Dutch Culture Manifested in the Windows of Domestic Architecture

Master’s Thesis
By T. Sopromadze

Leiden University
Master’s Programme: Art and Culture
Specialization: Art and Architecture before 1800
Supervisor/First reader: dr. Elizabeth den Hartog
Student: Tamro Sopromadze
Student number: s2244012
E-mail: t.sopromadze@umail.leidenuniv.nl
Study year: 2018-2019

1
Table of Contents

Introduction 3

1. The role of windows in domestic architecture 6

1.1 Defining the word ‘window’ 7
1.2 The early history of windows in the western world 9
1.3 Functions of windows 12
1.4 Windows and the modernist movement 14

2. The Relationship between some aspects of culture and domestic architecture 16

2.1 Cultural influences on windows in domestic architecture 23

3. The history of Dutch Windows 25

3.1 History of Dutch Window Decoration 32

4. The Dutch window as a product of a culture 34

4.1 Role of women 36
4.2 Family 40
4.3 Privacy 41
4.4 Social Intercourse 45
4.5 Some basic needs 47

Conclusion 48

Illustrations 49

Credits Illustrations 57

Bibliography 59

2
Introduction

When traveling, when stepping foot on the previously unknown land, a person gets flooded with
the unfamiliar. The shapes, the colors and the smells that do not resemble the ones a person is so
used to in their own homeland – are some of the many reasons that make traveling so enjoyable. If
we pose a question in order to understand what force is responsible for shaping these unique details
– in the majority of cases, the culture will be the answer.
Cultures consist of countless parts, some of which are hard to see with the first glance – like
people’s values and beliefs. On the other hand, some elements can be noticed immediately, among
these – is architecture.
Among the architectural works - the type that stands out the most because of its authenticity - is
traditional domestic architecture. Each culture has developed some sort of pattern when it comes to
domestic buildings. One might remember African huts, Japanese houses with paper walls, white-
painted houses on small Greek islands and many more. It is always interesting to think about these
buildings and what makes them different from each other. What is the reason every culture has
created a unique form of domestic architecture? Is it just the external factors – like climate, location
and available materials or is there more to it?
Numerous people who have visited the Netherlands, (including myself) while observing the
unfamiliar culture all noticed the same peculiar detail – the uncovered large windows on the street
side of Dutch homes, (Vera, 1989; Robilant, 2014; Capek, 1933) the tendency that disappears in the
neighboring countries.1 Before describing these windows we have to know what the Dutch urban
landscape looks like. Dutch cities are extremely densely populated. Traditional linked houses are very
narrow and deep. On the ground floor, in most cases a large window (or windows) - that is more
often than not uncovered by curtains – opens through the living room. (Fig. 25-28.) For the person
who is not used to living in this type of city, it is very easy to feel confused by how much of the
stranger’s interior they can see by just walking down the street. This tendency has not only been
noticed by travelers - immigrants coming from other cultures have rejected this tradition. Turkish
and Moroccan families covered windows with thick curtains,2 American immigrants complained

1 Vera, 216; Van Der Horst, 23.
2 Horst, 23

3
about the size of windows and said that they missed the feeling of privacy.3 Therefore this tendency
is somehow specific for the Dutch environment and culture.
In this thesis, we will focus on Dutch windows in domestic architecture, but our approach will be
both – art historical and anthropological. We will try to understand whether this tendency in Dutch
architecture and everyday life could be somehow connected and explained by the character of Dutch
culture. Therefore our main question is - To what extent could some parts of the Dutch culture be
considered as possible sources of influence behind having large uncovered windows in the domestic
architecture?
There are several points that prove the relevance of this topic. First of all, domestic architecture is
an extremely important part of human cultural heritage. Out of the things created by humans –
domestic/folk/popular architecture is responsible, for the largest part, for forming the character of a
man-made environment. Despite this, it historically has rarely been put in the foreground by art
historians.4 This is true about Dutch architectural history as well. Therefore, scholars need to pay
more attention to traditional domestic architecture.
Secondly, there is a very limited amount of literature that explores western domestic space from
an anthropological point of view. Moreover, the majority of Dutch people I casually interviewed and
asked them if they had an explanation for why strangers being able to see through their houses did
not bother them, they either admitted that they had no idea or brushed it off, saying that it is not a
big deal and people are just used to living this way. I believe, there is a more complex explanation
for this tendency than the one they presented, and also, it would be helpful for the person who is
the part of this culture to know, what makes them and their society unique.
When it comes to directly addressing architectural forms of Dutch windows as products of
culture, there are only two works that stand out. One is the chapter by Dutch anthropologist - Irene
Cieraad ‘Dutch Windows Female virtue and Female Vice’ (1999) and an article by American
sociologist – Hernan Vera ‘On Dutch Windows’ (1989). The former connects the openness of
Dutch windows to the historical role of women in the Dutch society, which is a significant part of a
culture. The latter proposes the hypothesis that Dutch windows are somehow connected to culture
and explores various possibilities for these connections, but does not offer any definitive answers.
When it comes to not the architecture - but the decoration of the interior side of the window, an
article –“It’s not Dutch to close curtains” (2006) by Hilje Van Der Horst and Jantine Messing

3 Baker, 121.
4 Rapoport, 1.

4
explores the use of curtains by Dutch city residents as opposed to immigrants and suggests that the
difference between them could has originated in their cultures.
In our specific case, we will outline the parts of culture that could be considered as an influence
on architecture (including the role of women) and discuss them in the context of Dutch society.
This research is could be considered as anthropological, due to its mission to explore the deep levels
of culture, however it is deeply rooted in art history as it relies on the history of development of a
specific architectural element.
In order to answer our main question we divided the research into several main parts. This thesis
consists of four chapters that are also sub-divided. In chapter one, we will talk about the windows as
architectural elements, describe their history and functions in order to understand what role they
have played in domestic architecture and perhaps see why different societies would utilize them in
different ways.
In the second chapter, we will define out theoretical frameworks. Our main theory is based on the
wirings by American architect and social geographer – Amos Rapoport. In one of his earlier works –
the book called House form and culture (1969) he developed his hypothesis that the major influence for
the form of the domestic architecture – is coming from culture. He created a clear connection
between the defined elements of culture and the way they could be manifested in the built form.
Frameworks used by him makes our mission much more achievable.
In the third chapter we will zoom in on Dutch architecture and explore the history of Dutch
windows. It is an essential step, because these windows, like any other element of domestic
architecture, are parts of centuries of development and evolution that lead to the creation of what
we have today.
In the final chapter we will develop our own hypothesis and apply the frameworks offered by
Rapoport to Dutch windows. Step-by-Step, we will explore the cultural elements discussed by
Rapoport in relation to the Dutch culture and see whether they could be influential enough to affect
the form and the open character of Dutch windows.
Hopefully, by the end of the thesis we will have a clear idea of these elements not only within
Dutch architectural history but also Dutch cultural environment.

5
1. The role of windows in domestic architecture

In order to understand what the meaning of Dutch windows is and what importance they carry in
the architectural history and cultural life of Dutch people, we should, primarily, try to see window as
an independent architectural element and focus on its role in domestic architecture. In order to do
so, in this chapter, we will define this element and discuss its origins and its functions through time.
Surprisingly, there has not been a large amount of art-historical research focusing solely on the
windows - their history and functions, less of them are dedicated exclusively to domestic windows.
Out of the earlier works, it is important to mention Sir George Gilbert Scott, an English Gothic
revival architect who, in his book - Remarks on secular and domestic Architecture, present and future (1858)
dedicates one chapter to windows and underlines their grave importance. Another significant work
on windows is the book Elements of Architecture, by Manfredo Di Robilant; Niklas Maak; Rem
Koolhaas; etc., published in 2014 for Venice Biennale that focuses on 12 different architectural
elements, window being one of them. This work briefly goes into the history of windows and even
mentions Dutch windows and their peculiarly large size. The 2007 work - Windows: history, repair, and
conservation mainly deals with medieval windows and the ways of preserving them but at the same
time delves into the history of this element. The majority of recent works pays attention to
modern/postmodern tendencies of growing windowpanes and the appearance of the glass curtain
wall, for example Surface Architecture (2002) by David Leatherbarrow and Mohsen Mostafavi. These
works create the foundation for us to explore all the characteristics of the windows and at the same
time see how different authors perceive their meaning. Yet, the most consistent history of windows
can be found in art and architectural dictionaries.
However, a big problem and a challenge in our specific case is that none of these authors write
about windows as symbols or products of culture (which is the main aim of this thesis), windows are
seen simply as functional additions to the buildings. Although in this chapter we will stay on the
same trajectory as most of these works and establish how windows are viewed in secondary
literature - later in the thesis we will discuss cultural-environmental theories that will help us to see
windows and more specifically – Dutch windows as part of more complicated process than just
adapting to the physical environment.
In the following paragraphs we will discuss windows from different perspectives to better
understand their role in domestic architecture.

6
1.1 Defining the word ‘window’

First of all, however, before delving into more complicated discussions we should define and
describe this element. This can be done by presenting three definitions chosen by dictionaries over
the centuries.
The earliest of these examples, A Dictionary of the Architecture and Archaeology of the middle Ages,
published in 1830, defines the window as: “an aperture, or opening, in the wall of a building, for the
admission of light and air to the interior. Before the invention and general use of glass, it is
presumed that the windows were of small dimensions, and usually closed at night by wooden
shutters.”5
James Stevens Curl’s A Dictionary of Architecture (1999) defines the window as follows: “Aperture
in a wall to allow light and air to enter a building. If a window aperture is divided into compartments
by means of, say, mullions and transforms, these compartments are light. In the simplest form, a
window is a mere hole in a wall.”6
And finally, the online Oxford dictionary as of March 2019 defines the window as: “An opening
in the wall or roof of a building, for admitting light or air and allowing people to see out; esp. such an
opening fitted with a frame containing a pane or panes of glass (or a similar transparent substance);
the glazed frame intended to fit such an opening, sometimes with hinges, a sliding mechanism, etc.,
so that it may be opened or closed.”7
As demonstrated, these dictionaries offer similar explanations for the word – window, they all call
it an opening in the wall and mention its function of providing light and air to the interior, the last
example also underlines its function of giving people ability to look outside. Moreover, they talk
about other additional details of this element. The earliest version mentions shutters, as they were
unitized more frequently in the past, the most recent definition also offers the reader information
about different window mechanisms, the number of which has grown with time.
As several functions of the window have been outlined by the dictionaries, it is interesting to dive
deeper - explore the word itself and look at other European languages to see where the terms
describing the window originated. This, more so than definitions given by dictionaries, will help us
understand how people regarded a window’s functions centuries ago and perhaps recognize what

5 Britton, 245.
6 Curl, 736.
7 http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/229262?isAdvanced=false&result=1&rskey=6U08xk&

7
was the reason for the different appearances of windows in their cultures, as the language always
reflects general knowledge and attitudes of society.
The Oxford English dictionary offers an etymology of the word in the English language. Studies in
ancient technology (1964) by R.J Forbes and Elements of Architecture (2014) explore the origins of the
word in different languages and how they have developed over time. We will explore these
developments in the following paragraph.
Words for the window in the different languages reference its different functions and perhaps help
us understand which of its tasks was seen as primary by society. The earliest attempt to describe a
window exists in the Greek language. The word phainein (φαινειν) was used as early as 2000 BC and
its meaning was – to produce light, to shine.8 The Latin word fenestra, meaning a hole in the wall,
became the origin for the word ‘window’ in many languages: including Dutch (venster), French
(fenêtre) and German (Fenster). In the old English language the original word for the window is
eyethurl, which we can translate literally as an eyehole. The Old Norse word was vindagua, which
means ‘eye of the wind’9. This term was later transferred to the English language and transformed
into the word ‘window’.
As we can observe, in different cultures, a window was seen as a source of light, a tool for seeing
outside of the house walls, or as the access for the wind.

