On the Restoration of the Northern Stalls of the Ostankino Estate Amusement Park

Bairamova Varvara Fedorovna Senior Lecturer, Department of Landscape Architecture, St. Petersburg State Forestry Engineering University named after S.M. Kirov letter U, 5, Institutsky per., 194021, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation novator72@mail.ru Isaev Sergei Sergeevich employee, MSU Botanical Garden 119991, Russia, Moscow, Leninskie Gory str., 1/12 isaev.s777@yandex.ru

Samokhina Ekaterina Borisovna Deputy General Director, JSC "Institute of Environmental Design and Surveys" 119234, Russia, Moscow, Leninskie Gory str., 1, of. page 75G samukhina@bk.ru

In 2012, the Moscow Department of Cultural Heritage included the restoration of the Ostankino estate in the list of particularly important objects.  The only one of its kind, miraculously preserved in all historical vicissitudes, the wooden palace-theater is an example of the highest skill of architects, engineers and craftsmen of a wide variety of specialties.

By the beginning of the construction of the palace, the Ostankino estate was a typical economic complex for its time with greenhouses, greenhouses, an apiary and a stable. And already by the place where the place for the new entertainment house was chosen – in the center of the estate - it becomes clear that Nikolai Petrovich Sheremetev was going to create not just a theater on his estate, but a very complex artistic space where the palace and garden are an indivisible whole capable of forming the atmosphere of the "Pantheon of Arts".^{[1, p. 33-45]} That is why the purpose of developing new project documentation for carrying out repair and restoration work is not only to restore the palace in full, but also to create an image of the garden of its heyday - the end of the XVIII century - the first quarter of the XIX century. After all, it is not for nothing that the motto inscribed on the family coat of arms of the ancient Sheremetev family is a winged expression - Deus conservat omnia - "God keeps everything."

In the course of restoration debates, the term "uniqueness" is increasingly used in relation to the examples of landscape art preserved in Russia of the XVIII-early XIX centuries. Of course, behind the desire to endow each preserved monument with the epithet "unique", there is, first of all, the desire to give weight and significance to the security measures carried out, to protect the object of cultural heritage from wrong actions entailing the possible loss of the monument. However, sometimes, by applying to the place and not to the place of this term, the opposite effect is achieved to the desired effect. Therefore, it is extremely important not only to realize the value of the preserved object, but also scrupulous analytical work, which allows at the first stages of restoration measures to determine not only the original intention of the author and subsequent historical layers, to identify all factors, all combinations of planning elements typical of their time, which led to precisely that aesthetic expressiveness, which determines the status of the object, as cultural heritage and national heritage. Uniqueness, according to the dictionary, is exclusivity and uniqueness. But it is important to understand that the creation of a park object is impossible without knowledge of the general laws of composition, without understanding the basic methods of achieving artistic expression. And the skillful author's adaptation of these methods, generally accepted at the moment of the epoch, to the existing situation speaks, first of all, not about uniqueness, but about the high professionalism of the master and national identity.

The Ostankino Palace and Park Ensemble was presented to the new owner, Nikolai Petrovich Sheremetev, as "a center of arts and entertainment designed for connoisseurs and connoisseurs of fine art." ^{[2, p.15]} Although subsequent alterations and transformations have significantly changed the appearance of the Pleasure Garden, the central, regular part, more than others corresponding to the ceremonial architecture of the palace, has been preserved. Rather, its outlines have been preserved and the restoration of the volumetric and spatial structure of the regular part in its full volume is the most important part of the ongoing restoration work. 

