Wim ten Bosch and Henri le Grand 'Friendly, enjoyable and playful' "In R'dam, 7484 houses were designed by me. In Amsterdam 288 houses were designed by me". (Ten Bosch in his application letter for BNA, 1949) Introduction Architect W.Th.H. ten Bosch was a prolific builder who gave an important part of the Rotterdam of between the world wars an - attractive - face. In addition, during the interwar period and just after World War II, he developed his own variation on the New Building style. In the mainstream architectural history literature, which places a certain emphasis on pioneers and innovators, little can be found about Ten Bosch. The fact that his archive has been lost will certainly also play a role in this. However, this creates an "amputated" picture of reality, reason for the BONAS Foundation to include Ten Bosch in its architectural inventory project. The immediate reason for this was the discovery by Frits Stuurman of an oeuvre list (see Appendix I) and important data regarding Ten Bosch's private life, in the Archives Bijzondere Rechtspleging of the National Archives in The Hague.1 On the basis of this data, it turned out to be possible to reconstruct Ten Bosch's oeuvre in outline. Because Ten Bosch was associated with the (interior) architect Henri le Grand (1903-1989) during the years 1925 - 1930, this architect also came increasingly into the picture. It soon became apparent that it was particularly fruitful to include Le Grand's pre-war oeuvre in the research. Unique visual material thus came to light of buildings destroyed during the bombing of Rotterdam, and of cafés and fashion stores, most of which are now no longer in their original condition. It also provided insight into networks of clients and clarified the division of roles between Ten Bosch and Le Grand. The list of Le Grand's oeuvre is limited to the period before World War II due to a lack of archival material, thus unlocking his most representative work. This makes a substantial contribution to the somewhat neglected research field of store architecture in the Interwar period. The oeuvre of both architects intriguingly reflects the world of the (upper) middle class in the Interwar period. Ten Bosch As outlined above, little is known about the architect Ten Bosch to date.2 He is mentioned only occasionally in professional literature. There is also a significant lack of sources. The NAI preserves no archive of his and it must be assumed that the archives of his firm have been lost.3 For Rotterdam, the Rotterdam Municipal Archives obviously offer little solace because the material for the relevant period was lost in the bombardment of May 1940. Archive material can, however, be found in the municipal archives of locations where Ten Bosch built that fell outside the municipal boundaries of Rotterdam at the time, such as Hillegersberg. Among the few publications - apart from newspaper articles - that contain substantial information, the book that Ten Bosch published together with J.G. Wattjes (1874-1944): Rotterdam en hoe het bouwde (1941) deserves special mention. In addition, the latter architect published three informative articles about his colleague in the late 1930s.4 Although Ten Bosch completed some major projects in Amsterdam from 1925 to 1930, the period when he was associated with Henri le Grand, he is still primarily the architect who managed to leave his mark on a number of parts of Rotterdam in the late 1920s and in the 1930s: the Meent breakthrough and a number of Rotterdam's expansion districts (Blijdorp, Bergpolder, the Liskwartier, and pieces of Zuid). Naturally, little was built during the war; Ten Bosch's activities were mainly limited to a number of makeshift stores. After liberation, Ten Bosch found himself in a predicament because he was suspected of Nazi sympathies. Based on the trial documents, the impression arises that people who begrudged him his pre-war business successes tried to exact their revenge on him.5 It is clear that this trial had a disastrous impact on the further career of Ten Bosch, who, in the five years before the War and in his emergency stores of the first year of the war, was just on his way to developing his own idiom, a variant of the New Building. After the war, as far as is known, he realized projects only outside of Rotterdam. These included a considerable number of working-class houses and two schools according to the prefabricated construction system Dotremont - Ten Bosch, which will be discussed in more detail below. Le Grand Even less is known about Ten Bosch's partner from 1925 to 1930, Henri le Grand, than about the former.6 He came from a background of interior designers. His father Napoleon le Grand (1857-1932) ran a thriving studio that was known especially in the 1920s as 't Meubelhuis. At that time he devoted himself to the production of luxurious furniture inspired by historical furniture styles, but with a contemporary accent. Both of his sons will have been trained by him in the workshop. Le Grand's collaboration with Ten Bosch lasted five years. Interviews with relatives have revealed that Le Grand was much more an artist than a businessman, while his associate clearly demonstrated a business instinct. It is difficult to reconstruct the degree of cooperation and to make out exactly who had a hand in what. In his registrations for NIVA and BNA (NAI Studiezaal; see note 3) Ten Bosch explicitly mentions that he established himself as an architect in 1919, which implies that he was first active on his own for a number of years; indeed, as late as 1925 the minutes of the Amsterdam Architects' Committee mention a project in which only Ten Bosch is said to have been involved (application for renovation of Salomon's store on St. Antoniesbreestraat; this was the first project in 1925). Antoniesbreestraat; this is also Ten Bosch's earliest activity as an architect for which, besides his own LIST (no. 30), documentation has been found). Moreover, Le Grand does not seem to have ever had any involvement with the 'Institute "Ten Bosch"' in Amsterdam, for evening education in all technical subjects, of which Ten Bosch, on occasion holding himself out as Dr.[!] W.Th.H. ten Bosch, was director, and for which documentation is found between 1920 and 1938 (Het Centrum of 28.09.1920 (see www.kb.nl/kranten); Telephone books Amsterdam, on film in Gemeentearchief [still to be entered]). Presumably financial considerations played a role in the cooperation between Le Grand and Ten Bosch, because in this way office expenses could be shared. In addition, it is important to underline that after the official termination of the cooperation, both architects whenever it was convenient gave the other's address as "dépendance. Moreover, no personal grievances appear to have underpinned the 1930 privatization: during the war years, when Le Grand, who was of Jewish descent, had to flee to Switzerland, Ten Bosch helped him do so. On the other hand, something is known about Ten Bosch's motivation for withdrawing from Amsterdam. In the minutes of the meeting of the Mayor and Aldermen of Rotterdam dated 09-11-1933, it is recorded that "Ten Bosch is an Amsterdammer [...], while moreover Ten Bosch is not a first class architect, so that due to repeated frictions with the architectural committee in Amsterdam he left from there. The projects which he submitted here [meant: in Amsterdam] contained numerous defects, which had to be corrected by the architectural committee" (GAR - 444.01 Minutes of the Mayor and Aldermen - File section 1117 (concerns the year 1933)). Incidentally, as an independent architect, Le Grand later also had the necessary clashes with the Amsterdam beauty commissions; but for this born and bred Amsterdammer - perhaps also because of local networks already developed by his father - leaving the capital was apparently a less appropriate turn of events. Based on the material now available it cannot be concluded otherwise, than that Le Grand's most fruitful period was that before World War II, when he made a mark on the main shopping streets of Amsterdam, The Hague and Rotterdam with his fashionable store conversions. Store architecture by its very nature is particularly fashionable, this applies not only to the interiors, but also to shop window construction, lettering and under-front lighting. On top of this, Henri Le Grand has shown a strong preference for cladding storefronts with travertine, a type of stone native to Italy. On this, our climate, combined with the polluted air of cities, has an unfavorable influence. In his application form NIVA, Le Grand lists as independently executed by him such projects as six shoe stores for Huf, three of them in Amsterdam, and nine stores for Etam. Another curious project is the showroom for Citroën on Kalverstraat, a commission that was combined with the window display construction for a fashion store called "Moderne. Combined with the store conversions by the Ten Bosch & Le Grand firm to be mentioned below, this forms a not inconsiderable body of work. These were not just 'little conversions' but far-reaching underpinnings, involving major building-technical interventions. Henri le Grand was associated twice more after the war, first with Abraham Samuel Polak7 and then with Paul Selle. Thus, in the former combination he rebuilt two more Huf shoe stores, including the one on Lijnbaan in Rotterdam and one of the branches in Amsterdam. And in the second combination, among others, a building in custom architecture on the Weteringschans (see also Appendix II). Stylistic development Le Grand It is difficult to discern any stylistic development in Le Grand's oeuvre. The renovation for Huf , Kalverstraat nos. 178 - 180 (ca. 1926), which must undoubtedly be counted among one of the first renovations for this firm, is already strikingly modern, and already shows the travertine cladding of the facade characteristic of him. New developments are recognizable around 1935 when neon letters are used on a large scale, replacing the impassioned copper lettering used previously.For the rest, his shop windows follow the general trend of being placed deeper and deeper in the building, with the customer being lured into the store unnoticed through a funnel-shaped entrance. This solution was most beautifully applied at the Huf branch Spuistraat 5, The Hague (1934). An important moment in his development was probably also his first renovation for Etam (ca. 1935), this small building on the Oudegracht in Utrecht was rigorously rebuilt, using bronze rebates for the shop-window windows, achieving optimal transparency. The interior with tubular chairs and glass virtrine cabinets must also have appeared very "modern" at the time. Unfortunately, the ninth volume in the series Modern Architecture in the Netherlands, Shops and Shopfronts, published in 1933, does not show any work by Le Grand; possibly this has to do with the fact that his work was not yet considered authoritative at the time. Regardless, Le Grand's storefronts stand up well to comparison with that depicted in this book. Newspaper reports unanimously praise his conversions. Amsterdam projects of the Ten Bosch & Le Grand