8 Robilands, 608.
9 Verena, 245.

8
1.2 The early history of windows in the western world

When discussing an architectural element it is vital to explore its history, starting from its origins,
which will answer the question - what was the reason behind the appearance of this element and
why was it necessary? Subsequently, discussing the window’s history will help us see how it
developed and adapted to the inhabitants’ needs.
The general outline of the history of windows can be found in the architectural dictionaries
mentioned above, as well as in the article dedicated to windows by Walter Smith in The Dictionary of
Art (1996), which also focuses on the earliest examples of windows.
In order to start from the origins, we should mention that the oldest examples of the domestic
architecture were windowless. However, the function of providing light and air was sometimes
served by other elements. For example, in some of the oldest shelters of a small size and simple
structure the entrance was combining the function of the source for the air and light, in some cases
doors were cut in the southeastern wall in order to maximize the sunlight that could get into the
interior, this tendency can be observed in the roundhouses of the British Iron age.10 People who
built these houses already understood the meaning of letting sunlight in the interior. In the warmer
climate, for instance, in Egypt - narrow slits were cut into the ceiling to reduce the heat.11 In this
case, an opening was needed for better ventilation. Consequently, at different times in different
cultures, due to realizing the importance of light and aeration, slits grew in size and transformed into
windows.
The earliest examples of actual windows, according to Smith, dating back to 6000 BC, can be
found in Çatal Höyük, Turkey.12 These windows were very small in size, mainly because in the warm
climate a large opening in the wall lets the warm air in, which was not desirable for inhabitants. For
this reason, windows of the large size were not a requirement in the middle eastern/southern
European architecture. Since then, windows in domestic architecture have developed in various
ways, resulting in a big diversity of windows all over the world. Their size and shape would be
dictated mainly by the climate, but also by technical/engineering achievements of the given society.
Cultural factors could also play an important role.
There is no linear evolution of windows it the world history of architecture, their development
depends more on technology than on chronology. Thus we will not delve into these complicated

10 Bradley, 10.
11 Smith, 245.
12 ibid.

9
timelines and will instead discuss major milestones in the history of windows in the Western world,
because this is the world in which Dutch windows come in later.
When discussing domestic architecture, it is always challenging to present examples from an
earlier point in history. Due to the character of domestic architecture, the fact that it is being used by
people every day and that its main function is to satisfy inhabitants’ needs – it gets constantly
renewed. Therefore, well-preserved examples of domestic architecture in their original state are
extremely rare and thus priceless. Fortunately, we do have few cases where domestic buildings
survived in an unchanged form.
Numerous and various types of Roman windows have been discovered in Pompeii and
Herculaneum, covered by and thus preserved by the volcanic ash that descended following the
eruption of the Mount Vesuvius in AD79. These buildings have been researched for centuries
following their discovery. Windows have been mentioned in some of these works, like Houses, villas
and palaces in the Roman world by Alexander McKay, in which he paints the picture of the evolution of
windows in these cities. Demonstrating, that in the earlier buildings only small slits were used for
reasons concerning safety, however, with the introduction of the second floor, it became possible to
use larger openings. Thus, the ground floor windows, especially the ones facing the common spaces
would have iron gratings or stone blocks with holes, when the windows on the top floors or the
ones facing the garden, according to McKay, would be much bigger in size, not risking the security
of the house by being so far above the ground.13
Before we go into discussing these materials Romans used it is important to mention, that
throughout history windows have been filled in different ways: with paper; a piece of fabric; an
animal bladder; parchment; etc. These materials were far from being transparent and needed to be
removed in order to let the sunlight in the interior,14 which was quite suitable for the houses built in
the warmer climate. The above-mentioned organic fillers were also quite fragile and as they could
not be stretched out to cover large openings, they presented one of the obstacles that stopped
windows from growing in size in the earlier centuries. That being said, going back to Pompeii and
Herculaneum, new materials used for windows included – petra specularis, a transparent stone in the
House of Pansa in Pompeii15and glass, parts of which have been recovered in Herculaneum and
were dated 70 AD. 16

13 McKay, 139.
14 Velo-Gala, 160.
15 Ibid, 140.
16 Robilant, 640.

10
 The discovery and the use of glass were revolutionary in the history of windows. It permitted the
window to grow in size and let much more light in, due to its transparency. However, glass was very
rarely utilized in domestic architecture before the Middle Ages because of its high price and because
of this other, cheaper materials were in use alongside glass until the 18th century.17
Glass windows found wider use in Christian religious architecture, starting from the Early
Christian and Byzantine era. The potential of glass was further explored with the use of stained glass
in medieval churches. Although in domestic architecture, still due to it being costly, glass was rarely
used. However, it made its way to palaces in the 15th century.18 After the 16th century development in
glassmaking technology allowed to create ‘sheet glass’ that was much thinner and more transparent
than ever before. This resulted in the rise of glass production around Europe, especially in France.19
We will not delve into the detailed history of windows in Europe during the Middle Ages and
early modern times, because in the following chapters we will discuss the history and development
of windows in the Netherlands, where the evolution and gradual change and growth of these
elements’ size in the Western Europe during this period will be more evident.

17 Curl, 736.
18 Cottle, 790.
19 Zantkuijl, 198.

11
1.3 Functions of windows

The discussion about the role of windows in domestic architecture is not comprehensive unless
we explore the functions of this element that do not only affect its shape and character but are the
reasons for its existence. None of the works mentioned above, except for The elements of architecture,
explicitly list and explain the different functions of windows. Even in this case, the list does not
involve every possible function.
The initial functions of windows are, as we have seen, concerned with letting in light, making
ventilation possible and with affording a view of the outside world. However, even starting from the
early period, other potential uses of having an opening in the façade were acknowledged by many,
and windows were used for completely different reasons.
One of the earliest examples of windows with an alternative use is the ‘window of appearance’ in
Egypt. It was a large, uncovered opening in the wall. The role of the window was to present a
Pharaoh to the public. This window literally and symbolically created the connection between
ordinary people and royals. Windows of appearance have been discovered in the Tomb of Meryre II
in the Amarna period (14th century BC) and later in the palace of Ramses III. (12th century BC)20
There is also a damaged relief from Amarna showing Pharaoh Akhenaten and queen Nefertiti at the
window of appearance, receiving gifts from their people.
Examples of a similar use of windows can be seen in other cultures too, e.g. the jharoka-i-darshan
in India. According to the tradition of the Mughal Empire in India (16th-19th C), the emperor had to
present himself to his people every morning at the window, for this reason the palace was located in
the center of the city, so that as many people as possible could attend the ceremony.21
Another function that a window might have is being an object of luxury. As continuously
mentioned above, historically glass was not very cheap, but other materials did not allow windows to
be large, for this reason, in the Roman era, only rich families could afford to have large windows in
their houses. Thus the size of the windows was an indicative sign of the wealth of an
inhabitant. 22 This continued to be true until the 20th century when glass became much more
affordable.

20 Kemp, 81.
21 Asher, 282.
22 Velo-Gala, 169.

12
 Overall, it can be said that the symbolic meaning of windows and their role in the exterior has
been recognized from very early on in history. In different eras and countries, architects used it in
diverse ways with different intentions.
Furthermore, windows can be utilized for different reasons, however, the existence of this element
can have additional repercussions – like jeopardizing security and privacy of the inhabitants. We
briefly touched on the problem of security when describing windows in the Roman cities, where
larger windows were only used on the top floors due to windows on the ground floor making the
houses more accessible to intruders. This is especially true when glass is used, because it is a fragile
material that can easily be broken. Thus, it is logical to assume that homeowners would not choose
to use large, unprotected windows if a house was situated in a crime-active area. Throughout the
centuries different means were used in order to secure the windows – like wooden shutters and
metal bars.
Another important detail is privacy. Open glass panes, if they are placed facing public areas,
expose the interior of the house. As time went on and it became easier to create larger windows with
undivided pieces of glass, this problem stood out more, especially in the beginning of the 20th
century, which will be the subject of our next discussion.

13



1.4 Windows and the modernist movement

In the last part of this chapter dedicated to windows, we will focus on Modernist Movement
because in this period, the value and potential of windows in domestic architecture were seen and
recognized like never before. This process can be observed not only in the architectural practice,
where windows of unique forms were designed, but also – in theoretical works.
The Modernist movement in western art and philosophy started in the second half of the 19th
century. Modernist architecture, more specifically, followed the idea of minimalism and lack of
décor, putting functionality first. In this period, architects and philosophers tried to reinvent
domestic architecture. These people thought about a house like a living creature and tried to make it
as truthful to their times as possible, and times were definitely changing. During the modernist era,
with the development of photography and the rise of mass production, the line between private and
public became much thinner. In response, modernist architecture was becoming more open - many
architects used picture windows – i.e., windows of a large size with undivided panes of glass. Beatriz
Colomina who dedicated a book to this subject called Privacy and publicity: modern architecture as mass
media (1994) writes: “The picture window works two ways: it turns the outside world into an image
to be consumed by those inside of the house, but it also displays the image of the interior to that
outside world.”23 This quote perfectly describes the newly found constant exposure to the outside
world of which the window could be an ideal metaphor. This metaphor can be seen in many
modernist architects’ house designs.
One of the leading architects of this era, Le Corbusier claimed that the history of architecture was
the history of windows.24 He advocated for having panoramic windows in modern houses. Although
in the silent movie he co-wrote the subtitles for - ‘L'architecture d'aujourd'hui’, we read that these
windows provide perfect lighting and ventilation,25 having windows in every wall around the house is
more than enough for these purposes and is probably used due to the architects taste and wish to be
innovative with regards to connecting a modern person with the world around him and his home.
Le Corbusier’s relationship with windows can be seen in his writing:

23 Colomina, 8.
24 Le Corbusier, 1991, 51.
25 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daFzqQFqe3M

14
 “I can state that glass will be a characteristic feature of building in the new machine
age because it is the most direct means by which we can find one of the essential
conditions for life: sun and light. The second machine age will be responsible for
restoring mankind to a harmonious relationship with nature, and with the human and
the cosmic.”26
However, not every modernist architect agreed with this. Auguste Perret, for example, advocated
for ‘portrait’ windows with a traditional, elongated form. According to him, this type of window
reflected a man and followed his proportions.27
Moreover, during this era, fully transparent openings stood in contrast to the sense of privacy of
inhabitants. To the degree that modernist architects needed to look for a solution to this problem, if
they wanted to keep incorporating large windows into their plans. One of the solutions was using
translucent glass. That would still let the light in, create a contemporary exterior, but at the same
time, keep the privacy of the interior intact.28
To sum up, during the modernist movement, the window became a tool for bringing philosophies
of the new era to life, however, at the same time it was development that sometimes understated the
privacy of inhabitants.

In conclusion, the aim of this chapter was to describe a window as an architectural element with
a long history and a broad meaning. Hopefully we saw how various and interesting are the factors
that influence its existence and characteristics. As mentioned above, this conversation did not
include deeper meanings of this element, coming from the cultural / social context, due to the lack
of literature on this matter. In the following chapter, we will attempt to connect domestic
architecture with cultural elements, and lay a foundation for including the windows in the
conversation.

