established himself as an architect. he that years the during Koolhaas influenced 1968-1978. This cooperation profoundly whom Koolhaas collaborated in the period with Ungers O.M. of work and texts the through interpreted is work his end, To this work. Koolhaas’ in role main a play definitely architectonic form and composition most idea, general the to contrary that theory the defends She architecture. Dutch and haas problematic relationship between Rem Kool OverHolland of issue this in addressed also are century choice. this in part active an played style architectural the whether and drawings or paintings these of theme the behind reason the is question core The ies. and public important buildings in Dutch cit interiors church of images scenes, urban many with drawings, and paintings in past the of buildings of presence physical the on focuses investigation historical art This cle. 17th-century Dutch architecture in his arti became prominent.‘court’ the of form building characteristic so ever developments of areas, during which the tions and the of typology buildings and between the development of urban institu interaction the out points she research, the after in area monastery and area Binnengasthuis the of transformation city. modern the in production from this phase of development physical presence of the design and building inevitable the more but here, arole plays that Age Golden the of inheritance cultural the of respect historical the much so not is Dutch city and its architectural structure. It understanding of the development of the agood gain to order in crucial remains period the subject, ahistorical is this 17th-century Dutch architecture. Although In Introduction OverHolland Furthermore in this issue,architecture 21st and 20th the naturally addition, In on focuses too Altes Korthals Everhard the researches Gramsbergen Esther Alteratie English TranslationEnglish . Using typo-morphological . Lara Schrijver focuses on the the on focuses Schrijver . Lara 6, much attention is paid to to paid is attention much 6, - - - - Republic. Dutch the in practices building and design the in drawing architectural of role the discusses the publication of Gerritsen about Hurx Merlijn 17th centuries. and 16th the in Countries Low Southern and Northern the relationsdifficult in architecture between the about Ottenheym and Jonge De by book the reviews Bergeijk van Herman section. architecture are discussed in the Polemen which won the public award. Stoltenberg and that of Akkermans, Carien including the award winning design by Luuk Technology, of University Delft the of studios Master’s Buildings Hybrid the in created all Floet examines their which designs, were land Design Award) 2007. Willemijn Wilms Hollandse Vormgevingsprijs (South Hol zone, which were nominated for the Zuid- rail Delft the for presented are projects Finally, two books on 17th-century Dutch Dutch 17th-century on books two Finally, - Lara Schrijver Lara architectural form andUngers Koolhaas: Urban conditions and 12 Everhard Korthals Altes paintings and drawings Seventeenth-century Dutch architecture in 9 Esther Gramsbergen Alteratie the after areas monastery former the of and hospital) (municipal the transformation theHidden Binnengasthuis Amsterdam: 3 Introduction 3 and trading centre on the western side of of side western the on centre trading and later developments of the administrative of beginning the been had hospital), beth’ Elisa (St Sint-Elisabethgasthuis of Oude- the hospital, first Amsterdam’s that gested sug been has It addressed. indirectly only therefore was poor and sick the for care 17th the of beginning the to formation city from period the in Dam the around area the of transformation spatial the to buildings these of contribution the into done was Research Keyser. De by Exchange Commodity the the buildings around the fishmarket and houses, weigh the Dam, the on Hall Town old the examined: closely were Amsterdam in trade and council city the for buildings public the study, the In development. city’s the in phases various of indicators sidered take shape in public buildings,were con and differentiating urban institutions, which tion and urban development. Establishing forma city of generators as seen be could 3 in published Amsterdam, of centre the of forming the and Exchange Commodity first the about article the In Esther Gramsbergen monastery areas after the former the of transformation the and hospital) gasthuis (municipal the Binnen- Amsterdam: Hidden , the position was that public buildings buildings public that was position , the The development of public buildings to century. 1

OverHolland Alteratie - - - - About the authors 80 Merlijn Hurx Book review 19 Herman van Bergeijk Book review 17 Willemijn Wilms Floet zone railway Delft’s for hybrids Three VormgevingsprijsZuid-Hollandse 2007 16 solution for the lack of space in the city. the in space of lack the for solution of the former area monastery city expansions could be realised, the re-use much less densely built up. were districts city other to compared as and walls, city the within area surface the of cent up area monastery freed The city. the of edge the on located monasteries city many the and churches parish including city, the in properties lic Catho all over control gained council city moved. be to had hospital, the including activities, other that effect aside as had Dam the around buildings most administration important and trading the of concentration The city. medieval the of edge the to Dam the from attention our development of Amsterdam we must shift the charitable institutions for the urban sense. acertain in area centre the outside indeed are institutions these century, 15th the of end the of As study. the in addressed further been not has city the of development the in founded were –that on later institutions charitable of and – hospital first the of role The centre. the Dam as an administrative and trading around area the of specialisation continued for paved was way the so And Middendam. the on position prominent its lost it how is which buildings, hospital the claimed Hall Town expanding the century, 15th the of end the At Hall. the Town of part first the build to grounds hospital the of aparcel bought the Middendam. Sint-Elisabethgasthuis was established on the council, city the for building a separate constructing before case, any In Dam. the tion of 1578, known as the as known 1578, of tion revolu political the in rooted was which for reason the institutions, charitable the of tion move was of part a large-scalereorganisa final This . the of south area the to moved were hospitals the century, 16th the of end the at reorganisation of wave ond asec In there. located hospital) Peter’s (St Sint-Pietersgasthuis the with merged was it where Nes the to moved Elisabethgasthuis As a consequence of the the of aconsequence As of significance the examine To further 2 In 1395 the city council council city the 1395 In

made up almost 25 per per 25 almost up made 3

Alteratie 4 6 First, the Sint- First, But before new new before But Alteratie,

provided . 5

the the

a : 7

-

-

- -

3 OverHolland 6 – Architectural Studies for the Dutch City 4 English Translation new Oude-mannen- en -vrouwenhuis was was -vrouwenhuis en Oude-mannen- new a Oudemanhuispoort, the of location the at niersburgwal and this building block, located between Klove- In block’. a ‘super of traits the has still Home) -vrouwenhuis Men’s (Old and Old Women’s en Oude-mannen- the of regents the to sold was century 16th the of end the at that area area. the from peared disap structure main typical the which during century 19th the in transformation Binnengasthuis area underwent a radical development of the area for a long time. The urban the dominated and city medieval the of corner southeast the in area uniform big a covered then Binnengasthuis The burgwal. Grim the of south located Nunneries), New Oude en Nieuwe and Nonnenklooster(Old the of grounds the of possession given were institutions The hospital). Lady’s Dear (Our Vrouwegasthuis Lieve Onze the and gasthuis Alteratie the after created was Binnengasthuis The ( Oudemanhuispoort bordering the with Binnengasthuis, the pital, used to be occupied by the municipal hos that area the is example Another day. the during public the to open are paintings with passage the and courtyards different The Museum. Historical Amsterdam the by used being now is complex The 1579. in lished estab was Orphanage Municipal the Here, Lucian’sLucienklooster (St monastery). Sint- the of area monastery the on built was that Kalverstraat the on block building the is part best-kept The pattern. urban exceptional an by characterised still are have remained, the former areas monastery court-shaped building structure here. a into developed has it that away such in areas monastery the of condensing urban the charitable institutions did influence the a ‘super block’. as to referred be can block building of type buildings formed This new the courtyards. bodiesinto of Extended various courtyards. parcelled into private but gardens, divided not are block building new this of areas the regular blocks of the buildings, inner with than Differently block. building of type anew form, urban adeviant of way by city the of parts other the from themselves tiate differen areas These areas. urban compact areas monastery up set the after decade the in that notices one in, inked clearly are monasteries city the which on 1544 from Anthoniszoon Cornelis of map the to pared com is map this When answer. an of ning Berckenrode from 1625 provides the begin van Floriszoon Balthasar of map known the of the former areas? monastery Examining charitable institutions on the developments manage. to city the in institutions charitable important most the to given were monasteries city these of A part Even though not all of these courtyards courtyards these of all not though Even the of influence the actually was What from a merger of the Sint-Pieters the of amerger from 9 Therefore, it seems that that seems it Therefore, Alteratie, Old Men’s Home Gate) 8 10

Only the part of the the of part the Only

are transformed into into transformed are the spaciously spaciously the ------. century are are 17th century the in Binnengasthuis the of the of aresult as institutions charitable the of tion reorganisa the and monasteries city the of confiscation the is part third the of subject The Amsterdam. in hospitals medieval the on focuses part second the while institution, public as a hospital the with deals part first block’ is described below in four steps. The ‘super the of forming The areas. monastery understanding spatial transformation of the to key the also is time same the at and charitablecentury institution in Amsterdam obligations is illustrative for every 17th- social their fulfil to means the obtained which the of councillors the Binnengasthuis in way The example. arepresentative as used therefore are area Binnengasthuis areas.monastery The developments of the former the in condensing urban of form cific spe the to led that mechanism the expose to and perspective this from Amsterdam the charitable institutions in 17th-century characteristics. group of buildings with similar morphological described as a homogenous typological these buildings for charitable institutions, on done been had study no then, Before the unique of history these buildings. the architectonic properties and described on focused authors the exceptions, any Without appeared. have Amsterdam in tions 17th-century buildings for charitable institu important most the to dedicated books of aseries Meischke, R. by Orphanage) about the Burgerweeshuis (Municipal passage with stalls for booksellers. and an the 18th-century Oudemanhuispoort, courtyard inner stately the is complex the the Universiteit van Unique Amsterdam. to of office head the now is and renovated was 18th the In 1601. in built established in the episcopal cities. were hospitals city first the how is which so, do to income their of 10% use and sick, the and poor the for ahospital establish church regulation that obliged bishops to a is there period same the around From handicapped. the and elderly the sick, the poor, the pilgrims, travellers, for abbeys the at up set were rooms guest 800, around of As monasteries. the were care this giving on dead. the bury and prisoners visit sick, the of care take aroof, foreigners offer naked, the clothe thirsty, the to drink giving hungry, the feeding namely mercy’, of deeds ‘seven the performing meant this Concretely, Christians. all of duty holy the According to church teachings, was charity religious beliefs about poverty and charity. the Middle Ages originates from medieval The of establishing charitable institutions in The hospital as a public examined. The first institutions that concentrated concentrated that institutions first The describe to is study this of purpose The astudy of 1975 in publication the Since Alteratie . In the last part, the buildings buildings the part, last the . In 12

century, the building building the century, institution 13

14 11 - - - the business part of the hospital, as the the as hospital, the of part business the for case the particularly was This 1200. of as authority secular under fell order this in hospitals decreased. The hospitals of meddling church sick, the for caring in ised special brothers lay of order an Spirit, Holy mass. in part take dying the and sick the let to desire the from derived This alcove. altar or chapel the and hall great the between link the was characteristic cal typologi Another cells. individual of up built actually was institution of kind this tradition, East Near the In hall. great undivided an construction, ahall in were rooms sick and rooms guest the hospitals, monastic and the city council. churches and was largely coordinated by parish the from originated system This sick. the and poor the for caring of system ised awell-organ was already there time that At established on a large scale in Dutch cities. were monasteries that century 15th the in only was it countries, neighbouring the to Contrary importance. any of barely were hospitals in the Dutch cities, cloister orders building. hospital the of part was acloister sometimes achapel, and ward asick Besides ing. leadership and design of the hospital build nuns placed requirements on the religious or brothers these of life ‘monastic’ The brotherhoods. religious by out carried was hospital the at work daily the cases many essential. was ward sick and chapel the between link Adirect dying. the and sick the treating for practices important remained relics of worship and proximity the and mass holy Celebrating beliefs. religious however, remained strongly influenced by the bourgeoisie and nobility. The ‘services’, and maintained through donations from secular authorities and were established by ruled were institutions The organisation. its as well as construction its in ences amalgamation of church and secular influ hospital. the of management the over took bourgeoisie the 1286, in Order Teutonic the by founded was it after Right century. 13th the of end the at founded was Hospital of Lübeck,the magnificentHeilige-Geist- example. for 1204), of (as Rome in Spirito Santo Ospedale the monastic hospitals were taken over, such as or episcopal Existing Spirit. Holy the of Order the by scale alarge on established man and Italian public cities, hospitals were Ger In century. 13th the of beginning the in bourgeoisie the of power growing the and cities the of origin the of light the in seen waspermission still required. Pope’s the cemeteries, and chapels altars, To establish Pope. the of responsibility the under fell still hospital the in working priests With the founding of the Order of the the of Order the of founding the With episcopal the in that see to striking is It Before and establishing developing an was hospital public medieval The The hospital turning bourgeois must be 20 21 Caring for the poor and and poor the for Caring 17 In the Hanseatic city city Hanseatic the In 15 19 16 Therefore, in Therefore, - - 18 - - - - exchange for payment. in hospital the at of care taken were who important to city councils for many reasons: reasons: many for councils city to important was hospitals of control The hospital. the of control financial the of charge in official amunicipal director, ahospital appointing by side business the over took councils city initiative. the took family Count’s the of members the of one or Count the cases, many In pitals were established in the Dutch cities. tutions after the Reformation. the further development of charitable insti in factor important an only were city Dutch the in orders cloister the introduction, the in the outside the city walls, just like the the like just walls, city the outside Rokin the of west located was hospital, aleper (1403), Sint-Jorisgasthuis The Homestead). (Holy Stede Heilige the of chapel the from across Kalverstraat the in (1422) hospital) ment’s the Heilig-Sacramentsgasthuis Sacra (Holy and Dijk Lange Nieuwe the on chapel) Lady’s Dear (Our Vrouwekapel Lieve Onze the from across 1413-1420) (between wegasthuis Vrou Lieve Onze the Nes, the on followed 1395) before (just Sint-Pietersgasthuis the Later Middendam. the on established was Sint-Elisabethgasthuis the century, 14th the through way half mentioned, As Ages. Middle the in hospitals six had Amsterdam Medieval hospitals in Amsterdam were well documented by Craemer. which Germany, in hospitals public small the probably ran parallel to the developments of development this part, large the For lands. Nether the in forthcoming not is hospitals building development typology of medieval tions for transients and sec separate with complexes building into grew hospitals Ages Middle the during that mind in keeps one if strange so not is sion itself. hospital the fact in was ahospital of chapel the be to thought was What confusion. to lead often has this that looked like chapels, and Craemer points out lapped. areas and sick ward and chapel (choir) over guest the which in halls bay simple from made were hospitals earlier the that believe not be reconstituted. much that the original construction could so modified or fires city in destroyed were regarding the The earlier hospitals hospitals. known are data construction any Barely the bourgeoisie. was because it operated on donations from hospital the of budget the monitor to wanted council city the why reason Afinal hand. of out get sometimes could this and shelter for asking came riffraff other and people less maintain public order; in the hospital home to second and health public monitor to first to the visitors of hospitals. help ‘internal’ and home’ at sitting ‘poor the to help ‘external’ into divided was sick the As of around 1250 the first public hos public first the 1250 around of As 25 23 From the outside these buildings During the 13th century, the the century, 13th the During 24 Most researchers 27 proveniers An overview of the the of overview An 22 As mentioned 26 This confu This , elderly 28

------at the chapels are established based on construction) the this calls devotion) and city the of morphosis Metamorfose van stad en devotie dissertation his In ward. sick and chapel the between connection aspatial excluded which street, the of side other the on located even were cases these in which chapel, existing already an near established were wegasthuis and Heilig-Sacramentsgasthuis Vrou Lieve Onze Sint-Pietersgasthuis, the saw, already we As angle. typological the is Interesting parallels. of anumber see can we way, that in Sint-Elisabethgasthuis and tals building”. achurch in lay sick “the describes, Blokland Kool- as where, hospital, urban oldest the in case the not definitely was This ward. sick and chapel the of separation physical the the guild hospitals were characterised by led to a differentiation typological in which this cases, many In function. hospital the these hospitals,the chapels existed before clients.” the of aspects material the of care took that hood the of responsibility the guild or brother under fell and achapel in or nearby located were hospitals These night. the stay could who transients for mainly guilds, the by claim. later “The hospitals were established hospital buildings as an argument for her the in differences typological advances she Moreover, hospital. the into injected directly was revenue tax urban some that and city, the in place aprominent at located was ing build the that hospital, first city’s the was out that the Heilig-Sacramentsgasthuis medieval hospitals in Dordrecht. She points eleven other the from itself differentiates hospital this which in aspects interesting of anumber advances She institution. public a as considered be primarily must gasthuis arguesBlokland that the Heilig-Sacraments Sacrament’s hospital) in Dordrecht, Kool- (Holy Heilig-Sacramentsgasthuis the of tion descrip her In society? in role adifferent as well as hospitals, other the of that from ent differ was that council city the with relation a had that institution apublic mainly fact in Sint-Elisabethgasthuis the Wasn’t same. the and one as seen were hospitals medieval six the whether remains question the However, established by religious brotherhoods. tals only mentions that the hospitals were Stede. Heilige the of chapel the near located both Oudemannenhuis Men’s (Old home) in 1548, an and 1523 in orphanage an hospitals: the of duties the of apart over took which other social institutions were established, proveniers for caring in specialised was but sick, the as well as transients for cared that hospital sic Zeedijk. the on located (1403), Sint-Nicolaasgasthuis The literature about Amsterdam hospi When we look at the Amsterdam hospi Amsterdam the at look we When 29 33 The latter was actually not aclas not actually was latter The . 30 During the 16th century, two two century, 16th the During gasthuisconstructie (hospital . He assumes that the hospitals hospitals the that assumes . He 32 It is remarkable that of of that remarkable is It

(Meta , Melker , Melker 31 - -

------in Amsterdam is normally referred to as the the as to referred normally is Amsterdam in transition This activists. Calvinist by ported provinces led by William of Orange and sup rebellious the of part became and king Spanish the against Revolt the joined dam Amster time, that By Amsterdam. of history the in date important an is 1578 year The The paragraph. last the addressedthe in municipal Binnengasthuis, development of Amsterdam and grew into the in role acontinuous played hospital Amsterdam first The Vrouwegasthuis. Lieve Onze the with Sint-Pietersgasthuis the of amerger of out created was nengasthuis public institution – he states that the Sint- the that states –he institution public a as Sint-Elisabethgasthuis the consider helps that proof of bit convincing most the Amsterdam. in hospitals other of that than bigger times many was that hospital the of capital tion recep large relatively the states he First, Elisabethgasthuis and the other hospitals. remarkable between differences the Sint- should be examined. further with hospital chapel played a role in this Whether the common confusion of hospital magistrates. the for achapel as function and form original its kept hospital the of chapel the only Hall, Town the to integrated were hospital the of buildings the after that claims chapel and sick ward overlapped. Melker the where hospital organised alinearly was Sint-Elisabethgasthuis the that assume huissteeg the along hall great the in shown was (‘hospital’) ‘gasthuis’ which on 1639, from Hall old Town the of plan floor the with tion to hospitals. construction with the ridge turret, common hall atypical see we complex, Hall Town the of side left-hand the On hospital. the of sion Amsterdam) Amsterdam te Stadhuis council. Saendredam’s painting hospital were already being used by the city the of buildings the that time the from tury, 17th cen the from date Elisabethgasthuis Sint- the of data construction The drecht? Dor with drawn be aparallel Can ward? sick and chapel the between relation the about say we can What like? look actually proveniers to residences selling by example for income, provided an to opportunity generate new chapel the to annexed hospital the of tion “The financialintroducconsiderations: 15th century. After the the After century. 15th the of end the at Sint-Pietersgasthuis the the Sint-Elisabethgasthuis merged with century. 14th late the as four councils (later, as burgomasters) early institution under financialof supervision the Elisabethgasthuis was the only charitable The introduction has already stated that that stated already has introduction The of anumber out points also Melker Sint-Elisabethgasthuis the did What Alteratie (‘hospital alley’), then one could could one then alley’), (‘hospital .” 34 37 from 1657 provides an impres 35 : Revolt and Reformation and : Revolt

Second – and this is perhaps perhaps is this –and Second If we combine this informa this combine we If Alteratie, ( 38 The Old Town Hall in in Hall Town Old The 36

