# From QR code to toppling. Debating the symbols of a controversial past in the public space of Brussels

## BSI synopsis

> Du QR code au déboulonnage. La mise en débat des symboles d'un passé contesté dans l'espace public bruxellois

> Van QR-code tot verwijdering. Debat over de symbolen van een omstreden verleden in de Brusselse openbare ruimte

Joost Vaesen, Serge Jaumain, Iadine Degryse, Dirk Jacobs and Benjamin Wayens

Translator: Jane Corrigan

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

OpenEdition
Journals

**Electronic version**

URL: https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/7968

DOI: 10.4000/12lwu

ISSN: 2031-0293

**This article is a translation of:**

Du QR code au déboulonnage. La mise en débat des symboles d'un passé contesté dans l'espace public bruxellois - URL : https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/7952 [fr]

**Other translation(s):**

Van QR-code tot verwijdering. Debat over de symbolen van een omstreden verleden in de Brusselse openbare ruimte - URL : https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/7980 [nl]

**Publisher**

Université libre de Bruxelles - ULB

**Electronic reference**

Joost Vaesen, Serge Jaumain, Iadine Degryse, Dirk Jacobs and Benjamin Wayens, "From QR code to toppling. Debating the symbols of a controversial past in the public space of Brussels", *Brussels Studies* [Online], Synopses, no 197, Online since 03 November 2024, connection on 22 November 2024. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/brussels/7968; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/12lwu

This text was automatically generated on November 7, 2024.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>
# From QR code to toppling. Debating the symbols of a controversial past in the public space of Brussels

## BSI synopsis

Du QR code au déboulonnage. La mise en débat des symboles d'un passé contesté dans l'espace public bruxellois

Van QR-code tot verwijdering. Debat over de symbolen van een omstreden verleden in de Brusselse openbare ruimte

Joost Vaesen, Serge Jaumain, Iadine Degryse, Dirk Jacobs and Benjamin Wayens

Translation : Jane Corrigan

## 1. The weight of memorial markers in the public space

"The walls of Brussels breathe and speak, but do not lie. For they are formed by layers of imbricated strata where all epochs survive and pile up..." Quoted in [De Vet, ed.: 2018, 114].

<footnote n="1">1 References to history and memory are omnipresent in our daily lives. Every day, we see "memorial markers": the "elements which bear witness to the past of a group or a community, and which help to organise the collective memory of a society"¹. While they generally take the form of objects placed in public spaces for all to see, they are also found in toponymy, in semi-public and private spaces such as museums, cultural and scientific institutions, archives, universities, businesses, churches, municipal, regional and federal institutions, private homes, etc. Intangible memorial markers also come into play, sometimes unconsciously, during commemorations and folklore events. These markers, which often had great importance at the time of their inauguration, subsequently blend into the landscape to such an extent that most people in the public</footnote>
space forget their significance. Yet the decision to commission, finance and install a memorial marker is never a trivial one.

2 For French philosopher and sociologist Maurice Halbwachs [quoted in Jalabert, 2022: 9], “space is a bearer of memory”. These memorial markers are symbols which refer to history and memory, to the point of becoming “constitutive referents of the identity of a group of individuals” [Jalabert, 2022: 11]. Like museums, archives and commemorations, statues are part of the memorial infrastructures “... [through which] people express their memories, experiences, views and knowledge” of people. As such, they enable us to understand “how individuals, communities and institutions deal with the past” and attribute meaning to it [Grever, 2023: 4,5]. It is therefore not surprising for them to be in the news when people feel excluded from certain messages or, worse, feel offended by them.

3 In debates on controversial memorial markers, the relationship between history (a problematic and incomplete reconstruction of the past) and memory (which is alive, evolving and unaware of its successive distortions) is a crucial point [Nora, 1984]. History and memory are not necessarily in opposition [Gentry and Smith, 2019] and may even enrich each other, as collective memory allows a renewal of historiography [Joutard, 2015]. Tensions arise when history is “warm” [Wansink et al., 2018], i.e. when there is a significant emotional charge surrounding an event (usually traumatic), which continues to influence later generations to the point of arousing strong moral reactions related to a collective or intra-family identity [Cordonnier et al., 2022]. This collective identity is shaped by the collective memory of certain events and has an impact on the way certain social groups are represented [Liu and Hilton, 2005].

4 The construction of identities relies on the events, places and people [Liu and Hilton, 2005] behind the many founding and dominant narratives (“master narratives”) which give meaning to a societal vision [Heller, 2006; Carretero, 2018]. Especially in the second half of the 19th century, these narratives contributed to the creation or reinforcement of national identities [Reid, 2019] and stimulated social cohesion by creating “imagined communities” [Anderson, 1983]. These were more or less covert attempts to reinforce ordinary nationalism [Billig, 1996] or even policies aimed explicitly at imposing historical narratives intended to unite the population. By simple deduction, this logic of inclusion has also led to the exclusion of certain social groups [Psaltis et al., 2017].

5 Public space has thus become a place of confrontation driven by memorial markers which reflect political choices [Dobruszkes, 2010; Tartakowski, 2022] and are recognised as “belonging” to certain population groups [Papen, 2012]. Throughout the world, they are tangible, functional and artistic instruments conveying a message [Joutard, 2015], which is generally one-sided and rooted in a vision of the world constructed by the politically dominant group [Gensburger and Wustenberg, 2023; Kolvraa and Knudsen, 2020].

6 This synopsis will examine the “controversial memorial markers” in Brussels: symbols which – at the time of their inauguration – conveyed political, ideological or moral values which were less and less widely shared over time, to the point of giving rise to an increasing number of complaints and protests [KNAW, 2023].

7 The questioning of memorial markers is not a recent phenomenon [Rigney, 2022]. Statues and monuments have been destroyed or relocated throughout history. Around the world, political decision-makers have often modified the memorial landscape of
their countries by erasing certain historical references, particularly during regime changes [Rigney, 2022; Gensburger and Wüstenberg, 2023]. In Belgium, as in many other countries, recent decades have been characterised by the vigorous protesting of memorial markers accused of conveying racist, colonialist or sexist ideas. In this process, civil society has played a key role, increasing the number of transnational protests [Rigney, 2022: 10].

8 Following a presentation of the characteristics of the controversial memorial landscape in Brussels, this synopsis summarises the most recent debates and, above all, the responses to them. This approach is all the more relevant given that Brussels – a city-region which centralises a number of national and international functions – has seen a deep transformation of the profile of its population since the birth of the Belgian state. Internal and external migratory movements, reinforced by the establishment of European and international institutions, have led to nearly 180 nationalities living side by side in Brussels today. This evolution has of course contributed to diversifying the perception of memorial markers in the urban landscape since the 19th century and has obliged public authorities to respond to these protests.

9 In order to analyse these phenomena, we compiled an inventory of all the statues in the public space of the pentagon area (excluding parks and cemeteries)², as well as a toponymic index of all roads in the Brussels-Capital Region³. Among these statues and place names, the identification of controversial symbols and the strategies put in place to respond to protests were the result of an analysis of debates in the Brussels Parliament (in particular during the Regional Development Committee meeting of 13 July 2020 on the traces of a colonial past), eleven semi-structured interviews conducted as part of research on former Schaerbeek mayor Roger Nols [Jaumain and Vaesen, 2022], two round-table discussions organised as part of a seminar on controversial symbols in the public space (attended by 23 participants from universities, university research centres, archive centres and decolonialisation activist organisations)⁴, as well as three meetings of a working group tasked with considering the future of the bust of Roger Nols (bringing together local elected officials, citizens, researchers, civil servants and representatives of civil society) [Degryse et al., 2022]. An inductive thematic analysis [Bryman, 2016] of this body of information revealed six intervention strategies in the face of controversial symbols.

10 Below, we examine some of the characteristics of the Brussels memorial landscape and its evolution in the public space, as well as the funding for memorial markers and their uses (point 2). We will then present a typology of the strategies used to respond to protests (point 3), which we will then illustrate with a few examples from Brussels, presenting the main arguments from these debates (point 4).

## 2. Characteristics of the public memorial landscape in Brussels

11 In its report on controversial monuments, the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences recommends that municipal officials should acquire strategic knowledge of all monuments and statues in their territory, regardless of whether there is controversy surrounding them, and even carry out a genuine study of the “memorial landscape” [KNAW, 2023]. Of course, this recommendation also applies to Brussels: in order to fully
understand the debates, we first need to understand the characteristics of the public
memorial landscape in Brussels.