26 Le Corbusier, 2012, 292.
27 Robilant, 651.
28 Le Corbusier, 2012, 298.

15
2. The Relationship between some aspects of culture and domestic architecture

While the goal of this thesis is to explore the relationship between some aspects of Dutch culture
and windows, one of the significant parts of the built environments in the Netherlands, and, more
importantly, see how the one could have influenced the other, we need to establish the general
relationship between the culture and the built form and discuss literature and theories in this field.
We will later apply these frameworks to Dutch architecture in order to shine light on windows as
products of the influence that is coming from the culture.
The complex issue of finding a connection between the non-material and material parts of culture
has been a topic discussed in various fields like archeology, anthropology, cultural studies, cultural
geography and art history. However, art history has not been the leader in this research. A
comprehensive review of the literature concerning this subject is presented by Lawrence and Low in
their 1990 article ‘The built environment and spatial form’, in which they review approaches taken
by scholars coming from different disciplines.
There are scholars that have paid attention to the culture of a given society when talking about
their material culture and ones who have created cross-cultural works dedicated to domestic
architecture. For example, a book by Paul Oliver – Dwellings, the house across the world (1987) illustrates
examples of dwellings from all over the world and dedicates one chapter to evaluate symbols and
meanings, in which he explores how the culture is represented in the domestic space and what
meanings homeowners’/homebuilders’ choices carry, based on their spiritual beliefs.
Cosmology has been a big part of anthropological works, because it helps us understand the
reasons behind many of the homeowners’ choices. Although, not many works refer to socio-cultural
factors as the main determinant factors in the formation of domestic space.
The main figure in this field of culture – architecture relationship, is Amos Rapoport, whose works
and theories we will focus on in this chapter. Rapoport is an Australian/American architect, a
professor and one of the founders of Environment-Behavior studies. His first book House form and
Culture, published in 1969 is the main source for the frameworks used in this thesis. This work has

16
been described as: “well documented”29; “concise but broadly comparative”30 and “well illustrated
and well organized”31 by different reviewers.
The book is focused on early forms of vernacular domestic architecture. In this work, Rapoport
explores his hypothesis – that built form is primarily influenced by socio-cultural factors and not
only by environmental conditions. At the same time, the author is against pointing towards only one
determining factor and claims that house form is influenced by multiple aspects, even though culture
always has the leading role in this process. He discusses every possible external source of influence –
like climate, materials, location, etc. and brings multiple examples from all over the world that he
had encountered during his extensive travels in order to prove that the built form does not fit the
requirements set by these factors.
First of all, before getting into theories, we have to make sure we define all of the terminologies
that could be more complex than they might seem, like – culture; material/nonmaterial culture;
forms of the built environment like vernacular architecture etc.
To begin with, we need to explain the term culture and what we mean when we suggest that some
parts of it could be affecting physical forms of architecture. Culture is a very broad term and does
not have one single definition. The word originated from the Latin cultura meaning cultivating,
agriculture. Since then, it has been defined in various ways. Alfred Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn
wrote an essay in 1952 “Culture, a Critical review of Concepts and Definitions” in which they
presented over a hundred definitions of culture and the authors’ conclusion was as follows:
“Culture consists of patterns, explicit and implicit, of and for behavior acquired and
transmitted by symbols, constituting the distinctive achievement of human groups,
including their embodiment in artifacts; the essential core of culture consists of
traditional (i.e. historically derived and selected) ideas and especially their attached
values.”32
Thus, culture can be seen as a set of ideas, values and other invisible factors, that influence the way
of living, the visible side of people’s lives and differentiate one group from the other.
Elements of culture can also be divided into two categories, material and non-material. This idea is
somewhat compatible with the iceberg model that Edward T. Hall explored in his 1976 book Beyond
culture, in which he compares culture to an iceberg, when its larger part cannot be seen and is hidden

29 Lozar, 142.
30 Lawrence, 6.
31 Francaviglia, 632.
32 Kroeber, 66.

17
under water and the part we can observe is just the tip of the iceberg. This part consists of all the
material culture a given society has created, like objects or dwellings but also the elements of non-
material culture that we can come across, like rituals, language, food etc.
Another important term that Rapoport uses is genre de vie, or the mode of living. This term was
used by French Geographer Max Sorre, to define every cultural, social and material aspect that
affects form.33 Rapoport sees genre de vie as more than just culture and says that it also incorporates
the concepts of ethos, worldview and national character.34 However, according to some definitions,
culture could be synonymous to genre de vie.
We also have to stress what type of architecture is our main focus and what we mean when we say
– domestic architecture. Rapoport distinguishes between grand design and folk buildings. Most of
the buildings that are created with a function to be lived in belong to the folk category, they are not
built to impress (like royal complexes or religious buildings) but rather to accommodate and meet
the needs of their inhabitants. Folk buildings also tend to follow the traditions.
Folk buildings can be divided into two groups – primitive and vernacular. Rapoport defines
primitive as: “produced by societies defined as primitive by anthropologists.” 35 Vernacular
architecture also consists of two categories – preindustrial vernacular and modern vernacular.
Preindustrial vernacular architecture came into existence when jobs in society become more
specialized and people no longer built their own houses. Combined with urbanization, this decreased
the full control and involvement of a human in every aspect of their own lives, unlike in the
primitive cultures.36 In preindustrial vernacular architecture there are models for domestic buildings
that can be adjusted to the needs of a new generation, but they mostly stay close to tradition. At the
end of the preindustrial vernacular era, these traditions are sometimes lost due to the rise of the
number of houses, the complexity of the new architecture and the lack of shared experience and
closeness with the community.37
Nevertheless, Rapoport believes that there is another stage which he terms modern vernacular
and although it is hard to keep the same forms and follow the old traditions in the modern world,

33 Rapoport, 47.
34 Ibid. 48.
35 Ibid, 3.
36 Ibid, 4.
37 Ibid, 6.

18
most traditional buildings “are designed for the popular culture, not by it, but they [..] continue to
show some commonly held values more clearly than does the design subculture.”38
After defining the terms that will be helpful for us in the following paragraphs, we should get to
the hypothesis formulated by Rapoport. It can be summarized in the following quote: “house form
is not simply the result of physical forces or any single causal factor, but is the consequence of a
whole range of socio-cultural factors seen in their broadest terms.”39
Vernacular domestic architecture is not a part of the grand design tradition, where buildings are
created following specific ideas in the architect’s (and patron’s) mind. Their main purpose is to fit
the lifestyle of the future inhabitant (at least at the beginning of vernacular era, when each house was
built for a specific person/family) and make his or her daily life as comfortable as possible.
Multiple factors can affect the shape of domestic buildings, resulting in a great variety of
vernacular houses around the world. The most apparent ones could be – the climate, availability of
materials, site, economy and need of defense. Rapoport examines all of these factors and comes to
the conclusion that, although they all play a part in forming the house shape, none of them (not
separately and not even combined) sufficiently explain all the different decisions that have been
made by homeowners/builders.
It would be helpful to bring several examples that illustrate his position and that go against the
requirements of the given environment. His examples mostly cover primitive/early vernacular house
types.
When it comes to climate, it could not be the leading factor, because in similar climates and even
microclimates different peoples create extremely different dwellings and some of them are more
compatible with the weather conditions than others. For example, in the severe climate of the
Arctic, when people are not given the luxury of choosing from a wide variety of building types to
keep them warm, completely different types of dwellings are built by people like Eskimos and
Athabascans. Houses of Eskimos have a central plan that is not found in other cultures with the
same climate, and – according to Rapoport – is not efficient considering the cold climate. 40
Moreover, some cultures, despite severe weather conditions and despite having the knowledge and
the possibility to build, choose not to have a house at all. Rapoport brings an example of the Ona of

38 Ibid, 7.
39 Ibid, 47.
40 Ibid, 20.

19
Tierra del Fuego, a tribe that lives in the arctic climate, can build huts for ritual purposes but
chooses not to have any form of built dwelling.41
Another important factor is constituted by available materials and technology. Building materials
make some of the decisions impossible, thus they are hugely influential, however, even though in
Polynesia, Melanesia and Papua-New-Guinea the people work with similar materials and the same
technology the houses they have produces take different forms.
The site could also be a form determinant. Houses that are built on slopes require different
solutions compared to the ones that are built on the water for example. However, in this case, as
with the other factors we already discussed, different dwellings are created despite existing in similar
environments. In some cases spiritual beliefs take a higher priority than topography. If according to
the belief, a house should be orientated in a certain way, like it is in the Gilbert and Ellice Islands
and parts of India and Japan, they will be built that way even when it is incompatible with their
locations.42
The need for defense can influence some elements of the house as well, fences could be added to
secure the territory of the house. In this case as well, there is a big variation in the decisions builders
came up within different areas.
Overall, it is quite clear that many factors are at play when it comes to choosing the form of the
house, most of them being influential but none of them single-handedly dictating the form. The
aspects that seem to be carrying higher importance in this process are never as easy to determine as
climate or materials for example. It is hard to identify them without having more information about
the society. As Rapoport says: “Once the identity and character of a culture has been grasped, and
some insight gained into its values, its choices among possible dwelling responses to both physical
and cultural variables become much clearer.” He agrees that genre de vie is what is the main
determinant of the house form and highlights the five elements that affect domestic architecture.
These are 1. Basic needs 2. Family 3. Position of women 4. Privacy 5. Social intercourse.
It is important to define these aspects in order to see how exactly do they get translated into the
physical form of the house and, later, in the 4th chapter, to apply them to our specific case.
The first element outlined by Rapoport - basic needs, solely based on the name could be the most
universal one, however, and this emphasizes how strong cultural influence can be, even the need for

41 Ibid.
42 Ibid, 28-29.

20
fresh air, fresh smell, understanding of resting and comfort can be seen differently by different
cultures.
The second element- family refers to different family structures that affect the number of people
that live together and their status within this smaller group. This can be seen most clearly when
comparing monogamous/polygamous societies. In the latter, in some cases, every wife is given a
separate house.
The third element of genre de vie - the position of women affects the form of the house in societies
where the role of the woman is strictly defined and connected to the domestic space. For example, in
cultures that require women to be cloistered, houses are built in a way that prevents the person from
the outside from interacting with the interior of the house, and consequently with the women inside
of it.
The terms of privacy seem to also to vary in different cultures. The comfort of domestic space
requires the sense of privacy, however, it is important that the understanding of private space, or
modesty is not the same in every culture, and is, therefore, expressed in various ways in the dwelling
forms. For example, in some parts of Japan and also India a blank façade faces the street while all the
doors and windows face the inner courtyard.
The last element of genre de vie, according to Rapoport, is social intercourse, this factor has less to do
with domestic building itself, but connects to the systems that exist in the settlements that create
social spaces. The different characters of social relationships require different solutions for these
spaces.
As one can see, there are a wide variety of factors influencing domestic architecture. A large
number of them could be environmental, however, as illustrated by Rapoport, sociocultural
elements can hold a leading position in this process, since every group reacts differently to outside
impulses.
Although it has already been faintly addressed, we have to make sure that we can apply this
approach to modern vernacular and more specifically, modern Dutch domestic architecture, because
most of the examples presented by Rapoport are from tribal and more traditional societies.
Although during the modern era in developed countries no person was responsible for building their
own house and every detail about domestic building was highly calculated by the group of
professionals and not the homeowner himself, some societies still continued on the same course that
they had in the pre-industrial times. If this is the case, even if the circumstances were completely
different than those of the pre-industrial period, the form evolution of the building had not been

21
interrupted and continued to be somewhat faithful to the tradition, we could apply the term modern
vernacular in the way that Rapoport defines it.
Understandably, Rapoport is not the only scholar who was interested in this subject and this book
is not the only work to focus on it, (the article by Lawrence and Low has a quite comprehensive list
of these works) but this work gives us a very clear idea of the frameworks concerning the deep levels
of culture being the form determinant for the domestic architecture that we will utilize in the
forthcoming chapters.
To sum up, in this chapter, we discussed Amos Rapoport’s theories of socio-cultural influence on
domestic space and explored the idea of elements of culture and the modes of living being among
the main factors that determine the form of house architecture.