Het Oude Oude Het the Bin Gast------enabled the magistrates of Amsterdam to to Amsterdam of magistrates the enabled Church. Reformed the by administered never were and authorities civil of control under came monastic) and (parish former properties of the Catholic Church The synod. aCalvinist or Estate, provincial political encroachment from a stadholder, a any fighting were municipalities city the tion, religious discipline of the Counter Reforma the and crown Spanish the of dominance the After church. state formal of status the acquired never Church Calvinist the ever, How 1572. in provinces rebellious the of making the reformed faith the public religion by support their for Calvinists rewarded land Alteratie. ies. With the exception of two monastery monastery two of exception the With ies. the location of the convents and monaster townhouses, provide a clear indication for regular the for roofs coloured red the to contrast in roofs, colored grey The city. the 19 the of position the and time that at Amsterdam of form urban the of image aprecise provides 1544 from and Nunnery Old Nunnery). (Reguliers Reguliersklooster and Oude Nonnenklooster for men and one for women, respectively first monastic institutions inAmsterdam, one two the of initiator the was He family. cian patri Amsterdam an of adescendent and Groote of adisciple was Douwe Amsterdam. in popular Moderna Devotio made Douwe Gysbrecht priest The city. the of vicinity ate immedi the within three and limits city the 19 within established, were monasteries 22 instance for Amsterdam In cities. Dutch in manycentury communities were founded 15th the during and Netherlands the in lar bread. The movement became very popu daily their earn to worked they and life, inner cultivate to was aim first their alms; received nor asked neither vows, no took Sisters) of the Common Life. Its members called people lay for munities promoted the foundations of religious com movement The century. 14th the of end movement called ‘Devotio Moderna’ at the religious anew established who Deventer from priest aCatholic Groote, Geert was It late. relatively started cities Dutch in ment As mentioned earlier, monastic develop relief. poor of institutions the of history the for important become structures building and city the in position their plexes, com monastic the of layout the did then institutes. municipal new into tions hospitals and transforming these old founda of accommodation the reorganising of ity possibil unique the provided city the within availability of numerous monastic complexes The relief. poor municipal of system tralised acen into converted was relief poor parish the after tions responsible for poor relief. Immediately founda and agencies all of control full gain The purchase of Catholic properties properties Catholic of purchase The The city map of Cornelis Anthoniszoon Anthoniszoon Cornelis of map city The The estates of and Zee and Holland of estates The Alteratie, the fragmented system of of system fragmented the

monasteries within 39 Brethren 40 Only Only 41 (or (or ------monastic complexes. The Franciscan mon the of part formed etc. sheds, workshops, buildings, autarkic also communities, service as function to preferred they As orchards. tic communities gardens possessed and addition to the living quarters most monas as a proper monastery, sometimes open. In organised around sometimes a closed court; and The living living quarters. are quarters chapel monastery the of consist asteries asteries. The basic elements of the mon mon city the of form built the on source best the is map Anthoniszoon’s sequently, survived. 1578 from dating plan floor a only monastery Franciscan the Of plexes. of buildings remain of these monastic com chapels and a cellar, no buildings or parts their property. on houses the of one in life communal their start to Nunnery) (New Nonnenklooster New the of sisters the allowed nenklooster Non Oude the of sisters The groups. new to help offered they houses, or land sessed pos fraternities religious Once there. land owned already probably family His there. commune first his established and Zijde Oude the on lived himself Douwe Gysbrecht that fact the from difference remarkable this explained Melker Bas Devotion’), and (‘Citizens devotie’ en ‘Burgers article his In Side). (New Zijde Nieuwe the as indicated city the of part the , the of side west the on located were foundations Three Side). (Old Zijde Oude the called was which Amstel, the of side east the on city the of part the in situated 16 were 19 monasteries, the From city. the of corner southeast the in centration of monastic complexes is visible and existingproperty buildings. land of shape as circumstances to adapted humble and irregularly They shaped. seem are complexes the general, In layout. like monastery- most the showed far by astery opment of one large municipal hospital devel the on time that from and place took merger the 1582, in Finally hospital. men’s a into Sint-Pietergasthuis the and hospital awomen’s into Vrouwegasthuis Lieve Onze the of specialisation the was step first The fusion. afuture for conditions the created Zijde, Oude the of border south the at area united alarge covered which properties, exact these of assignment The klooster. Nonnenklooster and Nieuwe Nonnen Oude the respectively of properties the to Sint-Pietergasthuis, the and Vrouwegasthuis Lieve Onze the hospitals, major two move to decided municipality the 1578 October In theBinnengasthuis, municipal hospital outside the city. lands agricultural owned they well, As walls. the within territory urban the of percent 25 owned they heydays their In possessions. monastic institutions could enlarge their the municipality, the by given privileges to revenues from land and possessions thanks Very remarkable is the fact that acon that fact the is remarkable Very 43 44 Due to donations, legacies, legacies, donations, to Due

42 - Con ------

5 OverHolland 6 – Architectural Studies for the Dutch City 6 English Translation the buildings filled in the space between the the between space the in filled buildings the that away such in placed were additions new All erected. were members staff for buildingsmore, and service living quarters Further walls. city the outside located ing build anew to moved were patients plague forspecifically medical treatment.The department anew established hospital the about beds. 50 housed it 9 metres of aheight and 8 metres of awidth metres, 50 of alength with ments: The building was unique in its measure walls. the along beds the of arrangement the and galleries wooden the with chapels converted the of scheme the with sponded corre building the of section The altar. or hospital hall-type, but without the chapel medieval the as construction in similar roof, an elongated building volume with saddle of consisted It soldiers. old or wounded for was erected, a soldiers’ house, intended building new afirst 1587 in when emerged ferentiation of the residents of the hospital dif More built. were patients plague for ward asick and transients for one women, complex. A section for men, a section for the of parts different in housed and groups different four into divided were needy the hall. of type same the into areas living and dorms former the transform More alterationscurtains. were needed to by separated placed, were beds walls, the against gallery, the Below windows. placed high the open to staff the enable to built was floor first the on gallery awooden only ably suited for conversion into sick wards. Prob especially the former chapels were perfectly that surprising not is it typology, hospital early the remember we If wards. into ings conversion of the former monastic build the with started almshouse the modate income by erecting rental houses. generating on second the almshouse, the of the accommodation of the different wards on focused first the activities; building of types two developed managers the duties, their To perform revenues. property the by paid be to had expenses almshouse’s The rules prescribed by the local municipality. the within strangers to shelter offer and hospital to house the poor, sick and aged much. as twice as Nuns) (Old Nonnen Oude the of properties the values Eeghen Van lived. they which on property the besides city, the outside land agricultural of hectares 92 and city the in land of hectares 2.5 owned Nonnenklooster Nieuwe the 1578 in that We know survived. from bookkeepers’ calculations that have available is Nuns New the of possessions the about Information small. were hospitals the of properties the convents, the of ties proper the to compared As Nuns. New the and Nuns Old the of properties the as well properties of the two original hospitals as the administrated institution new This began. The building activities set up to accom to up set activities building The the of managers the of task the was It 47 During the 17th century, 17th century, the During 45 46 From the start, start, the From ------belonged to the highest category of rental rental of category highest the to belonged houses number the Gasthuishof, the around created units rental small the to Contrary numbers. house by indicated city the in because theyhouses’) were the first houses were called the ‘nummerhuizen’ (‘number burgwal side of the along property the Kloveniers west the on erected were houses rental of rows Uniform well. as property their of sites the perimeter of their on property other the principle of estate development along court. the faced building main the of façade tive rooms and dining rooms. The representa regents’ as services collective with building amain and quarters living with wings three into divided was building The home. people’s old the of buildings the by formed metres 40 x 30 about of court alarge to led corridor This acorridor. by accessible only building enclosed atotally became 1602 in built home, people’s old new the aresult, As here. built were houses rental of Rows purposes. private for developed and kept was zone new accommodations here. The perimeter build to planned who home people’s old the of managers the to sold was part central The perimeter. the along land of azone and part acentral into divided was area The way. aspecial in sold was Nuns Old the of Secondly, the court). large orchard(Hospital Gasthuishof the units, rental small into converted was Nuns) (New Nonnen Nieuwe the of areas living former the of apart all, of First up. set were money generate to aiming the complex. of part were garden aformal even graveyard, herb bleaching gardens, purposes: fields, different for used were courts The galleries. structure of wards and connected courts by two monastic complexes forming one large very familiar world of rows of narrow town narrow of rows of world familiar very the hand one the on worlds: different two combining form urban an block’, ‘super the was directed outwards. This process created activities building of type second the and inwards directed was hospital) the of dation accommo the (for activities building of type the richest merchants in Amsterdam. very similar to typologically the mansions of were houses these buildings, outer and main of Consisting 1643. in built and Vingboons famous Dutch classicist architect Philips the by designed Rokin, the of side east the on wharf the Turfmarkt, the along mansions nine of arow of erection the was prestigious nomical policy of the managers. Even more eco rational of asign as regarded be can large rental units there was worthwhile and 11 of erection The canal’. ‘living aluxury into converted was moat city former the 1600, walls along the Kloveniersburgwal around location. and size their to due Amsterdam, in units In conclusion one can state that the first first the that state can one conclusion In used almshouse the of managers The activities building the meantime, the In 49

between 1603-1611. These houses 50 After the demolition of the city city the of demolition the After 48 51

- - - - - the hospital finally moved to the edge of edge the to moved finally hospital the space, of alack to due and ahandicap be to turned property reduced the Nevertheless, buildings. hospital new by replaced were and requirements new the meet not could ings build old The hospital. amodern into verted medieval institution, had already been con a originally almshouse, the then By left. were immediately around the almshouse buildings land the only century 19th the In bit. by bit property their sell to forced were managers nomical decline and political alterations, the eco to Due here. described is it way the in survived not has complex Binnengasthuis hidden world of and wards, courts galleries. the it, behind and houses, rental the houses, barely mentioned. of hospital buildings,Dutch examples are developments the about studies in that notice we exemplary, as institutions these Although foreign contemporaries considered perspective. aEuropean in Amsterdam 17th-century charitable institutions in city. the into appearance their made were the new architectonic elements, which galleries and publicly courtyards accessible of design Institutional assignment. gates, type anew formed buildings of blocks the in located institutions the of accessibility public the second, and architects, for ment residential buildings were a new assign serial First, Amsterdam. into introduced were projects architectonic new so And dences. hid charitable institutions behind the resi mon urban building block in but Amsterdam, com a from differ not did glance first at that block abuilding in encapsulated became institutions the of front in buildings the how was injected into the institution. developed residences of which the income orchards for the monasteries,the institutions ing grounds, formerly used as gardens and surround the On core. its as monasteries existing the with out, inside the from oped ‘super block’. the block, building urban of type particular ment on a unprecedented scale produced a develop Project areas. these of urbanisation the behind force driving the into grew tutions accumulation of the capital, charitable insti development. Through concentration and city’s the in phase anew marked areas tery charitable institutions to the former monas the of displacement the century, 16th the of seekers, and down-and-outers. on foreigners:tradesmen, pilgrims, fortune settlement the of attraction of force the shows hospitals establish to need The tion. forma city of phase first the of indicator an was Middendam the on Elisabethgasthuis Sint- the institution, charitable apublic As Conclusion Amsterdam during the 1980s. van Universiteit the by over taken were ings build hospital 19th-century The city. the As mentioned in the introduction, the the introduction, the in mentioned As It is interesting to put the guise of the the of guise the put to interesting is It 54 This building block devel 57 From the few lines that that lines few the From 52 53

55 At the end end the At This is is This 56 ------in Amsterdam in Amsterdam in Eeghen, Van Ages) Middle de in asteries mon (Amsterdam Middeleeuwen de in ters (red.), Schilder See 6. Orange. of William by led Amsterdam joined the revolting provinces the Catholic repression associated with it. directed against the Spanish rulers and and devotion) city the of (Metamorphosis devotie en stad Melker, De see century; 14th the of middle the around established probably was Sint-Elisabethgasthuis The 2. 59. p. 2006, Amsterdam’), of centre the of forming the and Exchange Commodity first Amsterdam’(The van trum cen het van vorming de en beursgebouw eerste ‘Het Gramsbergen, and 1. Engel spective can we get an insight into in their their in into insight an get we can spective studied from an urban morphological per are institutions these when Only them. hospitals and related institutions, ignore in the building development typological of interested researchers, why reason the be Binnengasthuis and could Burgerweeshuis the of buildings the of character fragmented, complex, The hospitals. of building the for good not was which system’, ‘health mented afrag for reason the was Reformation the after religion of freedom the that believes matters. these on knowledge of lack 1800) until Antiquity Late the of hospital European (The 1800 bis Spätantike his book in Netherlands the to devotes Jetter Dieter referred to as the the as to referred simply is Reformation the and Revolt the of side the chose council city Amsterdam’s which in 1578 in revolution political The 5. fringe-belt phenomena’, 1990. torico-geographical perspective on urban his ‘An Dollen, der von Busso of article the in on elaborated is mechanism This 4. 2006. Amsterdam’), of centre the of forming the and Exchange Commodity first (‘The Amsterdam’, van trum cen het van vorming de and beursgebouw eerste ‘Het Gramsbergen, and Engel 3. Notes this. into research further initiate to made is attempt althoughresearched, with this an article sufficiently been yet not have this of cations morphological and building impli typology Republic in the Netherlands. the of time the at organised was charity which in way unique the emphasise authors the viewpoints, (McCants) economic and (Parker) social from Written Republic. the of time the at institutions charitable Dutch for interest foreign the revealed (1998) Parker claims. Jetter as capital in lacking and insignificant as appear not do they Then, nature. true Recent studies by McCants (1997) and and (1997) McCants by studies Recent 59

Das Europäische Hospital von der der von Hospital Europäische Das Vrouwenkloosters en Begijnhof , 2002, p. 65. p. , 2002, , ( ), 1941. ), Nunneries and the Begijnhof Begijnhof the and Nunneries Alteratie Amsterdamse kloos- Metamorfose van van Metamorfose . The Revolt was was Revolt . The , 1997; see also also see , 1997; 60 The urban urban The , we see a see , we 58 He He ------13. Querido, users) its and Gate Home Men’s Old The Gate. (The De Oudemanhuispoort en haar gebruikers Jorishof in Amsterdam) Sint the and House Indies East (The dam Amster te Jorishof Sint het en Huis indisch Binnengasthuis) Amsterdam the of centuries (Four gasthuis al., et (Amsterdam’s Orphanage) City Meischke,ies: stud following the are meant is What 12. Amsterdam) van Universiteit the of buildings the (All dam Amster van Universiteit de van gebouwen Haagsma, and Haan this 11. for See 1981. century’), 20th and 19th the in Binnengasthuis the of buildings (‘The eeuw’ 20e en 19e de in Binnengasthuis het van gebouwen ‘De chke, Meis this for See environment. a park-like in pavilions free-standing as worse, or better century hospital buildings, designed, for 19th- typical came place its In buildings. tal hospi 17th-century the down tear to began century 19th the in Binnengasthuis the that is this for reason important most The 10. city. Dutch the in ment Holland Holland ( stadt Eber by century 20th the of beginning the at used was block’ ‘super of notion The 9. 25-26. pp. 2004, 1578-1813’), city visible (‘The 1578-1813’ stad zichtbare ‘De Bakker, areas: monastery of re-use for See expand. to opportunity the given was the After convent). (Paulus Paulusconvent the of land on lished estab was ill) mentally the for house (a huys aDol 1560 in earlier Sometime buildings. prisoners) were housed in former monastery male for house, (Rasp Rasphuis and ers) Spinhuis (Spinning house, for female prison the as such institutions new well, As ies. monaster former the of apart manage and use to right the given were Vrouwengasthuis Lieve Onze the and Sint-Pietersgasthuis the Orphanage), (City Burgerweeshuis the Oude Mannenhuis age (Old home for men), important social institutions in the city. The most the reorganise to opportunity the took council city the that noticeable is It 90. p. Parker, poor and maintaining church buildings. See the of care taking meant this Concretely, parishes. the by done being was as poses usus pios ad distributed be would properties these of profit the that principe the to adhere to councils city the forced States-General The properties. Catholic the redestinating in reign free have not did council city The 8. 2005. 1578-1813’), city visible 1578-1813’(‘The stad zichtbare ‘De the after expanded city the which in way the and place the 7. For Vier eeuwen Amsterdams Binnen , 2002. Städtebau und Wohnungswesen in in Wohnungswesen und Städtebau The Reformation of Community of Reformation The , 1914) to typify this form of develop of form this typify to , 1914) , 1914) , 2000, pp. 54-56. pp. , 2000, , meaning for charitable pur Godshuizen en gasthuizen Amsterdam Burgerweeshuis Amsterdam Burgerweeshuis (Urban design and housing in in housing and design (Urban , 1981; Jeeninga, Jeeninga, , 1981; Alteratie, , 1995; Vis, Vis, , 1995; Alteratie the Dolhuys Dolhuys the , 1975; Moulin Moulin , 1975; , see Bakker, Bakker, , see Het Oost Het De Poort. Poort. De Al de de Al , 1998, , 1998, ------ziekenverzorging in Dordrecht en Sliedrecht ments. See Kool-Blokland, onGouda, descriptions in historical docu and Delft of case the in maps, old on based probably is this Dordrecht, of case the In 25. 23. note in literature See location. that at hospitals municipal first the to back traced be can hospitals municipal current the city, Dutch every almost In institutions. as vived sur often have hospitals first These 24. Delft) in Gasthuis Nieuwe and Oude the of History centuries. (Seven Delft te Gasthuis Nieuwe eeuwen. Geschiedenis van het Oude en sick in Dordrecht and Sliedrecht) the for caring of centuries (Seven Sliedrecht en Dordrecht in ziekenverzorging eeuwen Kool-Blokland, see V; Floris Count by probably 1284, before established was Dordrecht in hospital first The 255. p. 1982, Countries’), Low Northern the in sick the and poor the for (‘Caring Nederlanden’ lijke Putto, ‘Armen- en ziekenzorg in de Noorde- Kossmann- see counts; of line Dutch the of amember for 1255 before established was ’s-Gravenzande of hospital small The 23. stay. to place own their had actually hospital, the of visitors most to contrary who, city the of residents poor were home’ at sitting ‘poor The 22. 20-59. pp. 1998, 21. Parker, included in this article. is which of plan floor the Lübeck, in Hospital A20. good example is the Heilige-Geist- as Misericordia’, pp. 77-106. Dame des Fontenilles at Tonnerre: Medicine Notre- of Hospital ‘The Courtenay, Lynn by tice Bowers, see healing about beliefs medieval For 19. 18. Ibidem,pp. 42-43. 17. Ibidem. 54. p. ibidem, See Spirito As Order. the to 727 in Rome in built Sassia in Maria S. hospital the over handed III Innocent Pope 1204 In 16. Ages) Middle the of type abuilding as hospital (The Mittelalters 15. Craemer, 139. p. 1976, Pevsner, See Cité. la de Île the on Notre-Dame the beside stood and mentioned was 829 of as that Paris, in Hôtel-Dieu the is abishop by lished estab ahospital of example Aknown 14. (Almshouses and hospitals) was established. See Oosterbaan, ahospital monastery this to linked and time same the At established. was monastery sian aPremonstraten Delft in II, William Count Dutch the of aunt an Ricardis, of initiative the at 1252 In case. aseparate is Delft in tal hospi first The landlord. the by century 13th the in established probably hospital) ine’s Cather (St Gasthuis Sint-Catharina the is Gouda in institution hospital oldest The 8-10. , 2007, particularly the exciting article article exciting the particularly , 2007, , 1954, pp. 3-14. 3-14. pp. , 1954, this become the seat of the Order. Order. the of seat the become this Medieval and Hospital Prac Medical The Reformation of Community of Reformation The A History of Building Types Building of A History Das Hospital als Bautyp des des Bautyp als Hospital Das , 1963, pp. 9-13 and 17. and 9-13 pp. , 1963, Ospedale Santo Zeven eeuwen eeuwen Zeven , 1960, p. 8. p. , 1960, , 1995, pp. pp. , 1995, Zeven Zeven Zeven Zeven - , - - - - , - - Denslagen, in text and drawings in documented Well Gouda. in hospital) Catherine’s (St gasthuis Sint-Catharina the example for 27. See Ages) Middle the of type abuilding as hospital (The Mittelalters Craemer,26. Denslagen, See ward. sick the in located was altar the that and chapel separate no was there beginning the in that said is it Gouda in hospital the about Delft) in Gasthuis Nieuwe and Oude the of History centuries. (Seven Delft te Gasthuis Nieuwe en Oude het van Oosterbaan, drecht and Sliedrecht) Dor in sick the for caring of centuries (Seven stedenbouwkundig en architectuurhistorisch Vermeer,42. Amsterdamse ‘De kloosters 271-277 pp. 2004, 1340-1520’), Devotion and (‘Citizens 1520’ 1340- devotie en ‘Burgers 41. Melker, De 90. p. Ibidem, 40. 4-7. pp. 1998, Parker, 39. 66. p. Ibidem, 38. 283. p. 37. Ibidem, devotion) and city the of (Metamorphosis devotie Melker, De 36. Ages) Middle the of type abuilding as hospital (The Mittelalters Craemer,35. devotion) and city the of (Metamorphosis devotie Melker, De 34. 11. p. Ibidem, 33. and Sliedrecht) Dordrecht in sick the for caring of centuries (Seven Sliedrecht en Dordrecht in verzorging Kool-Blokland, 32. Ages) Middle the from tals vanaf de Middeleeuwen (Amsterdam hospi Tang and Wigard, 243. p. 2004, century’), 16th the until history and discontinuity.(‘Unity Political and social eeuw’ zestiende de in tot geschiedenis en verdeeldheid. Politieke and sociale ‘Eenheid Verkerk, and 31. Carasso-Kok devotion) and city the of (Metamorphosis devotie Melker, De 30. 263-264. pp. 1982, tries’), Coun Low Northern the in sick the and poor forde the Noordelijke Nederlanden’(‘Caring ‘Armen-Kossmann-Putto, en ziekenzorg in See city. the outside them for established were hospitals Separate outcasts. ety soci were lepers Ages, Middle the In 29. Ages) Middle the of type abuilding as hospital (The telalter Craemer, See Ages. Middle entire the during Church remained under the of supervision the hospitals contrary, the on France, In sie. bourgeoi the of hands the in were cities Dutch in hospitals Germany, in like Just 28. 270. , 2002, p. 66 p. , 2002, 259. p. , 2002, 264. p. , 2002, Das Hospital als Bautyp des Mit des Bautyp als Hospital Das Gouda The Reformation of Community of Reformation The Zeven eeuwen. Geschiedenis , 1963, pp. 54-93. pp. , 1963, Das Hospital als Bautyp des des Bautyp als Hospital Das Das Hospital als Bautyp des des Bautyp als Hospital Das , 1995, p. 12. p. , 1995, Metamorfose van stad en en stad van Metamorfose en stad van Metamorfose Metamorfose van city en en city van Metamorfose Amsterdamse gasthuizen , 2001, pp. 141-147 pp. and , 2001, , 1963, p. 97. p. , 1963, , 1963, p. 58. p. , 1963, Zeven eeuwen zieken Gouda , 1995, p. 11; see also also 11; p. see , 1995, , 1954, p. 28. Also Also 28. p. , 1954, , 1994. , 144. p. , 2001, ------, - - and 20th century’), 1981, p. 105. p. 1981, century’), 20th and buildings of the in Binnengasthuis the 19th (‘The eeuw’ 20e en 19e de in nengasthuis Bin het van gebouwen ‘De Meischke, 46. 1981,demic pp. hospital’), 54-58. misch ziekenhuis’ hospital to (‘From aca acade- tot Gasthuis ‘Van Eeghen, Van 45. Amsterdam) in Begijnhof the and (Nunneries Amsterdam in Begijnhof Eeghen, Van 44. 279. p. 2004, 1340-1520’), devotion and (‘Citizens 1520’ 1340- devotie en ‘Burgers Melker, De 43. 28. p. monastery, Franciscan of plan floor 21-46, pp. 1997, explained’), ture ’s monasteries urban planning and architec (‘The belicht’ his research. See Lesger, for source available best the was institutions these of archives kept well the that fact the with do to has mainly This institutions. charitable the by set were which prices rent the on entirely himself bases Lesger Clé 1550-1850, in Amsterdam in prices rent of development the into research his In 54. Sliedrech en Dordrecht in ziekenverzorging eeuwen Kool-Blokland, also this for See 53. 138-139. pp. Amsterdam) van Universiteit the of buildings the (All Amsterdam van versiteit Haagsma, and Haan De complex. new the to moved were Binnengasthuis the of wards All Zuidoost. in Bijlmermeer and Bullewijk, Amsterdam wasAcademic built Medical Centre (AMC) huge the 1980s, the of beginning the In 52. 1955. Binnengasthuis’), or Pieters- St. the of grounds the of history (‘The Binnengasthuis’ of Pieters- St. het van Meischke, geschiedenis ‘De van het terrein in available is Binnengasthuis the of agers man the by site the on erected buildings all of list acomplete incomplete; is list 51. This 1850 1550- Amsterdam), in market housing The cycle. and (Rent Amsterdam in ningmarkt the of view arial the from derived is information This 48. 49-52. column 2, episode 1955, Amsterdam’), in Binnengasthuis or Pieters- St. the of grounds the of history (‘The Amsterdam’ te gasthuis Binnen of Pieters- St. het van terrein het building see Meischke, geschiedenis ‘De van the of description extensive 47. an For Amsterdam) in market housing The cycle. business and (Rent Amsterdam in woningmarkt De tuur. sick in Dordrecht and Sliedrech Lesger, 50. column 53-59. 1955, Binnengasthuis’), or Pieters- St. the of grounds the of history (‘The nengasthuis’ Bin of Pieters- St. het van terrein het van building see Meischke, geschiedenis ‘De the of description extensive an For 49. 1680. from Leupenius , 1986, pp. 90-92. pp. , 1986, t ( Binnengasthuis Seven centuries of caring for the the for caring of centuries Seven Huur en conjunctuur. De wo- , 1986. , Al de gebouwen van de Uni de van gebouwen de Al Vrouwenkloosters and , 1941. , Huur en conjunc en Huur by Johannes Johannes by t), 1995, p. 8. p. 1995, t), , 2000, , 2000, Zeven Zeven ------

