Bulletin KNOB

Handel en hergebruik

Gabri van Tussenbroek — 2025-03-18

This article discusses the use of tuff stone in the period around 1000-1250 in what is now the Netherlands. During the Middle Ages tuff was used from the Rhineland to Denmark. The historiography of this subject comprises a great many books and articles on tuff and the earliest tuff stone buildings in the Netherlands, but a lack of written sources makes it difficult to get a detailed picture of the trade in tuff and its use in construction. The dating of buildings from this period is also very challenging. This article draws on contextual information in an attempt to provide more insight into the extraction, transport and trade in tuff before the year 1250, while also discussing the principal actors and material characteristics.

To understand the context of tuff in the Netherlands one must first look at its distribution in Roman times. Tuff is known to have been used in over a hundred places in the Roman context and that material was sometimes reused in the Middle Ages. Although this reuse has never been systematically investigated, it can have consequences for the dating of medieval buildings, since that dating was sometimes based in part on certain characteristics of the material (block sizes). The article then looks at medieval tuff stone quarrying near Andernach. Quarrying of the stone had resumed in the tenth century, although it is impossible to give a precise date. Buyers played a crucial role, in particular the Cologne archbishops. The article names a number of these bishops as possible initiators of the interregional tuff-stone trade from the eleventh century onwards. In the Netherlands it can be assumed that the church building campaign of the Utrecht bishop Bernold had a major impact on the import of tuff from the Eifel region, judging by the massive size and regularity of the tuff-stone blocks used in the churches he commissioned.

Unfortunately, building-historical aspects like masonry composition and stone sizes offer few reliable indicators for accurate dating per whole, half or quarter century. Contrary to what some writers have suggested, large- and small-sized blocks were used interchangeably. The same applies to architecture. Features like spaarbogen (arches formed in the ground to save on building material), arch friezes and other architectural-historical characteristics were used over a longer time span, some as late as the thirteenth century by which time brick had become the main building material. So the architecture of the buildings discussed here does not furnish any hard evidence for dating either.

The article provides an inventory of over 500 locations where tuff was used in the Middle Ages, augmented with some 250 examples of tuff stone use in the Rhineland, thereby shedding light on the associated tuff stone landscape between Cologne and the North Sea. It concludes with an appeal for further research into each object, including systematic investigation of evidence of primary or reused (Roman) material. It is also recommended that traces of finishing be documented and mortar research be conducted, with the aim of gaining more knowledge about the Netherlands’ earliest tuff stone buildings.

Wet en rede

David Keuning — 2025-03-18

Since its introduction in 1912, the Auteurswet (Authors’ Act .copyright act) has protected works that have an ‘individual, original character’ and ‘bear the personal stamp of the maker’. The act grants that maker exclusive rights, including the right to exploitation. This means that the maker can decide for themselves how, where and when the work is made public or copied. In addition, the act confers personality rights, which protect the maker against changes or other impairments of the work that might damage their honour and reputation.

Although the Auteurswet did not have its origins in the building industry, the act has certainly demonstrated its relevance to that sector, given that architects’ designs also fall under the protection of the act. Since 1912 several authors’ rights lawsuits have been filed in the context of the construction industry. These have focused in particular on the question of whether alterations to buildings encroach on the rights of the architect. Nowadays the debate often revolves around the tension between the creative vision of the architect on the one hand and functional or social interests on the other, such as a change of purpose. This leads to a weighing of interests in which the key consideration is how these interests relate to the personality rights of the architect.

This article focuses on conflicts arising from changes to existing buildings during their architects’ lifetime. Four case histories are considered: the De Maerle villa (1917‑1918) in Huizen, the Metropool multi‑tenancy building (1991‑1992) in Amsterdam, the Ministry of Agriculture, Trade and Industry (2015) in The Hague, and the Naturalis Natural History Museum (2017) in Leiden. The key question is whether the arguments used in the evaluation and outcome of these cases have changed over time.

The analysis of the four cases reveals that legislation, including the Auteurswet, is constantly subject to interpretation. In summary, the cases demonstrate that the act continues to evolve, partly in response to social change. There remains the important question of whether the application of the act (in other words, the interpretation of the weighing of interests) to architects’ designs is still consistent with current practice. The societal importance of preserving existing buildings and retrofitting them for sustainability is increasing. Demolition has become less acceptable from the viewpoint of sustainability, which only serves to heighten the tension between architectural authors’ rights and societal interests.

Yet the jurisprudence shows that there is still scope for these societal interests. In the weighing of interests, arguments in favour of preserving a design are set against reasons for change, such as changing uses, modern functional requirements and sustainability. The cases discussed here illustrate how the interpretation of the Auteurswet has evolved and adapted to social change. This includes a greater focus on the personality rights of the maker. Although that does not result in a complete interdiction on changes to buildings, it does help to clarify the scope of these rights. It ensures that the Auteurswet remains balanced between creative freedom on the one hand and societal interests on the other, with room for continued development in the future.

Included | Architecture Repurposed

Marie-Thérèse van Thoor — 2025-03-18

Bespreking van twee boeken van Sanne van den Breemer & Robert Winkel en Uri Gilad, Annuska Pronkhorst & Jan Peter Wingender (red.)

Bouwmaterialen 1940-1990

Inge Bertels — 2025-03-18

Bespreking van een boek van Kees Somer en Ronald Stenvert (red.)

Beeldhouwer in de Lage Landen

Arjan de Koomen — 2025-03-18

Bespreking van een boek van Stefan Glasbergen

De toekomst van het verleden

Caroline Baetens — 2025-03-18

Bespreking van een boek van Thijs Weststeijn