22
2.1 Cultural influences on windows in domestic architecture

As we were able to observe in the preceding chapter, Amos Rapoport extensively discusses the
ways in which elements of culture can be reflected in domestic architecture. Because his case studies
involve entire dwellings, he does not focus solely on windows, and windows are not featured in
every example that he presents. For this reason we need more specificity in order to determine
which parts of genre de vie affect windows and how, to see how his theory fits the development of
windows around the world.
The first element of Genre de vie is basic needs. According to Rapoport, even basic needs that might
seem vital for one group are not universal. He brings the example of the need for fresh air, how high
smell concentration inside the house is accepted in some societies and how in some cultures there is
a fear of ‘night air’.43 Windows seem to be the perfect reflection of this notion, because ventilation is
one of the main functions of this feature. It is safe to assume that with people who were not
bothered by a lack of air circulating inside the house, adding a window to their house would not be a
priority.
Similar diversity of views can be seen regarding the desired level of light. Rapoport mentions
differences in the need for light in English and American households.44 The need for light could
affect the size of windows or the curtains and shutters.
The second element - family - does not seem to be connected to the windows.
Inversely, the third element – the role of women can be a factor of influence. Even in the example
that we discussed, in which cloistered women were to be hidden from the outside world, this
affected the house form and positioned windows so that they were only facing inwards, toward the
garden while the walls facing the public spaces lacked openings.
Similarly, the fourth element – privacy - is also quite important. The notion of privacy is different
in every culture. As we discussed in the first chapter – in the western world, people felt exposed to
the outside world because of the large windows in their homes. In the examples presented by
Rapoport, in some cultures people chose not to have any windows facing the public space.
Therefore, the size and shape of the windows and curtains could depend on how people felt about
passersby being able to see the interior of the house.

43 Rapoport, 60-61.
44 Ibid, 62.

23
 In discussing the fifth element – social intercourse, Rapoport does not focus on its effects on the
dwelling itself. However, windows are the elements of the homes that connect the interior to the
outside world. Windows could be influenced by the forms of communication between the members
of different families, how much do they share amongst each other (this is also connected to the
understanding of the privacy).
To sum up, when discussing the elements of genre de vie and their relationships with domestic
windows almost all of them (perhaps except basic needs and family) can be cut down to people’s
perception of ‘inside’ and interaction with the ‘outside’. Whether we are discussing the role of
women or understanding of privacy – windows reflect society’s views on domestic space and its
connection to the rest of the world, due to their essence and their function – that is simultaneously
connecting and dividing the two worlds.
In this short chapter, we connected Rapoport’s understanding of genre de vie to the windows, in the
following chapters we will describe these elements in Dutch architecture and apply the same
frameworks to them.

24
3. The history of Dutch Windows

This thesis is focused on windows in Dutch domestic architecture, their size and openness to the
gaze of ‘outsiders’, but before discussing what the reason behind this phenomenon we need to
specify the object of our study, describe Dutch windows and look at the history of their
development.
In the preceding chapters we touched on the great diversity of the domestic architecture around
the world. Dutch domestic architecture is a part of this idea, its authentic qualities have been kept
throughout the centuries and today they play the largest part in creating a uniquely Dutch cityscape.
Windows have, from early times (which we will specify in the following paragraphs) played an
important part in the facades of these dwellings.
Not many art historical studies are concerned with the history of windows in the Netherlands.
Most of them are, understandably, written in Dutch, and the majority of these studies pay more
attention to the windows of official or religious buildings than to those of domestic architecture.
There are, however, some exceptions. For example Vensters, (1971) by H. Janse that is fully dedicated
to Dutch windows in both church and domestic architecture. Bouwen in Amsterdam: Het Woonhuis in
De Stad (1973) by Henk Zantkuijl is a book dedicated to the architecture of Amsterdam, in which
attention is given to the development of windows in the city but also around the country as well.
Amongst works in English it is important to mention the album Old Domestic Architecture of Holland
(1924), the introduction of which describes the window as a principal element of the façade45 and
briefly discusses the history of Dutch windows. In the following paragraphs we will delve into the
history of Dutch window architecture as presented by these specific authors.
The earliest types of windows used in the North Western Europe were frameless, and consisted
of openings incorporated into the structure of the wall, unfortunately there are no examples of
window architecture on the Dutch territory dated before the 12th century. The earliest example of a
partially recovered window is in a house in Deventer, (which is the earliest surviving example of
domestic architecture in the city) built in the twelfth century. This window is narrow, and is divided
by the column in the middle. Two parts of the windows are arched on top.46(Fig.1) There are not
many medieval examples of domestic architecture with windows that have survived on the Dutch

45 Yerbury, xi.
46 Janse, 33.

25
territory, but, according to Janse, when compared with the rest of the world it is clear that the
window from Deventer belongs to a standard type. Next example presented by Janse is the Great
hall (ridderzaal) of the comitial palace (grafelijk paleis) in The Hague, built in the 1320s. This building
has examples of two types of windows with a central column. One – with halves that were arched
on top (similar to the one in Deventer) and one that had no curves on top so that window has a
rectangular shape.47(Fig.2)
In the medieval period, there was a separation between the openings with the function of
providing light versus the ones for air. Openings for light were placed higher and they were not
covered by shutters.48 Soon, these two openings merged and created the new elongated type of the
window that is referred to as monastery window (Kloostervenster )49 (Fig.3) it consisted of a bottom
part, that could be covered by shutters and was used for ventilation and a top part of approximately
the same size that was glazed with stained glass, (this type of window glass consisted of small square
pieces of not fully transparent glass, held together by strips of lead or other metal) uncovered and
used for providing the light. The width of monastery windows was determined by the possibilities of
the stained glass, which could not be wider than 2 feet (approx. 60cm).50
The next stage of development was created by combining two monastery windows and creating a
cross shape. This type of windows is called cross window (kruisvenster in Dutch). (Fig.3)
The rule for monastery window applies to the cross-window as well, they could not grow in size
because the size of the glass panels was fixed and could not be longer than 2 feet. Thus, cross-
windows were 4 feet in width at most, however, due to having four compartments cross-windows
were quite large. A lintel, the horizontal separation between two compartments was, in most cases,
placed in the middle of the window so that light and air compartments were of the same size. Both –
monastery windows and cross-windows could be created with both materials – stone and brick,
depending on the material that was used for the construction of the wall. If the brick was used
linters could be arched. If the house was made out of wood, wooden frames were created for
windows. Not many monasteries and cross-windows have survived over the centuries a large
number of the examples that we encounter in the literature were recovered after the process of
restoration.51

47 Ibid.
48 Zantkuijl, 199.
49 Ibid.
50 Ibid.
51 Ibid, 202.

26
 According to Janse, one of the earliest examples of cross-windows has been recovered during the
reconstruction of the town hall in Sluis, in Zeeland, built in the 14th century. 52(Fig.4) Besides
reconstructed evidence, paintings can also be used as sources for detecting the time period when
cross-windows became popular. The earliest examples date back to the 15th century and are
presented in the paintings by Rogier van der Weyden and Hans Memling. (Fig.5, 6)
The problem that was caused by window types mentioned above was, that in order to look
outside one had to open the shutters, which was not comfortable to do in the colder months of the
year. Therefore, glass began to be used for the lower compartments as well, but unlike the top
compartment these elements were not fixed and could be opened. At the same time, shutters were
still used for the purpose of security. Most of the monastery or cross windows that have survived
have a glazed lower part that was added during renovations, that is why it is hard to date these
examples and decide when this technique was introduced. However, we can conclude that this
change occurred before the second half of the 17th century due to examples of fully glazed in
paintings by Dutch masters like Johannes Vermeer (1632-75) or Cornelis de Man, (1621-1706) who
worked throughout the 17th century.53(Fig.7, 8)
Although the quality of glass still remained low and windows were not fully transparent this new
development created a larger, more transparent opening than before.
This modification was not the only one. The seventeenth century was the period when some
significant changes occurred in Dutch domestic architecture, that reflected on the development of
windows. The literature is not unanimous when it comes to defining either technical or cultural
reason that resulted in keeping the tendency of having large windows alive.
Although in the next chapters we will focus more intensively on the cultural impulses that could
have played a role in this process, in this chapter, we will discuss the technical progress of Dutch
home-building in the 17th century that also largely affected the development of this element. As
Amos Rapoport states, technique does not define architects decisions but it certainly makes some
decisions possible or impossible.54
Firstly, developing urbanism plays a big part in the history of Dutch domestic architecture. Over
the centuries Dutch cities became extremely densely populated, and in order to use space more
efficiently narrow but deep houses, with facades facing towards the canals or the street appeared in

52 Jense, 36.
53 Zantkuijl, 205.
54 Rapoport, 25.

27
the cities. Buildings stood so close to one another that they would share sidewalls. Therefore,
windows could only be used in the front and back walls and they hat to be large to provide light for
the whole house. At the same time, these shared sidewalls would carry the floor beams (wooden
beams that carry the weight of the floor). Therefore, the façade did not have to carry any other
structural element beside itself, thus large windows would not weaken the structure of the building
as a whole.55
Secondly, an important innovation in window architecture that facilitated large Dutch windows to
form was that of the sash windows. These types of windows have a fixed upper part and sliding
lower part, which makes the process of opening them easier. (Fig.13) Sash windows were reportedly
first used in England by Christopher Wren in 1683 in the Winchester Palace, however, it is still
debated what the real origin of these windows was. They appeared in the Netherlands just two years
later, in the Het Loo Palace, this fact, according to Henk Zantkuijl, is a reason to doubt that Wren
was the first architect to use them and perhaps they originated in continental Europe.56 Despite sash
windows’ ambiguous origin, they became more popular in the Netherlands than elsewhere to the
point when some scholars call sash windows ‘Dutch windows’.57
Thirdly, according to Zantjuijl, the spread of sash windows coincided with the development of
glazing techniques. Much higher quality and almost fully transparent glass became available. 58
Moreover, the stained glass that had been used up to that point, did not allow for glass panes to be
enlarged. A new technique used wooden glazing bars/muntins (roede in Dutch), instead of ones made
of lead. With time and better technique the glazed elements or lights became larger, this resulted in
the decreasing amount of muntins. Thus due to the larger size of the lights and better quality glass,
windows became more transparent than before. This technique was used for cross-windows before
sash windows appeared. The example of such window can be found in the house Zorgvliet in The
Hague, built in 1652.59
For the reasons mentioned above, the development of the new technique and introduction to the
sash windows started a new era in the history of Dutch windows. Although cross-windows were
quite large as well, due to combining opening of two separate functions – light and air - they were
still closed by the wooden shutters from the outside, sash windows did not have outside shutters and

55 Rasmussen, 163.
56 Ibid, 210.
57 Cieraad, 33.
58 Zantkuijl, 210.
59 Ibid.

28
they were not limited in size. The Dutch city population soon took advantage of this opportunity
and from the engravings and drawings from the early 18th century onwards we can see the canal
houses with large sash windows taking up the largest part of their façades. (Fig.14-16)
The Grachtenboek, (canal book) created in 1768 by Dutch engraver Caspar Philips is the best
example presenting multiple drawings of canal houses in Amsterdam in the 18th century. Although
there are still some cross windows and some windows are still partially or fully covered by shutters,
the majority of the houses depicted in the book already have large sash windows with no shutters on
the exterior. (Fig.14) Although we have to specify, that the ground floor of canal houses was raised
above the ground level and thus separated from the gaze of passers-by, 60 (Fig.16) who could
probably only see bits of the walls, the ceilings and part of furniture through the huge sash windows.
At the end of the 18th century, a new tendency appeared due to the French influence in the
Netherlands. This is the period when French windows were introduced. A French window is not a
sliding window; it opens inwards instead. (Fig. 17) This type was not very compatible with the Dutch
environment. Due to the rainy climate, smaller openings were more preferable, therefore sash
windows would be more practical than the French ones.61
Combining the technique of sash windows with the visual side of French windows a new type was
formed, called ‘Empire’ window. (Fig.17) Although, it was a sliding window, it visually resembled a
French window due to having a large vertical post in the middle.
However, despite these changes and the introduction of new window types, the overall look of
large cities and especially Amsterdam was still largely defined but the sash windows.62
The 19th century was the beginning of a new era for Dutch windows that could be described as a
downfall.63 The French occupation was followed by a new tax system. In 1812 window and door tax
was introduced, according to it taxes were calculated based on the number of doors and windows
that were facing the street. This decision mostly affected homeowners/inhabitants with less income,
because upper class homeowners could afford to pay these taxes. Apartment buildings for middle
and lower classes, constructed in the 19th century, however, had much smaller windows then canal
houses built in the 18th century. The window tax lasted until 1896.64 At the same time, the fact that