7 OverHolland 6 – Architectural Studies for the Dutch City 8 English Translation Golden Age McCants, as such books See example. anice is Vingboons, Philips by designedthe forest), Noordse Bos (Northern Weeverswoningen (Weever in residences) the of project the Amsterdam, in institutions charitable the of managers the by buildings for the development of a series of residential Carasso-Kok, M., and C.L. Verkerk, ‘Eenheid ‘Eenheid Verkerk, C.L. and M., Carasso-Kok, (ed.), B.S. Bowers, in 1578-1813’, stad zichtbare ‘De B., Bakker, Bibliography munity Parker, and 1997, McCants, 60. above. here 55 note also 113. See p. Ibidem, 59. 113-114. pp. 1800) until Antiquity Late the of hospital European (The 1800 bis Spätantike Jetter, 58. 10. p. 57. Ibidem, huis age. See Meischke, worked for the orphan Hendrick dePhilips Vingboons, Keyser and Besides Burgerweeshuis. the of projects building the in involved were who architects the of known are data more Much projects? building these with involved was tect) Maybe the (municipal archi Stadsfabriek unknown. are Binnengasthuis the of projects soldiers’ hospital and the other building the houses, number the of designers The Turfmarkt. the on mansions nine the of Vingboons was responsible for the design Philips architect the that seen We have 56. century.’ teenth famous reformed institutions in the seven endowment of one of Amsterdam’s most the in legacy Catholic the of importance discussed so far point to the overwhelming Burgerweeshuis the of records financial the together, ‘Taken 165): (p. Republic the charitable institutions in Amsterdam during functioning well the of basis afinancial vided pro buildings) and land of form the (in age dam Amster modern early in care Orphan Age. ( McCants For 55. city out of nowhere) of out city ( niets het uit stad Een 1578. tot Amsterdam (ed.), Carasso-Kok M. in century’), 16th the until history social and discontinuity. Political and(‘Unity eeuw’ zestiende de in tot geschiedenis en verdeeldheid. Politieke en sociale Ashgate 2007. Publishing, Hampshire, Aldershot, 3, vol. Art, and ofHistory Medieval Technology, Science and Practice Medical 17-101. pp. 2005, SUN, dam, world). the of Centre 1578-1650. Amsterdam of history (The wereld de Amsterdam van (ed.), Prak M. and W. Frijhoff The History of Amsterdam until 1578. A 1578. until Amsterdam of History The , 1997) it is clear that the Catholic herit Catholic the that clear is it , 1997) ( Amsterdam City Orphanage Amsterdam City , 1998. , Das europäische Hospital von der der von Hospital europäische Das , 1997, p. 158. 158. p. , 1997, Civic Charity in a Golden Age aGolden in Charity Civic

The Reformation of Com of Reformation The 1578-1650. Centrum van van Centrum 1578-1650. Civic Charity in a Golden aGolden in Charity Civic The Medieval Hospital Hospital Medieval The Amsterdam Burgerwees- . Amsterdam, SUN, SUN, . Amsterdam, . AVISTA Studies in in Studies . AVISTA Geschiedenis van Civic Charity in a in Charity Civic , 1987, , 1987, Geschiedenis ), 1975. As As 1975. ), Amster ------, Eberstadt, R., R., Eberstadt, Dollen, Busso von der, ‘An historico-geo W., Denslagen, Craemer, U., Jeeninga, W., W., Jeeninga, Haagsma, I. and de, H. Haan, ‘The Gramsbergen, E.H. and H.J., Engel, acade- tot Gasthuis ‘Van van, I.H. Eeghen, van, I.H. Eeghen, Lesger, C., C., Lesger, ‘Armen- en ziekenzorg J.A., Kossmann-Putto, J.L., Kool-Blokland, D., Jetter, type of the Middle Ages Middle the of type Mittelalters 205-249. pp. 2004, Amsterdam in Jorishof Sint the and House Indies Amsterdam te Jorishof Sint Amsterdam ( Amsterdam van Universiteit de van wen 3 in Amsterdam’), of centre the of forming the and Exchange Commodity first (The Amsterdam’ van centrum het van vorming de en beursgebouw eerste gasthuis ( eeuwen Amsterdams Binnengasthuis al., et Moulin in hospital’), academic misch ziekenhuis’ hospital to (‘From 1941. van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, dissertation, the end of the 16th century to 14th the from Amsterdam, in Begijnhof eeuw 16e der eind het 14e tot de van Amsterdam, in Begijnhof housing in Holland Holland in swesen 1990. Press, birthday eightieth his of occasion the on Conzen M.R.G. for Essays Cities. Western of Form phenomena’, in T.R.Slater (red.), graphical perspective on urban fringe-belt 2001. Kohlhammer Verlag, 1963. 1550-1850 Amsterdam), in market housing The cycle. business and (Rent Amsterdam in markt 254-267. pp. 1982, dle Ages) Netherlands) der Nederlanden (General History of the in Countries’), Low Northern the in sick the and poor the in de Noordelijke for Nederlanden’ (Caring 1995. Merwedeziekenhuis From Heilig-Sacramentsgasthuis to the for the sick in Dordrecht and Sliedrecht. wedeziekenhuis Van Heilig-Sacramentsgasthuis tot Mer verzorging in Dordrecht en Sliedrecht. DuMont Verlag,Cologne, 1987. 1800). until Antiquity Late the of hospital European (The 1800 bis Spätantike der All the buildings of the Universiteit van van Universiteit the of buildings the All Four centuries of the Amsterdam Binnen Amsterdam the of centuries Four . Amsterdam, SUN, 2006, p. 59. p. 2006, SUN, . Amsterdam, Das europäische Hospital, von von Hospital, europäische Das . Leicester, Leicester University ), 1981. ), Huur en conjuctuur. De woning . Fibula-Van , Dishoeck, (Amsterdam Historical Series Das Hospital als Bautyp des des Bautyp als Hospital Das ). Zwolle, Waanders, 1995. 1995. Waanders, Zwolle, ). 2000. Architext, Haarlem, ). Het Oostindisch Huis en het het en Huis Oostindisch Het ( Städtebau und Wohnung und Städtebau The hospital as a building abuilding as hospital The , Vol 2. 2. , Vol Gouda. Algemene Geschiedenis Vrouwenkloosters en ( Seven centuries of caring caring of centuries Seven Zeven eeuwen zieken ) ( . Urban design and and design Urban Jena, Fischer, Jena, 1914. ). Dordrecht, Morks, Morks, Dordrecht, ). Middeleeuwen (Mid Zwolle, Waanders, ( Nunneries and the the and Nunneries ). Cologne ,W. Cologne ). ). Universiteit). Al de gebou de Al ( The East East The OverHolland The Built Built The - Vier Vier ------

- Meischke, R., geschiedenisMeischke, ‘De van R., het A.E.C., McCants, Schilder, M. (red.), (red.), M. Schilder, Querido, A., N., Pevsner, H., C. Parker, D.P., Oosterbaan, R. and Eeghen van I.H. de, D. Moulin, devotie en ‘Burgers de, B.R. Melker, de, B.R. Melker, Bin het van gebouwen ‘De R., Meischke, Staatsuitgeverij, 1975. Staatsuitgeverij, Orphanage) (Amsterdam City column 49-84. 1955, April 2, episode and 1-20, column 1955, 1, February episode 8(1955), year in Amsterdam’), in gasthuis Binnen or Pieters- St. the of grounds the of history (‘The Amsterdam’ te gasthuis Binnen of Pieters- St. het van terrein 1997. dam Amster modern early in care Orphan Age. van 1986. Amsterdam, Universiteit the of Seminar History 10). Vossiuspers, AUP, 1997. 1997. AUP, Vossiuspers, Ages) Middle the in teries monas (Amsterdam Middeleeuwen de in Wetenschappelijke Uitgeverij N.V., 1960. (Almshouses and hospitals) 1976. Press, University Princeton ceton, University Press, 1998. land, 1572-1620 Hol in Charity Calvinist and Welfare Social 1954. Gaade, Delft, Delft in Gasthuis Nieuwe and Oude the of History centuries. (Seven Delft te Gasthuis Nieuwe and Oude het van Geschiedenis 1981. hospital). a of history the about contributions Three turies of the Amsterdam Binnengasthuis. geschiedenis van een gasthuis Binnengasthuis. Drie bijdragen over de Meischke, 251-311. nowhere). of out Acity 1578. until Amsterdam of History (The niets het uit stad Een 1578. tot Amsterdam van Geschiedenis (ed.), Carasso-Kok M. in 1340-1520’, 2002. Amsterdam, van siteit 1435 1385- development, urban of light the in Amsterdam in institutions charitable and religious church, of cycle business and Rise devotion. and city the of morphosis stedelijke ontwikkeling, 1385-1435 the van licht het in Amsterdam in lingen kerkelijke, religieuze en charitatieve instel van conjunctuur en Ontstaan devotie. gasthuis) Binnen Amsterdam the of centuries (Four Binnengasthuis Amsterdams eeuwen Vier al., et Moulin in centuries’), 20th and 19th buildings of the in Binnengasthuis the (‘The eeuw’ 20e en 19e de in nengasthuis . Urbana, University of Illinois Press, Press, Illinois of University . Urbana, ). Unpublished dissertation, Univer Unpublished dissertation, ). , 1981. , Wormer, Immerc / Amsterdam Amsterdam, SUN, 2004, pp. pp. 2004, SUN, Amsterdam, A History of Building Types Building of A History Godshuizen en gasthuizen Vier eeuwen Amsterdams Amsterdams eeuwen Vier The Reformation of Community. Community. of Reformation The Amsterdam Burgerweeshuis Amsterdam Burgerweeshuis Metamorfose van stad en en stad van Metamorfose Civic Charity in a Golden aGolden in Charity Civic Zeven Eeuwen. Eeuwen. Zeven . Cambridge Cambridge, Amsterdamse kloosters . Amsterdam, . Amsterdam, . Amsterdam, . Amsterdam, Bulletin KNOB . The Hague, Hague, . The ( Four cen Four ( Meta - . Prin ------). ). - - - - , Vis, J., J., Vis, Vermeer, Amsterdamse ‘De kloosters G., Tang, F., and Wigard, M. Amsterdam, 2002. Boom, users its and Gate Home haar gebruikers dle Ages) Mid the in monasteries (Amsterdam wen Amsterdamse kloosters in de Middeleeu in Schildermonasteries (ed.), explained’), and architecture of history Amsterdam’s urbantorisch planning belicht’ (‘The stedenbouwkundig en architectuurhis 1994. Press, Ages ( Middeleeuwen de vanaf gasthuizen Amsterdam hospitals as of the Middle Middle the of as hospitals Amsterdam De Poort. De Oudemanhuispoort en DeDe Oudemanhuispoort Poort. ). Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Amsterdam Amsterdam, University ). , 1997, pp. 21-46. pp. , 1997, ( The Gate. The Old Men’s Men’s Old The Gate. The Amsterdamse ) , 1602-2002 . - - - tell us about the appreciation of contempo this does what and architecture this depict they did How others. among Post Pieter and Campen van Jacob Keyser, de Hendrick of architecture the in interest an showed who artists the investigates and depth greater in 17th century. This pursues article this issue architecturecontemporary throughout the eval buildings, more attention was paid to initially also depicted mainly old, often medi Amsterdam. in Keyser de Hendrick of churches important most two the Church), (Southern Zuiderkerk or Church) (Western the of that painters never depicted the interiors remarkable is It Bouman. Elias by designed synagogue Portuguese-Jewish the or 4) Exchange inCommodity Amsterdam (Fig. the as such building, a17th-century paint he would exceptions rare in Only 3). (Fig. Amsterdam and Delft in Church) New and (Old Kerk Nieuwe and Oude the as such buildings old painted always almost Witte de designed by Jacob van Campen. Haarlem, in Church) (New Kerk Nieuwe the was painted ever Saenredam building contemporary only The 2). (Fig. Utrecht in and the Romanesque and Gothic churches Haarlem in Bavo) (St Bavo Sint of interiors had an unmistakable preference for the Saenredam Pieter as such interiors church of Painters subjects. their as architecture medieval buildings instead of contemporary literature. history art in attention much received not has subject this recently, Until drawing? or apainting of motive the on deciding when arole play style architectural the did is, question main The Haarlem. and Delft Utrecht, Amsterdam, as such places in squares city and houses town churches, of images painted Heyden der van Jan and Berckheyde Gerrit Witte, de Emanuel dam, Saenre Pieter as such Artists Republic. the scenes were unprecedentedly popular in urban and interiors church of paintings 17th century, the of half second the In Altes Korthals Everhard tecture in paintings and drawings* Seventeenth-century Dutch archi Even though painters of church exteriors chose often artists that remarkable is It 2

1 Emanuel

- - - - interiors, none at all. However, the church church the However, all. at none interiors, the and artists from interest much attract not did exteriors The art. 17th-century in depicted scarcely were Keyser De by designed churches that see to remarkable architect. the of name althoughChurch), failing to mention the Zuiderkerk and Noorderkerk (Northern Westerkerk, the of architecture the praised 17th the of half second the in Amsterdam of tions illustrated historical-topographical descrip the in found be perhaps can Keyser De of possible. still abook such of publication the made which death, his after years ten appreciated much very still were buildings his appeared, had classicism of form strict amore and dated already possibly was style tectural in great detail. architecture Keyser’s De of works important time), our of Buildings or architecture (Modern tyt onsen van Bouwinge ofte Moderna tura published a book in 1631 entitled vanertsz Seevenhove and Salomon de Bray tecture contributed to this. Cornelis Danck De Keyser brought him fame and his archi of sculptures The 5). (Fig. Vliet van Hendrick Gerard Houckgeest, Emanuel de Witte and as such artists by painted regularly was it toDelft admire the monument. Furthermore, to journey aspecial made travellers foreign and Dutch several and sculpture, the praised who those among were Vos Jan and Vondel Delft. in Kerk Nieuwe the in tomb Orange’s of William opus, num mag his on based mainly was 17th century the in Keyser de Hendrick of popularity The Hendrick de Keyser work? Keyser’s De in interest limited rather the for explanation an there is Finally, 17th century? the in architecture rary commissioned by the church wardens of the the of wardens church the by commissioned probably was which painting, the details, small some from Apart left. far the on Hall) (Western Westerhal the with seen be can Market) (Western Westermarkt the left, detail. for eye incredible an with and manner precise most the in 6) (Fig. the across from church the of side east the of view frontal a nearly painted he 1660, Around Heyden. der van Jan by paintings several in theme main the exterior of the Westerkerk is depicted as The 1638. in later years afew completed was Danckerts, Cornelis by designed sibly pos tower, the and 1631 in completed was church the Pieter, son his by Led later. ayear died but church, the designed had Keyser de Hendrick 1620. in started Keyser is prominently present. De of architecture the which in drawings and The following mainlythe describes paintings profiles. town or scenes urban of ground back the in seen regularly were towers The construction of the Westerkerk Westerkerk the of construction The century, which depicted, described and which describes and depicts the most most the depicts and describes which 5 An indication of the fading glory glory fading the of indication An 4 Even though his archi 3 Poets Joost van den den van Joost Poets 6 Furthermore, it is is it Furthermore, 7 On the the On Architec ------artist emphasisedartist the difference in height the viewpoint, alow Using location. its and surroundings church’s the of a depiction rather is but portrait, architectural an of character the have not does painting This Waag) Oude and South-East the from seen Church Western the with gracht Keizers of (View Waag Oude de en gezien Zuid-Oosten het vanuit Westerkerk de met painted he London). slightly closer position (Wallace Collection, a from church the of view asimilar painted archives). city (Amsterdam, exists Heyden der Van by work exceptional this of sketch a preliminary Westerkerk, accurately depicts reality. Also, 18th century, the Westerkerk was depicted depicted was Westerkerk the century, 18th the In Westertoren. the clearly is it crown, . the near one the is drawing the on shown bridge the that meaning Westermarkt, the bridge over the Keizersgracht, north of second the from drew Rembrandt Bakker, Boudewijn to According Louvre). du Musée background) the in Westertoren the de Westertoren Keizersgracht (The with achtergrond de op met Keizersgracht De near Rembrandt . himself drew bulwark, Nieuwkerk or Osdorp the sibly artist chose a more distant viewpoint, pos 10). (Fig. Koninck Philips by possibly surroundings) and Westerkerk the of (View is century, 19th the in Rembrandt to attributed drawing, Another striking. is tower the of tion depic coarse The drawing. this in seen be also can reality with differences Some racy. tiveness rather than on topographical accu focused on the characterisation and attrac He drawings. Rembrandt’s of intention the never was precision However, striking. is detail of representation the in accuracy the glance, first At Leliebrug. the from church the of aview is himself, master the to uted attrib time along for drawing, famous This Hoogstraten. van Samuel possibly 9), (Fig. unknown student of Rembrandt van Rijn an than Westertoren the of study detailed Musée d’Ixelles). tion (Brussels, atten less attract acloud, of shadow the in fall and trees the above just rise which tower, and church the while painting, the dominate canal the along trees lit brightly the which in Kessel Van from painting another to applies also This composition. this in important less is tower the that impression the giving erhal, West the to attention the draws light of use the though even is, actually it than higher looks Westerkerk the of tower the that sion illu the creating viewpoint, alow chose also Westerhal and the Westerkerk) en de Westerkerk (Keizersgracht with the painting his in similar something did Kessel van Jan point. highest Amsterdam’s tower, and church the and houses canal the between Het gezicht op de Westerkerk en omgeving en Westerkerk de op gezicht Het No one in the 17th century made a more amore made 17th century the in one No De Keizersgracht met de Westerhal Westerhal de met Keizersgracht De 9 8 Ultimately, around 1667-1670, 1667-1670, around Ultimately, Approximately ten years later, he he later, years ten Approximately Het gezicht op de Keizersgracht Keizersgracht de op gezicht Het 15 Based on the tower’s typical typical tower’s the on Based (Fig. 8). (Fig. 12 (Fig. 7). (Fig.

