Saturday, April 11, 2015

Axial interventions: the avenues of electoral Berlin and beyond



Following the growth of the Twin City Berlin-Cöln as a result of the growing importance of Prussia within the German Realm the capital city of Berlin grew rapidly from the 16th century onwards and several suburbs sprang up outside of the cities defences. In 1618 The Margraviate of Brandenburg and the Duchy of Prussia where joined cementing the pivotal position of the Elector of Brandenburg within the Holy Roman Empire.

Directly next to Cölln the electoral suburb of Friedrichswerder, which received town freedoms in 1662, was developed. The regular layout was aimed at enhancing the beauty of this new town as the first planned expansion. The new town was located on low-lying ground between the city walls of Cölln and the Spree Canal. In 1668 Friedrichswerder was incorporated into the city defences of the capital of Brandenburg, although it remained a separate settlement. Thus in 1678 a new town hall was built on the central market square.

In 1670 Elector Frederick William gifted the Kleiner or Cöllner Tiergarten (a swampy fenced-off hunting estate directly adjacent to the Spree river and the old city) to his wife Sophia Dorothea. Joachim Ernst, the Overseer of Fortifications, was responsible of the layout based on a strict grid of streets. This new extension of the city received town privileges in 1674 and was aptly named Neustadt before it was renamed Dorotheenstadt in 1681. It was secured by an extension of the city defences with an outer moat, earth banks and walls.



Electoral Berlin with the multitude of axial interventions and grid additions around the old Twin City of Berlin-Cölln with the city of Berlin (1) north and the city of Cölln (2) south of the Spree river The later was expanded with the addition of Neu-Cölln (3) and Friedrichswerder (4). Further west we find Dorotheenstadt (5) and Friedrichstadt (6).These were located adjacent to Luisenstadt (7) and the Grosser Tiergarten (8).

The grid of Dorotheenstadt was aligned parallel to the hunting avenue of Unter den Linden (literally: underneath the lime trees) that had been built in 1573 to link the Residence with the Kleiner Tiergarten and was extended to the edge of the Grosser Tiergarten in 1647. This axial intervention was done according to Dutch examples and planted with lime trees and walnut trees. In 1695 the avenue was extended for several miles to the Charlottenburg Palace and cut right through the large hunting pleasance. At one third of its length a large roundel was created within the Tiergarten with 8 avenues radiating out: the Grosser Stern. This design was based on Dutch examples of hunting forests, so-called Sterrenbossen, but on a much grander scale.  A second roundel was built at two thirds of the length of the axis, without the star shaped avenues radiating from it, but incorporating pre-existing roads.

After the death of the Elector Frederick William in 1688 his son Frederick III, the later King Frederick I of Prussia, had a new city built on the fields west of Cölln. The work on this third expansion of the city started in 1691 and was designed by a team of architects and engineers on a formal, geometric layout based on a grid with several open spaces of distinct shapes (square, rectangle, octagon and circle) and axial streets. The central axis was an extension from the Dorotheenstad north of Unter den Linden. The eponymous Friedrichstadt was entered from this point via the Friedricher Tor, a city gate. In the west the new city was bound by the Leipziger Landwehr, a defensive earthwork. It was also governed as a separate city with its own charter until all three electoral suburbs, Berlin and Cölln were incorporated as boroughs within the new city of Greater Berlin in 1709. After Prussia had been elevated to a kingdom in 1701 the importance of Berlin as a German Capital City rivalling Düsseldorf, Hanover, Dresden, Munich and Vienna increased steadily.



The first series of axial interventions was concentrated on the west side of the old city. The former hunting avenue of Unter den Linden (U) connects the Lustgarten (G) in front of the Hohenzollern Residence with the Brandenburgerplatz (B) with the well known Brandenburger Tor, a ceremonial gate. This splendid street also formed the central line of the Forum Fridericianum (F). The main axis of the new grids sits at a right angle to the original axis and was extended north across the river and south towards the round Hallesche Tor Platz (H). A secondary axis (Leipzigerstrasse) connects Friedrichswerder via the Leipziger Tor with the octogonal Leipziger Platz (L). The small oval Potsdammer Platz lay beyond the Potsdammer Tor. From here an axis (2) towards Schloss Bellevue (3) cuts through the Tiergarten. It crosses the extended axis of Unter den Linden with the Grosser Stern (1). A separately positioned axial intervention is related to the Reichstag Building (4). It follows the basic orientation of the Raczynski Palace that stood here before.

Whilst the development of Friedrichstadt was regulated and planned by royal appointment by Oberbaudirektor Philipp Gerlach, the suburb southeast of Cölln developed in a rather ad-hoc manner along pre-existing rural lanes and roads. This Cöllnische or Köpenicker Vorstadt fell prey to the ravages of the Thirty Years War and was completely destroyed by fire. Between 1734 and 1736 the Berliner Zollmauer (Customs and Duties Wall) was built around the city and its suburbs. The famous Brandenburger Tor on the axis through the Tiergarten is a remnant of this structure that had no military purpose. In 1802 the Köpenicker Viertel within was renamed Luisenstadt in honour of Luise the wife of Frederick William III.

Immediately after his ascension to the throne in 1840 King Frederick William IV commissions the famous landscape architect Peter Joseph Lenné to redesign Luisenstadt and execute an extension of this Borough towards the Flossgraben or Landwehrkanal ,a drainage canal that was dug in 1705. At the centre of the new design is a new drainage canal linking Spree and Flossgraben: the Luisenstadtischen Kanal that was opened in 1852. Lenné designed an axial composition inspired by Hausmannian interventions in Paris with several axes over a basic  grid layout, but incorporating older streets. The new canal forms part of the main axis that culminates in a church and starts at a wide lock. The brilliance of his design shows in the canal that curves away from the central axis leaving room for a secondary axial composition whilst widened sections of the canal served as spatial devices within the side axes with "water squares" at the crossing points.



The Luisenstadt is a contorted grid with several parallel axial streets. Of these only the central axis from the Canal Lock (1) via the Oranienplatz (2) on the main transverse axis towards the Church of St. Micheal (Michaelkirche - 3). The transverse axis connects two squares (one round, one square) on parallel axes. The Moritzplats (4) enforces the junction of the transverse axis with the Prinzenstrasse. The Heinrichplatz (5) signifies a secondary axis that ends with the Church of St Marianne (6) with the Bethanienkloster (7) at an angle of 90 degrees, thus emphasizing the curve in the Luisenstadkanal.

2 comments:

  1. hi there, i was quite interested in your article, then I started to do some research on the museum island especially the Altes museum, which has a neoclassical style, but in forms of the style, it has a particular element which is the pediment portico, but the Altes museum doesn't seem to have one, I was wondering why Schinkel design it with Agora instead of the pediment portico? Thx!

    ReplyDelete
  2. In the neoclassical some follow the rule books stricktly (especially in the United Kingdom) but often architects re-arrange style elements suchs as porticos and covered court yards. I don't know the reasoning behind Schinkel's decision. I suspect he wanted to create a "temple for the arts". His columened front is imposing which I suspect was favoured by the Prussian rulers, it also leads in quite dramatic fashion to the round hall as an inner sanctum. Such a covered space also allows free access over the whole width of the building making it more inviting in a way instead of emphasising the entrance by a pediment portico which is a more directional choice of architecture.

    ReplyDelete