firm (1925-1930) Most of Ten Bosch & Le Grand's Amsterdam projects involved remodeling stores, and it is noteworthy that these were largely owned by Jewish firm owners. Names such as Lehmann, Salomon and Goudsmit clearly point in that direction. To a large extent, therefore, these were clients from the world of men's and women's fashion and textiles. The shoe firm Huf was also a Jewish company. Presumably orders of this kind went through Le Grand, who was of Jewish origin. A company building with a certain allure is Van Straten's textile factory on Geldersekade, which has replaced two canal houses. The new building still shows some features of the original, presumably 18th century, canal house through its high gabled roof and characteristic relatively narrow, high windows. A number of the Amsterdam projects are unspectacular, belonging to the standard facades with bay windows, as also realized by numerous other Amsterdam architects. Examples include the buildings on Amazonestraat, Uiterwaardenstraat, etc. On the whole, the buildings have been preserved in reasonably authentic condition, which means that the original rods and other woodwork of the frames are still present. The houses on Dirksz-Krommertstraat are soberly executed. The corner building has a deep porch whose rounded corners are executed in "pseudo-rustic". (Ten Bosch retained a preference for such Renaissance details, such as soapstones, wrought ironwork and borde staircases, until about 1935.) The garage with upstairs apartments on Zeeburgerdijk is particularly notable for its large scale, which could indicate that this project was realized at the end of the architects' association period. It is suspected that in a number of interior and underpinnings such as the one already mentioned for Huf (ca.1926) and furthermore the Peugeot Garage (1926), the lunchroom VAMI (1927), the cafés Koch (ca. 1928) and Rijntalder (1929), Le Grand as a specialist in this field had an important input. This suspicion is supported by the fact that, after the dissolution of the firm, Le Grand continued to work primarily for Huf and Etam. The 'Colosseum' (1927). The client for this project was Carel van Zwanenburg (1875-1930). He sold his Luxor theater on Kruiskade to the UFA in 1926. He then developed plans for a cinema theater in Rotterdam-Zuid in the Hillesluis neighborhood that formed a "growth center. He was supported in this endeavor by the well-known socialist alderman Arie Heijkoop. Ten Bosch & Le Grand were commissioned to design a large complex, including housing and stores. This duo's plan proved financially unfeasible, so the design was slightly modified by Rotterdam architect Pieter Dick. This one also designed the interior, which was furnished according to French example with lamps from the Sabino glass factory in Paris. The site chosen for the planned theater of almost 260 m2 is located on the Beijerlandselaan between the Slaghekstraat and the Groningsestraat. The building thus fronts the road on three sides. The theater is only part of a larger building complex that further includes a large café with a reading room, a shopping arcade with a large store on the corner, and a number of residences. The theater proper can accommodate 1,200 visitors. It has an egg-shaped floor plan of 35 meters in length and 28 meters in width. The stage area is located at the tip of the "egg," with an opening of 11 meters and a depth of 12 meters. The building was intended not only as a cinema but also for operettas and stage performances (revues). After the death of the first owner, the theater was continued by widow and daughter. In 1933 the theater was sold to C. van Willigen. The new owner had the interior altered including the installation of modern neon lighting. This type of lighting was also applied to the facade. In 1967 the operation was taken over by the Cineac concern. After ten years, the unprofitable cinema was closed. Shortly thereafter, the building was almost completely demolished internally to function as a department store. The Meent complex (1931 about). On the Meent (the former Heerenstraat, the shopping street in Rotterdam) before the war, there stood a few shopping and housing complexes that must be counted among Ten Bosch's main works. Due to the bombing, nothing remained of these objects. Presumably the first building on the Meent, which stylistically corresponds closely to the Colosseum theater and must also presumably be dated to around 1929-1930, is now known primarily from a photograph in the album "Executed Works by Henri Le Grand" (part. coll.). This is a project that dates back to the period of the Ten Bosch & Le Grand firm and undoubtedly also corresponds to one of the various mentions of projects on the Meent that Ten Bosch also lists in his LIST. Probably the largest building block on the Meent was located between Botersloot and Tweede Lombardstraat. It was thus situated in line with a large building block by the architect H. Sutterland. Important information about Ten Bosch's project provides an illustrated newspaper report from the Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad of Jan. 28-29, 1933. It states that the site in question was owned by the building contractor M. van Dorp, for whom Ten Bosch had already made a design, but who died. The new owner, the NV Robomij, still had the block built according to the existing plans. Since the article mentions the start of construction, and assuming that some time must have been lost due to the change of ownership, Ten Bosch's design must be dated around 1931. The substantial structure consists of a central section and two corner pavilions, the latter being separated from the central section by an entrance in the form of a gate, above which a tower-like element on the right and a triangular bay window on the left. The corner pavilions are diagonally chamfered and have an entrance at the corner. The tripartite division mirrors in broad outline that of the Sutterland complex, thus striving for a uniform streetscape. The first floor with the store windows forms a heavy plinth by means of stucco motifs, giving the whole a monumental character. Above the stores are three floors with an attic above. The two corner buildings have flat roofs, but the middle section conceals gable roofs behind the straight architrave, which can only be seen from the air. Each attic floor receives light through a trio of windows above which lifting beams are installed. The newspaper's verdict: "As one can see, the architect has managed to give a calm and clear aspect to the large new building block, while also giving it a certain liveliness, which cannot be missed especially in shopping streets. "8 Shortly before the war, Ten Bosch must have realized another plan for the further breakthrough of De Meent. This project, which was presumably located diagonally opposite the new stock exchange building on the Meent, was built in a considerably more businesslike style than its predecessor on the Meent - Botersloot. Already in the years 1931-'32, the well-known architect J.B. van Loghem (1881-1940) had been asked to provide plans for the further breakthrough of the Meent, but his austere modernist style was seen at the time as too contrasting with the immediate surroundings, the old city center. Moreover, in the crisis years, there was no money for ambitious plans. Only at the end of the 1930s, when the economy improved somewhat, was the new Meent built on. Presumably Ten Bosch was also involved again at that time, along with architects such as J.P.L. Hendriks (1895-1975) and B. Buurman (1883-1951). They designed buildings in a moderately modern idiom inspired by the architecture of Van den Broek, Oud and Van der Vlugt. The design for this building by Ten Bosch, if this is not an incorrect hypothesis, must be dated around 1937 and thus was allowed to exist for only a few years. Stylistically it will have connected to the Central Plan (1937-'38) and to the post office on the Dordtselaan (1937). Such a building can be seen in photographs from that time, taken from or near the new Beursgebouw on the Meent. In 1938, the editors of the Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad were less pleased with this new development: "[...] the latest Meent buildings are again much more in conflict with the atmosphere of the old city than those designed by the architects Sutterland and Ten Bosch for the section between Lombardstraat and Goudschesingel. This finds its cause in the pronounced horizontalism of the newest blocks, in which the architectural spirit of the new Beurs continues. "9 Government telephone building at IJmuiden (1932) Another important commission for Ten Bosch was the now-demolished automatic telephone exchange at IJmuiden. This exchange was important not only for IJmuiden, but for the entire country, as IJmuiden occupied a key position as the outport of the capital, the then fishing company and Hoogovens. In 1931, the number of interlocal calls was 215,000, in addition to 29,000 international calls. The construction of the plant took nearly a year and furnishing five months. Thanks to a publication by J.G. Wattjes in Het Bouwbedrijf that is accompanied by a photograph and floor plans, it is possible to get a good idea of the building.10 It is a detached building measuring approximately 28 by 10 meters. On the first floor there is an entrance that, like a porch apartment, gives access to three doors, to a high-voltage house that is therefore integrated into the building here, and on the right to a switch box that can therefore be operated from outside. The actual entrance door gives access to a hallway through a drafty portal. To the right are an office for the area manager, a room for workers and a warehouse. To the left are a machine room and the battery room. Upstairs are the automaton room, a workshop and the "cross connection room. The building is basement. "The architecture is in keeping with the purpose quiet and dignified, but also enlivened by a facade articulation with equally protruding pilasters. The facades are built in a so-called Nordic bond of yellow sand-lime baked clay brick with sparse use of granite, where that was constructively desirable and to finish - at the top and bottom - of the pilasters mentioned above". All windows and doors are steel. The hipped roof is covered with black glazed tiles. The design as a whole has a business-like appearance and thus deviates somewhat from Ten Bosch's housing construction of the same period, such as those in Rotterdam-Blijdorp. This shows that he adapted his style to the function and location of a structure. Architect of Blijdorp Ten Bosch's earliest middle-class houses are located on the Vroesenlaan (Blijdorp); this is located north of the Central Plan, which should have served as a model for the new neighborhood to be built. Because the realization of this part of the expansion was delayed, the construction of the present porch houses more curiously precedes it. In 1933, the Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad reported on construction issues from the previous year. The article detailed the origins of the housing complexes