No abstract

Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne. https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit. Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l'

Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne. https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit.Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l'

Visible material remnants of ancient cultures were, for a variety of historical reasons, not particularly abundant in the territories of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1569-1795). The past monuments of these lands were not hewn in stone and marble but in timber, leaving behind no impressive structures to provoke the interest of subsequent generations. The dearth of material evidence did not, however, prevent generations of Polish historians and antiquarians from assigning Greco-Roman identities to local monuments. They were keen to offer tangible proof of the past glory of the land inhabited by the alleged descendants of the Sarmatians. In this paper, some of these monuments are explored, especially the Mounds of Krakus and Wanda near Cracow as well as an alleged tomb of Ovid in Vohlyna. The narratives fabricated around them as a part of the ideology of Sarmatism, a class discourse, which constructed an identity for the Polish nobility as the descendants of the ancient tribe of Sarmatians, are also examined.

As we continue to probe the boundaries of architectural history and to seek new approaches to the complex legacy of the past, we have to reassess the body of knowledge produced thus far, exposing its often-hidden agendas in order to be aware of our own engagement with today’s ideologies. The architectural history of Central Europe, although usually marginalized, serves as a particularly instructive field in which to study the mutability of ideological positions and their impact on interpretation. Scholarship on the Wilanów Palace near Warsaw (c. 1677–96) (Figs 1 and 2) offers some of the most interesting examples of architectural history’s appropriations, oversights and extraordinary intellectual constructions devised solely in order to claim a relationship with the glorious past, or to sever ties with certain aspects of it, depending upon the contemporary ideological agendas. This material demonstrates how a single building has been used over the years to express diverse concepts of national identity, either by subjecting that building to certain physical modifications, or by making it serve as a point of departure for narratives that emphasize different characteristics of precisely the same physical fabric. The vocabulary of classical architecture employed in Wilanów was particularly well suited to such cultural practices. Classicism – the paradigmatic architectural language, positioned at the nexus of the indigenous and the foreign – has traditionally been associated with discourses of national identity. It was a universal idiom of authority, easily reflecting diverse (or even conflicting) social agendas, its visual vocabulary lending itself to a succession of new meanings, in line with shifting expectations and ideological priorities. In Wilanów the classical and the universal were continually redefined in an attempt to express in visual form the national and the particular.