(Paris, (Paris, 14 The The 11 10 He He -

- - 13 - , - - - - -

century artists. An exception was Abraham Abraham was exception An artists. century 17th- from attention any received hardly 1623, and 1620 between built and Keyser de position. this use did Art) of Museum Philadelphia the in apainting in Monet Claude (including ries centu later in artists many while viewpoint, for the obvious picturesque Groenburgwal opted centuries 18th 17th and the in one no Historical Museum). and the Zuiderkerkstoren (both Amsterdam Houtgracht the depict 1758 from drawing and apainting example, for times: several Beyer de Jan of works the in appears tower The larger. is century 18th the in Zuiderkerk trees. and houses the above high rising tower the and the outlined roughly he which in 12) (Fig. Kessel van Jan by ing adraw in role prominent more afar gets it but background, the in role a secondary drawing. Kloveniersburgwal) the and Kloveniersdoelen the with nenamstel Bin the of (View Kloveniersburgwal de en de Binnenamstel met de Kloveniersdoelen Beerstraaten, Abraham by Drawn Blauwbrug. the of direction the in Amstel the of bank right the over looks viewer The Szépmûvészetiwell Múzeum). (Budapest, the by dominated was Blooteling. Abraham by printed later was that halle) Kunst- (Bremen, adrawing in viewpoint same the used Ruisdael van Jacob accuracy, de Keyser’s design. With little attention to Pieter with accordance in 1636 in built was mitage, and private collection). Her Petersburg, (St. Gate) Anthony’s (Saint houses located near the Sint Anthonispoort the above rises tower the which in Heyden, der van Jan from paintings two are examples seems to be slightly exaggerated. Other which of height the Church), Southern the the houses, the Zuiderkerkstoren (Tower of above high rising it, behind with shown, is house) (Weigh Waag the of building eval with the Zuiderkerk) Nieuwmarkt the of (View Zuiderkerk de met in as ground, back the in showing tower the of depictions several are there However, 11). (Fig. wal which also shows(Sailor), the Zwanenburg Zeeman as known Nooms, Reinier by 1659 from apainting in depicted clearly most was church The 17th century. the in theme main the as depicted ever hardly was 1611), (1603- Amsterdam in church Protestant built among others. Vinkeles Reinier and Beyer de Jan by printed or drawn mainly but Ouwater, Isaak as such artists by painted was it time to time From century. previous the in than often more Binnenamstel) the of (View Binnenamstel de op gezicht Het Berckheyde. The Noorderkerk, designed by Hendrick The Zuiderkerk, the first large and newly newly and large first the Zuiderkerk, The 22 The number of depictions of the 21 The Zuiderkerkstoren takes only 19 The background of the painting painting the of background The 17 Het gezicht op de Nieuwmarkt Nieuwmarkt de op gezicht Het On the right, the old medi old the right, the On 16 , also by Jacob van Ruisdael, Ruisdael, van Jacob by , also

is an extremely detailed detailed extremely an is 23 by Gerrit Adriaensz. It is remarkable that that remarkable is It Zuiderkerkstoren 18 This gate gate This Gezicht op op Gezicht as as - - - 20 - - -

-

9 OverHolland 6 – Architectural Studies for the Dutch City 10 English Translation among others. The Haringpakkerstoren mous painter Job (possibly Berckheyde) anony an and Berckheyde Gerrit Storck, Jacobus Nooms, Reinier by painted was the background. The Jan Roodenpoortstoren Zuiderkerkstoren is often depicted small in and Ludolf Backhuizen among others. Ruisdael van Jacob (?), Kessel van Jan Neer, Rembrandt, Pieter de la Tombe, Aert van der 16), (Fig. Goyen van Jan Saverij, Roelant by Abraham and Jacobus Storck and drawn and Heeremans Thomas Neer, der van Aert Beerstraaten, Jan Nooms, Abrahamsz. Reinier by painted was Montelbaanstoren The art. 17th-century in appear regularly toren, all renovated by Hendrick de Keyser, Roodenpoortstoren and Haringpakkers- Jan Montelbaanstoren, the Amsterdam, of Albertina). (Vienna, modity Exchange by the Rembrandt school Com the and Rokin the of adrawing is there etched. and drawn both times, several Exchange Commodity the and galerie). Staats surroundingimaginary (Stuttgart, the building, and in addition, adding a partly of back the from viewpoint unobvious and modity Exchange, but chose an unusual Com the painted also Heyden der van Jan centre. trade international an as Exchange ofimportance the Amsterdam Commodity the emphasise who traders many include also they but architecture, the depict only not paintings these of Most courtyard. the of the building, including the gate leading to façade North the shows however, Frankfurt as theircourtyard The subject. painting in 15)). (Fig. cal am Museum and Staedel Main, Frankfurt Amsterdam Amsterdam, Beuningen, Histori Museum Boijmans VanWitte (Rotterdam, de Emanuel and Berckheyde Job boons, include paintingsExamples by Philips Ving printed. regularly was it although drawn, or Exchange wasCommodity hardly painted started. Keyser, de Exchange, generally attributed to Hendrick since. found been has painting the of trace no but 1709, 18 April on is supposed to also have existed. It was sold A painting from Seghers of the Noorderkerk church. the surrounding houses the of roofs the and building the of side North the over looked he awindow, from up High gracht. Linden the of side North the on own his bly possi house, atall from church the etched 14). (Fig. print a fascinating Seghers also depicted the Noorderkerk in Hercules painting. the of point focal the it The sunlight illuminates the church,making snow. in covered are trees the of branches the and church the of roof The city. the above sky the in appear clouds dark ice, the on themselves enjoying are people of crowd centrally in a winter view (Fig. 13). (Fig. view awinter in centrally church the depicted who Beerstraaten It is remarkable that the old city towers towers city old the that remarkable is It Commodity the of works building 1607, In 28 27 Reinier Nooms depicted the Rokin These painters mostly chose the the chose mostly painters These 26 In the 17th century, the the 17th century, the In 29 Furthermore, 25 He must have have must He 24 While a While 30 The The ------appreciation of the ‘schilderachtig’ (i.e. lovers’ art many by explained be perhaps can preference This subject. their as ture tecture instead of architec contemporary century, often artists chose medieval archi 17th the of part alarge During arts? visual the in architecture Keyser’s de Hendrick in interest limited the explain we can How Picturesque 17th century. the in churches Amsterdam the than depicted less even were Delft of hall town the and Heads’ the with ‘House the Company), Indian – East (VOC House Indian East the Gate), Rasphuis and (Spin Rasphuispoortje en Spin- the Gate), the (Haarlemmer Haarlemmerpoort 140-142, House’, ‘Dolphin the lotti), Barto- (House Bartolotti Huis the Tower), (Mint Munttoren the as such Keyser, de 1). and 17 (Fig. Keyser De by afterwards added was ted the high spire, a modern addition which as Jacob van Ruisdael intentionally omit well as Rembrandt, and Saverij Roelant Both Montelbaanstoren. the of drawings three are this of examples best The emphasised. artists certain that age their was it and ries centu 16th and 15th the to back dated They old. years 100 than more were pakkerstoren toren, Jan Roodenpoortstoren and Haring Montelbaans- the while new, relatively were churches these that perhaps was factor and look equally picturesque. An important Westerkerk and Zuiderkerk are much taller the of towers The Keyser? De by churches the than attention more much so get towers others. among Storck Jacobus and Goyen van Jan Visscher, Jan Claes by drawn and Thomas Heeremans and Hobbema Meindert Storck, Abraham and Jacobus Beerstraaten, Abraham Goyen, van Jan by painted was variation of the term, praised by painter and and painter by praised term, the of variation appreciation was given to the more liberal in its traditional meaning. Eventually, more word the using on kept others while shapes, clear, balanced and strictly built geometric new, fine, straight, namely painting, worth sequently descibe what they believed was original, neutral meaning in order to sub his (in Bisschop de Jan artist amateur as such authors, classicistic 17th century, the ing andvaried, typical strange. striking, Dur ugly, even or deviant peculiar, or special Other possiblemeanings are characteristic, picturesque if it was run-down or unsuitable. be to thought was Abuilding structure. in irregular and time by characterised ful, picturesque meant colour particularly however, 17th century the of start the At painted’. be to ‘suitable was word the of literature.history art 17th-century in appeared often which term, this researched Bakker Boudewijn character of‘picturesque’) old architecture. Paradigmata Other buildings in the style of Hendrick Hendrick of style the in buildings Other city remarkable three these did Why from 1671), revert to the the to revert 1671), from 32 The neutral meaning 31 ------appeared in the visual arts was also altered. altered. also was arts visual the in appeared frequency with buildings which certain the ‘picturesque’, term the of definition ings desired by the bourgeoisie. ‘noble’ and subsequently also did the paint became class middle the 17th century, the During taste. in achange of result the picturesque were possibly established as term the of definitions different The scenes. charactercentury of and landscapes urban 18th- the determined has that view this is also exquisite, respectable and modest. It preference a‘correct’ to thanks but nature (1707), namely lively, charming and true-to- painting) of book great (The Schilderboek his in Lairesse de Gerard theorist art Westerkerk, Zuiderkerk and Noorderkerk the in interest no showed and Kerk, Oude the as such Amsterdam, in churches old the depict not did 17th century, the of half second the in worked who artist, this why peculiar is it that Berckheyde Gerrit on study axis. principle house’s the of side South the clearly depicts the unique situated loggia, on 22). (Fig. times a few drew Bisschop de Jan and occasions several on depicted Croos der van Pieter and Jacob Nieuburch near which Anthony, Rijswijk, ter Huis and Beerstraaten van Abraham by palaces are Huis Honselaersdijck, depicted 21). (Fig. Pieter van Florisz. der Sallem had designed and he that gardens beautiful the to tion atten much paying times, six Ten Bosch Huis painted Heyden der van Jan ground. back the in seen be often can Huygenshuis the of part Asmall Vijverberg. Lange the from viewed Hofvijver the of water the near 20). (Fig. painted several times by Gerrit Berckheyde Mauritshuis 19). (Fig. the and Huygenshuis the both drew Call van Jan and Bisschop de Jan Hague. The in Ten Bosch Huis and Mauritshuis the and Amsterdam in Heiligewegspoort the as such 17th century, the of decades last the during regularly depicted in paintings and drawings also were others, among Post Pieter and buildings, designed by Jacob van Campen classicistic other However, subject. this of popularity immense the in role important an played citizens Amsterdam’s of pride the of asymbol as hall town the of purpose and size exceptional the as well as style modern The 18). (Fig. architecture classicistic to hall by Berckheyde, who paid much attention town the of view frontal the is example tiful aensz. Berckheyde among others. Adri Gerrit and Heyden van Jan Ulft, der van Jacob by depicted often was Campen, van Jacob by designed Amsterdam, in hall architecture decreased. The new town while the number of depictions of medieval 17th century, the of half second the in porary, classicistic architecture increased In fact, the number of depictions of contem It is plausible that due to the changed changed the to due that plausible is It Cynthia Lawrence already noted in her her in noted already Lawrence Cynthia 37 36 Examples of other classicistic classicistic other of Examples He always depicted the façade façade the depicted always He 38 35 The drawing shown shown drawing The The Mauritshuis was 33 34 Abeau Groot ------De Keyser as the architect of the Zuiderkerk, Zuiderkerk, the of architect the as Keyser De mention not does 262, and 255-256 77-82, Manke, I. 2. 215-228. This possibly explains the small number of of number small the explains possibly This picturesque. be to old too considered was it 17th century the in later and enough old be to architecture Keyser’s De consider not did initially Painters 17th century. the in fashion of out and classicism of form strict more a of rise the to due superseded became that astyle in designed were Keyser De of meaning clear and The balanced. churches opinion, his in picturesque more was it as probably chose contemporary architecture, hall. town new the obviously the Synagogueand Guesthouse), (Oudezijds theChurch), Oudezijds Herenlogement Lutheran (Round Kerk Lutherse Ronde the as such architecture contemporary to drawn more felt instead but either, Keyser De by raphy of Amsterdam). laer, Tobias (Noorderkerk); van369-370 Domse (Westerkerk), pp. (Zuiderkerk), pp. 360-361 dam city). Stadt Amsterdam (Topography of Amster Zesen, von Filips 232; Amsterdam). town trading renowned the of (Topography wijdt-vermaarde koop-stadt Amstelredam Melchior6. Fokkens, 101. p. 1999, Hague) The in Huygens Constantijn of house The (Domus. Haag Den in Huygens Ottenheym, K. and Bruin H.G. Blom, F.R.E. also See 5. time). our of Buildings or Architecture (Modern tyt onsen van Bouwinge ofte Moderna tura Danckertsz, C. and Bray de S. 4. Amsterdam sa [around1930]. Amsterdam). of architect and sculptor ser, Key de (Hendrick Amsterdam van meester Hendrick de Keyser, beeldhouwer en bouw Neurdenburg, E. also 211-231. See pp. 2003, teenth-century Dutch tomb sculpture Sumptuous memories: studies in seven- F. Scholten, 110-118 pp. 126-132; and 2001, Keyser). De and Prince (The Keyser F. Scholten, and Ex N. 3. and 109). 77 76, (Fig. not are definitely most which look like the Westerkerk and Zuiderkerk, but that Witte de Emanuel of interiors church afew mentions 43-44, pp. 1963, Amsterdam day). his in painter (The tijd zijn in schilder De redam. Bok, M.J. and Schwartz 1. G. version of this article. his comments and suggestions on a previous for Bakker Boudewijn thank to like * Iwould drawing. or apainting of subject the on ing decid in role asignificant played have must architecture. of The style the architecture paintings and drawings clearly depicting his Notes Beschryvinge vanBeschryvinge Amsterdam (Topog Amsterdam, 1631. Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1664, pp. 307-308 307-308 pp. 1664, Amsterdam Maarssen/Den Haag 1989, pp. pp. 1989, Haag Maarssen/Den Domus. Het huis van Constantijn Constantijn van huis Het Domus. Emanuel de Witte 1617-1672 Witte de Emanuel Amsterdam, 1663, pp. 226- pp. 1663, Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1665, pp. pp. 1665, Amsterdam Beschrijvinge der Beschreibung der De Prins en De De en Prins De 39 Pieter Saen Pieter Berckheyde Architec . Zutphen, . Zutphen, Bussum, Bussum, . Zwolle, . Zwolle, - . - -

- - - - - 1999, pp. 171-173, fig 2. 171-173, pp. fig 1999, Custodia Bussum 1998- Foundation, Paris, near Amsterdam). and in Walks Rembrandt. of landscape (The Amsterdam om en in Wandelingen brandt. al. et Bakker B. 15. 75. no. 1996, dam auction 12 (Sotheby’s), November tertoren is visible on the far right, Amster Wes- the of aglimpse Koninck, Philips from drawing adifferent In Albertina). (Vienna, viewpoint same the virtually with drawing also mentions a different 17th-century Broos 159-161. pp. 44, no. cat. 13), (note catalogue. exhibition Broos, 14. 187-200. pp. Tower’). ern West Hoogstraten’s van (‘Samuel ertoren’ West Hoogstraten’s van ‘Samuel Binstock, B. 82-86; pp. 19, no. cat. 1981, Museum) ment’). and draughtsmen in his(‘Rembrandt environ omgeving zijn uit tekenaars en brandt catalogue. exhibition Broos, B. 13. 10. 118-119, no. pp. cat. Ibidem, 12. 7. 113-115, no. pp. cat. 1992, Doornspijk Davies, 11. A. Heyden Wagner, See background. the which depicts the Westertoren very small in der Heyden in London, Bridgewater House, Van of scene urban imaginary an is example Another 133-134. pp. 13, no. cat. 7), (note Sutton, 9; no. 69, p. Wagner, 10. 38-39. p. 7), (note Sutton, 147-149, P225; tion. Catalogue of Ingamells, 7; J. 67, no. Wagner, 9. 39. no. 99-101, pp. 1989, Amsterdam) Archives, of Amsterdam 1600-1900). Drawings collection: Eeghen Van (The 1900 Eeghen: Amsterdamse Tekeningen 1600- al. et Bakker B. 8. 37-38. pp. USA and 2006, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, Bruce Museum, Greenwich, Connecticut, catalogue exhibition Sutton, P.C. 6526; no. 557, p. 1600-1900 Brown, C. en MacLaren N. 8; no. 69, 1971, p. Amsterdam/Haarlem 7. Wagner, H. Tower). (Haarlemmer Haarlemmerpoort and JanExchange, Roodenpoortstoren kerk and Noorderkerk, Commodity Zuider- Westerkerk, the of architect the as p. 397,1663, mentions Hendrick de Keyser toric topography of Amsterdam). rische beschrijvinge van Amsterdam (His Tower).Roodenpoort Dapper, Olfert (Jan Roodenpoortstoren Jan the of a section of architect the as him mention does he 258 pakkertoren Packer (Herring Tower); on p. Tower)baanstoren (Montelbaan and Haring Westerkerk and Noorderkerk, the Montel Amsterdam (Amsterdam Historic (note 7), p. 16. 16. p. 7), (note Jan van der Heyden (1637-1712) Heyden der van Jan . National Gallery, London, 1991, Jan van der Heyden Master Drawings Jan van der Heyden Jan van der Heyden Jan van Kessel (1641-1680) Kessel van Jan pictures City Archives Amsterdam/ Amsterdam/ Archives City De verzameling Van Van verzameling De Het landschap van Rem van landschap Het Jan van der Heyden The Wallace Collec Jan van der Heyden The Dutch School School Dutch The . London 1992, pp. pp. 1992, . London Amsterdam (City (City Amsterdam XLV (2007), XLV (2007), Jan van der der van Jan (note 7), p. p. 7), (note Amsterdam Rembrandt (note 7), 7), (note . Rem Histo-