on Vroesenlaan: "When [...] a group of Rotterdamsche builders [...] in the back of Blijdorp began the construction of three blocks of new housing [...] many watched this experiment with very dubious expectations. In the situation at that time, this housing complex formed a kind of colony at quite a distance from the contiguous city buildings [...] But those who built there were able to offer pleasant, new homes with modern comforts at a lower price than they did elsewhere - and last but not least - they had in the architect W.Th.H. ten Bosch the man who knew how to give these housing blocks between the Statenweg and the Vroesenlaan a very attractive aspect. Especially along Vroesenlaan [...] the architect designed charming staircases behind the facades, and the builders, who provided beautiful teak exterior doors and other neat materials, worked strongly in his favor. But the facades on the other streets and roads also do it, both from close up and from afar. They give these housing groups a cachet [...] The leasing [...] went particularly smoothly [...] And [...] the purchasers also came, so that it soon became clear that this venture by the builders could be considered a success. [...] Therefore the Mij. "East" in cooperation with the N.V. "Robomij" started again with the foundation of a whole block. And also the builders Smelt and Hempel are going to build a second block of these successful houses, they - as well as the Mij. "West", which will take another half block for its account - on the north side of the broad Statenweg, thus expanding this characteristic new neighborhood significantly again." In 1938 Wattjes published the porch houses in Blijdorp as part of a series of three articles he devoted to Ten Bosch. He especially praised the porch solutions characteristic of these houses. The houses have four floors. The ground-floor dwellings are accessed by doors directly facing the street, but somewhat sheltered slightly set back in the facade. The six dwellings on the upper floors each have their own front door. The solution Ten Bosch chose is rather peculiar, falling back on a principle regularly found on wide Amsterdam canal houses: a double-barrelled staircase with a service entrance below. In the case of Vroesenlaan, this forms the entrance to a bicycle cellar. By climbing the outer staircase one is then already halfway up the floor. From the landing it is then a short staircase to a porch that has two entrance doors on three sides. The apartments on the third floor are accessed from this porch by an interior staircase. The fourth floor is reached by a private stairwell with two staircases. Also in these dwellings, Ten Bosch decorated the substructure with a pseudo-specco layer. The success of the dwellings led to further commissions for residential blocks along Vroesenpark in which, however, one block by Van den Broek (the Eendracht complex, 1931-1934) was, as it were, interposed. Incidentally, the blocks added later do clearly show a tightening in detailing. The speklagen have disappeared, the bordestrappen are executed in a somewhat less archaic style, furthermore, the upper dwellings now have balconies fitted with an iron balcony gate. However imaginative Ten Bosch's solution to the time-honored porch may have been, he was clearly outdone by Van den Broek, who succeeded in dealing with what Wattjes calls "the deep cavern, which aggravates police surveillance. As a newspaper report from 1933 about the continued construction on Vroesenlaan states: "The plans designed by [...] Ten Bosch have remained essentially the same and so, along Vroesenlaan, his friendly residential architecture is also continued [...]. Playful are the bordes gate arches with their deep shadows between the horizontals and verticals of the doors, windows, bay windows and cornices. "11 On the striking contrast between Van den Broek's creation and that of his counterpart, a subsequent notice from the same year reads: "in strong contrast with the bourgeois architecture of [...] Ten Bosch, who keeps the appearance of his residential blocks much more in the character of the transitional period, in which we live, and who would certainly have taken care of 90 percent of both districts of the city, had not the Woningdienst shoved a number of other Rotterdam architects between them, in the end even wriggled between them!" 12 Around 1935, however, Ten Bosch made a clear U-turn towards the Nieuwe Bouwen, from which he adopted the underlying principles of form without abandoning a more playful detailing. The reason for this may have been the collaboration with Van den Broek, and the exemplary effect that must have emanated from the Eendracht complex and the realization of the Central Plan. Ten Bosch's creations must have seemed very archaic in comparison to those of Van den Broek. This influence is particularly noticeable in housing complexes on Statenweg (1936) that he developed in collaboration with the architectural firm Kraaijvanger, and the generous middle-class houses on Breitnerstraat (1936). Other 'modern' projects can be found in Kralingen-West on Libellenstraat (ca. 1936) and surroundings, in Tarwewijk the Mijnsherenplein area (ca. 1936), in Oud-Charlois the Frans Bekkerstraat (e.o.), on the Noordereiland on Maaskade, and 'last but not least' his design for the post office with dwellings on Dordtselaan (near Zuidplein, 1937). His villa Wijlacker and 'mansions' on the Van Aerssenlaan, from the same period, are significantly more conservative in character, and would be categorized in a negative sense as retro architecture, or in a more positive sense as 'desirable' building. The particularity of the synthesis between Amsterdam School and New Building described above led to a form of architecture aptly described in a 1936 newspaper report: "Continued [...] the project, which the architect W.Th.H. ten Bosch, alhier, designed for Van Omme and De Groot. A striking architecture in modern character, in which, as something completely new in the Rotterdam building industry, the facades are covered with narrow tiles from the famous factory "De Porceleyne Fles" in Delft. Something has thus been obtained, which appears extremely beautiful and lively, it is up to date, but not as cold and hard as other ultra-modern housing architecture. "13 The housing development on Schepenstraat referred to in the newspaper article quoted above is among Ten Bosch's most original creations. It is curious that this project has virtually passed the attention of architectural historians and historic preservationists to this day. The Central Plan (1931;1936-1938 about) Although, as the above may have shown, Ten Bosch gave face to much of Blijdorp, it was ultimately Van den Broek who was the giver in the design of the Central Plan. Presumably Ten Bosch was involved in this project because otherwise the pursuit of a uniform cityscape would be jeopardized. After all, Ten Bosch had already built a lot in this area. The Central Plan was intended by the municipality to set the tone, so to speak, for the Blijdorp to be built further with private initiative. The municipality would not interfere with the construction itself, because this urban expansion was to be realized entirely by private entrepreneurs. The municipality set conditions only for the appearance of the projects - the architects had to take into account the provisions of the municipal building regulations. The submitted plan was well received with the result that the three architects were engaged to execute large parts of the plan. However, the implementation of the Central Plan, which consisted of housing with stores in the substructure, was delayed by the crisis years and only realized on a more modest scale from 1936 onwards. These were residential blocks at the intersection of Stadhoudersweg and Statenweg. As is known, the plan for the Blijdorp expansion was designed by the city architect W.G. Witteveen (1891-1979), who was inspired by H.P. Berlage's 1911 plan for The Hague South. The idea behind such an urban layout was to create a number of lines of sight from a central space. In the Witteveen plan, residential blocks four to five stories high were planned along a wide traffic artery. The outlines of the building blocks and the type of buildings were also already defined in the plan, so that for the architects Van den Broek, Otten and Ten Bosch the actual assignment was mainly the design of the façade wall. The plan was based on a vision of urban planning that was at least some twenty years old and did not in fact fit in with the new insights on parcellation that were held within 'de Opbouw' circles. They looked to neighboring Germany, where experiments with a more rational parcellation and strip construction were already underway. The original closed character of the four flats was therefore broken by creating end walls at one of the corners. On the street side, these feature balconies. "We have here a very matter-of-fact, i.e. sober and logically perfectly sound brick architecture, strongly influenced by a rational use of steel windows and of reinforced concrete for balconies. We could say of this architecture, especially that of the corner building Statensingel - Dresselhuysstraat, that it is Dutch architecture with a strong new-business slant, or new-business architecture with a strong Dutch slant. Very well resolved in this block are the so-called porches, as well as the balcony railings. "14 The dwellings were built at a slow pace, which was certainly due to the financial difficulties of the time. This effect also had an influence on the architecture, because within the Central Plan there are differences between the building blocks, especially in the access by means of either a public staircase to a hall on the first floor (as ten Bosch applied on the Vroesenlaan) or by a normal portico in which the public staircase continues to the top floor, as Van den Broek applied to the Eendracht complex. Compared to the Vroesenlaan, several changes can be noted, the windows are larger and no longer have the high skylights. Also noteworthy is that the characteristic far overhanging eaves have disappeared and that the balconies instead of stone parapets are provided with simple railings made of tubes. The former enhances the cubist character of the houses, the latter aspect gives the then so valued elements of light and air more opportunity. It is noteworthy that in newspaper coverage, Ten Bosch's architecture is more highly valued than the uncompromising architecture of the New Building. For example, one reporter commented in 1939: "[...] Ten Bosch played a rather romantic architectural game on Vroesenlaan with Renaissance-like motifs, creating a friendly ensemble that is generally easily appreciated. Later this architect again strayed from this kind of pleasant building and tried with simpler forms. Yet his last work in "Blijdorp" regained that friendly striving character that, for example, the high-rise at the intersection of Stadhoudersweg and Statenweg lacks. "15 Stylistic development Ten Bosch As can be concluded from the above, after 1935-'36 Ten Bosch moved away from a stylistic principle that was still