CEU eTD Collection Second Nadia Reader: Professor Al Supervisor:Ilona Professor Sarmany Architecture of the Balkan Countriesin ParisCenturyArchitecture atUniversal 19th theBalkan Exhibitions of In requirements for of fulfillment the thedegree partial o An Image the for Nation: Central European University - Bagdadi - Cosmin Tudor Minea Cosmin Parsons History Department Budapest, Hungary Master ofArts Submitted to Submitted

2014 By

f

CEU eTD Collection thewrmay without notbemade form a in the Central European Library. Details may or part, may be made only in accordance with the instructions given by the Author and lodged Copyright in the text of this thesis rests with the Author. C part of any such copies ma itten permissionitten ofthe Author. de. Further copies made in accordance with such instructions i be obtained frombe the librarian.

opies by any process, either in full

This page must CEU eTD Collection influences spread with ease and had long term repercussions for the Balkan cultural landscape. Fr architecture, national criticized their pavilions. sometimes even and Orient the with parallels many drew group, a as countries these saw di national official the contradicting often perceptions, French the represents paradox Another peninsula. the of heritage common the by inspired the if Howe nation. their promoting of purpose the with all monuments, historical prized with themselves architect’sresearches careers and to onthe occasion representation, national to defined truly were related these of None heritage. cultural and answersarchitecture quick find and questions new pose to had by way of participating and designing “national” architecture, the countries from the Balkans e universal goal h priiaig onre, oai, ree Sri ad Bulgaria and Serbia Greece, Romania, countries, participating The In this research I analyse the architecture of the Balkan nations at four 19 four at nations Balkan the of architecture the analyse I research this In I finally show that a multitude of actors were involved in the process of designing a a designing of process the in involved were actors of multitude a that show finally I

bg meu ws ie t te eeomn o ntoa styles, national of development the to given was impetus big a

xhibiti a t setteruiu etrs they features, unique their assert to was

national pavilions, restaurants and other decorations inspired by their most most their by inspired decorations other and restaurants pavilions, national ons in Paris as well as their reception by the French audience. I argue that that argue I audience. French the by reception their as well as Paris in ons ench and locals, making it an exchange hub, in which ideas and and ideas which in hub, exchange an it making locals, and ench

Abstract hi storical architecturalstorical heri ii

often often scourse displayed of the Balkan nations Balkan the of at

tage.

similar constructions, constructions, similar that time so with so time that

o nme of number a to ,

th promoted promoted ver, even even ver,

century . They . this this

CEU eTD Collection Figures...... Bibliography ListFigures and of Sources Resumes Short Appendix: ofthe Main Architects Mentioned i Conclusions Countries Balkan of 1900Universal Exhibition Representation: National of Paradox The 5: Chapter of 1889 Chapter 4: First Time Together: Balkan Countries Architecture at t Chapter 3: DisplayingBalkan ArchitectureFirst theat Time Exhibitions for Universal Chapter National 2: The First ArchitectureBalkans inthe Chapter 1: Theoretical Framework Introduction Table ofContents c) b) a) d) c) b) a) b) The in Beginnings:Paris in1867and1878 Exhibitions Universal a) b) Romanian Case ofNation a) b) a) f) e) d)

The Balkan Architectural Context andtheThe National Balkan Architectural Context StylesBalkan Capitals inthe Meanin Nation A Comparative, and Relational Approach Transnational Final overview Bulgaria Romania Serbia Greece Thethe 1900Universal Balkan Countries at Exhibition Greece Serbia Romania OverviewBalkan thecountries of participation Balkans Gaze the under Western

......

......

...... -

...... gs in Architecture: Theoretical Considerations and Examples from the the from Examples and Considerations Theoretical Architecture: in gs Building inthe Balkans

......

......

...... - Building ......

......

......

...... iii

......

......

......

n theText ......

...... he Paris World Exhibition ......

......

......

...... aiin a Paris at Pavilions ......

.....

......

1 124 123 119 113 109 103

3 89 85 80 72 72 68 66 59 54 54 46 43 43 29 21 21 17 11 11

5 1

CEU eTD Collection 1 countries section and close to the "exotic" part of the exhibition. was even compared to a mosque. What is more, the pavilion itself was located among the Oriental Otto the with directly it connecting thus culture, Oriental an of must have been great when the pavilion was seen by the French audience as rather an expression surprise His rule. Ottoman survived had that country a of past unique glorious a display to way a were monuments ancient of types these that knew Odobescu building. exhibition main the in miniature in reproduced also was Argeș, de Curtea of monastery the these, of One pavilion. the large drawings and photog him sent He pavilion. Romanian the build to Baudry, Ambroise architect the Paris, in studies his of time the from friend old his hired quickly He work. to set Odobescu career, his of most among Balkan nations. the first a pavilion, national a have to right the obtained even He world. whole the of front in state less im it had yet to gain what everyone dreamt of: Independence from the Ottoman Empire. But this was Exhibition of 1867. His country was a young one Ittoo. had been Romania only for one year and challenge of his life: wasHe named th

The RomanianPav The portant now because Odobescu had the chance of representing Romania as an independent In 1866 the young Minister of Foreign Affairs, Alexandru Odobescu, faced the biggest the faced Odobescu, Alexandru Affairs, Foreign of Minister young the 1866 In With the characteristic enthusiasm for the for enthusiasm characteristic the With ilion at the Parisian Exhibition of 1867 and its reception is described in detail in Chapter 3 in Chapter detail in is described its and reception of1867 Exhibition Parisian the ilionat

raphs raphs of the most famous monuments in the country to be imitated for

Introduction e organiser of the Romanian at section the Paris Universal 1

Romanian national cause, that was to guide to was that cause, national Romanian

1

mans, and in one publication it publication one in and mans, Of course, Odobescu was aware

CEU eTD Collection War. 2 1900butnot pavilion in organisedwas part ofthe bystill itself,asAustro it period: Greece, Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria. this in points various at independent were indeed or autonomy of degree great a obtained that those are region the from analysed countries The 1900. and 1889 1878, 1867, in years: eleven e Paris in held were These pavilion. national a with participated countries Balkan the all or rever French the and countries organisers. participating This collective effort posed new questions the the Balkan nations had to both ask which in turn satisfy would that design a with up come local and French officials, local architecture for the Balkan countries at the Parisian universal Theyexhibitions. were French and processcomplex that wouldlead tovarious a o of result a was conceived was architecture national way the Therefore work. his still was building resulting the inspiration, of sources as present to monuments what decided Romanians w architect the all, After exhibition. mediated French the and forms architectural of perception different stereotypes, old between mixture a of result the were views perc that even thecarefully Romanian” “traditional be designed architecture seenwas way. inthis to tradition Western long the of

Montenegro Montenegro was also an independent nation but did not take part at all in any world exhibition until the First World

eptions of Balkan national architecture at universal exhibitions. As we will see, Western Western see, will we As exhibitions. universal at architecture national Balkan of eptions berated into thecultural into berated andarchitectural Peninsula. landscape ofthe h eioe ecie aoe a nt nqe bt ahr h frt ae n sre of series a in case first the rather but unique, not was above described episode The I shall take into account only the universal exhibitions of the 19th century, where some where century, 19th the of exhibitions universal the only account into take shall I In light of this, my aim is to address the question how a variety of actors created a national

of orientalising the Balkan Peninsula but he surely did not expect not did surely he but Peninsula Balkan the orientalising of

architects who had to obey strict rules and work in a team to team a in work and rules strict obey to had who architects ften contradictoryften results. 2

2 I onlywill exclu

de Bosnia, which had a national as French and even if the the if even and French as

- HungarianEmpire. very

CEU eTD Collection the of each in names different have themselves styles The countries. different in phenomenon discourse and not in reality. In addition "national styles" were more an umbrella term for the same man same the In exhibitions. the at organisers the by and Balkans the in countries the by "national" as promoted and seen was It ideologically. created style a is it But forms. established certain employing constructions styles" inarchitecture,I using not am thecommon sense ofth view inthe andway similarities thevarious thecountriespresented themselves. region defined by its common Ottoman heritage helps me above all to expla also for other studies of the Balkans, are the main reasons behind my comparative approach. The the 14 from uninterrupted almost Empire Ottoman the of part a been had which Europe, in considered now area the as "Balkans" to refer will I thesis this of purpose the For debates. terminological wide popularity. War. The Parisian exhibitions were also preeminent in terms of visitors, expenditures and world World First the until fairs world to specific only is culture, “traditional” and heritage historical appeal by character “national” its assert to tries and buildings, historical different from a truly comparative perspective possible. In addition the type of architecture that employs shapes world locatedexhibitions in Paris th

I 19 chosen have Here a further terminological issue needs to be clarified. When I am referring to "national ref hitherto have I region The to th e 19 th

centuries. Its common characteristics acquired during this period, the backbone

th

centurymyParis of as research thelocation becauseonly was it at the

e, h acietrl om epoe ae ntoa" ny in only "national" are employed forms architectural the ner,

that that several or all the Balkan countries part,took thus making erred to in my research has been the object of many many of object the been has research my in to erred 3

e word “style”thatdefines various in the French common

ing to to ing CEU eTD Collection Historians Implications” Political Its and Architecture Serbian in Style National a of Universitaires de Rennes and Simetria, and 2004) Bratislav Pan in Popescu Carmen 3 candidatesBalkancountries’ architecture. national toalsocreate selection of architectswork countries experience whose inOriental supposedl made them the and event the on publications French the in expressed descriptions the space, exhibition the Orient connection was mad something particularly for nationalThe suitable Balkan atuniversal representation exhibitions. nation new the by denied underlying issuewas the Oriental architectural heritage that one Here Nations. des Rue the on diversity cultural and identity national one’s assert would which constructions unique all, above be, to intended were buildings these that fact the despite where Greece, Serbia and Romania all had national pavilions in the shape of a Byzantine chu states in the peninsula. This led to the paradoxical architecture exhibited at the exhibition in 1900, cultural and architectural heritage o common the of perhaps, Proof, French. the by also noticed fact a countries, these by exhibited as "national". defined ideologically to represent the nation and especially at the World Ex “Serbo or baroque” Ba

Two scholars dealing with the Balk kn ain. hs i Rmna t a be cle "ermna", n eba "Serbian Serbia, in "Neoromanian"", called been has it Romania in Thus, nations. lkan frt mlcto o m rsac i te biu smlrt bten h architecture the between similarity obvious the is research my of implication first A , Vol. 56, No. 1 (Mar., 1997), 16 1997), 1 (Mar., No. 56, Vol. , 3

Le style national Roumain. Construire une nation à travers l’architecture. 1881 l’architecture. travers à nation une Construire Roumain. national style Le - byzantine" and in Bulgaria, "Byzantine". However, all of these styles were were styles these of all However, "Byzantine". Bulgaria, in and byzantine"

- states, but employed nevertheless by local and foreign architects as architects foreign and local by nevertheless employed but states, e further more direct by the location assigned for tBalkan pavilions in

an architecture have also recently used “national styles” with the same meaning: f the Balkans, which was interpreted as “national” by the new - 41.

4

telić in “Nationalism and Architecture: The Creation was present throughout the Peninsula, , Journal of the Society of Architectural Architectural of Society the of Journal ,

hibition hibition were defined - 1945 , (Presses , y ideal rch, rch, -

CEU eTD Collection 55 (2003), architecture is described in Lorraine Decléty, “L’architecte orientaliste”, 1838 Baudry, Marie 1900: in one Serbian 4 thestudycontributionof a to other number architects' of careers. A similar situation can also be seen in other cases and this is why my research will be an important the of one is he if even far, so career his on studies the in overlooked been have exhibitions universal the with interactions his and Mincu’s contribution architecture. in style" Romanian "the as, seen been has subsequently what create, exh universal two at representation architectural country's his for Heworked Mincu. Ion architect Romanian the of case the was home" "back developments architectural the national st a what of examples first the create to effort collaborative French essential an in and up teamed organisers, local of help the with architects, French and local consequence, a As Balkans. Howev be style”. national architecture “a in presented their that countries participating the from demanded exhibitions universal the at organisers French the paradox: another yet by all above supported is fact The countries. the of development the and architecture exhibition between connection the fact: unnoticed almost hitherto a to allude to pertinent seem would it Therefore, world.. ateverythe part the exhibitionshad of influence exhibited in progressing, developments rapid were communication of means where time a In opposite. the rather was It environment.

A notable exception is the work on A on work the is exception notable A One must not forget that these exhibitions were not taking place in a closed exclusivist closed a in place taking not were exhibitions these that forget not must One - 65. yle in architecture could be like. The most conspicuous example of the connection with -

1906 , (Paris: Somogy Editions d'art, 1998). The case of the Frenc the of case The 1998). d'art, Editions Somogy (Paris: , - Laure Crosnier Leconte and Mercedes Volait, Volait, Mercedes and Leconte Crosnier Laure

mbroise Baudry, the architect for the Romanian pavilion in 1867 and the and 1867 in pavilion Romanian the for architect the Baudry, mbroise er, a style of this sort had not yet been defined in the in defined been yet not had sort this of style a er, 5

most well most Livraisons Livraisons d'histoire de l'architecture - known architects in his country. his in architects known

ainl tls n h Balkan the in styles national

'gpe 'n rhtce Ambroise Architecte: d'un L'Egypte h architects specialised in Oriental Oriental in specialised architects h ibitions and would and ibitions , , n°5, ly ly 4

CEU eTD Collection Implications, Political Its and Architecture F Angelaki”, modernities, European and articulations Myth well most The scarce. 7 practice and history between architecture; (eds.), Teodore Ioana Popescu, Carmen in Paris”, a 1867 de universelle L’Exposition a e Troesmis a Baudry Ambroise Romanian pavilion in 1867: Marie Laure Crosnier Leconte, “Du savoir archeologique a la reconstruction de fantaisie: French: 253 Nabila in roumain“, cas (ed.), Volait le Mercedes et Oulebsir travers à Lecture identitaires. quêtes et géopolitique entre : balkanique l’orientalisme l’ à l’architecture : l’identité 6 2005). P and Detrez, Loyalties in the Balkans: The Great Powers, the Empire Ottoman and Nation 2006 Press, CEU (Budapest: 5 countries, architecture where theexhibition onlyremains analysed. briefly ea in architecture national regarding studies few the been also have Important Parisian the been has domain this in pioneer non almost are architectural studies Comparative period. 1989 pre the of national representation have recently until embedded been inthe teleological trends andMarxist why I am counting chiefly on primary architecture emerging tothis contribute will field. has country and obstacles have studied been for some time, the actual nationalistic discourse in each specific needs its nationalism, of causes the If region. the in studies building nation on approach fresh

or Serbia: Bratislav Pantelić, Pantelić, Bratislav Serbia: or In this field there is also a need for further studies, as with the sole ex sole the with as studies, further for need a also is there field this In de patrimoine “Un research: my for point starting the provided that issue the on articles important two has She See as examples examples as See - 272. 272. (abig: abig Uiest Pes 20) Nn Pnugá “ooiig h iel neoclassica ideal: the “Colonizing Panourgiá, Neni 2000); Press, University Cambridge (Cambridge: ,

Genius loci: national et régional en architecture; entre histoire et pratique = national and regional in and regional national = pratique et histoire entre architecture; en régional et national loci: Genius Le style... Le By analysing architecture’s entanglement architecture’s analysing By Theresearch uponinacademic subject has touched been only literature ofmy and is this She is also the author of the seminal work on the Romanian national style, unfortunately available only in in only available unfortunately style, national Romanian the workon seminal ofthe author Shethe is also ieter Plas, eds. eds. Plas, ieter styles in the Balkans, let alone their connection with the universal exhibitions. A exhibitions. universal the with connection their alone let Balkans, the in styles ny eety eoe h fcs f scholars. of focus the become recently only . A sole study is entirely dedicated to a Balkan construction at construction Balkan a to dedicated entirely is study sole A . icuss f olcie dniy n eta ad otes Europ Southeast and Central in Identity Collective of Discourses - known studies are for Greece: Eleni Bastéa, Bastéa, Eleni Greece: for are studies known Developing cultural identity in the Balkans: convergence vs. divergence vs. convergence Balkans: the in identity cultural Developing écoute des nationalismes”, nationalismes”, des écoute

–

2009); 2009); ainls ad rhtcue Te rain f Ntoa Sye n Serbian in Style National a of Creation The Architecture: and Nationalism L’Orientalisme architectu L’Orientalisme

Hannes Grandits, Nathalie Clayer, and Robert Pichler, eds. eds. Pichler, Robert and Clayer, Nathalie Grandits, Hannes , (Bucharest: Simetria, 2002). , Simetria, (Bucharest: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 56, No. 1 (Mar., 1 No. 56, Vol. Historians, Architectural of Society ofthe Journal sources to develop my conclusions. Research dealing with Journal of the theoretical humanities theoretical the of Journal - based historian of architecture Carmen Popescu. Carmen architecture of historian based 6 tds balkaniques Études

with Balkan nationalism, I will also provide a provide also will I nationalism, Balkan with ral entre imaginaires et savoirs et imaginaires entre ral

The Creation of Modern Athens: Planning the Planning Athens: Modern of Creation The

ception of Romania, the literature is also also is literature the Romania, of ception 5

hs m rsac o national on research my Thus, - building , no. 12, 2005 and “Le paradoxe de de paradoxe “Le and 2005 12, no. , -

the World Exhibition, namely the namely Exhibition, World the xset eadn national regarding existent . . (IB Tauris, 2011); Raymond 7 , vol. 9, nr 2, august 2004. 2004. august nr2, 9, vol. , (1770 e

, (Paris: Picard, 2009), Picard, (Paris: , ch of the Balkan the of ch - 1945) . (Peter Lang, (Peter Conflicting Conflicting 1 Vol. , scu - 4, 6 l

CEU eTD Collection theEnlightenment Mind of the on Civilization 1998). Press, Goldsworthy, 9 forthcoming (2014). 18, image nationale: les pays d’ 1996. Press, California of University Berkeley: C University of California Press, 1992); 8 177 (2005), 147 Bulgaro the in Furnishings and Facades Nation: the “Housing University Press, 2006). For Bulgaria only some elements of its na Romania 1866 16 1997). nuanced view. more far a in entanglements and negotiations influences, mutual of examples offers however, Western perceptions and influences. Said’s Orientalism by analysing mainly literary works have come to define the regi paralleling mine inavery way.limited fr Mexico of 1, War World the before pavilion one expositions until the Second World War. However the author is detailing the architecture of only Tenorio Mauricio the on all of creation at the to led that influences of variety the dwell and limitations institutional not did but historian art an of eye accurate an with involved architects cultu other of representation architectural the analysing for precedents important set here mentioned books parallels several which among fairs, world the at countries Latin and

ambridge University Press, 1988; Mauricio Tenorio Zeynep Ҫelik, Ҫelik, Zeynep eie Tdrv' smnl work, seminal Todorova's Besides –

159; 159; Nikolai Voukov, “Le monastère de Rila: incarnation du national passé bulgare” I have found useful works that analyse the architecture and of representation the Oriental In this thesis I will also add a new dimension to Balkan studies where publications echoing - 41. For Romania the se the Romania For 41. - 179.

res at these Exhibitions. Zeynep Ҫelik described the Oriental pavilions and the the and pavilions Oriental the described Ҫelik Zeynep Exhibitions. these at res Focusing mainly on Russia and Eastern Europe is Larry Wolff, LarryWolff, is Europe Eastern and Russia on mainly Focusing Inventing Ruritania: The I The Ruritania: Inventing –

1927. 1927. Local and International Aspects of the Search for National Expression

ipaig h Oin: rhtcue f sa a Nineteenth at Islam of Architecture Orient: the Displaying

- rlo fee a eald con o Mxc’ priiain t h world the at participation Mexico’s of account detailed a offered Trillo

Amérique latine «entre pittoresque »indigène modernitéet proclamée”,

minal work is Popescu, Popescu, is work minal

Timothy Mitchell, mgnn te Balkans the Imagining mperialism of the Imagination Imagination the of mperialism 9

A glance at the Balkans through the Universal Exhibitions, , (Stanford: Stanford Universit , Stanford (Stanford:

Christiane Demeulenaere Christiane - Trillo, Trillo, Mexico at the World's Fairs: Crafting a Modern Nation,

"Egypt at the inExhibition" 7

Le style. style. Le

- Ofr Uiest Pes 1997) Press, University (Oxford om Paris 1889, and thus his endeavour is endeavour his thus and 1889, Paris om Ottoman Revival House”, House”, Revival Ottoman tional tional style have been analysed: Mary Neuburger, See also Shona Kallestrup, Kallestrup, Shona also See (New Haven and London: Yale University University Yale London: and Haven (New - Douyère, “Expositions internationales et internationales “Expositions Douyère, y1994). Press, Inventing Eastern Europe The Map of Map The Europe Eastern Inventing - Century World’s Fairs, Fairs, World’s Century Colonising Colonising Egypt can be drawn. be can , , Études Ba

Centropa , , (New York: Columbia

this architecture. this Art and Design in Design and Art ,

on on in terms of e as Vesna also see Diacronie , no.2, (2008), no.2, , lkaniques , , Cambridge: 8

The two The (Berkley: , , No. , , 12,

CEU eTD Collection (1989), 217 No. 2, 31, 12 2004). (1894 Gand: și Romania at the Universal and Internationa Liege Burxelles, Anvers, la de internaționale sau – 1867 Vlad, Laurențiu empire. second the of politics and Art 11 Burke, Peter 1996); Press, ofMichigan University McDonalds, J. Terrence see turn cultural onworks general Approaches European Central Heinz and Kocka in Jürgen History." Comparative 10 offers valuable insight. committee organizinglocal the and Paris to ambassador Romanian the betweencorrespondence investigate have I addition, In found. be also can exhibitions the at madeconstructions the of drawingsand plans the all Here byraisedthem. correspondence contains important instructions co given to the participants as well as concerned various issues the in ambassador French the with and committee local the and organisers French the between correspondence the of comprise These Paris. in kept organisers, history limited impact, rather with works in explored been have topics latter historiography,the exhibition o methods research other employs and structures and institutions, trends, economic statistics, like tools historical traditional from away moved that turn” “cultural the of part as seen be could thus language

1937], 1937], (Ia Ҫelik, Olmo, Carlo and Aimone Linda J ürgen Kocka and Haupt, Heinz Haupt, ürgenand Kocka –

1937 . Displaying; Displaying; ial, y eerh el wt noti with deals research my Finally, The main primary sources I have relied upon are the archives, created by the French French the by created archives, the are upon relied have I sources primary main The 12 11

ș , [Imagines of identities: Romania national at the Universal Internationaland of Exhibitions 1867Paris, hl nw prahs ae nihd oan lk post like domains enriched have approaches new while i: Institutul European, , 2007); Ibid., Imagini ale identității naționale. România la expozițiile universale și internaționale de la Paris, la de internaționale și universale expozițiile la România naționale. identității ale Imagini Timothy - 236. frd y te dsilns ihn h sca sciences. social the within disciplines other by ffered

Mitchell, , and New Perspectives and - Les expositions universelles: 1851 universelles: expositions Les Gerhard "Comparison and Beyond: Traditions, Scope, and Perspectives ofand Perspectives Scope, Traditions, Beyond: and "Comparison Gerhard

The Universal Expositions of 1855 and 1867 and 1855 of Expositions Universal The The The World as Exhibiton l Expositions of Pe Pe urmele „Belgiei Orientuluiˮ: România la expozițiile universale - Varieties of cultural hi cultural of Varieties Gerhard Haupt (eds.), (eds.), Haupt Gerhard

(New York and Oxford: Berghahn, 2009) Berghahn, Oxford: and York (New d the Romanian Foreign Affairs archive where the where archive Affairs Foreign Romanian the d n f ybls, dniy n self and identity symbolism, of on 8 Anvers, Anvers, Burxelles, Liege and Gand],

The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences Human the in Turn Historic The ,

Comparative Comparative inStudies Society and History, – - 1900,

1935 story Comparative and Transnational History. Transnational and Comparative

(Paris, Belin, 1993); Patricia Mainardi, Patricia 1993); Belin, (Paris, ) [Following the “Oriental Belgium”: Belgium”: “Oriental the [Following ) , (Cornell University Press, 1997). 1997). University (Cornell Press, , - , (London, Bath Pres Bath (London, , ooil tde ad art and studies colonial

10 (Bucharest: (Bucharest: Nemira, , 17 ,

ihn world Within nre. Such untries. - - dniy and identity

(Michigan: 18. For 18. s, 1989); s,

Vol.

CEU eTD Collection 13 nation of visibilityyoung and expressed neatly aspirations of the countr certain a had pavilions national the However domains. other in conducted successfully be can architecture can also be seen as part of this larger context on which parallel comparative research on work My on. so and elements, geographical industries, crafts, traditions, myths, products, various count can one which among exhibits innumerable involved that apparatus exhibition the to related considerations general representational discours More it. to ascribed meanings the and architecture crea the architects themselves, a complex picture has emerged regarding how Balkan architecture was Balkanconstructions were received inParis. un to essential were press, French the material source published primary such Among research. my to crucial been have booklets presentation of form the in countries ge

Çelik, eae b bt te rnh raies s ok junl, ttsis ad h participating the and statistics, journals, book, as organisers French the both by nerated ted and the multiple overtoneswith it. and thatcome themultiple ted Displaying, n diin o h acia mtra cnutd te fiil ulctos f h time, the of publications official the consulted, material archival the to addition In ulctos bt shlry n pplr ter einl n cross I shall begin the thesis with a theoretical chapter in which, after I survey the peculiarities and regional their popular, and disproportionate to scholarly both publications, contemporary in received they attention the and pavilions national the of As visibility high the cultures. of representing in architecture of role temporary installations, they the could be experi and definition cultural complex about and serious questions raised expositions universal the of grounds the on erected pavilions The from are onlytaken to conclusions thatI myself limit will currentThroughout thesis, the By looking at these sources, adding also an analysis of the building themselves as well as - building in the region, I shall explain the main concepts behind my approach with an an with approach my behind concepts main the explain shall I region, the in building

137.

e employed for the Balkan countries take should into account the larger

the shortthe life of the buildings themselves.

9 mental and ask these questions boldly. And, because

ies. As remarked: Çelik 13

derstanding how the the how derstanding - utrl mat was impact cultural

CEU eTD Collection west of thedisplayed perception andone’s own image. examinati the is argument the throughout Threaded Paris. of exhibitions world the at seen World Western the and Balkans the between thetime, one in1 thatof exhibition largest the on information of amount the as argument, the to pivotal chapteris 19 the of exhibitions universal Parisian the at architecture countries’ Balkan have Balkans the about stereotypes and ideas some how architectureexhibition howitmeant “the represent and to nation”. Balk the in styles architectural national the with briefly deals which subchapter, following Then sources. local to access best the have I which on Romania, caseof the in meaning national acquire canarchitecture how exemplifyI shall and following chapter has again two parts. First, I shall address the issue of symbolism The architecture. exhibition of creation the in involved exchanges and dialogues various the “relati on emphasis Thus, my research and thesis argument concludes with a study of the dynamic relations dynamic the of study a with concludes argument thesis and research my Thus, survey quickly I before where three chapter from begins thesis my of part research The 900, allows aanalysis. more thorough onal” or “entangled” histories, which I believe are the best suited to capture to suited best the are believe I which histories, “entangled” or onal” on of the tension between the images created by the the by created images the between tension the of on 10

n, u i esnil o h udrtnig of understanding the to essential is but ans,

developed, I embark on the analysis of analysis the on embark I developed,

th

century. The final century.The

in architecture CEU eTD Collection (eds JürgenKocka Transfers and Comparison “Between New Perspectives and Heinz Haupt, and Kocka Heinz 15 Reflexivity." ofthe Challenge and Croisée Comparison: Histoire "Beyond Zimmermann. Bénédicte and Michael Werner 204 2009), Books, Berghahn Oxford: (NewYork, (eds.), Kocka in and Haupt ofEurope”, History Transnational 14 recently advocated. argue that it is a case of combining all these theoretical frameworks, in line with what some have history relational and transnational comparative, of concepts in turn lead to a strong transnational orientation. In the following nations m the countries “relational” approaches. w dealing am I research my in why is this and importance utmost of are created connections The other. each influencing mutually also but competition in place, and time same the at culture “their” displayed nations where hub

“It is the task of the future to better to future ofthe task “It isthe ne For a) - Gerhard "Comparison and Beyond: Traditions, Scope, and Perspectives of Comparative History." in Jürgen History." ofComparative Perspectives and Scope, Traditions, Beyond: and "Comparison Gerhard

tworks study see Philipp Ther, “Comparisons, Cultural Transfers, and the Study of Networks: Toward a Toward Networks: theof and Study Transfers, Cultural “Comparisons, Ther, Philipp see tworksstudy My research is foremost positioned in the world of Un of world the in positioned foremost is research My A Comparative, and Relational Approach Transnational eans revealing similarities, shared cultural heritage and unrecognised past relations that History and Theory and History ’

participation participation at the World Exhibitions. In the Balkan context .), .), Comparative and Transnational History Transnational and Comparative

(New York and Oxford: Berghahn, 2009): 21. An idea also expressed in Hartmut Kaelble, in Kaelble, Hartmut An expressed 21. also idea 2009): Berghahn, Oxford: and York (New 15 -

Gerhard (eds.), (eds.), Gerhard Chapter 14

At the same time

45, no. 1 (2006): 30 1 no. (2006): 45,

– combine comparative and entanglement history”, Jürgen Kocka and Haupt, Haupt, and Kocka history”,Jürgen entanglement and comparative combine

1: Theoretical Framework and What Now? AFrench Now? What and Comparative and Transnational Histor Transnational and Comparative t wa hs en ald h suy f ewrs r the or networks of study the called been has what ith -

, 2

my approach is comparative, necessary for analysing 25. The term “relational” approaches has been usedin has been approaches term“relational” 25. The - 50: 31. 50: 11

, (New York and Oxford: Berghahn, 2009). Berghahn, Oxford: and (New , York Central European Approaches and Perspectives and Approaches European Central - German Debate” in Heinz in Debate” German applied to my research my to applied

iversal Exhibitions, an exchange an Exhibitions, iversal

pages, y.

Central European Approaches Approaches European Central I will briefly explore the ,

comparison between - Gerhard Haupt and and Haupt Gerhard ,

and I will will I and

CEU eTD Collection Theory and 20 19 Compari Historical 18 History, European Central 17 Genese 16 studies. historical in minority” “a approaches view ontheBalkan Peninsula. offeri of advantage added the with participation, Romanian the case, I try anwill towards “asymmetrical lean notto meaning study comparison”, best a ofthe known archite nations Balkan the the others. approach, where “one’s own national comparison”. others, from elements of number clarif better to used was comparison where milieu, actors. historical highly selective, based on a too mechanistic framework exchanges, influences and transformations. Consequently of importance the stressed have approaches new the states, nation usually analysis, of units buil been

The following critiques of comparative endeavours are taken from Kocka, “Comparison and Beyond” Beyond” and “Comparison Kocka, from taken are endeavours ofcomparative following critiques The 37. Comparison”, “Between Kaelble, aroundthe German debates The “Beyondthe Nation Ther, Phillip histoireculturelle”, en comparatisme “Surdu les limites Espagne, isMichell critique this for seminal text The , 1994, 112 112 1994, , cture and in their presentation by the French at the Since the mid the Since n addition In t upon a criticism of comparative approaches. comparative of criticism a upon t 42, (2003), 41 (2003), 41 42, 19

This hasbeen thecase research inmy 18

However son: the Case of the German 'Sonderweg'," 'Sonderweg'," ofthe German Case son: the – 17

121.

m poet epns o te ciius ht ae ae comparative made have that critiques other to responds project my , , against positioned were critiques These

epand h cmo clua heritage cultural common the explained I - – 1990s vol. 36, no. 1 (2003), 45 no. (2003), 1 36, vol.

42. Se 42. ,

a a comparison done on equal footing can actually lead to a transnational , Sonderweg Sonderweg

e also Koka, Haupt, “Comparison and Beyond”, 13 13 Beyond”, and “Comparison Haupt, Koka, also e : The Relational Basis of a Comparative History of Germany and Europe.”, Europe.”, and Germany of History Comparative ofa RelationalBasis : The the orientation towards a transnational and entangled history has has history entangled and transnational a towards orientation the

history” history” appears so not unique are the best illustration of this. See Jurgen Kocka, “Asymmetrical “Asymmetrical Kocka, Jurgen See ofthis. illustration thebest are a ehdlg ta hs en ald “asymmetrical called been has that methodology - 73. 20

12

By comparing actors through one phenomenon, one through actors comparing By

,

where y a single unit by looking only at only looking by unit single a y History and Theory and History which 16 , Universal E

, comparison comparison has been seen

Moving away from a focus on fixed on focus a from away Moving through a comparativethrough perspective of a

also reinforces the nation states as trend most visible in the German the in visible most trend which ,

ng a common transnational common a ng xhibitions. xhibitions. This is also why 38 40 (1999): 38 but rather similar to that of -

15. e t smlrte in similarities to led

- 51.

as a method a History limited CEU eTD Collection 22 21 constant switch of viewpoints countries which transformations atfour time same the At period. at W period. certain a over transformation with the back. participants. the and organisers E fact isolation process of the units compared, types ofsources by comes with comparing I Exhibition, Universal the

xhibitions lies in the interconnectedness and entanglement between the actors, the French French the actors, the between entanglement and interconnectedness the in lies xhibitions Kocka, “Comparison”, 41. “Comparison”, Kocka, 16. Beyond”, and “Comparison Haupt, Kocka, also See 35. Comparison”, "Beyond Zimmermann, Werner, the organisersof the diachronic logic ,

orld Exhibitions t s n o m mi agmns ht h poes of process the that arguments main my of one is it

in my case c case in my Comparing It has also been pointed out how comparison brings comparison how out pointed been also has It critique Another . 22

Building on this on Building .

ould , participations participations

the Exhibitions and byview and French Exhibitions the as any comparative approach must “freeze its objects in time” even if dealing ,

where countries had to present themselves or be presented at a certain fixed

more more and more cases. In my project I will focus on the documents created exhibitions, along oftheexhibitions, most long 19

be be brought to c to brought

,

identified avoid the increasing dependence on secondary sources secondary on dependence increasing the avoid also I ,

, the advocates of more recent historic recent more of advocates the

and T hus for address t h Wrd xiiin as mas mov means also Exhibitions World the at

omparing stresses stresses omparing as the French perspectiveFrench as on the , paying paying special attention to cases of “

I will pass from comparison to a study of networks and networks of study a to comparison from pass will I which would be 21

h dahoi dmnin y olwn te various the following by dimension diachronic the

But in my research this “freezing this research my in But 13

the tension between the synchronic and and synchronic the between tension the er inherent in any classical comparison.In s,

c as I was able to Iable was as forth etn acietr fr h W the for architecture reating th

centu a fixed, unbending viewpoint unbending fixed, a the the al methods felt the need for afor need the felt methods al ry. architecture

intercrossing intercrossing of points directly ” comes naturally comes ” ing of the of the ,

which often often which beyond the the beyond access bot access Balkan

orld h ,

CEU eTD Collection Zimmermann, Werner, 110; (eds.), Haupt and in Kocka History" Comparative in Boundaries 26 and 2007) Insititul European Vlad, Exh the at commissions Romanian ofthe publications official from factsthe merelyup reproducing ended have standpoint thiswrittenfrom few works The in Bucharest. archivalresearch 25 Process (eds.), Sejersted Francis and Ginev Dimitri in Cultures”, Colonising 24 23 consider processes However, Exhibition. from part a only of selection the limit: representation, is suitable for a comparative exercise archite the But 1889. of Exhibition World the at restaurant with a presentation of the Laurium silver mines in Greece, even if both were displayed Indeed comparable. them make to order in units of regarding the in the Balkan states considering that there perspectFrenchthe fromanalysis an view, of points presentation their saw they how and countries participating Balkans. the in discourses comes view”. of

Among the appeals on appeals Amongthe thefor even is the situation This “self ofthe case See 40 Comparison” “Beyond Zimmermann, Werner, Imagini ale identitatii nationale. Romania la expozitiile universale si internationale de la Paris la de si internationale universale la expozitiile Romania nationale. identitatii ale Imagini

, (Oslo: TMV, 1996). TMV, (Oslo: , in line with the French de Frenchthe with line in Another argument against comparative perspective is related to the isolation and selection

, 23 te rpeettoa strategies representational other

I will also refer to the l the to refer also will I

My research illustrates illustrates research My

availability ofsources. - , c

and a future project olonisation” presented in my research and theorised in Alexander Kiossev, “The Self “The Kiossev, Alexander in theorised and myresearch in presented olonisation”

reflexivity see Monica Juneja and Margarit Pernau, "Lost in Translation? Transcending Transcending inTranslation? "Lost Pernau, Margarit and Juneja Monica see reflexivity

is following postmodern appeals appeals postmodern following

Beyond Comparison Beyond limited limited information regarding the participations at the World Exhibition Pe urmele Belgiei Orientului, Orientului, Belgiei urmele Pe

24

Besides, I often tried to describe the other side other the describe to tried often I Besides, Romanian participation in World Exhibitions, although I did a thoroughlya did Exhibitions, I although World in participation Romanian

sire arger context arger such , 25

even

starting

, 48 , 48 mr cmlx ersnainl rcs a a at process representational complex more a a case when the perspective the when case a . though - 26

– 41.

49; Ha 49; Kocka, n motn eape s gi te Romanian the again is example important An 14

from from t ,

(Bucharest: Nemira, 2004). Nemira, (Bucharest:

and that was often contrary to the nation building nation the to contrary often was that ,

tr, s n o te an media main the of one as cture, ive is part of my main argument, mymain of part is ive while at t his Comparative and Transnational History Transnational and Comparative to whe ,

n cno cmae a a Roman a say compare cannot one Cultural Aspects of the Modernization theModernization of Aspects Cultural constan standpoint upt, "Comparison and Beyond...”, 14. 14. Beyond...”, and "Comparison upt, n .