------, - . -

- - Angeles County Museum)/ Philadelphia Museum)/ Angeles County Landscape. of Master Slive, S. 156-161; pp. collection) Eeghen Van (The Eeghen het centrum van Amsterdam’ (‘The first first (‘The Amsterdam’ van centrum het van vorming de en beursgebouw eerste ‘Het Gramsbergen, E. and Engel H. 26. hers Begemann, Haverkamp E. 25. hamsz. Beerstraaten). century). seventeenth the from Artists straaten. schilders uit de zeventiende eeuw (Beer Most, der van G. 24. 14. 1745). and 1660 between born draughtsmen Dutch Museum. Historical Amsterdam of hands in drawings 1745 en (Old 1660 tussen geboren Historisch Museum. Nederlandse tekenaars Amsterdams het van bezit het in tekeningen Oosterzee, van &L. Oud I. 78-84; Romers, 23. lost. were Kessel Van by Zuiderkerk the of paintings three years, the over that tions men which 194, d1. 1, fig. no. cat. 232-233, Davies, 22. 240. no. 1874, logue 21. Previously Fodor Museum, see cata 2. no. 15, p. Ibidem, 20. D32. 516-517, no. etchings catalogue of his drawings and paintings, Slive, S. 19. 20. no. 2006, 6December (Sotheby’s), Heyden Sutton, also See 19. 17 and no. Wagner, 18. x41 cm. 29,5 panel, 2004, 7July (Bonhams), Auction 17. London 87-88. pp. 1969, ’s-Gravenhage, works’). his of Catalogue Beijer. de (‘J. logus Romers, H. see jer, Bei De For 1997. 3October on (Sotheby’s) London in auctioned was which 1779 in version adifferent painted He Ottawa. Canada, of Gallery National the in display on is 1778 from version Ouwater’s 16. brandt landscape) (Rembrandt’s Bakker, See 30. 23. 77, no. p. 8), al., et Bakker 29. 46-47. p. 7), Sutton, 5; no. 68, Wagner, 28. 1550-1800). Staedel the at paintings (Dutch 1550-1800 Krempel, L. 59; and 35 no. 278-281, and 188-191 pp. Museum Boijmans Van 1991, Beuningen, century). 17th the of painters Saenredam andspectives: the architectural architectuurschilders van de 17e logue. cata exhibition Jansen, &G. Giltaij 27. J. 57-87. pp. 2006, centre’), city Amsterdam’s of creation the and exchange commodity . The Hague, 1973, pp. 87-88, no. 41. no. 87-88, pp. 1973, Hague, . The Amsterdam/Zwolle 1999, p. 30, no. no. 30, p. 1999, Amsterdam/Zwolle Perspectieven: Saenredam en de (note 7), p. 45; London auction auction London 45; p. 7), (note . New Haven & London 2001, pp. pp. 2001, &London Haven . New Noorden 2002, p. 26 (as Jan Abra Jan (as 26 p. 2002, Noorden Holländische Gemälde im Städel Petersberg, 2005, pp. 30-36. pp. 2005, Petersberg, Jan van Kessel van Jan Jacob van Ruisdael. A complete Acomplete Ruisdael. van Jacob Jan van der Heyden Jan van der Heyden Jan de Beijer de Jan Het landschap van Rem van landschap Het Jan van der Heyden De verzameling Van Van verzameling De J. de Beijer. Oeuvre-cata Beijer. de J. Beerstraaten. Kunst Jacob van Ruisdael. Ruisdael. van Jacob Los Angeles (Los (Los Angeles Los (note 16), pp. pp. 16), (note OverHolland (note 11), pp. pp. 11), (note Rotterdam, Hercules Seg Hercules Jan van der der van Jan eeuw (Per (note 15), 15), (note (note 7), 7), (note (note 7), p. p. 7), (note Oude (note (note (note (note - - 3, 3, ------

- - the Bartolotti Huis, see Sutton, For 86. 1977, no. Museum, Historical dam Amster of Gallery Art Ontario/Amsterdam, Sources) its and Century 17th the in Cityscape Dutch (The 17de de eeuw in zicht bloei van het Noordnederlandse stadsge- Seeers. exhibition catalogue oth among Tombe la de Pieter and Storck Jacobus by depicted was Munt 31. The D4. and 99 no. 484, 151 and pp. 2002, Doornspijk W. Schulz, 33; p. 24), Most, 34; 87, no. p. 5, no. Van(The Eeghen collection) al. et Bakker 70. no. 184-185, pp. 2005, Academy) (Royal London Museum of(Philadelphia Art)/ ace Foundation, Amsterdam, Zwolle 1997; 1997; Zwolle Amsterdam, Foundation, ace palace in Golden Age paintings schilderkunst van de Gouden Eeuw al., et Peeters J. 34. 51-60. pp. 2006, Kassel Meister, Alte galerie Dordrecht’s Dordrecht Museum, / Gemälde 1750). 1670- painting Dutch glory. Crowning (The 1670-1750 schilderkunst Hollandse werk. Weber, G. Paarlberg, S. Mai, E. in 1700’), around “noble” became painting of art the how of aspects Several schilderkunst rond 1700’ (‘A steep climb. de van “veradellijking” de van aspecten Enkele klim. steile ‘Een Weber, G. 33. 145-171. pp. 2006, Zwolle, Leiden, Lakenhal, de Museum and Kassel landscapes). Rembrandts landschappen (Rembrandt’s cat. exh. Weber, G.J.M. Vogelaar, C. in tion’), tradi Dutch the and aesthetics Rembrandt’s Art? or (‘Nature traditie’, Nederlandse de ‘Natuur of kunst? Rembrandts esthetica en Bakker, B. 319-338; pp. 2004, Bussum Rembrandt’). to Eyck Van From view. world and (Landscape Rembrandt tot Eyck Van Bakker, B. art). of rules the and (Rembrandt kunst de van regels Emmens, J.A. also See concept’, and term aseventeenth-century of sions pp. 11-24; B. architecture 1650-1900). and theory art, Dutch in ‘Schilderachtig’ 1650-1900 Studies (‘Schilderachtig’. about Nederlandse kunst, theorie en architectuur Studies over het schilderachtige in de (ed.) al. et Eck van C. in concept’), and term century seventeenth discussions of a (‘“Schilderachtig”: eeuw’ zeventiende de in begrip en term over sies Bakker, B. 32. discus ‘“Schilderachtig”: Teylers(Haarlem, Museum). Eeckhout den van Gerbrand by a drawing in and Berlin) zu Museen Staatliche galerie, Jantion), van der Gemälde Heyden (Berlin, collec (Private Goyen van Jan Museum), VroomCornelisz. (Amsterdam Historical Hendrick by apainting in depicted was poort 47. Haarlemmer p. The 7), (note Heyden Wallraf-Richartz-Museum, Cologne / Wallraf-Richartz-Museum, Simiolus Simiolus Landschap en wereldbeeld. Van Van wereldbeeld. en Landschap Utrecht 1968, pp. 124-129; 124-129; pp. 1968, Utrecht Bakker, discus ‘Schilderachtig: Gemäldegalerie Alte De verzameling Van Eeghen Eeghen Van verzameling De 23 (1995), pp. 147-162. pp. (1995), 23 Het paleis in de de in paleis Het Aert van der Neer Het Schilderachtige. Rembrandt en de De Kroon op het het op Kroon De Amsterdam 1994, 1994, Amsterdam Beerstraaten (note 8), p. 61, 61, p. 8), (note Opkomst en en Opkomst ), Royal Pal Royal ), Jan van der der van Jan Meister, ( . Toronto, . Toronto, The The (note (note . - -

- -

------Amsterdam, Zwolle 1992, pp. 9, 33 and 36; 36; and 33 9, pp. 1992, Zwolle Amsterdam, and draughtsman). lawyer Episcopus, (1628-1671). Bisschop de (Jan tekenaar en advocaat Episcopus, Plomp, M. and Jellema R.E. 268-269; pp. particular in 288, Lawrence, C. 79; Dumas, 79; Lawrence, 36. were depicted often. others while drawn, or painted never almost were Campen Van and Post of buildings some that remarkable is It 32). no. 85-86, pp. collection) Eeghen Van (The Eeghen Van verzameling al., et (Bakker others among Ruisdael van Jacob and Beerstraaten Abrahamsz. Jan by and Abraham Beerstraaten and drawings Abrahamsz. Jan and 109-113) pp. (Davies, Kessel van Jan by paintings see poort, Heiligewegs- the For Post. Pieter after dius Hon Hendrik by Huygenshuis the of drawing a shows also 167, p. which 1991, Zwolle, 1550-1800). scenes urban (Hague 1800 Dumas, C. 1628-1671’, 1628-1671’, Bisschop de ‘Jan Gelder, van J.G. 1993; Pieter Post (1608-1669), architect Ottenheym, K.A. and Terwen J.J. 1995; Age). Golden the in ideal classic The Campen. van (Jacob Eeuw Gouden de in ideaal klassieke Het Campen. van Jacob Schwartz, G. Ottenheym, K. Huisken, J. 35. 57. and 56 54, 52, 49, 48, Figs. (1638-1698) 39. Lawrence, Lawrence, 39. 520-527. and 344-349 pp. urban scenes) Dumas, 38. Klotz. Valentijn and Call van Jan Croos, der van Anthony and Jacob which among artists, other by drawings also mentions364 several paintings and urban scenes) (Hague stadsgezichten Haagse Dumas, p. 7), (note Heyden der van Jan Sutton, 133-139; no. 96-98, pp. 37. Wagner, 192-197. urban scenes) 17, no. and 72-73, pp. 8), (note Haagse stadsgezichten 1550- Haagse stadsgezichten (Hague Haagse stadsgezichten (Hague Oud Holland . Doornspijk 1991, pp. 49-60, 49-60, pp. 1991, . Doornspijk Jan van der Heyden Gerrit Adriaensz. Berckheyde (note 35), p. 23, fig 15, and and 15, fig 23, p. 35), (note and 322-329 pp. 35), (note 115-116 pp. and 35), (note Jan de Bisschop (1628-1671). (1628-1671). Bisschop de Jan Berckheyde Berckheyde Het Rembrandthuis, 158-163, no. 22-23. 22-23. no. 158-163, 86 (1971), pp. 201- pp. (1971), 86 (note 34), p. 52. p. 34), (note (note 34), fig. fig. 34), (note Amsterdam, Amsterdam, (note 7), 7), (note . Zutphen . Zutphen

De De -

11 OverHolland 6 – Architectural Studies for the Dutch City 12 English Translation Oswald Mathias Ungers, who had both a both had who Ungers, Mathias Oswald of work the with affinity his in seen be to is in urban and architectural This paradigms. York of publication the Until this. at alternatives. offer to tries Koolhaas lands, Nether the in perceives he that planning tion to the extremely overdetermined spatial opposi In modernity’. of ‘maelstrom the to rather but despite, the Dutch landscape might not be caused of ‘clutter’ the view, this In neglected. being them around everything to leads centers city the to approach rigid The devices. own its to left being that of outside everything in results which center, city historic ‘nice’ the of myth acertain from suffer cities Dutch that notes also he symposium the At place’. its in grows whatever ‘accept only could discipline the if arise could that potential the to opposition direct in is This control. under everything keep to need the all above on its conventionality, its politeness and comments He inflexibility. its about is 1990 modern is de Nederlandse architectuur? architecture during the symposium The criticism that Koolhaas directs at Dutch S,M,L,XL in: 6.1, City (Generic Koolhaas Rem place.’ its in grows whatever accept to and realism of blacktop of idealism with the jackhammers the up break –to use its outlived has – what work doesn’t what abandon to simply is great‘The originality of the Generic City 15) p. landse architectuur? Rem Koolhaas overgegeven en zich schrapgezet. maximaal architectuur zich al voor de oorlog minimaal Nederlandse de heeft dan maalstroom, ofnisering, schrapzetten tegen diezelfde overgave aan de maalstroom van moder schrapzetten, en overgave tussen ningsveld ‘Als de moderniteit zich afspeelt in een span Schrijver Lara conditions and architectural form Urban Koolhaas: and Ungers The early work of Koolhaas already hints hints already Koolhaas of work early The , his work is oriented towards the shifts shifts the towards oriented is work , his . Rotterdam, 010, 1995. p. 1232) p. 1995. 010, . Rotterdam, (in (in Hoe modern is de Neder because of because Rotterdam: 010, 1990, 1990, 010, Rotterdam: the resistance resistance the Delirious New New Delirious Hoe Hoe - in in - - - - hier een groot wederzijds negeren. Ook in mijn leven ben tegengekomen. Er heerst verloederde onderwijssituatieis die ik ooit meest de het dat zeggen ik kan Delft ‘Van answers: he Delft, and London York, New of contexts educational the compare can he whether question the to response In Dijk. van Hans with interview early an in cally Dutch context is put forward unapologeti te belonen.’ de gemeend jury dit plan met een premie heeft zetten, kan beweging in stedebouw, en architectuur van waarden de over sie en situatie, ook voor de algemene discus een shockeffect de gedachten over ontwerp door ontwerp dit …Omdat waargemaakt architectonische niet doorwerking wordt de in pretentie intellectuele de waarvan plan hard een omgeving deze in is ‘Het ambivalence: of display exemplary an offers building parliament Dutch the to extension the on report jury the example, For cism. voiced from the side of architectural criti being dilemmas in resulted often This time. the of ideas the with odds at been often has work his particular in Netherlands the in least as many questions as it answers, and Generic invokes. City that ‘realism’ the of potential the embrace to possible it makes explore, continually they contradictions of field The city. European different perspective on the contemporary a offers 1978 and 1968 between Ungers and Koolhaas of work the sense, this In itself. in object an as rather but stone, in carved ideal an as not and focus, their is building The time. the at common was what than city the in object architectural the for role ent adiffer of conceived Both him. for projects of anumber on worked also subsequently and Ungers, with studied first Koolhaas Rossi. Aldo with shared he ideas of number a as well Xas Team with connection loose the Dutch architecture debate, predomi ‘Generic City’. in suggest would Koolhaas as reality’ ‘accepting of ity possibil the consider to strong too still was in social engineering through architecture belief the Netherlands, the In architecture. modern with relationship its in Delft TU the at reigned still that discomfort the revealed is de Nederlandse architectuur? symposium the at questions some pose to opportunity the saw he where is This however. Delft TU the at sorship him from accepting a temporary profes heid en naïviteit?’ toch van een ontstellende plompverloren zogenoemde Hollandse Structuralisme is theorieën hier ontstellend primitief zijn. Dat een formele Vandaar kunst. dat alle formele als architectuur de van bewustzijn het van politieke geleid tot een volkomen wegebben het en bewogene sociaal het warme, het menselijke, het voor aandacht de juist heeft The complicated relationship between at raise to tends Koolhaas of work The Delirious New York 1 His own relationship with the the with relationship own His 2 All of this did not prevent prevent not did this of All Hoe modern and the later later the and which which ------At the Architectural Association (AA) in in (AA) Association Architectural the At Dutch the for ajournalist as working and film studying first after 1968, in Rem Koolhaas began studying architecture Against idealisations architect. an as work his to little and scenarios), (of awriter as background his to given being attention excessive to leads This program. and function on primarily focused is debate this indeed –since architecture speak explicitly about the formal aspects of to refusal his supports that work his of tion interpreta an to contributed likely has haas as the inscrutable personality) of Rem Kool well (as work the and 1960s, late the in Eyck Van of ideas the around revolving nantly fronted him with “architecture’s true nature”, nature”, true “architecture’s with him fronted con it words, own his In program. without object an of character lively the with banal’, length from intensely symbolic to ‘casual, create it, with the various disguises along its that elements separate the and totality its between tension the with scale, aheroic with event, the versus form architectural of tion ques the with him confronted It with. gles strug later he questions the of many holds it on writing his and trajectory, conventional subsequent interpretation did not follow a and project of choice His significance. its correlation between architectural form and direct the questioned it architecture: of traditional understanding of the discipline a overturned hand at object the of view Oddly enough, architectural his specifically urban an embodied wall Berlin the that argued he formation, its on speculations with wall the of presence architectural the of study acareful Combining work. later his time, his approach would prove prophetic for same the At architecture. the of analysis articulated acarefully required: was what precisely was it of examination his object, of assignment with his unconventional choice the from stray to appeared he Although old. years ten already then by wall, Berlin the study to decided Koolhaas villa. Italian an as such architecture of work a ‘classic’ was project of choice typical The object. documentation of an existing architectural a as intended was Study’ ‘Summer the few traditional elements of the program, the of One AA. the at studies his of part as AA. the at thought of mode architecture from expected he what on clear extremely be to him forced it since imagined, have could he than him for fruitful more was he would later suggest that this environment crete knowledge and techniques. However, from experienced teachers, through con acraft learn to hoped had who Koolhaas, to a sense, this school was a disappointment mind’ than to learn drafting techniques. In your ‘free to important more was it believed who hippies’ ‘rice-cooking of culture 1960s London, he encountered the quintessential In the summer of 1971, he visited Berlin Berlin visited 1971, he of summer the In in opposition to the dominant dominant the to 3 Haagse Post condition - . - - - - - . social emancipation. Next, in a series of four four of aseries in Next, emancipation. social and political of apower not was it believed, teachers his what to contrary but power, had certainly Architecture taught. was he eration lib the about than exclusion and separation that architecture was inevitably more about concluded he First, presence. its of fact pure the to asensitivity with coupled achieve can architecture what of limits the reveal the statementsdwelling), on the Berlin wall of forms new to lead then could (which building’ of kind anew imply that facts tural than Le Corbusier’s description of ‘architec Rather architecture. anew towards points five Corbusier’s Le to acounterpoint as epiphanies’, which it is tempting to consider ‘reverse five of series in a defined he which ing”. The project, when presented at the AA, AA, the at presented when project, The ing”. mean for avessel as form in believe again never “would he why communicating, was it message the and wall the of appearance most the fundamental: tension between the the perhaps And presence”. with a contest in win always would –absence architecture “in could: ever object any than more porate incor could which nothingness, of power the demonstrated absence as wall The spot.” the on evaporated It play. rhetorical about1960s architecture “seemed feeble the of optimism The work. later his of light in study merit that embedded are doxes bothepiphanies, insights and little para reverse these in wall, Berlin the with tion 5). 4, (figs. architecture the of introduction later the at hints already wall, the along events of astoryboard as photographs, of series The 3). (fig. text the in out written ambivalence the expresses that a compositional elementLeWitt structures”), Sol of line endless “an as them describes the crosses become aesthetic (Koolhaas here, yet visible; still guns their of glint – the background the in marching soldiers two of bodies lower the just and foreground, the in crosses antitank with ominous, more are images Other 2). (figs.1, wire barbed the and fence chain-link the between bag?) (a object an of passing the Or friends?). behind? left (family them to waving people see to wire barbed the through and blocks concrete the wall, where a bride and her groom look over the defying somehow life everyday show impotent and omnipotent. Some images demonstrate architecture as simultaneously form, between decision and creation, and theport tension between program and contradictory, deformations. often infinite, in expressed nevertheless was underlying ‘essential’ modern project that an represented wall the that and equated; be not could mass and importance that ing; causal relationship between form and mean proportional to its horror; that there was no was wall the of beauty the that concluded he architecture, in truths accepted of revisions In his conclusions to the confronta the to conclusions his In The accompanying photographs sup scenario as a guiding force in creating creating in force aguiding as 4 ------relegates architectural form to a secondary a secondary to form architectural relegates Koolhaas that idea an be to seems there perhaps?) accessible more appear ings per project. Somehow (because the writ intentions Koolhaas’ on than more it, form on architecture and the conditions that thoughts general offer they as insofar ing, some ways we might consider them mystify in And buildings. his than so more even engendered many interpretations, perhaps have texts The build. to began he before writings his for known became Koolhaas Elia Zenghelis ( for his ability as a good architect.” not and smartness his for Koolhaas Rem on concentrating been has everybody process, historical this in that apity is it end the “In Forms and conditions York. New Ithaca, in converged students interested only in social upheaval, his to knowledge impart to trying teacher a as Ungers and environment, activist an in adiscipline taught be to wanting a student as Koolhaas of trajectories inverted The nell. Cor at Ungers with study to went he Cook, Peter with AA the at studio final his fleeing move: asimilar make to was Koolhaas 1972, of September In architecture. learn to ing want from students his keeping was that activism all-encompassing the escaping States, United the to moved Ungers AA, the at teachers his of musings abstract the through suffering was Koolhaas while 1968, bauen!” zu auf hört schön, sind Häuser “Alle stating signs with architecture of ies stud the protested students organised, had Ungers that theory architectural on seminar a during 1967, In discipline. their of dations foun the them teach to trying was Ungers while university, the of structure entire the were arguing in the halls about reconfiguring meantime the in students The Berlin. TU the at students his to history architectural in types and forms building of array rich the on lecturing still was Ungers 1968, in ture before Koolhaas began studying architec with. associated briefly was he who X, Team of those with than Rossi Aldo of ideas the with more resonated work His political. be could itself architecture that idea the tain enter to refused he colleagues, his of many to opposition direct In design. urban in and issues of composition both in architecture raised Kunstwerk’ als Stadt ‘Die publication his when 1963, least at since architecture in composition and form of problem the ing mined to explore this disconnection. deter been have must he least very the at then severed, irrevocably were meaning and form between connection the in belief haas’ Kool If Ungers. O.M. with study to York, New Ithaca, in University Cornell for a departure here?” from go you do “Where Boyarsky: Alvin by posed was which of least the not question, some raised Oswald Mathias Ungers had been explor Exit Utopia Exit 5 The answer, oddly, was was oddly, answer, The , p262) 6 Just Just 7 In In ------cation.” classifi ‘ism’ the of abuse opportunistic and institutional modernism, in its calculating misrepresentation of meaning exploited by callous and despotic misused, most – the ‘formalism’ of label the to allergic were we drives radical our Despite form. of tessence involvedshortcoming in neglecting the quin the recognize to easy is –it retrospect in –and predicament present the In tyranny. abureaucratic became it where point the to importance in growing OMA, of work the to central became scenario as plan the of notion the another, in X by Team amplified form, one in outset Modernism’s from lished programme in architecture. Already estab the of importance the magnified Rem writer haas’ professional background. “As script Kool with do to everything has form than towards conceptual underpinnings more 7). 6, (figs. coherence architectural by governed not forms different of explosion the with also but concrete and specific architectural forms, into conditions these of crystallisation the with afascination express also book the accompanying images Yet the ‘conditions’. two but name to schism, vertical the and reveals the underlying logic of congestion which manifesto, retroactive the through architecture, can now only be understood of) (theories to recourse without built was condition urban Koolhaas, of work the In architecture. of rules formal the transformations without being explicit about surround architecture, that offer conceptual the various contemporary conditions that ous New York and ‘Bigness’ as such for well-known so is Koolhaas that texts the from derive fact in does form ‘forgetting’ of idea This it. address to ‘forgets’ almost he that status, less carefully orchestrated combinations. contradictory elements, which are neverthe of assemblage an are projects the cases, many In truth. moral or apolitical express to perceived is form architectural the when as representation, of principle adirect low fol they do nor function, versus form of scheme asimple within captured be not can they complex, are design architectural in concerns His 9). 8, (fig. events and objects of also but architecture, of only not quality an eye for the graphic and compositional photographs accompanying his work show selected carefully The less. no him concern composition and form architectural that cate indi to seems also evidence the Koolhaas, architecture is built do deeply concern constraints and conditions through which the Although misleading. also are ments lis’? metropo the of dynamics the ‘absorbing or vocabulary’ formal modernist the of legacy the ‘continuing between choosing of other, the or one of amatter truly it Is forgotten? is To Zenghelis, the explicit preference 10 It would seem that the texts and state and texts the that seem would It 9 Yet does this in fact mean that form form that mean fact in this Yet does . In . In Delirious New York . 8 These are texts that explore explore that texts are These form becomes urban urban becomes , the city that that city , the Deliri - - 11 ------architectural form that is embedded in Ungers. O.M. of tutelage collegial the under later and AA, the at hippies’ ‘rice-cooking the to resistance in produced work the in visible is interaction between program and form that this is It them. precede that conditions eral formal considerations as well as the ephem to refers that aposition of complexity the program between a choice force that schemes Simplistic form. urban an exploration of ideas on architectural and of tion comple the through Koolhaas, of work early the form, of notion the addressing about to address the forms that are there but have have but there are that forms the address to away for looking is he rather but formless, something for looking is he because not is it words, new means to address architecture, new for searching is he When form. of rant igno is he that indicates means no by this gaze to urban and ephemeral conditions, reader’s the redirects primarily he While event and the analysis of urban conditions. the scenario, the program, the on focus also work his of analyses many but construed, the conditions within which architecture is emphasises writing own His indirectly. so does typically he architecture, in issues formal addresses Koolhaas as Insofar Exploring form the limits of architecture. of aware remain they ideas, personal of less Regard ‘form’). of category larger the under of argument, allowing to be encompassed sake the for Iam, here (which it to available are that tools the and architecture of pline disci the within operate they yet housing), for need factual simply the metropolis, the collective, the contemporary condition of the of promise the as (such issues social in interests demonstrate both and within, ates societal constraints that architecture oper the of aware are Koolhaas and Ungers both Instead, did). Eisenman of work the debates on ‘autonomy’ centering around the (as architecture for impact social of ity possibil any denies nor did), 1960s the of political (as the more ‘engaged’ architecture that neither equates architecture with the aposition reveal can we oeuvres, mentary comple as Koolhaas and Ungers of work ture itself. the techniques and instruments of architec on directly reflected always Ungers 1976, exhibition the in lation instal his to 1963 in art of awork as city the investigating From object. and text both in specifically very them explore to tries and Ungers addressesquestions, them directly these obscuring than Rather Koolhaas. of work the in present implicitly find can we that concerns the of many addresses itly explic he since helpful, is Ungers of work the condition, urban the of exploration this To understand the undercurrent of misgivings own his despite Therefore, Delirious New York 12 In other words: exploring the the exploring words: other In Man transForms 13 can be seen as as seen be can or form, deny in in ------tradition. within the boundaries of the architectural analysed comfortably be can that something as not force, brute as architecture was This wall. the like object an of ramifications urban built reality York. New in visible as architecture anew of tion manifesta concrete the for manifesto tive aretroac creating of idea the in clear most remained ‘unseen’ by architecture. This is league Colin Rowe. col his and Ungers of work the in explicit made being were form of questions some least at where Ithaca, of calm relative the in design and write think, to space his found Koolhaas other. the on Eyck Van of tecture hand, and the socially programmed archi one the on Eisenman of architecture mous autono highly the to rise give to was This architecture. in programmatic the and formal the between arift degree some to caused 1960s late the in positions ideological the in preference program over form. The difficulty to tended which 1960s, the in architecture of the revolutionary potential claimed for an object of study, he began to discover discover to began he study, of object an as it approaching visible: is wall Berlin the with encounter his too, Here there. already is what reveal to hoping perspective, new a from York New address to attempts it the traditional of vocabulary architecture, a manifesto for something that was built built was that something for a manifesto descriptions of architecture, on writing He concentrates on avoiding traditional describe. yet as cannot he that something of ashift, of conscious is he him, before those Äußere.” das über Nichts weiß... niedrig, hoch, häßlich, schön, von Rede die ist Mal tonische Kriterien fehlen. Kein einziges geschrieben, in dem architek wortwörtlich buch ein ich habe so “Und Bollerey: ziska York literal architectural criteria, any use not does that abook write to tried traditional notions of architectural form, he thinking. In his ambivalence towards the and making between tension the in situated thought. not made, be to something was ture were instruments to be used, and architec They ideology. agrand of part not – were position, detailing, materialisation massing, –com form architectural of aspects various the Here, Europe. in designed being festoes mani (political) the of weight the without building of result the represented York New stood. it as city the of potential endless the explore to was, already there what for look to Koolhaas allowed This plan. amaster without reality built simply was which architecture American of naïveté the York, New of amnesia the about thing some was there – influence some had itself also Eisenman to some degree. perhaps and Ungers, Rowe, of influence of sphere this within settle to begin could ture Moreover, he is also explicitly sceptical The work of Koolhaas is continually continually is Koolhaas of work The . As he states in an interview with Fran with interview an in states he . As Delirious New York the incredible architectural and 14 His ideas on architec 16 Here, the form of of form the Here, struggles with with struggles Delirious New New Delirious 15 The place place The 17 - - - as as - As As ------