highly influenced by the Amsterdam School. The pointed arch windows increasingly disappeared, as did the expressive use of ornamental brickwork and multicolored stained glass. However, a number of Ten Bosch's characteristic elements remain even in this new stylistic phase. For example, for the stores (mostly located on the corner properties) he still uses tiling of the lower facade and entrance. He also continues to use wrought iron for the skylights of stairwells. Directly under the eaves, a simple frieze of decorative masonry can often be seen. Incidentally, the influence of contemporaries was not limited to Van den Broek. In the work from shortly before the war, the influence of the Kraaijvanger brothers is also noticeable. This manifests itself in the use of decorative elements such as round windows and natural stone lintels combined with fanciful architraves made of concrete. Stylized ornamental palmettes crowning windows in stairwells are also sporadic in this period. As far as we know, Ten Bosch always refrained from using building plastic, something the Kraaijvangers liked to use to liven up elongated residential blocks. The so-called Statenweg complexes (1936-1938) have acquired a certain reputation; these housing complexes are the result of the collaboration between the Kraaijvangers and Ten Bosch. However, the latter, based on the inscription of one of the construction drawings (Bureau Kraaijvanger Urbis), seems to have been mainly involved in the internal detailing (stairwells). Among Ten Bosch's most important creations in the field of housing from the period shortly before World War II must be counted, in addition to the Schepenstraat already mentioned, the four RVS blocks16 and the complexes on Breitnerstraat, Rochussenstraat and Mathenesserlaan (1935-'36). Strip building Jaffa (1936-1937). Possibly Ten Bosch's involvement with the Central Plan also put him on the trail of a new urban planning solution that broke with the traditional closed building block. In the RVS blocks mentioned above, he was already striving for a more open building plan, and in his housing complex on Libellenstraat in Kralingen-West (ca. 1936) he also strove for a more open structure, creating a 1950s effect. The design differs from actual strip construction only in that the facades do not have the same (north-south) orientation. From this perspective, it is not so surprising that around that date Ten Bosch became involved in one of the earliest applications of strip construction in our country: Jaffa.17 This is a fairly substantial plan for a combination of strip construction with one separate gallery apartment in Kralingen. Five three-story strips were built here by Ten Bosch. Van Tijen's office designed a short remaining strip and the well-known tall residential building. It is not clear how exactly the projects that Ten Bosch "took over" from the now more famous architectural firms worked. As was the case with the blocks on Rochussenstraat mentioned above, the original plan was implemented not by the Van Tijen - Van den Broek combination, but by Ten Bosch. Emergency stores (1940-1941) In the year 1940, Ten Bosch made the film Rotterdam and how it built, and together with Wattjes he published the book of the same name. After the bombing, the duo was forced to publish a revised edition of the book, which incidentally did not differ substantially from the first edition. A revised version of the film was also reportedly made; a copy of it could not be traced. The book gives a good picture of the state of architecture in Rotterdam shortly before the war. The New Building is admired in it, although with undisguised reserve. Despite this reserve, Ten Bosch's turn toward forms related to the Nieuwe Bouwen continues. His designs for Emergency Shops from 1940-1941 bear witness to this. Like all architects involved in the construction of such stores, the need to break with the past and arrive at fresh new contemporary solutions clearly emerges. Perhaps one of the finest examples is the design for the De Jong firm that is somewhat reminiscent of Van Ravesteyn's architecture. The newspaper praised the building: "Architect Ten Bosch has [...] designed the building [...]. He has given it a lively character by making grateful use of the situation near the corner of Mathenesserlaan and by creating a lot of display space at the side of the entrance. The interior also makes a cozy, fresh impression. It is tastefully decorated and furnished and includes two hearing booths and a small office. The stock of records has been given good storage space and in the showcases one finds musical instruments on display, among other things. "18 Unfortunately, this emergency store, like the others in Blijdorp and Dijkzigt, was demolished in the years 1954-'55. As indicated above, the war years and their aftermath were disastrous for Ten Bosch's career. Admittedly, on the occasion of his 30th anniversary in October 1949, the visit to his reception by such luminaries as the Minister of Housing and Reconstruction, J. in 't Veld (see also below) and the Director-General of Reconstruction, Dr. Z.IJ. van der Meer, could perhaps still be interpreted as (an attempt at) rehabilitation (Bouw 4-44, 29.10.1949, 780 [to be introduced]). As far as can be ascertained, however, after WW2 Ten Bosch made only one more attempt to actually make a new start: system construction. System construction according to the Dotremont-Ten Bosch method (1947-1951) Little is known about the history of this Dotremont-Ten Bosch construction method. It was originally a Belgian system, "Skalja", which Ten Bosch adapted for the Dutch situation.19 A certain Philippe Joseph Ghislain Dotremont (1898-1966), who lived in Uccle-Brussels, was responsible for the construction.20 In Belgium, the "Skalja" system was probably only built in a few places: perhaps a single villa (in Lasne?); and probably only the school buildings on the Avenue de Eglantiers in Uccle still exist today (late 2005). Around 1947-1948, numerous "small" building systems emerged, hoping to benefit from government subsidies for non-traditional construction methods. In 1949, after extensive research by the Ratiobouw Foundation, most of them disappeared again; a ministerial decree was issued at the time, under which only 17 systems remained permitted. In terms of design and appearance, the Dotremont-Ten Bosch system closely resembles the Airey system promoted by the government.21 A characteristic feature of the system is that the front, rear, and end walls consist of regularly spaced concrete posts with concrete tiles on both sides. In addition, the system includes concrete beams for the floor and a joist under the roof of bimbo concrete-channel slabs. With the given grid of concrete posts and originally whitish siding, a significant part of the architectural appearance is fixed in advance. The application of flat roofs is obvious because the building system requires a light roof construction. The best known application of the Dotremont-Ten Bosch system are the houses in Frankendaal (Amsterdam). Ten Bosch's role there is strictly limited to the building system used. The characteristic architecture of the houses in that district, to which the popular name "Jerusalem" is due, is attributed to Merkelbach & Karsten (later Merkelbach & Elling). The flat roofs in Jerusalem should not be considered a solution imposed by the building system, but are part of the design interventions of Merkelbach et al. This is evidenced by the fact that the -much less known- houses designed by Ten Bosch for application of the same system generally have a gable roof. The earliest experiments with the Dotremont-Ten Bosch system probably started in the Sittard area (1948, Broeksittard and Overhovenerheide). November 1948 followed an assignment from Boxtel. Then came Maasniel (Roermond). On April 19, 1949, permission was granted to the management of the Heerlen State Mines to build 50 assembly houses in Treebeek (Brunssum) (28 of which were duplex houses).It soon became apparent that some of the elements supplied for construction had exposed concrete reinforcement. More serious were structural problems with the corner rafters. It turned out that drawings were missing, so the contractor himself had sought a solution that was unacceptable from a construction-technical point of view. There were also problems with the madder boards, which, as usual, showed shrinkage. Although it is questionable whether Ten Bosch or the contractor was liable for these teething problems, the architect was suspected of being at fault. A complex was also realized north of the great rivers, at Zaandam. J. in 't Veld (1895-1981) was mayor of Zaandam from 1937 to 1941 and again from 1945 to 1948. It is almost inevitable that, as mayor, In 't Veld was still involved in the assignment to Ten Bosch for the test of housing construction according to the Dotremont-Ten Bosch system. There seems to have been a certain bond between In 't Veld and W.Th.H. ten Bosch. When In 't Veld was appointed mayor of Zaandam from Rotterdam in 1937, he had his mayor's residence, Botenmakersstraat 137 in Zaandam, designed by Ten Bosch. Moreover, this In 't Veld was one of those who, when the architect got into trouble after finishing, jumped into the breach for him. From March 1, 1948 (until September 2, 1952) In 't Veld was Minister of Reconstruction and Housing. It may therefore have been partly due to his influence that the Dotremont-Ten Bosch system rather than one of the other systems was chosen for the construction of Frankendaal. The project in Zaandam was a pilot scheme. In the archives of Zaanstad there is a document that sheds a lot of light on the question why this was not followed up: a letter from the Director of Gemeentewerken Zaandam, ir W. Zuurmond, to B&W of Zaandam, June 21, 1950, and a subsequent letter from B&W of Zaandam to the Chief Engineer-Director of the Directorate for Reconstruction and Public Housing Noordholland, Aug. 14, 1950. The contents of these letters are as follows: "The 6 prefabricated houses, according to system Doutrement-ten Bosch [sic], were built for trial in our municipality in 1948. The system consists of a concrete stud and batten system. The studs in the front and rear facades are provided with recesses, into which the ridges of the gable plates must fall. Since these cladding panels have fairly large dimensions, namely 125 x 50 cm, a fairly high degree of accuracy is required when setting the studs. This was rather lacking in the execution. Several studs turned out to be too long and had to be cut off. What this means in concrete is obvious. The result of this was that the cladding panels could not be set cleanly and showed discrepancies here and there, which were concealed as far as possible by an inconspicuous seam. The so-called inner cavity wall in the facades consists of mevritic slabs. These turned out to be far from shrink-proof, with the result that the room walls currently look unsightly and require provision. The low outbuildings found on both sides of the block present difficulties in meeting the main block. A sufficiently dense material between the