60 Cieraad, 35.
61 Ibid, 214.
62 Cieraad, 35.
63 Jense, 66.
64 Ibid.

29
French influence continued to affect Dutch society can be seen as another reason why large Dutch
windows’ popularity decreased in the 19th century.65
However, the logical evolution of the windows still continued. Several new types of windows were
created, in which the size of the lights continued to grow. The most famous new type is a T window
that was frequently used in Amsterdam outside the Singel canal area in most of the new houses that
were built there in the 19th century.66
Even after the window tax, windows in the high-class family houses in most of the cases remained
of a big size and Dutch cities were still generally characterized by large windows (Fig.18) and it
continues to be true today as well. The 1991 book het Grachtenboek presents side-to-side images of
drawings from the original canal book and photographs of the same sites from 1991.67 Although
parts of the facades have changed and the windows themselves have been renewed, their large frame
size still remains the same. (This can also be noticed on the mid century photographs like on Fig. 19
and 20.)
Moreover, the difference between the social classes faded with the abolition of the tax. In the
beginning of the 20th century, the windows in newly built lower class houses could be made larger
due to window glass becoming more affordable. At the same time the positioning of windows in
upper-class houses changed and moved closer to the ground.68
The Modernist movement in the Netherlands, as in the rest of Europe supported this tendency and
advocated picture windows. A parallel approach was used later, in the 1950s. In the post-war Dutch
domestic architecture the phenomenon of 'doorzonwoning'69 became popular. A Doorzonwoning is a type
of plan in which the living room extends from one end of the home to another, having windows on
either side so that the sun can shine through the whole length of the house. Although 20th century
philosophers argued whether this plan was compatible with the ideas of privacy and domesticity,70
the Dutch were already familiar with the notion of living with large windows and post-war picture
windows were not rejected by society. (Fig.21-24.) Moreover, in the same period, many families
replaced old stained glass with modern fully transparent glass,71and old sash windows with picture

65 Cieraad, 36.
66 Zantkuijl, 216.
67 Spies, 282-319.
68 Cieraad, 36.
69 Berens, 9.
70 Ibid, 6.
71 Cieraad, 39.

30
windows with undivided plates of glass, (Fig.19, 20) which, together with post-war architecture
contributed to creating the fully transparent character of Dutch homes. (Fig. 25-28.)
To sum up, in this chapter we outlined the history of Dutch city windows starting from the middle
ages. These elements seem to have been developing gradually until today and there has not been a
dramatic change in their form even following the events like the appearance of a window tax. This
observation – their truthfulness to tradition and natural evolution - is perhaps helpful for us in order
to conclude that Dutch windows are part of modern vernacular architecture – the category of
architecture outlined by Rapoport that despite being constructed in the modern era still carries the
features of vernacular architecture and can still be seen as a part and a representation of cultural
evolution of a given society.

31
3.1 History of Dutch Window Decoration

Another significant detail that plays a very important part in the open character of Dutch
windows is the decoration – namely curtains and shutters. This issue is discussed in another field of
art history, not the history of architecture but the history of the interior. In our case, both elements
– architecture and interior design are important. If only one was present and not the other - if the
windows facing the street were large but were thoroughly covered, or if they were not covered but
were of a small size, located higher than eye-level, they have the same effect as they do today.
While the size of the windows on the Dutch territory has already reached the large size in the 17th-
18th centuries, the tendency of not using the curtains or leaving them open not only during the day
but also at night is comparatively new.
An important work concerning the history of Dutch interior in the modern era, that goes further
than exploring the history and delves into the idea of domesticity is Art of Home in the Netherlands
1500-1800 (2001) edited by Jan de Jong; Bart Ramakers; Herman Roodenburg; Frits Scholten and
Mariët Westermann. This book contains articles written in both – Dutch and English languages and
explores the studies of domestic culture (wooncultuur) in the Netherlands from different perspectives.
Information about more contemporary tendencies in the Dutch window decoration can be found in
the book At Home: An Anthropology of Domestic Space (1999), edited by Dutch anthropologist Irene
Cieraad.
Before the sash windows became more commonly used in the second half of the 17th century,
shutters were providing enough protection and privacy for the inhabitants. They were used for both
monastery and cross-windows and they could be closed at night or during cold weather. Inversely,
sash windows did not have outer shutters, instead they were moved into the interior.72 Despite
having shutters, these large windows with big lights provided a greater sense of transparency and
connection with the outside world than cross-windows with stained glass and outside shutters ever
did. As Zantkuijl concludes, homeowners’ intentions in the 17th century were to create a more open,
bright interior,73 which became more achievable with sash windows with the aid of interior shutters.
This tendency continued well into the 18th century. Irene Cieraad states that in the 18th century
during the day these shutters were folded and curtains were drawn aside, 74 which, with the

72 Cieraad, 44
73 Zantkuijl, 201.
74 Cieraad, 44.

32
combination of large windows would enhance the feeling of transparency. Therefore, the tendency
towards more openness, expressed not only in the size of windows but also in open shutters and
curtains, was spread on the verge of 17th-18th centuries.
The 19th century, combined with the decrease in the size of the window that we discussed above,
was characterized by the use of thicker thus more expensive curtains in the higher-class families that
made, according to Cieraad, the well-lit interior of the 18th century partly disappear.75
In the 20th century, however, large curtains became less common and the tendency of leaving
windows completely exposed, regardless of the time of the day, originated. It became especially
noticeable in the 50s. (Fig. 21; 32) According to a national survey held in 1966, 64% of Dutch city
populations left their curtains open in the evening. This openness went to the point when it was
reflected on the overall use of resources in the Netherlands, which even became a part of a political
/ economical dispute. After the oil crisis in 1973 the Prime Minister asked people to close the
curtains in order to save gas.76
This type of exposure mentality although did decline in the following decades, (according to the
similar survey held in1984 the percentage of people who preferred their windows to be exposed was
46%77) still remains today and is considered by many as an important part of the Dutch culture.
To sum up, window decoration is much more flexible than the shape and size of the window,
because the latter is connected to the complicated process of constructing a building. Therefore, the
decorations could change more easily and thus reflect the change of taste and preferences in society.
However, the effect they are able to achieve is much more dependent on the size and the character
of windows. To be more precise, the effect of openness cannot be achieved by curtains and shutters
alone.
In the Netherlands, window decorations and the size and types of windows contributed to the
openness of the Dutch city house. Both developed at the similar rate and moved towards creating a
stronger effect of transparency that reached its peak in the middle of the 20th century, when the
window-size became uniformly large in every neighborhood, while the position of windows moved
closer to the ground and curtains were used less often. These elements could be included in the
frameworks presented by Rapoport and regarded as an expression of some elements of the culture,
among other influences.

75 Ibid, 46.
76 Ibid, 48.
77 Ibid.

33
4. The Dutch window as a product of a culture

Domestic architecture is an extremely interesting part of material culture. It is created by people

for people, therefore it is particularly reflective of society’s character and needs. In the third chapter,
we discussed how varied factors that influence domestic architecture could be and how important
the culture of a given society is in this process, to the point when it can be the only explanation for
decisions that were made by artisans. In the third chapter, we focused on windows in the Dutch
domestic architecture, we outlined the history of the element and followed its development. We saw
the changes in the knowledge of building or geopolitical circumstances that affected the form of this
element. Our main question, however, is what role could Dutch culture play in the formation of this
particular element?
There is a very limited amount of academic works that discuss Dutch domestic architecture in
connection to the culture and see the former as a manifestation of the latter. It is especially rare to
come across works that look at windows specifically from this point of view. However, there are
several authors who tried to place Dutch domestic architecture in a more anthropological discourse.
In this chapter, we will discuss all of the theories that have originated in this field and see how they
match the factors outlined by Rapoport.
Dutch architecture, of course, has been greatly researched and written about by many (primarily
Dutch) art historians. The largest amount of works is dedicated to the golden age of the Dutch
Republic and Dutch classicism. While general works mostly focus on grand design or specific
architects, when writing about city architecture (due to the fact that the Dutch cityscape is not
created by castles and palaces but by canals and blocks of houses78) a large number of scholars focus
on the city house architecture. (Meischke, 2000; Zantkuijl, 1993) Some works of a large scale – like
Grachtenboek (canal book) (1768-71) or series of books - Het Rapenburg (1986-1992) written by Th. H.
Lunsingh Schuerleer, C. Willemijn Fock and A. J. Dissel that consists of 6 volumes and 11 books,
present the full history (according to archival materials) and description of the buildings in the
historic centers in Amsterdam and Leiden respectively. All of these resources give us the
opportunity to explore the architectural history of Dutch cities and development of house building.
However, as mentioned above, works that adopt anthropological or cultural approaches in order
to research Dutch domestic architecture are much more rare. Nevertheless, they do exist and some

78 Rasmussen, 161.

34
of them even address the issue of Dutch windows. Most of them do not directly outline the
influential character of culture on architectural form, instead, they explore the deeper meaning of
domestic space in the Netherlands and the symbolical meaning of its elements. The majority of them
use the works of the Dutch golden age artists as case studies in order to paint a picture of the Dutch
society of that era.
Yet, before addressing these works, it is important to mention that, as Rapoport states, cultural
factors should not be seen as the only formative elements that affect domestic architecture. Factors
like climate, technology, materials, and urban development all play parts in this process, they make
some decisions impossible and some more convenient, although they can never fully explain and
justify every decision that has been made. Our goal in this specific chapter is to determine, whether
some parts of Dutch culture could fit the factors that are considered highly influential by Rapoport
and therefore determine how could they have contributed to the complicated development process
of domestic architecture.
As we mentioned in the chapter 2.1, five elements of genre de vie, when we try to look at them as
possible influences for window architecture and window treatment, are interconnected. Additionally,
there is not enough literature on this matter to help us dedicate one large chapter for each element.
Therefore, we will pay more attention to the elements that can be found in the literature and try to
incorporate other elements in this discussion.

