Artikelen

• Soestdijk, een vorstelijk decor

  Until 2004 Soestdijk Palace was one of the residences of the Oranje-Nassau family. Although the building appeals to one's imagination, until recently no profound research into the complex and its furnishing was carried out. Recently much new information has become available. This article gives a broad outline of the history and character of the palace, notably of the main building. The foundation of the country house in the 17th century was the work of the Amsterdam patrician family De Graeff. Possibly, the remains of the then built house are still to be found in the heart of the palace. Stadtholder William III bought the complex in 1673 and made it his Utrecht residence. It was an average-sized yet rich house, with beautiful gardens and hunting grounds. The architect was Maurits Post. In 1795 the complex became government property, after the expulsion of Prince William V. Louis Napoleon had it modernized and slightly extended; in 1815 William II received it as a present from the Government, including an extension and total transformation of the old house and gardens (architect Jan de Greef, landscape designer J.D. Zocher). Around 1900 a large modernization followed (architect, amongst others, Lucas Eberson). In the 1930s architects De Bie Leuvelink Tjeenk and A.J. van der Steur realized a completely new house for Princess Juliana and her husband Prince Bernard to the right of the old corps de logis, within the original building lines, which was also special because of the high quality of the movable furniture that had also been given as a present. In 2004 Prince and Princess died. Since then the Government Buildings Agency have been looking for a new function for the complex.

  Until 2004 Soestdijk Palace was one of the residences of the Oranje-Nassau family. Although the building appeals to one's imagination, until recently no profound research into the complex and its furnishing was carried out. Recently much new information has become available. This article gives a broad outline of the history and character of the palace, notably of the main building. The foundation of the country house in the 17th century was the work of the Amsterdam patrician family De Graeff. Possibly, the remains of the then built house are still to be found in the heart of the palace. Stadtholder William III bought the complex in 1673 and made it his Utrecht residence. It was an average-sized yet rich house, with beautiful gardens and hunting grounds. The architect was Maurits Post. In 1795 the complex became government property, after the expulsion of Prince William V. Louis Napoleon had it modernized and slightly extended; in 1815 William II received it as a present from the...

  Until 2004 Soestdijk Palace was one of the residences of the Oranje-Nassau family. Although the building appeals to one's imagination, until recently no profound research into the complex and its furnishing was carried out. Recently much new information has become available. This article gives...

  Corjan van der Peet

  159-171

  • Download PDF
• Koninklijk erfgoed van het verlies. Het Haagse Willemsparkhof in negentiende-eeuwse Europese context

  In contrast to other European countries 19 th century-court architecture in the Netherlands has not left a strong imprint on public memory. Just as most historical cities, most palaces in the Netherlands were restored in 17 th century Dutch Classicist Style, suggesting that after the Golden Age nothing happened. This article shows that such an impression is misleading. Focusing on the new monarchy of the Restoration era (1813-1848) it becomes clear that the first Orange kings William I and II started impressive building campaigns in both the Southern and Northern Netherlands, comparable to those of the 17 th century.

  Prince Frederick Henry and the Anglo-Dutch King-Stadtholder William III. Remarkably, in the early 19 th century the most magnificent palaces in neoclassicist style - except for Soestdijk - were built by the prince royal in and around Brussels. Nevertheless, the Belgian revolution of 1830 ended the role of the Orange dynasty in Brussels, after which royal and princely palaces, summer houses, and art collections were appropriated by the new Belgian monarchy. Although most of them are still in use, their origin has been completely forgotten. Strangely, this also happened to King William II's new palaces of the 1830s and 1840s in Windsor Tudor Style. This so-called William II Gothic was very popular at the time, but from the 1870s no longer fashionable in Protestant court circles after having been appropriated by Roman-Catholic architects for church building. The King was influenced by the memory of his Oxford college days, as can still be seen in the Gothic Hall of his Kneuterdijk Palace in The Hague, designed by himself as a Painting Gallery modelled after the hall of Christ Church College.

  A much larger project, however, the so-called Zorgvliet Palace at his huge private domain Williams Park between his The Hague palaces and the beach of Scheveningen, had a different origin. With the help of the English architect Ashton, the King made plans for a residential palace that would surpass his lost Brussels palaces and compete with the royal 'court scapes' of Versailles, Windsor and Potsdam. Connected by kinship and marriage to the Hohenzollern, William II shared the Prussian longing for castellated palaces as developed by Schinkel for his sisters, brothers and nephews in Germany. Nevertheless, palace building was stopped abruptly after the liberal revolution of 1848, when the Orange court lost its political power and almost went bankrupt because of overspending. After William II's death in 1849 the court had to sell its magnificent art collection, and William III - who disliked Roman Catholics and the Gothic Revival - sold most of his father's palaces. For almost three decades palaces in the Netherlands were only built by the king's relatives, such as his uncle Prince Frederick who owned the famous estate Muskau at the German-Polish Border as well as the Dutch estate The Horsten near The Hague. With the help of the Prussian architect Wentzel and the Muskauer landscape designer Petzold, Frederick introduced the Schinkel Style in the Netherlands.