2.1. The 19th century and “statuomania”

12 Since the independence of Belgium in 1830, local and national stakeholders have been setting up memorial markers in Brussels. References to the Belgian Revolution in the public space illustrate the determination of the young nation state to assert itself against foreign powers [Fransen, 2005]. In the process, certain references to William of Orange were removed. For example, in 1831, Boulevard du Prince became Boulevard du Régent, in honour of the first regent of the new Belgian state, Baron Érasme-Louis Surlet de Chokier (1769-1839)⁵. A few decades later, the capital of the small kingdom became closely associated with the colonial undertaking of King Leopold II. This evolution is reflected in the public space: many prestigious buildings and parks were funded with the money generated by the exploitation of Congo, and numerous statues (see Figure 1) were commissioned by the political authorities to “adorn” the public space, in reality to affirm the power of the country and its capital on the international scene. This movement, referred to as “statuomania” [Agulhon, 1978; De Spiegeleer, 2020; Clerbois, 2022], led to statues being placed at the heart of carefully chosen crossroads, squares and parks, contributing to the development of memorial sites which are still highly visible today [Vannieuwenhuyse, 2018; Witte, 2012; Min, 2016; Loir, 2022].

13 Representations of the official inaugurations of these monuments convey the image of a strongly united country, while at the same time casting a veil over the controversies surrounding some of them. Thus, for example, the liberals in power in Brussels throughout the 19th century were careful to symbolise their power by erecting statues paying tribute to liberal ideology, figures and key concepts which were important to them, such as liberty or the autonomy of cities [Röttger, 2006: 27]. The full-length statue of Pierre-Théodore Verhaegen (1796-1862) in front of Palais Granvelle - then home to Université libre de Bruxelles (which he co-founded) - is a good example (today it stands on the Solbosch campus along Avenue Franklin Roosevelt), as are those of Charles Rogier, Auguste Orts, Jules Anspach, Nicolas-Jean Rouppe, Charles de Brouckère and Walthère Frère-Orban. In so doing, the liberals broke with the tradition of depicting religious or royal subjects in the public space. Their choices caused discontent on the benches of the Catholic party, which was a minority in Brussels and therefore unable to celebrate its own emblematic representatives in the same way [De Spiegeleer, 2019]. These examples illustrate the significance of political power in decisions to place statues in urban spaces.
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Figure 1. Themed neighbourhood around Place de la Liberté</figcaption></figure>

© Authors and Q. Rombaux

## 2.2. Wars and decolonisation

14 The end of World War I marked the first major turning point in the memorial landscape of Brussels. As the only western capital to have been occupied by the Germans, Brussels was deeply marked by the war and decided to erase direct or indirect references to the former enemy as quickly as possible, in favour of war heroes and heroines such as Albert I, Edith Cavell and Gabrielle Petit [van Ypersele et al., 2014; de Schaepdrijver 2014; Jaumain et al., 2016].

15 Urban growth also made it possible to create new memorial markers through street names: new streets in rapidly growing municipalities such as Auderghem and Ganshoren, for example, were named after local soldiers who had died in battle [Kesteloot, 2024]. The end of World War II saw the renaming of several major local roads in honour of the victors, including Avenue de Stalingrad, Franklin Roosevelt, Général De Gaulle and Winston Churchill, as well as Square Montgomery.
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Figure 2. Road sign for Avenue de Stalingrad.</figcaption></figure>

© Iadine Degryse, 20 April 2023

16 At the same time, the number of new statues (and fountains) inaugurated in Brussels continued to grow until the 21st century, as shown in Figure 3.
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Figure 3. Number of statues and fountains installed in the pentagon area each year</figcaption></figure>

These figures do not include statues erected in parks and cemeteries, or fountains which have been removed.

Sources: Inventaire du patrimoine architectural de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale and "Brussels remembers": https://www.brusselsremembers.com/ Accessed on April 2021

17 Despite some occasional criticism, it was not until the beginning of the 21st century that the controversy surrounding memorial markers took on an unprecedented scale, centred on references to Belgian colonisation [Stanard, 2011 and 2019; Goddeeris, 2015]. The movement first came to public attention in Ostend in 2004, when activists from the De Stoeten Ostendoare group carried out an act on a monument in honour of the colonial policies of Leopold II: the hand of a Congolese figure was severed in reference to the policy of severed hands. In 2008, the equestrian statue of Leopold II in Place du Trône was painted red by artist and activist Théophile de Giraud. The act was carried out in front of the media, giving it an unprecedented impact. The controversy spread quickly to other representations linked to the colonial period: busts of King Baudouin and General Storms, the monument to Belgian pioneers in Congo, the arches of the Cinquantenaire, and various street names and monuments were at the heart of the protests [Jacobs, 2018; Goddeeris et al., 2020; Lewis, 2022; Guillaume, 2022; Abrassart et al., 2022]."

18 In fact, these criticisms were part of a transnational movement of demands for social justice, denouncing racism as well as police violence [McGonigle Leyh, 2020: 240]. Soon afterwards, feminist associations began to denounce the invisibilisation of women and gender minorities in monuments and place names, coupled with the continued use of symbols of submission, illustrated by the posture or clothing of the few women represented in public space [Gubin, 2006; Sterckx, 2009; Ouali, 2015 and 2021].

19 Some people expressed indifference with respect to these protests, others a lack of understanding, or even outright hostility, not hesitating to remove the graffiti from the statues. These movements generated heated debates, as public authorities are
sometimes forced to make quick decisions (e.g. with respect to certain types of damage)
without taking the time to reflect and consult, as we shall see later.

2.3. Ownership, funding and maintenance of memorial markers

20 In the 19th century, most of the statues erected in Brussels were commissioned and funded by the public authorities (national, provincial or municipal). Some, however, were the result of (lengthy) public subscriptions, particularly after World War I [de Schaepdrijver, 2014].

21 The public space in Brussels is also dotted with monuments donated by foreign nations. In 1924, British sculptor Georges Frampton presented the City of Brussels with a copy of his statue of Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens in London, to celebrate the friendship between the children of the two countries after the hardships and suffering endured during World War I. This statue can still be seen today in Parc d'Egmont. In the second half of the 20th century, the gradual establishment of European institutions in Brussels also left its mark in public spaces. A copy of the statue of Don Quixote in Madrid donated by Spain in 1989 was erected in Place d'Espagne. A few years later, the city of Budapest donated a statue of Hungarian composer Béla Viktor János Bartók (1881-1945), which was placed opposite Don Quixote. In 2009, remnants of the Berlin Wall were erected in the shadow of the European Parliament.

22 In addition to European countries, other countries have also sought to bring their symbols to Brussels. In 1975, Argentina presented Woluwe-Saint-Pierre with a copy of the statue erected in Buenos Aires of José de San Martín, the general who fought for the independence of Argentina, Chile and Peru. In 1992, a statue of Simon Bolivar, liberator and creator of Greater Colombia, was erected in Avenue Franklin Roosevelt at Avenue du Venezuela, and in 2011, a bust of Bolivar was donated to Belgium to mark the bicentenary of the country's independence. It was placed in the boulevard bearing his name near Gare du Nord. In 2014, the Comité Allende 40 donated a bust of Salvador Allende to Université libre de Bruxelles to commemorate the fortieth anniversary of the assassination of the former Chilean president. It was placed in Avenue Paul Héger.

23 Several private initiatives have also taken place, such as the memorial to the victims of the Armenian genocide erected in Place Henri Michaux in 1997 by the Comité des Arméniens de Belgique. Three red crescents and an insult were spray painted on the stone cross (an Armenian Khatchkar) on 24 April 2022, the day after the commemoration of the genocide⁶.

24 Another example of a private initiative – not linked to a particular national group – is the memorial for Stéphanie Verbraekel, who was run over by a speeding motorist in Schaerbeek on 7 November 2017. The memorial was co-funded by the victim's family, private citizens and Bruxelles Mobilité⁷.
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>Figure 4. Memorial to Stéphanie Verbrakel, Schaerbeek</figcaption></figure>

© Iadine Degryse, 26 June 2024

25 Knowing who funded, donated and inaugurated a memorial marker helps us to better understand the reasons behind its presence in public space, and determines ownership and responsibility for the upkeep of the object. In the event of a dispute, the owners and those responsible for the object are directly involved. If ownership is shared or poorly defined, the response in the event of a dispute is all the more complex. A well-known example is the equestrian statue of Leopold II in Place du Trône in Brussels. Created following a public subscription and inaugurated in 1926, the pedestal now belongs to the City of Brussels, while the equestrian statue is the property of the Régie fédérale des bâtiments. Therefore, if anything happens to this memorial marker – which is often the focus of protests – there needs to be cooperation between these two levels of power.

26 Furthermore, in addition to the ownership of the work, copyright must also be taken into account. If an original work of art is less than 70 years old, copyright may apply, subjecting any initiative to modify it to the agreement of the author, or his or her descendants or legal successors [Abrassart et al., 2022].

## 2.4. Uses and new uses

27 Over time, memorial markers which are well established in the public space can be taken over by different social groups which were not behind their inauguration, and their original meaning can change. Sometimes, political and institutional stakeholders use these markers to serve their own ends, as was the case with the Battle of the Golden Spurs in 1302, which was initially used to build the Belgian identity, and later reinterpreted by Flemish nationalists [Fransen, 2005; Witte, 2016]. The
commemorations organised by the Flemish (11 July) and French (27 September) Communities in Brussels also illustrate this desire to assert their identities beyond the festivities celebrating the Belgian state (21 July).