13 OverHolland 6 – Architectural Studies for the Dutch City 14 English Translation tigations of form in his 1982 publication publication 1982 his in form of tigations architectural. the from separate as it has a personal moral principle, he describes he that concurs Ungers Although tecture. some moral position embedded in the archi not is there whether questioning this, resists schaftlichen Fragen nicht lösen.” Koolhaas leme lösen. Genauso kann Kunst die gesell- Prob architektonische können Sie dazu. tel Mit keine haben Wir können. werden gelöst sozialen Probleme von Architektur nicht die dass Meinung, der bin “Ich architecture: and art of autonomy the of that towards tion sozial.” morphologisch Lösungen gibt, aber nicht und formal Dinge diese für es dass Arbeit, jeder in auch Sie sagen eigentlich “Und that: only remains nevertheless that Ungers, of work the in issues political of undertone an notes Koolhaas interview, an In architect. an to available agency of limits the indicate only architectural but questions, it does than more about thinking preclude not does must take it seriously as an architect. one that and task, important an was houses beautiful building that believed he students, his Unlike 1960s. late the in mainland pean politicised view of architecture on the Euro extremely the with struggled Ungers haas, understanding of architecture. Like Kool his in inquiry of line adirect as rather but program, to acounterpoint as form with or formal considerations as an undercurrent with not but line, asimilar along working complexity of everyday reality. the encompass to enough strong is that condition anew creates it architecture, of manifests itself as an undeniable presence and program the from itself disengages form the when skyscraper, the of condition the In 12). (fig. skin same the within opposites existence of distinct realities and absolute the allow which of both schism’, ‘vertical the and ‘lobotomy’ the as concepts such in tensions ineffable the describe to manages Koolhaas process, the In 10, 11). (figs. reality absolute as but pop cheerful as not culture mass of hedonism, of one side: unforgivable side of modernity, but a perhaps even more is, however, not the heroically engineered taining space for what cannot be restricted restricted be cannot what for space taining main while the all explicitly, techniques ent simply because Ungers positions the differ Koolhaas, of work the in innovations and gestures formal of undertones the illuminate help can Ungers by here posed ideas The metaphor, and their place in human thinking. and analogy image, of ideas extensively more explore to developed was that essay Forms for installation his on based was Metaphors phologie/City architecture’. of side ‘wrong the to turns him, before modernists the like Koolhaas, Neumeyer, Fritz to According time. its of spirit the with accordance in (unreflectively) Ungers goes furthest in his explicit inves been had Ungers meantime, the In at the Cooper-Hewitt in 1976, with an an with 1976, in Cooper-Hewitt the at 20 In reply, Ungers confirms a posi a confirms Ungers reply, In . The publication publication . The Man Trans 19 This This 18 Mor - - It It ------the plan – the image – the word”. –the image –the plan the as shown idea, –the reality conceptual “the also but itself), plan (the object the only not planning. Instead, his assemblages describe of aspects functional or quantitative the tectural and urban which analyses, explore more complex reality than the archi typical a circumscribes this Ungers, To 15). 14, (figs. as a description of the conceptual content word the and similarities; formal on primarily based image associative an but design, nal origi the of part not is which photo, erence aref image; architectural the as plan urban an of consists group Each 13). (fig. whole anew create which aword, and images two further explored through of juxtapositions is images and forms of importance the of foundation of the architectural discipline. very the as conceptualises here Ungers which wall, Berlin the of presence the in sees Koolhaas that gap the is It itself. in tive produc is that user the of reception the and space between the intention of the designer a is there that suggest to models symbols, employs the concepts of metaphor, analogy, He idea. underlying an of expression singular more than ‘decoration’, and also more than a be to formal the allows Ungers words, other imagination and by sensuous perception. In andspecificity distinction is served by the for need The importance. equal of is thing every where mass achaotic to everything reduce also to tends it since far, too taken when detrimental is it Ungers to reality, our to understand variousnecessary of parts comprehends the world. Analysis may be guiding principle upon which consciousness the as imagination and vision of role the to significance astrong attributes Ungers employs imagination together with thought. he so do to that and world, the to order bring to man to necessary is form that declares he essay the In words. in only adescription to not dependent on a single architectural or is it proposition, adesign As whole. a larger sition of fundamentally different areas within within-the-city, which allows for the juxtapo city- the of notion the through particularly multiplicity, of potential the explore to begin tectural gesture. The summer academies archi asingle with over that smooth not to desire the and it, know we as world our up make that conditions conflicting various the in interest the visible: becomes Koolhaas of and Ungers of work the between tion connec afundamental projects, these In projects. design as through worked be to ideas were given a systematic framework specific where Ungers, by undertaken projects earlier of lines the along continued academies summer The city’. the within ‘City the and villa’ ‘Urban the were 1977 in themes two The 1978. and 1977 in held academies, summer Berlin the of work the into way its finds implicitly but time, abrief for mant dor lays form of role the of exploration After the exhibition, the intellectual intellectual the exhibition, the After idea this exhibition, the in as book, the In 21 ------Ungers borrows the notion of the the of notion the borrows Ungers the is it Ungers for while oxymoron, the is it Koolhaas, For tions. concept to instrumentalise these contradic aspecific employ Ungers and Koolhaas Both New York in quoted as Fitzgerald, F. Scott to function.” ability the retain still and time, same the at mind the in ideas opposite two hold to ability the is intelligence afirst-rate of test “The Contradictions and oxymorons cultivated. be and exist can differences which within aframework offers rather but gesture, urban underlying conditions for his architecture. and provocative statements, exploring the short of full quotable, eminently are texts His tion and the collision of different materials. layering,concerns: circulation, the combina His projects revolve around architectural texts. the illustrate merely projects the do nor projects, the of explanations simply not are Koolhaas of texts The relations. public cipline, yet quick make one-liners for better of building. almost inevitable slowness and permanence the and ideas current by simultaneously dictated and parties, different many on ent depend is which building, of process the its public reception. It is circumscribed by by also but discipline the of history the by build), to money the and/or power the has conditions (for example, the question of who that is circumscribed by political and social one tension: of afield in situated is it sense, this In events. significant many for backdrop societal structure and is simultaneously the but it is embedded within a political and is not in itself a social or political gesture, theparticularly public domain. Architecture and city the within intervention astrategic as architecture situate to help and field, urban contradictions inherent in the contemporary the address concepts Both realities. ous allows a simultaneous presence of incongru as a combination of contradictory words, oxymoron, the fashion, asimilar In sense. aformal in it use and plurality ceptualise con to away him gave concept this unity, architectural of world new abrave sketch to attempting colleagues his to relation In geneity that shapes everything to itself.” homo of concept the into forced not is it if variety, and multiplicity its all in is that tions, contradic its all in experienced is world the if up opened is thought of dimension “A new unity. of obligation the from itself releases that one architecture, for vision anew allows this To Ungers, image.” all-inclusive an into integrated are but nature, antithetical their in up themselves shut not do contradictions “[t]hese where overcoming”, their not and antitheses of a“coincidence identify to tia oppositorum So many factors comprise the entire dis entire the comprise factors many So , p. 162 , p. 22 from Nikolaus von Kues, Kues, von Nikolaus from 23 coincidentia oppositorum Delirious coinciden 24 - -

------. city. The provocations that are present in in present are that provocations The city. specifi of aform through purely expressed this as a series of small or ideologies, ideals see also could we ‘realism’, to turn extreme an as this see than Rather demonstrate. simply they oppositions the between in between ambivalent tendencies, suspended analogies. portion and order to visual metaphors and to the discipline of architecture, from pro related are that ideas and themes explore they Instead, are. Koolhaas of those than projects his of explanations more no are texts the time, same the At directly. form and exploring questions of architecture, the city mystifying, less be to tend texts Ungers’ dus: ‘At the very least, there is a sort of of asort is there least, very ‘At the dus: Exo underlying program social of a kind is “there hand, other the on Koolhaas, For with pure architecture and its autonomy”. concerned been have really “should project Exodus the that thought who Zenghelis, Elia partner former his and Koolhaas between distinction a find we where also is This meantime. the in ramifications cultural its architecture while attempting to understand of autonomy formal the explored rather but Koolhaas addressed the political directly, revival.” their for optimism urban and desperately demanded a new architectural which life, urban of forms of multiplicity cal model, but rather depended on a bizarre aprototypi as typology historical take not did however, city, the of architecture “OMA’s architecture. into life new breathes then architecture”. This metropolitan condition ing program in a conventional (even boring) everchanging configurations with… dar a in life metropolitan of “aggregation an uses it notes, Neumeyer as Rather, realities. external possible of account no taking pline, disci the of limits the within drive mental experi an as form of autonomy the about not is it OMA: of work the in form of role the reevaluate can we Ungers, by offered world. Through the explicit formal concerns the of part become to form become must Idea form? given not is it when idea an is good what question: the begs also that But user or the surrounding urban context. the for architect the of part the on disregard a as interpreted easily was gesture formal apowerful scale, human the and context social for attention its all with debate Dutch the In adetail). of sensibility the evokes, it image the abuilding, of composition the sense: broadest its in (‘formal’ formal the of importance the reassess us help can they importantly, more perhaps But it. within architecture of role the and city, the of ing Through this, we can rethink our understand city. contemporary the in architecture of help illuminate some of the (im)possibilities Both work). of mode general his (as Ungers political architecture) were also present in against (provocations Koolhaas of work the The projects of OMA hold their ground ground their hold OMA of projects The Neither the work of Ungers nor that of of that nor Ungers of work the Neither 25 27 26 - -

------may originate from an understanding of the the of understanding an from originate may and the contemporary. Ungers’ architecture classical the of combination astrange them Maybe we canmodern consider (Koolhaas). the even or (Ungers) with linked typically are a longer tradition than the postmodern they in stand potentially they that, in And form. of that in particularly discipline, own its of tools the in manifestation its finds architecture individual. This potential for contemporary nor an idealised perception of the creative neither embodies a mechanical utopia, that architecture for apotential be yet may Within an collective there individualised materialise. to failed 1960s the of ideals the that fact the despite hope, find they where is space This public. the and private the between tossing us keeps that city porary contem the of complexity impossible the navigate to space the find individuals how form, given then is collective the how is defiance This themselves. around field the in defiant utopias, momentary tiny creating about finding whole,a unified but about not collisions, about is work The condition. postmodern the of acceptance the a sense that is embedded with various pluralities, in city to a whole aunified as city the from is it both, Koolhaas and Ungers of work the 1960s). the in heirs its and modernism Dutch opposed to the overdetermined forms of (as undetermined the of and imagination, of space same that suggest oxymoron, the the of idea the in freedom implied the Certainly form? architectural of essence the be to covers precisely the ambiguity that Koolhaas dis in essay his in meaning opens up between form-metaphor-analogy- Ungers that space strange the that possible it Is methods? and instruments own its on based strengths, own its rediscover could needed to be discarded before architecture social engineering in modernist architecture, the of version arenewed teachers, 1960s his of optimism the That implied? had tion easily correlated as his architectural educa as not is meaning and form between relation the that rather but irrelevant, is form that much so not suggesting is here Koolhaas that be it Could meaning.” of vessel primary the as form in believe again never would influenceon the experience of architecture. their have both that conditions autonomous are they but significance, is as present, is Form meaning. and form between link direct a offer not does it because ground its stands out a space of architectural that specificity –clears contradictions inherent of clash –the tool adesign as oxymoron the of use of contemporary urban transformations. His face the in flexible becomes that strategy uses architectural tools to formulate a Koolhaas while autonomy, of anotion into further retreat does end, the in Zenghelis, overwrought insistence on collectivity.”’ To return to an earlier thought then: “I “I then: thought earlier an to To return If one major shift can be identified in identified be can shift major one If contradictio oppositorum City Metaphors City and , is , is 28 - -

-

Ungers as completely at odds with every with odds at completely as Ungers eSocietà Spazio in world’ another from Ungers Mathias to ter ‘Let fuming Eyck’s van Aldo by represented Xis Team of side the from gesture dramatic Italian circles surrounding The most Rossi. the in present was that form architectural and urban to approach rationalist the with more lay sympathy Ungers’ visible. were differences the then even but 1965, in Berlin in Xmeeting aTeam organized in Italy to Ungers of work the introduced Rossi 6. 231. p. in Memoir’. A(A) trip, ‘Field 5. Peter Cook. AA, the at Peter other the by written was it Plan publication the of which perhaps explains the misattribution 1993, in written was memoir The 215-232. begründen.” erschreckende ‘Die Schönheit muß man seine dauernd Standpunkte Isoliert Reflexen. tüchtigen zu zwingt Das weisung, mit der man nicht übereinstimmt: mehr profitiert “Man 3. voneiner Unter 17-20. in: haas’, Kool Rem with ‘Interview Dijk, van Hans 2. 25. p. Kamer 1. Notes only be programmed, but also given toimportant examine how can urbanity not is it why precisely is This primacy. given was engineering a society through architecture socially of possibility the and action of range limited avery offered is form the which in zo gebruikelijk.” en planning zijn in Nederlandgelukkig niet zeggen en weinig anders. Dergelijke cultuur kan op neen of ja alleen men waar omgeving als een blauwdruk voor een toekomstige inhoud) en Koolhaas’ planningsopvatting bare architectuurvorm (anders dan voor de Koolhaas’ desinteresse voor de bespreek is“Er een zekere overeenstemming tussen states: he when wrong Meuwissen Joost proves Koolhaas where is This itself. proves building the which by expression final the is form the but form, the precedes strategy the earlier use of harmony or symmetry. an of reminiscent is that away in morons, employs a strategy of oppositions,or oxy nevertheless he Lagos; of growth explosive the or bigness, city, generic the like cepts flows of thecontemporary throughcon the navigating be continually may Koolhaas attention to proportion and pure geometry. classical language of architecture with its the on based primarily is it form as but tion, plurality inherent in the postmodern condi 4. ‘Field trip, A(A) Memoir’, in in Memoir’, A(A) trip, ‘Field 4. pp. 34-43. des Jahrhunderts,’ 20. Juryrapport prijsvraagJuryrapport uitbreiding Tweede The legacy of an architectural debate debate architectural an of legacy The to Peter (and Alison) Smithson. In fact, fact, In Smithson. Alison) (and Peter to . Staatsuitgeverij The Hague, 1978. 1978. Hague, The . Staatsuitgeverij Wonen Casabella 30 - 8, 1979, where he declares declares he where 1979, 8, TABK Architecture: Action and 244 in 1960. Ungers Ungers 1960. in 244 13-14, 1982, pp. pp. 1982, 13-14, Arch + 86, aug. 1986. 1986. aug. + 86, S,M,L,XL S,M,L,XL 29 form Here, Here, , pp. , pp. , - -

