community lifestyles, promotes legal restrictions and outside resources to manage the traditional techniques [59]. The problem is that the attention is not on the living communities and their motivation to maintain their environment. This lack of attention is reflected in the selection of uninhabited natural sites (mountains and islands) or easy-to-manage communities to ensure the fulfilment of the strict authenticity and integrity standards. These selected properties, then, can be managed by others/outsiders. According to such logic of cultural heritage protection, the sites with living carriers utilizing the sites can be a thorn in the other people's side in respect of the future management and ownership.

Conclusions and Implications
The main aim of this study was to examine the selection criteria in the international and national documents that enabled the exclusion of the living communities of Kakure Kirishitan from Japan's candidate sites selected for WHS nomination. For this purpose, the arguments to include sites based on concepts of cultural landscape, authenticity, and integrity by UNESCO and ACA were analysed. I showed that the concepts as applied by UNESCO and ACA have influenced the changing orientation in the nomination process, as it shifted from tangible to intangible; from sacred buildings to sacred sites, the environment, and cultural landscapes; from churches to Kirishitan villages; and finally moved from present to the past; from the living to the extinct traditions. After comparing all the villages, the Japanese authorities singled out the one where Kakure Kirishitan communities have lived and passed on the Kirishitan rituals of their ancestors. This was done despite the Kakure Kirishitan communities revealing their secrets to researchers, which provided the details we have of the Senpuku Kirishitan unique tradition, e.g., sacred places, rituals, objects, and beliefs.
We can conclude that the verification of authenticity within the cultural landscape was insufficient to acknowledge the existence of living bearers of heritage, let alone to help their sustainability. Perception of heritage as tangible and static construction led to underestimation of intangible resources that could have motivated the maintenance of Kakure Kirishitan lifestyles. While the recognition of traditional land-use and management of the landscape may be sustained in the future in a village like Kasuga, this will not provide protection of the cultural tradition.
The concept of cultural landscape is inclusive enough to include all tangible and intangible elements almost giving us a clue to community culture. However, the Japanese and UNESCO approaches to sustaining authenticity differ. In the process of national designation of Hirado villages as Important Cultural Landscape, the local city officials focused on continuing living landscapes, the locals, and their cooperation in conservation of sites. On the other hand, aiming at UNESCO designation, the focus shifted to fossil landscapes, traditional land-use, and management using outside resources to sustain the landscape. While the concept of cultural landscape, in theory, is inclusive, on the competitive ground as illustrated in the evaluation process of Kasuga among several Kirishitan villages, the authenticity and integration criteria tend to privilege the cultural landscapes which pass the tests of the visual integrity and intactness. The results of the document analysis show a lack of adaptation between conventional definitions of UNESCO and authenticity criteria of the State Party for including the variable and dynamic structure of cultural landscapes.
In the heritage-making process the officials aligned all the components to show the OUV criteria (the unique tradition). In a paragraph on integrity and authenticity, ICOMOS considers that "the justification of inscription is appropriate because the 12 sites do indeed reflect the earliest activities of Christian missionaries and settlers in Japan, including the earliest phase of encounter, a subsequent era of prohibition and persecution of the Christian faith and settlers, as well as the final phase of revitalization of Christian communities after the official lifting of the prohibition" [35].
Based on the on-site interviews with the stakeholders and available documentation of the evaluation process, the authenticity criteria for assessing the cultural landscapes acted as useful tool to recognise the value of the broader context of the Kirishitan village environment, such as farmland and Buddhist or Shintō shrines. On the other hand, its inclusiveness enabled the officials to select the elements they wanted to emphasise. Privileging the tangible in cultural landscapes before other heritage categories, e.g., intangible cultures, allowed the state to terminate the living cultural tradition of the difficult Kirishitans. While in the UNESCO's intangible heritage protection vision the living cultures bring the creativity and diversity needed for the future existence of cultures, the selection process of the Hidden Christian sites in Nagasaki showed their cultural diversity was pushed under the rug of multi-religious coexistence. Thus, the authenticity test can be utilized as a powerful tool in the hands of prefectural and state government in selecting the villages based on their own preferences.

Recommendations
To ensure objectivity of the perspectives and interests that affect the heritage-making process, a new system should be put in place allowing the participation of non-government experts in consultations with ICOMOS. As an international legal instrument in heritage protection, UNESCO should, besides the criteria, implement a channel to oversee and prevent biases at the national level and strive at protecting OUV of cultural traditions beyond the local disputes over their ownership. A channel of transparency and accessibility during the advisory process would allow the local voices and multiple scientific perspectives to enter the discussion on the heritage-to-be-made.
The present study did not answer the question of why ICOMOS failed to respond to Japan's refusal to include the Kakure Kirishitan intangible heritage under iii. (b) of the criteria [48]. Additional research is needed on the communication between ICOMOS and State Party experts within the nomination process as the exchanged information forms an essential basis for the evaluation of OUV.
Previous studies on the Christian heritage-making processes in Nagasaki pointed to problems caused by commodification and appropriation of religion; this study provides a new perspective on the role of heritage protection authorities and the authenticity criteria in evaluating cultural landscapes and their impact on sustainability of the Kirishitan cultural tradition. To protect not only cultural landscapes, but also the living traditions, decisions by heritage protection authorities should be carefully made, based on scientific research of a cultural tradition and an examination of the possible national interests and biases that could irrevocably spoil the existing unique cultural tradition by denying it the right to protection.
The controversial process of selecting the UNESCO World Heritage Sites has again left out many significant sites, peoples, and episodes underestimating the killings, persecution, martyrdom, and discrimination in the history of the Christian mission and religion in Japan in general.