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>Figure 5. Avenue des Éperons d'Or</figcaption></figure>

Avenue des Éperons d'Or was created in Ixelles in 1873. Avenue des Klauwaerts – named after the Count of Flanders' supporters who fought in the Battle of the Golden Spurs in 1302 – is an extension of this avenue.

© Iadine Degryse, 17 September 2023

28 This phenomenon is not limited to the public authorities. The monument in honour of the colonial Force Publique, erected in Avenue Huart-Hamoir by the Union Royale des Fraternelles Coloniales (Urfracol) in 1970, was taken over in 2010 by the decolonial association Bakushinta to commemorate Congolese participation in the World Wars, which, according to them, had been ignored in traditional November 11th ceremonies.

29 The same commemorative object can therefore be used to convey different messages by different groups. Such is the case of the statue of Gabrielle Petit, which was erected in Place Saint-Jean in 1923 and used both for patriotic commemorations and to evoke the role of women during World War I [de Schaepdrijver, 2014].
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>Figure 6. Statue of Gabrielle Petit, Brussels, decorated with flowers to mark the 108th anniversary of her death on 1 April 1916</figcaption></figure>

© Iadine Degryse, 13 April 2024

## 3. Typology of intervention strategies for controversial memorial markers

30 During a debate in the Brussels Parliament on 13 July 2020, Secretary of State Pascal Smet referred to two “schools of thought” regarding the future of controversial statues: “The first is in favour of removing statues which glorify a past which should not be glorified. The second is in favour of saving the statues, provided they are contextualised and explained. There are variations in both schools of thought, and the people of Brussels have already made several suggestions” [Commission du développement territorial - Session 2019-2020: 84].

31 In fact, numerous studies show that the protests against statues (as well as against symbols, memorial sites and intangible commemorations) go beyond this apparent binary opposition. Several works have presented an initial typology of monument protests [KNAW, 2023], and even a typology of “de-commemoration” [Gensburger and Wüstenberg, 2023]. Several studies have already put forward proposals to support decision-makers in managing these protests, mainly regarding colonial traces in the Flemish Region [de Reu et al., 2020] and in the Brussels Region [Abrassart et al., 2022].

32 A careful observation of the various strategies developed in Brussels between 2020 and 2024 has enabled us to propose a new typology based on a double axis: the visibilisation of the protest (or its invisibilisation), and the place of intervention (on the memorial marker, in the immediate vicinity or in a remote location). We were thus able to
identify and place six strategies on these axes in order to answer a very simple question: how to react to protest regarding a memorial marker?

A. Defending the status quo: not responding to the protests. The object is left as is in the public space;

B. Something is added directly to the controversial object (an explanatory plaque, a QR code, a sheet covering the object, etc.);

C. Something is added indirectly in response to the controversial object: a different perspective from that conveyed by the object is presented in another place (another statue, another bust, a street name located in another part of the city, etc.) or in virtual space (a digital device, an online article or a website);

D. Disapproval of the object takes place directly by transforming it visually (changing its colour, amputating it, moving it on its pedestal or to another location, etc.) so as to draw attention to it;

E. Disapproval of the object takes place indirectly, i.e. in another space (physical or virtual) which corresponds with the controversial object. This fifth strategy is very similar to the third strategy (indirect addition), but differs in that it makes a direct criticism, whereas indirect addition simply proposes another perspective;

F. Remove the controversial object from the public space. Depending on the circumstances, the object may be destroyed or moved out of the public space (to a shed, an archive, a museum, etc.).

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>Figure 7. Typology of six intervention strategies for controversial memorial markers</figcaption></figure>

© Authors and Q. Rombaux

33

This typology proposes a novel and more complex approach than existing typologies, by defining two criteria in the analysis of reactions to a controversial memorial marker (the place of intervention and the degree of visibility of the protest). It can support
decision-makers, administrations, activists and users of public space in general in their (re)actions regarding a memorial marker which is the object of protests by activists or by decision-makers themselves. (Demands for) adaptations to the symbolic memorial landscape are not only the work of activists, but may also be driven by decision-makers seeking to reflect a change of regime (e.g. after the Liberation of 1945) or a societal transformation in the public space (e.g. to give women greater visibility), and may even be used as a “smokescreen” (in an attempt to close a debate quickly and avoid in-depth dialogue) [Gensburger and Wüstenberg, 2023].

34

Some of the reactions presented in this typology have been adopted by both decision-makers and activists, sometimes in reaction to each other or in a different timeline. The actions of activists and decision-makers can therefore not be divided in a simple or clear-cut manner. There are several examples which go beyond this opposition, revealing differences between state representatives, and even between activists themselves⁸.

35

Furthermore, many users of the public space, who are neither activists nor decision-makers, express their views regarding these protests. Finally, it should be added that these different strategies are not exclusive; they can be combined, successively or simultaneously.

36

In order to illustrate and better understand these six strategies, we present a few examples of the reactions of activists, associations, citizens, administrations and political decision-makers in Brussels to controversial symbols.

## 4. Cases and controversies in Brussels illustrating the typology of interventions

37

In order to study the arguments put forward by activists, decision-makers and users of the public space regarding each of these strategies, we drew on the cases encountered during the inductive process which led to the development of this typology. It is therefore not an exhaustive list of the protests in Brussels, but a body of arguments gathered through an analysis of parliamentary debates⁹ and during interviews and meetings of the Roger Nols working group [Jaumain and Vaesen, 2022; Degryse et al., 2022]. These arguments were recorded, transcribed, classified and analysed according to the related strategy. The resulting typology was then discussed at a seminar attended by researchers, politicians, government officials and members of civil society¹⁰. A complementary literature search was conducted in the media in order to illustrate each of the six strategies with concrete examples.

### 4.1. Strategy A: Defend the status quo

38

When faced with a controversial memorial marker, a first strategy consists in defending the status quo, i.e. maintaining the marker in its original state. This could mean cleaning it or repairing it after damage, or even protecting it with fencing, anti-graffiti varnish, glass, etc. The equestrian statue of Leopold II in Place du Trône is a good example. The many protests against it have had little impact on political decision-makers (the City of Brussels and the federal government), as any signs of protest have been removed each time. The Brussels-Capital Region did put a working group in
charge of reflecting on colonial traces, but the group's recommendations for the future
of the statue (including melting it and using the melted material to create a memorial
to the victims of colonisation [Abrassart et al., 2022]) did not lead to opening a dialogue.

Defending the status quo might also consist in protecting the statue. The far-right
group “Nation” defended this strategy when it called for the statue to be “guarded” on
20 June and 28 November 2020, to prevent any unauthorised interventions¹¹. More
broadly, citizens have also signed petitions to keep the statues of Leopold II¹², or have
gathered to clean the graffiti from the busts of Leopold II in the gardens of the Royal
Museum for Central Africa (June 2020) and the bust of General Storms in Square de
Meus (September 2021).

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>Figure 8. Equestrian statue of Leopold II, Place du Trône (Brussels)</figcaption></figure>

© Iadine Degryse, 2 July 2020

There are four recurring arguments in our body of arguments which express explicit
support for the status quo strategy.

1. Defending the status quo avoids presentism, i.e. an approach to history which does not consider events from a distance or in context [Goegebeur and Van Nieuwenhuyse, 2010]. Defending the status quo would avoid instrumentalising the past for political ends;

2. Defending the status quo helps to avoid reviving the violence and reopening old wounds. In the discussions about what to do with the bust of Roger Nols¹³, this argument was based on the assumption that the former mayor had been forgotten. Interfering in any way with the bust would draw attention to him, at the risk of reviving the racist and xenophobic positions he defended;

3. A third argument in favour of this strategy condemns the temptation to use it as a "scapegoat". By focusing criticism on a single individual (Roger Nols, Leopold II, etc.), we are
ignoring the mechanisms which enabled the individual to establish his policies: electoral, political, religious and economic support¹⁴;

4. A final argument points out that there are other priorities for helping populations which have suffered due to the people whose statues are now the subject of controversy. On the topic of the equestrian statue of Leopold II in Place du Trône, historian Mathieu Zana Etambala declared: "Drugs and unemployment among young Africans in Belgium are more pressing concerns than the question of whether or not to remove the statue of the rubber magnate"¹⁵.

41 Conversely, several arguments against this strategy were raised in our workshops and in the literature. Some researchers argue that establishing a hierarchy of what is and is not a priority may lead to the avoidance of certain sensitive subjects, like teachers who are reluctant to discuss the contemporary impact of historical processes such as colonisation [Savenije and Goldberg, 2019].

42 Thus, not talking about a painful or sensitive episode in history on the grounds that there are other priorities risks generating a taboo which will very soon be criticised [Savenije and Goldberg, 2019].