- . - - - - - tal side to the book: the desire, in a sense, asense, in desire, the book: the to side tal experimen an was –this terms architectural Delirious New York wrote he later, discussed be will As 8. p28. OMU (ed.) Mühlthaler E. in Lehrzeit,’ Berliner Die Ungers: O.M. von ‘Lernen Arch Obrist,’ Ulrich Hans und Koolhaas Rem mit Gespräch im Ungers Mathias 7. ‘Oswald See only member of Team X”. and last, first, “the be to out turn may Ungers that and line,” our never was “membership that claims Eyck Van ‘situationists’, term the gesture not unlike Guy Debord’s disavowing a in Moreover, for. Xstands Team that thing 627-633. quote from pp. 628-629. pp. from quote 627-633. Franziska Bollerey, with conversation in 17. Koolhaas Rem the tools and vocabulary of the discipline. reassess to order in there already was that environment the examining 1972): in (also their publication in did Brown Scott and Venturi what with resonates itself work the sense, this In 16. director. was Eisenman Peter where 1973, in Institute for Architecture and Urban Studies Delirious New York for manuscript the on worked Koolhaas 15. hunderts,’ erschreckende‘Die Schönheit des Jahr 20. underrecognised. yet as is that work their in this remark may a signify correspondence Yet time. the at contested have would they doubt no which same, the essentially are Ungers and Rowe that remarks Koolhaas 14. com/wired/archive/4.07/koolhaas.html). Wired magazine both liberating and alarming.” (interview, that’s course Of it. with do to nothing has anything. More and more I think architecture in ecstatic and anything in miserable be can 13. can inhabit “People anything.And they (1982). Metaphors’ City images and metaphors, as / ‘Morphologie on essay accompanying an with installation his published Ungers Later, 1976. Hewitt 12. canonised ‘good architecture’. to limited not is however forms architectural of notion His Oorthuys. Gerrit with together researching been had he which Leonidov, of S,M,L,XL in images and references the throughout example for visible are form of issues in insight and of knowledge 11. Koolhaas’ 177. p. 1999, lishers, eeuw twintigste de in Dijk, van Hans 10. Zenghelis, 9. new. something creates that acondition about tools, formal urban condition of scale that transcends an around revolves ‘Bigness’ 627-633. pp. Bollerey, Franziska with conversation in Koolhaas Rem architecture. about think and speak we how redefine to Man transForms + 179, pp. 6-11, and E. Mühlthaler, Mühlthaler, 6-11, E. pp. and + 179, , catalog, Arch+ and TU Berlin, 2006. 2006. Berlin, TU and Arch+ , catalog, , but also in his interest in the work work the in interest his in also , but Arch Exit Utopia Exit + 86, aug. 1986, pp. 34-43. pp. 1986, aug. + 86, , July 1996. See www.wired. See 1996. , July Learning from Las Vegas Vegas Las from Learning without using any typical typical any using without with a fellowship at the the at afellowship with Architectuur in Nederland Bauwelt , exhibition at Cooper- . 010 Rotterdam: pub Bauwelt , p. 261. , p. 17/18, 1987, pp. pp. 1987, 17/18, Lernen von von Lernen 17/18, 1987, 1987, 17/18, - - - (ed.) (ed.) V. Bijvanck in: context’, in Superstudio pia. Uto of Antinomies ‘The Heynen, Hilde 28. 27. Neumeyer, 25. p. 1978, Hague, The Staatsuitgeverij NAi, map Koolhaas, 1975-1980). Koolhaas, map NAi, Knipselarchief maandag 29 december 1980. dam’ (in een ongeïdentificeerdekrant op architectuur in Stedelijk Museum Amster ‘Overgeaccentueerde Joost Meuwissen, 30. 12-19. lingen’, in: Hans van bezwijken ‘Het van Dijk, tegenstel OMA. by method adesign as used is but Koolhaas, for speech of form afavorite only not is notes, Dijk Van as oxymoron, The Dijk. van Hans by quickly quite seen was This 29. 61-74. pp. 2005, Museum, Zeeuws and Vleeshal De port prijsvraag uitbreiding Tweede Kamer visie.” formele zijn aan maakt schikt vernield wordt en hij de gebruiker onderge standpunt ingenomen, waarbij de omgeving een heeft Hij probleem. het naar geluisterd ontwerper “De heeft onvoldoende26. 307-317. pp. 1994, Hudson, and Thames The Representation of Architecture sance from Brunelleschi to Michelangelo: (ed.), Millon A. Henry in: ture’, Architec of Criteria The mesura: et fondo ‘Ordo, Ungers, O.M. example for See 25. Gruppo 1982. EditorialeMilano: Electa, Ungers, O.M. theme’, as 1, ‘Architecture no. 21. O.M. Ungers, Ungers, 21. O.M. Arch Obrist’, Ulrich Hans und Koolhaas Rem mit Gespräch im Ungers Mathias ‘Oswald 20. see also www.team10online.org. Cornell. at Xseminar Team the organised Ungers time the around postmodernism, of rise the to concomitant Xwere Team with social ones. His increasing disagreements could only solve architectural problems, not architecture that believed firmly always he facing architecture in a changing society, yet questions the in interested deeply and X, with Team involved briefly was Ungers 19. 44. p. from quote City’, the in Island Polemic The Berlin: ‘OMA’s F. Neumeyer, 18. 24. 24. otherwise.” them make to mined deter be yet and hopeless are things that see to able be example, for should, “One to the two architects being discussed here: suitable particularly seems essay the of tion Quotations Century than ‘opposite ideas’ ( rather ideas’ ‘opposed actually is phrase the Crack-Up”, “The text 1963 original the In 23. collectivities’, cle Archipelago ‘The Piecing City: together arti my see City, the within City the of idea the on elaboration specific amore For 22. phors Lotus di Documents Lotus) (Quaderni + 179, pp. 6-11. pp. + 179, Superstudio: The Middelburg lectures , Walther Cologne: König, 1982. Wonen-TABK OASE OMA’s Berlin OMA’s Morphologie/City Meta Morphologie/City Assemblage , 113:6). The continua The , 113:6). 71 (2006), pp. 18-36. pp. 71 (2006), Oxford Book of 20th 20th of Book Oxford 13-14, 1982, pp. pp. 1982, 13-14, , p. 43, 46. 43, , p. The Renais 11, pp. 36-52, 11, 36-52, pp. . London: Juryrap - - . - - - -

- - - . - -

15 OverHolland 6 – Architectural Studies for the Dutch City 16 English Translation of of issue this in contest this to attention draw to reason good have we prizes, two in resulting nominations, three With year. this cation’ were no nominations for communi ‘visual There category. design’ ‘product the in four and category design’ ‘spatial the in nated were submitted, of which four were nomi entries 42 of Atotal underground. Delft, in view from disappear will train the 2012 in planned, as goes everything If submitted. be intermediate vocational training level) could tion (at the university, higher vocational and institu design Holland South every from zone railway Delft the on projects student year, This Holland. South of province the in projects current to attention draw and talent design young encourage to meant is award sion in the city, the character of the new new the of character the city, the in sion cohe anew also but district, urban a new of identity the of aquestion only not is It expansions. the and centre city the between located centrally ground, above up freed be will area alarge Delft, through railway the replaces atunnel Once Architecture. in students Master’s of projects research design for perfect is that project current and Randstad. the in cities Dutch nine studying alternately are studios architecture could be developed? Various urban building and morphologies, typologies programmes, What areas? these of ment develop spatial the to make architecture interventions. What contribution could in urban areas using concrete architectonic transformation and renewal of possibilities the research Students locations. urban at scale buildings with complex programmes large- in conducted is research design Holland Design(South Award 2007). the for nominated been recently have nology Architecture of the University Delft of Tech of Faculty the at studio Master’s Buildings Hybrid the from students of projects Three Willemijn Wilms Floet zone railway 2007 VormgevingsprijsZuid-Hollandse OverHolland The railway zone in Delft is a concrete aconcrete is Delft in zone railway The studio, Master’s Buildings Hybrid the At Zuid-Hollandse Vormgevingsprijs 2007 : Three hybrids for Delft’s Delft’s for hybrids : Three . 1 The The - - - - -

- a framework in which they can propose their their propose can they which in a framework students offers plan This Delft. of city the for Spanish urban planner Joan Busquets made that plan master urban the is studies recent compare. to difficult were results the that Delfland) station building to a sanatorium in Midden (from the design of a residential district or in such a large variety of planning proposals resulted this However, Delft. in railway entire the along projects choose to free initially Buildings Master’s studio, students were university. the of Architecture of Faculty the at studies architecture in subject arecurring is zone railway Delft the 2002, in system Master’s this design research project. for apilot as developed were studios ter’s OverHolland in published been already have studies cal urbanPreliminary and architecture analyti university. the of Architecture of Faculty the to linked firms, architecture leading of anumber by out carried being currently is and x5’ ‘5 called is project research design Gouda Leiden, andHaarlem, Dordrecht. This as such Randstad, the in cities smaller similar of centres city the in railway the research the of possibilities tunnelling under to used was project zone railway Delft the city, Dutch the in transformations urban between architectonic interventions and interaction the into research conducts which Architecture, of Faculty the at group the railway disappears. after side afront into change will railway the rear side of residential development along the now is what buildings: existing the of transformation the in aproject also is There tunnel. the of design the and infrastructure, underground station, a complex junction of insurance claims and is designated as apark. as designated is and claims insurance with connection in upon built be not may ProRail, by owned tunnel, the of zone The account. into taken not –was pattern street responding buildings – the hierarchy in the cor the of character the Also, connections. visual and spatial to correspond always not do which districts, neighbouring from area determined by drawing lines in the planning formally is buildings of blocks new the of form The boulevards. into transformed be the Westlandseweg and will Phoenixstraat, like area, the in roads main existing The expansions. the and centre city historical the between alink as area the sees Busquets tion and alternation like in the historical city. whichestablished should guarantee varia been have rules blocks, the For courtyards. inner semi-public with buildings of blocks in combined are parking and working living, where environment, urban inner an was and provide viable alternative designs. own design project, test design solutions Busquets’ idea for the new station area area station new the for idea Busquets’ Hybrid the of project Master’s the For Since the introduction of the Bachelor’s- research Architecture Urban the For 5 4 The starting point for the more more the for point starting The

5. 3 TheBuildings Mas Hybrid 2 - - - - between the new, combined city records block building the location: third the regard projects nominated The addressed. is square station new the with relation the ing, build station old the of south location the At high-rises. for space with infrastructure, the to proportional is that aproject regards it Westlandseweg, road main the at problems: The locations have urban specific planning elaborated. is variant asingle Then, tives. by formulating different building alterna tested are requirements of schedule the which on plan, Busquets’ in offered are locations three To so, do requirements. of schedule agiven on based building a hybrid ings Master’s studio, students must design research, in which the ‘hybrid building’ and and building’ ‘hybrid the which in research, urban planning analysis and architectonic an on based project, design own their late formu –students project Master’s – the an expressionistic submission. is It entity. athree-dimensional form space public space, where buildings and outdoor the of design the in intense more is language formal The context. the to react and space urban an form way, adynamic in other each over flow that strips of anumber of consists design The identity. own its area station new the giving area, the for characteristic are undulating, flowing linearmovements, which of form the chose He handwriting. obstinate an in plan Busquets’ of spirit the in ration elabo an as viewed be –should plan nated suburbs. the and centre the between link obstinate an as itself presents and entation, ori of apoint forms centre, city the and tion sta the between way the shows building the intentions: two has form distinct The Poort. Waterslootse the and station the between proposes placing an elongated building She anonymous. too and careful too is nominated student – Busquets’ solution existing architectonic cultures. the to it adapting of apossibility is there and obvious, more is space urban and building between relation the which in typology, ing build achosen of elaboration an usually are designs The point. starting as used rarely are high-rises the for rules the and shapes formal, graphical approach: the diagonal height. asderstraat, regards buildings and building Coen- the on buildings scale smaller the to atransition makes and spaces public the of contour the follows it as role’, a ‘service has block building this plan, Busquets’ to According Church). (Old Kerk Oude the and area station the between vision of aline with centre, city the and station the between tion connec the forms them of One converge. roads many where intersection an Poort, Waterslootse the at Busquets by designed bulwark the and hall station and office In the first semester of the Hybrid Build Hybrid the of semester first the In In the last two semesters of the studio studio the of semesters two last the In nomi second –the project Arce’s Oscar first –the vision Akkermans’ Carien In Busquets’ with trouble have Students ------a square. During the project research was was research project the During a square. enclose station old the with together which are designed as two monumental buildings, They facilities. public important of tradition the in themselves manifest expressly hall city and station the which in plan, master engineering) he designed an alternative the studies of architecture and structural combined he which (in project Master’s his autonomous and distinct urban For area. an as area station new the –sees student design. adefinitive of level the to up architecturally developed is design The above. mentioned been already have that Thesestudies. projects regard questions the of part are themes architecture’ ‘urban connected by a construction system that that system aconstruction by connected face. a has city the in station the that so ground, the above metres five tilted is that volume added. They are bundled into a building were centre aconference and a restaurant ahotel, stay, to aplace as more and more itself manifest to wants century 21st the of station the that Supposing junction. port trans compact and efficient an into stacked station square and the station building are a vertical organisation:the the platforms, was point starting The building’. a ‘hybrid urban programme could be combined into adiverse and transport of forms other as well as tunnel train the how into done was square. apedestrianised with station old the round monumental buildings, which together sur are prominently housed in two autonomous, office records city the and station new The tunnel. the beside and on built character, urban adistinct with centre complete and akilometre. of zone park anarrow of middle the in hall, city new the of extension lobby the in stop ametro is It junction. port trans invisible almost an to reduced is tion Sta Central Delft where centre, city the of extension an as seen is zone new the area: station the to role amodest attributes plan design urban Busquets’ good. for Delft of cityscape the from disappear to threatens train the zone, railway the of arrival the With Duin and Henk Mihl Teachers: Leen Korpershoek, Maarten van LuukDesign: Stoltenborg spatial design) 2007 ZHVP (winner Station Central Delft 1: Project documentations Project descriptions for three various programmes. house as well as light day other’s each from and above ground buildings could benefit underground the that so tunnel atrain on done into how construction could be done Luuk Stoltenborg – the third nominated nominated third –the Stoltenborg Luuk The tunnel and the building are spatially research station new the of design the In anew become should area station The - - - - bridges and elevations. The entire design slopes, paths, for used is form oscillating The character. powerful and astrong given is complex the map, the as well as section cross- the for shapes of kind same the using By aunit. as seen are hotel) and restaurants and cafés supermarket, residences, (with activities. various for space large one form together which strips, undulating with sition compo a making flows, the increase to was design this in idea main The tunnel. train the through come who pedestrians of flow new the and south, the from city historical the to go who pedestrians of aflow side, west the on cars of aflow acanal, of form the in side east the on water of Aflow direction. South North- in a flows about is place this that tive characteristics of human movements. andtwisting turning movements, two attrac of use the was design this for point Starting van Meel Teachers: Korpershoek Maarten and Hubert Oscar ArceDesign: Gonzalez Strips Delft 3: Project yeardifferent look, round. absorbing sound and giving the building a grows, ivy where afence is layer outer the and elevation east the with alevel is layer inner The layers. two of up built is it and character another has Coenderstraat, the road, noisy and busy the on elevation west The bricks. of made is and city Dutch the of centre reflects the traditional proportions storeys. the in located are Residences built. be will rants restau and cafés and ahotel, shops, centre, information atourist theatre, air open bour, har inner An places. various in up broken is volume the and plinth atransparent of way by metres six tilted is building the urbs, sub the and centre city the between rier built, which clearly points visitors the way.. be must wall’ a‘guiding why is That nately. unfortu lacks, centre city the to entrance alarge making of possibility the station, the locates Busquets where place the At Delft. to entrance main the was historically which Binnenwatersloot, the to moved be to station the for chance aunique is there ground, under disappear will railway the that Now Haartsen Jaco and Bus Petra Teachers: Akkermans Carien Design: by public jury) selected (winner Gesture Urban 2: Project hall. station and square underlying the to light day provides also and floating were it if as lightThese the wells building carry volume upwards. goes it as wells light of set open an to tunnel aclosed from changes gradually To make sure that this wall is not abar not is wall this that sure To make The new public space and the buildings buildings the and space public new The realisation the to led area the of Analysis city the of side the on elevation east The ------Amsterdam, SUN, 2005, pp. 91-104. pp. 2005, SUN, Amsterdam, in Zone’, Rail ‘Delft Floet, Wilms Willemijn and Duin van Leen See 5. ways. many in semester every addressed is zone rail the Building, Hybrid Architecture project Master’s the For grounds. factory yeast the of redevelopment the is project the semester of the Bachelor’s design project, third the In project. design planning urban as Delft through tunnel railway the above plan vocational education) students has a master (higher HBO new for semester key The 4. city Dutch the for Projects of research were published in a special edition design the of results The 69-138. pp. 2007, See 3. nology Tech of University Delft 2005-2006. Annual in areas’, railroad city inner Dutch architectural City: interventions for the for ‘Projects Duin, van Leen Floet, Wilms Willemijn SeeBuilding. François Claessens, Master’s Architecture programme Hybrid the at studios design the in theme recurring and adesirable are locations Railway 2. www.zhvp.nl. 1. See Notes Delft. of image a typical from taken were façades the of colours The Delft. for canals and water of significance the and city the through movements existing towers, church both with relations visual into astudy from developed was It Delft. of part scale. ahuman on tion relaxa for places with place, takes shapes green, where an interesting convergence of stay, to places sunny quiet, with area trian pedes interesting an as considered be can OverHolland The entire design does its best to be be to best its does design entire The . Rotterdam, 010, 2007, pp. 134-135. pp. 2007, 010, . Rotterdam, OverHolland in June 2008, entitled entitled 2008, June in 5, Amsterdam, SUN, SUN, Amsterdam, 5, OverHolland . The Architecture Architecture The 5x5 5x5 2, 2, - - - who was to become an important advisor advisor important an become to was who theorist, inventor and scientist from Leiden, middle-class) (The With his treatise 978-2-503-51366-9 ISBN 2007. Publishers, Architectura Moderna Turnhout, 5, Brepols 1530-1700 Countries, Low ern tionships between the Southern and North andUnity Discontinuity. Architectural Rela (eds.) Ottenheym K. Jonge, de K. Herman van Bergeijk Book review [Polemen] written by Krista de Jonge and Konrad Konrad and Jonge de Krista by written part greater the for and English in lished Northern Low Countries, 1530-1700 and Southern the between Relationships justified. is Netherlands the of revolt the all, Above wide. too becomes gap the that extent the to not but different being on is stress The mind. your clearing about all is It differences. for need the clarifies loudly and clearly This aunity. as time, acertain until up considered, be could what in driven is wedge A North. the to immigrants of stream the and exchanges and contacts many the despite widening is South and North between gap The War. Years’ Eighty the during crystallise slowly would it how and identity Dutch the support to had that amanuscript wrote He Spanish. the of yoke the by down weighed still were country, native his Countries, Low Southern the example, for that way the from tise, which he consciously wrote in Dutch, ditions. Stevin himself distances in his trea based on old-fashioned and superseded tra on modern foundations rather than one based astate wants He tradition. and class by determined was society in citizens of position the empire, the in how, of rejection his to similar is This intensively. studied he asubject architecture, in orders of system existing the rejected Stevin that strange not therefore is It logically. linked be to need Laws actions. people’s for standard the as raised was sense common but history Not meaningless. be to present the identify to considered venturing into the past in order former the while latter, the for argument tant historic precedent was an extremely impor the plea his in that conclude can we Leuven, of University the to Leiden of University the from move would later who Lipsius, Justus scholar with Stevin compare we When tor. fac compliance the for themes uses and level-headedly sentences his formulates He science and renounces rhetoric. classical exact uses he whereby republic, young the of revolt the about ideas his by inspired ance toler religious and political for aplea is It Netherlands. the of Republic United the in arose that middle-class new the of privileges and duties the codifies Maurits, Prince to In In Unity and Discontinuity. Architectural Architectural Discontinuity. and Unity

on on from 1590, Simon Stevin, Stevin, Simon 1590, from The burgerlijcke leven leven burgerlijcke The , pub ------tectural relations between North and South South and North between relations tectural Low Countries and believe that the archi timeworn clichés about architecture in the view their in and existing the against turn architecture and its development. They the on focus they background, military and Without losing sight of the political, religious authors. the to importance less of is context political The mentioned. not is treatise cal tecture are brieflyStevin’s discussed, politi Although his texts on the and military archi Maurits. Prince young the for adviser’ useful complex, logistic problems made him a solving for talent his as well as knowledge sense for the practical application of the naturally They appears. argue that ‘Stevin’s Bruges, in 1548 in born Stevin, Ottenheym, to the exodus of capital and artists. and capital of exodus the to due Europe Northern of parts large across quickly spread to managed culture willed monasteries and thiscourts, cities, self- European North about study his in cated indi book, this for epilogue the wrote who Kaufmann, DaCosta Thomas like just and, theirless, books enjoyed considerable fame Neverthe route. anew take to choose but literature architectural existing the of aware are They text. contain hardly books ment orna Their style. different entirely an into cal orders are degenerated and transformed inconceivable without the The quest. classi been have would Vries de Vredeman Hans even or Dietterlin, Wendel or Shute John by books decorative excessive The trend. same Germany and England experienced the Countries; Low North the in case the only not was This irregularities. by dominated ornaments resulted in many ornament books new for Looking used. be to had ornaments buildings, representative materials and InCountries. order to build representative Low North the to use of be to proved This materials and different building practices. different theory, of type adifferent of knowledge North, the to knowledge of type adifferent brought They refugees. the for not were it if different entirely looked have would culture Dutch The South. to North from than refugees, many the of because only if North, to South from exchange larger a was there although South, Catholic the and North rebellious the between place taking still were exchanges many sion, seces the after Also right. are Ottenheym rhetorical difference than a one. stylistic a of more is it them, to According 13). (p. citizens and civic authorities in Holland’ for use “modest” amore and South, the in court and Church the for use “magnificent” a common architectural system with a more of species two as but styles, opposing two as seen be not should Countries Low the of parts both in architecture enteenth-century ‘Sev is introduction, the in written already been researched. Their conclusion, which is never have secession political the after still young Republic lacked natural building To a certain extent, De Jonge and and Jonge De extent, To acertain 1 The The