 Nikolay Petrovich Sheremetev from an early age took part in theatrical productions and musical evenings organized by his father. But if for Pyotr Borisovich the theater was just a part of the court ceremonial, then Nikolai Petrovich took his theatrical studies seriously and the construction in Ostankino was for Sheremetev part of the program to create the best theater in Russia. During his trips abroad, Nikolai Petrovich made useful contacts in the theatrical environment and for many years was in business correspondence with the musician of the Paris Opera Ivar. ^[3] From Paris he received new plays, scores, drawings of scenery and costumes, as well as architectural plans of theaters. Thanks to these plans, the reconstruction of the theater in Kuskovo was carried out. However, five years later, in 1790, Count Sheremetev wrote to his manager: "I intend to build a theater in Ostankino...". ^{[4, c.78]}

Thus, a decision is made to create a pleasure estate, where the palace-theater becomes the semantic and architectural dominant, and the planning decisions of the Pleasure Garden are of a theatrical and decorative nature.

According to the first (1793) drawings of the Pleasure Garden, the parterre opening from the loggia of the palace, according to the plan of the fortress architect A.F. Mironov, was to become a semantic continuation of the theatrical scenery. This is evidenced by the parameters of the stalls. The width of the stalls fully corresponds to the width of the garden facade of the palace. The depth of the stalls is solved due to its multiplicity (which was changed during the work), where the diameter of the last round fragment is less than the width of the stalls. Such a solution on this scale allowed to create the illusion of narrowing the stalls to the visual axis and directed the observer's gaze into the distance. This planning solution not only emphasized the "similarity" with the rules of building theatrical scenery, but also opened a view of the palace from the forest part of the garden.

Figure 1. The plan of the Pleasure garden and the house of the village of Ostankovo. 1793 The plan with the explication was drawn up by Alexey Mironov

However, during the construction of the Pleasure Garden (1793-1796), the purely decorative function defined for the stalls changed slightly. Probably, over time, the orchestra began to be perceived as a stage platform.

Fixing drawings and plans show that the dimensions of the stalls, its proportions were preserved, there were only minor changes in the contours of the stalls. It can be assumed that this is due to the desire to smooth out the straightness and give the outlines of the stalls a more picturesque look: "An English gardener from Ostankovo should make paths in the Anglin garden, as he comes up with better ...". But in the process of reconstruction, evenly distributed "flower beds" appear on the stalls, which serves as indirect proof of the previously put forward hypothesis.

The statements of some researchers can also be interpreted in the same way: "The orchestra finally loses its regular character and turns into an elongated clearing bordered by "free" groups of trees, shrubs and a covered path, which by this time, obviously, had already been arranged.<...> In the center of the garden there is a sunlit clearing, it is divided by "wings" of larches, oaks and maples into several visual planes separated from each other, creating a full effect of deep perspective." ^{[5, p.195]} That is, the author of the final planning decision in Ostankino suggests considering the ground floor not just as a "foyer" of the palace-theater, but as additional theatrical stages in the open air.

Figure 2. Plan for the gardens of the village of Ostankova. 1824 Fragment.The preserved fragments of the plan of the park with the ground floor from the time of active construction, made in the first third of the XIX century, indirectly confirm this version – the location of the "flower beds" on the ground floor are associated with exits from the changed outlines of the berso, as well as with smooth turns of the circumferential path, which also allowed, as in a real theater, actors to wait for their exit on stage.

Indirectly, the hypothesis about the possible use of the stalls as a theatrical stage is confirmed by the word "flowerbeds" (or "bedbugs") from the fixation drawing, which meant at the end of the XVIII - early XIX century a group of trees and shrubs. On the same fixation drawing in the explication, it is clearly visible that there are "flowerbeds" with flowers and "flowerbeds" without flowers. The same groups, consisting mainly of trees and shrubs, are also called backstage or backstage planting. "Strictly theatrical terminology includes the term "backstage", also used in "gardeners" to refer to plantings hiding something unsightly or, conversely, mysteriously attractive. Properly arranged "scenes" decorate the garden and are its undoubted advantage." ^{[6, pp.270-278]}  In this context, "mysteriously attractive" is understood as a correctly constructed perspective using landscape techniques rather than regular ones, as before: "In the arrangement of perspective plans, or scenes of the front view, which connect the most pleasant rear views in the vicinity with the point of view from your home." ^{[7, p.66]} Another a term that originally refers to theatrical terminology, but has firmly entered the garden lexicon – curtain.  "The vegetation itself took on a scenic appearance. Tree plantings formed the so-called curtains (fr. courtine, canopy, curtain; Polish. kurtyna, theater curtain) high landings, sometimes in the form of an openwork wall, intended, in particular, "for the production of any scenes." There were also scenes that form a shrinking perspective going deep, as in San Parei near Bayreuth..." ^{[8, p.344]}