43 Some also believe that defending the status quo (by cleaning and repairing the controversial memorial marker) means ignoring the protests of a part of the population which often already feels excluded from the founding narratives [Carretero, 2018, see above].

44 On the other hand, defending the status quo conceals the wounds of the past, which are often still alive (see “warm” history above). By leaving controversial figures on their pedestals, we fail to face up to the racist or discriminatory acts which have hurt part of the population, generating forms of “collective oblivion” [Cordonnier et al., 2022].

45 Finally, defending the status quo would allow the glorification of a person or a historical perspective to continue¹⁶. The strategy of maintaining the status quo is therefore not neutral, as the legitimacy and initial principles which led to the establishment of the symbol remain intact, while the message is challenged and debated.

46 This glorification is also influenced by spatial layout (location, visibility, accessibility) and by the materiality of the object (size of the object, materials used, etc.), as illustrated by the equestrian statue of Leopold II in Place du Trône, a place of passage and power, which is regularly spray painted, unlike the statue of Leopold II in Ixelles (Square du Jardin du Roi) in a less visible location, which has been spray painted twice since 2020.

## 4.2. Strategy B: Direct addition

47 This strategy consists in pleading for the addition of information to a controversial memorial marker. This can take place in a number of ways.

48 For example, the owners of the object or those responsible for it could add an explanatory plaque, although this format has some limitations (it must be brief and, in Brussels, written in at least two languages). They could also add a QR code with a link to a website, which is a simple and more flexible option. This was the solution chosen by the Parcours BD of the City of Brussels, which was accused of sexism in 2021 by the group Noms Peut-Être.
49

A new object could also be added (a second street name plate, for example) or information could be added directly on the object (such as the addition of a female first name for two streets in Ixelles, Rue Maria Malibran and Rue Pierre et Marie Curie).

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>Figure 9. Inauguration of Élodie Shanta's fresco "Après-midi place Bockstael"</figcaption></figure>

Inauguration during which alderman Arnaud Pinxteren (right) presented his strategy for recontextualising the Parcours BD frescoes.

© Iadine Degryse, 11 September 2020
<figure><img src="image_12.png" /><figcaption>Figure 10. Parcours "Rues Elles" in Ganshoren</figcaption></figure>

Every year since 2021, the municipality has affixed a dozen symbolic plaques bearing the names of women.

© Iadine Degryse, 11 October 2022

50

Finally, in some cases, those responsible for the controversial object have also opted for a direct addition in the form of a performance. This is what the Brussels Region did with the Monument aux pionniers du Congo in the Parc du Cinquantenaire in March 2024:
<figure><img src="image_13.png" /><figcaption>Figure 11. Photo of the work of art “The grand opening”, created by architects from the firm Traumnovelle, commissioned by the Brussels Region (Urban)</figcaption></figure>

https://collections.heritage.brussels/fr/objects/98614 © urban.brussels, 2024

51 While the above examples are supported by the public authorities, this strategy is also promoted by activists and artists who ask for an explanatory plaque to be added to a controversial memorial marker, or even in addition to its removal. This was observed, for example, with the bust of Leopold II in Parc Duden. The graffiti on the pedestal demanded a text about the Congo Free State and the horrors which had taken place there.¹⁷ In April 2024, artist Pixie Pravda affixed a mirror to the pedestal of the equestrian statue of Leopold II in Place du Trône to “provoke thought [and] reopen the debate”.¹⁸

1. The first argument identified in our body of arguments in favour of a direct addition is that it makes the protest visible to passers-by, inviting them to take an interest in the debate. It is a form of questioning. Without this addition, a person unfamiliar with the references conveyed by the memorial marker would not be able to understand a possible controversy [Stanard, 2011]. Depending on the purpose and implementation of the addition (text, QR code, mirror, artistic performance, etc.), this strategy could be used to provoke thought among people who are, in principle, indifferent to the symbol;

2. Following on from this argument, a direct addition would also have the advantage of juxtaposing different messages, creating a new understanding of the symbol, or even complementing the message initially conveyed, thanks to a counter-narrative, critical comments, testimonials, etc. History education advocates the inclusion of what is referred to as the “in-between”: the analysis of the evolution from the original historical event until the present day [Wansink et al., 2018]. In this way, the emphasis is placed not only on reconstructing the period in which the statues were erected, but also on their subsequent use, and therefore on the different meanings attributed to them. This allows people who are not directly involved in protesting against the symbol (e.g. students) to reflect on its current significance;

3. With this in mind, direct addition lays the foundations for the debate by presenting various arguments.
52

Conversely, direct addition is sometimes accused of being an insufficient response to the protests. For example, the working group for the bust of Roger Nols identified the need to implement other actions in order to reinforce this strategy, focused on education, awareness-raising, inclusion and anti-discrimination [Degryse et al., 2022]. Interpretations of the symbol by different social groups over time can be placed at the heart of a comprehensive programme built around the controversial symbol.

53

A direct addition as such is not (necessarily) proportionate to the controversial symbol. There is sometimes a big difference in format between a symbol and a direct addition. If the direct addition takes the form of a QR code or a text, for example, its visual and symbolic reach will often be considered far inferior to the symbolic reach of a marble or copper object, or a work of art several metres high.

54

Finally, direct addition also runs the risk of individualising a protest around a single person, thus avoiding questioning societal structures or examining public space as a whole. Thus, for example, while women's first names have been added to two street names in Ixelles, there is still a glaring imbalance in the municipality, with only 15 street names in honour of women compared to 139 dedicated to men (and 1 street paying tribute to a man and a woman, Rue Pierre et Marie Curie).

### 4.3. Strategy C: Indirect addition

55

The third strategy consists in adding something indirectly to the memorial landscape to present another point of view. This indirect addition is therefore not placed on the controversial object, but elsewhere in the physical or even digital space. In Brussels, the Parcours BD is once again another good illustration of this strategy. New frescoes linked to works by female authors have begun to feminise the Parcours BD. Square Patrice Lumumba, inaugurated in 2018, features a commemorative plaque in his name¹⁹, and will soon be home to a work of art by Nelson Louis paying tribute to the former prime minister of independent Congo and his two colleagues who were assassinated on 17 January 1961²⁰. It is an indirect addition to the equestrian statue of Leopold II in Place du Trône, some 400 metres away. In its call for artistic projects, the City of Brussels explicitly asked for a work of art "conceived in connection with the urban context, and more specifically in relation to the statue of Leopold II as a counterpoint"²¹.
<figure><img src="image_14.png" /><figcaption>Figure 12. Square Patrice Lumumba, located in the City of Brussels, at the entrance to the Matonge neighbourhood in Ixelles</figcaption></figure>

© Iadine Degryse, 6 August 2020
<figure><img src="image_15.png" /><figcaption>Figure 13. Square Patrice Lumumba, located in the City of Brussels, at the entrance to the Matonge neighbourhood in Ixelles</figcaption></figure>

As the municipality of Ixelles refused to create a space in Lumumba's name in its territory, the half of the square located there has kept its name: Square du Bastion. The other half, located in the City of Brussels, is officially named Square Patrice Lumumba.

© Iadine Degryse, 6 August 2020

1. Among the main arguments in favour of this strategy is the idea that the indirect addition would rebalance the urban space (see, for example, for the feminisation of the Parcours BD, the press release from A. Pinxteren, 11.09.2021). By intervening elsewhere with complementary measures, the overall coherence of the public space in Brussels would be adapted to the values our society wishes to promote (at least in the eyes of those in positions of power). This strategy would make it possible not to remove controversial symbols, but to add new ones in order to multiply and diversify points of view as well as put them in perspective, which is an argument also put forward by members of the Brussels parliament²²;

2. According to some members of the working group for the bust of Roger Nols, an indirect digital addition would make it possible to reach a wider audience, as it would no longer be necessary to be in front of the controversial object to access information relating to the protests. Depending on its format, the indirect addition could be more inclusive, aimed at schools (in the form of an educational kit, for example), visitors and Brussels residents alike;

3. This strategy would make it possible to juxtapose different messages, in particular by providing new information on a different perspective of the symbol related to its context, evolution and the protests surrounding it. Facts and historical debates are presented simultaneously, as author Bart Van Loo sums up: "We need to explain to our young people not only the facts, but also how they have been instrumentalised. That is the true meaning of history: knowing first, then understanding how others use it."²³

4. Finally, the indirect addition would lay the foundations for dialogue (see also strategy B). The indirect addition would be a first step, to be reinforced by other interventions (the study on Roger Nols served as the basis for setting up a working group, and the report of the
working group of Urban.Brussels on colonial traces in Brussels served as the basis for
organising Heritage Days 2022 on this theme and for drafting the Brussels action plan
towards decolonisation, etc.).