------

17 OverHolland 6 – Architectural Studies for the Dutch City 18 English Translation Bray, author of the book, also tried to create create to tried also book, the of author Bray, Dutch architecture. Whether Salomon de the of confidence the captured which book first the to refers Moderna’, ‘Architectura Jonge and Ottenheym’s book is published, de which in series the of name The latter. the on focused been have would attention much too that and all after discontinuity and continuity been have would there that except theories, on dwell not do and facts the to close remain authors the contrary, book on Rembrandt and Rubens. voluminous his in used Schama Simon as liberties narrative large of clear well stayed ference being less pronounced. The authors dif the in resulting context, European more a in embedded further be to have Belgium of European unity, the Netherlands and times imbalanced these In publication? this behind idea greater the is what but sources They gratefully used recent researched mined by a larger agenda or programme. deter is that aview on taken have graphs, which incorporates a large number of mono and years ten than more for on worked they that book, this of writers the if ask may One unity. Dutch alarger of part as Netherlands cultural boundaries considered were they that and nation the of borders then the by determined much too far was art of history of perception the that indicated and replied 1930 in Geyl Pieter Dutch developments, to which historian architecture Nederlandsche bouwkunst the to guide his in 1928 in later come under heavy criticism, described indicated. Tollebeek Jo as this, deny not could ography histori Even fact. ahistorical is similarities be different and value both and differences to like countries both that fact The doubtful. is nature, arhetorical of solely is Ottenheym and Jonge De by investigated period the in Countries Low South and North the between criminating Whether factors. this distinction dis for adistinction, for cried Europe, in countries many in stronger became which today. case the still is this if wonder may one however, tinuities’, con of study the largely is culture of study Gombrich could still contend that ‘the point of discussion in historic circles. Ernst alively been have discontinuity and ity North. the in value adifferent of were Woodideological differences. and brick and strategic as well as cultures, different the between remains continuity a doubt, Without North. the in traders local by over taken was this later quarry, the near essed Countries. Low South and North the both in work ered Gabri van Tussenbroek’s contribution, cov in illustrated as Neurenbergs, Van the as such family abuilders’ that see to surprising not is it Therefore quality. highest the of be materials, the ones generally considered to For many years, problems of continu 4 2 F.A.J. Vermeulen, who would would who Vermeulen, F.A.J. Initially, raw material was proc was material raw Initially, ) nearly exclusively the North North the exclusively ) nearly . Geyl regarded the the regarded Geyl 3 The urge for identity identity for urge The Geschiedenis der ( History of Dutch Dutch of History 6 On the the On ------5 -

ance of power. In this respect, Stevin’s trea Stevin’s respect, this In power. of ance bal existing the from derived not was which existence, own its and differences as well as countries, other in those to similarities had have may which culture, own their upon call could they that indicate to try to had They Countries. Low North the for complicated more was matter The reasoning. of tinuity tries in order to historically the support con Coun Low South the to importance extreme of was Italy, in canonised was as tecture, overall unity is sometimes clearly missing. An exist. to continued ideas and shapes in irregularities major that proves reality however, role; important an played ideas ‘mathematical’ Bray, De also and Stevin to does this transition take place? According how and they are what but ideas’, modern ancient architectural forms according to referred to modern architecture that applied term ‘the that argues Ottenheym claims, remains the question. He architectural ornament around as 1600’, of a‘systemization is really there Whether a pedestal. on placed is Keyser, de Hendrick late the of that particularly and architecture, Dutch the that clear is It image? Keyser’s De was what and ‘modern’ by meant is What mind? in have they did era What time’)? our of Buildings (‘Or tyt’ onsen van winge Bou ‘Ofte subtitle the Why architecture’? the movement towards a pure and ancient of examples first the ‘only present book this Did indicated: Bray De As upon. elaborated further not is contradiction inherent The ity’. of the ornament and the designers’ ingenu novelty the for praise receive engravings the eternal validity of the principles, classical and true the preaches Bray De ‘whereas say does he although not, is he Ottenheym, to According question. the remains books, as described in many Italian architecture a distance from the ancient architecture, equalled religion’. On the one hand, they they hand, one the On religion’. equalled mathematics ‘pure them for say, later would Novalis As Belgium. or Italy Catholic in ists’ ‘manner the by permitted those to level different entirely an from liberties afford theprinciples, Republican Dutchmen could abstract therefore and mathematical using of spite In parts. both in directions different in develop will architecture the division, this to Due Countries. Low South and North the in architecture to approach the in ference become responsible for a substantial dif lookedSeveral significantly different. events things outbreak, iconoclastic the after ever how 1539-1543, period the to regard with is discussed in de Krista Jonge’s chapter to standardise the ancient architecture, as attempt an notice perhaps could we mation Refor and revolt the Before architecture. cal classi the in expressed was order This God. by created order adominating against Dutch the of revolt the fashion, rational and able areason in legitimised he view, of point cal aradi taking Without instrumental. was tise Calling upon the rhetoric of classic archi classic of rhetoric the upon Calling Architectura Moderna ------

------text more than for example that of Palladio, Palladio, of that example for than more text universale treatise his in more even and Scammozzi, Vincenzo of sicism the equally sober though slightly boring clas in found be could style This clear. and strict be to had architecture The ‘read’. to easier was and character auniversal had ‘local’, less was which style architectural an for became an economic power did they look Republic the after Only architecture. the in revealed not were that tensions and accompanied by conflicting appearances ornaments and different orders.This was exterior was usually decorated with irregular the hand, other the on and types, building definitelystrived towardscharacterising Also the client’s role receives much atten the theoretical and organisational aspects. ferent manner, focussing more strongly on a dif in timeframe researched the approach to try They angle. pan-Dutch aunited use into the convenient regional division and to back fall to not Daring daring. is book their Nevertheless, Jonge. de and Ottenheym by addressed not is Alps the below and above art the between difference the about tion unknown.’ is aspect, given free aproblem as appears therefore and rally natu comes shapes for instinct the where style, Roman the in that passion a serious with still but classicist, exclusive an into him turn will and arevelation as him to come will which shape, the of existence higher the to [the Northerner, his that day the Until (...) character. arts’ resulting in the deprivation of the visual effect, esthetical the to unrelated content literary of acarrier to means the grades down it that however means, formal pure using not say, to like would it what expresses art this that (...) exists only Alps the of side this on art of essence ‘the that namely 1908, Einfühlung essay programmatic his in thatThe theory Wilhelm Worringer presents ments of the young republic’s architecture. distorted perspective of the specific ele aslightly in results which over-present, is Italy abackground, As Italy. in happens what by determined much very still are book the of standards the however tackled, be could issue this English, in book this publishing By and exciting than generally acknowledged. interesting more far is parts both in tecture archi of history The Countries. Low North the and South the in developments the both of overview alarge-scale offers it that and matter subject this questions it that fact the in lies book this of value The lines. ing conflict has even It lines. discontinuous and science with representative qualities. exact an to architecture upgraded Scamozzi Furthermore, ideas. of mixture the liked also on middle-class’ architecture, the Dutch focussed Scamozzi that fact the Besides which mainly had an influence inEngland. The historical process has continuous continuous has process historical The from 1615. The Dutch liked this this liked Dutch The 1615. from (‘Abstraction and Empathy’) from from Empathy’) and (‘Abstraction HvB L’idea dell’architettura ] eyes are opened up up opened are ] eyes Abstraktion und Abstraktion 7 The ques ------cisms and polemics) and cisms vision. Second volume of historic views, criti Dutch United (The polemieken en kritieken Tweede bundel historische beschouwingen, P. Geyl, in state’), modern the of spell the under art of (‘History staat’ moderne de van ban de onder kunsthistorie ‘De P. See Geyl, 5. Amsterdam 1994. riography in the Netherlands and Belgium) histo the about Essays (Gaugers. België en len over de geschiedschrijving in Nederland Tollebeek, Jo See 4. tory Ernst3. Gombrich, vital that the value of this sparkling historic historic sparkling this of value the that vital is It architecture. this of character nificent mag the devalue book this in images poor or quality bad many the that mentioned be to needs it Furthermore, Post. Pieter about Terwen J.J. and Ottenheym by work ous because Kuyper severely criticised previ Kuyper’s recent book is missing, Wouter that out pointed be must It ography. cal notes and readings. practical side but on his artistic and theoreti the of experience his on based longer no is knowledge architect’s The Church. the from work pioneering the over –take class middle –the families powerful and rich and cities The Ottenheym. from to used are we as tion, Holland W. Kuyper, 8. and 58. ics and art W. Worringer, translation: Dutch the from 7. Translated www.gombrich.co.uk. Paradox’, as Artist the of ‘Portrait brich, Gom E.H. see story; his telling when took Schama liberties the out pointed already had Gombrich Ernst areview, In 1999. York Schama, Simon 6. 203-213. pp. 1930, Countries (1480-1640). Low the in family Neurenberg Van the of work author: this of study the of asummary is contribution This 2. Europe 1450-1800 Central of Culture and Art The &City. ter Kaufmann, DaCosta 1. Thomas Notes future.’ our of steps cruel the under dying trapped, are expressions cultural previous ‘Our wrote: he when right was world, ancient the of alover Couperus, just historians of architecture, because Louis to than rather others to inheritance this in interest the spread could This photography. every Dutch city, is illustrated with good nearly to colour gives which inheritance, Vol. II, Amsterdam sa, p. 19. p. sa, Amsterdam II, Vol. Couperus, L. in impressions’), mate (‘Inti impressies’ ‘Intieme Couperus, L. 9. Leiden 2002. The book also offers an extensive bibli extensive an offers also book The . Oxford 1969, pp. 48-49. pp. 1969, . Oxford De Groot-Nederlandsche gedachte. ( The monumental heart of Holland of heart monumental The ). Utrecht/Antwerp 1965, pp. 56 56 pp. 1965, Utrecht/Antwerp ). Esthetica en kunst Het monumentale hart van van hart monumentale Het . London 1995. Rembrandt’s Eyes In search of cultural his cultural of search In The architectural net architectural The . Antwerp/Amsterdam . Antwerp/Amsterdam De ijkmeesters. Opstel Turnhout 2006. 9 Court, Clois Court, 8 ( possibly Aesthet Proza . New . New

- - - - - . - . - ). ). ------someone who is unrelated to the traditional traditional the to unrelated is who someone period, term new architectural design of top The commissions. the of charge in were painters and sculptors stonemasons, but surveyors, goldsmiths, the Not client. the of demand changing the meet better could style classical of baggage and knowledge of the language intellectual their to thanks who century, sixteenth the in designers of groups new figure. akey as Campen van Jacob with trade, building the outside tion painter-architects who enjoyed their educa the for reserved is role exceptional An tool. acommunication as drawing the for role important increasingly an in resulting all ers, growing gap between designers and build the and architecture in clients of interest increasing an designers, of diversity larger a this: to linked are factors Three practices. and the variations in the design and building designers of groups responsible the in ring occur changes the to it linking of means by development of the architectural drawing the explain to was goal The drawings. of collections consulted various the of up opening the just not is book the sertation, design to contract drawing. proposed and draft rough from analysed, are drawing of production entire the of types research is limited to civil architecture, all of field the Though examples. known lesser of seventeenth-century drawings,including author researched a considerable amount The length. great at discussed are ers design the and drawings the both chapters, illustrated generously four In gap. this in fills further 2004), University, (Utrecht tion mercial edition of Elske Gerritsen’s disserta architectural drawings’) tectuurtekeningen (‘Seventeenth-century time. along for exception an remained (1952), century sixteenth the and Ages Middle late the in design architectural the on a paper by architectural historian Ruud Meischke, The standard Dutch on article this subject tectural drawings, as an independent theme. the actual output of architects, namely archi of subject the tackle architecture of history Strangely enough, hardly any books on the pp. 287 2006, Waanders, practices in the ’) ings. The drawing in the design and building (‘Seventeenth-century architectural draw inbouwpraktijk de Nederlandse Republiek en ontwerp- de in tekening De ningen. Zeventiende-eeuwse architectuurteke GerritsenE. Merlijn Hurx Book review Thechapter first outlines theemerging As can be expected from a good dis 1 The book book The

is linked to the term free designer: designer: free term the to linked is architect Zeventiende-eeuwse archi , which appeared in this this in appeared , which , which is the com the is , which . Zwolle, Zwolle, - -

- - - -

- - - - - actual realisation of the drawing. The images images The drawing. the of realisation actual the on other the cross-section, and plan floor elevation, between link systematic the and used projections the on focuses One parts. two of consists and drawings the of sections were put on paper in great detail. ing, nothing was to left chance and nearly all During the preparations of a complex build contracts. written to relation in increased century. Moreover, its also importance seventeenth the in drawings of use the in increase an ascertains author The sation. tance in the processof planning and reali designer, client and builder and its impor a means of communication between the as drawing the of role the on focuses ter chap third The book. the of part largest the up take and themselves drawings the on excellentpossessing drawing skills. while theory, architectural in trained was term the of meaning the on aconsensus was there tice, inthe prac building Nevertheless, trades. in working craftsmen by designed still was architecture the of Most formulation. retical fully in met specialised designing, the theo had who painter-architects, of layer top the only whom of existed, designers of diversity alarge century, sixteenth the in as Just education. for institution an of lack the was sion never developed. An important reason profes aseparate Republic, the in existed architect the of qualities the of image clear a theory in Although century. seventeenth designer’s profession came into being in the the of profile aunivocal whether question part. remaining the to introduction agood offers and research the of quo status the of overview aclear gives chapter The guild. the of rules restricting building trade and who is not bound by model when conceptualising a design,but Ottenheym, probably served as a theoretical Koen and Terwen Jan by described as ples, princi design the that believes She century. seventeenth the in designs creating when system of geometric constructions was used a that belief the to differentiation important With this Gerritsen observation, adds an being. into came they inches, and feet in measures concrete utilising mainly system, coordinate asimple of use Making created. explanation of how proposed designs were the is section interesting An survive. not did century seventeenth the from drawings phase is not discussed, as this category of draft The practice. in made were drawings seventeenth century. the in drawing architectural the of sation strict depicting manner led to the standardi elevation, floor plan and cross-section.This between link the and projection in changes the for responsible held are practices ing survey land Dutch and tracts Italian in The second part investigates how the the how investigates part second The appearance the at looks chapter last The Chapters three and four expand more the down lays chapter second The architect , namely someone who who someone , namely ------for the large amount of drawings. The author author The drawings. of amount large the for just even it, worth is book Gerritsen’s Elske colouring maps. surveyors Dutch to made is a reference colours, of use typical the for source sible apos As drawings. the to colour applying century design practice is exceptional in chapter is that the Dutch seventeenth- measures. usable exact the read to able be to had who builder the by used also were drawings these as obvious, is this for reason The design. proposed the creating when place taken already had measures real to struction that the conversion from a geometric con acteristics in the design and building trade. trade. building and design the in acteristics study the continuous conspicuously char price, etc. the determine qualities artistic and expertise were designers paid an hourly rate or did ment when supplying drawings changed; pay of manner and amount the whether as such matters be could research for aspects shed a different light on this issue. Potential economic-historical approach will possibly research opting for a more sociological and Future carpenters. of guild alarge had city hardly any mason’s while guilds, nearly every were there Holland, in century sixteenth the in example, For stonemasons. to regard with tradition asmall knew only Countries Low North The less. increasingly designers of layer top the of part became stonemasons why explanation an offer to able be would which indicated be can reasons other haps men with a conservative inclination. Per crafts working as level same the to down stonemasons all bringing of exists risk the pay attention to such contradictions where to necessary is It stonemasons. of milieu a from originated also Scamozzi and ladio Secondly, Italian examples such as Pal century. sixteenth the in courtiers become to managed had Brabant from stonemasons several Firstly, unsatisfactory. is clients from demand new the meet to painters than skilled less definition by were trades building Thecussion. assumption that men from the dis for up be to seems still designers top from stonemasons to painter-architects as shift the example, For review. of need in are 1952 from article the from assumptions attitude towards Meischke’s Certain article. critical amore adapted have should She questions. raise still that work Gerritsen’s followed. be scrupulously can drawing’ the ments leading up to the ‘standardisation of and international perspective. The develop awider with together go text, and images in both resources, new of amount the that is aspect positive additional An fluent. is language of use its and clear is book the of structure The details. the in lost get not did and research in-depth conducted has The final interesting observation of this this of observation interesting final The Furthermore, it would be interesting to to interesting be would it Furthermore, However, there are elements certain in ------by Gerritsen. well so described as standardisation the and Jonge) De Krista by out (pointed scale same the on presented are cross-section the of part and view afront where Vienna), in (now Duhamel forAlart a monstrance and canopy from the comparison between the designs of deduced be can what see to interesting be would It centuries. seventeenth and teenth munication problems in thesix fifteenth, gic similarities existed in order to avoid com strate which wonder can one however this; about detail into further go to place the not is This site. building the on present nently perma not was designer the cases, many was already considerably specialised and in trade building the century, fifteenth the In century’), century’), 16th the and Ages Middle late the during Netherlands the in design architectural (‘The late middeleeuwen en de zestiende eeuw’ ontwerp in de Nederlanden gedurende de 1. Meischke, R. architectonische ‘Het 5, Turnhout, Brepols, 2007, p. 49 note 157. note 49 p. 2007, Brepols, Turnhout, 5, Countries 1530-1700. Low Northern and Southern the between and Discontinuity. Architectural Relationships (eds.), Ottenheym K. Jonge, De K. 2. 161-230. pp. Notes near future. the in expected be to is University, Utrecht of department history architectural the of Röell Eva by completed being currently tury, follow-up research of the eighteenth cen designs. creating on live solely to able be to history Dutch in first the became possibly which group aprofessional on focuses book the this, to addition In architect. the for medium important most the still is drawing the since material, interesting offers book the ticular, par in architects For audience. awider for suitable are style and subject the both tions, book is based on strong academic tradi every architectural historian. Although the of shelves the on belongs which book, this of reasoning strong the alter not does This outside the selected point of discussion. should be which undertaken, largely falls research new and in-depth issues, these Finally, it should be mentioned that the the that mentioned be should it Finally, of view acritical to come to order In Bulletin KNOB, KNOB, Bulletin 2 Architectura Moderna 5 (1952), 5 (1952), Unity Unity ------

19 OverHolland 6 – Architectural Studies for the Dutch City