But even if I will constantly switc constantly will I if even But I he same time providing an obvi

have the opportunity the have ibitions. ibitions. t reflexivity on these selection these on reflexivity t

w ould See for example Laurenţiu for See of the of

encounter

too Balkan countries Balkan , meaning the meaning , ,

(Iași: (Iași: difficulties

I will also will I e specially specially

, 108 108 , f self of W

- orld – ous ian ian

h s -

CEU eTD Collection 29 28 (Edinbu Realistic or Strategy?, Ideal an Typologies 27 interrelations”. dynamic of network a “reveals arc an creating of process the that is arguments my of one Infact presented. and receivedwere countries theseassessing how in tool indispensable an Itis nations. Balkan concerned the and organisers French the between relations the in developing is This also “level in that exists interaction withthe others, producing ownlogic its with feedback effects”. macro direct more a given a relational focus on the transnational approach, in a fact In Exhibitions. World the at processes relational the analyse the national potential generalis over of risk the Exhibitions, World at architecture Balkan of typologies for looking constantly reflection ontheconstructed naturestate Balkan ofthe comparison. of units the constituting the that restaurant in 1889 Ebbinghaus, Bernhard 7. Beyond...”, and "Comparison Haupt, and Koka Ibid. Zimmermann, Werner,

rgh, UK: 2012). UK: rgh, A possible T

to o o laig utpe set aside aspects multiple leaving of or ation he comparative and transnational framework can be seen as seen be can framework transnational and comparative he architecture. future debates around this issue c issue this around debates future applies architectural to my research ,

critique ofmy project where

- historical or r or historical Beyond Comparison, Beyond oe h less, the None

, styles intheBalkans

in the eyes of the French

, in the sense that egional approach. Accordingly approach. egional

Paper presented at European Social Policy Analysis Network, Network, Analysis Policy Social European at presented Paper

I 43. elxvt i rqie in required is reflexivity ti sense this n could be

ould only be useful for useful be only ould

29 still are still 15

Intertwined with this is the is this Intertwinedwith the the transnational level at the

related thetypological to I undertaking: as am ,

th ,

e musicians and the food . y rjc cn e en s continuous a as seen be can project my s las present. always is s

and n

attempt its Comparing Welfare State Regimes: Regimes: State Welfare Comparing ietr rpeetn te nation the representing hitecture

high degree ,

, recent theoretical works have works theoretical recent

establishing an under an

transnational should mean a a mean should transnational to distance

a background serving to serving background a 27

of randomness. u I osdr that consider I But - shared researched W were more visible themselves themselves orld h criteria the architectural Exhibi

area, from from ti

ons Are

for as 28 - ,

CEU eTD Collection (EGO), 35 Univer Stanford LarryWolff, Imagination The the Imperialism of Ruritania: Inventing 34 33 Kocka, and in Haupt history” German on perspective transnational 32 31 Kocka, and Haupt Transfer and Comparison “Between Kaelble, Hartmut EGO; Transfer, Cultural Schmale, 30 Oriental on research Ҫelik’s complex transfer processes in specific historical contexts.” investigate “which situations on but technology and science European of export unidirectional dimension new a add to locals the to voice” a “give to opportunity good a are Exhibitions World the West, the and ma using West, examples. the by constructed was Balkans the of image the how shown Said’s of perspective dimensional principle be were not so straightforward stud postcolonial of field comingconcepts like “entangled closeor to history” foreigners and heritage

Veronika Lipphardt, Ludwig, David, “Knowledge Transfer and Science Transfer”, in ScienceTransfer”, and Transfer “Knowledge David, Ludwig, Lipphardt, Veronika Todorova, Maria 116. inTranslation?”, "Lost Pernau, Juneja, Marginal “Double Conrad, Sebastian by process ofthe Europeanization critique a See Young, Robert See Zimmermann, intrends Werner, methodological these about More identified

2011 These new methodological developments have been influential and have enriched the enriched have and influential been have developments methodological new These s of

34 -

f nage hsoy hs epd post helped has history, entangled of Inventing Eastern Europe The Map of Civilization on the Mind of theEnlightenment of the Mind on Civilization Mapof The Europe Eastern Inventing 12

the Balkan Peninsula Balkan the But by stressing the different entanglements and dialog and entanglements different the bystressing But

sity Press, 1994). Press, sity - n y research. my in 12. URL: http://www.ieg 12. by Comparative and Transnational History Transnational and Comparative Imagining the Balkans Imagining

local architec Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction Historical An Postcolonialism:

ies. to ,

but far more nuanced, producing dialogue and negotiations, can also

31

onre a the at countries 32 akn tde. n te wo other In studies. Balkan

ts. With ts. With this complex web of relations Their main assumption, that the influences influences the that assumption, main Their

n fact In , which , - , (New York: Oxford University Press, 19 University Press, , (New Oxford York: Orientalism ego.eu/lipphardtv

,

h fcs n eain ad dialog and relations on focus the

has been selected and used in various ways, both by both ways, various in used and selected been has 16 W

(New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1998). 1998). Press, University Yale London: and (NewHaven . 33 . orld

- - oooa n ohr, aalln Si, have Said, paralleling others, and Todorova ludwigd ooil tde t mv byn te one the beyond move to studies colonial the E , (Oxford: Blackwell, 2001). Blackwell, (Oxford: , xhibitions. She noticed how “European how noticed She xhibitions. Comparative and Transnational History Transnational and Comparative history transfers. of Beyond Comparison Beyond 35 - 2011

rds This , -

en[02.04.2014]. h fcs s o ogr n the on longer no is focus the is the methodology underlining ues ,

97); Vesna Goldsworthy, Vesna97); Goldsworthy, my research is once again

between Balkan people Balkan between European History Online Online History European ization: A plea for a for A plea ization: s , 31. See also Wolfgang also See 31. , ue -

30 and what now?”, in in whatnow?”, and of , n ie ih t with line in s,

Western Europe Western , (Stanford: (Stanford: , ny literary inly , 56. , ,

and

he s -

CEU eTD Collection 37 11. 1992), Press, California of University 36 influential. deeply been has Exhibition World the at architecture the goes, arguments main my of one as which, on Balkans the in architecturalstyles national the of creation the also is process building architecture inspired by the most glorious construction demonstrated constitute “characteristics” certain promoting and defining by this support to tried they nation as themselves assert to way a was Exhibitions World the at representation Balk Exhibitions.suitable ina the World researchabout opens continually that interaction”, and communication of space a “as seen but borders political and national by defined not one Europe, of concept flexible more a exchanges: on stress a with together process,them accordingreshaped which toself corrective a through filtered often were they appropriated; simplistically not were paradigms

A call made by Ther, “Comparisons”, 215. 215. “Comparisons”, Ther, by made A call Zeynep Ҫelik, Ҫelik, Zeynep b) n b wy f w prle peoea First, phenomena. parallel two of way by ans

frhr osqec emer consequence further A My research is organically intertwined with the with intertwined organically is research My Nation nto. country A nation. a T hroughout the hroughout - bv al by all above ipaig h Oin: Arch Orient: the Displaying Building inthe Balkans

p itgae ad excludes. and integrates up,

peninsula, some architectural forms were seen as "national", were "national", as seen were forms architectural some peninsula, ancient

a supposed was

ouet. xrsig hs a te oe f h national the of role the was this Expressing monuments. e fo te aall ih h “el Erpa colonies European “real” the with parallel the from ges

tcue f sa a Nineteenth at Islam of itecture 17 - visions and aspirations.” visions o ae goiu hsoy n a ih culture, rich a and history glorious a have to 37

hs ye f ewr suis s particularly is studies network of type This

s

on its t study of of study for for erritory. Second, part of the nation akn countries Balkan nation - Century World’s Fairs, Fairs, World’s Century - 36 building process in the in process building

,

wh - h national the states. Thus states. c would ich (Berkley: - ,

CEU eTD Collection 42 (ed.) Balakrishnan inGopal 41 2004) University Press, Oxford 40 Studies Political Comparative view see Stephen Shulman, “Challenging the Civic/Ethnic and 39 152. first 1983, editions: Antet,1997), (Bucharest: ofthe Pas] Perspectives 38 before the appearance nationalism”. of identitynational a or consciousnessnational “a formerhaving the nations, new and betweenold tradition” liter continuous or unit political nobility, own their “lacked groups ethnic Europe Eastern frontiers. existing already on elites political the by nation were rarely the same” a of and state a of frontiers “the as state” existing the against grew nationalism “the Balkans the “ethnic” one for of engineering”. cultural assertive w Gellner derogatory comparison with the Western European one. nationali Consequently buildings public in used

Hugh Seton Watson, “Old and New Nations” “Oldand Watson, HughSeton Miroslav Hroch, “From National Movement to the Fully HansKohn, See Anthony D. Smith,

ret Gellner, Ernest hc te ot aos itnto i bten “civic” a between is distinction famous most the which In general In sm , as opposed to the West the to opposed as , rote s intheBalkans, as described Western and Eastern Nationalisms, Nationalisms, Eastern Westernand ,

bu a “l a about

s rlvn bcgon t m topic my to background relevant a as ain ș nțoaim Ni esetv aur trecutului, asupra perspective Noi naționalism. și Națiuni Eastern Europe. ,

nationalism in Central and Eastern Europe has been described by way of a of way by described been has Europe Eastern and Central in nationalism National National Identity Mapping the Nation, Nation, the Mapping

, Vol. 35, No. 5, (2002), 554 554 5, (2002), No. 35, Vol. , , s peae” ouain h wud be would who population prepared” ess , 164. ,

n wr pooe b te tt a pr o te fiil ideology. official the of part as state the by promoted were and ,

as opposed to the West

38 39

This

. Echoing 41 , , (Reno: University of Nevada Press, 1991); For a recent critique of these

Hugh Seton Watson sees the East the sees Watson Seton Hugh 42 idea ,

in This is why the new nati

(London, New York: Verso, 2012), 80. 2012), Verso, New(London, York: by some of the influential onthetopic. most theorists by some

in John Hutchinson, Anthony D. Smith, Smith, D. Anthony Hutchinson, John in Hutchin has led to a very popul very a to led has it

are the works of Hans Kohn 18 - formed Nation: The Nation

– son and Smith, Smith, and son

585.

, West/East West/East Dichotomies in the Study of Nationalism”, 40

where

Another cliché states cliché Another

,

This wl sec sm o the of some sketch will I

nationalism w

has been the case ever s ainls fr h Ws and West the for nationalism

Nationalism, ons ar form of binary opposition, binary of form ar

[Nations and Nationalism. Nationalism. and [Nations n ed f “ocfl and “forceful a of need in would - - building building Process in Europe”, West opposition as one as opposition West

ould have been 134. ,

who who considers that in

Nationalism, need intellectuals to that in Central and Central in that

ince Ernest features

(Oxford: (Oxford:

applied Ne

ary an of of w

CEU eTD Collection 45 22 1985), Nations European Smaller the among Groups Patriotic of Composition 44 43 that “the government became the leader of the national movement” in Turkey, Greece and Romania. in Poland and Hungary, a “popular” one in Serbia and Bulgaria and a “bureaucratic” nationalism proposed tha among advocateda national orienta Exhibition Universal 1867 the at participation Romania’s of charge in was who politician and historian art archaeologist, Romanian a Odobescu, Alexandru masses broad an “active patriotic agitation”; and finally “national consciousness has become the concern of the “for the study of language, the culture, the history of the oppressed nationality”; then they mount firstly of national movements: distinguish phases three various by nationalism than the political sphere”. rather realm propagandistic and educational the in movement “a ideology, national the diffuse

Peter Sugar, Peter Ibid. Miroslav Hroch, Hroch, Miroslav

h rl o itletas a be ietfe a fnaetl n h “atr” ye of type “Eastern” the in fundamental as identified been has intellectuals of role The I nationalism tletas i as a te er o sm iprat dif important some of heart the at also lie ntellectuals – type

23. Nationalism in Eastern Europe Eastern in Nationalism

t there would be of s . ”

44 many scholars. A famous example of this is Hroch’s comparative analysis of analysis comparative Hroch’s is this of example famous A scholars. many oil rcniin o Ntoa Rvvl n uoe A oprtv Aayi o te Social the of Analysis Comparative A Europe: in Revival National of Preconditions Social

An example of example An ainls i Cnrl n Esen uoe Accordin Europe. Eastern and Central in nationalism s

in the region. the in

43

tion inthe artistic spheretion consideredchapter are inthe 2a. a “bourgeois” nationalism in Czech Republic, an “aristocratic” one

45 an

In Greece and Romania As such, As intellectual

in

Hutchinson and Smith, and Hutchinson depending 19 who w who

, ould

intellectuals develop a int develop scholarly intellectuals on ,

the “bureaucratic” nat

, (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, Press, University Cambridge (Cambridge, , fit Hroch’s model in my research is research my in model Hroch’s fit who took who Nationalism

in Paris in ferences identified by scholars scholars by identified ferences ,

while in Serbia and Bulgaria . Other . , 172. , a decisive action decisive

t hm one him, to g

intellectuals ionalism ionalism meant

,

it

erest who was can CEU eTD Collection Meditat 49 48 2000). Press, Rang Terence and Hobsbawn Eric in Tradition” 2008), 17. For the new, ”national” traditions that reinforce the idea of the nation state see Eric Hobsbawn, ”Inventing Raymond Detrez, Barbara 47 46 transnational depart ofanalysis, unit of which isthepoint Ba w Exhibitions, unique as themselves “exotic” or “mythical” as seen been An past the Europeancountries. tha has been concept and it folkl (historians, “ a than nationalisms merchants livingthe outsidethebordersof whowere nobility small no was there

To To paraphrase here the title of Nietzsche’s famous critique “On the Use and Abuse of History for Life” in Nationalisms Eastern Western and Kohn, Hans in Legacies” Historical Ottoman and Byzantine the On Building. Nation and Identity “Etnic Millas, Hercules Ibid. lkan n idealised view of history was was history of view idealised

the Western one” Western the , was ions 175 175

eie dfeecs s differences, Besides The mixed mixed The land 49 discovered

, 1974. 1974. ,

can – mostly this

scape, 176.

in the Balkans. in the be identified in the architectural designs architectural the in identified be h

ere each hadagainst At countries time tocompete the same other.

orists) played an important part in publicizing what was what publicizing in part important an played orists) ualised ualised as as and shared and ”

48 one noticed by the authors

. perceived

Sagaert (eds.), Europe and the Historical Legacies in the Balkans, (Bruxelles: Peter Lang,

,

This interplay of representations can representations of interplay This in a view more sentimental towards the past for the Central and Eastern and Central the for past the towards sentimental more view a in

–

a a “mission of the whole nation based on a more profound nationalism would have pla have would ,

For instance, it has been argued that the past the arguedbeenthat has it Forinstance, so

cultural heritage cultural ome major similarities have also been been also have similarities major ome legacy that both

regions, and a way for the Balkan countries to distinguish to countries Balkan the for way a and regions, “nationalism was developed by the native clergy and the and clergy native the by developed was “nationalism

which was a case of Western influence, as the Balkans have often have Balkans the as influence, Western of case a er, er, , 164 , The Invention of Tradition, of Invention The

y mentioned ed .

20

and a

esteemed and peculiar role in Balkan nationalism. Balkan in role peculiar

traditions Ottoman Empire”. above, above, consolidates the region as a single

that w that ure

in my research. in my , as w as , be spotted ve spotted be ere selected for

meant to represent the nation. the represent to meant (Cambridge: Cambridge University University Cambridge (Cambridge: ell as ell 46

the use and “abuse” of of “abuse” and use the ecie aog the among described

– called “our tradition” “our called

ry well at Universal at well ry an “invented”an preserv

,

the entangled ation

Untimely Untimely Experts . 47 rather

This ,

CEU eTD Collection 218. Press, 1998), MIT MA: (Cambridge, 52 Ibid., also 8 See 4. 1979), Publishers, (Hague:Mouton 51 160 Ibid., also see meaning as bearing ofarchitecture historyidea a ofthe For W in language as architecture 1867 50 sty architectural national the so one) Romanian the also but obvious most modern creations, constituted by former dialects reshaped and purified (see the Greek case as the Europe. Eastern and Central in styles national of creation the for inspiration of sources provided it and architecture. t “language” of kind another with nation the of language “maternal” the as promoted and rediscovered peasants the of language vernacular “architectonic conveycultur signs”, that meaning “in by formed are buildings of aspects exterior the how explains who Preziosi Donald by offered architecture. European Western common parallel is with language, comparison called “one of the oldest tropes i

Donald Donald Preziosi, Alofsin, Anthony Akos Moravanszky, Moravanszky, Akos a) - 1933

Case of Nation Meanings n h cnet f ainl self national of context the In most the messages, various or symbols ideas, transmits architecture how explain To

To extend the comparison one can also say that as the national languages were often were languages national the as that say also can one comparison the extend To (hcg: nvriy f hcg Pes 20) 8 A eiw f h mi pit ad ieaue on literature and points main the of review A 8. 2006), Press, Chicago of University (Chicago: , Chapter 2:Chapter The First National Architecture in Balkansthe 52

The rural buildings were indeed often seen as representing “the spirit” of the nation

Architecture, Architecture, language and meaning: the origins of the built world and

When buildings speak: architecture as language in the Habsburg Empire and its aftermath, its and Empire Habsburg the in language as architecture speak: buildings When in Archi optn vsos Ashtc neto i Cnrl uoen rhtcue 1867 Architecture, European Central in Invention Aesthetic visions. Competing - Building

illiam Whyte, “How do Buildings Mean”, Mean”, Buildings do “How Whyte, illiam tecture

50

: Theoretical andfrom Examples the Romanian Considerations

An example of the semiotic approach towards architecture is architecture towards approach semiotic the of example An

- eemnto, ks oaask ee euts the equates even Moravanszky Akos determination,

hat helped the national discourse, the vernacular vernacular the discourse, national the helped hat 21

e - specific and codespecific and History and Theory and History –

168.

- specific ways”.

its semiotic organization , No. 45 (2006), 154. (2006), 45 No. , les were modern modern were les n the tradition of

51

–

1918, . CEU eTD Collection arc of meaning the assessing in space of 55 54 53 structures. other with relation” “spatial its by and design urban the by influenced is meaning architecture’s how noticed time longhaveScholars Exhibition. Universal a of world peculiar the placementin accountinto aesthetic solely value. their taking or motifs) Byzantine or Oriental the (like symbols predefined some to according nation, in having pavilions the described often French the Thus countries. local the for and audience French the for meanings multiple bear they as pavilions involves a wide variety of “media and genres” form art an is it physics, of laws the to subject is it function, a serves it language unlike Whyte says that architecture “should not be studied for its meaning, but for its meanings” because Others though have tried to dis meanings. different conveying as seen Empire, Habsburg the in architecture of “languages” inseparable. considered be must context context when it was built, and the materiality of arch the in foremost analysed be must work every that idea the stresses Alofsin Anthony scholars. the official nation the architecture of the pavilions fulfils the role of national representation and is designed to “tell” constructs,

Lawrence Vale, Vale, Lawrence 153 Mean”, Buildings “Howdo Whyte, “Co method his hasHe named But the metaphor of architecture as language has its obvious shortcomings, explored by explored shortcomings, obvious its has language as architecture of metaphor the But Every reference to an exhibition pavilion should consider its spatial conte spatial its consider should pavilion exhibition an to reference Every 55 inspired

In our case the foreign nation’s pa nation’s foreign the case Inour Architecture, power, and national identity national and power, Architecture, - building discourse of discourse building

from old monuments and oldmonuments vernacularfrom

ntextual formalism”: Alofsin, Alofsin, formalism”: ntextual

tance themselves completely from the language metaphor. William hitecture see also Andrew Ballantyne, Ballantyne, Andrew also see hitecture –

154.

the Balkan states. the

53 54

22 u h vnue nvrhls t epoe five explore to nevertheless ventures he But vilions were usually grouped together, in a spacea in together, grouped usuallywere vilions . The observation is valid in the case of exhibition

. ( . itecture together with its social and historical When Buildings Speak WhenBuildings Yale University Press, 1992), 9. On the importance importance the On 9. 1992), Press, University Yale

constructions mind either its purpose, to represent a represent to purpose, its either mind

Architecture Theory: A Reader in Reader A Theory: Architecture . Specifically in my paper paper . Specificallyinmy , 11. 11. ,

xt, namely its namely xt,

and it and CEU eTD Collection 61 60 59 58 57 Europae Ethnologia Ro “The 56 Culture and Philosophy work. architectural an of meaning the asses correctlyto transpositions these explore to is the and construction actual the idea, the of conception the transformed: and reshaped are meanings the which during and “transposed” are a fundamental process in developing meaning to architecture. He sees three stages in which ideas cannot be so easily distinguished from the work itself” interpretation that aware us makes architecture art, other any than “More that concludes even by interpre something, of symbol a as the role its by conveyed is meaning the which on base a as onlybuilding of shape physical the see even Others important. equally considered are commentators “the architects of words”, who talk ab critics, the and workers; the endeavour; the sponsors who patron, the designs; the makes who architect, the elements: four of consists architecture that considers Evelyn, John writer century Forty, Adrian architecture. of meaning the consequently and creation to represent the nation. R nation”. “a the be to exhibited order in state elements each necessary where grammar” cultural “international an forming as described

epresentative Ibid., 175. Ibid., 155. Mean”, Buildings “Howdo Whyte, 650. Ibid., Nelson AdrianForty, Orvar Lofgren, “The Nationalization of Culture The central role of more than one actor, usually the architect, has been stressed in the the in stressed been has architect, the usually actor, one than more of role central The le of the International Exhibitions in the Construction of National Cultures in the 19th Century” in in Century” 19th the in Cultures National of Construction the in Exhibitions International the of le Goodman, “How Buildings Mean”, Mean”, “HowBuildings Goodman,

tations tations of others, usages of the building or own knowledge of the observer.

Words and buildings, A vocabulary of Modern Architecture Modern of vocabulary A buildings, Wordsand s

of the c of the , Vol. 24 (1994), 35. (1994), Vol. 24 , , (Bloomsbury Academic, 2005), 232 Academic,2005), (Bloomsbury ,

oncerned country and French architects worked to create architecture an worked to architects French and countryoncerned

out architecture and assign meaning to it. Critical Inquiry Critical ”, Ethnologia Europae interpretation. 23

56

n architectu In – , (1985), 649. (1985), ,

243. 243. 59 . Whyte also argues

60

Accordingly the job of the historian the of job the Accordingly . Vol 19,

, (Thames and Hudson, 2000), 11. 11. Hudson,2000), (Thames , and e hs s n nage process. entangled an is this re

(1989) (1989) quoted in Bjarne Stoklund,

interpreting English 17 English interpreting for for interpretation as 57

So So here also the 58

Goodman 61

This

th

CEU eTD Collection 62 architect to ascribed The Romanian Case ofNation as muchas ontheexterior possible aspect of could not apply. This together with a lack of space in my paper gave me analysis comparative my so pavilions the all for not were they available, were data these When sketches must still take them into account and be aware of his limits. In my case the knowledge of previous to beconsideredanalysing meaning: its in assessing my from thebuildings perspectivewith my and biases. of trap the avoid can I way this In time. the of commentaries the from emerging something the among buildings the by produced echoes the possible as much as analyse to tried I paper my in why is

Alofsin, To round In the of context my paper, that of nation building, one can see very well how meaning is Having the necessary data for all these aspects is an ideal case. Nevertheless the historian exteri and public recep interior the on patterns movement object; the and user the of interaction the spaces; its and fabric building’s the sequence; construction documents; and sketches, drawings, relationship between th thearchitect,and theand client the ofidentities buildingsite; conditions;socialthe and political and designs, the interior of the pavilions as well as the movement patterns are limited. are patterns movement the as well as pavilions the of interior the designs, and When Buildings speak, WhenBuildings

rnh uine Ad h maig srbd o h ntoa pvlos per as appears pavilions national the to ascribed meaning the And audience. French

up Alofsin gives a complete list of factors besides the building in itself that are besides initself thebuilding offactors a list complete gives up Alofsin tion of the building over time. ure by way of discourses. In the long 19 long the In discourses. of way by ure

12. em; building program; design sequence, which is often deduced only from

- Building

the building and reception.the building its 62 24

th

century, the goal was to fulfil yet fulfil to was goal the century, the reasons to concentrate

or; and or; CEU eTD Collection Eliade, România în public spiritului Pompiliu see influence French on work general a For 2006). ICR, (Bucharest: XX şi XIX secolelor România 66 l 65 429 2004), Cornis Marcel in Paris” History of the Literary Cultures of Romanian East of Faces Manifold “The Spiridon, Monica in assimilated” “totally being as far as going France, with ties close very had who intellectuals of range whole a of 64 63 the new villas ofthe state private andRomanian bourgeoisie. the like Architects architects. im most the designed others and Blanc French Bernard, Ballu, Galleron, Gottereau, by fashion in style French the to according remodelled the Meanwhile style. French the in works archit with career their started and Paris in studied (1838 Grigorescu Nicolae an painters artists, Romanian 1859. in Moldova and strong Wallachia a of was union the and in cause determinant national Romanian the advocated III, Napoleon through turn, in in Wallachia and Moldova studied in Paris a revolution 1848 the of figures main the all Almost activity.of domains all in model Parisian the on reliance strong the was countries Balkan the amongst Romania of feature distinctive the fact and so on, were directly against foreign influences, represented almost exclusi nation briefly analyse theways inwhich Romanian intellectuals usedand referredto a identity. an creating of that architecture, of purpose possible another ea și Principatele Române, Române, și Principatele ea

A recent colective volume on this isphenomenon Augustin Ioan (ed.), see sphere artistic the on stress witha III’sinfluence, Napoleon about ofstudies collection a For Details in Lucian Boia, 9. Ibid., ectural landscape of the two former capitals, Iași and especially Bucharest, was completely - building at discourse, the dawn national of state. theRomanian Generally those who promoted “national” sources of inspiration, a “national” character “national” a inspiration, of sources “national” promoted who those Generally

–

431.

Istorie Istorie si mit in constiinta romaneasca , [The French Influence on the Public Spirit] I Spirit] Public the Frenchon [The Influence , Catalog de expoziție, Muzeul Național de Artă al României, 2008 României, Artă al de Național Muzeul Catalogexpoziție, de , [French Influences Influences [French ,

–

1907), and the “national” architect, Ion Mincu (1852 Mincu Ion architect, “national” the and 1907), d later architects, went to study in Paris. The “national” painter, “national” The Paris. in study to went architects, later d

- Central Central Europe in Architecture and Art of Romania in 19 in Romania of Art and Architecture in nd returned there when the revolution failed. , Vol. 2, (Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 25

, , Humanitas, Influenţe Influenţe franceze în arhitectura şi arta din - II, ( II,

Bucuresti, Bucuresti, 1997, pp. 20 66 65 Bucharest, Univers, 1982) Univers, Bucharest,

-

oe n Jh Nuae (e Neubauer John and Pope rud hs ie h first the time this Around 63

To exemplify this I will I this exemplify To Influenţa franceză asupra asupra franceză Influenţa portant buildings of of buildings portant th vely Inby France.

rchitecture inthe and 20 and Napoleon al III al Napoleon – –

1912), both 1912), 27. 27. Examples th

Centuries], 64

France ds.), - CEU eTD Collection 68 Europe 67 o that is example Kogălniceanu, mainlyagainstwho spoke theforeign he influences when emphatically advised: famous A Romania. in sort this the first Universal thatof London Exhibition, contemporary in1851,is thefirstof opinions with Infact terms. artistic and cultural Un in specificity nation’s everypromoted turn in that Exhibitions the at representation the around discourses the to corresponded that background ideological and theoretical the formed They borrowings. foreign of rejection a and inspiration F the against So remarked how: national a create to attempts various the were responses the period found towards the end of the 19 promoted by theWest through theUniversal Exhibi and encouraged also was architecture of type this and schools Western in acquired ideas the architecturala transferredwho created it nationalof bearingmeaning styles those many because “self as some by characterised

Ada Hajdu, AdaHajdu, self on Kiossev,‘Notes Aleksander See , ed. B. Pejic and D. Elliott 1999); D. and (Stockholm: ed.B. Pejic , The process of voluntary adoption of “alien values and models of civilisation” has been has civilisation” of models and values “alien of adoption voluntary of process The y rahn hte fr l ta i ntv, e ae orwd rm h frinr only foreigners the from borrowed have we native, is that all tha nation Buta spirit [...] the not but word superficialities, the for hatred preaching By national style can be related the to Art Nouveau movement. functionalobservancespaces,the theof innovation, for desire (the vocabulary formal its manifested of th in view of point the from and arts) applied both conceptually (the interest in local specificity, the vernacular, traditional architecture, and the are Paris in Academy Arts Fine the by promoted style the to response the France in If Art Nouveau in Romania in Art Nouveau

rench influence were those who advocated a return to the “national” sources of sources “national” the to return a advocated who those were influence rench e firsteinstance thedecoration, at of level followedneed modern, createthe by to

- th colonisation”.

, Noi Media Print,(Buc Media Noi , century in the Art Nouveau movement, in Romania, in the same - colonising cultures’, in cultures’, colonising Gesamtkunstwerk 67

26

The concept is also central to m to central also is concept The

tions. harest, 2013), kindle edition. 2013), harest, After the wall: Art and culture in postArt andculturein wall: the After

te uue prime future the f

ideal) the first phase of the Romanianphaseideal) firstof the the 68

t denies its past is threatenedbyais past deniesits t Romanian style. It has been has It style. Romanian

- minister, y analysis of the of analysis y - communist communist

iversal iversal Mihail

CEU eTD Collection 73 18. 1955), și artă, statpentruliteratură de Editura (Bucharest: 72 Wallachia], 71 Culture], 70 temps du actuel”. les progres et les idee par passe institutionsdu les enameliorant et reformant menacee est passe nous avons emprunte des etrangers que des superficialites, la lettre et non l’esprit [...]. Mais une nation qui renie son 69 hut”. peasant the theshape of “adopting “local” by the architects toobserve was world.” future the of needs the with line in nothing “have that confusion” for the against advised he when 1851, in them among Paris, in speaking was He Rosetti. C.A. or Golescu Nicolae Bălcescu, Nicolae like 1848, from revolutionaries former the of many had he colleagues as and Quinet Edgar and Michelet Jules Romania the of advocates known were professors His Paris. in 1850s, of of the Monuments and long time archaeology professor, he studied in his youth, at the beginning advoc nation.” genius the for expression considered the of Berindei, are that“arts necessarily mediumof who a t genius”, “national of notion the is arts foreign the context. to Romanian the to uncritically applied referringhabits and institutions borrowings, foreign the against and local the towards orientation

Ibid: "arhitectul român are trebuință a adopta forma col adopta trebuințăa are român "arhitectul Ibid: Viitorul artelor în România in culture their and arts the [About Românească” Ţara în lor cultura despre şi arte „Despre Berindei, I. Dimitrie Titu Maiorescu, « Mihail Kogălnieanu, ates ates of Romanian art, the critique and statesman, Alexandru Odobescu. The future Minister Titu Maiorescu, famous for his theory of “shapes without con without “shapes of theory his for famous Maiorescu, Titu reforming andimproving past institutions the by itself, in roots its finds who one the is civilization true a because danger terrifying and great But the first traces of this attitude in the artistic sphere come from one of the fiercest the of one from come sphere artistic the in attitude this of traces first the But 71 Opere

Analele

, 1973, 153. 1973, ,

a u gad t fru dne, a l vae iiiain s el q’n ie e or si, en sein, notre de tire qu’on celle es civilisation vraie la car danger, affreux et grand un par

I/5 (mai 1890), p. p. 110. (mai I/5 1890), În În contra direcției de astăzi ȋn cultura Opere

in in Popescu, Le style, 47: “Ainsi, en prechant la haine pour tout ce qui etait autochtone, [The [The Future of the Arts in Romania], Paris, 17 March 1851 in A. L. Odobescu,

The study The kn p n h sm pro b pol lk Dimitrie like people by period same the in up aken dates from 1862. dates 27

ibei și a bordeiului țărănimei". țărănimei". bordeiului și a ibei română 69

eign architectural styles seen as a “bizarre a as seen styles architectural eign

»

[Against [Against the Current Direction of the Romanian

70

Key to this discussion in discussion this to Key tent”, also spoke also tent”, 72

n national demands, national n

The answer for the for answer The

73

20 yearsafter20

for the for Opere ,

CEU eTD Collection 77 românesc”. stil punct,un adevărat unoarecare constituie la până artelor, 76 prefaceți dar dinvechime; rămase românești monumentele sorgintea unei mărețe arte și avute nu [...] nicio pierdeți ocaziune d multă 75 mai prezente să poate străbunești". tradițiuni glorioase nu artă "nicio 82: 1908., Bucharest, ad III, vol complete, Opere in 1872 decembrie 74 year:the same Bucharestin appearedin which arts, history the forof handbook first the advicesgivenin the of country houses, as well Romanian restaurant initial at the 1889 the World Exhibition in Paris. for plans the designed style National Romanian the of “father” the as today until for the Romanian stylenational emerged: Ion Min figures important first the when time the also was It Bucharest. in school architectural first the that has tobe used by t andpast” turbulent most our “emergedthat in style” phrase“Romanian the usesOdobescueven referred tothe architects, a directly build future advisingto “nationalstyle”: them traditions”. ancient glorious most the from people, the of instincts lucky the by inspired be will who those than [...] eye Romanian the to charm more have will he first advocated

For the reasons why Mincu is considered the “father” of the mentioned style see C mentionedsee style ofthe the “father” considered is whytheMincu reasons For „s 168: Ibid., ș trecut din artistice producțiunii ale mărunte, de fi ar oricît remăștițele, "Studiați 83: Ibid., preistoric periodul în România din Artele imenire ochilor romînești, [...], decît acelea care se vor inspira din norocitele instincte ale poporului, din cele mai cele din poporului, ale instincte dinnorocitele inspira vor se care acelea decît [...], romînești, imenireochilor them the root of a grand and rich art [...]do not miss any from make and past the from production artistic the of small, how matter no remains, the Study The proponents of these ideas would found around 1890 the first architectural journal and know you if how. them, develop them, remake but past; the from left monuments Romanian the in 75 -

ar fi i fi ar

a national style, he would still express the same ideas, considering that “no art vit şi în trecutul nostru cel mult tulburat manifestaţiuni estetice care, în felurite ramure ale ramure felurite în care, estetice manifestaţiuni tulburat mult cel nostru trecutul în şi vit oday’s artists.

as as by medieval princely architecture, can be looked upon as an illustration

76 [Arts from Romania in the Prehistoric Period], Ateneul Român, 17 Român, Ateneul Period], Prehistoric the in Romania from [Arts

28 -

le, dezvoltați le, cu and Ion Socolescu. Mincu, who is regarded - a vă a artistice folosi ce văde elementele prezentă

opportunity to use artistic elements found 77 -

le, daca știți". daca le, The building inspired by Romanian 74

In the same the In hapter 4, especially note 26. especiallynote 4, hapter

i faceți dintr faceți i

conference he conference

- însele însele

CEU eTD Collection 3. 2014, unpublished, Context], 79 popor”. unui punct,unşi la caracterul până judeca, prin putem chiar, felul arhitecturii Ba ... d popor, unui credinţei regional şi Hajdu, local Ada context in în 1889) Mincu Gobl, Joseph Tipografi (Bucharest: , Romania] including places, the all and Rumânia inclusiv ţările, 78 European model. In the realm of architecture and urban planning this is even more preeminent as Architecture withwhichitrelates]Ion foundedin1890. andarts ofby the Socolescu Architecture, of journal first the of role main the fact in was inspiration of sources its promote to and is style national a still French the for case the was As practice. architectural the followed theory the words, other in Or style. new the in buildings first the The examples above show that a true th

Ada Hajdu, Hajdu, Ada Idieru, Nicolae b)

ambiguous principles that only afterwards were analysed by theoreticians. by analysed were onlyafterwards that ambiguousprinciples

the type architecture of we see,can up ato point, also the character of apeople. and its towns look like can be appreciated its degree of culture and its social welfare... Even from ofbeliefdeducedkind looksthe of templebe can Ifthe fromhow The 19 Balkan’s Cultural andArchit andtheThe National Balkan Architectural Context StylesBalkan Capitals inthe Arhitectul Ion Mincu în context local şi region şi local context în Mincu Ion Arhitectul th Istoria artelor frumoase. frumoase. artelor Istoria

century development of the Balkans indisputably followed the Central and West in înfăţişarea caselor şi oraşelor sale putem aprecia gradul lui de cultură şi starea lui socială. socială. lui starea şi cultură de lui gradul aprecia putem sale oraşelor şi caselor înfăţişarea in

[The History of the Fine Arts. Architecture, Sculpture, Painting, Music from all t all from Music Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, Arts. Fine the of History [The

nll Arhit Analele

, unpublished, 2014, 7: „dacă după înfăţişarea templului se poate judeca felul felul judeca poate se templului înfăţişarea după „dacă 7: 2014, unpublished, ,

ecturalBackground Architectura, sculptura, pictura, musica din toate timpurile şi din toate din şi toatetimpurile din musica pictura, sculptura, Architectura, cui ș ae reo c cr s leagă se care cu artelor ale și ecturii eory of national architecture would not be defined before regionalist 29

al al style, the architects in their works draw on draw works their in architects the style, [The Architect Ion Mincu in Local and Regional Regional and Local in Mincu Ion Architect [The

a people,housesfromitsa how

79

Te nas of Annals [The 78

To define whatdefine To

Arhitectul Ion Arhitectul

he times times he CEU eTD Collection 266. 1986, Press, Washington 84 29. 1977), Kiado, 83 culture. peasant same ofthe in and the promotion state modernfuture creating the 82 East”, the and Middle Balkans the in Legacy Ottoman of Dilemmas Past: the of Spectres the “Fighting Yosmaoglu, K. İpek and Yilmaz 81 Europeanization'? of Dacades Balkans: An21]. example of use the of the Jakir, Zimmermann, concept in theAleksandar Tanja see Balkans http:/ URL: 2010). History, European of Institute (Mainz: (EGO), 80 the peasant was surrounded by myth from various folk tales and was seen as a definitive proof of literatu oral and traditions crafts, folk of exclusively almost comprised was formation, state of pillar fundamental a as used be to later was that life, Only the serfs and the peasants ethnically belonged to the concerned lands. society. of backbone the (1821 Balkansat the dawn of modernity. the of landscape cultural and social the of features some consider and will Romania I firstly Serbia, But Bulgaria. Greece, of cities capital the ideology, national the of point focal the followin by Balkans the of architecture the in style new this of beginnings the country and, of course, to serve the national ideology. In the followingI will briefly trace the having time this but These were the so 19 the of end the proces the in reshaped completely were cities Balkan

Charles Jelavich and Barbara B. Jelavich. Jelavich. B. Barbara and Jelavich Charles Tibor Iván Berend and György Ránki, called so The “on called Feature Schmale Wolfgang see concept the of discussion a For – Before the c the Before

1832), the Balkans was a largely agrarian region, where small peasant holdings formed formed holdings peasant small where region, agrarian largely a was Balkans the 1832), boyars

- e of the most significant and enduring socioeconomic legacies of the Ottomans” in Şuhnaz Şuhnaz in Ottomans” the of legacies socioeconomic enduring and significant most the of e th called “national styles” in the Balkans, also closely connected to Western ideas Middle Eastern Studies Eastern Middle

, the native Romanian ruling class were the future intellectuals who were instrumental in in instrumental were who intellectuals future the were class ruling Romanian native the , century alternatives to the imported Western architectural styles appeared. styles architectural Western imported the to alternatives century

reation of nation states, starting with the long Greek war of independence of war Greek long the with starting states, nation of reation as a goal to be unique, to draw inspiration from the history and tradition of of tradition and history the from inspiration draw to unique, be to goal a as

81

With the exception of Romania, there was no native ruling cla ruling native no was there Romania, of exception the With

East East cent (Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann, 2014). 2014). &Neumann, (Würzburg: Königshausen

The establishment of the Balkan national states: 1804 states: national Balkan the of establishment The , 44:5, (2008), (2008), 44:5, , ral ral Europe: in the 19th and 20th Centuries 30 , Processes of Europeanization of Processes ,

677 re. - s called “Europeanisation”. called s 693, 680. 693, 84 /www.ieg

In the future nation future the In

- ego.eu/schmalew

, European History Online Online History European , 83 g the development in development the g

This is why cultural . . (Budapest: Akademiai - building discoursebuilding - 2010b 80

Europe theEurope and - But towards But 1920 - en [2014 en , Univ of of Univ , ss. - 04 82 -

CEU eTD Collection 88 motifs.Popescu, See historical and 87 1906 the and Style' 'National Exhi Jubilee Bucharest "Romanian Kallestrup, Shona see Europe Central in and Balkans the in vernacular 86 85 elements. Ottoman undesired the undermine helps status historical their to refer to “crossroad” or “bridge” Ba like metaphors the of feature defining a as religion and language on emphasis The beautiful andenoughrepresent impressive the country. to exception. an remains architecture 19 the paper, this in analysed period the for Still case. would be at the forefrontof thisprocess particularly but inthe Romanian obvious and Bulgarian creating the national styles. Less in Greece and Serbia, where the classical and Byzantine from anytime. no specific time and space, could be had culture vernacular the Balkans the in Czechs), for Slovacko Poland, in Zakopane Hungary, for (Kalotaszeg ideals national purest the expressing as region certain a see to was tendency o borders the within while But Europe. Central especially independence domination. from Turkish lan for struggle their for also but production, cultural their for only not important were They genius. national a

Edin Hajdarpašić, “OutEdin Hajdarpašić, of Ruinsthe of the Empire: Reflections Ottoman on the Ottoman Legacy in South vernacular mixes who Mincu, Ion of works the and case Romanian the considered be can exception the of One of rediscovery the between differences some For 248. Moravansky, see Europe Central of regions mythical For Ranki, and Berend The mythical gaze on peasant culture was a phenomenon also specific to Western and Western to specific also phenomenon a was culture peasant on gaze mythical The Overcoming the Ottoman heritage was a fundamental drive in the nation in role defining a play also would production vernacular the architecture of realm the In 86

ad rvt poet, en n h nto bidn dsore s fgt for fight a as discourse building nation the in seen property, private and d

East Centre East bition", bition",

Journal of Design History Design of Journal l Europe 88 Un Patrimoine Un

In the realm of architecture, the most common used strategy is strategy used common most the architecture, of realm the In 87 , 19. ,

found anywhere and the cultural productions could be taken Preferred is the arc the is Preferred

85

, 53. ,

31 , Vol. 15, No. 3 149. No. 3 (2002), Vol. 15, ,

hitecture that reminds of one’s history, one’s of reminds that hitecture

th f the former Habsburg Empire the the Empire Habsburg former the f

etr, h uae f vernacular of usage the century,

lkan nations or the the or nations lkan - building process.

heritage - eastern eastern CEU eTD Collection humanities theoretical the 92 Greece http://www.eie.gr/archaeologia/En/chapter_more_9.aspx of 2006. Kingdom 21, Vol. 91 Conferences, Fellows' 90 Visiting 701 Junior Balkans”, thein heritage cultural Ottoman IWM the concerning Vienna: Torsen, 89 I. http://www.iwm.at/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=153&Itemid=12 and B MacLachlan the of Think Always We Should Geography: Europe”, for Capital the remained It choice. obvious most and quickest Tarnovo, Veliko as designated Bulgaria, at the moment of the much aw in And chosen. was Belgrade of town important less the finally when 1839, and 1818 between antique glory of the city in what Neni Panourgiá has called “ piles of stones”. being rest the houses, “300 than more no of Acropolis, the of foot the at gathered town little a Nafplio. When Athens was chosen to serve as Capital and royal seat of King Otto, in 1834, it was of town Peloponnesian the 1821, in revolution, its of start the from city Capital as had Greece as beginning, the at Capitals of the Capital cities. This is the case of Athens, Belgrade, Sofia and Tirana, all of them not being features central but to oriental of majority a with Arges, be de Curtea toof church the taken of Or Bulgarians. and the by Balkans, “national” the as well as Anatolia in spread houses, Ottoman of case the is adoptio the “nostrification”, calls Hartmuth what

Neni Panourgiá, “ K Leonidas Hartmuth, aiiin atuh “De/con Hartmuth, Maximilian –

702. Related to a national ideology, directed against the Ottoman heritage, is also the choice the also is heritage, Ottoman the against directed ideology, national a to Related In comparable developments, the capital of the autonomous Serbian state was Kragujevac ide atr Studies Eastern Middle

Negotiating Tradition Negotiating allivretakis, allivretakis, 91 Colonizing the ideal: neoclassical articulations and european modernities”,

Subsequently, as we will see, mainly West Europeans tried to revive the former Cneec Acaooy f h Ct o Ahn, tn 19. URL: 1994. Atena Athens, of City the of Archaeology Conference ,

, volume 9, number 2, august 2004, 166. 2004, august volume2, number , 9, Athens in the 19th century: From regional town of the Ottoman Empire to capital of the of capital to Empire Ottoman the of town regional From century: 19th the in Athens the Romanian national discourse.

structing a 'Legacy in Stone': Of interpretative and historiographical problems problems historiographical and interpretative Of Stone': in 'Legacy a structing

, 17. , 715 (2008), 44:5, , other towns were more important economic and social centres. social and economic important more were towns other

aited autonomy from the Ottoman Empire the capital was alkans as Part of Europe?” in History and Judgement, eds. A. A. eds. Judgement, and History in Europe?” of Part as alkans - 32 734, 717. Also Alexander Vezenkov, “History Against Against “History Vezenkov, Alexander Also 717. 734,

Middle Eastern Studies Eastern Middle n as “national” of various constructions. various of “national” as n

a case of colonisation of the ideal”. , Vol. 44, No. 5 (2008), 695 (2008), 5 No. 44, Vol. ,

Angelaki, Angelaki, Journal of 89

– This 713, 92 90

CEU eTD Collection 94 1 Vol. Yesterday], ofBucharest For the case. this in also necessary considered immediately was redevelopment modern a Thus plots. empty and orchards of lots streets, houses, irregular withof lots settlement, like village a it as see depictions contemporary inhabitants), 93 Schaubert, Leo von Klenze, Eduard Schinkel, Friedrich Karl Europe: of planners urban and architects famous most the of chosen as capital for the new Greek state, in 1834, the Bavarian king Otto brought with him some s the startingwith Balkancities, capital the in nation the of the 20 inspiration; all this led to a period of glory for the national styles s of sources national of advocates strong being them of all emerged, societies architectural and expression in a Western first the of century generation the of half second the in styles; European Western in built that architects ap the to leading architecture Balkans’ very process. ofthis forefront muchat the citie small all were these Bucharest, of exception the With Sofia. to status its lost it before year a almost

Popescu, “Un patrimoine... ”. “Un patrimoine... Popescu, mor had (it 1859 in autonomous became Romania time the at bigger much was Bucharest if Even most exhaustive analysis of Bucharest in the 19 Following Carmen Popescu, we can briefly the sketch main stages of development in the I will now briefly trace the appearance of this architecture which was meant to express to meant was which architecture this of appearance the trace briefly now will I Athens th

s for modern standards and in dire need of urban development. The architecture was was architecture The development. urban of need dire in and standards modern for s century, thestates officiallyit. promoted when

rchitecture rchitecture began; shortly after the first architectural journals, architectural schools

- rie lcl rhtcs eund oe n a erh o a national a for search a and home returned architects local trained

- 2, (Bucharest: Editura Științifică și Enciclopedică, 1900). și Enciclopedică, Științifică Editura (Bucharest: 2,

Theophil and Christian von Hansen, and Ernst Ziller. They embarked

pearance of the national styles: First there were foreign were there First styles: national the of pearance 93

th

33 century see George Potra,

pecial case of Athens. Since it had beenhad it Since Athens. casepecialof 94

tarting earliest at the beginning Din Din Bucureștii de ieri

e than 100,000 100,000 than e , , [From the CEU eTD Collection 98 Greece in Imagination “non National and Archaeology, the and Community Greeks” Language, speaking Boundaries: “Shifting Exertzoglou, Haris “Hellenism...”, Liakos, Century”, 19th the of End the at Athens of City 97 (Ed 96 95 Cat the for design his with Hansen, Teophil brother, his by architecture ecclesiastic in made been much in fashion also in Western Europe. The first attempt at a new “Greek of hospital eye the designed emphasis onthe Byzantine culture. an o advocated all (1889) Museum creation History Municipal the the and (1882) Society and Archaeological Lambros Spyridon Paparrigopoulos, Konstantinos of doctrine political The heritage. Byzantine Greek the mainly promoted they specificity, national their assert to wanted nationalists Greek the when century customs. and traditions other with together state, visible element in the everyday life of the Greeks, was rather left aside in the ideology of the new tradi and legacy historical itself naturallyofnew Greekas thesymbol identity. T the removing by Acropolis the of transformation the and Athens for plan master modern new on a grand project of restoration, urban planning and construction. Among the first works were a

urkish stronghold and rebuilding the main ancient temples. ancient main the rebuilding and stronghold urkish The final project was however a completely different one, in an eclect an in one, different completely a however was project final The Co New A Recent and History: “Medieval Giakovaki, Nasia in trends survey ofa these See Mod of Making the and “Hellenism Liakos, Antonis 166 the ideal”, “Colonizing Panourgiá, .), Hellenisms. Culture, Identity and ethnicity from Antiquity to Modernity to Antiquity from ethnicity and Identity Culture, .),Hellenisms. erl f tes a os itrrtto o Bznie shapes. Byzantine of interpretation loose a Athens, of hedral hs a, oee, n dniy oe eae t Erp’ iaiain hn ih the with than imagination Europe’s to related more identity an however, was, This However, in architecture examples of a Byzantine style remained few. Christian Hansen Christian few. remained styleByzantine a of examples architecture in However, ,

Historein vl 1 (99, 75 (1999), 1, vol. ,

tion of the Greek territories. The Orthodox Church, maybe the most most the maybe Church, Orthodox The territories. Greek the of tion

tes Ohamarin uig Byzantine using (Ophtalmiatreion) Athens – 97

174.