56 On the other hand, the arguments against this strategy put forward the concern that the indirect addition may be an insufficient response to the protests and may be imperceptible to passers-by if there are no additional explanations regarding the controversial symbol (passers-by looking at the equestrian statue of Leopold II are too far away from Square Patrice Lumumba and may not be aware of it). Furthermore, this strategy could lead to the expression of violent sentiments if it included a digital device allowing comments (due to the difficulties observed in content moderation)²⁴.

57 Finally, some members of the Roger Nols working group feared that indirect addition could be inaccessible to part of the population, particularly in the case of digital devices and the digital divide (i.e. “various forms of inequality linked to the mass distribution and use of digital technologies in everyday life” [Brotcorne and Mariën, 2020: 12]). In this context, a combination of information strategies should be considered in order to reach target groups from various backgrounds.

## 4.4. Strategy D: Direct protest

58 This strategy involves interfering with the memorial marker, its colour or positioning. In Brussels, graffiti has often appeared on colonial symbols. Representations of Leopold II, King Baudouin and General Storms were often the targets of this direct protest, as were monuments honouring the “pioneers” of Belgian colonisation.
<figure><img src="image_16.png" /><figcaption>Figure 14. The bust of Lieutenant-General Emile Storms in Square de Meeus in Ixelles</figcaption></figure>

The bust of Lieutenant-General Emile Storms in Square de Meeus in Ixelles was covered in red paint in June 2020. The mayor of Ixelles, Christos Doulkeridis, had just announced that the bust would be removed from the public space and entrusted to a museum. The bust was removed in June 2022 and is currently inaccessible to the public.

© Iadine Degryse, 6 August 2020

59 Direct protest can also take the form of a move within the public space. For example, the working group set up by Urban.brussels on decolonisation called for the creation of an open-air “dumping ground” in the Parc du Cinquantenaire where the colonial memorial markers in Brussels could be brought, with free public access [Abrassart et al., 2022: 154].

60 While graffiti on statues is mainly the work of activists, direct acts of protest are also carried out by public authorities. For example, the mayor of Ixelles, Christos Doulkeridis, did not ask for the bust of General Storms to be cleaned, leaving it covered in red paint for just over a year (anonymous citizens cleaned the bust one night in September 2021; interview with C. Doulkeridis, 15.12.2022). In Schaerbeek, two elected representatives returned the bust of former mayor Roger Nols to its pedestal on 5 December 2023. A direct protest against a memorial marker is therefore not an act which is limited to militants.

1. Arguments in favour of this strategy postulate that it would make it possible to counter the violence conveyed by the symbol with a form of proportionate response or even legitimate defence. The Association Citoyenne pour un Espace Public Décolonial (ACED) claimed responsibility for the protest against the bust of Leopold II in Parc Duden (the bust was toppled and rolled into the bushes), with the question: “What better way to exclude a segment of the national community than to honour the executioners of its ancestors?”²⁵

2. This type of intervention would once again allow different messages to be juxtaposed. In 2004, in Ostend, the De Stoete Ostendenoare group sawed off the hand of the Congolese
figure in the monument in honour of Leopold II. The group wanted to divert the propagandist message instilled in the work of art when it was erected in 1931, in reference to the policy of severed hands in force in the Congo Free State. On discovering the amputation of the Congolese figure, the city of Ostend decided that the modification of the work provided useful additional information to passers-by [Kesteloot, 2022]. It therefore left the artwork as it was, rather than opting for the status quo strategy (strategy A).

<figure><img src="image_17.png" /><figcaption>Figure 15. Monument in honour of Leopold II in Ostend</figcaption></figure>

Monument in honour of Leopold II in Ostend, with a view of the left side representing "the grateful Congolese people" and showing the amputated Congolese figure on the left of the image.

© Iadine Degryse, 10 September 2023

61 However, this strategy is often described as vandalism by its opponents (whether elected representatives, local residents, heritage activists, etc.). According to them, it damages works of art without changing anything about the past. The term “vandalism” is not neutral. It can be defined as an act committed by a person “who, for pleasure or malice, deliberately damages or destroys works of art, or beautiful or useful things” or “who, through stupidity, ignorance or lack of good judgement, defaces or damages a site, a landscape, a work of art, etc.” [CNRTL lexical portal].

62 Direct protest can also lead to an escalation between the defenders and critics of a symbol, if it is not accompanied by a programme of dialogue and exchange. This further accentuates the polarisation surrounding these debates. Some elected representatives have condemned the lack of democratic dialogue when activists protest against an object, such as when the bust of Leopold II in Square du Souverain in Auderghem was toppled in June 2020. The mayor of the municipality, Didier Gosuin (DeFI), and the president of the MR party, Georges-Louis Bouchez, both declared that these acts were not conducive to democratic debate²⁶.
4.5. Strategy E: Indirect protest

63

This strategy consists in proposing another memorial marker elsewhere in the public space (as with indirect addition) when dealing with a controversial memorial marker, but this time explicitly protesting against the initial object instead of simply adding information.

64

In Brussels, an example of indirect protest was seen at the Nuits Blanches de Bruxelles on 6 October 2018. On this occasion, activist artist Laura Nsengiyumva presented her work of art PeoPl, a replica of the equestrian statue of Leopold II made of ice and placed in the courtyard of a school in the Marolles. The pedestal was placed above the statue and melted throughout the night for some 2 800 spectators to watch<sup>27</sup>. In this example, the artist made use of a counter-object (the ice statue) and a performance (melting during a public event). Other examples of indirect protest take the form of guided tours, such as the decolonial and feminist tours organised by various associations in Brussels.

<figure><img src="image_18.png" /><figcaption>Figure 16. Banque Congo belge</figcaption></figure>

Decolonial guided tour organised by CIVA in collaboration with the Royal Museum for Central Africa, here with guide François Makanga in front of the former Banque Congo belge.

© Iadine Degryse, 15 April 2023

1. The main argument in favour of indirect protest is that it allows us to build new narratives with new material. In this sense, indirect protest allows groups who feel excluded from public space to reclaim it in part and to feel that they are being represented in new urban narratives [Stoler, 2013]. About her work PeoPL, Laura Nsengiyumva explains: “Melting means disappearing, but it is also a process which can reveal something hidden – here, of course, and metaphorically, there was the desire to reveal unheard narratives and regain power over the symbols which surround us”.²⁸
2. Certain activities which are part of this strategy, such as guided tours, also make it possible not to focus on a single object or figure and to concentrate on the issues which the symbol represents, for example by linking colonial traces to the discrimination which people of African origin still face in Brussels today [Demart et al., 2017], or by approaching a theme from its urban perspective (e.g. colonial traces on the scale of a municipality, or the gendered dimension of the centre of Brussels).

65 But this view on the scale of a neighbourhood or municipality is at the heart of the main argument against indirect strategies (C and E): indirect protest, like indirect addition, runs the risk of being unnoticed by passers-by, who will encounter the controversial memorial marker at another time or in another place.

## 4.6. Strategy F: Removal

66 The final strategy advocated with respect to a controversial memorial marker is to demand the outright removal of the object from the public space. It could then be entrusted to a museum or cultural institution, which would decide whether or not to make it accessible to the public. It could also be left in a place which is inaccessible to the general public, or destroyed and all traces of it removed. This is the case of the Léopold II tunnel, which has been renamed Annie Cordy, and some STIB stops which have been renamed after women. In Ixelles, the bust of General Emile Storms was finally removed by the municipality on 30 June 2022. Pending a possible agreement with the Ixelles museum, which is currently being renovated, the bust is no longer accessible to the public. This strategy of suppression is not exclusive to militants. In Brussels, the busts of Leopold II in Square du Souverain (Auderghem) and in Parc Duden (Forest) were badly damaged and knocked to the ground, suggesting an attempt to destroy them.
<figure><img src="image_19.png" /><figcaption>Figure 17. Square du Souverain</figcaption></figure>

The pedestal of the bust of Leopold II in Square du Souverain (Auderghem), empty since 12 June 2020.

© D. Degryse, 25 October 2024

1. The first argument in favour of the strategy of removal from public space is that it allows us to delegate the delicate memorial task to museums and cultural institutions. The object can be contextualised by professionals. This argument was put forward, for example, when the mayor of Ixelles, Christos Doulkeridis, said of the Storms bust: "It belongs in a museum, which will help put the facts into context"²⁹;

2. A second argument in favour of removal ties in with the abovementioned argument for indirect protest: removal is a means of reclaiming narratives presented for all to see. This argument is based on the dynamic and evolving nature of public space, which is shaped in keeping with the values which society wishes to convey today, in contrast to those displayed when the symbols concerned were erected. This does not mean that certain narratives would be “erased”, but rather that they would be reserved for other spaces more appropriate than public space, which – by definition – imposes itself on users. A controversial object can therefore be removed from the public space without completely destroying the debate on the subject in question, provided that other tangible anchor points are chosen in order to establish a dialogue (e.g. a museum).

67 This ties in with an argument put forward by opponents of this strategy: removing a controversial symbol would deprive us of a medium for debate. In the case of the bust of Roger Nols, the working group felt that, rather than removing it, it would be more appropriate to divert the object from its original purpose and convey a new message of awareness and education.