tiles and the wall consisting of concrete elements has not yet been found. The roof is covered with tiles. Oosterhout roof sheets were used for the roof sheathing. As you will see from the above, the system has its drawbacks. The framework is very reminiscent of a steel construction and cannot be replaced by concrete with impunity. In addition, the construction work was not carried out with the accuracy and care that could reasonably be expected." All in all, the launch of the Dotremont-Ten Bosch system became a tragic failure for the architect. Payments were delayed, deficiencies settled and follow-up assignments failed to materialize. In a letter dated Voorburg, January 5, 1955 addressed to the Municipality of Maasniel, the following is written about the matter: "Since the system was still in its early stages and, as already mentioned, the dwellings built in your municipality were the first to be built with the system, many changes and adjustments had to be made and it turned out that the fees paid did not cover the actual costs, since at the end of the entire system construction a debt of f 29,000 remained. All this is partly the cause of the dissolution of my office as of Sept. 1 last and since then I have been living in France." In examining the correspondence, one can come to no other conclusion than that the complaints about the houses were exaggerated. This conclusion is also supported by the fact that most of the Dotremont-Ten Bosch dwellings are still occupied satisfactorily today; the former duplex dwellings have even been transformed into attractive single-family homes in the spacious neighborhoods. A final project in the Dotremont-Ten Bosch system was the Potgieterschool in Voorburg (1951), a rather exceptional project for prefabricated construction. Earlier, a first Dotremont-Ten Bosch school was built in Zuidlaren (where, incidentally, coverage emphasizes the role of Minister In 't Veld as "promoter" of Ten Bosch and his system). In a commentary on the occasion of the opening of the school in Zuidlaren, Ten Bosch also announces a school in 's-Hertogenbosch; but no documentation of any realization of this could be traced. Perhaps a swipe at the Dotremont-Ten Bosch system is the fact that under Ten Bosch's architecture a second school in Voorburg, now the Pius X school, was later built in the traditional manner. Ten Bosch retreated, as shown above, after the fiasco of the prefab experiments, to his second home on the French Riviera (Bouches-du-Loup, municipality of Villeneuve Loubet) for an unknown time. From 1955, things then went quiet around the architect, who died in 1967. Balance Now that the oeuvre of Ten Bosch and Le Grand has for the first time become clear in terms of size and quality, the question arises as to what significance should be assigned to these architects. With regard to Ten Bosch, it is clear that in his most productive period, i.e. the 1930s, he was one of the most sought-after architects in Rotterdam for builders. He tried to give his predominantly large blocks of middle-class housing an attractive appearance through a careful and varied architecture. He employed ornate details borrowed from Renaissance architecture to achieve this goal. In doing so, he placed value on the belaying of the residents, which manifested itself in much attention to stairwells, bicycle sheds, large windows, bay windows and balconies. In a certain sense, Ten Bosch imported stylistic elements from the Amsterdam School into the Rotterdam building environment. In Rotterdam, he underwent the influence of the Nieuwe Bouwen from around 1935. His architecture always retained a recognizable signature of his own. In the early war years, he experimented with buildings as playful as they were practical, in the form of makeshift stores. He was one of the first to put the principle of strip building (Jaffa) into practice in the Netherlands. After World War II, he seems to have focused mainly on solving the problem of housing shortage combined with the lack of building materials, this by introducing a prefabricated system that he had developed based on a construction method patented by Dotremont. Henri le Grand was primarily an interior designer. A strong tendency toward innovation is also noticeable in him from 1935 onwards. His store interiors were then relatively empty, bright, carefully lit and stylish. The fact that he served as the "house architect" of the major retail chains Huf and Etam proves that he was able to meet the wishes of his clients extremely well. The transience of his creations probably contributed to his being forgotten. For both architects, the Second World War had a profound influence on the course of their careers, which were at their peak when it broke out. The 1930s are still known in architectural research as a period of decline compared to the decade before. The specificity of the architecture of this period deserves further investigation. Possibly a the new vision of (architectural) history will do more justice to Ten Bosch and Le Grand, or at least create the frameworks within which their architecture can be better assessed. (original text Michiel Roding; later edited) APPENDIX I (Source: see footnote 1) LIST OF WORKS PERFORMED W.TH.H. TEN BOSCH ARCHITECT BEUKELSDIJK 46A R O T T E R D A M The original LIST is composed of 3 columns, successively with "No.", "Work", "Client"; under "Work" an address is given and an indication of the nature of the work. Correspondingly, Appendix I consists of a series of four entries per number: address; category; client; where an entry is missing, we state -; in many cases Rotterdam is not mentioned but apparently meant: then the place name is between square brackets, []. 1 Almelo; Renovation of a mansion; - 2 Arnhem; Double villa; - 3 Germany Berlin and Hamburg; Housing construction; - 4 Bilthoven; Villa; - 5 Bloedstraat O.Z. Achterburgwal Amsterdam; Construction of warehouses; - 6 Beyerlandschelaan R'dam; Collosseum Theater; Zwanenburg 7 Krommertstraat Amsterdam; Housing construction; Mij Deldes II 8 Stadionterrein Amsterdam; Housing; N.V. Delos 9 Diezestraat Amsterdam; Housing construction; Mij Deldes II 10 Gelderschekade 10[1] Amsterdam; Confection factory; Max v. Straten 12 Alex Boersstraat Amsterdam; Warehouse construction; Huf 13 Haarlemmerstraat Amsterdam; Shop building; Huf 14 Hoogstraat Rotterdam; Shopbuilding; Huf 15 Kalverstraat Amsterdam; Retail building; Huf 16 Spuistraat The Hague; Retail building; Huf 17 Hoogstraat Rotterdam; Shop building; Huisman 18 Const. Huygenstraat A'dam; Café-construction; Koch 20 Euterpestraat Amsterdam; Apartment building; Mij Letta 21 Boetonstraat Amsterdam; Housing; Me Lobrou 22 Meent, Botersloot, 2e Lombartstraat R'dam; Shop- and apartmentbuilding; Buitendijk 23 Kalverstraat Amsterdam; Shopbuilding; Mesa 24 Clerqstraat Amsterdam; Shop and apartment building; Meeuwsen 25 John Franklinstraat Amsterdam; Housing; Mij Nicoen II 26 Oude zijds Achterburgwal A'dam; Warehouse building; Fa.Lehman & C. 27 Prinsenstraat Amsterdam; Warehouse building; - 28 Euterpestraat Amsterdam; Apartment building; N.V. Remm 29 Kinkerstraat Amsterdam; Café construction; Rijntelder 30 St. Antoniebreestraat Amsterdam; Shopbuilding; Salomon 31 Schiedam; Villa; Kuyk 32 Waterlooplein Amsterdam; Café with houses; Stuiver 33 Beethovenstraat Amsterdam; -; V.A.M.I. 34 Beethovenstraat Stadionweg Amsterdam; -; V.A.M.I. 35 Beethovenstraat corner Stadionweg Amsterdam; -; V.A.M.I. 36 Kalverstraat Amsterdam; Restaurant; V.A.M.I. 37 Weesp; Bicycle factory; Magnet 38 Weteringschans Pieter Pouwstraat Amsterdam; Auto Showroom; Pimentel 39 Zeeburgerdijk Amsterdam; Garage building; Zeeburg 40 Zeeburgerdijk Amsterdam; Housing construction; Zeeburg 41 Volendam; Dwelling house with store; Gebr. Sul 42 IJmuiden; State telephone building; Rijksgebouwendienst 43 Blok 30 Blijdorp [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; - 44 Goudsmit Amsterdam; Shop building; - [Goudsmit?] 45 Savornin Lohmanstraat Tak v. Poortvlietstr. [Rotterdam]; Residential building; Noordzij 46 Abr. Kuyperlaan Sav. Lohmanl. [Rotterdam]; Woningbous; Smelt 47 Berkelschelaan Dr. de Visserstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing; Hempel 48 Insulindestraat Berkelschelaan [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; de Winter 49 Savornin Lohmanlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Noordzij 50 Block 29 Blijdorp [Rotterdam]; Housing; - 51 Block 33 Blijdorp [Rotterdam]; Housing; - 52 Meent [Rotterdam]; Housing and store construction; de Winter 53 J. v. Oldenbarneveldtlaan Hillegersberg [now Rotterdam]; Mansions; Recently 54 Insulindestraat Gordelweg Savornin Lohmanlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; v. Veen Binkhorst 55 Hoytemalaan Mauvelaan Hillegersberg [now Rotterdam]; mansions; de Winter 56 Bijlwerffstraat Statenweg Nideckstraat Nobelstraat [Rotterdam]; housing; Smel & Hempel 57 Savornin Lohmanlaan Dr. de Visserstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Mulder 58 Dr. de Visserstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Ruyter 59 Noordblaak [Rotterdam]; Shop building; Laimböck 60 Breidnersingel Hillegersberg [now Rotterdam]; Heerenhuizen; P. de Winter 61 Savornin Lohmanlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Mulder 62 v. Maanenstraat and Bergschelaan [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Luitgaarden 63 Nobelstraat Nideckstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Buitendijk 64 Statenweg Bijlwerffstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Mij Oost 65 v.d. Horststraat Vroesenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; de Winter 66 Nieuwstraat [Rotterdam]; Shop construction; v.d. Loo 67 Nolens[s]traat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Hofman 68 Schieweg Bergschelaan v. Maanenstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Voormolen 69 Stadhouderslaan Schiedam; Double Villa; Gebr. Voormolen 70 Mauvelaan Hillegersberg [now Rotterdam]; Heerenhuizen; de Winter P. 71 Sonmanstraat [Rotterdam]; Dwelling houses; de Winter D. 72 v. Nideckstraat Statenweg v. Vlooswijkstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; de Winter D. 73 v.d. Meydestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; A.C.B. 74 v. Maanenstraat Bergschelaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. Luitgaarden 75 Bergschelaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Manhave brothers 76 Breeweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Lemmens 77 Bisschopstraat Statenweg Bijlwerffstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; de Winter D. 78 Kleincoolstraat Baljuwstr. Harddraverstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Buitendijk 79 Noorderhavenkade [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; de Winter 80 Bijlwerffstraat Statenweg v. Nideckstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; de Winter 81 Cleyburgstraat Vroesenlaan Navanderstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; de Winter 82 Spangenschekade Mathenesserdijk 39a [Rotterdam]; -; Noordzij 83 Mijnsheerenlaan Mijnsheerenplein Moerkerkenstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Korendijk 