Archaeology of the City of Athens of City the of Archaeology - , Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007, 109. 2007, Oxford, Press, University Oxford , 92; Yannis Hamilakis, Hamilakis, Yannis 92; ern Greece: Time, Language, Space” Language, Time, Greece: ern 34

96

This is why in the second half of th of half second the in why is This 95 ic style by the architect architect the by style ic

h Nto ad t Ris Antiquity, Ruins: its and Nation The The neo The , Aldershot, Ashgate, 2008, 206. 2008, Ashgate, Aldershot, , 98 Idea Megali , (Atena: 1994). Also details in details Also 1994). (Atena: , epi Hne hd an had Hansen Teophil - classical style imposed style classical - - inspired shapes very very shapes inspired Byzantine” style had

nsciousness about the the about nsciousness în Katerina Zacharia Katerina în te Christian the f

te ok of works the , Demetres Zezos. Demetres - e 19th e Greek

- CEU eTD Collection Its Political Implications, 102 12.03.2012. on European Quarterly 101 Grèce”. la de “Correspondance box concerning F 12, Serie France, de Nationales Archives 100 99 Hamon, Françoise See 19 the themiddle of a around trend architecture became inspired baroque Viennese howthe This is ve were that academy its and some authors call the new Serbian state “an obedient satellite of Vienna”. making everysphere, virtually in seen be could Itsinfluence Empire. Habsburg the mainlywith pavilionprevious its Exhibitions followed twoParisian World theneoclassical model. Theodore. 11 the model a as having church, Byzantine a of shape the in built was pavilion national Greek the There Paris. in Exhibition Universal 1900 the at but Greece in fashion for architecture for this ideology”. ofnational theprofit European the “diverted disciples whereSerbia,his in styleByzantine the for alsorole important

Popescu, Popescu,

th Bratislav Pantelić, Pantelić, Bratislav MacKenzie, David h suc o isiain o te pavi the for inspiration of source The asls ooa, « Colonas, Vassilis

century, where it was seen as a local development under the name “Serbian baroque”. “Serbian name the under development local a as seen was it where century, Ma Ever since the first movements against the Ottomans, the against movements first the since Ever Belgrade “Unpatrimoineˮ 100 ybe the most obvious assertion of the Byzantine legacy in architecture was not made not was architecture in legacy Byzantine the of assertion obvious most the ybe

t a a od ttmn soig h Bznie eiae f ree sne t the at since Greece, of heritage Byzantine the showing statement bold a was It L’architecture religieuse au XIXe siecle XIXe au religieuse L’architecture

, , Vol. 28, (1994). Nationalism and Architecture: The Creation of a National Style in Serbian Architecture and Architecture Serbian in Style National a of Creation The Architecture: and Nationalism ” Serbia as Piedmont and the Yugoslav idea, 1804 idea, Yugoslav the and Piedmont as Serbia

a ahdae ’tee e l nisne u tl ˮgreco style du naissance la et d’Athenes cathedrale La Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 56, No. 1Vol. 56, 16 1997), Architectural Historians, Journal (Mar., of the of Society

ry influential also in the architecture of Serbia’s capital, Belgrade. capital, Serbia’s of architecture the in also influential ry

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7063/is_n2_v28/ai_n28650617/ accessed http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7063/is_n2_v28/ai_n28650617/ lion has been mentioned in the official documents regarding Greece: Greece: regarding documents official the in mentioned been has lion 35 , (Paris: PUPS, 2006). 2006). PUPS, , (Paris:

- 1914”, Serbia started to forge close ties close forge to started Serbia 99

- East European Quarterly, European East th byzantinˮ

century 101

It was indeed Vienna

», in Bruno Foucart, Foucart, Bruno in », church of Saint of church

- 41

East , , 16. 102

CEU eTD Collection CaseofSerbia”, The Centuries: “ 106 Aleksov, Bojan also St See Venice. from Marc Saint or 105 unique. must be thatbuilding each national pavilions in the shape of a Byzantine church, paradoxically contradicting the unwritten rule of the exhibition 104 103 aswould promote central thechurch for Serbian ideology. national administr elements. Byzantine of full style romantic a of promoter ardentHansen, von Theophil of Vienna in students been had them of all Almost returnedhome. Shortl community. local the by 1861 between built actually church a was identity national forms.similar national the why is This past. different a to relating by period Ottoman the brackets into put to way a was heritage Byzantine the analysed countries the all for fact nati a works of art history and would emphatically declare: “architecture best characterises the spirit of culture. He would do archaeological researches on Serbian medieval architecture, would publish cultural heritage started to emerge. Mihail a national meaning. Illustrated foremost by Belgrade cathedral, it was the first form of architecture that was attributed .

A most The Ibidem,20. Pantelić, Pantelić, Sava

style not at all accurate that quoted in a vague way the most famous Byzantine monuments like Saint Sophia Sophia Saint like monuments Byzantine famous most the way vague a in quoted that accurate all at not style on”.

on But it was again the second half of the 19 the of half againsecond wasthe it But In Serbia’s case the first example of a Byzantine monument recognised as expressing a expressing as recognised monument Byzantine a of example first the case Serbia’s In

ation, would build churches throughout the country only in the Byzantine style and style Byzantine the in only country the throughout churches build would ation, 103 Vračar Hill in Belgrade”, Hill in Vračar

Nationalism, obvious example is from the 1900 World Exhibition in Paris, where Serbia, Greece and Romania had had Romania and Greece Serbia, where Paris, in Exhibition World 1900 the from is example obvious

The Byzantine forms were again seen as appropriate for national representation. Inrepresentation. national for appropriate as seen again were forms Byzantine The 104

22; Bratislav Pantelić, “Designing Identities. Reshaping the Balkans in the First Two Two First the in Balkans the Reshaping Identities. “Designing Pantelić, Bratislav 22;

Journal of Design History Design of Journal

Balkanologie VII Balkanologie atr ht h frt eeain f oeg tand architects trained foreign of generation first the that after y o Valtrović was one of the main promoters of a Serbian

(2), 2003, 47 (2), 2003, 36 , Vol. 20, Nr. 2, Nr. 2, 2007, 20, Vol. , th Nationalism

century when the focus on the country’sown the on centuryfocus the when - 72, 56. 72, 105

– in

1869, not in Serbia but in Trieste, Trieste, in but Serbia in not 1869, hy ol od e oti the in post key hold would They Construction

106

4.

architecture often led to led often architecture The :

eoil hrh of Church Memorial CEU eTD Collection 108 107 newlycreatedArchitectureBucharest. Schoolof of inter late, the and architects; trained French 1906 period, mature “classical”, the there is the early 1886 period, also clo but trend this reflects style the of periodization A influence. French the to related closely was nation Serbo Byzantine style. a in be to and dimensions monumental of be to architects: the for requirements two cathedral great the architecture: be seen Serbianfor as nation. the specific the and powerful polychrome facade. It was thus the case of a purely Western inspired arches style that came to round Europe: Central in “Byzantine” as seen favoured, elements usual the employed who and Hansen with studied who Nevole, Jan Czech, the was architect Its noted. be mansion in Belgrade,

Mihaela Gavris si Ana Maria Zahariade, Zahariade, Maria Ana si Gavris Mihaela Aleksov, Bojan alism andenriched theprocess building. ofnation Besides churches, the path breaking monument for the new style was captain Miša’s Miša’s captain was style new the for monument breaking path the churches, Besides In the new Romanian state the creation of a “National Romanian Style” in architecture in Style” Romanian “National a of creation the state Romanian new the In Bucharest Byzantine by inspired Belgrade in monument biggest the on started works 1895 In sely follows developments in other Balkan countries: according to Gavris and Zahariade, 107 Nationalism

Defining Defining this style was thus a constant matter of debate that reinforced Serbian finished in 1863, a building where lots of Hansen’s byzantine elements can

, 56. ,

–

1906, when the style it was created by French trained architects; of Saint Sava (completed in 1989). The Serbian state had only only had state Serbian The 1989). in (completed Sava Saint of – The Neo The

1918, when the artists were i were artists the when 1918,

- - romanian style: elements of language, of elements style: romanian war period, where the architects came from the the from came architects the where period, war 37

108

n the majority of cases also cases of majority the n în Carmen Popescu, Popescu, Carmen - CEU eTD Collection 112 fame. 111 110 Ș 109 practice and history between architecture; in regional Ioana Teodorescu (eds.), in Exhibition Universal the for restaurant Romanian a build to commission a received Mincu monasteries. medieval of one reminds that porch inner an and Walachia) official in 1906. School for Girls in Bucharest, one of the few public buildings in a national style before it became house in“a Romanian style”. atmosphere”. Romanian a give these all hope I reasons. durability for faience the and people Romanian the docu my all was It Alpar. by taken photos some and monasteries old few a saw “I this: admitted himself building does not prove a solid knowledge of historical Romanian architecture and in fact Mincu fashio in material a freeze, ceramic vernacular architecture, trilobe arches taken from medieval Romanian architecture and the glazed the from taken columns wooden houses, traditional in one similar a of one reminds that porch architects. Romanian among figure known well most the become would and style new this of father” “the considered be would himself Mincu Ion 1886. in Mincu Ion by built villa, Lahovary was style neoromanian or national the tiințifică, 1960). tiințifică,

Popescu, Popescu, After the Petrașcu, Nicolae Caffé, Mihail is image this enforces that work of example good A

In the Parisian environment of Bucharest, the first building subsequently con subsequently building first the Bucharest, of environment Parisian the In Soon other orders for a Romanian style followed for Mincu. In 1888 he built the Centralthe built he In1888 Mincu. for followed style Romanian a ordersfor other Soon mentation when I began working. (...) I used the polychromy which is in the nature of nature the in is which polychromy the used I (...) working. began I when mentation Romanian General Exhibition General Romanian Le Style, 59. Style, Le 110

111 In fact Mincu only followed what his patron, the general Lahova general the patron, his what followed only Mincu fact In Ioan M Ioan

Here

Genius loci: national et Genius loci: national régional histoire entrearchitecture; en et =pratique nation incu

he he further adds the median belt (inspired by the 16

, (Bucharest: Cultura națională, 1928), 10. 1928), națională, Cultura (Bucharest: ,

, , wherewas pavilion built that in style national almost this every reached n at the time throughout Europe. The overall shape of the of shape overall The Europe. throughout time the at n 109 , (Bucharest: Simetria, 2002), 59 2002), (Bucharest: , Simetria,

Lahovary villa’s main villa’s Lahovary 38

Arhitectul Ion Mincu Ion Arhitectul

characteristics are a centrala are characteristics –

60. th 112

century churches of

, (Bucharest: Editura Editura (Bucharest: , ntesm year same the In ry, wished, a wished, ry, sidered in sidered al al and - CEU eTD Collection History 115 114 113 Balkan its to compared delayed consequence, a as were, developments architectural Bulgaria’s period. interwar the in legacy lasting long its for base solid a be to proved that forms of variety a in and scale granda on time first the style,for this in built were pavilions the all almost exhibition Gen Romanian the style, national of affirmation the in moment defining a with coincided building latter the for constructions the of start The Hall. City the or Administration Public the of Palace the Bucharest, in important most the of some including Academy asin Romania. butseen having aspecificity national Vienna the by promoted style a in 1881 in built Bălașa, Princess of church the is Bucharest T appear. to began fashion European the after modelled style Byzantine idealsthe initial ofthesocalled of a national style and the restaurant was praised as “expre main walking avenue of the city. It was the building that consolidated Mincu’s role as the creator P aris. Eventually it would not be built for that purpose, but in Bucharest, 4 years later, on the on later, years 4 Bucharest, in but purpose, that for built be not would it Eventually aris.

See Shona Kallestrup, “Romanian 'National Style' and the 1906 Bucharest Jubilee Exhibition”, Popescu, Kallestrup, , Vol. 15, (2002), 147 (2002), 15, Vol. , 115 n clsatc rhtcue n smlr anr s n l ohr akn onre, a countries, Balkan other all in as manner similar a in architecture ecclesiastic In s th As Sofia st national a in appeared buildings more and more century the of turn the After

Le Style, Le Art and Design, Design, Art and

ls cuty o ban t atnm, n 88 atr h Russo the after 1878, in autonomy, its obtain to country last e

101.

- 162. 76. 76.

neo - Romanian 39 style”.

113

ssing with the highest degree of success

114 eral Exhibition of 1906. At this this At 1906. of Exhibition eral

he best example from example best he Journal Journal of Design - Turkish War, War, Turkish yle, CEU eTD Collection 96. 2002, Simetria, Bucharest: Practice and Century 20th Early the During and 19th 117 177 116 became almost a rule in Sofia around 1900. Churches like Saint Nikolai Novi (1 Alexander “theBulgaria”. the liberator second,of named 1878, of war “liberation” the in died that soldiers Russian the commemorate to intended was it finally and architecture; in style romantic the of advocate known a and Petersburg Saint in Academy Art Fine the at professor Pomerantsev, Alexander neo the of (1896). It was a monument almost entirely dedicated to the Russian Empire. Its style was a variant Greekof closeway ties influence withRussia. by and heritage Ottoman the from itself distance to state Bulgarian young the for opportunitygood It was Romanians with France, the Bulgarians’ connections were the strongest with the Russian Empire. for Bulgarianawakening”. national opp Greek against Slavs the of unity the representing monument 1816 between process, rebuilding long a saw monastery the century, 10th the in Founded Monastery. Rila ofnationalneighbours. architecture Before autonomy oneexample its significant stand

Ljubinka Stoilova, Petar Iokimov, Voukov, Nikolai - 179. the Russians, also a Slavic people, who fou http://etudesbalkaniques.revues.org/index112.html that something was style Byzantine inspired Russian the in architecture Ecclesiastic In architecture this the and Empire Habsburg the with ties closest the had Serbs the if autonomy, the After - Russian byzantinism; it was built by a Russian architect well familiar with familiar well architect Russian bya built was it byzantinism; Russian –

Le monastère de Rila de monastère Le 1870, in in 1870,

connection was emphatically displayed by the great cathedral of Sofia neo

- The The Search for Identifiably National Architecture in Bulgaria at the End of the yatn sye I ws osdrd h aporae tl fr a for style appropriate the considered was It style. byzantine

in Genius Loci. National and Regional in in Regional and National Loci. Genius in 116 : incarnation du passé national bulgare, bulgare, passédu national incarnation :

40

ght for them to be autonomous

117

as well as to honour the Emperor the honour to as well as ression and the “peak moment “peak the and ression Études Balkaniques Architecture Between History History Between Architecture 896), Saint Chiril

and it seemed a this style, this , 12, 2005 12, , s out: the out: s , CEU eTD Collection 118 trend that appeared towards the end of the century: regionalism in architecture. Very much related to a Balkan phenomen certain a to related not and atmosphere or geographical area. style general a of part are artists and sell; to in front of a large audience; it was dependent on art shops, galleries, meant beBrettel: was to it displayed according art characteristics of to with some ofmodern the Com (the Mincu by used ones the with similar motifs style,with national a in time same the at but villas) private 1894; market, covered style(Traian historicist a in Bucharest in buildingsdesigned who also for foreigners to in build a Romanian na easywas it how is This time. the of custom prevailing the at looked turn in who desire, patrons’ the to listening mainly was He style. academic French fashionable the in and style “national” mentioned Romanian Ioncase, Mincu built at the same time constructions in already the from example quick a In artist. the than important more maybe became suddenly extr the and desires patron’s the in mainly manifested was It styles. these of spreading and creation neglected in the historiographies of this region thus far, had been an essential driving force in the the Bulgarian fashion of the time, the neo fortaste a common in had all They education. of type different a with and generations different from architects of range wide a by built were (1902) Rilski John Saint (1899), Methodius and

See Richard Brettel, Brettel, Richard See m feiiiy f h aciet i sicig tls Ti i hw h pto o te state the or patron the how is This styles. switching in architects the of flexibility eme Finally I should also mention that the creation of national styles cannot be attributed solely munal School, 1897, or the project for the City Hall). These developments are in line in are developments These Hall). City the for project the or 1897, School, munal 118 Modern Art 1851 Modern

on. on. This type of architecture must be linked more with a general European

- 1929 , (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), 57. and p. 2 1999), University Press, Oxford (Oxford: , - Byza tional tional style. An example is the Italian Giulio Magni 41 ntine style. In fact the fashion, even if completely

in other words it was meant the newly invented

CEU eTD Collection Ci Balkan of Ottomanisation" 121 120 10. (2003), 119 representation. way milieu. Austrian the in popular very but Africa Northern and Spain from architecture Moorish the with similar shapes, Oriental obvious were features Its Austrians. the by directly turn the at Empire Austrian the under starting popular. tobecome tradition. materi style, local of use the advocated regionalism movement, nouveau art the with

See Eric Storm, History, “Regionalism in 1890

Maximilian Hartmuth, Hartmuth, Maximilian Bosnia’s style could be Oriental but not Ottoman, and thus unique and adequate for a national Jean The European influences can best be seen in the special case of Bosnia. Even if a region a if Even Bosnia. of case special the in seen be best can influences European The 119

- Claude Vigato, Vigato, Claude

These principles reached Romanian artists by way of France, where the style was style the where France, of way by artists Romanian reached principles These

L’architecture regionaliste, France 1890 France regionaliste, L’architecture eoitn Taiin n Abto: Cmaaie epcie n h "De the on Pespective Comparative A Ambition: and Tradition Negotiating tyscapes, tyscapes,

120

Ethnologia Balkanica, No. 10, (2006), 15 (2006), 10, No. Balkanica, Ethnologia

- of the century, it also had a national style, but one created one but style, national a had also century,it the of 1945: 1945: CulturalApproach”, The 42

- 1950 , Norma Editions, 1994. Norma , Editions, European H European –

33, 19. 33,

istory Quarterly

121 als and and als , , Vol. 33

In this In - CEU eTD Collection 124 145 Society, Balkan Ottoman 123 review historical Fl Elisabeth Katherine 2002; Press, eds. Savić, Obrad and Bjelić I. Dušan 2000; G., Markovich Slobodan writing British century nineteenth in Balkans the 1994), 144 Enlightenment the of Mind the on Civilization of Map The Europe: 122 emerge. to started Peninsula, Balkan the thus including strait, theEmpire. in Christians “Gree called sometimes were there century. 18 the of end the of milieu enlightenment the to back traced be can features geographical and important elementsmost ofWestern and especiallyBalkans. perceptionFrench of the the survey to necessary is it exhibitions world Parisian the at countries Balkan of participation analys an on embarking before why is This region. the of had Europe Western and France view historical the with connected intimately is display the influenced they way the and Exhibitions Chapter

Alexander Alexander Vezenkov in Identity National and Secularization Enlightenment, Nation: Greek to Millet Rum “From Roudometof, Victor Todorova, Maria In the same period the new geographical concept of Europe, spreading until the Bosporus the until spreading Europe, of concept geographical new the period same the In region distinct a as Balkans the of view the that agree Scholars the How a)

Balkans Gaze the under Western 122

–

: ipaig akn rhtcue o te is Tm a Universal at Time First the for Architecture Balkan Displaying 3: 195. 195. See also other works on the “discovery” of the Kostova Balkans:,Ludmilla Until Until then the Balkans were seen as part of the Ottoman Empire and the people living

Balkan nations were perceived at the World Exhibitions, the French expectations French the Exhibitions, World the at perceived were nations Balkan

105.4 (2000): 1218 (2000): 105.4 Imagining the Balkans the Imagining , “History Against Geography: Should We Always Think of the Balkans as Part of Europe?” British perceptions of Serbia and the Balkans the and Serbia of perceptions British 3 123 – 1821”, 1821”,

eming, "Orientalism, the Balkans, and Balkan historiography", historiography", Balkan and Balkans, the "Orientalism, eming, - 1233. 1233. Journal of Modern Studies Greek Modern Journal of s, n codne ih h Trih eoiain o the for denomination Turkish the with accordance in ks”,

, (Oxford University Press, 2009), 62. Larry Wolff. Wolff. Larry 62. 2009), Press, University (Oxford , Balkan as metaphor: between globalization and fragmentation and globalization between metaphor: as Balkan

Vl 4 (nvrieso izd (Universitetsko 4. Vol. . 43

. (Stanford, Calif.: (Stanford, . : 1903 , Volume 16, 1998, 19. 1998, Volume , 16, - 124 1906 - , with its own cultural, socialcultural, own its with , o v s. ii i eoi, 1997); Metodii, i Kiril sv. Sv. vo

ar Wlf notices Wolff Larry , Vol. 1. Bibliothèque Dialogue, Dialogue, Bibliothèque Vol.1. , Stanford University Press, Press, University Stanford Tales Tales of the periphery:

Inventing Eastern Inventing The American American The

is of the the of is

n this in . MIT . th

CEU eTD Collection 128 (1999); n°2, 127 72. 2007), Press, University Oxford (Oxford: 126 1994) Press, University Stanford Calif.: 125 http://www.iwm.at/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=153&Itemid=125 (2006). 21, Vol. Judgement, and History in Europeangeographically notonly historical ofvie butalsofrom andcultural a point (Lord Byron’s example is probably the famous one). By this time the Balkans were seen as fully mo defining the was „prisoner” under the and Turks would advocate its liberation. Chateaubriand, Friedrich Schiller, Byron or Keats would spread the of vision a country held as a peasan barbaric” and “illiterate the with and territory the of state current the with contrasted that antiquity of word lost the of dreaming day romantic for opportunity territory, idealised an of perception the of proof are Greece in a Numerous lands. Greek former the all in interested became they impetus this Under civilisation. Greek the of antiquities the time first the for saw and Sicily reached Europe Greek for struggle independence. the for sympathy in culminating favourable, more and more became view European the Still contrasted with the West, liked for their exoticism but despise line. east/west new a to north backward and barbaric the and south civilised the between line dividing north/south old the of displacement a context

Vezenkov Pamela Wolff. Larry Yannis Hamilakis, Hamilakis, Yannis . The former territoriesancient of Greece wereparts thefirst oftheBalkans discovered by

Initial contact was made by way of the “Grand Tour”, when travellers and intellectuals and travellers when Tour”, “Grand the of way by made was contact Initial

Ballinger

, History Against Geography Against History , Inventing Eastern Europe: The Map of Civilization on the Mind o Mind the on Civilization of Map The Europe: Eastern Inventing

, “Definitio , h Nto ad t Ris Atqiy Acaooy ad ainl mgnto i Greece in Imagination National and Archaeology, Antiquity, Ruins: its and Nation The ment in this struggle, an occasion for some to even fight along the Greeks the along fight even to some for occasion an struggle, this in ment , eds. A. MacLachlan and I. Torsen, Vienna: IWM Junior Visiting Fellows' Conferences, Conferences, Fellows' Visiting Junior IWM Vienna: Torsen, I. and A.MacLachlan eds. ,

nal Dilemmas nal

: Southeastern Europe as ”Culture Area” ”Culture as Europe Southeastern : try. 44 126

on aos rtr ad oiiin like politicians and writers famous Soon 125

ned h Blas ee generally were Balkans the Indeed d for their perceived backwardness. 127

The Greek war of independence f the Enlightenment the f

?”, ?”, ccounts of travellers travellers of ccounts Balkanologie w.

128 . (Stanford, . ,

Vol. III, Vol. , CEU eTD Collection 134 133 132 131 15. 1998), Press, University 130 129 self countries Balkan the with hand oriental semi developed, semi as seen were They of the Balkans, that ofa transitorytwo worlds,and place,theOriental between theWestern one. people, or beautiful women and primitive men. This is closely related to another persistent feature original Europe,before state of industrialisation. as a place mystical where anexotic region, one see can theunspoiled state of society,almost the 19 the During important. especially emergeBalkan wars. afterthe only popular. Greek the or Greek the Peninsula, Oriental The Turkey, European like terms then Until 1878. of Congress Berlin the after only rule Ottoman the under na to way usual the became “Balkans” this, Despite 1809 when it appears in the work of the German geographer August Zeune, published in Berlin. Haemus and also extended the name to the whole region. of instead chain “Balkan” mountain local the for name Turkish) in chain the mountain (meaning use to started travellers Western century, 18th the of end the Towards

Todorova, 2009, p. 34. 2009, Todorova, p. 54. 2002, Goldsworthy, p. 16 2002, Goldsworthy, Todorova, Goldsworthy, Vesna Todorova, The name of the Peninsula goes hand in hand with the developments illustrated above. above. illustrated developments the with hand in hand goes Peninsula the of name The The Balkans were further seen as place of contrasts: between beautiful lands bu are Balkans the of discovery the with created stereotypes certain purposes, my For 131

The verb verb The Imagining Imagining, , , 27. Inventing Ruritania: The Imperialism of the Imagination, Imagination, the of Imperialism The Ruritania: Inventing 22. balkanise

meani 132 th

century and especially in the popular the in especially and century ng to split something in small and hostile entities would entities hostile and small in something split to ng

- fashioned national images. All the states referred to to referred states the All images. national fashioned 45 133

or semi civilised. semi or

me the European countries that used to be to used that countries European the me 129

The first written reference dates from –

lvnc eisl wr more were Peninsula Slavonic

134 (New Haven and Lon and Haven (New

The view goes hand in hand goes view The literature it appeared it literature the ancient name name ancient the t backward don: Yale Yale don: 130

CEU eTD Collection l’Enginyeria de d’Història 138 1880." 137 136 135 the need for this. Countries that since their autonomy or independence from the Ottoman Empire b) The in Beginnings:Paris in1867and1878 Exhibitions Universal look. an orientalisingexotic and an practices that I will analyse in numerous by French the display, their of charge in were countries foreign Although organisers. used. compariso and faded gradually fascination Western prejudice traditionally ascribed to the Orient.”. as known was Europe so many others. among influence an just it making heritage, Ottoman the discard to countries Balkan the helped d “wall” a or cultures, themselves as culturally “In between”, situated at a “crossroad”, constituting “a bridge” over two

Ibid Konstantinos Chatzis and Georgia Mavrogonatou, “Greece at “Greece the in and Mavrogonatou, Konstantinos Exhibition Chatzis Universal Paris Georgia 1878”, Vezenkov, zqil Adamovsky"Euro Ezequiel 138 .

The Journal of Modern History Modern of Journal The However the Orient was closely associated with the Balkan Peninsula. The Universal Exhibitions not only created an opportunity for self French the by practice in put were stereotypes these all Exhibitions World the At

History Against Geography. Against History 136

efending Europe from the Turkish invaders. Turkish the from Europe efending , Vol 8, (2012), 12. 12. (2012), , 8, Vol Europe Orientale Europe

‐ retls ad h Mkn o te ocp o Esen uoe n rne 1810 France, in Europe Eastern of Concept the of Making the and Orientalism

the following chapters, managed to give to the Balkan nations both

77.3 (2005), 592 and 599 and 592 599 (2005), 77.3

and the entire region got “many of the stereotypes and stereotypes the of “many got region entire the and 137 46

More so after Greece became independent, the ns with the Orient were more and more more and more were Orient the with ns –

600.

135

In fact all these metaphorsthese all In fact - representation In France, Eastern

Quaderns Quaderns but also – CEU eTD Collection 1998). Somogy, of M. Exhibition International see the at 1867 and Romania in work his including Baudry, of oeuvre and life the to dedicated Odobescu, Alexandru in himself 139 Ludwig Austrian Reissenberger was translated into the French and displayed byat the exhibition; and it large about written work main the monastery; the of model tall meter d Curtea of national exhibition pavilion. And they focused on mainly one monument, the 16 a creating in Baudry by used be to country the of monuments historical representative most architect French the Odobes and too Here them. interpreted inspiration of sources the established committees local the rule Baudry. As we will also see in other cases it was more a negotiated process in which as a general he had metOdobescu. where yearbefore the just Romania in surveys archaeological some did who Baudry, Ambroise exhi Parisian a at convenient more even and pavilion Romanian the for foreigner a find to easier seemedalso it architecture.ForOdobescu of schools no andbyforeigners, being built buildings In Paris. in Exhibition Universal 1867 the at section Romanian the of organiser as position, newest his in working started he when Odobescu, Alexandru Affairs, Foreign of Minister Romanian young the facing dilemmas th for architecture “national” unique, a display to had suddenly buildings state new in styles architectural Western employing with satisfied been had

At only 28 years of ages Baudry spent around 6 month at different sites in Romania. The story is told by Odobescu iin fr hs oege t b Fec. hs n 86 e eie o a on architect, young a on decided he 1866 in Thus French. be to foreigner this for bition, The process of creating a representative architecture w architecture representative a creating of process The - e Argeș.(figure 1) The sculptor Karl Stork was commissioned to do a two and a half half a and two a do to commissioned was Stork Karl sculptor The 1) Argeș.(figure e . Crosnier L.

- eot e M Volait M. et Leconte 139

Opere complete Opere

his country there were few trained architects, most of the new the of most architects, trained few were there country his cu and others in the organisation committee decided on the on decided committee organisation the in others and cu LÉyt du aciet : mrie ady 1838 Baudry Ambroise : architecte d'un L'Égypte , , vol 2, (Bucharest 2, vol , 47

e World Exhibitions. This was one of the of one was This Exhibitions. World e

: Minerva, 1906), 319. For For 319. 1906), Minerva, : as not left solely in the hands of of hands the in solely left not as th a good monograph good a

century church

drawings and - 1906 , (Paris: (Paris: , CEU eTD Collection 2007), Institutul European, 144 318 Franck,1868), à roumaine ( section pays, ce dans travail du la l'histoire sur notice d'une dans et 1867, en Paris, de exposés universelle l'exposition produits des spécial catalogue du suivi commerciale, et industrielle rurale, 143 between architecture; in regional practice and history and national = pratique et histoire entre architecture; en régional et national Paris”, a 1867 de universelle L’Exposition a e Troesmis 142 d 141 Arts,2009) of Museum 140 that proof styles, architectural of mixture unfortunate an as seen further was pavilion The a colours, vivid in languorous, culture, oriental an of representation a saw They interpretation. different rather a had French architecture” old entire the of anything with similar „not towers, twisted with „Greco of type a as seen was pavilion exhibition, thethe presentingat Romania In publication official the received. presented andwas building the way the to importance secondary of are considerations aesthetic the however, goal being twisted divergent and not convergent, this makes them particularly unattractive”. mostly, and original their than flatter „much are domes twisted two the that also and been have remarked how the church looks (Figure 2) Romania. from construction ecclesiastic another from elements some with monastery, Argeș structure also in the of ashape byzantine church that was i gallery. main the in section Romanian the and pavilion national the both for model main the as serve would that Baudry to sent were monument the of pictures idn’t see also this building but pictures of it were also sent byOdobescu. sent were also it of pictures but building this idn’talso see The second source of inspiration was monasteryStavropoleos from Bucharest, an 18 Laurențiu Vlad, Aurelian, Petre Odobescu, Alexandru Leconte Crosnier Laure Marie catalogue the in explained exhibits these See The resulting pavilion was seen as a rather unaccomplished structure. It has been been has It structure. unaccomplished rather a as seen was pavilion resulting The 141

Imagini Imagini ale identităţii România naţionale. şi de expoziţiile la universale Paris, 1867 – , Bucureşti: (Simetria, 2002), 124. 2002), (Simetria, , Bucureşti:

319.

156 156

84 -

158.m

–

85. ,”

Du savoir archeologique a la reconstruction de fantaisie: Ambroise Baudry a Baudry Ambroise fantaisie: de reconstruction la a archeologique savoir Du

nd with a strange choice of a Greek church for a Latin nation. Latin a for church Greek a of choice strange a with nd suddenly shortened towards its eastern part where the altar should Notice sur la Roumanie: la sur Notice - Roman” architecture, w architecture, Roman” Napoleon al III al Napoleon

48 in

Carmen Popesc Carmen - lea și Principatele Române Principatele și lea

principal ntended ntended to be personala replica of the

u, Ioana Teodorescu (eds.), Teodorescu Ioana u, ement au point de vue de son économie économie son de vue de point au ement ith a rich interior decoration and and decoration interior rich a ith 140

osqety e ul a built he Consequently th

century monument. Baudry , (Bucharest: National National (Bucharest: , 143 Paris . However the However . : Librairie A. Librairie :

142 Genius loci: Genius - 1937,

For (Iași: my 144

CEU eTD Collection 148 305 1868, 147 146 couchant du levant, du encore?”. quoi allemande, midi, française, russe, grecque, sera Elle aussi. du comme nord du côtés, tous de lumière la reçoit Elle pas. rayonne ne Elle même. 145 while the countriestheBalkanswanted from themselves toassert as “modern” spectacular, the exotic, the of search in was France case our in and West the where Exhibitions and Orient 19 the in peninsula the regarding clichés main two the in correspondence have views different two These Orient. the and Balkans in heritage Oriental and Ottoman surroundingExhibitions, mainly of notion „Oriental”. the The Balkan countriestriedtoputtheir for lack its ofproportions. cri was it and pavilion Bosporus the and Alhambra like structures Oriental famous with one place: wha German, French, Russian, Greek, is It (...) shine. doesn’t It itself. by exist doesn’t “Romania

Carmen Popescu, Popescu, Carmen (coord.), Chevalier Michel in roumaine”, „L’Eglise Ducuing, François illustrée L'Exposition t else?” t Kremlin in this architecture, half imported half imposed; it is an art of the of and mosque a of something is there time, more One Mecca. in one the like needle magnetic as it is, a transition between Byzantine and Oriental art. What churchRomanian the take us Let Moscow. than Byzantium more no is that architecture an (…) This double and often contradictory perception could also be noticed at other Universal Universal other at noticed be also could perception contradictory often and double This compared was pavilion the Exhibition Universal 1867 the of guide official the in More that looks for its mediu –

307. 307.

as the “Orient of Europe” of “Orient the as

145

Even the most unwanted comparison, with the Orient, was sharplywasOrient, inthe emphasised with comparison,unwanted most the Even “Unpatrimoine , tom II, 1900, 130 1900, II, tom ,

Rapports du jury international jury du Rapports 147 m but does not find it, in the same way as the country that it represents .

”.

to brackets while the West often made parallels between the between parallels made often West the while brackets to th

century: The Balkans as a “bridge” between Occident and Occident between “bridge” a as Balkans The century: - 148 132: “Ce qui manque à la Roumanie, c'est de ne pas exister exister pas ne de c'est Roumanie, la à manque qui “Ce 132: L'Exposition illustré L'Exposition . The contradiction is further emphasized by the World the by emphasized further is contradiction The . 49

, (Paris: Imprimerie Administrative de Paul Dupont, Paul de Administrative Imprimerie (Paris: , e,

tom I, (1867), 53. (1867), tomI, these three cupolas are missing is a

middl or “European”. e, Iif can say so, par elle par ticized 146

-

CEU eTD Collection l’Enginyeria de d’Història 152 151 150 149 eff Greek the measure what in judge to wants Whoever exposition: this of occasion Alexandros making”. own her of not were that circumstances for the efforts the new state had made in its quest for “modernisation”, considering “the historical Ottoman Empire. Montenegro and Serbia, Romania, Russo the in involved not one only the was it because promoted and thep visited by the crowd”. most the and sights interesting most the of “one as seen still was it 1900, of exhibition world amp the from far Although meters. 5 measuring façade one near the other, anywithout separating space, and having as distinctive architectural feature a along place, same the in displayed architecture important episode appeared, an indefining a true style. national

Konstantinos Chatzis and Mavrogonato Konstantinos Chatzis Georgia Celik, Champs au “L’architecture See Carmen Popescu Carmen t h Uiesl xiiin f 88 o te is tm al h frin pavilions foreign the all time first the for 1878 of Exhibition Universal the At N During this time, Western attitudes towards Greece had been characterised by sympathy sympathy by characterised been had Greece towards attitudes Western time, this During mainly exhibition, the in part took that Balkans the from country only the was Greece Displaying, Displaying, e ve

Mansolas, member a of the Greekwho commission, wrote an official booklet on the rt he le

68. ss roblem of“national”roblem architectureraised. was ,

Le Style Le ih hs nvra Ehbto, h frt xml o Rmna national Romanian of example first the Exhibition, Universal this with 150 , Vol 8, (2012), 12. (2012), , 8, Vol

Here for the first time the architectural diversity of the whole world was - de - ,

Mars”, Mars”, 40

–

43 and 43 Gazette des Beaux Arts Beaux des Gazette Nation’s street Nation’s

and needne n Blai atnm fo the from autonomy Bulgaria and independence gained

Leconte u,at “Greece the in Exhibition Universal Paris 1878”, ,” 50 Du savoir archeologique Dusavoir

. It consisted of a juxtaposition of buildings, of juxtaposition a of consisted It . , (Paris, 1878), 732. 732. 1878), (Paris, , 152 - litude of the next the of litude Turkish war of 1877 1877 of war Turkish

h sm attd i epesd by expressed is attitude same The 151

”, 127. ”,

Nation’s street Nation’s 149

–

1878, in which in 1878, orts in this in orts Quaderns Quaderns , at the at ,

were CEU eTD Collection the of realisation the and difficult idea first the we own Sections 157 156 F/12/3493 from 1877, letter façade.”, national of section ofa construction 155 154 tyranla lequel de joug le secoué a elle quand trouvait se elle dans misérable l'état oublier pas devra ne civilisation, la de carrière la dans ans quarante de période courte exposants 153 street. issues. of number a on section Berges, Georges of approval the for asked architects two the how seen be can it exposition the of Commission General the by kept documents the Bénard. Paul and Olive J. architects, French two namelyforeigners, again were Greece for neoclassical shapes.(figure 3) Those who designed what was referred to as the whendiscussions referringBalkan tothe nations. b often which publications, French the by exhibition, previous Oriental section. This connection will be reinforced, as we have seen in the Romanian case at the w that continued with Egypt, Tunisia and Morocco. archives, Greece is positioned between Portugal and Turkey, starting a row of Oriental countries Orien the with made connection yoke Ottoman tyranny. of the shook it when was it state miserable the forget not must succeeded,years 40 of period short as very similar, being right next to the Cairo Street and the Moroccan pavilion, again near the the near again pavilion, Moroccan the and Street Cairo the to next right being similar, very as

“L’architecture “L’architecture auChamps France de Nationales Archives In a letter to the ofit Greece thatCommissioner is“itGeneral mentioned has to each demanded been country the France de Nationales Archives Mansolas, Alexandros

The Greek pavilion position is a clue for yet another type of attitude of the West, the the West, the of attitude of type another yet for clue a is position pavilion Greek The 157 The architecture of the pavilion referred to ancient Greece, by using very distinguishable , (Athens, 1878), VI : VI 1878), (Athens, ,

Therefore he and his team of architects must have played a decisive role in shaping therole inshaping a decisive have played architectshis team must of Therefore and he La Grèce à l'exposition universelle de Paris en 1878, notions statistiques, catalogue des catalogue statistiques, notions 1878, en Paris de universelle l'exposition à Grèce La

- de 153 quiconque voudra juger à quel point ont réussi les efforts de la Grèce pendant la pendant Grèce la de efforts les réussi ont point quel à juger voudra quiconque -

Mars”, Mars”, F/12/3493. Paris, , F/12/3493. Paris, ,

156 t. In a project for “international facades” kept in the Parisian the in kept facades” “international for project a In t.