68 A second argument found regularly in the analysis of our body of arguments³⁰ is based on the principle that by removing a memorial marker, a part of our collective history risks being erased. This argument postulates that collective memory would be deprived of part of its history if a symbol is simply removed from the public space. In this sense,
members of the Roger Nols working group indicated that this was more about a fear
(and therefore a feeling) regarding the evolution of narratives conveyed in the public
space, than a well-founded argument (e.g. “we do not need statues of Hitler to teach
people about World War II”).

69

Another argument put forward in opposition to the removal strategy concerns the relocation of these objects to museums. The characteristics of these places are very different from those of the public space: access is not free and the public is less diverse and more inclined to take time to reflect. In public space, however, there is a much wider diversity of people who pass through, and it is of course free of charge. These characteristics influence the scope of contextualisation work regarding a controversial memorial marker. At the same time, museums and cultural institutions have sometimes been reluctant to house controversial symbols from the public space. Furthermore, by entrusting a controversial symbol to a museum, there is no guarantee that the symbol will be part of the institution's permanent exhibition, and that educational work will be carried out (and well, for that matter).

70

Finally, one last argument makes the removal of a controversial memorial marker conditional on its replacement by a new marker espousing a counter-perspective. During the seminar organised by the BSI, the choice of Annie Cordy as the new name of the Leopold II tunnel was strongly opposed by decolonial associations, which had hoped that the new name would reflect the protests against the colonial role of the former sovereign, for example through the names of people who had resisted colonisation, and also pointed to the use of racist stereotypes in some of the music videos by the famous singer.

Conclusions

71

Protests against memorial markers are not a recent phenomenon, as attested by those
against statues erected in the 19th century by the liberal majority in Brussels, or much
older movements related to the French Revolution, the Iconoclastic War, or changes of
power under the Roman Empire [KNAW, 2023]. Nor are they specific to Brussels: many
cities are confronted with these debates, both in Belgium and abroad [Gensburger and
Wustenberg, 2023].

72

The murder of African-American George Floyd by a white police officer in 2020 in the United States and the amplification of the Black Lives Matter movement created a momentum in Brussels and an unprecedented protest against the colonial traces present in the public space [Kesteloot, 2022]. Numerous initiatives have been taken by decision-makers in Brussels at various levels of power (municipal, regional, community and federal). This multiplicity of stakeholders and initiatives presents a risk of inconsistency and even contradiction, but it can also offer opportunities to include other perspectives in the dialogue. However, this potential is scarcely ever used. Decision-makers are therefore pushed to take quick and uncomfortable decisions, sometimes leading to the emergence of new protests and even greater polarisation.

73

These protests reappear regularly. The destruction of the statue of the worker on the monument in honour of John Cockerill in Place du Luxembourg, or the creation of a bus stop in the name of Mehdi Bouddha, who died at the age of 17 after being hit by a police car, before the end of the trial against the indicted police officers, are recent examples
of the new protests which are emerging and the difficulties encountered in dealing
with them.

74

In a cosmopolitan city such as Brussels, events on the international scene can also suddenly reignite debates. Recently, for example, anti-Semitic graffiti appeared on a plaque in Bois de la Cambre commemorating three World War II resistance fighters. The conflict in Gaza has regularly led to an increase in anti-Semitic acts in Belgium [Jacobs et al., 2011].

75

If we examine the debates in Brussels on this issue, it is striking how often they are reduced to a binary field of tension: when faced with a controversial symbol, the choice seems to boil down to removing the marker in question or adding an explanatory plaque. However, further exploration reveals a more refined context, influenced by proposals from various stakeholders. Numerous examples from Brussels point in this direction. Each strategy does not necessarily exclude the other, allowing combinations according to the objectives pursued. In this perspective, our inductive approach identifies an additional crucial parameter: the willingness of decision-makers to open a dialogue on the figures, events and messages associated with memorial markers.

76

The opening of such historic debates should take several elements into account. Firstly, these debates should not be limited to a single object, but should encompass all of the associated markers: a single event is often commemorated by several markers (statues, street names, celebrations, etc.). It is important not to consider memorial markers in isolation, in order to build integrated approaches (which also pertain to potential protests, i.e. memorial markers which do not appear to be controversial at present, but could be at any time). This requires making room for programming initiatives over a longer period (involving schools, museums, etc.).

77

Secondly, some interviewees highlighted the risk of adding new elements with a contemporary meaning in the outskirts of the city, disconnected from central, densely populated public spaces. In other words, this would maintain central visibility for controversial markers (e.g. with frescoes from comics accused of sexism and racism in the pentagon area, while contemporary frescoes by female authors are in Haren, Laeken and Neder-over-Hembeek). It is therefore necessary to adopt a global approach to question the public space, as well as the policies which have led to the segregation, discrimination and exclusion of certain social groups (racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, etc.). Several initiatives, albeit uncoordinated, have been taken in this regard recently, such as the Equal Street Names mapping³¹, which classifies the street names in Brussels by gender and suggests names “of women from immigrant, racialised, transgender and LGBTQIA+ backgrounds” to Brussels policymakers. The working group “tasked with studying the presence of colonial symbols in public space in the Brussels Region”³² set up by Secretary of State Pascal Smet in September 2020, and which submitted its report on 17 February 2022, is also part of this approach. It led to the adoption of an action plan towards the decolonisation of public space by the Brussels government in May 2023. Some municipalities have also taken steps to reflect at various levels on the memorial landscape of their territory (for example, Etterbeek, with a joint participatory committee; Koekelberg, with four new street names in honour of women inaugurated between March and June 2024; Ixelles, with the creation of a toponymic advisory committee, etc.). At the same time, these memorial markers are too often approached in a thematic manner (with a well-defined objective), while the Brussels memorial landscape is vast and should be analysed in an integrated manner.
78 Thirdly, the people involved in decision-making processes and the associated intervention strategies are a major concern. As the commemorative landscape reflects the vision of decision-makers modifying public space [Dobruszkes, 2010], it is crucial to involve other social groups, stakeholders and organisations (political decision-makers, experts, local residents, activists, etc.) in the reflections and decisions regarding the modification of public space. The plurality and polyphony of memory will enable us to find a better balance of power in the definition of a new, more inclusive public space.

79 In this way, controversial symbols can (possibly) become springboards towards a democratic dialogue in which preconceived ideas and misinformation can be deconstructed, and in which different stakeholders from the Brussels population can participate in the production of new knowledge during participatory workshops, for example by going beyond the simplistic vision of a “victimised” group or a “bad” figure, which would not take into account the institutions (state, financial, cultural, museum, etc.), organisations or schools of thought which founded or reinforced this balance of power.

80 Finally, as history is always a problematic and incomplete interpretation of the past [Nora, 1984], memory and history should remain dynamic and evolving, and should even follow rotating cycles, in order to present different perspectives of a historical debate, and above all the viewpoints of groups which have been excluded from it in the past.

81 This summary aims to show the importance of going beyond debates confined to the removal or recontextualisation of a controversial symbol, in order to build a global approach to representations of history in the public space, their roles, the intervention strategies available when dealing with these protests, and the main aspects of the debate to bear in mind when making decisions and choices. The report by the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences quoted at the beginning of the synopsis states that “[f]reedom of expression, even on controversial monuments, is part of Dutch democracy. Monuments help people develop a vision of themselves and the world. Discussions, demonstrations, petitions and protests cause unrest, but they also keep the past alive and prevent a society from losing its memory. Through trial and error, the unrest surrounding public monuments creates a new history of the Netherlands” [KNAW, 2023: 11].

82 The protests against memorial markers in Brussels can therefore be a true opportunity to build a more inclusive and democratic society, provided that decision-makers create possibilities for dialogue with the various parts of the population representing the pluralism of society.

*We thank all participants at the seminar on 14 June 22, as well as I. Goddeeris, C. Kesteloot, L. Licata and C. Loir for their proofreading and suggestions regarding this article.*
BIBLIOGRAPHY

ABRASSART, Gia, CATHERINE, Lucas, CEUPPENS, Bambi, CHEVALIER, Alexandre, COLARD, Sandrine, DE CLIPPELE, Marie-Sophie, DIBUA MBOMBO, Georgine, EKOFO, Sandrine, LAKAMA, Dieudonné, LIEFOOGHE, Maarten, LUYCKFASSEEL, Margot, NSENGIYUMVA, Laura, YSEBAERT, Salomé and ZIAN, Yasmina, 2022. *Vers la Décolonisation de l'espace public en Région de Bruxelles-Capitale : cadre de réflexion et recommandations*. Rapport du groupe de travail [online]. Urban Brussels. Available at: https://cloud.urban.brussels/s/b624cNZqZy6XXNr

AGULHON, Maurice, 1978. La « statuomanie » et l'histoire. In: *Ethnologie française*. 1978. Vol. 8, no 2/3, pp. 145-172.