84 Bergweg [Rotterdam]; Shop and housing construction; Jansen 85 Bergweg [Rotterdam]; Shop and housing; Winkelman 86 Dordtschelaan Rijsoordstraat [Rotterdam]; Tax office; Roos & Sinke 87 Sonmanstraat Noorderhavenkade Gordelweg [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Smelt J.O. 88 Schieweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Bos v.d. 89 Gordelweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Bos v.d. 90 Talmastraat Schieweg [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Aerts 91 Gordelweg Drukkerstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; 's Gravendijk 92 Drukkerstraat corner Gordelweg [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; N.V. Bergshoef 93 Walenburgerweg [Rotterdam]; Garage (100 cars) and Flats; Hempel 94 Sonmanstraat Besemerstraat Noorderhavenkade [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Mij Oost 95 Rijksweg Overschie [now Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Buitendijk 96 Bas Jonggeriusstr. Blankenburgstr. Mijnkintstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Combinatie 97 Zwaanshals [Rotterdam]; Housing; Binkhorst 98 v. Onselenstr. corner Bas Jonggeriusstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Boer 99 Noorderhavenkade corner of Talmastr. [Rotterdam]; Housing; Aerts 100 Maaskade corner v.d. Takstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing; Lemmens 101 Noorderhavenkade Besemerstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Mij Oost 102 Noorderhavenkade [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Mij Oost 103 Jonkerfransstr. corner Warmoezierstr. [Rotterdam]; Shop and apartment building; D.J. Punt 104 Donkerslootstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Kloos & Wapenaar 105 Donkerslootstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Boer & Both 106 Donkerslootstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Boer & Both Kasteleyn 107 Donkerslootstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Spindler 108 Delfgauwstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Boers & de Groot 109 Spangenschekade Mathenesserdijk 67a [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Noordzij 110 Bergweg corner Gordelweg & 67a [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Moerman 111 Delfgauwstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; de Ruyter 112 Donkerslootstr. corner Vlasackerstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Manhave 113 Tak v. Poortvlietstr. Savornin Lohmanlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Hooghart 114 Gordelweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Luitgaarden 115 Tak v. Poortvlietstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. Spindler 116 Donkerslootstr. Vlasackerstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Spindler 117 Edisonstr. Boerhavelaan Orentzplein Schiedam; Housing construction; v. Schijndel 118 Noorderhavenkade corner Sonmanstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Mij Oost 119 Donkercurtiusstr. Tak v. Poortvlietstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Groenewegen 120 Savornin Lohmanlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Boer & Both 121 Delfgauwstr. Bieslandstr. Gordelweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Buitendijk 122 Troelstrastr. Bergpolderstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Verhoeff 123 Dortschestraatweg [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Spindler 124 Dortschestraatweg Blankenburgestr. Polsland [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Spindler 125 's Gravendeelstr. Dortschestraatweg [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Boer & Both 126 Bonaventurastraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. Boer 127 Polslandstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Barendrecht 128 Rochussenstr. Breitnerstr. [Rotterdam]; Apartments; Lemmens 129 Schepenstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; v. Omme & de Groot 130 Ackerdijkstr. Delfgauwstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing; Klaasse 131 Polslandstr. Boelstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Boers & de Groot 132 Donkerslootstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing; Casteleyn 133 Bergpolderstr. [Rotterdam]; Housing; Verhoeff 134 Gordelweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Luitgaarden 135 Gordelweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. Spindler 136 Lischplein [Rotterdam]; Heerenhuizen; Gebr. Spindler 137 Bergschelaan [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Spindler brothers 138 Zegenstraat Gruttostraat [Rotterdam]; Residential buildings; Spindler brothers 139 Bergschelaan Gordelweg [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Rombouts 140 Zegenstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Boer & Both 141 Gordelweg Noorderhavenkade [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Groenewegen 142 Dresselhuysstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Boer & Both 143 Schepenstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Omme & de Groot 144 Ackerdijkstraat Delfgauwstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Klaasse 145 Vlaardingerambacht; Housing construction; Scholten 146 Nieuwe Haven Schiedam; Housing construction; v. Dordt 147 Lischplein Gordelweg Bieslandstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Spindler 148 Oude Binnenweg Tuinderstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Klein 149 Russischestraat Roemeenschestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Smits & Verhoeff 150 Engelschestraat Roemeenschestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Smits & Verhoeff 151 Schiedamscheweg [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Smits & Verhoeff 152 Marconistraat Schiedam; Housing; v. Dordt 153 v. Beuningenstraat Stadhoudersweg Nic. Ruysstraat Statensingel [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; N.V. Oost 154 Rochussenstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Smits & Verhoeff 155 Mathenesserlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Lemmens 156 Kralingen [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Noordzij 157 - [as 156?]; Heerenhuizen; Noordzij 158 - [as 156?]; Heerenhuizen; Noordzij 159 - [as 156?]; 1 Heerenhuis 9 double 18 upper houses; Noordzij 160 - [as 156?]; 10 double 20 upper houses; Noordzij 161 - [as 156?]; Heerenhuizen; Noordzij 162 Breitnerstr. Rochussenstr. [Rotterdam]; Apartment houses; Roos & Sinke 163 Immobiliastraat Donkerslootstr. [Rotterdam]; Dwelling houses; Korendijk 164 v.d. Meydestr. Vroesenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Boer & Both 165 Corn. Muschstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; N.V. Oost 166 v. Aersenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; N.V. Oost 167 Hoogerbeetsstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Boer & Both 168 Libellenstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Lagendijk 169 Schiedamscheweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Klaasse 170 Breitnerstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. de Ruyter 171 Breitnerstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Aerts & Schepens 172 Rochussenstraat Breitnerstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Smits & Verhoeff 173 v. Beuningenstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Groenewegen 174 Dresselhuysstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Boer & Both 175 Sourystraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Hooghart 176 Libellenstraat L. Oostzeedijk [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Lagendijk 177 Schiedamscheweg Roemeenschestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Smits & Verhoeff 178 Meikeverstr. Hommelstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; v. Leeuwen & Muller 179 Cleyburgstraat Sourystr. Statenweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; v.d. Gaag 180 Statensingel v. Aersenlaan [Rotterdam]; Villa; Weylaeker 181 Statensingel Dresselhuysstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. Spindler 182 Buys Ballotsingel Edisonstraat [Schiedam]; Housing; Schotel 183 Pleinweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; v. Boven 184 Krekelstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Klaasse 185 Statensingel [Rotterdam]; Housing; Boer & Both 186 Bonaventurastraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Casteleyn 187 Bonaventurastraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Boers & de Groot 188 v. Beuningenstraat Statensingel [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Spindler 189 Sourystraat Cleyburgstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Omme & de Groot 190 Boreelstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Boer & Both 191 Nobelstr. Cleyburgstr. Sourystr. [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Muys & Hanemayer 192 Bisschopstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Boers & de Groot 193 Dordtschelaan [Rotterdam]; Post office with apartments; Roos & Sinke 194 Nobelstr. v.d. Meydestr. [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Boer 195 Jaffa [Rotterdam]; 5 streets housing; Combinatie 196 v. Aersenlaan Corn. Muschstr. [Rotterdam]; Garage; N.V. Oost 197 Mijnsheerenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Casteleyn 198 Russischestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Smits & Verhoeff 199 Russischestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Smits & Verhoeff 200 Griekschestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Manhave 201 Frans Bekkerstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Korendijk 202 Duitschestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. Spindler 203 Pleinweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; v. Vliet & v. Dulst 204 Zaandam; Mayor's residence; Mr. in 't Veldt 205 Schiedamscheweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Klaasse 206 Poolschestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Manhave 207 Griekschestr. Engelschestr. [Rotterdam]; Housing; Boers & de Groot 208 Pleinweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; v. Leeuwen 209 Boezemkade [Rotterdam]; Housing; Aerts 210 Franschelaan Italiaanschestr. [Rotterdam]; Housing; Blok 211 Schiedamscheweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Klein 212 Duitschestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Smits 213 Gouwstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; v.d. Vorm 214 Franschelaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Bergshoeff 215 Franschelaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Klaasse 216 Mijnsheerenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Roos Bolnes 217 Franschelaan Italiaanschestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Smits & Verhoeff 218 Mijnsheerenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; J. v. Duyn 219 Sichemstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Aerts & Schepens 220 Statenweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. Spindler 221 Gruttostraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. Spindler 222 Mijnsheerenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Casteleyn 223 Gruttostraat [Rotterdam] corner building; Housing; Gebr. Spindler 224 Franschelaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Lyten & v. Ieperen 225 Gruttostraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; v.d. Vorm 226 Statensingel [Rotterdam]; Housing; Boer & Both 227 Lumeystraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; v.d. Gaag 228 Stationssingel [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. de Ruyter 229 Lumeystraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Smits Oost 230 Hoogerbeetsstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Boer & Both 231 Gruttostraat [Rotterdam] adjacent; Housing construction; v. Boven 232 Bickerstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. de Winter 233 Statensingel Paetsstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; N.V. Oost 234 Franschelaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Sparnaay 235 Ramlehweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Schapers 236 v.d. Graafstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Roos & Sinke 237 Dordtschestraatweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; v. Boven 238 Boergounschevliet [Rotterdam]; Housing; v. Boven 239 Statenweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Boers & de Groot 240 Statenweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Weber 241 Statenweg Lumeystraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Noordzij 242 Ramlehweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Hempel 243 Sonoystraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. de Ruyter 244 Rubenzplein Schiedam; Housing; Hooghart 245 v.d. Graeffstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. Boer 246 Boergounschevliet [Rotterdam]; Housing; v. Wingerden 247 Schiebroek [now Rotterdam]; Housing; Kooy 248 Gruttostraat [Rotterdam] adjacent; Housing construction; Boer & Both 249 Gruttostraat [Rotterdam] Bordering; Housing construction; v.d. Vorm 250 Gruttostraat [Rotterdam] Bordering; Housing; Barendrecht 251 Voetjesstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. Spindler 252 Arendsweg [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Spindler 253 Bonaventurastraat Voetjesstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Spindler 254 Voorburg Oosteinde; Double villa; ten Bosch 255 Arendsweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Spindler brothers 256 Wolphaertsbocht [Rotterdam]; Housing; Korendijk 257 Velgersdijkstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Blok & Roos 258 Amelandscheplein [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Verhoeff 259 Texelschestraat Uitenhagenstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Smelt 260 Texelschestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Hooghart 261 Noordsingel [Rotterdam]; Reconstruction; Blok 262 Amelandscheplein [Rotterdam]; Housing; Klaasse 263 Josephstraat [Rotterdam]; Reconstruction; v.d. Kamp 264 Pleinweg [Rotterdam]; Housing; Philips 265 Mijnsheerenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; v. Veen 266 Ceintuurbaan [Rotterdam]; Cliche factory; v.d. Vorm 267 Mijnsheerenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Roos & de Rij 268 Flakkeeschestraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Aerts 269 Boergounschevliet [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Spindler 270 Joost van Geelstraat [Rotterdam]; Reconstruction; Blok 271 Kralingen II [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; N.V. Oost 272 Centraalplein [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; v. Boven 273 Velgersdijkstr. Wolphaertsbocht [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; v. Boven 274 Donkerslootstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing; Roos & Sinke 275 Mijnsheerenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Schuddebeurs 276 Wilgenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Gebr. Spindler 277 Kralingen II [Rotterdam]; Garage's; Lekkerkerker 278 Stationssingel [Rotterdam]; Emergency building; Wyers 279 Mathenesserlaan [Rotterdam]; Emergency building; Mij Nederland 280 Statenweg [Rotterdam]; Emergency building; Vos 281 Weytemaweg [Rotterdam]; Emergency building; Willem de Jong 282 Stationssingel [Rotterdam]; Emergency building; Heybroek company 283 Sperwerstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Spindler 284 Kwartelstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Spindler 285 Admiraliteitskade [Rotterdam]; Sheds and offices; v. Schijndel 286 Nassauhaven [Rotterdam]; Facing; v. Schijndel 287 Franschelaan [Rotterdam]; Shop and residential buildings; Gebr. Spindler 288 Blommesteynweg [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Spindler brothers 289 Schiekade [Rotterdam]; Sales warehouse; J.P. Wyers 290 Botersloot Meent Pannekoekstraat [Rotterdam]; offices and stores; Bakker v. Pelt 291 Hoogstraat [Rotterdam]; Shop premises with dwellings; Klaren firm 292 Havenstraat [Rotterdam]; Construction workshop; Rotterd. Forge 293 Diergaardelaan [Rotterdam]; Bank building with residences; v. Splunder & Co. 294 Parkweg Binnenweg v. Oldenbarneveldtstr. [Rotterdam]; sales warehouse; H.H. de Klerk & Sons 295 Arendsweg [Rotterdam]; residential building; Gebr. Spindler 296 Mijnsheerenlaan [Rotterdam]; Housing; Ir. Witteveen 297 Boymansstraat [Rotterdam]; Shop with residential building; v. Pelt 298 Boymansstraat [Rotterdam]; Shop with residential building; City Magazijn 299 Visschersdijk [Rotterdam]; Shop with housing; Modehuis de Vos 300 Pannekoekstraat [Rotterdam]; Shop with housing; Holthuizen 301 Wijnhaven [Rotterdam]; Coffee roastery; Mannee 302 Schiedamschesingel [Rotterdam]; Café-Restaurant; Weimar 303 Havenstraat [Rotterdam]; Workshop with dwellings; Heinrich 304 Ged. Glashaven [Rotterdam]; Warehouse buildings; Schreuder 305 Stadhoudersweg [Rotterdam]; Housing development; Venn. West 306 Schiedamschesingel [Rotterdam]; Chin. restaurant; King Low 307 Bergschelaan [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Venn. West 308 Weg 69 - 77 [?]; Shop-housing construction; Kemper 309 Kralingen [Rotterdam]; Shop-housing construction; Alg. Delegate of Reconstruction 310 Kwartelstraat [Rotterdam]; Housing construction; Gebr. Spindler 311 Voorburg; Villabouw; Groeneweg 312 Groenendaal Adm. de Ruyterweg [Rotterdam]; Hotel; Weimar 313 Meent [Rotterdam]; Warehouse- offices- housing construction; Robelmij 314 Weg 69 [?]; Shop-housing construction; J.A. Keizer 315 Weg 69 [?]; Shop-housing construction; N.V. de Nijverheid 316 Pelgrimsstraat; Offices garage showroom etc.; Handels Mij v. Wijngaarden N.V. APPENDIX II: Works by Le Grand c.s. after WW2 (this list is intended as a first step, to be expanded and corrected) [to be inserted]. - Renovation and interior wholesale building, Amsterdam, 1947-1950 ((Le Grand &?) Polak (registration A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room) - Interior cinema de Vries van Buuren en Co. N.V., Goes, 1949, ((Le Grand &?) Polak (application A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room) - Hotel Mabesoone, Oostburg, 1949, (Le Grand &?) Polak (application A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room) - Cafeteria Reiners, Oostburg, 1949, (Le Grand &?) Polak (application A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room) - Stoffenmagazijn Fikkert, Enschede, 1949, (Le Grand &?) Polak (application A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room) - Offices furnished and remodeled Buma and Co, Amsterdam, 1949, (Le Grand &?) Polak (application A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI Reading Room) - Store agricultural implements de Schrijver, Oostburg, 1950, (Le Grand &?) Polak (application A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room) - 2 stores Rodts and Hogestegen, Oostburg, 1950, (Le Grand &?) Polak (notification A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room) - Fabric warehouse, Pais, Amsterdam, 1950, (Le Grand &?) Polak (registration A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room) - 5 houses 2 garages private homes, Ouder-Amstel, 1950, (Le Grand &?) Polak (application A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room) - Villa van Willigen, Prins van Wiedlaan 1, Wassenaar, 1950, Le Grand & Polak (application A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room; building documentation Wassenaar Municipal Archives) - Etam stores, Arnhem - The Hague - Amsterdam - Hilversum, (Le Grand &?) Polak (application A.S. Polak as a member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room) - Renovation and showroom Electrolux N.V., Amsterdam, 1951, (Le Grand &?) Polak (application A.S. Polak as member of BNA, 1951, NAI study room) - Hotel, Vijzelstraat, Amsterdam, Le Grand & Polak (Building 7-46, 22.11.1952, 831; Building 8-5, 31.01.1953, 85) - Dwelling A.F.M Stubbe, Kerkeboslaan 3, Wassenaar, 1952-1953, Le Grand & Polak (construction documentation Wassenaar Municipal Archives; signed Paul Selle) - Interior(s) shopping promenade, Lijnbaan, Rotterdam, Le Grand & Polak (Bouw 8-45, 07.11.1953, 862; also listed "Le Grand" only: this could refer to both Henri and - possibly more likely in this context - Henri's brother Simon Herman le Grand) - Housing development Irenebuurt (Catharina van Renesstraat 24-30; Evert Cornelisstraat 21-27; Prinses Margrietstraat 17-19, 21-23; Willem Kesstraat 15-31; possibly more), Amsterdam, 1954, Le Grand & Polak (information Lieneke Meurs; photos in Beeldbank Gemeentearchief Amsterdam) - Office building and factory Monroe Calc.Mach.Comp, Amsterdam, 1955-57, Le Grand & Polak (registration P. Selle as a BNA member, 1962, NAI study room) - Single-family houses Slotervaart (enclosed by Cornelis Lelylaan - Huizingalaan - Christoffel Plantijnpad), Amsterdam, 1955, Le Grand & Polak (Forty years of owning houses in garden city Slotervaart, Amsterdam, May 1997, p. 11; also houses by Bijvoet, Göbel & Den Hertog) - Three office buildings with showrooms and stores, Vijzelstraat, Amsterdam, Le Grand & Polak (Building 10-17, 23.04.1955, 343) - Sports building ESSO Nederland N.V., Waalsdorperlaan 40, Wassenaar, 1955, Le Grand & Polak (building documentation Wassenaar Municipal Archives; signed P. Selle) - Bungalow C. van Liers, Goes, 1956, Le Grand, Polak & Selle (registration P. Selle as a BNA member, 1962, NAI reading room) - Office house and store V.V.V., Noordwijk, 1957, Le Grand & Polak (application P. Selle as member BNA, 1962, NAI Reading Room) - Canadian Embassy, Sophialaan 7 The Hague, 1955-1957: architect Antoinette Monette (1899-1968), with the assistance of. Le Grand (communication relatives Le Grand; see Marie- Josée Therrien, AU-DELÀ DES FRONTIÈRES, L'ARCHITECTURE DES CHANCELLERIES CANADIENNES 1930-1992, Tome 1, Thèse présentée à la Faculté des études supérieures de l'Université Laval pour l'obtention du grade de Philosphiae [sic] Doctor (Ph. D.), Département d'histoire, FACULTE DES LETTRES, UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL, Québec, March 1999: especially pp. 64, 74, 76-84, 423-429; photos on website