35
4.1 Role of women

In this chapter, we will discuss these theories and organize them based on the elements of genre de
vie outlined by Amos Rapoport, starting from the third one – the role of women in society. This
particular issue seems to be the in center of attention of many scholarly works starting from the last
two decades of the 20th century, due to the rise of the Woman’s Studies as an academic discipline.
First of all, it is important to discuss a few facts about women and their role in domestic life in the
Netherlands, in order to better understand their connection with architectural elements of the house.
In the traditional Dutch culture of the 17th century, the house was fully a woman’s domain. For
example, the popular self-help book Oeconomia Christiana (1655) written by Petrus Wittewrongel
endorses the idea that women should be in charge of every domestic chore and responsibility.79 Dr.
van Beverwijck, in his book Schat der gesontheyt (1636) writes that women are anatomically made for
domestic space. 80 Simon Schama in his book about Dutch society during the golden age, The
Embarrassment of Riches (1987), dedicates one chapter to Dutch housewives and their roles in the
society. He pays special attention to the excessive cleaning regimen of Dutch women of the 17th
century that had been noticed by many travelers of this era. This regimen was especially focused on
cleaning the front of the house. “The steps in front of the house, the path leading to the house, if
any, and the front hall were all to be washed every weekday early in the morning”81 – Schama writes.
The front of the house seemed to be a particularly important space for a Dutch woman. Dutch
genre paintings of the 17th century frequently depict a scene placed in the interior, where a woman
sits by the window. Scenes of this nature can be found among the works of Quiringh van
Brekelenkam, (1622-68) Pieter de Hooch, (1628-84) Ludolf de Jongh, (1716-79) Gabriel
Metsu,(1629-67) etc. (Fig. 9-12)
In the 2001 book Art & Home: Dutch interiors in the age of Rembrandt the author H. Perry Chapman
discusses the societal and familiar rules of the 17th century Netherlands and her conclusion is that in
the domestic space, women were in the center of attention and were judged according to their ability
to manage the household while husbands and grown up sons were mostly absent.82
In many of these paintings, women are seated in the voorhuis (which is translated as front house, it
is a room next to the entrance of the house), sometimes a chair is placed on a wooden platform

79 Referenced in Westermann, 134.
80 Referenced in Schama, 400.
81 Schama, 376.
82 Westermann, 134-139.

36
(vlondertje in Dutch83) that protects them from the cold floor, which indicates that they spent a large
part of their day in this room, on this spot. Based on this information, it is not surprising that the
role of women could be considered as a possible influence on the forms of domestic architecture.
One of the authors who use this information in order to connect Dutch women’s domestic life
with windows is Heidi de Mare. In her article The Domestic Boundary as Ritual Area in Seventeenth-Century
Holland (1993) she discusses this relationship based on three primary sources – works of Dutch
writer Jacob Cats (1577-1660), paintings by Pieter de Hooch (1629-1684) and architectural theory by
a Flemish engineer Simon Stevin (1548-1620).
Cats wrote at great length about a woman’s role in the household. He compared her to the ruler
and paid much attention to the borders, walls, doors and windows. “The housewife must therefore
keep a watchful eye and can never leave her post”84 – de Mare writes.
De Hooch often depicted domestic scenes where women were in proximity of the open door or a
window. A painting, of course, can be more symbolic than a literal depiction of reality, however,
together with theoretical works and descriptions, it gives us a better perspective of 17th century
Dutch society.
Stevin mentioned, that women had a habit of sitting at the window and they were often visited by
passers-by. According to De Mare, “Stevin shows his preference for windows that allow a sideways,
downward and frontal view onto the street making it unnecessary for residents to stick their head
out of the window”85, thus confirming that this way of looking outside was common at that period
and perhaps not appreciated by Stevin. De Mare concludes this based on Stevin’s suggestions to add
a courtyard to the house in order to avoid women being visited by men at the window and offering
types of windows that inhabitants can see outside from without leaning out of.86
These three sources combined help us see that there is indeed strong interest in the idea of a
boundary in the domestic space and woman’s relationship with it in the 17th century Dutch culture.
One of the most notable works to connect the role of women in Dutch society and windows in
the domestic architecture is the book At Home: an Anthropology of Domestic Space (1999) edited by
Dutch cultural anthropologist Irene Cieraad. The book consists of twelve chapters by thirteen
different authors and is an anthropological study of home. It explores the idea of domesticity and
the relationship humans have with their home. The chapter written by Cieraad herself – Dutch

83 Ibid, 29.
84 De Mare, 110.
85 Ibid, 120.
86 De Mare, 120; 122.

37
Windows - Female Virtue and Female Vice is the most relevant academic work to our particular thesis. It
incorporates the study of Dutch domestic architecture, mainly focusing on windows and discussing
them from the anthropological point of view, looking at them as gendered borderlines that could
have been influenced by the role of women in Dutch households. The author references de Mare’s
article and elaborates on the idea of a boundary in Dutch domestic architecture. This chapter is not
limited to the 17th century but explores this relationship into the 20th century.
Cieraad uses the theoretical frameworks created by anthropologist Mary Douglas, who writes
about physical or symbolic borderlines that manifest some classifications that exist in the given
society. Cieraad suggests that Dutch windows could be considered as a symbolic borderline between
the female space – which is the indoors and male space – the outdoors. A woman could be seen as a
guardian of this border who is responsible for maintaining it figuratively and literally – that might
include protecting and cleaning it.87 We have already discussed how Dutch women of the 17th
century prioritized cleaning the front of the house and how they possibly spent a large part of their
day in a voorhuis, which could be seen as acting as a ‘guardian’ of domestic space. Cieraad explores
this role further. “With her chair on a heightened stage the housewife secured her guarding position
at the often open window, while monitoring life in the street and supervising the open entrance
door”88 –she writes.
We also have to remember that the descriptions are mostly of 17th century society. It is the same
period when the windows in the Netherlands started to be enlarged, (more precisely starting from
the end of the 17th century) more and better quality glass was used and shutters became less
standard, therefore it became much easier to observe the street from the inside of the house. This
tradition could have been a factor of influence on the development of domestic architecture, and
even after leaving the tradition in the past architectural forms could have remained.
Cieraad describes the development of the relationship between a Dutch woman and a window.
According to her, throughout the centuries, this tradition of ‘guarding’ the entrance of the house
gradually disappeared, the speed of this process depended on social status. At first, (in the 18th
century) it became associated with lower-class women and later (in the 19th century) it was
condemned in all social circles. However, middle and low class women were so used to this role that
during the 19th century spying mirrors (spionnetje in Dutch89) were used in order to observe the street

87 Cieraad, 32.
88 Ibid, 33.
89 De Mare, 138.

38
without looking out.90(An example of spying mirror can be seen on Fig.29 and 30.) During the same
period ‘twilight lamps’ became popular among the lower class,91 these were moderately dim lamps
that perhaps helped people to monitor the better-lit streets from the dimly lit interiors at nighttime.
Based on how long this tradition persisted even despite social stigma, it can be assumed that it
played a quite strong role in the cultural life of Dutch women.
According to Cieraad, the lower class tradition of sitting in the twilight with curtains drawn aside
(that originated from the tradition of monitoring the entrance and the street by women) was merged
with ideas of open-mindedness and sexual liberation in the post war era and created the showcase
mentality that can be seen in today’s Dutch cities.92
When it comes to women’s contribution to their windows today, in the article by Van Der Horst
and Messing, “It’s not Dutch to close curtains” majority of their interviewees expressed that
decoration windows and windowsills was wife’s responsibility.93
To sum up, women’s role in society is a factor that has been outlined as one of the determinants
of the development of domestic architecture. Based on the articles that we discussed above,
women’s role in the Dutch household historically has been quite significant. Dutch women have
been largely associated with the architectural borders of the house – windows being one of them.
Women were seen as guardians of domesticity which manifested itself in housewives acting like
guardians of their homes’ doorways, which often required monitoring the streets from the window.
This tradition could have been one of the reasons why Dutch houses continued to have large
windows throughout the centuries and where the tendency of leaving the curtains drawn aside
originated. It is not the only reason for this occurrence, but it is difficult to deny this connection
given the paintings, historical descriptions, and theoretical works that associate Dutch woman’s role
with the windows of her home.

90 Ibid, 36-37.
91 Ibid, 47.
92 Ibid, 50.
93 Messing, 26.

39
4.2 Family

In the preceding chapter we have spoken at length about women and their role in the household.
According to the primary sources – like paintings or historical descriptions, the woman was indeed
the main figure in the Dutch house, therefore there is not much left to say when it comes to
outlining the next element of genre de vie – family. However, we still should address the issue of men
in Dutch households.
As we already mentioned above, H. Perry Chapman emphasizes the lack of male figures in the
paintings of the 17th century depicting domestic scenes. She even asks the question whether men
were afraid of being identified with feminine household chores and tried to stay at a distance and
not interfere.94
Heidi de Mare when speaking about Cats’ writing mentions that Cats focuses on married men but
only ‘briefly’. “The male figure, however, is seen primarily as a traveler. His symbolic place has no
boundaries, since his profession can take him anywhere.”95
Based on the information mentioned above – culturally speaking – Dutch men did not play as
strong of a role in the domestic space of the household as women. Therefore it is much harder to
speak about their role as the influence of the architecture of domestic space.

94 Westermann, 139.
95 de Mare, 112.

40
4.3 Privacy

Another element of genre de vie that is mentioned by Rapoport that could affect the development of
windows is privacy. Compared to the role of women it is much more difficult to define what exactly
Dutch people’s perception of the notion of privacy was historically and how it is expressed today.
However, some authors tried to identify it based on the case studies – similar to those that we saw in
the previous chapter.
Martha Hollander, in her article Public and private life in the art of Pieter de Hooch, addresses the
relationship between private and public in domestic space in Dutch society of the 17th century by
commenting on some of the paintings by de Hooch. This is not the first time that the name of de
Hooch has come up. The reason is perhaps the vast number of domestic scenes he had depicted
that more often than not feature women.
Before addressing how privacy is presented in the paintings by de Hooch, Hollander explores the
idea of privacy and its origin in western society. Her writing gives us an interesting perspective on
the articles cited above. According to her, the division between public and private in the seventeenth
century was not as unambiguous as it is today. At the same time, she writes: “the notion of
regulating and codifying behavior, that is, distinguishing oneself from others within any number of
social environments, bespeaks as a new acknowledgment of the individual actor within and outside
the home.”96 This notion fits perfectly with the peculiar interest in the idea of boundary by writers
and artists in the 17th century.
In a nutshell, the 17th century was the period in Dutch cultural history when people just started to
acknowledge the idea of privacy, however, this change was not universal for every member of
society. Perhaps this is the reason why Stevin decided it was necessary to advise women not to stick
their heads out of the windows because from their perspective, there was nothing wrong with this
behavior and the border that Stevin and Cats were so interested in was not that obvious. According
to Hollander, this division between private and public was not fully recognized before the beginning
of the nineteenth century, and even then - only among the bourgeois.97
We also have to remember that according to Irene Cieraad, in the 19th century the size of curtains
grew in the upper class houses, a change which the author identifies as a part of a process of

96 Jong, 286.
97 Ibid, 287.

41
‘domestication of women’ of this class.98 We have also mentioned how (still according to Cieraad)
the woman’s activity of visibly monitoring the street was first associated with the lower classes and
in the 19th century was entirely condemned. Therefore, Cieraad’s writing fits perfectly with the issues
presented by Hollander.
To sum up and put cultural context (related to the role of women and privacy) behind the historical
development of Dutch windows - before the 17th century there was no solid distinction between the
private and the public spaces. The 17th century was the period when the idea of privacy first
appeared in Dutch society. Writers and artists highlighted the importance of the borders that
protected this notion. This idea spread throughout society, and women, who were spending most of
their time caring for their homes became responsible for guarding this border, the tradition of sitting
by the open window originated.
The 18th century gave us the large window openings that were popular in every social class but were
more affordable for the upper class. During the following century, however, these windows stood in
contrast to the rising idea of privacy, (also in upper class houses) thus, windows were covered and
women moved away from them. The lower classes, however, – a large part of the country’s
population, still kept the tradition alive. In the 20th century upper class houses got rid of large
curtains (which Cieraad partly connects with women’s liberation movement99) and, at the same time,
there was no longer any difference in the sizes of windows different classes could afford. Therefore,
the new type of equality originated in the Dutch society, houses had large windows and curtains
were rarely used no matter what a family’s income was.
In modern times, the issue of privacy has been frequently noted by immigrants. In the work that is
dedicated to American immigrants’ adaptation process in the Netherlands – Wooden shoes and baseball
bats, (1983) we read that one of the complaints of the Americans when it came to the housing was
that they missed having privacy in the living rooms.100
Immigrants interviewed by Messing and Van Der Horst expressed the same sentiment. One
immigrant from Surinam said he covered his curtains with plastic for keeping his privacy.101

