Idea of "Earthly paradise" in the Lentvaris Manor Park

The article discusses what kind of information is relevant for the current management of historical parks (emphasizing the relation between the architect’s intentions and the object’s connotative features, as well as requirements for information that could be helpful for the perception and identification of the specific features of the object). The results of the semantic research on the Lentvaris Manor Park (designed by Édouard François André, 1840–1911) allow us to present the idea of “Earthly Paradise” implemented in the landscaped part of the park, which is significant for European culture. The “Earthly Paradise” is marked by the following elements: an “obelisk”, a bridge-overpass with a grotto, a waterfall, a maze, and pedestals for the Forerunners sculptures. The symbolic significance of all these cultural objects of the Lentvaris park have not been discussed by other authors yet. The studies of the Lentvaris manor park by other authors are assessed critically because they focus mainly on the personality of the creator of the park, his activities and the general features of the park’s style, emphasizing the universal typological compositional aspects that are often hardly related to this concrete park. The description of the Lentvaris manor park as a cultural property does not take into account the cultural context. Besides, all the valuable features of the park are defined referring to superficial historical, cultural and aesthetic information. The semantic study of the Lentvaris park was inspired by the model of “Earthly Paradise” based on the Jesuit Athanasius Kircher’s concept and discussed in Mikhail Yampolsky’s and Eugenio Lo Sardo’s works. The idea of “Earthly Paradise” was represented in the Lentvaris park indirectly, through the cultural tradition of park design. As we can see from available sources, Eduard Andre designed the park without reflecting on this concept. Looking at the descriptions of cultural heritage objects and cultural areas, including parks, we see a formal “algebraic” model of registering the values, which does not reflect the inspirations of the designer’s creative activities. The same is the case with the description of the Lentvaris manor park. This is because such formal descriptions refer to the categories of psychology of individuality, in which socially relevant cultural ideas are not important. It would be a good option to make descriptions combining denotative and connotative features. Connotations allow perceiving the objects holistically and better understanding their character; besides, they fulfil the role of catalyst in preparing renovation and restoration projects. Currently, the Lithuanian Ministry of Culture is in charge of the preparation of cultural heritage protection legislation, so it should take note if the description of cultural heritage objects and cultural sites is made in accordance with the methodologically deficient provisions