Gazette des Beaux Gazette Artsdes Beaux Berges is even credited with the idea of creating a nation’s a creating of idea the with credited even is Berges

nie Ottomane. nieOttomane. 51 154

As we will see Greece’s positioning in 1889 Nation’s street Nation’s , (Paris, 1878), 732: , 1878), “to(Paris, the of Director the Foreign h ofca rsosbe o te foreign the for responsible official the

.

roughtthe notion of Orient into into Orient of notion roughtthe ”

“national facade” 155

In CEU eTD Collection fromareas. rural architecture 159 158 reminde a exposition, their of narrow so and restraint so facade their in us giving for Greeks the congratulate thus “We like comments are category first the From inaccuracy. and aspect its criticised others but antiquity, Greek of all of firstreminded easily in wereExhibitions at Paris. World requirements common todifferent very c next polyvalent architect, who built very different buildings at the same exposition. We will see in the Ropet Ivan architect Russian famous the with collaboration Bénard Paul two the of architects, One 1889. of exhibition the at repeated be would that motif a Athena, Goddess floor columnsthebustof balconyand architrave.itstood thedecorated Doric Under withits period. independencemoments ofits and remainedthroughout like this the 19 designat was architecture neoclassical the as one particular a under the strict supervision of the French organisers. However the Greek case was in this respect the among are what Thus architects. the to advice additional give often would which commission, French central the from plans their for approval seek to had commissions foreign the where foreign the of appearance

Ivan Ropet was one of the main promoters of a vernacular inspired Russian national style, based on wooden on based style, national Russian inspired vernacular a of promoters main the of one was Ropet Ivan M

first examples of “national styles” in the Balkans were actually designed forforeignfirst styles”were of“national actually examples a Balkans public designed inthe avrogonatou, “Greece...”, 12. Also see 12. “Greece...”, avrogonatou, hapters that these types of artists, specialised in exhibition architecture, who could adapt could who architecture, exhibition in specialised artists, of types these that hapters 158 h pvlo rcie mxd eiw i te rnh rs. hs wo rie i we it praised who Those press. French the in reviews mixed received pavilion The classicalthe from workshop artist’s typicala represent to meant was pavilion GreekThe

Suggestively named “The Pericles House” “ThePericles Suggestivelynamed

lo okd t h Seih n Rsin aae, h lte in latter the facades, Russian and Swedish the at worked also facade. The situation was similar at the next two World Exhibitions, World two next the at similar was situation The facade.

Journal official de la Republique Francaise Republique la de official Journal 52

, its most conspicuous element was the first was conspicuous most element the its , r that their antique architecture is our our is architecture antique their that r 159 d s ntoa” rm h first the from “national” as ed S Bnr ws n extremely an was Bénard So . th

century. , May 3, 1878. May3, ,

re CEU eTD Collection 164 163 162 161 160 one. st display dual of examples other see also will a common issue for all participatingthe countries at the world In exhibitions. the next chapters we was ancient the case Greek in and vernacular traditional, the or modernity the displaying independence. since made had it progress the and state modern the assert to designed products contemporary were exhibits its of majority The display. overall construction” todesignit. abilities has thetechnical couldn’t have built “a loggia that has the appearance of a temple tetra style” as only “our modern Arts Beaux des a mixture of crude and indigestible tones” time a construction without grace and without proportions (...) and under the name of polychromy ex many so gave ago long grace”. of and arts of country the still is classical architecture”

Mavrogonatou, “Greece...”. 12. “Greece...”. Mavrogonatou, Champs au “L’architecture Charles Blanc, Francaise Republique dela official Journal Qu Lamarre, Clovis

T he Greek architecture in 1878 referred to the ancient heritage but was not central in the centralin not was heritagebut ancient the referredto 1878 architecturein Greek he LesBeaux

where the lack of historical accuracy was the main problem. So the Greeks Greeks the So problem. main the was accuracy historical of lack the where eux de St de eux 160 -

Arts a l’Exposition universelle de 1878 universellede l’Exposition Artsa

or “Everything is simple, sober, pure and of a supreme elegance. Greece - de quisite models of architecture and sculpture to the world, gave us this us gave world, the to sculpture architectureand of models quisite - Hilaire, Hilaire, - Mars”, Mars”,

La Grèce et l'Exposition de de 1878 l'Exposition et Grèce La Gazette , May , 1878. 3,

161 des Beaux Arts Beaux des 162

However one critique thought that “Greece, which “Greece, that thought critique one However An equally harsh critique can be read in th rategies where again an obvious case is the Greek Greek the is case obvious an again where rategies 53

163 , (Paris, 1878), 747. 747. 1878), (Paris, ,

, (Paris, 1878). (Paris, , , (Paris, 1878). (Paris, , 164

h fin The

blne between balance e e Gazette CEU eTD Collection 168 117 1937 a 1855 De Paris a Universelles Expositions 167 16. 1996), Press, California 166 Mathieu 165 space inthe world, covered largest the was equipment, industrial of exhibition the for designed Gallery, Machine Tower. The main attraction was the newly built Towe training field, across the Seine, the yearfor the 1889. cover all the costs of 41,5 ha. 95 of surface a on exhibitors 61,722 far so exhibition biggest 11 of tradition the Paris, in 1889. The purpose was to celebrate the centenary of the Republic together with keeping Exhibition of 1889 WorldParis the atArchitecture CountriesBalkan Together: Time First 4: Chapter

Ibid., 112. Ibid., exhibitors. 53,100 and visitors million 16 had Paris in Exhibition the Universal 1878 in Bycomparison eal o is osrcin n rcpin n yim ah, etie e ni ad Jean and Andia de Beatrice Bacha, Myriam in reception and construction its of Details arco Tenorio Mauricio – a)

125;

, La Tour Eiffel et l’Exposition Universelle l’Exposition et Eiffel Tour La , 167 OverviewBalkan thecountries of participation The exhibition had 3 locations in the very centre of the city:of thecentre thevery in had 3locations The exhibition deci official the issued France 1884 as early As

oehr ih t nte io cntuto ws n vn rae tcncl et The feat: technical greater even an was construction iron another it with Together

- 166 Trillo,. Trillo,.

- at 420 mlongat and 420 115mwide. year intervals between Parisian World Exhibitions. It turned out to be the be to out turned It Exhibitions. World Parisian between intervals year

eio t h Wrds ar: rfig Mdr Nation Modern a Crafting Fairs: World's the at Mexico : between 5 May and 31 October 1889, 28 million visitors could see could visitors million 28 1889, October 31 and May 5 between : million

francs, it would consume 15 percent of the revenues of Fran Jardin du Trocadero 165

(Paris: Action Artistique de la Ville de Paris, 2005), 105 105 2005), Paris, de Ville la de Artistique Action (Paris:

(Paris: Réuniondes (Paris:

It had been noticed how if the French state were to were state French the if how noticed been had It r of 300 54

168

meters that These were thevery instarkcontrast with

and the nearby Esplanade des Invalides. sion to organise a World Exhibition in Exhibition World a organise to sion

Musées Nationaux, 1889), 40. 1889), Nationaux, Musées

would Champ des Mars des Champ later , (Berkeley: University of of University (Berkeley: ,

be known as Eiffel - P ierre Babelon, Babelon, ierre

, a military Caroline Caroline –

106, Les ce CEU eTD Collection L'Exposition Vulgarisation: et Gudehus, ”Les grandes puissances devant l'Exposition universelle de 1889” in 170 169 French the by found also were similarities various or positioned in the same place, they were presented often Oriental as a group in the official publications and other with and them between noticea made once connections At Paris. in constructions different had and represented were Romania, and Serbia Greece, countries, Balkan independent the of rest the Exhibition), wa eventually had participations products, eventually the European monarchies found the solution to sponsor private comities, and Parisian exhibitions as well as the econom among the few monarchies that had an official participation. But due to the enormous prestige of are who Serbia and Greece of not but Romania, of case the also was This participation. official Europe’s of majority the Monarchy, the of abolition the since thus and revolution French the from years 100 commemorating by Republic the celebrate to purpose its meant illustratetypes to of dwellingsfrom and toEs places,from allperiods Egyptian Habitation”. Built by the architect of the Opera in Paris, Charles Garnier, comprisedit 44 houses Tower,Liberal famousFine and examples. of Arts Arts,are themost Eiffel to next palaces two which of time, that at Paris in fashionable architecture decorative

The sole European countries that did not participated at all were Germany and Montenegro. Montenegro. and Germany were all at participated not did that countries European sole The Formig Camille Jean 1900, pavilionin Romanian ofthe architect future werethe by designed Both y . 170

Another famous famous Another With With the exception of Montenegro (that would not take part in any 19 danger in was 1889 of Exhibition the However

of History “The called buildings of set the was display architectural

Universelle de 1889, 1889, de Universelle equal in magnitude with the countries that participated in an official

ic interest of companies around Europe to present their No. 149, (1989) No. 55

authors. What is more the Balkan countries Balkan the more is What authors. of suffering of , 15 - 24, 15 24, Le Mouvement social

exotic ; Bacha et all, all, ; et Bacha

a major setback: because of of because setback: major a 169

onre. hy were They countries.

kingdoms refused an refused kingdoms l ae h various the are ble th

LesExpositions century Universal Brigitte Schrœder Brigitte

: Mise Mise en Scène é. kimo. kimo.

, 105. ,

-

CEU eTD Collection 173 172 171 and the Moroccan constructions, were the pavilions of Japan, Serbian and deChamp Mars Exposition 1889 presented in chapters following those dedicated to the Oriental colonies, as in the case of were presented together in the newspapers and booklets dealing with t the Oriental Countries”. facadesof continued the th In to usea contemporary atra term, in, introduction an of need the felt author the country, Balkan each of analysis an on embarking event, this to dedicated volume vast the from thus making themless“European”. exhibition, the of part exotic and Oriental the with connection direct the and unique; less them Fren the of part the their Far some and Oriental the near located were L’exposition de LesMerveilles An example is in isin Anexample 847. Ibid.,

e same publication we can also read that “the pavilions of Serbia and Greece successfully Greece and Serbia of pavilions “the that read also can we publication same e nation as a distinct European country, they immediately encountered a double obstacle from The location enforced very much the Balkan the much very enforced location The that the again earned independence did no Turkish yoke that had been oppressing for centuries these people, dictating them habits and tastes local industries in the fir that a world exhibition emphasises. (...) There are between the majors industries of these countries, These people, different as origins, race and aspirations, show at the same time certain similarities connectio the of examples telling most the of One

, along , . 173 Figaro

ch audience: the tendency to treat the Balkan peninsula as a whole, making making whole, a as peninsula Balkan the treat to tendency the audience: ch - Avenu Exposition 1889 Exposition

, (Paris, 1889), (Paris, , e Suffren st st place, striking Could analogies. not we assign these semblances to the

nsnational perspective:

, Boussod, Valadon & Co., Paris., (1889), 66. (1889), Paris., & Co., Valadon Boussod, , , continuing , the

846. 846.

- East nations. Therefore in the search for asserting for search the in Therefore nations. East t maket themyet disappear[?] to 56 Les Merveilles de L’exposition, L’exposition, de Merveilles Les

172

Also as a rule the Balkan countries notonly countries Balkan a the rule Also as – Cairo StreetCairo

Orient connection. On the far right of of right far the On connection. Orient n between the Balkan nations comes nations Balkan the between n , the main Oriental attraction mainOriental, the he Exhibition but were also Greece 171

, one next to the hr before where Figaro - CEU eTD Collection per girls whereEgyptian house, coffee as a up set been had it interior, the for As was. there that all was mosque a as form external Its facade. a called Europeans of rest the like that, discover and mosque the of door the enter to been 217 , (1989), 176 175 (Berkley: 174 countries. Balkan of display the also concerned that urge picturesque, and exoticism for search the was strong how and like the French organisers. But the example of Cairo Street shows what by exclusively shown been had ones Oriental the whereas exhibition the themselves organised mal young with dances performed girls “Egyptian that mosque the inside see to especially shocked The popularity of than the streets in Cairo itself” as yo authenticmore “itwas that saidconstruction coordinatedits who one the Gleon, deDelort Even fantasy. European of creation a rather was it styles, architectural different and periods different Cairo. old the from street imagined an populate to donkeys 50 with together broughtbeen Egyptians have 160 Orientalism. Saidian of goodexample a time on donkeys, by Egyptians driven from visitors noticed be can there restaurant, Romanian the or pavilion Greek the presenting pictures in even if important been have must displays cultural of mixture The one. Chinese the left the other. Exactly across was the Romanian Restaurant, having on its right Siam the pavilion a

Celik, ioh Mthl, Te ol a Exh as World “The Mitchell, Timothy Z in Details es” 176 The Incase type thenations this theBalkan of displaycould never of thecountries happen as

Displaying the Orient, the Displaying University of California Press, 1992), 75 1992), Press, California of University .

: “The Egyptian visitors were disgusted by all this and stayed away. Their final embarrassment had had embarrassment final Their away. stayed and this all by disgusted were visitors Egyptian “The : Cairo Cairo Street eynep Ҫelik, Ҫelik, eynep the

attraction contrasted heavily with the impressions of theEgyptian withthe impressionsvisitors, of attraction contrastedheavily

ipaig h Oin: rhtcue f sa a Nineteenth at Islam of Architecture Orient: the Displaying was was one of the most popular attractions at the exhibition and at the same

76. T

he main goal of the organisers the of goal main he u ibiton”, ibiton”, could not - Rue de Caire. formed dances with young males, and dervishes w males,dervishes and with young dances formed – oprtv Suis n oit ad History and Society in Studies Comparative

80. Mathieu 80.

57 find

any more (figure , La Tour Eiffel Tour La , 4) the street, it had been erected as what the what as erected been had it street, the

an an untouched old street in Cairo. 174

was that each nation to nation each that was

Compris a very popular attraction looks , 109. ,

ed of 25 houses from houses 25 of ed - Century World’s Fairs, Fairs, World’s Century Vl 3, o 2., No. 31, Vol. , hirled”

have an have nd on 175

CEU eTD Collection 281. Vol. Culturale, Paris, Fond Bucharest, Affairs, Foreign of Ministry the of Archives 1900: of Exhibition Universal 179 178 de 1889 Internationale Universelle 177 wer result of the exhibits. provi only Paris would The organisers in comprised very specialists fromFrance, locals. mixed Romaniaand and foreigners for living Romanian a Bibescu, George was Romania of case the in that commissioner general a had Italso Paris. based commission private French the pavi architects whobuilt local and French specialists in different domains. From this second commission was part also the bya decision local comprising and minister Affairs Foreign the by usually led honorific, more home, back one commissions: organising two had country each Serbia, and Greece like participation, official an of case the In process. decis entangled an proving specialists, of number a and commissions several were 1889 of dimension. exhibition attractive

They usually would usually They Généraux Renseignements étrangeres: Sections Detail lists of all the comissions of the participating countries in “Commissions étrangéres”, étrangéres”, “Commissions in countries participating the of comissions the all of lists Detail e

local already available in Paris. of practical reasons In charge of the architectural display of the participating countries at the World Exhibition These commissions were in charge and had to support the whole display of their nation. their of display whole the support to had and charge in were commissions These a of case the In general commissioner from the participatingcountrythe from generalcommissioner

178

So So the resort of the majority of Balkan countries to French architects appears

advertise themselves as proves a letter to the Romanian ambassador in Paris related to the the to related Paris in ambassador Romanian the to letter a proves as themselves advertise so the so non

: they were

partici - official , , (Paris, 1889); ,(Paris, ,

179

Oscar André, the architect hired by the Romanian commission, pating countries had to take into account into take to had countries pating lions ofGreecelions and Serbia.

participation, the the participation, experienced in designing constructions for World Fairs and - makers or politicians; and politicians; or makers de the space and a 50% reduction for the transportation the transportation for reduction 50% and a space de the , (Paris: 1889), 4. 1889), (Paris: ,

58 ay er i Prs n te omsin itself commission the and Paris in years many

participation was organised by organised was participation

and comprising a comprising and one commission in Paris, in commission one

also this “popular” this also

mixed team ofteam mixed 177

Exposition Exposition only one one only ion led a

CEU eTD Collection arhite felul prin chiar, Ba ... socială. lui starea şi cultură de gradul lui aprecia putem sale şi oraşelor caselor dinînfăţişarea regional şi local and all the places, including Romania] , (Bucharest: Joseph Gobl, 1889 in Ada Hajdu, Rumânia inclusiv ţările, 182 1867 Paris, de la și internaționale universale Laurențiu also See 1890). fii, Gobl F. (Bucharest: 1889. Paris, din 181 180 historyarts were ismade of it a architecture: between directconnection and its thenation the Bucharest in appeared 1889 in Still Romania. in sphere intellectuals coul Romania participation, private the to due Probably Products. Diverse of Gallery the in section expensive. as the amount raised by the committe to added This Serbia.and Greecewayofficial an in did as sum exactsame the with commission p Telephones the build exhibition. to state French the by 1889 in hired also was he as Exhibitions Universal the at working and designing in artist experienced of example an is

Nicolae Idieru, Idieru, Nicolae econom The Mathieu, b) d afford to replace the traditional national pavilion with ad affordwith morereplace traditional national crowd tothe pavilion restaurant. friendly cturii putem judeca, până la un punct, şi caracterul unui popor”. unui unşila caracterul până punct, judeca, putem cturii

Romania the type architecture of we see,can up ato point, and its towns look like can be appreciated people,housesfromitsa ofhow belief deduced kind looksthe of templebe can Ifthe fromhow the in onlymarginally up broughtbeen has nation the represent architectureto type of A private the funded state the 1889 in officially participated not did Romania if Even

La Tour Eiffel Tour La 180 ic details are presented by the General Comissioner in Gheorghe Bibesco, Bibesco, Gheorghe in Comissioner General the by presented are details ic

181 , unpublished, 2014, 7: „dacă după înfăţişarea templului se poate judeca felul credinţei unui popor, popor, unui credinţei felul judeca poate se templului înfăţişarea după „dacă 7: 2014, unpublished, , aot epe urrl cmttli ainl oa, e a 0 ui 18 l 2 mri 1890 martie 20 la 1888 iulie 20 la de roman, national comitetului lucrarile despre Raport

Istoria Istoria artelor frumoase.

The constructions presented in Paris were a restaurant, a bar and the Romanian the and bar a restaurant, a were Paris in presented constructions The

[The History of the Fine Arts. Architecture, Sculpture, Painting, Music from all the times times the all from Music Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, Arts. Fine the of History [The , 256. ,

e through a lottery, making Romania’s exhibition in fact twice Architectura, sculptura, pictura, musica dinpictura, sculptura, Architectura, –

1937 Vlad, Vlad, , Institutul European, Iași, 2007, pp. 93 pp. 2007, Iași, Institutul , European,

its degree of culture and its social welfare... Even from 59 Imagini ale identității naționale. naționale. identității ale Imagini

also the character of apeople

Arhitectul Arhitectul Ion Mincu în c

first handbook for the the for handbook first toate timpurile şi din toate vlo a te same the at avilion Expositiunea universala universala Expositiunea România la expozițiile la România –

102. 102. . 182

ontext

, CEU eTD Collection Paris. la de Bibescu George Principelui “Reședința Juvara, Chiliman Alexandra in w youth, their fromfriends fact were in Bibescu and LeCoeur Renoir. Auguste 187 1881 l'Architecture Popescu, Carmen in Nouy” de Lecomte ”L’étranger: 186 publ French several but inhere mentioned isnot André Oscar Bibesco, Gheorghe see 185 cunoa că demonstrează care în țară, specialitate această omare care un asigure] se [să românești, secțiunii decorația sau aranjarea privind patrați, metri 375 de spațiul delimitează care 184 1 VARIA XI Bibescu, 183 architects,LeCoeur werewith Bibescu. Oscar André,friends and who Charles promoters of the future “national” or “neoromanian” style; from graduated that Romanians were Cerchez Grigore and Mincu Ion monuments; historical of restorer important most the being latter the and Bucharest in constructions important designed having one first architects: the Romanian style”. knows he that proves who country, the in specialisation this has that man a be] [should section, Victoriei Calea from merchant bya demand a proves ascountry the for exhibiting people the by demandedalso style”. Romanian the in facade “decorative a for letter a in elusive notion at that time. It was the General Commissioner of the Exhibition himself who difficulties torespond to the demands of the French organisers for a socalled “Romanian style”, Thu architecture. opinions of types these But

Charles Charles LeCoeur even designed the house in Paris of George Bibescu, decorated among others also by the painter Bibescu, George in mentioned are They Clouard, August of Letter Letter of G. Berger form 19 July 1888. Romanian Academic Library, Buchares, Manuscript Cabinet, Fond George lo eot d Nu hs eety en en s aig mjr oe n h dvlpet f hs tl; See style; this of development the in role major a having as seen been recently has Nouy de Lecomte Also o te rain f hs Rmna sye, iec smoe a ies ta of team diverse a summoned Bibescu style”, “Romanian this of creation the For 185

Paul Gottereau and And – Vcoy vne: o te ragmn o te deco the or arrangement the “on Avenue]: [Victory

s 1945,

– Expositiunea universala din Paris, Paris, din universala Expositiunea

certainly the Romanian General Commissioner, George Bibescu, had had Bibescu, George Commissioner, General Romanian the certainly the Fine Arts School in Paris and would later become the most preeminent most the become later would and Paris in School Arts Fine the 148, leaf 171. 148, 184

(R

marchand

ennes represented only minor steps towards defining towards steps minor only represented

: Presses Universitaires de Rennes/ Simetria, 2004) Rennes/ Simetria, de Universitaires : Presses

- granie La Roumanie avant Roumanie La ré Lecomte de Nouy were French working in Romania, the r , Calea Victoriei 134. Ibidem,, leaf 41: „După construcția Galeriei Galeriei construcția „După 41: leaf Ibidem,, 134. Victoriei Calea ,

Le Style Le 60 1890, 19. 1890,

ications.

National Roumain. Roumain. National - pendant ș

te stilul român”. te 186

183 -

apres and finally two Paris

The same “Romanian style” was style” “Romanian same The , (Paris, 1890), 90, 92, 96, 105. Also Also 105. 96, 92, 90, 1890), (Paris, , hen they werestudents. they hen Construire une Nation a travers a Nation une Construire

ain f h Romanian the of ration Componente artistice.” [The [The artistice.” Componente ,68 a –

Romanian style in style Romanian 77. 187

As we will As we - based French More details details More asked asked

see CEU eTD Collection Mincu Caffe, Mihail style: new a of creator” “the as Mincu establish definitely will period communist the Petraș Nicolae friend his by pre the h after 190 189 Expression for National Search the of Kallestrup, Shona 19; 1928), națională, that motivation exposition the at shown been have 188 1 octobre 16 du [exposition 1996) Renoir de amateur premier et architecte Cœur, Le Marc thecatalogue in Coeur Le ofCharles career the of important review Paris. from Bibescu George Prince the of residence recently when until account into taken been not has pavilion, exhibition an as Restaurant, the of project would become archetypal elements of a national a first this in employed decoration ceramic glazed the and arches trilobe the columns, wooden is still regarded today as the “father” of the Romanian national style. example of a national style, “the renaissance of the Romanian architecture” best the as seen been subsequently has building The 5). (figure restaurant a as today functions de fortunate a had project that was dropped off probably because it was too expensive. architecture. le negotiations and influences various were work, team truly a of that is emerges that image the But architects. the of each of contribution the details 1889 of exhibition the at participation Romania’s on Bibescu by written booklets three the of none

Mincu (1852 Mincu (1852 Petrașcu, They Bucharest. in Arts Fine of Museum National the of collection thein kept are Mincu by signed designs The , (București: Editura Științifică, 1960). Științifică, (București: Editura , im other architects built very different buildings also considered in this style. Ion Mincu’s fame dates from dates fame Mincu’s Ion style. this in considered also buildings different very built architects other im - war period, due to his students, and can clearly be seen in the first monograph on his life and works written works and life his on monograph first the in seen be clearly can and students, his to due period, war We only know for sure that Ion Mincu made the first designs for a Romanian restaurant Romanian a for designs first the made Mincu Ion that sure for know only We Ioan Mincu, Mincu, Ioan

the initial restaurant would cost too much see Nicolae Petrașcu Petrașcu Nicolae see much too cost would restaurant initial the –

1912) is1912) known as the ofinventor this style even if he designed a limited number of buildings and 20. See 20. Kallestrup, also cu cu

stiny, having been being built 3 years later in Bucharest where it still it where Bucharest in later years 3 built being been having stiny, Ioan Mincu Ioan 996 996

Ion Mincu. Desene și proiecte de arhitectură, arhitectură, de proiecte și Desene Mincu. Ion , (New York (New , -

5 1997]. 5 janvier Art and Design in Romania 1866 1866 Romania in Design and Art , (Paris: Les dossiers du musée d'Orsay, Réunion des musées nationaux, nationaux, musées des Réunion d'Orsay, musée du dossiers Les (Paris: ,

(Bucharest: Cultura națională, 1928). A second monograph written in written monograph second A 1928). națională, Cultura (Bucharest:

Art and Design Art and : Columbia University Press University Press : Columbia Artistic Components], Components], Artistic

61

, 76. 76. , Popescu rchitecture. rchitecture. Despite this, the initial role 188

– However in the long term Mincu’s d to the creation of “Romanian” of creation the to d Monumentul XI Monumentul

1927. Local and International Aspects International and Local 1927. ,

, 2006), 76. 2006), , Le Style Le 190 Ioan Mincu Ioan

Charles Le Cœur (1830 Cœur Le Charles The traditional porch with MNAR, 2009 2009 MNAR, , 57. , 189

, (Iași:, 2009). The mos The 2009). (Iași:, ,

and Mincu

(Bucharest: Cultura Cultura (Bucharest: –

Arhitectul Ion Ion Arhitectul 2010; On the On 2010; himself - 1906), 1906), t CEU eTD Collection Roumanie en 192 191 the of drawings “Thethat Bibescusays even Infact 6). (figure byMincu restaurant also in the shape of a Romanian country house, very similar with the first IerarhiIași.de from Argeșand Trei areexactly 1900 1889and 1867, of exhibitions way it one. old the replaced building new completely a almost restoration his after often as which he reinterpreted and revived the Byzantine heritage is important in defining a in ways the However criticized. heavily was time, that of restorer French famous most the Duc, and completely rebuilding of method His Argeș. de Curtea monastery the or Craiova from Dmitry Saint Iași, from Nicholas Saint church the like monuments of restoration controversial his for Romania in The Exhibition. Universal vernacular a also build and Mincu from over take will former The Nouy. de Lecomte André monuments ancient of restoration in specialist style nationala in buildings restore and build would that architects other two that fact the also is home back style national have emphasis been possible as authentic as time same the at but spectacular as be to building the for demands the

Details in Carmen Popescu, Popescu, is Another argument for a decisive influence of the exhibition architecture in creating a creating in architecture exhibition the of influence decisive a for argument Another eunn t te ol xiiin f 89 n ai, oai wl eetal bid a build eventually will Romania Paris, in 1889 of Exhibition World the to Returning no coincidence that the main sources of inspiration for the Romanian architecture at the Le Style Le , (Paris: Société de l'histoire de l'art français, 1998). français, l'art l'histoirede de Société (Paris: , sometimes transforming the monument, in the manner of his master, Viollet le Viollet master, his of manner the in monument, the transforming sometimes , 57 , ed. –

58. 191

André Lecomte André du Nouy (1844

case of the of case in Romania in

latter is worth pausing upon. pausing worth is latter were part of that team, that of part were - inspired pavilion after 15 years, at the Li the at years, 15 after pavilion inspired 62

the monuments he restored: the churches Curtea churchesCurtea the restored: he monuments the

–

1914) 1914) et la restauration des monuments historiques

Grigore Cerchez and the French French the and Cerchez Grigore Lecomte de Nouy de Lecomte cabaret

remind of two two of remind

national national style one designed is famous famous is 192 ege 1905 ege

In this In CEU eTD Collection 147 2008) Bucureşti, „Fântâna”[The Iancovescu, Ioana See mosques. of front in found be also can that but churches Paleolithic the of typical structure a 200 199 198 197 196 195 194 193 monastery. Argeș of front in fountain the of that like much very look kiosks the of and Argeș”. the after “copy height, in meters 11 being as Bibescu by described pavilion a inside further seen be can it picture same the In 7). (figure windows shop of kind wi kiosks small constructions, similar other two by divers industries. It is atnoticeable first glance the main monumental gate, flanked on both sides ofexpression thenationthe Romanian ispeasant,his way lifewha and of authentic most “the that mentions Bibescu George commissioner general the where exhibition, hou application”. practical [its] in interest serious a “arousing thus construction, some fantastic not house, real a be to praised architecture, vernacular of example this at hypotheses “constru as André André” Oscar by “assisted architect, the be to it seems at least that Mincu collaborated also at this second project. In one place he is even taken the possibility of a remaking of the Mincu project or three of the most joyful motives from the Mincu project”

In fact the famous inconstruction Argeș is not a baptistery Bibescu as called it but a fountain for the Holy Water, Bibesco, Georges architectes des Moniteur Le Architectes des Moniteur Mat Popescu, Bibescu, Bibescu, e lo elcs h apa o fl ceto i te fiil ulcto o Rmna t the at Romania of publication official the in creation folk on appeal the reflects also se hieu, This team of architects also made the facade of the Romanian Section in the Gallery of Gallery the in Section Romanian the of facade the made also architects of team This 199

La La Tour Eiffel Tour La Le Style Le

Indeed the shape of the tower but also the decoration above the main entrance gate entrance main the above decoration the also but tower the of shape the Indeed La Roumanie La

Roumanie Fountain] in Fountain] , 57. , - Notice sur la Roumanie. Productions Roumanie. la sur Notice 148. ctor”.

.96.

, 257. , , , 1890, 3; 3; 1890, , 110. Repertoriul picturilor murale brâncoveneşti murale picturilor Repertoriul

, 1889, 15. 1889, , 196

o French a So Figaro

- Exposition 1889 Exposition - oain olbrto ses h ms viable most the seems collaboration Romanian 63 195 -

Industries

into into something less expensive. but the French publications give the name of name the give publications French the but , 66 , th a bell a th - 67. , J. Kugelmann, Paris, 1889. Paris, Kugelmann, J. ,

193 -

tower on top and between them a them between and top on tower

and recently it has been mentioned I. Judeţul Vâlcea Judeţul I. atsey f uta de Curtea of baptistery t he creates”.t , (Bucharest: UNArte, UNArte, (Bucharest: , 194

Nevertheless 198 200 197

And The

CEU eTD Collection 203 252 2005), Rochester, Press, 202 Centropa 201 class. high Parisian the unanimously atmosphere an appreciated. created waitresses the and food traditional the songs, folk of Romanians The Restaurant. Romanian the of atmosphere the regarding architects waysOriental intheir work. used indifferent motifs “self of phenomenon the about talks examples other citing Romani image the precisely is this if even character orientalising an architecture Romanian the gives church looking Oriental This 19 the all in architecture exhibition the for glasscreation withthetrilobe arches, windows ainhiswork. of recurrent the motif Mincu way same the in But inspiration. of source a as Argeș from the building. restored turn in interprets who architect the by then restorer, the by first transformation: double t construction if So church. the rebuilt also who for the Romanian section is not the original one, but a reconstruction of André Lecomte du Nouy, The us: forobservation important in comes here . Guide Bleu du Figaro et du Petitdu et Figaro du Journal Bleu Guide Fauser, Annegret See Self and Geopolitics Orientalism: „Balkan Popescu, Carmen h cneto wt te ret s also is Orient the with connection The monaster Argeș de Curtea the of use the notice also can We , no. 2, (2008), (2008), 172 2, no. , 202 o create an architectural style for national representation, here we have a case of case a have we here representation, national for style architectural an create o

The popularity was such that the restaurant became a usual place of meeting for meeting of place usual a became restaurant the that such was popularity The It

also seems probable that Lecomte du Nouy himself sugges himself Nouy du Lecomte that probable seems also Musical Encounters at the 1889 Paris World’s Fair World’s Paris 1889 the at Encounters Musical 203 - – 185.

261. 261. And the music was a way a was music the And

a wanted to deny in its nation its in deny to wanted a n general in , (Paris ,

: Figaro Petit journal, 1889) Petit journal, : Figaro th

century Universal Exhibitions Romania took part. took Romania Exhibitions Universal century

64 the architects transform an established motif or motif established an transform architects the

fountain that provided the source of inspiration sourceof the provided that fountain

ae n h Fec pbiain, u mostly but publications, French the in made to have romantic reveries, it was “slow” or“slow” was it reveries, romantic have to - Invention: A Reading of the Romanian Case” în în Case” Romanian the of Reading A Invention: - orientalisation” in which Romanian Romanian which in orientalisation” 201 , (Rochester: University of Rochester Rochester of University (Rochester: ,

, 216 216 , - building paradigm. Popescu Popescu paradigm. building might y as a source of inspiration of source a as y –

217. Lăutari

be responsible for the for responsible be

ted the fountain the ted , Gypsy singers Gypsy ,

CEU eTD Collection 5 pp. 1991), 211 Firmin de Librairie 210 2005. 209 208 207 terre”. la jamais bues qu’a les larmes toutes passion, 206 héroïques”. sentiments 205 langoureuse lentes, valses 204 messagegoal senttheaudience to offer buttheto just is simple entertainment. restaurant be can what placed hasbeen in called “entertainment areas”, where there special isno a “auth as an praises, as or received house” it Romanian Still a public. of “reproduction the for important least the probably was building music at the world expos, were “Picturesque” music comprised t insertions”. bucolic with people Orient/Romania has been remarked, even if not in a direct way, also in publications dealing with “rural a of authenticity the having earth has ever drunk”. thethat tears the all frenzies, passion the all contain tubes] flute pan [the reeds these and strings Deux des Revue of the heroic sentiments”. “languishing”

Burton Benedict, „International Exhibitions and National Identity” ȋn Anthropology Today, Vol. 7, No. 3 (Jun., 3 No. 7, Vol. Today, Anthropology ȋn Identity” National and Exhibitions „International Benedict, Burton in restaurant Romanian the of descriptions Other Fauser Annegret exposition Figaro poesie”. de pleine et musiqueest charmant “leur 735: soi, chez L'Exposition Mondes Deux des Revue Le Menestrel, s “Those

ned n h jyu amshr o te oain etuat te rhtcue f the of architecture the Restaurant, Romanian the of atmosphere joyful the in Indeed low and languishing waltzes are seemingly essential Romanian”. Romanian”. essential seemingly are waltzes languishing and low - 9, p. 9. 9,

204 1889, 275: 1889, “Il en résulte une sonorité plus efféminée et moinsbeaucoup apte à la interprétation des - ,

Didot, 1890), 239 and and 239 1890), Didot,

Musical Encounters at the 1889 Fair theWorld’s 1889 Paris at Encounters Musical , 100: “peuple pasteur, avec note champetre”. noteavec pasteur, “peuple 100: , Mondes Mondes and

s, sont,paraȋt s, 206 had , tome 94, (1889). 944: “ces cordes et ces ros ces et cordes “ces 944: (1889). 94, tome ,

The same the music was considered “charming and full of p 205

h msc a even was music the “a sonority more feminized and less appropriate for the interpretationthe for appropriate less and feminized sonoritymore “a

These all are epithets usually attributed to an Oriental culture. In the

- il, essentiellement roumains”. essentiellement il,

Figaro - Exposition 1889 Exposition

Maurice Brincourt, Brincourt, Maurice 65

an opportunity for for opportunity an

, (1889), (1889), 100. , ni architecture”. entic

, University of Rochester Press, Rochester, Press, University , ofRochester L’Exposition Universelle de 1889, de Universelle L’Exposition eaux contiennent tous les délires de la de délires les tous contiennent eaux he Oriental and the Gypsy one. exposition Figaro

oatc metaphors romantic 208 210 211

h association The u oeal the overall But

, 1889, 100: “Ces 100: 1889, ,

oetry” “these :

(Paris : (Paris 207

209 or

CEU eTD Collection 216 188 215 214 213 212 attitude ofthe French or general the reinforces only Europe of part being not as country Balkan a to reference direct country, European Europe". from countries the from Serbia approach"to success a without apparently tried commissioner general Balkan nations, they demanded a place "that is included with the countries from Europe" and the [extréme Orient] probable. Lafanège, of name the also Serbia. with familiarity his for chosen probably Gibert, B. pavilion w participation. country’s Exhibition of 1889.

Ibid. August 12 Serbia, of Mionister Affairs Foreign the to Exhibition the of Commissioner General the from Leter in published 1885 Gibert F/12/3762 Paris, France, des nationales Archives Petitdu et Figaro du Journal Bleu Guide 8, Archives Nationales de France, Paris, F/12/3763. Paris, France, de 8,Archives Nationales c)

eba a be te is n first the been has Serbia Serbia The location of the pavilion “in the gallery of the countries from the Orien the from countries the galleryof the “in pavilion the of location The Its commission comprised only two foreigners, as architect Alfred Labouige and Armand

ere all the Serbian productsere were displayed. all theSerbian

216

profoundly dissatisfied the Serbs.

o e ae h pof f drc and direct a of proof the have we So as if as 212

As early as April 1887 the French ambassador to Belgrade announced his 213 Quelques jours en Serbie et a Constantinople a et Serbie en jours Quelques being part of the continent was not a thing taken for granted. for taken thing a not was continent the of part being ganisers Exhibitions. Universal at these

Still the exposition exposition the Still

as the architect of the pavilion so collaboration with Labouige is Labouige with collaboration so pavilion the of architect the as

to t cnim h ofca priiain t h World the at participation official the confirm to ation , (Paris ,

: Figaro Petit journal, 1889), 2 1889), Petit journal, : Figaro

was 66

215 among the smallest one, with only a national a only with one, smallest the among

Relevant fact for the display st

osiu ty o oiin eba as Serbia position to try conscious 214

In the French publications appears publications French Inthe , Mars ,

- Avril 1885 21

t and Far EastFar and t rategy of the In fact In

the a

CEU eTD Collection 219 218 217 Fine the at professor same the had education: same the exactly almost received Labouige and 19 the of turn the at Europe throughout motif used commonly national a as Serbia and Romania of case both a by is appropriation this fact, In exhibition. same the for pavilion Romanian the been have should what in motives main the of one as ceramic used Mincu, Ion style”, Romanian “national the of central element in the Romanian architectural discourse. The architect credited w a also was ceramic glazed the But art. decorative Serbian of example beautiful a as seen tiles, invented styles. character of this historic the the monuments”. Turkish the as Serbia in architecture byzantine of traces few find can Serbo as pavilion the praised that publications “ab French the by enforced is view This 8). (figure 19 the in studied architectsSerbian important most the were Europe Central in as well t quote together decorationthat by using the elements seen as “traditional” Serbian: large round arches and the polychrome façade

Popescu, Popescu, Ibid.. Krakow,S. solutely giving the impression of Serbian national architecture” and of being in “the purest “the in being of and architecture” national Serbian of impression the giving solutely - Byzantin style”. Byzantin

The French team of architects, Labouige architects, of team French The The mo The Le styleLe al monuments that are no more, r more, no are that monuments al Guide Bleu du Figaro et du Petit Journal Petit du et Figaro du Bleu Guide st talked about element on the Serbian pavilion façade were the glazed ceramic glazed the were façade pavilion Serbian the on element about talked st , 55. , 218

Thus paradoxically it is praised a Serbo

217

However in the same magazine there is also the recognition that “we that recognition the also is there magazine same the in However

he so called “byzantine style”, very much in fashion in Serbia as Serbia in fashion in much very style”, “byzantine called so he

elevant statement although not recognized for the the for recognized not although statement elevant 67 , (Figaro Petit journal, 1889), 221 1889), , Petit journal, (Figaro

–

Lafanège, managed to design a construction construction a design to managed Lafanège, - Byzantin byzantine style inspired by

eoain f ht a a rather a was what of decoration th

century. occupation destroyed all destroyed occupation 219 -

222. And actually Mincu actually And

ith ith the invention th

century CEU eTD Collection Greece in Humanities modernities”, european and articulations neoclassical ideal: the ”Colonizing 224 223 locals. and foreigners the all time 222 221 regionalism” ofFrench father P styles. national the for important ideas the of many 220 per short a in made progresses economical and a technological its with impress As only could nation Greek young it. the consequence in task impossible an has nevertheless that but antiquity of glory lost the regain to Universal Exhibition it was generally seen as a nation waken civilisation and most of the comments in the French publications refer to it. famousof Paris, work opened theCasino in Sauffroy. assembled a team fo like in the Romanian case, a specialist who was based in Paris, the engineer E Labouige of1882). Arts School in Paris, Julien Guadet and

Details of the idealisation of the Greek nation and how this w this how and nation Greek the of idealisation the of Details Delaire, involving Exhibition, World the at architecture national the of nature mediated much the for relevant is fact The Paris". in "engineer iscalled He ofthe promoters most ardent ofthe as one known is JulienGuadet d)

Greece ree led hd seetpcl mg i te et s h ihrtr f h antique the of inheritor the as West the in image stereotypical a had already Greece Next to the Serbian pavilion was the Greek one, country that had as general commissioner, , (Los Angeles (Los , 222 , vol. 9, no. 2, (2004). See also Manos G. Birēs și Marō Kardamitsē Marō și Birēs G. Manos also See (2004). 2, no. 9, vol. , Lesarchitectes

He

studied like all the other cases at the Fine Arts school in Paris and has as his most 220 rmed rmed almost entirely by Greeks, t

: J. Paul Getty Museum, 2004). Museum, Paul Getty : J.

.