ALEN, André and MUYLLE, Koen, 2011. *Handboek van het Belgisch staatsrecht*. Kluwer. Mechelen: Kluwer.

ANDERSON, Benedict R. O'G, 2006. *Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism*. Revised ed. London: Verso. ISBN 978-1-84467-086-4.

ARIESE, Csilla E., 2020. Amplifying Voices: Engaging and Disengaging with Colonial Pasts in Amsterdam. In: *Heritage & Society*. 3 May 2020. Vol. 13, no 1-2, pp. 117-142. DOI: 10.1080/2159032X. 2021.1901335.

BADARIOTTI, Dominique, 2002. Les noms de rue en géographie. Plaidoyer pour une recherche sur les odonymes / Street names, an argument for a geographic research. In: *Annales de géographie*. 2002. Vol. 111, no 625, pp. 285-302. DOI: 10.3406/geo.2002.1658.

BAWIN, Julie, 2024. *Art public & controverses: XIXe-XXIe siècle*. Paris: CNRS éditions. ISBN 978-2-271-15000-4.

BEN FREDJ, Mohamed and FANNI, Anna, 2019. Mobilisations associatives contre les politiques de R. Nols à Schaerbeek. In: *Dynamiques. Histoire sociale en revue* [online]. September 2019. No 10. Available at: http://www.carhop.be/revuescarhop/index.php/2019/09/26/mobilisations-associatives-contre-les-politiques-de-r-nols-a-schaerbeek/

BERNAERTS, Aimé and KERVYNDE DE MARCKE TEN DRIESSCHE, Roger, 1951. *Le nom des rues à Bruxelles. Leur histoire, leur signification, leur sort*. Brussels: De Visscher.

BERTRAND, David, 2018. L'essor du féminisme online. Symptôme de l'émergence d'une quatrième vague féministe ? In: *Réseaux*. 2018. Vol. 208-209, no 2-3, pp. 232-257. DOI: 10.3917/res.208.0229.

BILLIG, Michael S., 2010. *Banal nationalism*. Repr. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. ISBN 978-0-8039-7525-5.

BLAKE, Raymond Benjamin and HAYDAY, Matthew (éd.), 2018. *Celebrating Canada: Commemorations, anniversaries, and national symbols*. Toronto; Buffalo; London: University of Toronto Press. ISBN 978-1-4426-4980-4.

BOCHART, Eugène, 1981. *Dictionnaire historique des rues, places... de Bruxelles*. Culture et Civilisation.

BRAGARD, Véronique and LAMBERT, Alicia, 2021. (Un)drawing Belgium's colonial monuments: Comics' engagement with decolonial debates. In: *Memory Studies*. 2021. Vol. 14, pp. 1185.

BRAGARD, Véronique, PARENT, Sabrina and AMURI MAPALA-LUTEBELE, Maurice, 2020. Entre évitement et ressassement : le spectre colonial belge dans les productions littéraires, artistiques et culturelles. Numéro thématique consacré au Passé colonial belge dans la littérature, les arts et
la culture de l'extrême contemporain. In: *Revue Belge de Philologie et d'Histoire* [online]. 2020. Vol. 97. Available at: https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal:236320

BUKOWIECKI, Łukasz, WAWRZYNIAK, Joanna and WRÓBLEWSKA, Magdalena, 2020. Duality of Decolonizing: Artists' Memory Activism in Warsaw. In: *Heritage & Society*. 3 May 2020. Vol. 13, no 1-2, pp. 32-52. DOI: 10.1080/2159032X.2021.1898076.

BURCH-BROWN, Joanna, 2022. Should Slavery's Statues Be Preserved? On Transitional Justice and Contested Heritage. In: *Journal of Applied Philosophy*. 2022. Vol. 39, no 5, pp. 807-824. DOI: 10.1111/japp.12485.

BURGOS-VIGNA, Diana and ZARIFIAN, Julien, 2023. États et sociétés des Amériques face aux blessures de l'histoire. Des politiques nationales aux réponses locales. In: *Cahiers du MIMMOC*. 2023. No 30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/mimmoc.11633.

BURGOS-VIGNA, Diana and ZARIFIAN, Julien, 2023. Introduction. Mémoire(s), politique et sociétés dans les Amériques. In: *Mémoire(s), identité(s), marginalité(s) dans le monde occidental contemporain*. *Cahiers du MIMMOC* [online]. 20 December 2023. No 30. [Accessed on 9 February 2024]. DOI: 10.4000/mimmoc.11644. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/mimmoc/11644

CAPANEMA, Silvia and RUOSO, Carolina, 2023. Les musées face à une autre histoire du Brésil : la muséologie sociale et l'émergence de nouvelles représentations et actions populaires. In: *Mémoire(s), identité(s), marginalité(s) dans le monde occidental contemporain*. *Cahiers du MIMMOC* [online]. 20 Decembre 2023. No 30. [Accessed on 9 February 2024]. DOI: 10.4000/mimmoc.11966. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/mimmoc/11966

CATHERINE, Lucas, 2006. Wandelen naar Kongo [online]. In: *EPO*. [Accessed on 18 August 2023]. Available at: https://www.fr.fnac.be/a8725587/Lucas-Catherine-Wandelen-naar-Kongo

CAUMARTIN, Anne, GOYETTE, Julien, HÉBERT, Karine and LAPOINTE, Martine-Emmanuelle, 2021. *Je me souviens, j'imagine: essais historiques et littéraires sur la culture québécoise*. Montréal: Les Presses de l'Université de Montréal. Champ libre. ISBN 978-2-7606-4431-1.

CHINE-LEHMANN, Dalila, 2023. Gráfica del 68 : une esthétique pratique, des objets mémoriels. In: *Mémoire(s), identité(s), marginalité(s) dans le monde occidental contemporain*. In: *Cahiers du MIMMOC* [online]. 20 December 2023. No 30. [Accessed on 9 February 2024]. DOI: 10.4000/mimmoc.12109. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/mimmoc/12109

CHUVA, Márcia and PEIXOTO, Paulo, 2020. The Water that Washes the Past: New Urban Configurations in Post-Colonial Lisbon and Rio de Janeiro. In: *Heritage & Society*. 3 May 2020. Vol. 13, no 1-2, pp. 98-116. DOI: 10.1080/2159032X.2021.1915081.

CLERBOIS, Sébastien, 2022. La sculpture publique bruxelloise au 19e siècle : ville, pouvoir, idéologie. *ULB* [online]. 2022. Available at: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/334825/3/Sculpturepublique.pdf

COLE, Tim, 2023. After the fall, where?: Relocating the Colston statue in Bristol, from 2020 to imaginary futures. In: *Journal of Historical Geography*. 1 October 2023. Vol. 82, pp. 156-168. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhg.2023.03.001.

COLIN, Philippe, 2023. *Pensées décoloniales: une introduction aux théories critiques d'Amérique latine*. Paris: Zones. ISBN 978-2-35522-153-8.

COHEN, William, 1989. Symbols of Power: Statues in Nineteenth-Century Provincial France. In: *Comparative Studies in Society and History*. 1989. Vol. 31, no 3, pp. 491-513.

CORDONNIER, Aline, ROSOUX, Valérie, GIJS, Anne-Sophie and LUMINET, Olivier, 2022. Collective memory: An hourglass between the collective and the individual. In: *Memory, Mind, & Media*
[online]. 2022. Vol. 1. [Accessed on 14 February 2024]. Available at: https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal:259347

DE KAMER [ed.]. *Bijzondere Commissie Koloniaal verleden. Inleiding en Vaststellingen van de experten. Voorlopige vertaling uit het Frans*. Available at: https://www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/pdf_seCTIONS/PRI/CONGO/20221122%20Vaststellingen%20EXPERTEN%20(003).PDF

DE SCHAEPDRIJVER, Sophie, 2013. *De Groote Oorlog* [online]. Standaard Boekhandel. [Accessed on 7 February 2024]. Available at: https://www.standaardboekhandel.be/p/de-groote-oorlog-9789089242617

DEGRYSE, Iadine, JAUMAIN, Serge and VAESEN, Joost, 2022. *Rapport sur les conclusions du Groupe de travail « Buste de Roger Nols » (13 octobre - 6 décembre 2022)* [online]. Brussels Studies Institute. Available at: https://bsi.brussels/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/09/GT-Roger-Nols_Conclusions.pdf

DEMART, Sarah, SCHOUMAKER, Bruno, GODIN, Marie and ADAM, Ilke, 2017. *Des citoyens aux racines africaines : un portrait des Belgo-Congolais, Belgo-Rwandais et Belgo-Burundais* [online]. FONDATION ROI BAUDOUIN. Available at: https://media.kbs-frb.be/fr/media/7528/20171121_CF.pdf

DE REU, Stijn, DE BRUYN, Tom and MUTITHI, Mutihi, 2020. *Omgaan met koloniale verwijzingen in de publieke ruimte. Handreiking voor lokale besturen*. AGENTSCHAP INTEGRATIE en INBURGERING. BRUSSEL.