Gemeentearchief Den Haag) - Hotel complex, The Hague, Le Grand & Polak (Construction 14-15, 11.04.1959, 404) - 48 apartment houses Holweg construction company, Clematislaan 2-48 (even) and Kamperfoelielaan 1-47 (odd), Oegstgeest, 1959, Le Grand & Selle (application P. Selle as member BNA, 1962, NAI study room; construction file 233A, Oegstgeest municipal archive) - Office building Knoek & Ros n.v., Bunschoten, 1958, Le Grand & Polak (registration P. Selle as member BNA, 1962, NAI study room) - Office building and intern. wisselk. N.H.M., Amsterdam, 1959, Le Grand & Polak (registration P. Selle as member BNA, 1962, NAI reading room) - Factory Reece Corporation, Leiden, Le Grand & Polak (Bouw 14-34, 22.08.1959, 980) - Renovation Palace Hotel, Noordwijk, 1960, Le Grand & Selle (registration P. Selle as member BNA, 1962, NAI study room) - Facade of San Marco, Vijzelstraat, Amsterdam, 1960, Le Grand & Selle (registration P. Selle as member BNA, 1962, NAI reading room) - Farmac. Grooth. and fabr. n.v. Vriesia, Alkmaar, 1961, Le Grand & Selle (registration P. Selle as member BNA, 1962, NAI reading room) - Garage business in zoning plan Kooimeer, Alkmaar, P. Selle (Construction 21-19, 07.05.1966, 721) - Office building at intersection Joh. De Wittlaan - Scheveningseweg, The Hague, Le Grand & Selle (Construction 23-13, 30.03.1968, 500) - Project on Johan de Wittlaan, The Hague (Le Grand's relatives suspect that Le Grand built a hotel here: this could then be the Bel Airhotel, which opened in 1971: photos on the website of Gemeentearchief Den Haag) - Office building N.V. Bankgirocentrale, Sloterkade 22, Amsterdam, 1971, Le Grand & Selle (Bouw 26 (1971)-16, 648) - Housing complex, Iepenplein, Amsterdam, 1975, Le Grand & Selle (Construction 30 (1975)-50, X) - Office building Westland / Utrecht Hypotheekbank, Westeinde 26 - Nicolaas Witsenkade, Amsterdam, 1976 (approx.), Le Grand & Selle (image on website Gem.-Archief Amsterdam) - Shopping center, Haarlem, 1978 (approximately), Le Grand & Selle (Building 33 (1978)-4, 19) - WTC, Amsterdam, 1978-1979, G. de Klerk, P. Selle (De Architect 10 (1979)-12, 27 (mentioned is "assisted by Architecten Associatie Le Grand & Selle"); Bouw 47 (1992)-20, 96 (Selle mentioned as "senior architect at architect and engineering firm Van Kerckhove in Amsterdam"); Bouw 34 (2001)-1, 20-21 - Office building "West End," Valschermkade corner Anthony Fokkerweg, Amsterdam, 1979, A.Staal, Le Grand & Selle (NAi archive A. Staal, code NAi/STAA a1; a letter from le Grand & Selle to Staal lists in the letterhead - in this order - Henri le Grand b.n.a., Paul Selle h.b.o. b.n.a., Ton Butzelaar arch., Jan Reijnierse) - Dutch Credit Insurance Company office building, Keizersgracht 287 (corner of Wolvenstraat), Amsterdam, 1980, Le Grand & Selle (Construction 34 (1979)-4, 28) 1 The original of the LIST OF WORKS EXECUTED is in the National Archives in The Hague, in the Ten Bosch files of the Centraal Archief Bijzondere Rechtspleging, number access 2.09.09, inv.nr. 34724; together with the other Ten Bosch files in the National Archives, Nederlands Beheersinstituut, number access 2.09.16, inv.nr. 126 and Ereraden voor de Kunst, number access 2.14.46, inv.nr. 126. 2 Wilhelmus Theodorus Hyacinthus ten Bosch (born Utrecht, 09.03.1895 - died The Hague, 13 January 1967). Ten Bosch was married twice: first 1924 to Selma Houba; after divorce in 1933 to Johanna Vrijmoet. From this marriage two daughters were born (1933 and 1935). 3 The NAI does retain his registrations as a member of NIVA (from 1935) and of BNA (1949). Ten Bosch was also a member of Arti et Amicitiae, to which he was nominated in 1922 by architects A.C.A. Rotgans and P. Vorkink. In the archives known to NAI as 'SKWOD', drawings relating to work by Ten Bosch, mostly executed by or in collaboration with Rotgans, can be found in the folders SKWO 21 and SKWO 22. In his applications, Ten Bosch mentions that before he established himself as an independent architect in October 1919, he worked as an architectural draughtsman for J. Gelens in Amsterdam (1912-1913) and with architect J.M. v.d. Mey (1918-1919); the latter is sufficiently well known as one of the icons of the Amsterdam School (Johan Melchior van der Mey, 1878-1949); the former probably concerns Joh. Gelens Czn., Contractor, Wyttenbachstraat 54 in Amsterdam (Phone book 1915). 4 See: Het Bouwbedrijf 13-15 (1938), pp. 119-122: J.G. Wattjes, 'Eenige werken van Arch. W.Th. ten Bosch N.I.V.A.'; idem 15-16 (1938), pp. 154-158: J.G. Watjes, 'Modern housing construction in Rotterdam by Arch. W.Th.H. ten Bosch'; idem 15-21 (1938), pp. 201-202: J.G. Wattjes, 'Eenige werken van arch. W.Th. ten Bosch N.I.V.A. [...] II' [Savornin Lohmanlaan]. 5 The accusations did not go much further than that he would have had a glass of wine with his neighbor in the semi-detached villa on Oosteinde in Voorburg, the German Ortskommandant. This was apparently sufficient for a one-year sentence. 6 Three sources provide information about Le Grand's pre-World War II activities: the LIST OF WORKS EXECUTED by Ten Bosch, the photo album Uitgevoerde Werken Henri Le Grand, and the latter's application form (dated 1939) for the Nederlandsch Instituut van Architecten (NIVA). Curious is the appearance of Le Grand as "architect Lebon" in Jacques Gans's autobiographical novel, Liefde en Goudvissen (original 1940 edition); in the 1989 edition (Amsterdam: De Arbeiderspers) [yet to be introduced]; see pp. 199, 201, 201-202, 203, 207; relatives of Le Grand confirm that what is described by Gans did indeed largely play out that way with Le Grand (see also Mariëtte van Stralen, Atelier dwellings Zomerdijkstraat 1932-1934: Zanstra, Giesen and Sijmons, architects (Rotterdam, 1989), p. 57: "Furthermore, some residents tell that the architect Le-Grand, who lived in the block, had snatched the girlfriend of the writer Gans and that Gans even wrote about this in his autobiographical novel LOVE AND GOLD FISHING") [yet to be introduced]. 7 Because Henri le Grand 1925-1930 was associated with W.Th.H. ten Bosch (1895-1967), and Ten Bosch never mentioned ETAM stores as his work, it can be assumed that Le Grand began working for ETAM in or after 1930. Abraham Samuel Polak (*1913), in his application for membership in Maatschaoppij tot Bevordering der Bouwkunst and Bond van Nederlandsche Architecten dated April 18, 1951, in which he states "I am associated with Henri Le Grand," mentions as works performed including. Etam stores: Arnhem, The Hague, Amsterdam, Utrecht. This brings the number of ETAM stores involving Le Grand and/or Polak to 13 in total: 9 stores, Le Grand, through 1939; 4 stores Le Grand & Polak, through 1951. Important information regarding these building activities can be found in the company archives of the Etam company in Zoetermeer. 8 Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad, 28-29/01/1933 'The further construction of the Meent' (with perspective drawing). 9 Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad, 09/06/1938; IV,1: 'ARCHITECTURE AT THE MEENT Horizontal tendencies'. 10 Het Bouwbedrijf 13-15, 24.06.1938, pp. 119-122: J.G. Wattjes, 'Eenige werken van Arch. W.Th. ten Bosch N.I.V.A.'. 11 Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad, 02/06/1933; IV,1, 'Another 250 new houses in "Blijdorp"'. 12 Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad, 12/02/1935; II,2-3) 'New Rotterdam architecture. Modern housing construction in "Blijdorp"' 13 Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad, 'More interest in "Blijdorp". New housing types', 24/11/1936; III,1. 14 Wattjes and Ten Bosch, Rotterdam and how it was built, pp. 60-62: exterior photographs, situation; pp. 79, 84-85. See also: W. (= J.G. Wattjes?), 'De Kwestie Blijdorp', Het Bouwbedrijf 8-46, 25-12-1931, pp. 589-592, containing the 'Situation of the plots to be issued'. The Central Plan can be indicated by the plot numbers 16, 17, 25, 26: 'CP16': Statenweg 112-134 - Statensingel 121-111 - Dresselhuysstraat 19-3 - Stadhoudersweg 100-122; 'CP17': Stadhoudersweg 156-134 - Statenweg 119-141 - Statensingel 129-139 - Van Beuningenstraat 20-4; 'CP25': Vroesenlaan 54-1 - Van der Meydestraat 52-34 - Statenweg 105-115 - Stadhoudersweg 135-159; 'CP26': Stadhoudersweg 99-127 - Statenweg 108, 106-100 - Van der Meydestraat 30-24, 22-12 - Nobelstraat 115-131. 15 1939 (17/03; II, p.3) 'Architecture in Blijdorp. Experiments' 16 These are four separate blocks from c. 1936 that were designed as architectural units and owned by the RVS: Van Beuningenstraat 1-13;Stadhoudersweg 160-162; Nic. Ruyschstraat 6-16; Statensingel 147-149. 17 Ton Idsinga & Jeroen Schilt Architect W. van Tijen 1894-1974 The Hague: Staatsuitgeverij; z.j., p.65 18 "The Willem de Jong firm in Dijkzigt," De Rotterdammer, 28/02/1941, 6. 19 In the 1948-1950 volumes, Bouw magazine occasionally gave overviews of the production of assembly building systems. [yet to be introduced]. * 06/11/1948, Construction Center Communications, III: as of 01/10/48 In progress Completed Total SITTARD 6 - 6 ZAANDAM 6 - 6 * 1949, 189: as of 01/02/49 SITTARD 50 6 56 MAASNIEL 50 - 50 ZAANDAM - 6 6 * 1949, 409: per 01/05/49 SITTARD 70 6 70 MAASNIEL 50 - 50 ZAANDAM - 6 6 BOXTEL: 50 - 50 * 1950, 66: per 01/11/49 SITTARD 40 36 76 MAASNIEL - 50 50 STATE MINES HEERLEN 50 - 50 BOXTEL 30 20 50 AMSTERDAM 396 - 396 * 1950, 766: per 01/09/50 AMSTERDAM 569 36 635 Note: The numbers mentioned are not always consistent with the numbers known from other sources and should be considered a rough indication. In volume 1950, "approved" building systems were mentioned (at least) twice, including Dotremont-Ten Bosch: p. 220, p. 854. 20 As late as May 1964, a certain Ph.J.G Dotremont residing in Uccle-Brussels filed a patent application with the Netherlands Patent Office for the system: no. 6405504, class 37 ac 4 (37 ad; 37b 6; 37 f 4). 21 J. Schilt reported by e-mail: Based on construction drawings of the complex Nemavo-Aireywoningen (N.A.-system for short) at the Burg. de Vlugtlaan in Amsterdam-Slotermeer (Berghoef, 1953), I suspect that around 1952 this construction system either pushed the DtB-system [= system Dotremont-Ten Bosch] out of the market or took over. Indeed, it is remarkable that the stamp of the relevant construction drawings also mentions Dotremont-Ten Bosch, while the houses were obviously built in the N.A. system. A possible explanation lies in the fact that the DtB-system and the original English Airey-system were very similar; not only with regard to the characteristic concrete facade slabs, but especially also because of the underlying construction of a 'forest' of regularly placed concrete pillars that made large window openings impossible and prevented a free division of the facade. Education: HBS Utrecht (dir. De Waal)/1907-1910;Ambachtsschool Utrecht/1910-1912;Kunstgewerbe Schule Berlin/1913-1915 (had to discontinue this study due to call up for military service);mathematics, teacher Oosterman, Utrecht/1910-1912;architecture and construction, teacher Zucker, Berlin/1914;architecture and construction, teacher Matheus, Berlin/1915; Additional positions: Institute "Ten Bosch," Amsterdam/director/1920-1938 (documented).