Authors

Nina Viaznikova¹;  ¹ Global History Lab of the University of Cambridge, Austria

Discussion

As M. Foucault observed: "A whole history remains to be written of spaces—which would at the same time be the history of powers” (Foucault, 1986). Following his and other scholars’ steps (like H. Lefebvre or P. Bourdieu) modern architecture is widely studied as a political endeavour, yet heritage architecture and the policies that shape it often remain limited to niche research fields. Most scholarship tends to focus on the restoration of authentic objects, highlighting the complexity and cultural value of the preservation process (e.g. Fixler, 2008).

In this paper, we examine post-1992 heritage architecture policies in Russia, using the Palace of Empress Catherine II at Tsaritsyno (Moscow) as a central case study. This palace, a newly constructed structure, is commonly presented as a historical artefact, offering a powerful example of how historical and political narratives can be crafted and embedded within public spaces, shaping collective memory and attempting to influence cultural identity.

Our research has two primary objectives. First, we aim to deconstruct the methods through which this heritage project was assembled, uncovering how its historical narrative was constructed. Second, we analyse why criticism of the palace’s creation has largely failed to disrupt its historical positioning. We concentrate on the specific practices and routines that emerged after the Palace's creation, as these practices contributed significantly to its positioning as a 'historical' building.

To support our inquiry, we apply Martina Löw’s theory of the refiguration of space (Löw, 2016), which draws on A. Giddens’ work to explore relational space and the concept of “arrangements”—a notion that includes both order and the active process of arranging or ordering. We argue that the practices undertaken to complete the Tsaritsyno project cultivated a sense of historical authenticity, using routine activities and elements that resonate with public understanding, making it seem inherently familiar.

Our sources include newspaper articles from both critics and supporters, as well as existing anthropological research on the subject. Through our analysis, we hope to provide new insights into the role of heritage projects in reinforcing narratives of national and cultural identity, demonstrating how spatial constructions can transform collective perceptions and contribute to a shared history.