Changing public space

periods, the table illustrates the different functions (i.e., mono- versus multifunctional) as well
as the dominant planning form of the eras (i.e., organically evolved versus rationally planned).
Obviously, these categories are merely indications or simplifications. It is possible to categorise
city squares as dominantly organic or planned, but many places are a combination of both (Carr
et al., 1992: 51-52). There are also no values attached to the different categories, in contrast to
American historian Lewis Mumford. He also made the distinction between naturally evolved
and planned cities or spaces in his influential book The City in History (Mumford, 1961). The book
provides an overview from the cave dwellers, through Mesopotamia, Babylon, ancient Greece,
and Rome, through the Middle Ages and down to the modern city at the middle of the 20th
century. Mumford advocates the organic relationship between people and their living spaces in
the Middle Ages and warns for the planned structure of Roman and modern cities. The division
in Table 2.1 does not profess that one planning form is superior to another.
Each time period indicated in Table 2.1 is elaborated in Section 2.2 to 2.5. Section 2.6
subsequently outlines the different typologies of city squares that have been set up over the years.
The overview shows that trends cannot only be observed in the development of squares, but also
in the way they are categorised. The knowledge derived from the overview is later applied in
Section 5.2.1, in which a new typology of city squares is presented.
2.2 Classic squares
Public spaces are as old as the earliest human settlements; from the moment people gave up
their nomadic way of live and settled in small villages, there was a need for common spaces and
facilities. However, the history of European city squares did not begin in this early period, but
started around 500 BC with the construction of the agora in cities in Ancient Greece (Webb,
1990: 28). The agora, literally meeting and market, was a relatively large open area located
in the heart of the city or near the harbour (Herzog, 2006). It formed the urban centre and
was surrounded by public buildings; such has the Bouleterion (council chamber) where public
meetings were held, commercial buildings such as the Stoa, and temples like the Hephestion,
which served religious purposes (Meyer et al., 2006; Crowhurst Lennard & Lennard, 2008).
Initially, the agora developed organically, its irregular shape determined by each individual
surrounding building. But by the 3rd century BC, regularity and enclosure gradually became the
norm ( Jongepier, 1988; Webb, 1990).
The agora was regarded as the essential component of a free city or polis, a symbol of
democracy (Webb, 1990; Madanipour, 1999; Hénaff & Strong, 2001). However, the agora was also
the place of citizenship: “… without sharing the life of the polis no person could ever develop
or exercise the virtues and qualities that distinguish men from beasts …” (Dahl, 1989: 15). The
agora was only sporadically used as market place; it rather functioned as assembly- or classroom.
Philosopher Socrates, for example, taught his student Plato in a corner of the agora: “Certainly
much of Plato’s inspiration generated from these teachings and from the marvel of democracy
in action, all about him in the square …” (French, 1983: 52). Because of these characteristics, the
agora can best categorised as democratic public space: space in which issues regarding the urban
community can be brought up, discussed, and decided upon (Oosterman, 1993: 55). Oosterman
also distinguishes other categories of public space, based on aspects of holiness, security,
democracy, trade, and traffic.
31