98 Cieraad, 46.
99 Ibid, 50.
100 Baker, 121.
101 Messing, 30.

42
 Additionally, there is also another tendency in Dutch society that also shows Dutch people’s
inclination toward creating more open space. This is the tendency towards display in Dutch
households. This notion is connected to privacy and answers the question of how much of one’s
interior can someone show before it is considered going too far. This tendency, of course, is
reinforced by large windows with not much covering them and it mostly affects the rooms facing
the street, especially on a ground floor.
Simon Schama in his book that we mentioned above, addressed the habit of displaying the wealth
of the upper-class family in the interior during the golden age. He writes that “The most important,
and effective, stage on which the Dutch patrician displayed his wealth, however, was his own
home.”102. He does not mention windows, but it appears logical. If the family wanted to let others
know about their wealth and decorating the façade was not sufficient because of the extremely
narrow facades in large cities, they would want people to catch a glimpse of their interior that they
had invested in.
This type of mentality has been noticed much later, in the beginning of the 20th century by Czech
writer Karel Capek, who wrote: “Every passerby is able to judge the material status of the household
and the exemplary domestic family life by simply looking at the Dutch windows.”103
It is extremely helpful to consult the texts that address the tendency toward openness in Dutch
domestic architecture in more contemporary settings. Ritual communication in Groningen and The Hague
(1993) by Karen Wuertz is one of the few works that give us this opportunity. The author conducted
research between 1987 and 1991 in six neighborhoods of The Hague and Groningen to explore
their living environment.
According to Wuertz, this tradition of the display depends on manners in a given social class. We
saw a similar tendency in the previous paragraphs, in that the lower class showed the signs of being
used to altering the rules of privacy. However, in this case the opposite is true – as noticed by
Schama, upper-class families were more eager to show their possessions and thus would agree to
have windows uncovered during the day.
The middle class people the author interviewed had moved to the high-class neighborhoods.
They expressed the pressure to display their interior as their new, wealthy neighbors did. At the
same time they had a feeling that this new area was much more oriented towards privacy. The
author also addresses this paradox. “In the view of the middle-class residents, throwing open one’s

102 Schama, 311.
103 Capek, 75.

43
private domain by means of large, uncurtained windows which allow people to look in is a different
matter from displaying family affairs to the outside world by keeping the front door open for hours
on end.”104
It seems like each social class has different ways of opening up to the rest of the world.
Displaying the wealth in the upper class and gossiping and being involved in each other’s lives - in
the lower class. Both are related to having large windows, in the first case, they act as a shop
window, in the second case, they play the role of a monitoring tower.
Once again, we have to stress that this thesis does not offer direct causes to architectural choices
made in the Netherlands. By describing a society’s relationship with the privacy we do not presume
that it directly causes people to choose larger, uncovered windows. Our mission is to take a look at
Dutch society and outline the tendencies that could have affected domestic architecture.
That being said, the tendencies mentioned above, that although they are manifested differently in
different social classes, still indicate that Dutch people are comfortable with openness and the
feeling of transparency and this characteristic could have been among the reasons why Dutch houses
have large uncovered windows.

104 De Mare, 138.

44
4.4 Social Intercourse

As we mentioned in chapter 3.1, when it comes to another element of genre de vie, social intercourse,
Rapoport mainly focuses on public spaces and not the architecture of the house itself, because this
element addresses the interactions between members of different families. However, doors and
windows create the spaces in domestic architecture that also make this type of intercourse possible.
When it comes to addressing social interactions in Dutch society in relation to domestic
architecture, this element is intervened with other elements of genre de vie discussed above. Because
interacting with others through the openings in the domestic space can be indicating towards the
rules of privacy, at the same time considering how the relationship between women and the borders
of a household has been conceived in the Dutch culture, it also is related to the role of women.
Therefore, examples in this small chapter will not be much different from the ones discussed above.
As Martha Hollander noted, before the 17th century there was no clear division between private
and public spaces, therefore there was no clear etiquette when it came to interacting with the outside
world. For example, women shouting at one another through the windows,105and men visiting
women and talking to them, also through the windows106were considered a norm.
As the division between the public and domestic space became clearer, social rules were applied
to these types of interactions and they were condemned. However, the lower class was still in favor
of them. This tendency, in a different form but still, seemingly persisted until today. For example,
the middle-class citizens interviewed by Karen Wuertz noted, that in their old middle to the lower
class neighborhood it was pretty common to leave the doors open and to sit outside and this routine
helped the neighbors communication with each other.107
When it comes to the upper class, most of the authors who used 17th century paintings as case
studies (Heidi de Mare, Simon Schama) noticed a type of genre painting that depicted a scene placed
in the doorway of a house. These works were created in a period when the notion of privacy was
starting to become more accepted in this social class. The paintings present a difference between the
insiders and the outsiders, who are dressed differently but there is not a huge contrast between
them. The door is still open for them and there is a sense of hospitality – they still are able to freely

105 Cieraad, 36.
106 de Mare, 109.
107 Ibid, 137-138.

45
interact with each other.108This idea perhaps reinforces the thesis we mentioned in the previous
chapter – that Dutch people are more comfortable with being exposed to the outside world.
To sum up, social interactions in the Dutch society have frequently taken place around the
entrance of the house or through the windows, in the lower classes this tradition has still not faded.
Therefore this form of communication could be considered as an influence on the development of
domestic windows.

108 Schama, 570-571.

46
4.5 Some basic needs

The last element of genre de vie is basic needs. Some needs that could be met by windows are the
need for light, ventilation, view and possibly even social intercourse.
This element is perhaps the hardest to address, as we can only suppose what Dutch people’s need
for sunlight and ventilation in the interior was. Based on the fact they created windows with a
separate opening for both (monastery windows and cross windows) we can suggest that the need for
both was equally high. The further development of windows, – like adding moving glazed frames to
the lower parts of cross windows - were to provide more light and more convenient way to let the
air in.
However, the 20th century Dutch windows mostly act as “glass walls”109 as Hernan Vera calls
them. Majority of them cannot be opened therefore ventilation cannot be considered as the leading
basic need for today’s Dutch homeowners.
Social intercourse can be considered as a basic need, especially in the lower classes, where the
interaction with neighbors did and sometimes still does take place around the front of the house.
To sum up it is difficult to assume how Dutch people’s basic needs affected the shapes of
windows, however, we can suppose that it played a part initially, when monastery and cross windows
were created.

In this final chapter, we united the theory by Amos Rapoport, which offered us frameworks for
identifying the aspects of culture that could have an effect on domestic architecture with the
literature delving into the Dutch culture. As a result, we saw that ties between the two can be found
and there could be an answer to the question – what facilitated the existence of large, uncurtained
window in the Netherlands – in the culture of this country.

109 Vera, 220.

47
Conclusion

The aim of this MA thesis was to explore the possibilities of Dutch culture influencing the forms
of domestic architecture and being a partial cause for a specific type of window treatment in the
Netherlands. Our hypothesis is that the reason behind having large, uncovered windows in the cities,
even during the nighttime can be found in Dutch culture.
We delved into the frameworks proposed by Amos Rapoport that were among the very few that
outlined several elements of culture that can be manifested in domestic architecture. Later, we broke
down these elements and based on the secondary literature dedicated to the character of Dutch
culture, characterized their character in Dutch society.
Our conclusion is that specific parts of Dutch culture – like their understanding of and the need
for privacy, the historical role of women in the household, social interactions within the members of
a community are characterized in such way that could explain why large, uncovered windows
developed over time and why in today’s Dutch cities they are simply accepted by Dutch
homeowners.
Based on this work, I believe, it is clear that there are numerous possibilities for future research.
We only touched on one of the elements of Dutch architecture and the way it is and has been
treated. There is a still large gap in the literature dedicated to the cultural history and analysis of
western domestic architecture and this does not exclusively include Dutch vernacular architecture or
windows in the domestic architecture of The Netherlands.

48
Illustrations

Fig.1. House in Deventer, Sandrasteeg 8, Fig.2. Knight’s castle (grafelijk kasteel),

12th century, Unknown architect, photo The Hague, 1230 (circa), unknown
circa 1970. architect, photo circa 1970.

Fig.3. Examples of monastery (from top Fig.4. Sluis town hall, 14th century, Sluis,
to bottom, first row on the left) and cross Netherlands, photo circa 2011.
windows in the Netherlands.

49


Fig.6. Rogier van der Weyden, Annunciation, (detail) c.

Fig.5. Memling, Hans. Diptych of Maarten van
1435-1440, 86 x 93 cm, center panel of a triptych,
Nieuwenhove (Diptyque de Maarten van
Musee du Louvre, Paris.
Nieuwenhove.) right panel, 1487, oil on panel,

44.7 cm x 33.5 cm, Musea Brugge-Sint-
Janshospitaal, ID Number 0040161.

Fig.7. Vermeer, Johannes, 1632-1675, Music Fig.8. Man, Cornelis de (Dutch, 1621–1706) A
Lesson, oil on canvas, 73.3x64.5cm, Buckingham scholar in his study oil on canvas 74.2 x 60.6 cm.
Palace (London, England)

50


Fig.9 Hooch, Pieter de, A Woman Directing a Young Fig.10 Hooch, Pieter de, 1629-ca. 1684, Boy Bringing
Man with a Letter [Het aanreiken van een brief in een Pomegranates, 1663, 74 X 60 cm, The Wallace
voorhuis], 1670 oil on canvas, 68 cm x59 cm, Collection, London
Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam; Bruikleen van de gemeente
Amsterdam (legaat A. van der Hoop), Accession Number
SK-C-147

Fig.11. Hooch, Pieter de, Interior with a woman Fig.12. Jongh, Ludolf de, Woman Receiving a Letter,
reading and a child with a hoop, 1662–1666, 63.3 × 1663-65, Oil on canvas, 60 x 72 cm, Private collection
80.4 cm, Royal Pump Rooms, LEAMG : A388.1953

51

Fig.13. Examples of sash windows in the Netherlands
through 17th-19th centuries.
Fig.15. Hermanus Petrus Schouten (Dutch, 1747-
1822) View of the Herengracht in Amsterdam, towards
the Amstel, (detail) 242 x 327 mm. P. and N. de Boer
Foundation, Amsterdam, inv./cat.nr 613.
Fig.14. Illustrations from Canal Book Grachtenboek
(1768-1772) by Caspar Philips.
Fig.16. Hermanus Petrus Schouten (Dutch, 1747-
1822) Revellers visiting a house with a Twelfth Night
lantern (January) 138 x 135 mm. private collection
Heirs Johan Quirijn van Regteren Altena, The
Netherlands.
52

Fig.17. Examples of 19th century windows in the
Netherlands. 1st from the left – French window. 2nd and 3rd
– Empire windows.
Fig.19. February 1965, Amsterdam. National Archive
Collection / Archive Photo collection Van de Poll.
Catalog reference number 2.24.14.02. Inventory File
Number 254-5153
Fig.18. Postcard from the end of 19th century
beginning of the 20th century. National archive.
Collection / Archive Bunge, J.C. (BUNGE 067)
Fig.20. Amsterdam, Photographer Oorthuys, Cas
Copyright Holder © Nederlands Fotomuseum
Collection / Archive Photo collection
Rijksvoorlichtingsdienst Eigen. Catalog reference
number 2.24.10.02. Inventory File Number 133-
0592
53
Fig.21. In an apartment building on Melodielaan six Fig.22. Unknown photographer, National archive.
illuminated windows show musicians (violinist, Collection / Archive Spaarnestad
drummer, saxophonist, horn player, cellist) in the
evening.
24 October 1953. Hilversum, The Netherlands.
Photographer: Henk Blansjaar. National archive.
Collection - Spaarnestad Archive.

Fig.24. A young woman is sitting in the living room in

front of the window reading a book in a new
neighborhood in the sunlight. There are indoor plants in
the windowsill. Location unknown, 1963. Photographer
Jan van Eyk. National archive, Collection / Archive
Spaarnestad.
Fig.23. 1958. Amsterdam. Photographer: Jan van Eyk.
National archive. Collection - Archive Spaarnestad.