Archives Nationales, Paris, Archives Nationales,

iod of time. Maybe considering this double perception and trying and perception double this considering Maybe time. of iod were admitted there in yearssuccessive (Mincu of 1881,

1891. opescu, 68

223

“Un Patrimoine…” “Un

F/12/3762. F/12/3762. he only exception

as reflected in the architecture in Neni Panourgiá, Neni in architecture the in reflected as regional specificity in architecture, spreading spreading architecture, in specificity regional up from its long time sleep that tries

Angelaki, Journal of the Theoretical the of Journal Angelaki, - Adamē, Adamē, , 60: “Julien Guadet, the spiritual spiritual the Guadet, “Julien 60: , being N 224 eoclassical architecture architecture eoclassical

the the architect, Aimé rnest Vlasto.

Specifically at the 221

He CEU eTD Collection 225 nations. independent newly of group another countries, America Latin or contemporary art thatasserted products “modern” nation. the “traditional” elements and inside the pavilion one could find also modern industrial achievements architecture the nations, Balkan the with case the was as Usually, crafts. and monuments vernacular or historical traditions, at least in certain aspects with the West; and to promote one’s unique cultural heritage by way of itsindustry,citie moderna nation,of strategies: by way topromote shape. take to begins design final the to contributed that architects of team entire an of image usual named houses fantasy of series the building after exhibition the of architects star the of one Garnier, Charles and Sedille Paul French the by with the head of the Medusa on it. goddess the of shield the side each on and centre the in Athena of statue the antiquity: classical engineer Ernest Vlasto andhad nevertheless elements visible most stillthesymbols as the ofthe (figure 9). The façade of the pavilion was made under the supervision o major industrial works of the modern state like the Corinthian channel or the mines from Laurium ancien re one entrance, main the of left the on façade: main the on frescoes two Sauffroy commissioned organizers Hellenic the state Greek modern the with Greece ancient relate to

Tenorio

t history that represented that history t Other examples of this dual display dual this of examples Other display two balance to tendency the for conspicuous most the is example Greek The - Trillo,. Trillo,. Mexico,

9.

a view of the Acropolis and on the right side a view of some of view a side right the on and Acropolis the of view a

a mat o hw h lte dmnin b uig unique using by dimension, latter the show to meant was In addition, strategy, often at odds which other, are offered by offered are other, which odds at often strategy, Histoire du Habitation Humaine Habitation du Histoire that that the plans for this pavilion had to be approved 69

s, arts, etc., that compare s, arts, can f the French based Greek 225

ae t present to Eager . In this way the way this In . lated to the to lated

CEU eTD Collection cngahe o te ainl n retn, rzl n Chile and Brazil Argentina, in National 1855 France, européennes, Demeulenaere Christiane the «» d’Amérique latine pittoresque entre indigène et 229 of 228 http://bbk.ac Iconographies 1889”, de París de Universal Exposición la en yBrasil “Argentina river: a even included that it, 227 18; 1996), Press, California Tenorio Mauricio Hond Haiti, Guatemala, Ecuador, 226 architectural the and exhibition this at used styles and motives the between connection obvious the Univers taken torepresent historyofthe real from something nation was the quite common something at architecture “imagined” an nations Balkan the of case the in saw already we as But architect. archaeo besides required them recreate to and Mexico in existed barely period colonial the before from monuments fact of matter a As Antonio Penafiel, whose discoveries were the start for the reconstruction of the ancient temple. Sala Luis architect the Anza, Antonio engineer the pavilion: the at an to referring therefore temple, from. tradition indigenous Aztec an after modelled building a presenting by times opposite example is offered by Mexico which has chosen to relate its pavilion the pre immigration. European attract to also and modernity their assert to way a Paris, in time Brazil, Argentina El Sal displays. costly and biggest the of one had they world, “modern” the of front in themselves

Tenorio Brazi ofthe architecture “modern” the However The Latin American countries that took part were Argentina, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Chile, the Dominican Republic, eal i Crsin Demeulenaere Christiane in Details okn aan t h tre aiin o te akn onre w cn lo oie the notice also can we countries Balkan the of pavilions three the at again Looking - Trillo, Trillo, .uk/ibamuseum/texts/FernandezBravo02.htm#top .uk/ibamuseum/texts/FernandezBravo02.htm#top al Exhibitions. - Mexico at theat Fairs World's Mexico Trillo,. Trillo,. - Douyère, Douyère, eio t h Wrds ar: rfig Mdr Nation Modern a Crafting Fairs: World's the at Mexico - 1937 vador vador or Bolivia presented pavilions made in the fashionable style in that

228 , (Paris ,

uras, Nicaragua, Paraguay, El Salvador, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Mexico. Mexico. and Venezuela, Uruguay, Salvador, El Paraguay, Nicaragua, uras, Also an exception was the choice of an all an of choice the was exception an Also

xtqe epstos lx xoiin uiesle e ls utrs extra cultures les et universelles expositions lex expositions: Exotiques

- : Archives nationales, 2010). nationales, : Archives Douyère, “Expositions internationales et image nationale : les pays pays les : nationale image et internationales “Expositions Douyère, , 66. , logical work also a high degree of imagination from the the from imagination of degree high a also work logical

lian pavilion was counterbalanced by the tropical garden around around garden tropical theby was counterbalanced lianpavilion modernité proclamée”, modernité 70

Diacronie a ad h archaeologist the and zar , forthcoming (2014). See , also forthcoming (2014). - , (Berkeley: University of of University (Berkeley: , Mexican team to work to team Mexican Relics and Selves: and Relics - Co lumbian 227

An 229 226 -

CEU eTD Collection with their pavilions theByzantine cultural heritage. nations Balkan the all were 1900 in Exhibition World Parisian next the architecture withthe artistic developments each in of these countries inspiration of the finally anexample ofvernacular theRomanian pavilion, architecture istelling for thesources of overtoimpossible be to proved heritage classical the of prestige the that shows case Greek The earlier. decades 2 than more finished Mansion Miša’s Captain with starting Serbia, from motive similar successful very the developments at home. Thus, the Serbian pavilion with its s initial

Romanian national style. The deeply intertwined nature of the exhi come by a medieval or vernacular inspired “national”style.And vernacular or inspired medieval byacome 71

uccession of round arches reminds of are

seen evenseen more clear at had

chosen to promote promote to chosen bition CEU eTD Collection eff varied and aninteresting Palaces small these 231 230 “big ofthe manifestations 19 careers local architects. and French the involved, actors the on and architecture national a creating of process the on be will focus The involvement. country’s each of peculiarities the detail will I finally Paris 1900 World Exhibition, Nations orga French the of desire Fairs,World heritage cultural ecclesia of reminded church Orthodox an of shape the in constructions had Romania Balkan countries participated and were represented with national pavilions. a) Paris Universal Exhibition of 1900 Chapter 5: The Paradox Nationalof Representation: Balkan Countries Pavilions at

The only The except Archives Nationales de France de Nationales Archives Thethe 1900Universal Balkan Countries at Exhibition , as well as, as The 1900 Universal Exhibition in Exhibition Universal 1900 The of four date, to Exhibition World biggest the In ’

Street T hroughout the chapter the hroughout which was . 231 ion is Montenegro, which has not participated at any World Fair until the Second World War. War. World Second until Fair the anyat World not participated haswhich ionis Montenegro, ,

the Balkan countries contradicted the principle of national representation at representation national of principle the contradicted countries Balkan the

the reception In order t order In stic architecture. Opting for for Opting architecture. stic assert

ies wo pcfcly eadd dvriy of diversity a demanded specifically who nisers, o explain this paradox, first I will sketch some particularities of theof particularities some sketch will I first paradox, this explain o th , Paris: F/12/4270, F/12/4242: “it is wished though, to obtain of the entirety of of entirety the of obtain to though, wished is “it F/12/4242: F/12/4270, Paris: , then

ing

century”, oc

of the Balkan pavilions in in of the Balkan pavilions

each country’s Also uniqueness.

I will ,

I will stress crucial stress will I ect”. look at the Balkan nation

Paris

casions forcasions unprecedented thefield in of experiments

72

has been considered a kind of swan song for the the for song swan of kind a considered been has

repres entation similarities regarding these architects’ these regarding similarities the French publications.

ie independen five s through , ’

, theycontradicted bluntly the participation participation as a wh

hl Blai’ oe also one Bulgaria’s while

230 the the

Greece, Serbia and shared buildings o autonomous or t

Byzantine ole

on the the on ,

and

CEU eTD Collection 110. 236 An (Los Style and Psychology 235 135 2005), Paris, ArtistiqueVille Béatrice and Bacha, Myriam 234 inhabitants. ”Memo 233 16. 2007), d'Orsay, 232 des Nations). which “Mareorama”, Some examples are the all with crowd the of entertainment the fairs”, international the line. Thus the with together Paris, in Exhibition previous the at the Beaux buildings have led to the often stated conclusion that in 1900 stone triumphed over iron, and Franco the concluded who III, Alexander Czar the designed would visitors, of number spectacular the in particularly aspect, every in architecture.

Sylvain Ageorges, Ageorges, Sylvain Mathieu Geppert, C.T. Alexander See “The 1900 Paris Exhibition” in Debora L. Silverman, Silverman, L. Debora in Exhibition” Paris 1900 “The See aoie Mathieu Caroline

Esplanade des Invalids des Esplanade

i e iec” N. 7 (04, . . ot ntcn i ta Fac hd t ht ie ol” 1 milions 41 ”only” time that at had France that is noticing Worth 9. p. (2004), 17, No. Ricerca”, e ria last until theOsakaof 1970. last until exhibition The core of core The At the same time same the At , Les expositions, expositions, Les , in the French the in , the1900E

Arts and 232

The last exposition in Paris before 1937 surpassed by far all the previous eventsprevious the all far by surpassed 1937 before Paris in exposition last The

Ls xoiin uiesle à ai: rhtcue rels u utopiques ou réelles architectures Paris: à universelles expositions Les , Sur les traces des Expositions Universelles. Universelles. Expositions des traces les Sur

Art Nouveau constructions covered and overcame the iron frames, the event were considered were event the

contrasted with the more traditional displays like the like displays traditional more the with contrasted xhibition leftprominent thexhibition most marks onthe capital. French

“m Città brevi: storia, storiografia e teoria delle pratiche espositive europee, 1851 europee, espositive pratiche delle teoria e storiografia storia, brevi: Città Beaux , 16. See also Gilles Plum, l’Exposition Universelle de 1900, in Jean Pierre Babelon, Babelon, Pierre Jean in 1900, de Universelle l’Exposition Plum, Gilles also See 16.

geles: University of California Press, 1989) Press, California of geles: University in 1900 one can notice what has been called “a real turn in orga in turn real “a called been has what notice can one 1900 in e Andia, de

oving sidewalk”, “the up Gare Gare in 1889. in

throug –

139. 139.

- Arts d’Orleans

h

235

e epstos nvrels Prs e 85 1937 à 1855 de Paris à universelles expositions Les style, "the masterpieces of the Exposition", connected with connected Exposition", the of masterpieces "the style, the new bridge bridge new the

T he aforementioned constructions can still be seen today seen be still can constructions aforementioned he

( nowadays the nowadays 233 73

the newly built built newly the

-

usa Alac o 1892). of Alliance Russian - Alexander III Alexander side r Nueu n Fin in Nouveau Art - Paris 1855 1855 Paris down house”, d’ Orsay

sorts of popular amusements popular of sorts Petit Palais Petit , (named in the memory of the the of memory the in (named , – fifty M

1937 useum

“ million the the , (Paris: Parigramme, 2006), 2006), Parigramme, (Paris: , - de - Nations m ice France Siecle )

and and 234 agic mirror” or the s ,

hs tps of types These a Grand Palais Grand the first metro first the (Paris , (Paris , record record ’

Street so visible Politics, :

Action : Musée : which nising - (Rue (Rue 2000 that that . 236 , ,

CEU eTD Collection 281. Vol. Culturale, Paris, Fond Bucharest, Affairs, ofForeign ofthe Ministry Archives 1897). Feb. (23 organisers French from the received advices exact same tellingthe in Paris, ambassador ofForeig Minister Romanian C.Stoicescu, to thesee letter also F/12/4242; 1897, October Paris, to ambassador Delyannis, Greek M. to letter ofSerbia, Commissioner General sonterritoire. régionde une pays du l'histoire ou de époque une nettement na dansson architecture choisisse pays chaque varie, et effetintéressant un Palais petits ces l'ensemble de de obtenir 239 238 237 indication by ofofficial way letters organiserFrench from the following the received too) states other presumably (and state Balkan Every like. look should architecture pavilion the how on doubt no left organisers French the of desire express the But modernity of the Balkan states, by way of a fashionable architectural style like The etc. pos as much as included modernityassert to world”, where for the first time the Balkan nations were included. Street colonies or other “exotic” nations had hierarchical a cl emphasised space of allocation this how remarked Celik pavilions. national Hereattractions. main the of one as every time assification. While the sovereign nations had their national pavilion on this street, the oriental the street, this on pavilion national their had nations sovereign the While assification. tionale, soit ancienne, soit moderne, des types d'habitation ou des monuments dont la reproduction caractérise caractérise reproduction la dont monuments des ou types d'habitation des moderne, soit ancienne, soit tionale,

“ Albert Quantin, Celik, Le caractère de la construction est également laisse à votre appréciation; il est à désirer toutefois que pour pour toutefois que désirer est à il appréciation; votre à laisse est également construction la de Lecaractère could be seen at the time as “a unanimous and emot and unanimous “a as time the at seen be could However, the 2. the However, region of its territory. the from nationalchoose architecture, its oldeither Palaceseveryinterestingansmallforvaried effect,entirety these of the countryoftoand obtain characterThe theof constructionyour also atleftappreciation; is wishedit is though, Displaying the Orient the Displaying rhtcue f h pvlos them pavilions the of architecture

reproduction L’Exposition du Siècle du L’Exposition and of whichwould of

24 km 24 progress was felt ubiquitously felt was progress sible modern constructions, engineering feats, industries, modern arts, modern industries, feats, engineering constructions, modern sible

, 89. , 239

5 October, 1897, October, 5

long , Le Monde Moderne, Le , Monde Nations their clearly characteriseclearlya

pavilions in other sections. Archives Nationales de France de Nationales Archives ’

sel Street , 74

the sovereign states displayed on two rows theirrows two on displayed sovereignstates the ves

or modern,orhabitationof types

, along the left bank of Seine, is mentioned is Seine, of bank left the along , ol hv be dsge t epes the express to designed been have could

(Paris, 1900), 127. 1900), (Paris, . This is why the Balkan nation Balkan whythe is This . Archives Nationales de de France Nationales Archives n

era from the history of the country the of history fromthe era ional manifestation of the civilized the of manifestation ional ” s: n Affairs from the Romanian Romanian the Affairsfrom n The exact same text in the letter to to textletter inexact same the The

238

As a matter of fact , , Paris

237

Therefore , F/12/4270; and in and the , F/12/4270; the A

or of monuments ofor , Paris, , ,

the rt s , N in order in ’

the the drive Nations exhibits ouve ,

or aor au. to ’ ,

CEU eTD Collection 241 240 The organisers. the to role for done be to still is phenomenon monuments ancient ar architecture, of schools involving par is architecture of heritage. monuments architectural rating and own knowledge Acquiring one’s presenting then and reassessing of way by monuments, “national” for search a motion in set indications French the that see will we organisers, the of caseexhibition 1889, even at was the definedat iftheBalkans. not concept allin authent and places different from forms various also where paintings, Orientalist the of renderings architectural c Islamic of regions the Oriental pavilions have reproduced at the World Exhibition. Even if she does not qu monuments modern” or “old by represented in trend

Sylv Çelik, the not exist iane Leprun, Leprun, iane icity”. In this statement there are noticeable traces of Once theplans Confused as the Balkan nations might have been

Displaying... pavilion fin - historical de 241 ed for -

siècle So architecture Le Théâtre des colonies des Théâtre Le , 56. , ,

, and ,

Oriental Oriental countries we notice again the same reference to a “national architecture” as was the was as architecture” “national a to reference same the again notice we , re were re

ivilization”.

“which “which were often architectural collages incorporating various periods and f rne Accordingly France. eid ae obnd n qet eie b “h ossin with obsession “the by defined quest a in combined are periods or

handbooks and journals of architecture. A architecture. of journals and handbooks the construction the

played

five officials (among them (among officials five 240 the Balkan the

in this discussion. discussion. in this

(Paris, 1986) 48 1986) (Paris, helgcl oite, societies societies, chaeological , though) Çelik identifies a h se te trig on o tee rain i the in creations these of point starting the sees She s

were , ,

from which it could pick could it which from s. 75 cuty led hs ntoa architecture national a has already country a H

finished owever –

83 in Ibid. 83 a

positivist positivist way of thinking, par

in

, , they for tobepresented approval had two architects) in charge of validating of charge in architects) two

the beginning by this rule ote the above indication (which might i n this paper I paper this n

similar similar method of constructing t of a larger phenomenon phenomenon larger a of t thorough research of this of research thorough

up for

will

several “types” to be to “types” several

the

demonstrate what demonstrate

rsrain of preservation

imposed by t of a larger

,

CEU eTD Collection Ibid. Ambassador the Romanianto Director the General from letter décoratif”, effet bon le en doivent assurer qui l’harmonie et diversité la fois la à diverses constructions 243 in found are countries Balkan the of each for letters Approval Paris,F/12/5223. ANF, exhibition”. the for commission foreign commissions, on their expenses. However, the plans must be submi 242 obvious the similarit pavilion, each of therefore and nation each of features distinctive the promote the publications French the in if Even street. the of spots visible most the of one in other, the to next one were Serbia, and Greece of ones the most, the resemble that Firstly representation. national of discourse the underlying principles main the of one uniqueness, resemblanc “diversity” reinforces the paradox I talked about at the beginning time maintai of necessity the by us to suggested the plans “as soon aspossible” organisers least at offer regard French. the by imposed control strict the account into take the Exploitation charge the Foreign Sections; of the appearance of each pavilion: The Chief Architect of the General Installations; the architect in

Archives Nationales de France de Nationales Archives “[...] envoyez “[...] les the by built are pavilions the and “installations” indoor “The stated: regulations official the of 52 article The

,

the diversity and the harmony that must assure must that harmony the diversityand the ,

The paradox is further emphasised by other elements elements other by emphasised further is paradox The all th ies , kept in the Archives of the the of Archives the in kept ,

e between theBalkan pavilions w e pavilions were grouped together at one end of among s; and the General Commissioner of the Exposition.

observations qui pourraient nous être suggérées par la nécessité de maintenirces entre de nécessité la par noussuggérées être qui pourraient observations

the pavilions the pavilions th for justification one

, F/12/4223, F/12/4242, F/12/4262, F/12/4270. F/12/4270. F/12/4262, F/12/4242, F/12/4223, ,

, sothat they could the director Architectural of the of the Ministry of of Ministry Balkan , March 18, 1898, Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ofForeign Archives ofthe Ministry 1898, 18, March , is ere ning among the diverse constructions, at the same same the at constructions, diverse the among ning

control. In the correspondence correspondence the In control.

76 not overlooked. countries countries

in return “send theobservations that wouldbe Foreign Affairs Foreign a

good decorative effect”. gooddecorative even more puzzling. The official documents issued in this in issued documents official The Nations tted tted in advance for approval by the French

F Service; General the Directorof or instance of this chapter, denying , ’

242

the French demanded to see see to demanded French the

street

Thus,

, and the two pavilions eea ted a to was trend general h ie o national of idea the ,

every design had to with the Romanian the with one

243

and c

The desire fordesireThe ould renders

read that

the

CEU eTD Collection 248 247 heureuses.” plus des orientale harmonie une grec pavillon le avec formait et remarquable uneélégance 246 245 244 similarities reveal mainly they because representation national of idea the francs”. 53008 of budget] that a at had part took also Serbia states, exhibition”. Balkan the among Romania, and Greece Besides one make also fact In countries. participating the bother not did therefore and discours appreciative “national” a under lurking just was perspective comparative the press, for toobserve thereader o presented time every almost harmony Serbian pav pavilion Serbian the in up one”, a picturesque archi “the Palace Serbian isof

Ibid. Videlo, The official description kept Marché Bon de Illustré Guide 1901) (Melun, Seine dela gauche rive la Berge de la et Nations des Rue La from the Serbian paper paper Serbian the from 244

T Nevertheless, 248

o

” hese sorts of comparisons and connections and comparisons of sorts hese 13 November 1896 November 13 r .

246 references to the other neighbours from the Peninsula. A conspicuous example is example conspicuous A Peninsula. the from neighbours other the to references

that ilion ilion is 247

Moreover,

This is followed by a direct comparison with a Balkan nation: “[in 1889 Serbia 1889 “[in nation: Balkan a with comparison direct a by followed is This “ the same described

as we will see in other descriptions

them

in French publications French in

as for , too , by the French officials, F/12/4270 (sic!) Francs while Romania Romania while Francs (sic!) : L’Exposition et Paris et L’Exposition

Videlo as forming “together with the Greek

n consecutive pages, often even often pages, consecutive n and judgethem together. .” the neighbouring 245

Even ,

where even the term “Balkan term the even where a

parallel with Oriental architecture is made when the when made is architecture Oriental with parallel tecture, quite analogue ini , (Paris, 1900) 57. 1900) (Paris, , 77 the four pavilions of the Balkan nations were nations Balkan the of pavilions four the Greece and Romania, the Byzantine Style turns

can be interpreted as being as interpreted be can

: “L’ensemble, œuvre de l’architecte Baudry avait

from a gvn oe hn 0 thousands 200 than more given had

official publication on the same page, same the on ,

, 10. , publication pavilion pavilion a

states” appear states”

ts entirety with theentirety Greek ts

very joyful Oriental s among the among

from the Balkans the from in opposition to opposition in s making

s or : “[in 1889] “[in :

the

Balkan French French it easy the the e ,

CEU eTD Collection only on the most visible forms of architecture, namely the national pavilions and in the Romanian case, its restaurant. 250 85. 2010, Macmillan, Exhibits. 249 General as chosen have they 1889 in If Exhibition. World Parisian previous the since constructions. decoration included all They spaces. exhibition larger within sections other of different places (a pavilion, a restaurant, a tobacco kiosk and an oil pavilion) appears case Romanian other of maximum a for and World exhibition and build a pavilion and other construct a budget, country’s participation. Once they confirmed, it direction particip the by motion in set process institutional the of overview general a with start will I publications. French the in comments relevant the to and case each exhibitio with the discourses it around countrie

However, considering that other Balkan nati Balkan other that considering However, Usually of product categories by Exhibition Exhibition of 1889,

n h following the In s al a 1895 as early As s. The point can also can point The s. See n architecture for the Balkan countries. I will pay special attention to the peculiarities of which has and to and Alexander C. T. Geppert, Geppert, T. C. Alexander 250

form a national committee in Paris that would see over the organization of their the over thatwouldsee a committee inParis national form Regarding the Balkan nations, an i an nations, Balkan the Regarding

not been been ,

gi t be to again , I will describe the process of choosing an architect and and architect an choosing of process the describe will I

both h frin masdr i Prs ee otce cnenn their concerning contacted were Paris in ambassadors foreign the , explored so far inpublicationexplored sofar

s. For example, the aforementioned For s. the example, aforementioned be made that their display at the World Exhibition World the at display their that made be was thatsuccessfulterms not in ofasserting nation. one’s local and French specialists, responsible for the national pavilion seventeen leig iis ipra epstos n fin in expositions imperial Cities: Fleeting

the most complex. complex. most the ons displays are not so well documented, I will focus in this paper paper this in focus will I documented, well so not are displays ons

lcs w places 78 was was the responsibility of each

ions. It was a complex task h mportant change seems to have happened have to seems change mportant ere Romania exhibits s Grand Grand

dealing with World Exhibitions. Exhibitions. dealingWorld with and and

ation of foreign countries, foreign of ation ol be could ipae fu buil four displayed Petit Palais Petit - de - , ice Europe siècle

as well as a number of them involv displayed hosted hosted Arts the Fine , s

taken together taken

and different and ing to establish of , as at the Palgrave , dings in in dings . creating creating

249

The

a

CEU eTD Collection 1 “The indisplay 253 Guechoff M. addresse 1898 December, 18 Letter, architect”. “your 252 281. Vol. Culturale, Paris, Fond Bucharest, 251 their restaurant. In this respect, from producersexhibits all over the country. home at based one the Commission, important other the to giveas tothe possible participatingfreedom as countries. much i to referred organisers French the and country certain that FrenchOnce architects designingwas their architect in pavilions. appointed,an employee of the to appealed countries the all that know we but Romania, to related documents the in anymore other Consequently negotiate stated to have will and architects” and engineers of and group a hands their on have will Commissionaires him to appeal to Romanians the convince to tried Montferrat Bouval organ in services their offering were who persons private or companies from offers received he Sometimes Paris. in required with growingconfidence local a Commissioner

A very detailed account of Mexico’s process of gathering the exhibits from all over the country and of making a makinga of and country the over fromall exhibits the gathering of process Mexico’s of account detailed very A In a letter addressed to the Bulgarianby commission the officials at the exhibition, Henri isSaladin toreferred as Archiv1897. 31, March in Paris, Ambassador Romanian the Letterto s coe b te omsinie” Te ae e ovl otert os not does Montferrat Bouval de name The Commissionaires”. the by chosen , The Beside the national pavilion, another important construction for the Balkan coun with touch in closely keep to had Paris in Commission the that forget not also must We ih hm “en vr ltl koal o or ais n o te oa customs”. local the of and habits our of knowable little very “being them, with , Archives Nationales de France de Nationales Archives , General Commissioner ,

889 Wizards of Progress”, in Tenorio ofProgress”, Wizards 889 “we can either make the plans and the construction ourselves who ,

theyappointed

lived in France and was well integrated in the French society, now society, French the in integrated well was and France in lived

Romania seemed to have had an advantage izing the construction team. For example For team. construction the izing ’s

first first step was to form a team for the different constructions , Paris, F/12/4223. F/12/4223. , Paris,

their own General toParis. their own Commissioner 253 d to the General Commissioner of Bulgaria at the Exhibition, Exhibition, the at Bulgaria of Commissioner General the to d - Trillo, Trillo, 79

Mexico at the World's Fairs the at Mexico

,

which was in charge of collecting the collecting of charge in was which t accordingly, proving that they tried tried they that proving accordingly, t es of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Foreign of Ministry es ofthe 252

, ,

as

a certain Marquis de Marquis certain a ..., 49 49 ..., ,

or we can appeal to it it was the only one –

63.

that tries was appear “ t 251 he ,

CEU eTD Collection 257 256 F/12/4242. 255 V. 1878) 254 since the architect’s the General Commissioner Lucien French the architect, the that is case Greek the of peculiarity 20 of would pavilion the details: the received Sacilly Nicolas Commissioner General Greek the space, the of dimension the national pavilion in the first row on yoke”state thecountry when shookthe Ottoman foundit itself 1878 in offered justifications the from far rhetoric, gradua display its (1878), b) situated close by,and being visible peculiar very having a architecture. have any information regarding a possible B assigned of row first the on being Serbia, and Greece construction. special a build to

"L'Exposition Universelle. Le Pavillon deGrece" Pavillon la Le Universelle. "L'Exposition spelling. French usedthe I available, werenot names Whenoriginal Philocalie, la de (Athens: Imprimerie en 1878, Paris de Universelle L’Exposition a LaGrece A.Mansolas, etr o . eyni Gek masdr n ai, O Paris, in ambassador Greek Delyanni, M. to Letter Greece

wd wt 2. m n et, ih nte sae o a etuat underneath. restaurant a for space another with depth, in m 28.5 with wide m As early as 1895 as early As Paris in one first the Since Exhibition. World a to participation third its at was Greece

for their restaurants a special space in space special a restaurants their for

study trip in Athens, ,

lly grew lly Greece ,

be on the first row, along the Seine's bank Seine's the along row, first the on be but by the Greek ambassador to Paris, Delyanni. ambassador to Paris, Greek the but by

confirmed its participation and expressed its desire to have a a have to desire its expressed and participation its confirmed

in size, in Nations i n 1896, whe

’ and the country showed a showed country the and

ulgarian ulgarian restaurant, I will refer to the Romanian one, street. Journal de debats, politiques et litt et Journalpolitiques de debats, 80

the basement the

ctober, 1897: 1897: ctober, 255 ,

such as such

Finally n

he had Letter from August 1898, Ibid. 1898, August from Letter

, “one must not forget the miserable the forget not must “one

after several discussions regarding of their their of rhvs ainls e rne Paris France, de Nationales Archives 254 worked in several .

Magne, was not chosen by chosen not was Magne, , and would and , more and more more and more pavilion

eraires 257 s

He Magne knew . While I do not do I While . Nation , 30 March March 1900". 30 , archaeological

have a facade a have

confident s ’

street

256 fin

al al A , ,

CEU eTD Collection 259 inIbid. intermédiaires. d'appui points huit sur charges les reportent qui trompes des par polygonal 258 Greece, for arByzantine same bythe inspired pavilion national a build to commissioned was Athens, of churches Byzantine Basilica 1904 (between France architecture. 19 the of retrospective a published he when 1889, in exhibition previous the at working with accustomed nevertheless architects interesting more even becomes picture appealed paradoxically they architecture, “national” representative locals the architects manner similar with parallel book Paris in exhibited Magne sites,

Lucien Magne, LucienMagne, Lucien Magne, Magne, Lucien

including the Acropolis, making draw on the Byzantine churches in the Greek Capital. Greek the in churches Byzantine the on

,

Thus Lucien Magne, an archit the all that add must we Here n hs ot well most his and chosen chosen had had edd o id oen wo knew who someone find to needed 259 regarded as the Ro the bec

L’Architecture Francais du Siecle du Francais L’Architecture fe the After gie geqe ds I e XI sèlsdn l cuoe etae s ote u u tambour un sur portée est centrale coupole la dont siècles XIIe et XIe des grecques Églises due to his expertise, having worked in Romania a year before. year a Romania in worked having expertise, his to due ome manian case in 1867, when 1867, in case manian worked in

a kind ofexperts a –

appropriate pavilions forfor designing

1916), 90 xiiin e eae npco o eceisi mnmns in monuments ecclesiastic of inspector became he exhibition 1900 various photographs various - nw fa i ta h wre a a he aciet of architect chief a as worked he that is feat known Universal Exhibitions. Lucien Magne was one of the organisers of organisers the of one was Magne Lucien Exhibitions. Universal

expert expert in the architecture of Athens, who published a work on the the the a very neo influential chitecture Orient Orient and were specialists in Oriental architecture considering that, considering in

the ings and pla , (Paris, 1889). (Paris, , (figure 10) (figure architecture ofthe ects 81

and drawings made in Athens in made drawings and

the architect Ambroise Baudry was chosen chosen was Baudry Ambroise architect the hi acietrl eiae n cud buil could and heritage architectural their

working - ns for various restorations. Subsequently, Byzantine .

258

It was the first time Greece decided not decided Greece time first the Itwas in the cas the in

At this point, point, this At o te akn ain wr also were nations Balkan the for these countries building e s to these to

of Serbia and Bulgaria and Serbia of Balkan countries.Balkan it is it .

concerned

French The work is mentioned workis The , th worth and published a published and

century French century Th ar Coeur Sacré experts

ese French ese ,

draw , and wh

but . The . ing were , in a in

d the en

a a

CEU eTD Collection in chapter. this mentioned etc.)” archivalboxes borrowed, been etc.) éléments, les empruntés sont en auxquels have Monuments elements which mise from particularités et de en la (Nature de l’installation: des construction œuvre monument the construction, the of construction the of peculiarities 262 236. (Editor), 261 Nineteenth and Greeks”, 260 the finding for sources valuable most the are architecture. sty the architecture at ofitspavilion the Exhibition dr just became period Byzantine the state, Greek the of aspirations irredentist the for legitimacy offered also un ensuring over taking as considered future the Paparrigopoulos. of work monumental the by intellectuals, of attention the into came heritage cultural Byzantine as known aspiration t that at Empire, Byzantine the of territory ancient the conquer home back developments political the of reflection a considered be can turn to b

awback in the Greek defeat of 1897 against the Ottomans, traces of it can be can it of traces Ottomans, the against 1897 of defeat Greek the in awback Under the title the Under See Antonis Liakos, “Hellenism and the Making of Modern Greece: Time, Language, Space” Exertzoglou, Haris details for See

e represented by the neoclassical style, which reminded of the ancient Greek civilisation. This le of le T

Helle Historein, vol. 1, (1999) 75 (1999) 1, vol. Historein, he Parisian archives Parisian he - its nisms. Culture, Identity and ethnicity from Antiquity to Modernity to Antiquity from ethnicity and Identity Culture, nisms. 262 interrupted conti interrupted - s important as Century Greek: Nationl Identity”, Identity”, Nationl Greek: Century

pavilion, These questionnaires included Demanded Statistical Information Statistical Demanded n hs ok p work this In Megali Idea Megali the name of the of name the

s h Antiquity the as the glory of Antiquity of glory the nuity in the history of the Greeks. Because of that, and because it because and that, of Because Greeks. the of history the in nuity preserve

- Shifting Boundaries: Language, Community and the “non the and Community Language, Boundaries: Shifting 92 and K. E. Fleming, Constantinople, E. “Athens, K. and 92

bihd ewe 16 ad 84 te yatn per Byzantine the 1874, and 1860 between ublished , had become very popular. very become had , installation (Nature of it and employment of materials materials of employment and it of (Nature installation See for instance the Greek case in the following footnote. footnote. following in case the Greek the instance for See short questionnaires short architect and any other important details regarding its its regarding details important other any and architect New Perspectives on Turkey on Perspectives New . in 261 , at part 10, there is the section: “Information regarding the the regarding “Information section: the is there 10, part at , a brief, unsigned description of the pavilion

“national” “national” 1900 inParis. 82 ntoa” itra o Gec, Konstantinos Greece, of historian “national”

vn huh the though Even

, bridging it with the modern times, modern the with it bridging , »]. These questionnaires can be found in almost all the the all almost in found be can questionnaires These »]. monument in which in 260

ime mostly under the Ottomans, the under mostly ime

By way of the the of way By

matériaux; , Vol. 22, (2000), pp. 1 pp. (2000), 22, Vol. , eai Idea Megali s a , Aldershot, Ashgate, 2008, 201 2008, Ashgate, Aldershot, , each nation had to mention to had nation each used as used movement best illustrated best movement

Istanbul: Urban Paradigms Paradigms Urban Istanbul: [«

- Renseignements sur les les sur Renseignements

Style de la construction. Style de la construction. ,

w inspir

in Katerina Zacharia Megali Idea Megali - h ufrd huge a suffered identified Greek – ere the drive to drive the ere

The style of the the of style The

ation for the for ation - - 24. speaking speaking

and thus and iod was was iod

s: t

in the in , hese

the -

CEU eTD Collection 268 l’Attiqueˮ 267 266 265 264 263 quite similar in appearance, belonging to fact in and century”. “ Athens Attica of countryside the ornate that Ages Middle the of sanctuaries Christian N M of town the in churches the biga Greek roomintheof shape cross”. T noadditions.almost with deliv organisers the that is questionnaires constructions h evertheless

Quantin, L’Exposition. Quantin, “a A. Quantin, Univers "L'Exposition Ibid. Paris France, de Nationales Archives e questionnaire further

pris pour modèle un de ces charmants sanctuaires chrétiens du moyen âge qui ornent les campagnes de de campagnes ornentles âgequi moyen du chrétiens sanctuaires charmantsces modèlede un pour pris

T For the purpose of this research this of purpose Forthe InFrench the press andproportions are studied harmonious is coloration The (...) style. the regarding precise very enjoyable, excessively to dates It is the reconstruction, along general lines, of Saint Theodore

only he description 268 Louis Rousselet, Rousselet, Louis the

L’Exposition du Siècle du L’Exposition ,

at the exhibition, five t

Kapnikarea hey all praise the Byzantine heritage Byzantine the praise all hey the 11 the

also reproduced in several publications of the time,the of severalreproducedpublications alsoin

remain of remain th elle. Le Pavillon de la Grece" Grece" la de Pavillon Le elle.

century, the most interesting era of interestingeramost the century, of L'Exposition Universelle de 1900 de Universelle L'Exposition ered these descriptions to the press, which in turn opted to publish them publish to opted turn in which press, the to descriptions these ered

mentions the Greek pavilion mentionedthe following: ,

Church some other monuments in an the

as well as for other , Le Monde Moderne, Paris, 1900, p. p. 151. 1900, Paris, Moderne, Le , Monde istra over 300 churches 300 over , F/12/4242. F/12/4242. , admirable

and th 265 at “The plan is inspired by B ,

the the

or the Kapnikarea Kapnikarea the or 264 the exact model for the pavilion is not very important very not is pavilion the for model exact the the same

Saint Theodore Saint

way

Journal de debats, politiques et litteraires et politiques debats, Journalde 83 . 263

architectural relevant

, (Paris: Librairie Hachette & Cie, 1901). Cie, & Hachette Librairie (Paris: , are

which were which in Greece in also mentioned B yzantine architecture.yzantine ’s Church ’s details. C uc i Athens in hurch type ’s , comprised of “those delightful “those of comprised ,

standing in the city in the 11 the in city the in standing Church, the construction yzantine plans having

I

nformation nformation and built in the same period; a fact which could indicatefactcoulda which are two Athenian churches Athenian two are

asof inspiration sources

(...) The ensembleis The (...)

(11 included in these , ” , 30 March 1900" March 30 , 267 th

of which in which of century).

of which a single 266

th – :

CEU eTD Collection 271 270 form”, typologyand 269 a architects, character”. ceramic and bricks of use fortunate the in the Parisian press: “[A pavilion] so modern th modern construction techniques is often made in public, general chapter previous the in saw which architecture, be as as lavishly possible. to which decorated had exhibitionthe of underlying principles the forrelevant detailIta pavilion.is the of dome the for (compared to the single one of system window double a has Theodore Saint dome. the of system windows the at is added he to make hispav were not enough for a monument to pro Greece in architecture Byzantine Theodore h owever

La Andreas Xyngopoulos (192 "L'Exposition Universelle. Le Pavillon de la de Grece" Pavillon Le Universelle. "L'Exposition new

Rue des Nations et la Berge de la rive gauche de la Seine Seine dela gauche rive la Berge de la et Nations des Rue

was employedwas Along the same principle same the Along ,

construction ’s, h cuc mnind n h acie as archives the in mentioned church the 271

was considered at the turn of turn the at considered was famous

h ceramic The

ilion ceramic Zograf -

church asas spectacular One possible. embellishments ofthe obvious most example as “traditional” for the Serbian andas theSerbian “traditional”for material , No. 31, (2006) 15 (2006) 31, No. , s

9) in Nikolaos Gkioles, “The church of Kapnikarea in Athens: Remarks on its history, was a material a was s

. a ide haiy sd t h Uiesl Exhibition Universal the at used heavily indeed was

t s ot mninn that mentioning worth is It being the , the s, , Magne made use of of use made Magne , . 269 Kapnikarea church)

But for a Universal E Universal a for But the abundant use of ceramics in the two palaces made by made palaces two the in ceramics of use abundant the rn n te ceramics; the and iron s udly represent its country. Therefore,

- 27.

.. [ht gv te tutr a oen n national and modern a structure the give [that] (...) denoting modernity denoting

the century the most richly ornamented richly most the century the Journal de debats, politiques et litteraires et politiques dedebats, Journal 84 r the descriptions ough the judicious usage that has been made of

(Melun, 1901), 9. (Melun,1901), , abundant ceramic decoration, decoration, ceramic abundant

but Magne made a triple being the the being the Romanian pavilions in Romanian pavilions the xhibition o Fr for . " The as The 270

of the Greek pavilion published

nh rhtcua ter and theory architectural ench o direct inspiration, inspiration, direct r , ,

even those those even with ceramics of sociation n nte pae “ very “a place: another in

Lucien Magne tried - rich rich window s , 30 March 1900" March 30 ,

s

1889 decorations example of example

an eleme an y French by the , as we ystem Saint nt

CEU eTD Collection 273 moderne palaces. the two at tiles employed thousandsof 272 o As ch in style exclusive the became churches, Serbian 19 the of end the towards c) standsAthens, werestill it today churchan orthodox “A as named Itephemeral. frame an iron had E national, be also could modernity France for traditions, specificity national different character national” and “modern the being “traditional” a the ceramics for the Romanian Pavilion and Restaurant in 1900, keeping with this trend in designing modern. being as praised and exhibition 1889 the for Formigé xhibitions w xhibitions

Pantelić, “Nationalism and architecture”, 21 architecture”, and “Nationalism Pantelić, For it had models whoFormigé to 600 for hire Muller, thetiles hundreds a of ceramic created of Émile ceramist,

national architectureexhibition for Romania. But the fact that the Balkan nations took this element as Serbia ne of the main the of ne , 8 June 1889, 409. 8 , June1889, T ending happy a has pavilion Greek the of story The

he same strong drive in promoting the Byzantine heritage can also be noticed be alsocan heritage Byzantine the promoting in drive strong same he perceptions

architectural specificities h eregave their to modern theFrenchnational achieveme connotation

could nd historically related to their features of what could be architecturally

be asserted only by only asserted be th

of etr. lcl ain o neo of variant local A century.

the designed soasdesigned to

f h pavilion. the of national discourse was the promotion of Byzantine heritage Byzantine of promotion the was discourse national . Moreover - “Exposition un “Exposition 22.

using history or established ( established or history using 85 ,

in one in

be dismantled after the exhibition andbe taken dismantled after toexhibition the countri

urch architecture throughout the country. the throughout architecture urch iverselle de 1889. Lain céramique” 1889. de iverselle This remark is especially relevant for the the for relevant especially is remark This representat

publication es sheds light on the an idea further enforced further idea an : i : t was the only one made not to be to not made one only the was t - B ive for a nation yzantine, inspired by medieval medieval by inspired yzantine, gios Sostis”.

272 the journalist

omg wud lo use also would Formigé i. e. ancient e. i.

invented nature of : if in the Balkans

mentioned the La Construction Construction La at the at nts.