  Nevertheless, enriched by the inheritance of his brother Prince Henry grand duke of Luxembourg, William III started a last royal building campaign in the 1870s, supporting the Baroque Revival of his favourite Eberson. Just as in the case of his father, his new plan for a residential castle at Zorgvliet failed, however, and after the king's death in 1890 the royal domains in and around The Hague were sold to the city government and some private investors. Ironically, near Lord Portland's former summer house Zorgvliet or Catshuis (used today as the official residence of the Prime Minister), the Carnegy Foundation built the famous Peace Palace in French Neo-Renaissance Style in the early 20 th century, which could be seen as the final outcome of the royal dream of a Williams Park Court.

  In contrast to other European countries 19 th century-court architecture in the Netherlands has not left a strong imprint on public memory. Just as most historical cities, most palaces in the Netherlands were restored in 17 th century Dutch Classicist Style, suggesting that after the Golden Age nothing happened. This article shows that such an impression is misleading. Focusing on the new monarchy of the Restoration era (1813-1848) it becomes clear that the first Orange kings William I and II started impressive building campaigns in both the Southern and Northern Netherlands, comparable to those of the 17 th century.

  Prince Frederick Henry and the Anglo-Dutch King-Stadtholder William III. Remarkably, in the early 19 th century the most magnificent palaces in neoclassicist style - except for Soestdijk - were built by the prince royal in and around Brussels. Nevertheless, the Belgian revolution of 1830 ended the role of the Orange dynasty in Brussels, after which royal and...

  In contrast to other European countries 19 th century-court architecture in the Netherlands has not left a strong imprint on public memory. Just as most historical cities, most palaces in the Netherlands were restored in 17 th century Dutch Classicist Style, suggesting that after the Golden...

  Rob van der Laarse

  172-189

  • Download PDF
• Authenticiteit en authenticiteitsbeleving: de presentatie en receptie van museum Paleis Het Loo

  By means of two case studies this article centres on the question of authenticity in both the presentation and the reception of museum Het Loo. The restoration of the palace in the years 1977-1984 meant a return to the 17th century-situation, leading to the destruction of various later additions. The house was unplastered, lowered by one storey and refenestrated; the landscape garden was removed and replaced by a copy of the original classical garden. The less than enthusiastic responses can be explained - at least in part - by the fact that this was already an old-fashioned restoration practice at the time.

  The two case studies presented here deal with recent changes in the presentation of the palace and the garden. The rooms once occupied by Queen Wilhelmina, which were moved at the time of the restoration from their original location to a lower floor, were rearranged a few years ago with the aim to give a more realistic impression of the past. With the help of a detailed photograph and a well-stocked depot, the early 20 th century situation of the rooms was accurately restored. Interestingly, the same approach was not adopted in the garden. The discovery of a basin (part of an ensemble consisting of a fountain, cascade and two 'resting places', which constituted the formal ending of the garden in the 17 th century), did not lead to a more realistic presentation of the past in the reconstructed garden.

  Hence, in contrast to the recent museological policies adopted in the presentation of the palace, which veered in the direction of a higher level of authenticity, it was decided that the archaeological discovery in the garden should be followed by another reconstruction. Already outdated and contested in the 1970s, currently this approach seems even more anachronistic. Be that as it may, the plans met with little resistance. Reconstruction and 'staged authenticity' were thus favoured over preservation and ruin sensibility. This article argues that there is room for both approaches. Visitors have 'different horizons of expectations', they do not have one uniform museological preference: where some enjoy the reconstructed garden (the 'staged authenticity'), others wish to see a more authentic presentation.

  The curators who have recently altered various spaces inside the house (the rooms dedicated to Wilhelmina and a chamber inhabited and decorated by her daughter Juliana) seem to have anticipated this dual palate on the part of the visitor; this development has not resonated in the Loo gardens.

  By means of two case studies this article centres on the question of authenticity in both the presentation and the reception of museum Het Loo. The restoration of the palace in the years 1977-1984 meant a return to the 17th century-situation, leading to the destruction of various later additions. The house was unplastered, lowered by one storey and refenestrated; the landscape garden was removed and replaced by a copy of the original classical garden. The less than enthusiastic responses can be explained - at least in part - by the fact that this was already an old-fashioned restoration practice at the time.

  The two case studies presented here deal with recent changes in the presentation of the palace and the garden. The rooms once occupied by Queen Wilhelmina, which were moved at the time of the restoration from their original location to a lower floor, were rearranged a few years ago with the aim to give a more realistic impression of the past. With the help of a...

  By means of two case studies this article centres on the question of authenticity in both the presentation and the reception of museum Het Loo. The restoration of the palace in the years 1977-1984 meant a return to the 17th century-situation, leading to the destruction of various later...

  Hanneke Ronnes

  190-199

  • Download PDF