Changing public space

1985 on behest of the communist leader Ceausescu. Similarly, the large Place Vendôme in Paris had
been constructed by the end of the 17th century as metaphor of the supremacy of King Louis XIV.
Also Sennett (1978) emphasises the monumental function of squares:
The great urban places were not to concentrate all activities of the surrounding streets;
the street was not to be the gateway to the life of the square (…) the square was to be a
monument itself, with restricted activities taking place in its midst, activities mostly of
passage or transport …. (Sennett, 1978: 54)
Many examples of Renaissance, Baroque, and Neoclassic squares are found in Paris and other
European cities like Rome, Brussels, and Madrid. In England, the idea that a square was
necessarily a place for public assembly was less strong. This resulted in a small number of large
squares and the enclosure of others (Girouard, 1985). In the Netherlands, these kinds of traffic
and representative squares can also hardly be found, with the exception of the Keizer Karelplein
in Nijmegen and the Plein 1813 in The Hague (Meyer et al., 2006).
The absence of imposing squares in the Netherlands can be explained by a number of
societal characteristics of the Dutch Republic. The creation of large squares was only possible
in strong regimes in centralistic societies that could afford the high construction costs
(Wagenaar, 1999). This was not the case in the Netherlands: the Dutch Republic was known
for its unique federal state structure with no central authority. It was a society in which cities
and urban elites set the tone, rather than a feudal society in which the nobility reigned, as was
the case in many surrounding countries (Prak, 2002). Individual stadtholders such as William of
Orange (1533-1584) ruled over the cities, but they did not create large-scale city squares. One
of Williams’ successors, Frederik Hendrik (1584-1647), did attempt to upgrade the status of the
Oranges, but his endeavour was limited to marrying off his children to notable royal courts and
ordering the construction of classic buildings in The Hague (Prak, 2002). However, it did not
entail the creation of large city squares. This might be explained by the general Dutch Calvinistic
ethos, by which austerity was preferred to grandeur. Even though the Dutch Republic was one
of the leading economies in this period, economic prosperity was rather manifested in private
possessions than in large public spaces. The development of these squares was also impeded by
the swampy physical conditions of Dutch cities (Wagenaar, 1999). Moreover, the Republic was
not only characterised by wetlands and canals, but also by a relatively large urban population. By
1670 one-third of the population lived in settlements with more than 10.000 residents, while in
most other European countries this number was below 15 per cent (Prak, 2002). The rare public
spaces in these wet and populous merchant cities were used for trading rather than promenading
and the display of power. Therefore, only a few Dutch city squares originate from the period
1500-1800. These few squares were mostly marginal spaces, resulting from badly connected
parcels (Wagenaar, 1999).
2.5 Industrial and post-industrial squares
The end of the 18th century and the first half of the 19th century saw the birth of several key
inventions, such as the introduction of Bessemer steel and the steamship (Short, 1996). These
inventions resulted in the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century. The numbers of factories and
industries grew, and attracted machine minders from rural areas. In a short period of time, many
people migrated to the coalfields and ports, which eventually led to overpopulated cities. The
35