) cultural cultural ) in W Serbia orld 273

CEU eTD Collection 277 276 275 Serbia”, Caseof Centuries:The First Two the Balkansin Century 274 Serbia Slavic speakers, including those century medieval of considered the greatest king from the Nemania family, under time t identifies it considers style, architectural national with a Greek a have none of these medieval monuments can be directly co and national pavilion is built in the “Serbo Serbian the that mentioned is it questionnaire the in and description official the In centuries. all typearchitectureas of (the

Ibid. Pant France de Nationales Archives Djordjevic, Dimitrije See of them of that it 13 elić, “Nationalism and architecture”, 28. architecture”, and “Nationalism elić, .

, Serbian Serbian , longitud 277 th In the following, Bratislav Pantelić, who wrote briefly about the pavilion in his analysis of the Serbian Serbian the of analysis his in pavilion the about briefly wrote who Pantelić, Bratislav

Serbian politicians, politicians, Serbian and 14 and

As such, has moti he model as being the five the being as model he churches built in the period of the Serbian medieval kingdom, in the 13 the in kingdom, medieval Serbian the of period the in built churches Ottoman Serbia much much Serbia - cross plan, cross Studies, Vol. 13, No. 1, (1999), 29 (1999), 1, No. 13, Vol. Studies, inal plan th

century ves a copy of Dušan’s church in the form of a pavilion should have expressed the

rule).

its borrowed from ) Ottoman Heritage Versus Modernization: Symbiosis in Serbia During the Nineteenth Nineteenth the During Serbia in Symbiosis Modernization: Versus Heritage Ottoman , I will

pavilion at the Universal Exhibition pavilion attheUniversal Exhibition they only have one central dome central one have only they has many churches), further 276 , Paris, Paris, , who

make an h mnmn ws h muoem f tfn Dušan, Ștefan of mausoleum the was monument The under under the Austr

than before. Therefore before. than dreamed of of dreamed F/12/4270

Roman 274 - - B domed the

overview overview it was al was it

yzantine style of alternating red bricks and white stones” to be to Studenica, Studenica, Žiča and Kalenić monaster

esque –

church of church 59; Bratislav Pantelić, “Designing Identities. Reshaping the the Reshaping Identities. “Designing Pantelić, Bratislav 59; 86 liberat a direct statement against Austria against statement direct a most unavoidable for Serbia Serbia for unavoidable most ian Journal of Design History Design of Journal

of of

( and Western thus - Hungarian the possible models for the Serbian pavilion, nnected to the pavilion of 1900: n al h triois naie by inhabited territories the all ing because he the ,

K , and, above all, all, above and, , Saint Archangels Saint ing Dušan Dušan ing in 1900 in in 1900 Paris

rule

managed , and thus remaking medieval )

architectural elements. , Vol. 20, (2007). Vol. 20, , was was to to expand a model for the 19 the for model a Studenica to exhibit th exhibit to in (figure 11) ies Kosovo (at that (at Kosovo - Hungary, . 275

t the borders hey th However (a church church (a h was who

and 14 and

. samee

South do not

and th t - h , ,

CEU eTD Collection 279 Paris, 278 M. Kapetano exhibition, decision tothe Serbian General Commissioner. p the of location officials French the and Commissioner General Serbian Pavil " documents official the in called is He Paris. in 1867 of exhibition the at pavilion Romanian the of architect former foun plans All work. team a of World the pavilion. domes the like Gračanica, st dome Thus documents irredentist anding

Letters from October 1, 1897 and October 5, 1897, Ibid. 5, 1897, October 1897 and 1, fromOctober Letters decorations honorific receive to proposed persons of list the example for See , ion of Serbia” of ion F/12/4270. d

a direct model could only have been

E and with overall similar features. However W church xhibitions xhibitions

t h ed f h 19 the of end the at ho exactly designed this pavilion is not so clear so not is pavilion this designed exactly ho , siain o te eba sae However state. Serbian the of aspirations Catalogue General Officiel

and vich vich [French spelling] (…) [and] the works were executed under the direction of the

dating the avilion ,

nte nm apas as appears name another in 278

Serbian Serbian Sain

t 1889, there is more e rhtc o te eba Cmiso" r “ or Commission" Serbian the of architect he . Moreover . rm h glor the from , which were which , t Archangels church Archangelst

pavilion

th d in the archives are signed by one person, Ambroise Baudry, Ambroise person, one by signed are archives the in d

,

century he seems to have played the role of a middleman between thebetween middleman a of role the played have to seems he

addressed only to Baudry to only addressed ious at the Exhibition the at ¸ where it is mentioned that “the plans have been made by T than one name mentioned, obviously indicating Fudd y tfn iui, rnfte o Dušan, of grandfather Milutin, Stefan by Founded .

he he church has a porch added la eid f h Srin eivl kingdom medieval Serbian the of period the the church of the had been had the 87 279

architect in the official publication of the the of publication official the in architect , is a Greek a is , completely destroyed in the 17 the in destroyed completely ,

, as proved by the le the by proved as , the hypothesis is not backed by any any by backed not is hypothesis the . As was the case for Romania at the the at Romania for case the was As . Gračanica , who, , - cros

Archives Nationales de France de Nationales Archives h a the in turn in

monastery s plan church, with five with church, plan s ter, ter, similar to the one of ciet f h Royal the of rchitect ,

tters communicated the communicated , the five only regarding the regarding and , th

century. the idea

still - , CEU eTD Collection 284 240. CNRS,2009), (Paris: in 1910)” 283 282 281 1900. Paris, Lemercier, 280 figure country, inhis architectural andstyles with experience at Universal Exhibition have at least two architects collaborating, one Kapetanović relevant with architect for styles” ”national create to Baudry fragments in new buildings. “Arab style” for European officials, by employing anci Fair World a at Exhibition in a neo the other hand c He pavilion. the of design S Commissioner”. “Deputy of function the with architect of the pavilion by Pantelić effect”. gracious a of decorations plans, previous the to added who Badury, A. M. architect eminent erbia, had an important role important an had erbia,

For instance For Mercede postcard. a on and commission withthe Serbian Inthe list 28. architecture”, and “Nationalism Pantelić, concernant Notice

280 copied copied Nabila s Volait, “Dans l'intimite des objects et des monuments: l'orientalism architectural vu d'Egypt (1870 (1870 d'Egypt vu architectural l'orientalism monuments: des et objects des l'intimite “Dans Volait, s

Milan Kapetanović, professor at the Polytechnic School in Belgrade, is had only employed the employed only had the elementary school in Dorcol (1893) or the house of Jevrem Grujić in Belgrade (1896). in Belgrade Grujić Jevrem orthe house of (1893) inDorcol school theelementary ,

various architectural parts belonging to . the true expert was Baudry. uesr n Mree Vli, eds. Volait, Mercedes and Oulebsir He had also had He

le Pavilion royal de la Serbie, la de royal Pavilion le -

B yzan familiar with familiar

xets in expertise tine 283 ould been working in Egypt for Egypt in working been

style,

in the Serbian delegation i delegation Serbian the in the the In

be considered be quite a similar manner, when designing for

different countries different , too, its architecture.its so he was familiarized

French

einn te eba pavilion Serbian the designing 281

while in H Beaux

e Volume annexe du Catalogue General Officiel, General Catalogue du annexe Volume a

'retlse rhtcua ete mgnie e savoirs et imaginaires entre architectural L'orientalisme 88 had had designed a specialist in recombining ancient forms in 282

specialist specialist

-

ANF, Paris, Paris, ANF, official documents Kapetanović is mentioned Arts aeaoi ws well a was Kapetanović

ancient ancient monuments ent motifs or incorporating he worked for worked he

fifteen style n Paris n both i n Serbian medieval architecture. On architecture. medieval Serbian n

the

F/12/4270. in his designs his in , years (1871 years(1871

with th

Romanian Romanian and the other one a ,

and surely had his say on the on say his had surely and . Ambroise Baudry was an was Baudry Ambroise e style,

while , ,

and recombined them pavilion for the 1867 . – 284

World World Exhibition -

eadd ae in name regarded 1886) and wit

To conclude, weconclude, To

old ro t 1900 to prior taken , well

e creat

r h the work Imprimeries

authentic authentic

to be

- known to ing

new

the an s, - .

CEU eTD Collection 289 288 287 286 orin 177 Quantin, 1900), Mericant, (Paris: 285 products folk and tradition 1889). particip the for francs million 1.3 of budget and shape,river withthe sidefacingfou the Moreover sections. national their with Mars, de onlyon not other eachto next againwere d) Byzantinearchitecture. for sources of 287 monuments of Serbia, the only monuments street in the French publications, particularly because of its position, the first

Letter to the Minister of Commerce of ofCommerce the Minister Letterto F/12/4223. and F/12/4262 Paris, ANF, in the plans See 1900 Exposition Paris (Paris 1900, de Universelle L'Exposition LouisRousselet, For example inArmand Silvestre, . Romania The last The having . 285 289 The result of their work, the Serbian national pavilion in Paris Romania’s participation was confirmed in 1897 in confirmed was participation Romania’s The last two Balkan countries represented

It was was It As a general picture general a As an the innerinthe centreco staircase of is an unusual an is

that perceived as being in being as perceived something all the Balkan countries tried to appropriate to tried countries Balkan the all something , (Paris, Hachette, 1900), 242. (Paris, 1900), , Hachette,

ly frank remark fo remarkfrank ly

less than before, than less

,

Guide Guide Armand Silvestre de Paris et de ses environs et de l'Exposition de 1900 we can we France, April 1898, ANF, Paris, F/12/4262. Paris, ANF, April 1898, France, L’Exposit

agree with agree “Byzantine style” “Byzantine r times as long Nations in r ion

and focused on the the on focused and

a French journal French a a country

89 ( ation , 151. ,

,

with ’ their pavilions their Vlad that Romania promoted the rural world rural the promoted Romania that Vlad

: Librairie Hachette & Cie, 1901). &Cie, Hachette : Librairie mposition street

as

national pavilion as the lateral side as the where there is no domestic , oprd with compared ,

286

and next year the Parliament voted a voted Parliament the year next and but also in the main the in also but

and . 288 , drawing attention attention drawing ,

industrialis as had

remind

in a very similar rectangular similar very a at at one end of s

1900, was well received , , Romania and Bulgaria, being the ing

ation of the of ation and nationalize and 400,000

gallery “of the religious the “of two stories

on the scarcitythe on

architecture”

the

i francs

n Champ n Nation

country high, high, ,

the in s ’ , ,

CEU eTD Collection 292 291 Paris, 1900 din universală exposițiunea 290 by inspired be the constructions itself display approved theplans. designed i was who Mincu, Ion names: Romanian Commissioner. OnlyPe came inApril topower 1899 of Conservative The though. section. Romanian whole the of architect Camille techniques, although inspired from monuments. medieval of designs the in and

Adevărul Kallestrup, by made Observation Formigé on , I will describe briefly the expectations of the of expectations the briefly describe will I , the urban so h governm The In the Romanian case we have a furth conve To Besides the two French architects mentioned above tre Poni resigned Poni tre Formigé

the the tobacco pavilion , 8 aprilie 1898 in Kallestrup, Ibid.. in Kallestrup, 1898 8 , aprilie

as architect was called “an insult addressed to the country”. the to addressed insult “an called was architect as Art and Design Art and “national “national

y a picture of the process the of picture a y

the architect of the pavilion and restaurant and pavilion the of architect the

ciety. h lvs pvlo, melse wt te ep f oen aeil and materials modern of help the with embellished pavilion, lavish the

Laurențiu Vlad in Vlad, 2007, pp. 166 166 pp. 2007, Vlad, in Vlad Laurențiu n dcdd ht er P Petru that decided ent ;

and thenthe teamand following by ofarchitects 290 , 82. , , architecture”. On an inquiry addressed by the Romanian Minister of Minister Romanian the by addressed inquiry an On architecture”.

and in June in June and Party,

This

and different could made have appointments, ;

and George Sterian, who held the bidding for the construction and

intention intention to promote a modern Romania could , Imprimeria Statului, București, 1901. București, , Statului, Imprimeria i n opposition n 1899 Dimitrie Olănescu was installed ad Dimitrie installed 1899 Olănescuwas

n charge of “the installations”; “the of charge n lead 291 er of confirmation the

90 o eeyn ws ap wt tee decisions these with happy was everyone Not n would oni ing at the time the at

to the creation of creation the to –

French French

168. See also See 168.

, criticized ,

, e h Gnrl omsinr Jean Commissioner, General the be

we must add another three important ,

organisers regarding the pavilion; the regarding organisers and Andre Lecomte du Nöuy the the Nöuy du Lecomte Andre and

Dimitrie C. Ollănescu, Ollănescu, C. Dimitrie rule that the pavilions the the them, and the appointment the and them,

292 contribution Romanian architectur Romanian

Petre Antonescu Petre

no one was replaced. no onereplaced. was However

also be the new Generalnew the ,

of each when they when România la România identified should ,

who who .

al ,

CEU eTD Collection 294 281. Vol. Culturale, Paris Fond C.Stoicescu to addressed 1897 Feb. ȋ 293 around. and could be relevant for the degree of can suppose archiv the in else, anywhere appear not does he and However exhibition. same Sevelinges de Henri pavilion the for worked have would who architect more one of mention is medieval monuments representing by function this fulfilled 1900 in Romania of pavilion Romania be perceived as a context, this In acknowledged. among d in exhibition their blend also anoth advis “ that responded Paris to ambassador Romanian the Stoicescu, C. Affairs, Foreign neca ceea ce vor expune ȋn diferitele grupuri, unde n’ar mai avea nici o ȋnsemnătate”. ȋnsemnătate”. niciavea o mai n’ar unde grupuri, ȋnexpune diferitele vor ce ceea neca

Ibid. “Dl. suggest how easily added that added able er relevant detail comes up: comes detail relevant er

Picard a mai adaugat ca țerile de importanță secundară au preferat tote pavilioane separate, spre a nua spre separate, pavilioane tote aupreferat secundară importanță de maițerile a ca adaugat Picard

Romanian Romanian officials In a

that the building remind building the that

description description of the

that Sevelinges was not engaged all countries of secondary importance preferred separate pavilions, pavilions, separate preferred importance secondary of countries ,

, the architect of the Bulgarian pavilion (together with Henri Saladin) at t at Saladin) Henri with (together pavilion Bulgarian the of architect the

its gloriousits one history, oft

it it could have been

, ifferent groups, where they would be meanin be would they where groups, ifferent country equal to the We

the f his named is crossed out with crossedout is named his pavilion pavilion found in the archives

, Ministry of Foreign. Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Bucharest, Bucharest, Affairs, ofForeign Ministry ofthe Archives ofForeign. Ministry , act act that their country was “of secondary importance” cran re o promot to urge certain a entangle “Mister Picard [the General Commissioner of the Exhibition] the of Commissioner General [the Picard “Mister s

of one of the national monuments”. national the of one of f ment or or

in actors, actors, ideas and influences to 91 planning

involved in the design of

he attributes ofmodern nations stern al documents or in the press. Therefore, press. the in or documents al ones ones was obviously desirable. the Rom

a pen in what seems to be to seemswhat in pen a ing

in Paris, in one single instance, there

all anian pavilion etrs which features ,

gless Letter n. 283, from 11/23 from n.11/23 283, Letter exhibition exhibition architecture through the shapes of of shapes the through 293 circulate and

” In the same letter same the In besides 294 ,

but

– (figure 12)

ol make would it seems that seems it

this mistake a correctiona so as so it would it was was openly The Royal

Formigé: spread spread - not to not și

.

we we

he be , ,

CEU eTD Collection 296 295 political connotations shared th all which in way ambiguous the Exhibition in Paris for feature common “Byzantine”, as coined nevertheless centuries. This variety of buildings Romania the of areas important the all almost cover heritage, century, Moldova). Stav region of medieval monuments T of church buildi the of galleries lateral the of top the provided d by covered towers their with elevation and elegance of character the in common a style”, Byzantine us, for information spired by the main monuments of the country the of monuments main the by spired

Ibid. F/12/4262. Paris, ANF, Curtea de Argeș ooes (18 ropoleos

cultu h sm descr same The n dtn t a to dating and : “[there : hree Hierarchs in Hierarchs hree ral heritage ral

th is a] reproduction in the central hall of the narthex of Hurezi Monastery”, “at “at Monastery”, Hurezi of narthex the of hall central the in reproduction a] is

are etr, uhrs) Hrz (17 Hurezi Bucharest), century, by mentioning by

As such, and the Hurezi monasteries the Balkan Peninsula in Peninsula Balkan the .

illustrative. , with the purpose of asserting their uniqueness while suggestingvarious while assertinguniquenessof their purpose the with ,

on the territory of pin continues iption

ifrn cen different

the the I

ași has supplied the supplied has ași feature models for the pavilions, For this, the c

originating its its ree

point uy te oatre o Argeș of monasteries the tury: main sources of inspiration. It starts by mentioning “the “the mentioning by starts It inspiration. of sources main for all the Balkan pavilions: “the architects have been been have architects “the pavilions: Balkan the all for

countries Romania are mentioned, ng [there are towers] from the Argeș the from towers] are [there ng by s

o h vr euie oin of notion elusive very the to general, for which the pavilions at this Universal this at pavilions the which for general, rel dsrbn te aiin n, important and, pavilion the describing briefly 92 from from different times, places or circumstances , which are omparative perspective ,

, Greece, Serbia and Romania, and Serbia Greece, ,

like like theme for theme th

the church of the Three Hierarchs in Iaș in Hierarchs Three the of church the century, all considered examples of Byzantine in

the plan”. the Byzantine style n Kingdo n lei) T Oltenia), each coming omes”. 296 I adopted helps

m and encompass and m (16

295 All in all in All re Hierarchs, hree th the

,

Further details are details Further

but etr, Vâlcea), century,

cathedral”, “ cathedral”, from

Bznie, a “Byzantine”, used the same the used have a ,

four a reveal different

special names three (17 , but ing t he i th ,

CEU eTD Collection 299 298 http://www.monumenteiasi.ro/monument_de_arhitectura.php?id=314. Cătălina Mihalache, Mânăstirea Sfinții Trei Ierarhi 297 personal by manner Formigé. innovation entire here" innovate to try all at not "did architect the directly taken from different other constructions in the country. acco newspaper juxtapose in order where pavilions Balkan the task. fulfilling of worthy most the considered wererestorations his representation, national cameto it Exhibition, one architecture. Romanian for delegati architect, same monuments,

“L'exposition de 1900; LaRoumanie”, 1900; de “L'exposition Kallestrup, by ismix”employed term“Pick and The The ,

rding to the same positivist way of thinking, as a style formed by mixing mixing by formed style a as thinking, of way positivist same the to rding as Curtea Curtea de Argeș Regarding The Romanian pavilion has been described as a “pick and mix approach”, similar to other on at the Parisian exhibition in exhibition theParisian on at I

will will

restoring the monumentsrestoring the ora ds debats des Journal the demonstrate the French French the Argeș as ,

to create the building. h Rmna sucs f inspiration of sources Romanian the cathedral and

all the "original" elements were modified and recombined in a highly highly a in recombined and modified were elements "original" the all

cathedral and cathedral

lmns rm ifrn hsoia mnmns were monuments historical different from elements

bellow In the case of the Exhibition in 1900, in Exhibition the of case the In nr Lcme e Nouy. de Lecomte Andre

299

Three Three Hierarchs

hr the where . But besides being directly involved in the designs for this for designs the in involved directly being besides But . Journal de debats, litteraires et politiques debats, de Journal used as model actuallyused as model Three Hierarchs church had been had church Hierarchs Three

1889 298 , , Monumente de Arhitectură

A detail

,

ntoa Rmna acietr” s understood, is architecture” Romanian “national and weand

church church had been restored in 1885 and 1889 respective 93 Romanian nation Romanian ,

although th although ed have already mentioned already mentioned have

description of the pavilion is offered 297 ,

He t s ot ntcn ta te main the that noticing worth is it def e building c building e al style al a been had Quite r ined their importance ined , , (Iași, 2008), accessed May 10, 2014, his role is again a pr a again is role his , 150. 150. , elevant elevant is the , 29 August 1899. August 1899. 29 ,

recently restored by the the by restored recently

ould at f h Romanian the of part

his influential ro his influential be regarded as an as regarded be various eetd and selected mention ,

and when elements o minent ly. See in

that

the le CEU eTD Collection LXI. 301 d'Argesch. cathédrale la a empruntés qui sont campaniles, quatre de chacun flanqués leurs tambours, sur surelevés tres extremes, domes Cesontdeux les roumains. les départements e stylises feuillages melent des se ou et anterieur facade la long le de fenetres latérales, garnies de rigides ferronneries; a l'une des églises de Jassy, la frise de grés qui courra, en bandeau, m au tors; tambours a campaniles ses brillants, gres des et cathedrale d'Argesch, reconstruite par un Francais, Leconte du Nouy, il a emprunté ses domes, revetus de cuivre poli construct ephemeré cette dans les étudie longuement a en (...) oeuvre. mettreen qu'a plus qu'il n'avait il et pays le dans eglises, rendu cloitres, caracteristiques, s'est monuments Il roumaine. nationale l'architecture de possible, que ici cherché, nullement 300 to restaurant quoted

La Roumanie à l'Exposition de 1900. Catalogue des Exposants. (Paris: Nouve (Paris: Exposants. des Catalogue 1900. de l'Exposition à Roumanie La n'a étrangeres, pavillons les tous presque de architectes les avec cela, en rencontrant, se Formigé, "M. : Ibid. the rich landlord rich the

here with awealthwith of documents specific the time long a for studied he us an idea try at all to innovate here notdid pavilions, foreign the all almost of architects the with regard this in Formigé,similar M. the to Due Trois Trois domes revetues, comme on l'a vu plus haut, d'imbrications de cuivre et de gr tous de écussons les encadreront frises Leurs d'invention. plus peu un comporteront laterales facades Les Les lignes du pavillon roumain sont d'une élégante simplicité.(...) M. Formigé, donc, s'est attaché a grouper, f Not flanked d ceramic, th very peculiar sawfret decoration. ba a likecovered, whichfreeze ceramic garnished windows, lateral its covered Nou du Leconte French, domes a its by borrowed reconstructed cathedral, Argesch the From about. pr the construction ephemeral this in group to e , also counties of counties

in its entirety: entirety: in its ar from the national pavilion, also on the Seine embankment, Seine the on also pavilion, national the from ar by four campaniles, The lateral facades have a little more invention. Their freeze frames the emblems of all of emblems the frames freeze Their invention. more little a have facades lateral The The li

in designed by Formigé and described as “t ,

ominate the pavilion. T pavilion. the ominate as as exact as possi brightceramics; from , a innover, innover, a , amount of details and the focus the and details of amount s

nes the of Romanian an pavilion of simplicity. elegant are M.Formigé (...) wanted from the countryside” (figure 13). (figure countryside” the from Romania. Three domes covered, as we saw above, by a mixture of cooper and cooper of mixture a by above, saw we as covered, domes Three Romania.

ion, les élements saillants des monuments dont s'enorgueillir la Roumanie. A la la A Roumanie. la s'enorgueillir dont monuments des saillants élements les ion,

covered -

aussi bine n'en était n'en bine aussi

–

as as a matter of fact ble , andallhe had to do was to are borrowedare from Argesch cathedral. , in in

of the Romanian national architecture. He went to the country with

oihd cooper polished the the palais. Il est revenu pourvu d'une abondante moisson de documents documents de moisson abondante d'une pourvu revenu est Il palais. he two do two he

ii rnok rmoe of one from ironwork; rigid Horezu monastery, its porch; from the church of Stavropol,Horezuchurchporch; fromof monastery, the its

nner, the other façade, other the nner, monuments, cloisters, churches, palaces. He came back came He palaces. churches, cloisters, monuments, - 94 ce pas le lieu, le pas ce onastere d'Horezu, son parvis; a l'eglise de Stavropol, ses Stavropol, de l'eglise a parvis; son d'Horezu, onastere mes at the extremes, very tall on their drums their on tall very extremes, the at mes ,

it was not the place for it, but he o

on sources of inspiration, the description is description the inspiration, of sources on minent monuments minent ,

n is apnls ih the with campaniles its and 301 he reproduction of old houses belonging t une grecque d'allure particuliere. particuliere. d'allure grecque t une

Its inspirati Its put put them his in work. (...) -

mais plutot a nous donner une idée exacte exacte idée une donner nous a plutot mais

mix

lle Imprimerie E. Lasnier, 1900), 1900), Lasnier, E. Imprimerie lle 300 ing the churches from Jassy, the Jassy, from churches the on were p were on

with wich with

the stylised foliagestylised the es, domineront le pavillon. stood stood rather robably the few the robably

ir Romania boasts Romania the Romanian the

twisted tried tried to give (sic!) y

with awith , shafts each he , and CEU eTD Collection 303 français Nouydu (1844 302 pro architecture. in an important as seen been 1889 and has Duc. time his of restorer French leading the master, his byinspired spirit romantic Romania, mentioned decades two for Romania in churches medieval architects Romanian three and French two capture to established Romanian for national motifs the architecture. suppose that Formigé knew Mincu’s projects exter the and roof the under disks ceramic of use abundant house Lahovary quite balcony. the of design intricate the and arches of row the Oltenia, from mansions princely examples

According According Popescu, Carmen in Argeș church de ofCurtea restauration, mosthis controversial Detailsof bably related to i to related bably 302 similar similar , Paris, 1998. Paris, ,

I will now add He was also involved in the Romanian exh Romanian the in involved also was He mansions. mansions. Characteristic for buildings like the famous Mogoșoaia palace or the fortified

of the the intricate relations between different actors different between relations intricate the in the previous chapter how he modified one of the most impor most the of one modified he how chapter previous the in to Carmen Popescu, ”L’étranger: Lecomte de Nouy” in Popescu, Popescu, in Nouy” Lecomte de ”L’étranger: Popescu, Carmen to domestic – to

Curtea de Argeș church, according to a very diligent scientific method scientific diligent very a to according church, Argeș de Curtea 1914) et la restauration des monuments historiques en Roumanie en historiques monuments des restauration la et 1914) 303

the ones the (considered

But his most obvious role in role obvious most his But ts

some architecture sources of inspiration. of sources

used by used brief brief k ule, the first the

biographies is the richly d richly the is Mincu which

building in building figure

survived from the “pre the fromsurvived in . Andre Lecomte du Nöuy was the leading restorer of restorer leading the wasNöuy Lecomtedu Andre . , his of of the architects involved in these displays

Both t Both and

95 in the development of the national Romaniastyle the development national in the of ecorated open terrace on the first floor, with the with floor, first the on terrace open ecorated creating project for the E the for project

national style national that

he already ibition at the Parisian World Exhibition in Exhibition World Parisian the at ibition he deliberate used what Curtea de Argeș de Curtea One can also distinguish distinguish also can One the Romanian exhibition architecture isarchitecture exhibition Romanian the

as accurately as possible as accurately as

A aort o te King, the of favourite A . o sarae One staircase. ior ) : the slim wooden columns, the columns, wooden slim the : - modern” xhibition in 1889 and 1889 in xhibition Le styleLe ”, ”, Société de l'histoire de l'art l'art de l'histoire de Société

church , 68 68 ,

period, the boyar’sor the period, – ,

in monument tant 77. Eugène Viollet le Viollet Eugène s , which , tarted

“

André Lecomte André several several a definitely can . Ther .

to become

, was was , in order

but in a in but for the for I have have I e wer e details used e CEU eTD Collection 306 305 304 a Romania M. to friends, th For has Poni Petru Commissioner General then and pavilion Royal the of designer exhibition previous the of designer famous the Formigé, Camille Jean In with different 1900 architects roles. team bya of he alwayssurrounded was that had Universal tobeshown at the Exhibitions. the architectural heritage of Romania. And his restorations beca assessing in expert an restoration in expertise his of way by became foreigner, a paradoxically architecture. at point and that he was a permanent representative of the Romanian st by him. The fact that his and 1900 Roman the for model main as

“L'exposition de 1900. La Roumanie 1900. de “L'exposition Debats des Journal 1900”, de l’Exposition a “LaRoumanie already “been distinguished” “been already is reasonable choice, reasonable is Formigé.”. N

the Romanians, very artistic the , evertheless

a d hs [i] euiu tln rse, notntl ti tm, lot inactive”. almost time, this unfortunately rested, talent beautiful “[his] thus nd

nd nd the role of advisor he might have might he advisor of role I n the same way as Lucien Magne Magne Lucien as way same the n 305 Three Three Hierarchs , 20 mai 20 , 1900. , who ,

, The g The

Lecomte du Nöuy was not res

appears in all plans and documents as “architect of the of “architect as documents and plans all in appears ood fortune ood toration the Romani the

ian section at the exhibition in exhibition the at section ian

.”, Journal des debats des Journal .”, working church

works were chosen to be promoted on the international stage and very informed, have the good fortune to of L’independance roumaine L’independance the was enhanced by the fact that he was working was he that fact the by enhanced was an ,

who

had organisers are organisers employed in for Romanian

justifies justifies an when it came to represent to came it when 96 acting

exhibition, namely the two palaces in 1889. in palaces two the namely exhibition,

a for was , 2 Fine 9 August 9 1899. restaurant. alone. alone. As one of my main arguments goes, his choice his

1900 were restored and heavily modified congratulated in the French press French the in congratulated

, 16 April 1899. 16 , Arts

ree Ade eot d Nöuy, du Lecomte Andre Greece,

1889 and 1889 ate at the World Exhibitions could me me th

and Formigé was Formigé with the fact that fact the with

e most priceless monuments iea Arts Liberal for

ing the pavilions the

the country th country the ,

appointed one of themone of be able to

aae a the at palaces city the architect the

of Paris”, Paris”, of only for only in

appeal appeal by rough :

1867

“ was o the the 306 304 ur ,

CEU eTD Collection 309 Dimitrie also Ollănescu, See 55. 1901), Socecu, (Bucharest: 308 307 Government”Romanian the of “DelegateCommissioner the as roles Thus team. Romanian bythe monuments the on advised b an Poni, restau the and pavilion the for used Romania publications period various from back traced be can church restoration in specialist a was pavilion Greek the of of Pere Lachaise (1887). All in all bishopric the of rebuilding architects Though ut probably Formigé, who did not have any expertise on the country’s architecture, was directly

d George Sterian. Ibid. See also the mention of the visi the mentionalso ofthe See Ibid. Ollănescu, C. Dimitrie XIXe du diocésains architectes des Répertoire

in the process of creating the exhibition architecturein the processcreating exhibition of the the

very similar similar very Of the two, only th Some he he experienced was in building at the world exhibitions , in order in , . then General Commissioner General then 307 involved,

He also designed buildings in a French neo French a in buildings designed also He of the

to stud to Paris Paris 309 in details details he he , who also was architect of a bishopric a of architect was also who ,

Raport general asupra participării României la Exposiția universală din Paris din universală Exposiția la României participării asupra general Raport

conception What happenedWhat inthat trip and He restorer. a mainly was City Hall, having been been having Hall, City y e name of George Sterian appeared of its

, how how he chose the sources of inspiration for the Romanian pavilion

architecture on site. architectureon

and contributed to the building of Sacré Coeur, a neo a Coeur, Sacré of building the to contributed and t in t in , his career is very simila to rant, in Oltenia and Vâlcea counties, accompanied counties, Vâlcea and Oltenia in rant,

Jorunal de debats, debats, de Jorunal the PereLachaise Crematorium. ,

and

siècle, http://elec.enc.sorbonne.fr/architectes/217. siècle, by 97 two Romanian architects, Constantin Băicoianu Constantin architects, Romanian two

308 Notice sur la Roumanie en en 1900 Roumanie la sur Notice rvosy pone a te rhtc o a of architect the as appointed previously politiques et litteraires et politiques .

He visited the monuments which monuments the visited He I had among n the summer of 1898 he made a visit to visit a made he 1898 of summer the n , -

B Băicoianu and S and Băicoianu r r to representing Romania worked yzantine style yzantine ,

that of Lucien Magne, the architect in the documents of the Exhibition the four of them cannot worked at the exhibition in exhibition the at worked , ,

a similar nd he also also he nd since

, June 30, 1898. 30, June , to

,

85 for 1885 terian

like the Crematorium the like du du Nöuy and signed (Paris, 1900). (Paris, . also played key key played also

for approval for

h famous the - found out, Byzantine

would be by Petru by to

(1900),

1889, other

CEU eTD Collection 315 Sterian], http://www.ziaruldebacau.ro/un George Architecture: Romanian arhitecturii al nume mare “Un Busnea, Dan Romulus article the in 314 313 312 311 310 architects other architect, only historical of restoration and conservation the country the in monuments on law first the behind figure main the be of monuments and wrote an important study on 1885. in style, national Romanian Fine at the institutional development of the architectur in involved and Paris in trained restorer, a firstly was he home: back style national a of creation someo for career revealing a has architects, “interior decorations”. invaluable". as "the third delegate" and constructions and designs the of supervisor a be to for delegate main of function pavilion the for constructor a choosing of process all the plans related to the architectural display of Romania.

George Sterian, George here presented the work.found information I in academic any studied not been has Sterian ofGeorge career The April 1899. 16 roumaine, L’independance 1900”, de l’Exposition a “LaRoumanie 1899. August 29 LaRoumanie: 1900; de L'exposition 281. Vol. Culturale, Paris Fond Bucharest, Affairs, ofForeign ofthe Ministry Archives ofForeign. Ministry F/12/4264. Paris, ANF,

ereSein rpeettv fteGvrmn, uevsradpr fteta of team the of part and supervisor Government, the of representative Sterian, George Arts School in Paris in School Arts 312

In addition The Commission for the Historica the for Commission The , Despre restaurare Despre

he found he

313

, , ed - is inferred

mare a Romanian mentions newspaper that he also worked for some and at the same time time same the at and ,

the first Romanian Architectural Society. At the turn of the 19 the of turn the At Society. Architectural Romanian first the from where he graduated two graduated he where from

the General Commissioner”. General the - a monumentelor istorice în strainatate si în România si în strainatate în istorice monumentelor a nume After returning to returning After - that "his advices for building the pavilion (...) were, I al - irl e Bacău de Ziarul arhitecturii ne involved involved ne al 98 restoration

- would business

romanesti l Monuments l

, and an Romania d in a French publication publication Frencha in d Arl 9 21, cesd a 4 2014. 4, May accessed 2011, 19, April , he found both

romanesti: George Sterian” A Great Name of Name Great A Sterian” George romanesti: . -

in 1889. 314 george is 310 311

years later than the than later years appointed

He was ,

H in exhibition architecture exhibition in

So , together with others but others with together

. e - he specialized in the restoration the in specialized he sterian T , wa

315 ogether with Mincu and Mincu with ogether he is sent by the Government the by sent is he s responsible for the bidding

a After

colleague

as having “the honorific honorific “the having as

three years , (Iassi: , 1889) he is mentioned is he of “father” of the of “father”

Ion Mincu ,

he would

, he

and the and as the the as think, of of the with

’s th

CEU eTD Collection 316 designed installations”. the of architect Crafts, and Arts of School the at Professor Deputy,“former appearsheas delegation Romanianofficial Exhibition Universal 1900 the at Romania for worked also he that is career, in Exhibition s have we as documents ofthe Universal Exhibition monastery century Băicoianu,was also sp Sterian on influence greater This figure. established an already was French. He was also younger tha monuments important most the on work not is on the one had due to flaws in Romanian historiography worked also who French the than figure known less (1895), theBărbătescu Church(1897), Vechi century

ANF, Paris, F/12/4262. Paris, ANF, , T Ion Mincu is the most well accompan who architect other The in

, from a list including he main Romanian expert on the restoration of medieval monuments, Sterian e etrs ay itrcl monuments historical many restores he

matters of ee

1889. A 1889. n, he was a central figure of figure central a was he n,

ia Vodă Mihai restoration restoration assessing

fact ecialized inthe restoringecialized

previous

all the ar

h acietrl eiae f h country the of heritage architectural the theoryentirely seems plausible

n Formigé rm uhrs. However Bucharest. from - known name in the studies of the Romanian national style and ly 316

unknown, in spite of the general interest of scholars in his in scholarsof interest generalthe of spite in unknown, chitects in

F explains explains

1900 ortunately ied Formigé in his study trip in trip study his in Formigé ied ,

and he started work the Romanian architectural displa architectural Romanian the the ,

99 , who

n ws o sc a otoesa fgr a the as figure controversial a such not was and medieval monuments, having workedat monuments, medieval the 16 wheretake part. he didnot probably

Bucur (1905 Church , why

oty n uhrs: h Ntoa Theatre National The Bucharest: in mostly worked for the Romanian display. Ion Mincu , we , in Romania, André Lecomte du Noüy. This Noüy. Lecomtedu André Romania, in ,

in 1900 in

know exactly what installations he hadhe installations what exactly know ,

and on the other hand because he did ,

i nm de nt per n the in appear not does name his . ing ,

most probably most

in Romania when the French –

1907). 1907). ,

Romania, Constantin Romania, and . In the list of the of list the In . y at the Universal the at y

him Formigé had a had Formigé

influenc ,

is a much ing th

CEU eTD Collection F/12/4264. Paris, ANF, approved); be to had windows 318 F another and kiosk, ofthe tobacco designer 317 being of restored. It worthy is the process we have followed it for other making thus monument, “Romanian” important an as monastery the of for the pavilion in 1900. Therefore sources the of one monastery, Stavropoleos of restoration important an undertook However building Formigé influenced turn in have might architecture his above, natio thinking about nationalstyles. one F the by approved individually be to had decorations bec quickly and decoration, the same motif mention can I paper, my of other nations. While go backgro or consisted Mincu of designer the was

For instance the plans for Group 10, classes 60 classes 60 Group10, for instance plans For the Ibid. Besides him, the list includes Formigé as the of architect the pavilion and restaurant, Petre Antonescu as the

c nal style by the work undertaken at the former exhibition exhibition former the at undertaken work the by style nal ould Mincu app already have We that ,

ic too Mincu unds for diffe for unds consider includes o in small installations, merely installations, small in m ears ears as the only “

ing their their the

elements ofvernacularelements architecture. would

ing n o te eta moti central the of one

constructions for constructions

rent Romanian products within within products Romanian rent seen how Mincu might have been influenced in his development of a of development his in influenced been have might Mincu how seen osbe influence possible

into into the specific architectural details of every group exceeds the being also

318 pcaie n etrtos A e yas fe te xiiin he exhibition, the after years few A restorations. in specialise h audn ue f h oina teol rh in arch trefoil oriental the of use abundant the

, real

it it is possible that this exhibition rench architect, Piqout, for the pavilion of the Petrol. the for pavilionofthe Piqout, architect, rench used for the Romanian restaurant at the exhibition ” architect, - exhibition exhibition

62 shows that every architectural detail (entrances, decorations, decorations, (entrances, detail shows62 that every architectural both both

100 decorative elements decorative ves

all the others on

Romanian models, only of groups 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14. 13, 10, 9, 7, 6, groups rench officials, rench the architecture and and architecture the

h Rmna national Romanian the larger exhibition space exhibition larger

in being specialized in restorations. in

the design of the restaurant, the of design the

– 1889. would have raised the status

entrance porches, supports supports porches, entrance a fact which suggests that suggests which fact a N on ow, as I mentioned mentioned I as ow, this this time ic’ wy of way Mincu’s 317 style

s eea o his of several

of inspiration of

and between and The work of work The Al these All . in reverse: in

scope 1889 a ,

CEU eTD Collection 1907). moderne, 319 display style War World Second style. national a in built also he which Hall, City the Bucharest, w he century kiosk, Tobacco his With w ground, testing a architects: French the Exhibit Universal the been praised as a nice early example of Romanian national style. Paris Universal Exhibition. The building, inspired by ancient monuments from Romania, has also career his of commission important first the received Paris. in school Arts Fine the from before year the graduated known figure for th Exhibitions. career his in episode previous other the monument is restored after it has been promoted at the exhibition

Edmond Edmond Delaire, s

examples ranging fromranging the already style mentionednational eclecticism and toFrench modernism. dig o h itiae itr of picture intricate the to Adding is important, as Imentioned architectsfive the of last the Antonescu,Petre is the French named in the documents o restoration.

ould

h mnmn enters monument the Les archit

i te optto fr einn oe f h ms iprat ulig in buildings important most the of one designing for competition the win e Romanian national architectural style ,

,

he w he

ions appear ions and a further evidence of his entanglement within the Universe of World of Universe the within entanglement his of evidence further a and Nevertheless,

ectes ectes élèves de l'Ecole des Beaux Antonescu has successfully launched successfully has Antonescu ould

design many buildings in the in buildings many design to be to M

nus ok n ai i 1900 in Paris in work incu’s attention the for h Romanian architects Romanian the the ere skills can be developed and abilities put to test. to put abilities and developed be can skills ere 101 nly as Piqout, an architect specialised in industrial esn ivle i te Roman the in involved persons

- f rhtcs einn pavilions designing architects of Arts, 1793 , the building of the Tobacco kiosk at the the at kiosk Tobacco the of building the , . He is youngestthe of all, having just - Roman 1907

a what 319

In this case, career , , (Paris

Subsequently, and up to up and Subsequently, t ut 6 er o ae he age, of years 26 just At , ian

they whereas in the majority of

ersns n important an represents , as ,

: Librairie de la construction Capital, in a variety of of variety a in Capital,

ha

after the tu the after ve we can

a architectural ian always been for been always another notice rn of the of rn u t a to due well

how

the

- CEU eTD Collection de déplaire au Roi Charles que nous avons entendu déclarer à Sinaïa, qu 323 322 321 320 declaring pavilion] the aspectof the that Romanians wished acknowledgin while made Orient the with parallel a is interest of Particularly Orient. seem to be situations, including the W part of the implicit comparisons its in forms twisted windows, of rows campaniles, cupolas, with style Oriental the is decorating architectureOrientalRomanian luxury”. decorative oriental very a of vivid, so elegant, so the types of Romanian architecture from on in “Oriental” as seen is Universal Exhibition Romania took part made or atgive the least advices other for projects. Howeverpavilion. Petrol the designed who buildings,

Le Petit Journal du dimanche, Nat des Rue La Marché Bon de Illustré Guide 1900 Exposition Paris ewe Rmna and Romania between In the French press French the In in

rather connected to attempts at the different facades different the

Sinaia that from nowontheOrientSinaia thatfrom sto ions et la Berge de la rive gauche de la Seine dela gauche rive la Berge de la et ions , (Paris, Hachette, 1900), 243 243 (Paris, 1900), , Hachette,

to discardto this influence:

, e publication: “The Romanian Palace (...) concentrates and evokes all evokes and concentrates (...) Palace Romanian “The publication: e

orld Exhibitions. However if we would not be afraid to displease KingCharles displease afraid to be not would we if exhibition, the to connected : October October 14, 1900 L’Exposition et Paris et L’Exposition

the the ornamentation, blind windows blind ornamentation, , [that] can be found in the motives the in found becan [that] made made between the ” 321 culture of the the of culture

and even an “Oriental style” in describing the pavilion: “It pavilion: the describing in style” “Oriental an even and

in the

, in 1867 in Paris. The lavish decoration of the pavilion describ : « 16

Nous Nous dirions que c’est l'Orient délicieux si nous ne craignions

– 102 th , (Paris, 1900) 58. 58. 1900) (Paris, ,

244. to

“We would say that it is graciousthe Orient [in ret cnimn a rn started trend a confirming Orient, ing

the Balkan ps at the Danube.”