54

Fig.25. Christmas celebration, the Netherlands.
From the outside we look through the window:
inside, two women in traditional Zeeland attire sit
by an illuminated Christmas tree.
November 1949. Ritthem. Zeeland. Photographer
Henk Blansjaar. National Archive. Collection -
Archive Spaarnestad
Fig.27. View into the living room: the television
is on, mother is reading the newspaper, a boy is
playing in front of the window. Location
unknown, 1972. Photographer Pot. National
Archive. Collection / Archive Spaarnestad
Fig.26. Typical 70’s interior. Curtains open in the evening.
1971. Photographer Unknown. National Archive. Collection /
Archive Spaarnestad.
Fig.28. View through the window in the living room: the
television is on, mother is reading the newspaper, a boy is
playing in front of the window. Location unknown, 1972.
Photographer Pot. Collection / Archive Spaarnestad
55


Fig.29. Man looking out of the window. Spy mirror can

be seen on the right window. Fig.30. Woman looking out of the window. Spy
20 October 1940. Amsterdam, Jordaan. Photographer: Co mirror can be seen on the right side of the window.
Zeijlemaker. National Archive. Collection / Archive ANP 1973. Photographer: Gijsbert Hanekroot. National
scans (ANP 222) Archive. Collection / Archive Elsevier (ELSEVI 081)

Fig.31. A social worker visits a single woman. She looks Fig.32. While New Year's Eve is celebrated with drinks
through the windows for a moment. Place and date and donuts, a man standing outside the window looks
unknown. Photographer Ton Nelissen, National archive, inside. 1950. Photographer Unknown. National Archive.
Collection / Archive Spaarnestad.

56
Credits Illustrations

Fig.1. Jense, 133.

Fig.2. Jense, 135.

Fig.3. Downloaded 8 June 2019

https://monumentenhandboek.nl/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/1.4-Vensters.pdf

Fig.4. Downloaded 14 May 2019

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2K2l8SeOajg/TrTOLNb4tlI/AAAAAAAAf1g/BfWDF12EpeA/s1600/belfort1110-05.jpg

Fig.5. Downloaded 14 May 2019

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/Hans_Memling_045.jpg

Fig.6. Downloaded 14 May 2019

https://static.artbible.info/large/weyden_annunc.jpg

Fig.7. Downloaded 14 May 2019

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Jan_Vermeer_van_Delft_014.jpg

Fig.8. Downloaded 14 May 2019

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/A_scholar_in_his_study%2C_by_Cornelis_de_Man.jpg

Fig.9. Downloaded 14 May 2019

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/Interieur_-_Pieter_de_Hooch.png

Fig.10. Downloaded 14 May 2019

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/A_Boy_Bringing_Bread_Pieter_de_Hooch.jpg

Fig.11. Downloaded 14 May 2019

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/22/Pieter_de_Hooch_-
_Interior_with_a_woman_reading_and_and_a_child_with_a_hoop.jpg

Fig.12. Downloaded 14 May 2019

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Ludolf_de_Jongh_-_Woman_Receiving_a_Letter_-
_WGA11967.jpg

Fig.13. Downloaded 8 June 2019

https://monumentenhandboek.nl/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/1.4-Vensters.pdf

Fig.14. Downloaded 5 June 2019

https://www.onderdekeizerskroon.nl/database/pics/1/gb_k254.jpg

Fig.15. Downloaded 5 June 2019

https://images.rkd.nl/rkd/thumb/650x650/7d27338c-265d-1f2c-102b-80fa3008ed63.jpg

Fig.16. Downloaded 5 June 2019

https://images.rkd.nl/rkd/thumb/650x650/52fa638d-5748-b383-fe5c-abb41e665a4c.jpg

Fig.17. Downloaded 8 June 2019

https://monumentenhandboek.nl/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/1.4-Vensters.pdf

Fig.18. Downloaded 5 June 2019

57
http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_1156/SFA004003691.jpg

Fig.19. Downloaded 8 June 2019

https://www.nationaalarchief.nl/en/research/photo-collection/detail?limitstart=126&q_searchfield=grachtenpanden

Fig.20. Downloaded 8 June 2019

https://www.nationaalarchief.nl/en/research/photo-
collection/detail?limitstart=8&q_searchfield=grachtenpanden%20raam

Fig.21. Downloaded 27 May 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_694/SFA002012058.jpg

Fig.22. Downloaded 5 June 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_1135/SFA008010277.jpg

Fig.23. Downloaded 27 May 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_1162/SFA002023433.jpg

Fig.24. Downloaded 5 June 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_1251/SFA002025664.jpg

Fig.25. Downloaded 5 June 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_433/SFA007002205.jpg

Fig.26. Downloaded 5 June 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_229/SFA003002737.jpg

Fig.27. Downloaded 5 June 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_1206/SFA002024871.jpg

Fig.28. Downloaded 5 June 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_1206/SFA002024872.jpg

Fig.29. Downloaded 27 May 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/sfa/01/SFA_154/SFA222001540.jpg

Fig.30. Downloaded 27 May 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_1006/SFA002018869.jpg

Fig.31. Downloaded 5 June 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_1214/SFA003016221.jpg

Fig.32. Downloaded 5 June 2019

http://neon.pictura-hosting.nl/naa/naa_mrx_bld/thumbs/500x500/upload/upload_443/SFA007002351.jpg

58
Bibliography

Altman, Irwin, Amos Rapoport, and Joachim F. Wohlwill. Environment and culture. New York: Plenum Press,
1980.

Asher, Catherine B. "Sub-Imperial Palaces: Power and Authority in Mughal India" in Ars Orientalis. 23 (1993) 281-
302.

Baker, Victoria J. Wooden shoes and baseball bats: a study of sociocultural integration of Americans in The Hague. Leiden:
Institute of Cultural and Social Studies, Leiden University. 1983.

Berens, Hetty. Inrichten. Zomeruniversiteit Vrouwenstudies 1987. Groningen: Zomeruniversiteit Vrouwenstudies.

1987.

Bradley, Richard. Ritual and domestic life in prehistoric Europe. London: Routledge. 2005.

Britton, John, John Le Keux, and George Godwin. A dictionary of the architecture and archaeology of the middle ages:
including words used by ancient and modern authors in treating of architectural and other antiquities ... also, biographical
notices of ancient architects. London: Longman, Orme, Brown, Green, and Longmans. 1838.

Burke, Gerald Louis, and William Holford. The Making of Dutch Towns: A Study in Urban Development from the
Tenth to the Seventeenth Centuries. London: Cleaver-Hume Press, 1956.

Cieraad, Irene (ed.) At Home: An Anthropology of Domestic Space. Syracuse University Press, 2006.

Čapek, Karel. Over Holland. Amsterdam: Van Holkema En Warendorf, 1933.

Carrington, R. C. “The Ancient Italian Town-House.” Antiquity 7, no. 26 (1933): 133–52.

doi:10.1017/S0003598X00007894.

Curl, James Stevens. A dictionary of architecture. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2000.

Davies, Norman de Garis, T.Eric Peet, and Harry Burton. The tomb of the vizier Ramose. London: The Egypt
Exploration Society. 1941.

Hall, Edward T. Beyond Culture. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1976.

Forbes, R.J. Studies in Ancient Technology. 2nd Rev. ed. Leiden: Brill, 1964.

Francaviglia, Richard V. "Book Review: House Form and Culture". Geographical Review. 59, 4 (1969): 632-633.

Grinberg, Donald I. Housing in The Netherlands 1900-1940. Delft: Delft University Press, 1977.

Janse, H. Vensters. Nijmegen: Thieme, 1971.

Jong, Jan De. Wooncultuur in De Nederlanden = The Art of Home in the Netherlands : 1500-1800. Nederlandsch
Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek ; Dl. 51 (2000). Zwolle: Waanders, 2001.

Kemp, Barry J. "The Window of Appearance at El-Amarna, and the Basic Structure of This City." The Journal of
Egyptian Archaeology 62 (1976): 81-99.

59
Kroeber, Alfred L., Clyde Kluckhohn, Alfred G. Meyer, and Wayne Untereiner. Culture: a critical review of concepts
and definitions. 1952.

Kuyper, W. Dutch Classicist Architecture : A Survey of Dutch Architecture, Gardens and Anglo-Dutch Architectural
Relations from 1625 to 1700. Delft: Delft University Press, 1980.

Lawrence, Denise, and Setha Low. "The Built Environment and Spatial Form." Annual Review of Anthropology
19 (1990): 453-505.

Le Corbusier, Paul Stirton, and Tim Benton. "Glass, the Fundamental Material of Modern Architecture". West
86th: A Journal of Decorative Arts, Design History, and Material Culture. 19, 2 (2012): 282-308.

Le Corbusier. Precisions on the present state of architecture and city planning: with an American prologue, a Brazilian
corollary, followed by the temperature of Paris and the atmosphere of Moscow. Cambridge (Mass.): Massachusetts
Institute of Technology Press. 1991.

Leatherbarrow, David, and Mohsen Mostafavi. Surface Architecture. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2002.

Lozar, Charles. "Book Review: House Form and Culture". Journal of Aesthetic Education. 4 (1970): 142-143.

Mare, Heidi de, Anna Vos. (eds.) Urban rituals in Italy and the Netherlands: historical contrasts in the use of public space,
architecture and the urban environment. Assen: Van Gorcum. 1993.

McKay, Alexander Gordon. Houses, villas and palaces in the Roman world. London: Thames and Hudson. 1975.

Rapoport, Amos. House Form and Culture. Foundations of Cultural Geography Series. Englewood Cliffs, NJ [etc.]:
Prentice-Hall, 1969.

Robilant, Manfredo di, Niklas Maak, Rem Koolhaas, and Irma Boom. Window. Elements. a Series of 15 Books
Accompanying the Exhibition Elements of Architecture at the 2014 Venice Architecture Biennale. 2014.

Rybczynski, Witold. Home : A Short History of an Idea. London [etc.]: Heinemann, 1988.

Schama, Simon. The Embarrassment of Riches: An Interpretation of Dutch Culture in the Golden Age. London [etc.]:
Collins, 1987.

Scott, George Gilbert. Remarks on secular & domestic architecture, present & future. London: J. Murray. 1857.

Spies, Paul, and Annemieke van Oord - de Pee. Het grachtenboek [1]. Den Haag: SDU Uitg. Koninginnegracht.
1991.

Tutton, Michael, Elizabeth Hirst, and Jill Pearce. Windows: history, repair, and conservation. Shaftesbury: Donhead
Pub. 2007.

Van Der Horst, Hilje, and Jantine Messing. ""It's Not Dutch to Close The Curtains: Visual Struggles on The
Threshold Between Public & Private in a Multi-Ethnic Dutch Neighborhood." Home Cultures 3, no. 1 (2006): 21-
37.

Velo-Gala A, and Garriguet Mata J.A. 2017. "Roman window glass: An approach to its study through
iconography". Lucentum. 36 (2017): 159-176.

Vera, Hernan. "On Dutch Windows." Qualitative Sociology 12, no. 2 (1989): 215-34.

60
Walter Smith, “Window” in Turner, Jane. The Dictionary of Art. 33, New York: Grove, 1996.

Westermann, Mariet. 2001. Art & Home: Dutch interiors in the age of Rembrandt. Waanders Publishers.

Yerbury, Francis Rowland, D. F. Slothouwer, and E. R. Jarrett. Old domestic architecture of Holland. London:
Architectural Press. 1924.

Zantkuijl, H. J. Bouwen in Amsterdam: het woonhuis in de stad. Amsterdam: Vereniging Vrienden van de
Amsterdamse Binnenstad u.a. 1993.

61