It is quite possible that the stalls, as a stage platform, were used during receptions of crowned heads. Of course, the materials of such authors as P. P. Weiner, M.I. Pylyaev or S.M. Lyubetsky, whose narratives are written "from the words of eyewitnesses", cannot be fully used as evidence of the hypothesis put forward, but nevertheless they give a colorful idea of the festivities held in the estate.

 And finally, the last argument in favor of the hypothesis about the application of the principle of theatrical scenes is the larch preserved on the stalls. The explanatory note to the Restoration Project of 1980 indicates the approximate age of the larch – 180 years. Consequently, it was planted around 1800. Its location when combining the plans coincides with the location of one of the "flowerbeds". In the same restoration materials, it was assumed that she was not planted alone: "It is difficult to imagine what made the organizers plant the larch in this place ... it is possible that she had to additionally decorate the stalls and was planted simultaneously with other larch trees near the palace." Confirming the assumption of the designers, E.P. Shchukina, in her analysis of typical planting techniques in Moscow manor parks, writes: "Low ground vegetation, clipped shrubs and rhythmically arranged verticals of trees growing separately or grouped into several pieces are most common in the design of the main front yard. At the same time, larch, fir, spruce, and thuja have become the most widespread — as the most expressive and architectural trees in their outlines. The usual "murava" (lawn) was used as carpet vegetation, replacing the patterned and lush flower beds of the middle of the XVIII century." ^{[9, p.176]}

The most weighty arguments against the hypothesis put forward can be considered, firstly, the lack of documented data on landings in the stalls, and secondly– the watercolor by F. Smyslov 1847, which depicts only one larch (attribution of watercolors is questioned by archival workers Ostankino – approx. authors).

Figure 3. Ostankino. Pleasure house and garden.Part of what is depicted in the watercolor is explained in the same materials of the 1980 restoration: "... the two northern "flower beds" have already been merged into one, and the eastern part of the stalls has only one larch tree that has survived to this day."

The watercolor was made in 1847, after the death of Count Nikolai Petrovich Sheremetev. All researchers of the history of Ostankino, without exception, say that after the death of N.P. Sheremetev, the garden gradually falls into disrepair and work is carried out in it only to maintain architectural structures in good condition. And if, judging by archival documents, permanent plantings were regularly carried out under N.P. Sheremetev to replace "withered" trees, then the same archival documents indicate that there is no replacement for fallen plantings under the new graph. This is what can be explained by what is depicted on the watercolor.

In connection with all of the above, when carrying out new restoration work, it is necessary to raise the question of restoring "flower beds" in historical outlines. In modern conditions, when the scale of the Ostankino park has changed, its functional purpose has changed, it would be wrong to suggest restoring "flowerbeds", while using tree and shrub vegetation. 

Six "klomps" are formed in accordance with and on the basis of these iconographic materials. The proposed floral assortment is similar to the solutions of the front yard – herbaceous peony (Latin Pae?nia), hosta (Latin H?sta), lily (Latin L?lium) and spring flowering ephemeroids.

The proposed nature of plantings in "flower beds" and a meager list of species is dictated by the fact that, as a rule, the assortment of such flower beds was very "mobile". Seasonal and fashionable "at the moment" plants were planted here. This is the picture we observe in the engraving by F. Smyslov 1847, where various other perennials are planted along with clearly recognizable roses.

With our proposal, we intended to set a certain matrix, both spatially and temporally, in order to restore not only their original geometry, but also the form of using these flowers. Thus, they can be changed and supplemented in the future, without causing serious costs to the owner. The offered assortment has been present in culture for a long time and the agrotechnics of growing the proposed plants is very simple and low-cost.