, the the architectural with style reference the to (Melun,1901)

, 17 in the

he might he diverse coloured stones, small and large and small stones, coloured diverse it is i is it th s and the

century, of this Byzantine architecture e désormais l’Orient s'arrêterait au Danube

320 case of the nteresting to note the parallel often parallel the note to nteresting .

”

322 Other publications men publications Other have

, , 10. These types of comments are comments of types These

of the polychromethe of Orient 323

also very well collaborate well very also

Romanian

,

so so frequent ,

who pavilion, they

m t h first the at ornaments in various

g the fact the g we heardwe tion “t tion he

».

CEU eTD Collection F/12/4223. ANF, Paris, 1898. 27, SofiaOctober on 326 138 152, Fremdes Europa? K Popov, Petar in Ausstelung”, die über Debatten publizistischen zeitgenössischen 325 Practice and the 19th and During the Early 20th Century” in 324 surprise! They were turned back with the following advice: “It is desirable that the concepti appointment Henr Paris, from foreigners style”. Byzantine and local to addressedboth competition a of opening the announced Agriculture by Greek Bulgaria Russo Bulgaria’s Empire, Ottoman the against aimed but officially under the Ottoman Empire. Nevertheless e)

They are named in the official decision “M. M. Saladin et de Sévelinges, architects a Paris”. De Paris”. a architects Sévelinges, de et Saladin M. “M. decision official the in named are They 1900. Weltausstellung Pariser der au “Bulgarien Dobreva, Doroteja of End the at Bulgaria in Architecture National Identifiably for Search “The Iokimov, Petar Stoilova, Ljubinka Bulgaria - Turkish war of 1877 Bulgaria is the only country still not completely independent in 1900. It was autonomous rbby aig this having Probably –

adopted adopted - 139. cross churchescross

, Bucharest, 2002, eds. eds. , 2002, Bucharest, ot powerfu most

,

the plans for the pavilion were already sent for approval to the French officials. But Selbsbilder Selbsbilder und Europa a 325

Russian Russian inspired Byzantine style

h cmeiin a hl i Sfa bt h aciet coe wr two were chosen architects the but Sofia, in held was competition The

with several domes. al ws usa wih obtained which Russia, was ally l to – i Saladin and Henri de Sevelinges. de Henri and Saladin i

1878. Consequently

Carmen Popescu și Ioana Teodorescu, (Bucharest: Simetria, 2002), 96. 2002), Simetria, (Bucharest: Teodorescu, și Ioana CarmenPopescu foreignarchitects, ye f buildings of type - Vorstellungen Vorstellungen in Bulgarien (1850

a aray ne way under already was Genius Genius Loci

324 103

who had to fulfil a singlea fulfil to had who . ,

National National and Regional in Architectur

there thearchitecture were when instances in n mind in ,

represented at the turn of the century ,

a nation building process, with discourses

o dsgig h Blain pavilion, Bulgarian the designing for te iity f omre and Commerce of Ministry the ,

Bilder von Eigenem und Fremden in den den in Fremden und Eigenem von Bilder the autonomy for Bulgaria in the the in Bulgaria for autonomy the

- o a while a for 1945 326

fe n ot rm their from month one After ), (Berlin: Lit Verlag, 2007), 101 aterina Gehl, Klaus Roth, eds, eds, Roth, Klaus Gehl, aterina

condition: “to be in ain be “to condition: I ti endeavour this In . e Between History cision taken in in taken cision

mostly on of - , ,

CEU eTD Collection programme.” le par proscrits styles des reminiscenes des retrouve on maineceseraiment, ou, Sa M.M. Les architectes, 329 the of research. me point this at to inaccessible not has pavilion Bulgarian the for plan original The 328 Pavillon votre de façade la nationale”. architecture votre nettement plus caractérisant de l’ensemble que souhaiter a serait “El F/12/4223: 327 “national”. being my paper, the architecture of the pavilion was not inspired by some old monument with which the “Bulgarian” culture could be mistaken. But unlike the other countries analysed in and specifically ask the official stresses description theofanystyle: lack specific is pavilion the of style the archives, Paris the from any architectur “national 14). and (figure beauty elegance” has it countries, foreign for “representative is it because pavilion exhibition an w press Bulgarian the architecture” the façadeyour of pavilion

ANF, Paris, F/12/4223 Paris, ANF, 138 “Bulgarien”, Dobreva, in (1899) 40 No. Journal], Bulgarian [Comercial vestnik targovski Balgarski Paris, ANF, 1898, December, 18 Guechoff, M. Exhibiton, the at Bulgaria of Comissioner General the to Letter monument The final modified plans were approved after another two month L forbidden by program. the joyful style, personal n Bulgaria seemed to have wanted that the style of its pavilion o ike all the other Balkan countries, Bulgaria countries, Balkan other the all ike Trih Te rhtcs M. aai ad e Sévelinges de and Saladin Mr. architects, The Turkish. r 327

of of the past

Inspiration could have come for come have couldInspiration ed e”. Indeed e”. ladin et de Sévelinges ont du imaginer un monument de style personnel joujesment colore, joujesment personnel style monumentun de Sévelinges imaginer ontdu de et ladin

ith the ith : “Bulgarie, a voulu, parait voulu, a “Bulgarie, : that that it would 328

This short description does not have any references to some kind of kind some to references any have not does description short This , being rather a personal creation of ly would

mention that “comp that mention coloured

,

329 the construction seems to be the only one only the be to seems construction the

present adecoration characterising clearlyyour more national not have any elements ,

but but

in which, by which, in been published and it could be kept in some archives in Sofia, Sofia, in archives some in kept be could it and published been - il que le style de son pavillion ne fut ni russe ni grec ni turc. ni grec ni russe ni fut ne pavillion son de style le que il 104

etent opinions” etent

instance from from instance characterised as “modern a “modern as characterised

also

necess

of wanted a unique style for for style unique a wanted

the important neighbouring cultures, ity

the Inthe architects. the would , we find reminiscences of the styles the reminiscences of find we , declared the ,

mgnd mo a imagined

Rila Monastery, Monastery, Rila be neither Russian, n (sic!) présentât une décoration décoration une présentât (sic!) s ,

the design suitable for for suitable design the a that does not point to point not does that decision decision reflected in

rchitecture” uet n their in nument s perceived as questionnaire its considered considered

pavilion o r r Greek, – ,

139. and ,

CEU eTD Collection 332 331 330 Worldat the Parisian accustomed architecture withworking Oriental and renowned in specialist churc of (mostly restoration in specialised studied, of majority the to similar and, 1882 in Academy Arts Fine from graduating figure, missing. relevant for a situation when Mus half Byzantine, half concerning the pavi in accomplished civi the to show “to Commissioner: General Bulgarian Tarnovo. But in 1900 of inter the Romanian case, because simply as locals, the by monuments historical valuable shown been have not could an archi only the society and promote an architectural heritage, no Besides monument. historical valuable by the time

Louis Rousselet, L'Exposition Universelle de 1900, Librairie Hachette & Cie, Paris, 1901. &Paris, Cie, Hachette Librairie 1900, de Universelle L'Exposition LouisRousselet, Annual re 1900, Exposition Paris, F/12/4223. April 1899, Letterfrom 29 the Ottom h aciet o te aiin ae eln cres Svlne ws rte unknown rather a was Sévelinges careers. telling have pavilion the of architects The tectural heritage was not yet defined. The two French architects, Saladin and Sévelinges war period, Bulgarian period, war

the most important monument in the country. But Rila was a sole case of a confirmed, an houses with projecting second with houses an such a such lion the ,

the “modern archi

, journal journal of architects, founded in 1893 (Spisanie na BIAD). short period of time” of period short

even if we can still find comments like

lim

” all the elements important for creating an architectura 331

port, 10. port, architects it it was not clear which these

or of “Byzantine style”. “Byzantine of or

r

archaeological societies or architectural schools. There was

this tecture” tecture” was the only solution to express the wish of the w ould , in Bu in , 330 105 floors floors

. The French publications w publicationsFrench The . identify

lgaria there were no foreign restorers to help to restorers foreign no were there lgaria hes). Henri Saladin Henri hes). to be to

their “national” architecture in the type the in architecture “national” their 332 found in cities like Plodviv or Velikoor Plodviv like cities in found

ie wrd h pors Bulgaria progress the world lised monuments w Rounding up Rounding

the pavilion would be ,

on the other hand other the on ,

oul the Bulgarian case i case Bulgarian the ere indeed laudatoryindeed ere d be

it happened in the in happened In this context, . Only later, in l heritage, are

“of the , a

was a was cases style s ,

CEU eTD Collection orientaliste”, 336 1855 France, européennes, 335 334 eds. inVolait, 333 If in the Balkan Peninsula, as we have seen, they restored, promoted and gave an impetus for the restorers in the Balkan it. about books wrote of rest the for and architecture local the discovered countries, Oriental to mission archaeological an accompanied desirewanted“Tunisian a ofthestyle”. who locals, from originating differ recombining Moroccan pavilion in 1900. 1900 and 1889 in Tunisianpavilions the build would he architecture,Tunisian in Orient. published he 1907 France. Tunisia Baudry to contrast in But 1865. suppose archaeological mis exhibitions. After graduating from the Fine Arts Academy in Paris (1879)

Ibid., 217. Ibid., Myriam Bacha, Henri Saladin (1851 h tr “retls aciet” a cie an coined was architects” “orientalist term The hitae Demeulenaere Christiane 334 333 e a be icue i te aeoy f oinait aciet, hs wo usually who those architects, “orientalist” of category the in included been has He d w

state of the unearth the of state He also had a productive activity at the Parisian Universal Exhibitions. As the expertthe As Exhibitions. Universal Parisian the at activity productive a had also He ould I

Livraisons d'histoire de l'architecture de d'histoire Livraisons n 1898 n L'orientalisme

be the starting point of a career dedicated to the promotion of Oriental art in art Oriental of promotion the to dedicated career a of point starting the be different monuments, religious, civilian and vernacular, vernacular, and civilian religious, monuments, different

sion of the French state in Tunisia. His role was to reconstruct in drawing their career worked there, promoted a style inspired by that architecture and and architecture that by inspired style a promoted there, worked career their h ent motives ent The Handbook The e founded founded e 336 s - , 1937

- 215. , We can regard th regard can We with the notable difference that they were working in a c Douyère, Douyère,

, (Paris , He showed with this occasion a great mastery in directly coping and

ed

The Historic Association for the study of Northern Africa Northern of study the for Association Historic The . For .

, ruins, the exact same role Ambroise Baudry had in Romania in in Romania in had Baudry Ambroise role same exact the ruins,

– who continued to work in Egypt, in work to continued who xtqe epstos ls xoiin uiesle e ls utrs extra cultures les et universelles expositions les expositions: Exotiques

1923), 1923), “Un architecte “Beaux : Somogy, Archives Nationales, 2010), 44 2010), Nationales, Archives : Somogy,

of Muslim Art Muslim of example, for for example, em as as em . n°5, (2003), 55 (2003), n°5, . d it is further explained by Lorraine Decléty in “L'architecte “L'architecte in Decléty Lorraine by explained further is it d 106 the

, the peak the , the Tunisian pavilion he employed six parts six employed he pavilion Tunisian the 335 equivalents of the foreigners who worked asworked who foreigners the of equivalents

- 65. -

Arts” promoteur de l’art islamique tunisien”

of his promotional activity promotional his of for for - 45. Henri Saladin Henri , he wa

in order in s assigned to the o , lonial context.

as well as theas well as to satisfy t satisfy to

the visit visit the ,

for and in and s

the the the he in - CEU eTD Collection 338 1910 337 inspired by Ottoman houses “national a of creator a and advocate an become later Bulgaria the of critique trenchant th to connections made paper, this in time several mentioned I thesis the for telling is countries Balkan expeditions. archaeological no was Paris in Academy Arts Fine “specialists buildings inBucharest Marseilles) in exhibition the (at 1906 and 1900 h decades three Sa of the pavilions of the Balkan nations. Another one, Albert Ballu, who was in Algeria the equivalent developments. and creating directly active, more much were architects the countries colonial in styles, national of creation is

Marie (1870 d'Egypt vu architectural l'orientalism monuments: des et objects des l'intimite “Dans Volait, Mercedes all the pavilions the all

)” in Volaid (ed.), (ed.), in Volaid )” id f eak cam remarks of kind ladin in Tunisia and Tunisia in ladin Thus As we have seen, - Laure, “Oriental ou colonial?” in Volaid (ed.), (ed.), in Volaid colonial?” ou “Oriental Laure, in ,

two specialists in Oriental architecture, Saladin and Ambroise Baudry, worked for for worked Baudry,Ambroise and architecture,Saladin in Oriental specialists two architect national a in building and and enthusiastic of the Orient”

e was the chief architect chief the was e between Balkan andbetween architecture Oriental

of the Balkan countries Balkan the of L'orientalism , The , The

parallels parallels with the Orient have been made in the French press

of as fo te l the from also e 338 Palace for Ba

, 37. , The fact that these architects these that fact The

the Exhibitions the Exhibitions u dry in Egypt, in dry n pavilion. His opinion is all the more the all is opinion His pavilion. n

of Justice keig h pc with pace the keeping t of

. However . Algeria, he designed the Algerian pavilions in 1889, in pavilions Algerian the designed he Algeria, 337 , in 1890. All three, in1890.All cl. h aciet no Torny Anton architect The ocals. r, oriaig rhelgcl ie ad urban and sites archaeological coordinating ure, 107 , in a time when the teaching of Oriental art at the L'orientalism , was was in

but

Liege and(1905) also work also he ,

only in the in only Bulgarian also , 56. , . designed have been assigned to work work to assigned been have

ing architects

style”, first with his pavilions his with first style”, the of case

in the Romanian Capital. Romanian the in h kolde acquired knowledge the

in on

Torino (1906) Torino e of the most important most the of e

relevant have considered been Bulgarian ov unleashed a a unleashed ov ,

as he as namely with regard , as well asas well pavilion for the for would For the the in -

CEU eTD Collection 341 340 142. “Bulgarien...”, 339 architecture. for stimulus a represented mixture, w that discussions “bizarre” a such as appeared it because particularly style pavilion Serbian pavilion Greek the Romania”, Ro the considers h Then of meaning figurative the with dessert, Turkish Exhibition pavilion attheParis World of development the in with

Ibid., 137. Ibid., Bobchev 19 na kraia v izlozhba svetskata “Vse Tornyov, , the

s eiicn o a od eba church”. Serbian old an of reminiscent is e h fu Trih uoa ad seily h rd oor f h otie wal outside the of colour red the especially (...)Wouldn’t it and cupolas Turkish four the decoration the and ornaments architectural The oppression. Turkish the by saved recently colony European a represents that impression the foreigners the to leaves pavilion Our T Romanians?the

articles he oprs h Blain pavilion Bulgarian the compares

(1900), in Dobreva, “Bulgarien...”, 132. in“Bulgarien...”, Dobreva, (1900),

painter

published manian one as being as one manian as being ”a beautiful building beautiful ”a being as ould eventually lead to theorising and cr and theorising to lead eventually ould

Stefan Bobchev ironi have been easier and 339 the Bulgarian national style, Torny style, national Bulgarian the

in the architecturaljournal the in

as being as

”a building having a church architecture characteristic for characteristic architecture church a having building ”a in

” cally describes the pavilion as been an

an original building in a pure B pure a in building original an simpler 1900: - to stoletie”, stoletie”, to

ih the with 108

that

to to take the example of the Serbs, a

341 , strange mixture with an Oriental Oriental an with mixture strange

with its five domes in a T a in domes five its with Spisanie na BIAD na Spisanie

Spisanie na BIAD na Spisanie te pa other In this context, context, this In ov p ov ystallising the ystallising vilions rofoundly disliked its country’s its disliked rofoundly , no. 5, (1900), 234 in Dobreva, Dobreva, in 234 (1900), 5, no. ,

of Balkan countries. He He countries. Balkan of h Blain pavilion, Bulgarian the . yzantine style”yzantine T notio he future main figure figure main futurehe the urkish n of “Bulgarian” “Bulgarian” of n ashure, s em bizarre. seem ls Greeks , together with together , - Byzantine aspect a kind of ,

, and the and

or or even . 340 . CEU eTD Collection 346 345 180. 1900), 344 343 Beaux 342 has been remarked how for the French with relation and careers architecture,their exhibition designing in architects Exhibitions. the demonstrating sympathy that foreign here, nations had mentioned than numerous more much are countries Balkan the of pavilion is accomplished” and gracious most the of “one domination Turkish the of remind to it want not that pavilion gracious temple in rose, blue and green”. Similar a dome, the and roof the on doves laurel, of wreath a is missing is that thing only “the as antiquity of reminds church, Byzantine a although pavilion, Greek the connections critiques, The case. each in nation of idea the time same the at asserting laudatory, highly f)

Ibid, Oct Ibid, dimanche du Journal Petit Le Armand Silvestre, la de Pavillon Le Universelle. "L'Exposition l’architecture”, : 1900 de universelle l’Exposition à Arts “Les Magne, Lucien in France Anatole Final overview

- Arts ly, In the French press French the In I n this chapter I have tried to tried have I chapter this n , vol. 23, (1900), (1900), 383 23, vol. ,

ober 14, 1900. 14, ober

nte junl xrse te oe ht te ih o Hla wl gnl srk the stroke gently will Hellas of light “the that hope the expressed journal another “surely one of the most shimmering for the eyes”.

with the Orient or Orient the with ”its graceful constructiograceful”its Guide Guide Armand Silvestre de Paris et de ses environs et de l'Exposition de 1900

- , , April 22, 1900. April 22, , 396, 396. 396,

the majority of descriptions concerning the Balkan pavilions were pavilions Balkan the concerning descriptions of majority the

among the Balkan countries Balkan the among from the part of

n successfully satisfied the Bulgarian expectations that did that expectations Bulgarian the successfullysatisfied n

a accentuate rchitects Grece" Grece" 343

The poet Armand Silvestre writes 109 Journal de debats, politiques et litteraires et politiques debats, Journalde

pavilions

the the exhibitions were “platforms for architectural , ” French

344 mostly the mostly

and in another place we can read that it is it that read can we place another in and . men 345

are frequent but not the norm. Thus, norm. the not but frequent are 346 In the same manner same the In

with the occasions of t intricate

Such evaluations of the pavilions d h sn rm Attica”. from sun the nd contribution of different of contribution

about about the Bulgarian others involved others , , 30 March 1900. March 30 ,

, , (Paris: Mericant, the Romanian the he

Gazette des des Gazette Universal the . It . 342

CEU eTD Collection 349 348 347 would be, Thus advanced. experience no had Bulgaria because is This inspiration”. of sources as fantasy and “feelings on relying method, “intuitionists” the calls case was The architectural advicemethod ofnational creating styles. the country the of monum these events becameprivileged at being imposed by a variety of contexts creation their in freedom greater taken several buildings for various opp four where city the living. of way a as well as experimentation” France de Nationales Archives a Celik,137. Celik,

ortunities and ortunities s World Exhibition Exhibition World

of Greece, Serbia and Romania and Serbia Greece, of up h avc gvn y h ognsr, ht cuty hud hoe eea “national several choose should country a that organisers, the by given advice The ents” and reproduce theminonebuilding so Displaying, Displaying, by the local architects local the by were questions

atcptn in participating ,

, a , or

plenty 134. of of range of range world fairs world a region of its territory its of region a

n eeded

of work for the French architects French the for work of

simply not

national monument national , Paris ,

ol Exhibitions World events. This profession of “exhibition architect” could not

to

; h ; took place took places for places , especially at especially , adequately , F/12/4270, F/12/4242; F/12/4242; F/12/4270, , owever fore yet answered ,

ign restorers working in working restorers ign . Adding to this the main requirement that the architecture while the Bulgarian pavilion is a is pavilion Bulgarian the while ,

experimenting withthe national architectural styles. in the time span of span time the in for them them for represent represent , 347 ” 110 348 s to select from,select to s ,

a time when constrains when time a

And in this case Paris was in the spot lights, as lights, spot the in was Paris case this in And n is ntttoa dvlpet a not was development institutional its and

offers a rare glimpse into the actual proposed actual the into glimpse rare a offers

in 1900. the world the as

a country, one country, a

to remind ,

who,

thirty fairs

or the

in one what the what

were also opportunities for afor opportunities also were - the country, more or less followed in the lessfollowed or inthe more six years. six

can easily understand how understand easily can of “an era from the history

cases n to

instance

artistic creation artistic national architecturenational

it had no previous previous no had it I studied, designed Istudied, T here were here

of what Celik what of have been many were yet 349

CEU eTD Collection monastery. Rila inspirationthe 350 pre were torepresent taken whole P the 15 from monuments are throughout the Balkans. At the Universal Exhibition of 1900, taken to represent their specificity l or more with up ended inspiration context, this (1891 (1889 the of the newly founded institutions that promoted the Byzantine art in the Balkans we can m cultural developments that favoured a ofpromotion the Byzantine heritage. As a quick overview 19 the of countries focused on the Byzantine heritage. This was not a random occurrence. Towards the end

th n h sgetos ae y ono ad io ta te ugra pvlo cud ae sd s suc of source a as used have could pavilion Bulgarian the that Mitov and Tornyov by made suggestions the In ss 19 hita Acaooia Society Archaeological Christian centur ,

) ) th where

in Greece; the first architectural journal (1890) and the Society of the Romanian architects i At the Exhibition Exhibition the At Further revealing is the elusive character of the “Byzantine style”, used with great ease great with used style”, “Byzantine the of character elusive the is revealing Further

n Romania; the Society and Journal of the engineers a eninsula, century th

ies , and this choice caused the paradoxical situation in which century, as I b I as century, monuments reflect monuments

one encounters one in

Serbia in various medieval

Bulgaria the the ’s case a Byzantinea same heritage. The

.

r 11 s smlr ainl pavilions national similar ess countries Balkan the all in showed, iefly

n ai in Paris in ’s th

, terms like “Serbo like terms

and 12 and case from the ing .

and 350 the Byzantine heritage were chosen as chosen were heritage Byzantine the th

So in a period of period a in So 1900 fudd n 82 ad h Mncpl itr Museum History Municipal the and 1882) in (founded post centur 16 th - , 17 , medieval medieval churches and

h “xeietl ntoa sye o te Balkan the of styles national “experimental” the ies in Greece’s in ies 1 th 11 - Byzantine”, “Oriental” Byzantine”, ,

and 18

ambiguity is th nine hundred nine , even though they were intended to to intended were they though even ,

centur nd architects (1893) case, ies

from the from

sometimes sometimes other monuments

in three of the there were institutional and institutional were there also be in the “Byzantine style”

Romania ye

or ars, in the space of the of space the in ars, reflected intheFrench

privileged “half 12

’s case, th Balkan countries - , Byzantine”

in Bulgaria 13 th sources of sources ,

and 14 th ention , from

, all , and . In

CEU eTD Collection 351 representationBalkans ofthe sto Orient the K the if even Orient, France. material by both Serbia and Romania moti nations Balkan the of pavilions country, consulted be to first country the of architecturalheritage the in specialists main the paradoxically, became Balkana Peninsula he Byzantine the of usage the of analysis thorough A style. same the to referring

Le Petit Journal du dimanche du Journal Petit Le ves

I have also shown the importance of foreign restorers, who worked in the Balkans and and Balkans the in worked who restorers, foreign of importance the shown also have I The usage ofthe kindof colourful mate is heritage architectural shared The a

and materials. The most prominent example is that of ceramics, used as a traditional a as used ceramics, of that is example prominent most The materials. and for representation for representation comparison totally ing of Romanian of ing ps at the Danube the at ps s a multi

when it was demanded to ch to demanded was it when

at World Exhibitions. at World , October 14, 1900. 14, October , - unintended unintended and facet . 351

had ”

b ,

ed the concept of Orient was Orient of concept the

t hv as bify etoe sm sh some mentioned briefly also have I ut declared, declared, phenomenon is still tobedone in is still phenomenon ,

and and that at the same time taken to a be modern

unwanted unwanted noticeable as as 112 rials ceramics like often quoted by a Fr a by quoted

oose the most representative monuments of monuments representative most the oose from the part of the

oeot n h similarities the in foremost

tl eycoeyrltdwt the with related closely very still ench

journal, academic literature. incited Balkan

that

rd architectural ared parallels with theparallels with

“from now on, now “from

countries ritage in the in ritage among material , being the the being ,

. But

the

in a

CEU eTD Collection However, a general picture of the national styles in the region, of which the pavilions at the World states in the Peninsula. An endeavour like this would have far exceeded the scope of my research. moder the among developments parallel these comparing study any been not has there "Byzantine"), the (e.g. to referring are architects the that notions common of and architecture of i heritage architectural common obvious the of spite In else. something was puzzling However, literature. academic the in noticed barely was styles particular these on exhibitions world of influence The Balkans. an perceptions, and stereotypes their with influence, national historiographies. But it soon developed on two parallel axes: an assessment of the French actually created was Balkans the in architecture national modern praised long the that possibility intriguing the official architects who designed these samples of national architecture were French. So I foresaw immediate is paradox The history. art in particularly trends the against evidence ha co each world whole the of front in when moment, expected least the probably at were also two church pavili identical ve promoted its unique features unique its promoted ve The initial spark that raised my interest in this subject was a picture showing the almost the showing picture a was subject this in interest my raised that spark initial The In this manner my project began as a statement for a transnational approach and against and approach transnational a for statement a as began project my manner this In ons of Greece and Serbia at the Paris Universal Exhibition of 1900. Behind them Behind 1900. of Exhibition Universal Paris the at Serbia and Greece of ons

by foreigners. by foreigners. - like like constructions, of Romania and Bulgaria. The flagrant similarities came

n the Balkans, in spite of similar institutional developments in the realm realm the in developments institutional similar of spite in Balkans, the n

o

f

ainl itrorpis sil o oiat n h Balkans, the in dominant so still historiographies, national Conclusions

that makes it a nation. So So nation. a it makes that 113

d the issue of national architectures in the in architectures national of issue the d ly reinforced by the fact that actually the actually that fact the by reinforced ly only one image we have a vivid a have we image one only untry should should untry n nation n CEU eTD Collection for inspirations of sources the on decide to persons suitable most the as seen were theyway this In heritage. architectural its in experts main the became restoration, of way by paradox, another archi country concerned the in specialised They missions. archaeological beside or restorers as designed, they pavilion the of country the in working been have architects st the and of creation paradoxically this for reasons Universal of the peculiarworld Exhibitions international inboth byforeigners representation lie The Balkans. the for architecture “national” directl were They fundamental. studies. network and histories entangled of framework theoretical the on based chapters two last the in the picture that emerges is of multiple influences, negotiat So together. all refused were plans the shows, case Bulgarian the as and suggestions additional approval to the French officials. This was not merely a formality, as often the architects received for submitted be to had they ready, were designs the once and specialists local some by advised A usual situation was when the local commissions would choose French architects that were often together under the of supervision Fr worked architects local and foreign both cases of majority the In designs. final the influenced that officials and architects of teams diverse very the are noticeable once at Here Exhibitions. how a national architecture for the Balkan countries was created for inte appropriatefor a thorough investigation. more is This necessary. was of, part are Exhibitions My primary chapters, 3, 4 and 5, gravitate around the main research question of my thesis: h rl o te rnh b wy f hi aciet ad hi cmisos appears commissions, their and architects their of way by French, the of role The

ate of the Balkan architecture in the 19 the in architecture Balkan the of ate y involved or at least closely oversaw the construction of of construction the oversaw closely least at or involved y ench and local officials to come up with a satisfactory result. 114

h I i a re cmaaie td ta is that study comparative brief a did I why th

century. Firstly, in many cases the French French the cases many in Firstly, century. ions and compromises, which I detailed rnational rnational display at World etr ad enter and, tecture CEU eTD Collection tra without saying that the Balkan nations themselves were presented as a group, appropriate for the goesIt press. French the in made often parallels the by and ones Oriental the to close countries, T Orient. the and Balkans the between that research: my all underlines that connection the of speaks architecture countries Balkan the designing for assigned were they that fact The architecture. Oriental developing and promoting This is especially the case of Ambroise Baudry and Henri Saladin, who countries. national a of architectu creation the in foreigners: the of role double a notice can we up rounding So this. did others, or French foreigners, the phase first the in that seems it far so research my from an promoting evaluating, sorting, with grips one’s had architectural statestocome alltheBalkan heritage.to ofnation At thedawn countries redesigned t but themonument, the monument in the romantic fashion recreated of the time; then by the who architects at the exhibition who in restorer turn the by first monument: historical original the of reinterpretation the French restorer were copied for the exhibition construction. participations Greece andalso of in1900. exhi world the at architecture national a nsnational analysis Insnational analysis undertake. A particularly interesting case is the Romanian one where the monuments recreated by recreated monuments the where one Romanian the is case interesting particularly A Other architects were also mainlyOtherwith experiencecountries.Oriental architects also restorers but inthe were creating of phenomenon researched not and larger the into glimpse a offers issue The

e t h ehbto ad n h ceto o a acietrl eiae n h Balkan the in heritage architectural an of creation the in and exhibition the at re his time the restored one.

his can further be seen by the positioning of the Balkan the of positioning the by seen be further can his bitions. It was the case of Romania in all the analysed the all in Romania of case the was It bitions. d using its architectural remains from the past. And past. the from remains architectural its using d

115

This means that we have a double dedicated their careers to CEU eTD Collection displayed be should what important, is what Determining monuments. historical one’s country’s pavilion. vernacular a of creator future the when 1900 in Bulgaria of case the is example eloquent An style. national a to related home world of atmosphere peculiar exhibitions. the The echoes of the world in exhibitions were important likewise nation f the affirm to goal a as had which architecture nati Romanian of examples finest and first the of one considered subsequently was fair 1889 the for for the first time at the Parisian universal exhibitions. More, the restaurant designed by Ion Mincu direct connection in the case of Romania most the saw We architecture. “national” a build should country each that demanding specific, built for an international audience at the Parisian Universal Exhibition. The organisers were very styl these of samples first the Among countries. the in styles architectural mentioned national style. Antonescu and George Sterian, who all would later be main figures in the creation of a Romanian Petre Cerchez, Grigore Mincu, Ion of case the is This ones. French experienced more alongside this of advantage took commission the had certain freedoms in making crowd onal style. we So can concludeyoung that allthe Romanian architects learned howtodesign The exhibition architecture was a fortunate testing ground for the architects, where they where architects, the for ground testing fortunate a was architecture exhibition The Then in the case of case the in Then connection intrinsic the research: my in point important another here reached We a t

the beginning between the Balkan architecture at world exhibitions and the national

all countries the exhibitions were a step in acquiring knowledge of knowledge acquiring in step a were exhibitions the countries all - inspired Bulgarian style, Anton Tornyov, heavily criticised his his criticised heavily Tornyov, Anton style, Bulgarian inspired - friendly and spectacular buildings. In the Romanian case, where where the future developers of this architecture worked potnt t sn i yug rhtcs h worked who architects young in send to opportunity 116

or or the discussions back es were the pavilions pavilions the were es CEU eTD Collection archi the here considered only I tovernaculartime same the at switched both Bulgaria and Romania where 1905 of Exhibition Universal Liege of ca the example for consider can One further. even or War World First the until up exhibitions important contribution. The time frame of my research can be further expanded and include other architectural an of creation the for casethe is same The topics. researched under are regionthe in developments subsequent 19 the in culture and entangled Exhibitions. alsoWorld the representationalat with process being architecture, in orientation national a for important be to proved institutions new these d two last the in Peninsula the throughout appeared all journals, institutional developments: the schools of architecture, of the 19 exhibitions world threeParisian at time the first foremployed extensively arch,the trilobite was use for a short Alsotime. one of the most widely used motifs in the Romanian national style, the consid Europe Western while Serbia, and Romanian materials or shapes. I have shown how ceramics, for example, was taken to be “national” by both restor reverberated also in the architectural developments back home. This process again saw the French ers asers theleading figures. h cntuto a te ol ehbtos epd lo sin ainl au t some to value national assign also helped exhibitions world the at construction The Another inherent limit in my enterprise can become a thriving field for future researches. similar considered also I Balkans the in developments architectural the at looking By My thesis opens up a number of possible researches that th

cen tury. -

inspired pavilions. inspired th

century Balkans. The creation of national architectural styles and their and styles architectural national of creation The Balkans. century

heritage, in which I have shown how the World Exhibitions have anhave Exhibitions World the how shown have I which in heritage,

tecture in the face of a multitude of aspects that comprise the the comprise that aspects of multitude a of face the in tecture

117

ered it a modern material that had been in been had that material modern a it ered archaeological

can can push forward the field of art ecades of the 19 the of ecades

societies and architectural

th

century. All century. se CEU eTD Collection to nationalrepresentation, architecture heritage.cultural and nations it was an experience that helped them raise new questions and find quick answers related spre influences and an ideas into which in developed hub, Exhibitions exchange Universal of world peculiar the well as countries other for China and Japan among others, cases in which there is still room for investigation. It may be that American states. But French architects also designed pavilions for Russia or Far youngthe South at look that works Icitedalready countries. have other case of the in alsoseen created orbrought for the represent nation and to similar areendeavours. suitable also were tactics display or products different But exhibitions. world the at country a of display The issu The e of French influence on nation building through universal exhibitions can be can exhibitions universal through building nation on influence French of e 118

d ih ae Nvrhls fr h Balkan the for Nevertheless ease. with ad

East East nations like

- CEU eTD Collection tower, Paris; Heat several Arles rebuilt and monuments Orange. Roman throughout France starting from 1878: Notre the (1887), glasshouse Lachaise Pere of Crematorium (1885), collaborator Paris, Hall, City works: Main Historical Paris (1887 Monumentsin promenade and gardens Arts is however more famous at the universal exhibitions for designing the palaces of He was the architect of the Romanian Royal pavilion a Formigé, Jean he made ofGreece,Russian. facades thenational Swedish and of Paris Exhibition attheUniversal in1855; Paris Fine School in enteredBorn Arts the in1834, Bénar (1875 (1871 Egypt the survey of the Troesmis stronghold in Romania (1865) before embarking on a 15 years stay in 1 in one Serbian the at collaborated and 1867 in pavilion Romanian the Designed AmbroiseBaudry, Arch,BucharestLaw Faculty (1921); Palace, Bucharest (1935). Palac Hall (1945 Academy the Romanian for the Commission of member the Monuments, of Historical member Bucharest; in career whole his for worked 1899, in Paris School Arts Fine the from Graduated 1900. of exhibition the at kiosk Tobacco Romanian the of building the career, his of commission important first the received he age, years of 26 just At Antonescu, Petre

t h Uiesl xiiin f 89 Doea aciet f uh cif rhtc o the of architect chief Auch, of architect Diocesan 1889. of Exhibition Universal the at – d, Pauld,

Appendix: Short Resumes ofthe Main A 1877); Haichois Castle, Bretagne1877); Haichois (1888). e, Bucharest (1906); Crețulescu Palace, Bucharest; Sinaia Casino (1912); Triumphal (1912); Casino Sinaia Bucharest; Palace, Crețulescu (1906); Bucharest e, of Auteuil (1898), the square in front of Sacré Coeur Bisilica. Restored churches Restored Bisilica. Coeur Sacré of front in square the (1898), Auteuil of –

1886). Main works: Villa of Delort de Gléon, Cairo (1872); Gizeh palace, Cairo Cairo palace, Gizeh (1872); Cairo Gléon, de Delort of Villa works: Main 1886). - Camille

(1873

(1838 (1838 o Prs cif rhtc o Als mme o te omsin for Commission the of member Arles, of architect chief Paris, of s (1845 –

– 1965)

1906) - 1926)

–

1892), chief architect of the same commission. 1892), architect chief commission. ofthe same - Dame 119

- la Grande, Chauvigny, Poissy, Saint nd restaurant at the exhibition in 1900. He rchitects Mentioned in Text the

–

1965). Main Works: City Works: Main 1965).

Fine Fine 900. He drew He 900. and

- Jacques Jacques Liberal Liberal

in CEU eTD Collection Julien Guadet; founding member of the Romanian Architects Society (1891) and of the Romanian of class the at 1883 in Paris in School Arts Fine the from Graduatedinstallations. the for motifs and 1900. He1889 designed for of the first one Exhibitions the plan forUniversal a restaurant Paris and for t the for architects of delegation Romanian the of Part Mincu, Ion Restoration (1904 publishes when he returns to France a work on these churches. Main Works: Sacré Coeur Basilica goes restores1896 heand buil toAthens In (1901). Paris Monuments, Historical the for Commission the of architect chief and inspector of history (1899 of Paris Professor Conservatory, Daumet; Honoré of class the at architecture 1868, at the Fine Arts School, Paris (1891 in Pairs in School Arts Fine the from Graduated 1896. in Pantheon Greek the at restoration of works his for known mostly exhibition, 1889 published the he of which organisers the with among occasion was and 1900 in pavilion Greek the Designed Magne, Lucien high sch Main works: thermal establishments, casino and theatre in Vichy (1901 Bibescu, which house in Paris he designed. Graduated from the Fine Arts School in Paris in 1852. with friend was He installations”. the Collaborated at the Romanian display of 1889,being at the exhibition named “Chief architect of LeCoeur, Charles block of flats Paris. in Fine Arts School in Paris in 1877, fromgraduated 1853, Lafanège.Bornin with together 1889 in pavilion Serbian the Architectof AlfredLabouige, synagogue Belgrade. in (1908), other several houses and schools (1918 Constructions of Minister the at (1911 Professor Serbia in Economy the of Minister 1900. later and Belgrade in School in Polytechnic pavilion Serbian the design to Baudry Ambroise with Collaborated Kapetanov –

ools (Condorcet, Fénelon, Montaigne, Louis Fénelon,ools (Condorcet, Montaigne, 1916), the markets of Port of markets the 1916), s: multiple monumentss: multiple at Angerschurches and France. throughout ić, Milan

(1852

(1849

–

(1830 (1830

1912)

(1854 (1854

–

1916) –

1906) – –

1932)

96; eea isetr f h doea mnmns general monuments, diocesan the of inspector general 1916); –

from the class of Julien Guadet. He subsequently built several

1919). Main wo Main 1919). -

’rhtcue rnas u Siècle du Français L’Architecture Royal, Gros Royal,

the Romanian General Commissioner of the time, George time, the of Commissioner General Romanian the dings on the Acropolis, several Byzantine churches onthedings Byzantine Acropolis,and several 120 – -

Caillou, etc, several privat mansions in Paris. in mansions privat several etc, Caillou,

1916), professor rks: Belgrade fortress renovation, Belgrade renovation, fortress Belgrade rks: - Le - Grand).

of applied arts at the National he second, several decorative – (ai, 89. H 1889). (Paris, ,

1903), 1903), several Parisian

–

1912) and 1912) was e CEU eTD Collection Universa Fine the from Graduated constructions. the approving and supervising of charge in government, 1900 the at Worked Sterian, George mainly did He Daumet. Honoré of class the at 1891, restorationFrance works in FourgesBlandainville like thechurches and of in Paris in School Arts Fine the from Designed together with Henri Saladin the Bulgarian pavilion in Sevelinges, Henride New Paris; of Casino Paris; hotel, FigaroCircus, Paris. works: Main Guadet. Julien of class the at School a Greece of pavilion the Design AiméSauffroy, also a published monograph ofSidi ontheGreat Mosque Tunisia between 1882 and 1883 and publishes subsequently a Manual of Art Muslim (1907). He from the Fine Arts School in Paris in 1879, at the c at the world exhibitions the pavilions of Tunisia (1889 and 1900) and Morocco (1900). Graduated Designed with Henritogether de Sevelinges the Bulgarian pavilion in 1900. He further designed Henri Saladin, (1889); Metropolitan church, Târgoviște(1889 (1882 Iași church, ArgeșdeCurtea (1875 monastery The restorations:from Main monuments. Viollet Part of the Romanian delegation at the Parisian exhibitions of 1889 and 1900. Disciple of Eugène Nouy, André Lecomte de Church, Bucharest (1904 (1905 Galați Palace, (1900 Bucharest Gheorghieff, Cantacuzino, Ghica, of tombs the (1892), Sch Central House(1886), Lahovary works: Main Style. National Romanian the of creator the Considered 1912); (1895 parliament Romanian pro (1892); Architecture of School - le - u, e a rcmedd y i a a etrr o te otiprat Romanian important most the for restorer a as him by recommended was he Duc,

(

1851 (1860 - 1890); Saint Nicholas, Iași (1890 (1890 Iași Nicholas, Saint 1890); ool for Girls, Bucharest (1890), The (1890), Bucharest Girls, for ool –

– 1906). Restoration works: Monteoru House (1887 House Monteoru works: Restoration 1906). –

1923)

– 1936)

(1844 1910). –

89; rsdn o te oain rhtcs oit (1903 Society Architects Romanian the of President 1899); t Paris Universal Exhibition of 1889. Studied in the Fine Arts Arts Fine the in Studied 1889. of Exhibition Universal Paris t Ehbtos s h mi rpeettv o te Romanian the of representative main the as Exhibitions l - 1914)

fessor at the mentioned school (1898 school mentioned the at fessor

121 –

1893).

lass of Honoré Daumet. He did a study trip in –

- 1904); Saint Dmitry church, Craiova Craiova church, Dmitry Saint 1904); Buffet Uqba, Tunisia. 1900. Born in 1860, he graduated

form Kisselef Road, Bucharest Road, Kisselef form – –

–

1904), Administrativ 1904), the in Deputy 1912); -

188), Stavropole 188), 1880); 1880); Trei IerarhiTrei os –

CEU eTD Collection (1915 (1905 Architects) and Engineers Bulgarian of Association the of (Journal BIAD na Spisanie journals the of editor Chief Architects. and Engineers Freelance of B Association the of President 1895. in Stuttgart of University the at architect of diploma his One of the most important figures in Bulgarian architecture after the turn of the century. Obtains Mladenov Anton Torniov, main works: from Casino Municipal Moldova Slănic The (1894), (1905 Bucharest Church, Bucur (1897), (1901); main restorations: The National Theatre (1895), the vice Church Bărbătescu Vechi, Bucharest monuments; historical of restoration and Historical Monuments, Bucharest (1891); in 1992 worked on the first law regarding conservation foundi Arts School in Paris in 1885; in 1889 finished a study on the restoration of historical monuments; lain nier ad rhtcs sne 87. rsdno te no o te Bulgarian the of Union the Presidentof 1897). (since Architects and Engineers ulgarian - ng member of the Romanian Architects Society (1891) and of the of and (1891) Society Architects Romanian the of member ng 1934).

(1868 –

1942) –

1907), Cașin Monastery, Bucharest (1920 Bucharest Monastery, Cașin 1907), 122 - rsdn o te oain Archite Romanian the of president

–

1908) and "T and 1908) atre,Bacău (1927).

Commission for the for Commission echnical Tribune" echnical

cts Society Society cts –

1925); CEU eTD Collection

             

iue : uta e re Mnsey 1t cnuy, re, Romania Archives Argeș,France, deF/12/11910 Nationales Paris, century), Figurethe on 3:(first (16th Monastery section:Orsay Museum, Documentation Argeș Figure 1867. Paris, Pavilion, 2:RomanianNational de Curtea http://www.idealtravel.ro/imagini 1: Figure ArchivesFrance, de F,12,4223 Nationales Paris, architectsand 1900. Sevelinges, Saladin Paris, wate in Drawing 14: Figure utopiques Mathieu, Caroline 1900. Paris, (right), façade lateral a and (left) 1900. façade front Restaurant, Romanian 13: Figure de Universelle Le journal 190 14octobre petit Exposition Figure 1900: Paris, Pavilion, 12:RomanianNational Washington: Art, de of http://www.nga.gov/content/dam/ngaweb/features/slideshows/Exposition Gallery National Figure 190 Paris, Pavilion, National 11:Serbian http://exposition pavilion. 1900. Paris, Pavilion, National Greece 10: Figure L'expos 1889 Paris, Figure Pavilion, 9:Greek National / L’Exposition de Paris (1889), (Paris, 1889) Gravuri Figure 1889. Paris, Pavilion, National 8:Serbian și http://www.flickr.com/photos/punkmemory/ Desene de Figure 7:Rom Cabinetul Moniteur des Architectes României, Figurerestaurant Universal 6:Theat Romanian the Paris 1889 Exhibition al http://romaniaistorica.ro/2012/03/01/ion Național Muzeul Figure“Bufet”. 5:The Romanian http://prints.encor the and (left) pavilion Greek the with Romania restaurantParis, (down), 1889 press French the from Illustrations : 4 Figure - 1900/serbie.jpg ition universelleition de 1889

(Paris,d’Orsay, Muséeand 42. 2007), 41 List List and Sources Figuresof

anian inthe mainGallery section Diverse 1889 Paris, of Products, - universelle e

- editions.com/500/0/pavilion

right) Greekright) onNation’s façade street,1878. national Paris, , 1890,page 3. Les Expositions universelles a Paris: architectures réelles ou réelles architectures Paris: a universelles Expositions Les - rcolours of the Bulgarian National Pavilion, signed by the by signed Pavilion, National Bulgarian the of rcolours paris 0 , (Paris, 105. 1889),

-

1900.com/Image:BAL04PAV27A.jpg 123

- mincu Exposition universelle 1867Paris

- - 0. arhitect

of

- Behind, the domes of the Romanian the of domes the Behind,

greece

- 1852 - paris - 1912/ - exposition

-

Universelle , Album. - 1889.jpg

- CEU eTD Collection materials:Published Archives:         

Bibescu, George, 1890. comitetului national roman, de la 20 iulie 1888 la 20 martie 1890 Gheorghe. Bibesco, 1889. Bibesco, Georges, Wallachia], arts and their in culture Ber III,Ateneul vol Bucharest, 1872inOpere 17decembrie complete, 1908. Român, Artele dinRomâniaîn periodul preistoric VARIA 1 Library Academic Romanian Archivesof ForeignAffairs theMinistry of Nouy. duLecomte Andre Formigé, Camille Jean Mincu, Ion Saladin, Henri Baudry, Ambroise 187 1867, of Exhibitions Universal d’Orsay Musee F/12/4242 F/12/308 Archives de France Nationales

indei, Dimitrie I., „Despre arte şi despre cultura lor în Ţara Românească” [About the [About Românească”Ţara în lor cultura despre şi arteI., „Despre Dimitrie indei,

9

– ; F/12/4262 ;

148.

F/12/3090 , Documentary Section, boxes concerning foreign countries at the Paris the at countries foreign concerning boxes Section, Documentary ,

La RoumanieLa avant Notice Notice sur la Roumanie. Productions xoiina nvraa i Prs 1889. Paris, din universala Expositiunea Bibliography Primary sources ; F/12/4264

F/12/3491 ; , Buchares , , Paris. Folders

; F/12/4270 Analele

F/12/3493 ; -

, 89 10; oe cnenn te architects the concerning boxes 1900; 1889, 8, pendant

124 t, Manuscript Cabinet, Fond George Bibescu, XI Bibescu, George Fond Cabinet, Manuscript t, [Arts from[Arts Romaniain thePrehistoric Period],

, Bucharest, 281. Culturale, Paris, Vol.

I/5 (1890),

- :

apres

; F/12/5223

F/12/3462 ; , (Paris, 1890)

- Industries

;

F/12/3463 ; aot epe lucrarile despre Raport , Bucharest: F. Gobl fii, , J. Kugelmann, Paris,

F/12/4223 ;

; CEU eTD Collection

                    

Idieru, Nicolae, Nicolae, Idieru, 1885. Armand. Gibert, Librairie construction de la Edmond, Delaire, Delaire, E., 1890. Brincourt, Maurice, 1901. Louis, Rousselet, 1901. Paris 1900, de Universelle L'Exposition Louis, Rousselet, Petrașcu Exposition1900 Paris universală dinParis C. Dimitrie Ollănescu, Ollănescu, DimitrieC. 1868. pays, ce dans travail du l'histoire sur notice en d'une Paris, et 1867, de universelle l'exposition à roumaine section la dans exposés produits des spécia catalogue du suivi commerciale, et industrielle rurale, économie son de vue de Aurelian, Petre Alexandru, Odobescu, Odobescu, Alexandru, Officiel, Serbie,lade royal Pavilion concernantle Notice Direction Opere, Culture], of theRomanian 1973. « Titu, Maiorescu, Lucien.Magne, illustrée L'Exposition RueLa etBerge des la Nations de Exposants RueLa etBerge des la Nations de de laSeine larive gauche des Catalogue 1900. de ImprimerieLasnier, 1900. E. l'Exposition à Roumanie La Kogălniceanu, Mi regionallocal şi (Bucharest:Romania], Hajdu, Joseph Gobl,1889inAda including places, the all and times the all from Rumânia Music Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, inclusiv ţările, toate din şi timpurile toate

, Nicolae, ImprimeriesLemercier Les architectes éléves Beauxde l’Ecole Les architectes Arts des L’Architecture Francais Siecle du , unpublished, 2014. Quelques jours en Serbie et a Constantinople a et Serbie en jours Quelques Istoria artelor frumoase. artelor Istoria hail, "Opere hail,

Les architectes élèves de l'Ecole des Beaux des l'Ecole de élèves architectes Les Ioan Mincu Ioan 'xoiin nvrel d 1900 de Universelle L'Exposition În contra direcției de astăzi ȋn cultura română cultura ȋn astăzi de direcției contra În L’Expositi

(1900), Bucharest:1901. Socecu, , tom II,, tom 1900. , Paris: Hachette, 1900. Opere complete Notice Roumanie1900 surla en aot eea aur priiăi Rmne l Exposiția la României participării asupra general Raport moderne, 1907).

”, , (Bucharest: Cultura națională, 1928). on Universelle 1889, de , Paris, 1900 , Paris,

Scrieri istorice

la rive gauche de laSeinela rive gauche

125 , vol2,Bucharest Notice sur la Roumanie: la sur Notice

Architectura, sculptura, pictura, musica din musica pictura, sculptura, Architectura,

, 1946. ,

Volume annexe du CatalogueGeneraldu annexe Volume , Paris, 1889. , Paris: Librairie Hachette & Cie, Cie, & Hachette Librairie Paris: ,

Paris : Librairie de FirminLibrairie Paris de : [The [The Paris, 1900.

: Minerva, 1906. : Minerva, Arhitectul Ion Mincu în context Arhitectul încontext IonMincu

, Paris, 1907 : Librairie Hachette & Cie, Cie, & Hachette Librairie :

(Melun, 1901). Melun, 1901. Paris: Librairie A. Franck, A. Librairie Paris: itr o te ie Arts. Fine the of History - ,

Arts, 1793 Arts,

principalement au point point au principalement Mars

»

[Against the Current the [Against

- Prs Nouvelle Paris: . Avril 1885 Avril

-

1907

, (Paris , - , Paris, , Didot,

l : CEU eTD Collection Newspapers (in chronological                       

ygpuo, nra (99 i Nklo Gils “h cuc o Kpiae in Kapnikarea of church “The Athens: Remarks history, onits and typology Gkioles, form”, Nikolaos in (1929) Andreas Xyngopoulos, L.in A Odobescu, România în artelor Viitorul (Iassi: 1889). Sterian, George, de 1900 Silvestre, A “La de 190 Roumanie a l’Exposition August 1899. Roumanie”, La 1900; de “L'exposition 1889. in céramique” La 1889. de universelle “Exposition L' Revue DeuxMondes des Le Menestrel, du PetitGuide Journal Bleu duFigaroet Figaro Moniteur des Architectes Figaro Sections étrangeres: RenseignementsGénéraux Exposition Universelle de Internationale 1889 catalogue desstatistiques, exposants Mansolas, Blanc, Charles, Lamarre, Queux Clovis, de St delaRepubliqueJournal official Francaise “L’architecture au Champs Administrative de Paul Dupont,1868. (coord.), Michel Chevalier, Ducuing,François, roumaine”, „L’Eglise in Exposition chez soi

- - Exposition 1889 Expo , Paris:1900. Mericant, Alexandros, Alexandros, rmand, sition 1889 sition

1889. Les Beaux Despre restaurarea monumentelor istorice în strainatate si în România Opere Guide ArmandSilvestreGuide de et Paris deses environs et del'Exposition

, Paris, 1889. order): . , Boussod, Paris., (1889).& Valadon Co., La Grèce à l'exposition universelle de Paris en 1878, notions notions 1878, en Paris de universelle l'exposition à Grèce La , tome 94,Paris, 1889. ,

, 1890. , (Bucharest: pentru literatură1955). Editurastat de șiartă, - - Arts a l’Exposition universelleArts a de 1878 de [The Future of t of Future [The -

- Hilaire, Mars”,

aprs u uy international jury du Rapports

0”, , Athens, 1878.

Gazette des Bea Gazette des 126 La Grèce et l'Exposition de 1878 l'Exposition GrèceLa et L’independance roumaine ora d eas pltqe e litteraires et politiques debats, de Journal , Paris

, May 3, 1878. , May L'Exposition illustrée,L'Exposition he Arts in Romania], Paris, 17 March 1851 1851 March 17 Paris, Romania], in Arts he , Paris, 1889. , Paris,

, Paris: 1889 , Paris: : Figaro journal, Petit 1889.

Zograf a osrcin moderne Construction La ux Arts

No. 31, (2006) 15 No. 31,(2006) , Paris, 1878.

, Paris, 1878. , Paris, (ai: Imprimerie (Paris: ,

, 16 April 1899 , 16April tom I, tom 1867. , Paris, 1878.

-

27. , 8 June June 8 ,

, 29 ,

, CEU eTD Collection

                 

Le Petit Journaldudimanche, Journal des Debats Quantin, Albert. litteraires l de Pavillon Le Universelle. "L'Exposition Videlo, Guide Illustréde BonMarché LeL’ExpositionQuantin, duSiècle, Albert, Moderne, 1900. Monde Paris, CambridgeUniversity Press, 2000; Eleni. Bastéa, Balkanologie Pamela Ballinger, a Pa Bacha, Myriam, Beatrice de Andia and Jean Empire aftermath, 1867 andits Anthony. Alofsin, “ St Bojan. Aleksov, 1993. Olmo. Carlo and Linda Aimone, Parigramme, 2006. Ageorges, Sylvain. Europe inFrance, 1810 "Euro Ezequiel. Adamovsky, des Beaux l’architecture”, : 1900 de universelle l’Exposition à Arts “Les Lucien. Magne, no. 5,(1900). 19 na kraia v izlozhba svetskata “Vse Anton. Tornyov, Exposition1900 Paris, .

Sava ris Deris 1855a1937

Paris, November1896.

on , 30March 1900. - Arts

Vračar Belgrade”, Hill in ,

Vol. III,Vol. 1999; n°2, , vol.23,(1900), 383 h Ceto o Mdr Ahn: lnig h My the Planning Athens: Modern of Creation The L’Exposition duSiècle L’Exposition . “Definitional Dilemmas “Definitional .

hn ulig sek acietr a lnug i te Habsburg the in language as architecture speak: buildings When , 20 mai 1900 , 20 Sur les traces des Expositions Universelles.

, Annual rep – , Paris: Action Artistique de laVille de Paris, 2005. Nationalism 1880." 591 History The ofModern 77.3(2005): Journal SecondaryLiterat

: ‐

Orientalism and the Making of the Concept of Eastern Eastern of Concept the of Making the and Orientalism October 14, October 1900. L’Exposition et Paris - 1933

Les expositions universelles: 1851 universelles: expositions Les

ort.

-

396. , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006. , Chicago: UniversityPress, ofChicago

in Balkanologie VII Balkanologie 127

, Le, Moderne, 1900. Monde Paris, Construction

-

: Southeastern Europe as ”Culture Area” ”Culture as Europe Southeastern : Pierre Babelon. ure Grece" a

, (Paris, 1900). The :

ora d dbt, oiius et politiques debats, de Journal (2), 2003, 47 (2), - to stoletie”, to Les Expositions Universelles

eoil hrh of Church Memorial Paris Paris 1855

- - 72, 5 Spisanie na BIAD na Spisanie 1900, th

6.

Cambridge: , –

Belin, Paris, 1937 - Gazette 628. , Pari

?”, ?”,

s: , CEU eTD Collection

                 

fragmentation eds. Savić Obrad and I., Dušan Bjelić, Angeles Birēs,Manos G. and Marō Kardamitsē Centuries Ránki. György and Iván Tibor Berend, Anthropology ȋn Today, 1991), pp.5 Vol. 7,No.3(Jun., Identity” National and Exhibitions „International Burton. Benedict, und Fremden in den zeitgenössischen publizistischen Debatten über die Ausstelung”, in in Ausstelung”, die über Debatten publizistischen zeitgenössischen den in Fremden und Dobreva, Doroteja, “Bulgarien au der Pariser Weltausstellung 1900 During the Nineteenth Century Dimitrije. Djordjevic, 4, (Budapest: (1770 Europe Southeast and Central in Identity Collective of Discourses et les cultures extra proclamée”, modernité et Demeulenaere » indigène « pittoresque Diacronie entre latine d’Amérique pays Demeulenaere (2003). Decléty, Lorraine. “L'architecte orientaliste”, 2006. PUPS, Hamon, Françoise Foucart, Bruno in Universal Co Paris the at “Greece in1878”, Exhibition Mavrogonatou. Georgia and Konstantinos Chatzis, World’s Fairs, Ҫ Caffé, Mihail, http://www.ziaruldebacau.ro/un 2014. romanesti 4, May accessed [A Sterian” Great Name George of Ro romanesti: arhitecturii al nume mare “Un Dan. Romulus Busnea, Burke, Peter. Brettel, Richard. Implications”, Political Its Architectural Historians and Architecture Serbian in Style National a of Creation The Architecture: and “Nationalism Pantelić. Bratislav lk Zeynep. elik, lonas, Vassilis. « lonas, Vassilis.

: J. Paul Getty: J. Museum, 2004. . (Budapest: Akademiai Kiado,1977). - , No. 18, forthcoming (2014)., No.18,forthcoming george

Varieties of cultural history cultural Varieties of CEU Press, 2006

. MIT 2002. Press, - - Arhitectul Ion Mincu Arhitectul Douyè les nationale: image et internationales “Expositions Christiane. Douyère, Berkley: ipaig h Oin: Arch Orient: the Displaying Modern Art1851 Modern - manian manian Architecture: George Sterian], sterian -

européennes, 1855 France, La cathedrale d’Athenes et la naissance dustyle ˮgreco Quaderns del’Enginyeria d’Història re, Christiane. re, toa Hrtg Vru Mdriain Smiss n Serbia in Symbiosis Modernization: Versus Heritage Ottoman

, Vol.56,No.1(1997), 16 University CaliforniaPress, 1992. of

, Serbian Vol.13,No.1,(1999), Studies, 29 –

2009); - 1929 , (Bucharest: Editura Științifică, 1960). Științifică, , (Bucharest: Editura Exotiques expositions: lex expositions universelles expositions lex expositions: Exotiques - 128

Adamē. ’rhtcue eiiue u Ie siecle XIXe au religieuse L’architecture -

Balkan as metaphor: between globalization an globalization between metaphor: as Balkan , Oxford: Oxford University Oxford , Oxford: 1999. Press, 9.

, Cornell University 1997. Press,

at eta Erp: n h 1t ad 20th and 19th the in Europe: central East

Livraisons d'histoire Livraisons tcue f sa a Nineteenth at Islam of itecture Neoclassical Neoclassical architecture in Greece - 1937 - 41 , Paris .

Ziarul Ziarul de Bacău , Vol8,(2012). ora o te oit of Society the of Journal

: Archives 2010. nationales, -

mare de l'architecture - . Bilder von Eigenem nume , April 19, 2011, - -

al 1945),

- – - byzantinˮ arhitecturii

59; - Century

Paris: ,

Vol. 1 Vol. . n°5, , Los

», d - -

CEU eTD Collection

               

lmn, . . “tes Cntniol, sabl Ubn aaim ad NineteenthIdentity”,Century Nationl Greek: and Paradigms Urban Istanbul: Constantinople, “Athens, E., K. Fleming, University RochesterPress, R of Annegret. Fauser, speaking Greeks”, Haris. Exertzoglou, (eds). Roth, Europa Klaus Gehl, Katerina Popov, Petar historiographical problems concerning the Ottoman cultural heritage in the Balkans”, Balkans”, Middle EasternStudies the and in heritage interpretative cultural Of Ottoman the Stone': concerning problems in historiographical 'Legacy a “De/constructing Maximilian. Hartmuth, GreeceImagination in Yannis. Hamilakis, Hajdu, Ada. i Ada. Hajdu, Legacy inSouth Hajdarpašić, Edin. “Out of the Ruins of the Ottoman Empire: Reflections on the Ottoman and Nati Balkans: the OttomanEmpire TheGreat Powers, eds. Pichler. Robert and Clayer, Nathalie Hannes. Grandits, Haven UniversityLondon: Yale and 1998. Press, Ve Goldsworthy, Greek “non the and Community Language, Boundaries: “Shifting Haris. Exertzoglou, 1994). Century”, 19th the of End the at Athens of a Consciousness New A History: Recent and “Medieval Nasia. Giakovaki, europee, 1851 Geppert, Alexander C.T. Palgrave 2010. Macmillan, T. C. Alexander Geppert, andpracticehistory architecture; between in regional and national = pratique et histoire architecture;entre în Gavris, Mihaela si Ana Maria Zahariade. Hudson, 2000. Adrian. Forty, The American review historical histo Balkan and Balkans, the "Orientalism, Elisabeth. Katherine Fleming, n Local unpublished, 2014.n andRegional Context], amn oec, on Tooec (eds.), Teodorescu Ioana Popescu, Carmen - speaking Greeks” - Vorstellungen inBulgarien(1850 Art Nouveau inRomania Art Nouveau Arhitectul Ion Mincu în context local şi regional şi local context în Mincu Ion Arhitectul -

Words and buildings, A vocabulary of Modern Architecture Modern of vocabulary A buildings, and Words 2000 - eastern Europe”,eastern sna.

Historein, 1,(1999) vol. 75 uia Ecutr a te 89 ai Wrds Fair World’s Paris 1889 the at Encounters Musical , ”Memoria e Ricerca”, No. 17, (2004).”Memoria e Ricerca”, No.17, , , Bucharest:Simetria, 2002. hfig onais Lnug, omnt ad h “non the and Community Language, Boundaries: Shifting h Nto ad t Ris Atqiy Acaooy ad National and Archaeology, Antiquity, Ruins: its and Nation The

, Oxford: Oxford University Oxford Oxford: , Pres Inventing Ruritania: The Imperialism of the Imagination, Imagination, the of Imperialism The Ruritania: Inventing , Vol.44,No.5(2008), 695 , Città Città brevi: storia, storiografia e teoria delle pratiche espositive

Historein Fleeting Cities: imperial expositions in fin in expositions imperial Cities: Fleeting

105.4 (2000): 1218 ochester, 2005. New Perspectives onTurkeyNew Perspectives Middle Eastern Studies Eastern Middle , vol.1,(1999), 75 , NoiMedia Bucharest, Print, 2013. 129 The The Neo -

1945 Archaeology of the City of Athens of City the of Archaeology - 92. 92. ), Berlin:Lit), Verlag, 200

- Genius loci: national et régional en régional et national loci: Genius romanain style: elements of language,

– - 1233. Europa? Fremdes 713.

- 92; s, 2007,72.

, 44:5,(2008), 715

on

Conflicting Loyalties in the in Loyalties Conflicting - building [The Architect Ion Mincu Ion Architect [The , Vol. 22, (2000), 1 , Vol.22,(2000),

- , IBTauris, 2011. de ebble und Selbsbilder 7, 101 7,

- siècl , Thames and Thames , bout the City the bout Rochester: , - 734. riography." e Europe e - , (Atena: , 152. - Greek -

24. New

- - - ,

CEU eTD Collection

              

Bucharest:ICR, 2006. şi XX, Ioan, (ed.). Augustin in Fountain] brâncoveneşti „Fântâna”[The Ioana. Iancovescu, 15 on the "De Maximilia Hartmuth, Popescu, Ioana Teodorescu (eds.), L’Exposit a e Troesmis a Baudry Ambroise Leconte, Marie Laure Crosnier 1906 Leconte, M. du 16octobre 1996 (Paris: Les dossiers du musée d'Orsay, Réunion des musées nationaux, 1996) [exposition Le Cœur, Marc. writing Ludmilla. Kostova, culture inpost Kiossev Athens, Atena 1994.URL: http://www.eie.gr/archaeologia/En/chapter_more_9.aspx Greece of Kingdom the of capital to Jubilee Empire Bucharest 1906 the Leonidas. Kallivretakis, and Style' 'National Exhibition”, “Romanian Shona. Kallestrup, 2006) Expression National for Search the of Aspects Shona, Kallestrup, Components], Paris. fromBibescu George Prince the of residence artistice.”[The Componente Alexan Juvara, Perspectives, (eds.), Heinz and Kocka Jürgen in History." Comparative of Perspectives and Heinz and Kocka Jürgen states: 1804 Jelavich. B. Barbara and Charles, Jelavich, Io n Mincu. Desenede șiproiecte arhitectură, –

33. , Paris: Somogy, 1998.

[French Influences in Architecture and Art of Romania in 19 Comparative and Transnational History. Transnational and Comparative . Vol. Aesne, Nts n self on ‘Notes Aleksander, ,

- Ottomanisation" Ottomanisation" of Balkan Cityscapes, - -

Journal ofDesign History L. etCrosnier M. Volait 1920

4. Universitetsko izd New York and Berghahn, Oxford: New York 2009.

- I. Jud I. Monumentul XI communist Europe communist r Ciia. Rșdna rnieu Gog Bbsu e a Paris. la de Bibescu George Principelui “Reședința Chiliman. dra Charles Le Cœur (1830 , Univof Washington Press, 1986. Art and Design in Romania 1866 Romania in Design and Art - eţul Vâlcea eţul ae o te eihr: h Blas n ieenh etr British century nineteenth in Balkans the periphery: the of Tales

n. Influenţe franceze în arhitectura şi arta dinRomâniasecolelor franceze înarhitecturaarta XIX şi Influenţe 5 jan

Negotiating Tradition and Ambition: A Comparative Pespective Comparative A Ambition: and Tradition Negotiating Athens in the 19th century: From regional town of the Ottoman the of town regional From century: 19th the in Athens - Gerhard Haupt. "Comparison and Be and "Comparison Haupt. Gerhard vier 1997].

, (Iași:, 2009). , , (Bucharest: UNArte,Bucureşti, 2008). ”Du savoir archeologique a la reconstruction de fantaisie:

, ed. B. Pejic and D. Elliott, Stockholm: D.Elliott, , ed. B.and 1999. Pejic - Genius Genius loci: national et vo Sv. sv.Kirilvo Sv. 1997. iMetodii, . L'Égypte d'un architecte : Baudry Ambroise 1838

- 130 ooiig utrs, in cultures’, colonising , Vol.15,(2002), 147 - 1906), 1906), architecte et premier amateur de Renoir

ion universelle de 1867” a Paris, a 1867” de universelle ion

h etbihet f h Bla national Balkan the of establishment The MNAR, 2009 MNAR, Cneec Acaooy f h Ct of City the of Archaeology Conference , , (New York: Columbia University Press, Press, University Columbia York: (New ,

Central European Approaches and New Central European andNew Approaches Ethnologia Balkanica, No. 10, (2006),

– eetru pcuio murale picturilor Repertoriul

1927. L 1927.

régional en architecture; entre – - 162.

2010; yond: Traditions, Scope, Traditions, yond: fe te al At and Art wall: the After ocal and International and ocal

th

and 20

- Gerhard Haupt Haupt Gerhard th

Centuries], in

Carmen Artistic

- ,

CEU eTD Collection

             

Baudry, 1838 Leconte, Marie Bucharest: Simetria, 2002. practice, and history between architecture; in regional and national = pratique et histoire IoanaPopescu, (eds.). Teodorescu national loci: Genius etrégional enarchitecture; entre Ba Ambroise Leconte, Marie Laure Crosnier. “Du savoir archeologique a la reconstruction de fantaisie: Bucureşti: (Simetria, 2002). histoire et pratique = national and regional in architecture; between history and practice of Michigan Press, 1996); McDonalds, Terrence J. Na Mathieu, Caroline. 1. Bibliothèque 2000. Dialogue, Markovich, G. Slobodan Marie catalogue desstatistiques, exposants Alexandros. Mansolas, 1855 and1867 Patricia. Mainardi, 12.03.2012. Quarterly, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7063/is_n2_v28/ai_n28650617/ European D MacKenzie, (2003), 55 “L’architecteorientaliste”,LorraineDecléty, National Culturesinthe19thCentury” in Ro “The Bjarne, Stoklund, Culture of Nationalization “The Orvar. Lofgren, Modernity Katerina(ed). Zacharia, in Liakos, Antonis. “Hellenism and the Making of Modern Greece: Time, Langua Modernity (Ed Katerina Zacharia, in Liakos, Antonis, “Hellenism an Leprun, Sylviane. tionaux, 1889. tionaux, - Laure,“Oriental - , Aldershot: 201 Ashgate, 2008, , Aldershot, 2008. Ashgate, 65.

udry a Troesmis e a L’Exposition universelle de 1867 a Paris”, in Carmen in Paris”, a 1867 de universelle L’Exposition a e Troesmis a udry -

1906 , London,, Bath Press, 1989. - vd ” avid. Laure Crosnier and Mercedes Volait.

Le Théâtre des coloniesLe Théâtre

La La Tour Eiffel et l’Exposition Universelle , Paris: Somogy 1998. , Paris: d'art, Editions Art and politic and Art eba s idot n te uolv da 1804 idea, Yugoslav the and Piedmont as Serbia ou colonial?” inVolaid(ed.), ou colonial?” La Grèce à l'exposition universelle de Paris en 1878, notions notions 1878, en Paris de universelle l'exposition à Grèce La The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences British perceptionsBritish Serbia of theBalkans and .). Hellenisms. Culture, Identity and ethnicity from Antiquity to Antiquity from ethnicity and Identity Culture, Hellenisms..).

Hellenisms. Culture, Identity and ethnicity from Antiquity to Antiquity from ethnicity and Identity Culture, Hellenisms.

e f h Itrainl xiiin i te osrcin of Construction the in Exhibitions International the of le at uoen Quarterly European East d the Making of Modern Greece: Time, Language, Space”

s of the second empire second the of s , (Athens, 1878).

131 Ethnologia Europae Ethnologia - , Paris: 1986.

236 Livraisons d'histoire de l'architecturede d'histoire Livraisons

”, Ethnologia Europae Ethnologia ”, L'Egypte L'Egypte d'un Architecte: Ambroise

L'orientalism

. The Universal Expositions of Expositions Universal The , Paris: Réunion des Musées Vl 2, ( 28, Vol. , , Vol.24(1994)

(Michigan: (Michigan: University .

: . Vol 19, (1989). 19, Vol . 1903 accessed - 1914”, - 1906 ge, Space”

1994). 1994).

. Vol. , n°5, , East East on ,

CEU eTD Collection

                

08 acse My 0 2014 10, May Moravanszky, History Exhibiton”, as World accessed “The Timothy. Mitchell, History, “ Timothy. Mitchell, http://www.monumenteiasi.ro/monument_de_arhitectura.php?id=314 2008. Ierarhi” Trei Sfinții “Mânăstirea Cătălina. Mihalache, monuments historiques en Roumanie Carmen. Popescu, des l’écoute Romanian Case” à l’architecture : Popescu, Carmen. „Balkan Orientalism: Geopolitics and Self l’identité de patrimoine nationalismes”, “Un Carmen. Popescu, 2009), 253 (ed.),Mercedes et Volait Oulebsir Nabila in roumain“, cas le et travers géopolitique à Lecture entre identitaires. : quêtes balkanique l’orientalisme de paradoxe “Le Carmen. Popescu, I Influence Spirit] onthePublic Eliade, Pompiliu Artistique Ville Paris, 2005. and Béatri Bacha, Myriam Babelon, Pierre Jean in 1900, de Universelle l’Exposition Two Gilles. Plum, First the in Balkans the Centuries: TheCase ofSerbia”, Reshaping european Identities. and “Designing Bratislav. articulations Pantelić, neoclassical ideal: the modernities”, ”Colonizing Neni. Panourgiá, european and articulations august 2004. neoclassical ideal: the modernities “Colonizing Neni. Panourgiá, i the modernities, Angelaki”, “Colonizing Neni. Panourgiá, Revival House”, Neuburger Mary. “Housing the Nation: Facades and Furnishings in the Bulgaro alIIINapoleon l’art islamique tunisien” inVolait,eds. Myriam Bacha. Architecture, 1867 , Vol.31,No.2,(1989)

Vol. 31, No. 2, (1989), 217 Vol. 31,No.2,(1989), ce de Andia, - 272. ”

, ’retlseacietrlete mgnie e savoirs et imaginaires entre architectural L’Orientalisme Angelaki, Journal ofthe TheoreticalAngelaki, Humanities Journal

neai Junl f h theoretica the of Journal Angelaki, - Akos Études balkaniques “ lea și Principatele Române lea șiPrincipatele

Centropa Henri Henri Saladin (1851 în Influenţa franceză asupra spiritului public în România în public spiritului asupra franceză Influenţa – 1 Centropa nr Lcme u oy (1844 Nouy du Lecomte André . 918, 918, h Wrd s Exhibiton” as World The Les Les expositions universelles à Paris de 1855 à 1937 optn vsos Ashtc neto i Cnrl European Central in Invention Aesthetic visions. Competing Journal ofthe theoretical humanities Cambridge, MIT Press, 1998. MA: , no.2,(2008), 147

, no.2,(2008). .

- Journal ofDesign History II,Bucharest, Univers, , no.12,2005 - , (Paris: Société de l'histoire de l'art français, 1998).. 236. – 132 el nolsia atcltos n European and articulations neoclassical deal:

L'orientalisme 1923), 1923), Un architecte “Beaux

, Bucharest:of Arts,, National 2009. Museum

–

159; 159; ,

oprtv Suis n oit and Society in Studies Comparative a Society in Studies Comparative humanities l

. , Monumente de Arhitectură de Monumente ,

– 1982.

94 e l rsarto des restauration la et 1914) , Vol. 20, (2007). , Vol.20,(2007). - Invention: A Reading of the

, vol.9,(2004).

, vol.9,no.2,(2004). , volume 9, number 2, 2, number 9, volume , - Arts” promoteur de

, (Paris: , , Paris , [The French [The ,

- Ottoman Ottoman

: Action

Picard, , Iași, ,

nd

CEU eTD Collection

              

amn Dte, n Pee Pa. eds. Plas. Pieter and Detrez, Raymond semiotic organization its Preziosi, Donald, présentât caractérisant une décoration votre nettement architecture plus nationale”. Bucharest: Editura șiEnciclopedică, Științifică 1900. George. Potra, l’architecture Carmen. Popescu, Berkeley:California UniversityPress, of 1996 Tenorio. Mauricio Trillo, Berkeley:California UniversityPress, of 1996. Tenorio History Quarterly 1890 History, in “Regionalism Eric. Storm, 2002 Century 20th Early the National During and Regional i and 19th the of End the at Bulgaria Iokimov. Petar Ljubinka, Stoilova, eds. Practice and History Between Architecture in Regional and National the at Bulgaria inIdentifiablyArchitecture Iokimov. National for Ljubinka,“TheSearch Stoilova, Petar Benjamins PublishingAmsterdam: John Company, 2004. (eds.) Neubauer John Cor Marcel in Paris” Romanian of Faces Manifold “The Monica. Spiridon, StyleLos Angeles: 1989. University Press, ofCalifornia L. Debora Silverman, de 1889, 1889” in Schrœder 2010b Inst Mainz: Wolfgang Schmale, Studies, Volume and IdentityNational inOttoman Balkan Society Mil Rum “From Victor. Roudometof, convergencevs. divergence. CarmenIoana Popescu și Teodorescu,(Bucharest:Simetria, 2002. .

- en [2014 - rlo Maurici. Trillo, Le Mouvement social No. 149, (1989), 15 No. 149,(1989), - Gudehus, Brigitte. ”Les grandes puissances devant l'Exposition universelle deuniverselle l'Exposition devant puissances grandes”Les Brigitte. Gudehus, tt o Erpa Hsoy 21. R: http://www.ieg URL: 2010. History, European of itute . 1881 -

i Bucu Din n o te 9h n Drn te al 2t Cnuy in Century” 20th Early the During and 19th the of End 04 16, 1998

Architecture, language and meaning: th , Vol.33(2003), 251 - - 21]. 21]. Poess f Europeanization of Processes . 1945 e tl ntoa Ruan Cntur ue n une Construire Roumain. national style Le History of the Literary Cultures of East of Cultures Literary the of History r Nueui Fin in Nouveau Art n Architecture Between History and Practice Bucharest: Simetria,

, Hague: 1979. Publishers, Mouton

, 19. , Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes and Simetria, 2004. eti e ieri de reștii eio t h Wrds ar: Craft Fairs: World's the at Mexico eio t h Wrds ar: rfig Mdr Nation Modern a Crafting Fairs: World's the at Mexico

(Peter Lang, (Peter 2005). - 24.

: Mise en Scène et Vulgarisation: L'Exposition

The Search for Identifiably National Architecture in Architecture National Identifiably for Search The let to Greek Nation: Enlightenment,SecularizationGreek Nation: to let 133 - Vl 1 Vol. , 267. eeoig utrl dniy n h Balkans: the in identity cultural Developing

-

de - 1945: The Cultural Approach”, Cultural The 1945: . -

Siecle France Siecle -

[rm h Bcaet f Yesterday], of Bucharest the [From 2

1453 , European History Online (EGO), (EGO), Online History European ,

– 1821”,

e origins of the built world and

: Politics, Psychology and and Psychology Politics, : Journal of Modern Greek - Central Europe Central n a oen Nation Modern a ing - , Bucharest, 2002, Bucharest, ,

ego.eu/schmalew

to à travers à ation n eis Loci. Genius in eis Loci Genius nis Universelle - European Pope and Pope , Vol. 2, Vol. ,

- , , .

CEU eTD Collection

             

ina IM uir iiig elw' ofrne, o. 1 (2006). 21, Vol. Conferences, 1994. Fellows' Visiting Jean Vigato, Junior http://www.iwm.at/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=153&Itemid=125 IWM Vienna: Balkans as Part of Europe?” in Alexander Vezenkov, Bloomsbury2005. Academic, Andrew. Ballantyne, Vale, Lawrence. Zimmermann, Tanja, Aleksandar Jakir. Jakir. ,Europea Aleksandar Tanja, Zimmermann, (2008). East”, Middle the and Balkans the in Legacy Ottoman Yilmaz, Şuhnaz and İpek K. Yosmaoglu. “Fighting the Spectres of the Past: Dilemmas of GreeceImagination in Hami Yannis Enlightenment Larry. Wolff, Whyte, “How doBuildings William. Mean”, Balkaniques Nikolai. Voukov, l'orientalism Balkaniques monuments: des et Voukov, Nikolai. “Le monastère de Rila objects des l'intimite architectural vud'Egypt (1870 “Dans Mercedes. l'orientalism Volait, monuments: des et eds. objects (1870 d'Egypt des vu l'intimite architectural “Dans Mercedes. Volait, 2004); internaționale de la Anvers, Burxelles, Liege și Gand: (1894 Laurențiu. Vlad, internaționale de 1867 laParis, Laurențiu. Vlad,

L'orientalisme architecturalL'orientalisme entre imaginaires et savoirs

nization'? , 12, 2005. Online lahttp://etudesbalkaniq , 12,2005.Online , 12,(2005). - Claude. Claude. lakis. , Stanford: Stanford University1994. Press, netn Esen uoe h Mp f iiiain n h Mn o the of Mind the on Civilization of Map The Europe Eastern Inventing Architecture, power, and national identi Pe urmele „Belgiei Orientuluiˮ: România la exp la România Orientuluiˮ: „Belgiei urmele Pe Imagini ale identității naționale. România la expozițiile universale și universale expozițiile la România naționale. identității ale Imagini Le monastère de Rila de monastère Le , WürzburgNeumann,& :Königshausen 2014. h Nto ad t Ris Atqiy Acaooy ad National and Archaeology, Antiquity, Ruins: its and Nation The .“ L’architecture regionaliste, France 1890 France regionaliste, L’architecture , (Oxford: Oxford University Oxford (Oxford: Press, 2007). , rhtcue hoy A edr n hlspy n Culture and Philosophy in Reader A Theory: Architecture itr Aant egah: hud e las hn o the of Think Always We Should Geography: Against History

History

-

1910)” inVolaid(ed.), –

- 1937

90” n aia Ouleb Nabila in 1910)” and Judgement 134 ,( Iași:Institutul,( European, ,2007);

: incarnation du passé national bulgare, national passé du incarnation :

: incarnationdupassé national bulgare”

uoe n te akn: aae of Dacades Balkans: the and Europe History andTheory History , eds. A. MacLachlan and I. Torsen, ues.revues.org/index112.html L'orientalis ty ide atr Studies Eastern Middle

. Yale University Press, 1992. –

. Paris: CNRS, 2009. 1935 i ad ecds Volait, Mercedes and sir - , No.45(2006). 195

ozițiile universale sau universale ozițiile ), (Bucharest: Nemira,

m 0 .

, Norma Editions, Norma ,

, Études

Études 44:5, ,

,

Figure1: CEU eTD Collection

Curtea

de

Argeș

Monastery(16 135

th

century), Argeș,century),

Romania

CEU eTD Collection

FigureRomanian2: NationalPavilion, Paris,1867. 136

Figure 3: (first on the right)Greek(first the3: Figure on national façade on national Paris, 1878

CEU eTD Collection

.

Nation’s street, 137

CEU eTD Collection

138

Figure 4 : Illustrations : Figure 4 from Frenchthe press with the Greekpresswiththe pavilion (left)and the Romaniatherestaurant Paris, (down), 1889

T exhibitionpavilion(up) and the builtthe and constructionin Bucharest, on boulevard(down)

The RomanianThe “

he initial plan asan initialheplan

Figure5:

Kiseleff

CEU eTD Collection Bufet

”.

139

CEU eTD Collection 140

Figure 7 7 Figure section : in the RomanianofGallerymain

CEU eTD Collection 141

D

iverse Products, Products, 1889. iverseParis,

CEU eTD Collection

Figure 8: Serbian National Pavilion, 8: Figure Serbian National Pavilion, 1889. Paris, 142

CEU eTD Collection

Figure 9 :GreekFigure 9 Pavilion,National Paris, 1889 143

FigureGreeceNational 10: Pavilion, Romanian Paris, of domesthethepavilion. Behind, 1900.

CEU eTD Collection 144

CEU eTD Collection 145

FigureSerbian 11: National Pavilion, National Paris, 1900.

CEU eTD Collection 146

Figure12: RomanianNationalPavilion, Paris, 1900

FigureRomanian 13: Restaurant, frontfaçade lateral a (left)and façade(right), Paris, 1900.

CEU eTD Collection 147

FigureDrawing14: in Saladin andSaladin

Sevelinges CEU eTD Collection

watercolours

, Paris, 1900. ,

of the Bulgarian theof Pavilion,National architectsthe signedby 148

CEU eTD Collection 1