DE SCHAEPDRIJVER, Sophie, 1993. 'De stenen spreken tot de geest': stedenbouwkundig ingrijpen in Brussel en Belgische identiteit 1850-1970. In: *Leidschrift*. 9.2. 1993. pp. 83-104.

DEROM, Patrick, VAN LENNEP, Jacques, LECLERCQ, Catherine and EVERAERTS DE VELP, Vincent, 2000. *Les sculptures de Bruxelles* [online]. pandora. [Accessed on 26 April 2023]. Available at: https://catalogue.civa.brussels/index.php/Detail/objects/76309

DIERKENS, Alain, 1995. La statuaire publique. In: STIENNON, Jacques, DUCHESNE, Jean-Patrick, RANDAXHE Yves and ALEXANDRE, Serge (éds.), *L'architecture, la sculpture et l'art des jardins à Bruxelles et en Wallonie*. La Renaissance du livre. pp. 246-250.

DOBRUSZKES, Frédéric, 2010. Baptiser un grand équipement urbain: pratiques et enjeux autour du nom des stations de métro à Bruxelles. In: *BELGEO (Leuven)*. 2010. pp. 229-240. DOI: 10.4000/belgeo.7103.

ELST, Martin Vander and CLETTE-GAKUBA, Véronique, 2018. Une tentative de décolonisation de la statue de Léopold II. *Bruxelles en mouvement* [online]. Inter-Environnement Bruxelles. 2018. [Accessed on 7 February 2024]. Available at: https://www.ieb.be/Une-tentative-de-decolonisation-de-la-statue-de-Leopold-II

ERLL, Astrid, 2011. Travelling Memory. In: *Parallax*. 1 November 2011. Vol. 17, no 4, pp. 4-18. DOI: 10.1080/13534645.2011.605570.

FEINDT, Gregor, KRAWATZEK, Félix, MEHLER, Daniela, PESTEL, Friedemann and TRIMCEV, Rieke, 2014. Entangled memory: Toward a third wave in memory studies. In: *History and Theory*. 1 February 2014. Vol. 53. DOI: 10.1111/hith.10693.

FRAITURE, Pierre-Philippe, 2022. Performative Challenges to Belgium's Colonial Amnesia: Mobilising Archives and Resonant Spaces. In: *Unfinished Histories: Empire and Postcolonial Resonance in Central Africa and Belgium* [online]. Leuven University Press. pp. 121-142. [Accessed on 10 April 2024]. ISBN 978-94-6166-492-1. Available at: https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/258/oa_edited_volume/chapter/3265880

FREEMAN, Joseph F., 1990. The Social Meaning of Civic Space: Studying Political Authority through Architecture. By Charles T. Goodsell. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1988. 254p.
$25.00. In: *American Political Science Review*. March 1990. Vol. 84, no 1, pp. 305-306. DOI: 10.2307/1963670.

GENSBURGER, Sarah and WÜSTENBERG, Jenny (éd.), 2023. *Dé-commémoration: quand le monde déboulonne des statues et renomme des rues*. Paris: Fayard. Divers Histoire. ISBN 978-2-213-72205-4.

GENTRY, Kynan and SMITH, Laurajane, 2019. Critical heritage studies and the legacies of the late-twentieth century heritage canon. In: *International Journal of Heritage Studies*. 2 February 2019. Vol. 25, pp. 1-21. DOI: 10.1080/13527258.2019.1570964.

GIRAUT, Frédéric, HOUSSAY-HOLZSCHUCH, Myriam and GUYOT, Sylvain, 2008. Au nom des territoires ! Enjeux géographiques de la toponymie. In: *L'Espace géographique*. 2008. Vol. 37, no 2, pp. 97-105. DOI: 10.3917/eg.372.0097.

GODDEERIS, Idesbald, 2015. Postcolonial Belgium: The Memory of the Congo. In: *Interventions* (*London, England*). 2015. Vol. 17, no 3, pp. 434-451. DOI: 10.1080/1369801X.2014.998253.

GODDEERIS, Idesbald, 2016. Square de Léopoldville of Place Lumumba?: De Belgische (post)koloniale herinnering in de publieke ruimte. In: *Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis*. 1 August 2016. Vol. 129, no 3, pp. 349-372. DOI: 10.5117/TVGESCH2016.3.GODD.

GODDEERIS, Idesbald, 2020. Mapping the Colonial Past in the Public Space. A Comparison between Belgium and the Netherlands. In: *BMGN - Low Countries Historical Review*. 26 March 2020. Vol. 135, no 1, pp. 70-94. DOI: 10.18352/bmgn-lchr.10783.

GODDEERIS, Idesbald, 2021. *Missionarissen: geschiedenis, herinnering, dekolonisering*. Louvain: LannooCampus. ISBN 978-94-014-7662-1.

GODDEERIS, Idesbald, LAURO, Amandine and VANTHEMSCHE, Guy, 2020. *Le Congo colonial: une histoire en questions*. Waterloo: Renaissance du livre. ISBN 978-2-507-05689-6.

GODDEERIS, Idesbald, 2019. The Nazi and the Colonizers: Flemish debates on street names in 2017. In: *Zeitgeschichte*, vol. 49, n°1, pp. 61-82.

GODDEERIS, Idesbald, 2023. The Decolonization of Belgian Society. In: *Memoria e Ricerca*, a. XXXI, no 73, issue 2, pp. 237-254.

GORDON, Alan, 2001. *Making public pasts: the contested terrain of Montréal's public memories, 1891-1930*. Montreal; Ithaca: McGill-Queen's University Press. ISBN 978-0-7735-2254-1.

GOSSELIN, Janie and OUELLETTE-VÉZINA, Henri, 2020. La statue de John A. Macdonald déboulonnée à Montréal. In: *La Presse* [online]. 29 August 2020. [Accessed on 21 August 2023]. Available at: https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/grand-montreal/2020-08-29/la-statue-de-john-a-macdonald-deboulonnee-a-montreal.php

GREVER, Maria, 2023. Historical consciousness and controversial statues in a postcolonial world: the case of Missionary Peerke Donders (1809-1887). In: *History of Education*, vol. 52 (6), pp. 1000-1014, DOI: 10.1080/0046760X.2023.2226666

GUBIN, Eliane, 1999. Du politique au politique. Parcours du féminisme belge (1830-1914). In: *Revue belge de Philologie et d'Histoire*. 1999. Vol. 77, no 2, pp. 370-382. DOI: 10.3406/rbph.1999.4363.

GUBIN, Eliane, 2006. Bruxelles et les Bruxelloises aux XIXe et XXe siècles. Croiser l'histoire des femmes et l'histoire des villes. In: *JAUMAIN, Serge et LINTEAU, Paul-André* (eds), *Vivre en ville. Bruxelles et Montréal aux XIXe et XXe siècles*. Brussels: Peter Lang, pp. 99-111.

GUILLAUME, Tom, 2022, 17 février. Fondre la statue équestre de Léopold II ? Les experts bruxellois ne sont pas contre. In: *La Libre Belgique*.
GUILLOREL, Hervé, 2009. *Toponymie et politique: les marqueurs linguistiques du territoire*. Brussels: Bruylant. Droits, territoires, cultures. ISBN 978-2-8027-2622-7.

JALABERT, Laurent and GRANDHOMME, Jean-Noël (éd.), 2019. *Les marqueurs mémoriels de la guerre et de l'armée: La construction d'un espace du souvenir dans l'Est de la France* [online]. Villeneuve d'Ascq: Presses universitaires du Septentrion. War Studies. ISBN 978-2-7574-3543-4. Available at: https://books.openedition.org/septentrion/140159

HA VAN, Véronique, 2017. Sculpteurs d'une cause perdue : statues et causes d'une perte ? In: *Transatlantica. Revue d'études américaines*. American Studies Journal [online]. 30 December 2017. No 1. [Accessed on 21 November 2023]. DOI: 10.4000/transatlantica.9018. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/transatlantica/9018?lang=en

HALBWACHS, Maurice, 1925. *Les cadres sociaux de la mémoire* [online]. Presses Universitaires de France. [Accessed on 21 August 2024]. ISBN x². Available at: http://classiques.uqac.ca/classiques/Halbwachs_maurice/cadres_soc_memoire/cadres_soc_memoire.html

HOUSSAY-HOLZSCHUCH, Myriam, 2008. Nomen est omem. Lectures des changements toponymiques. In: *L'Espace géographique*. 2008. Vol. 37, no 2, pp. 153-159. DOI: 10.3917/eg.372.0153.

HUTCHISON, Yvette, 2015. Between word, image and movement: performative critiques of colonial ethnography. In: *Témoigner. Entre histoire et mémoire. Revue pluridisciplinaire de la Fondation Auschwitz*. 1 October 2015. No 121, pp. 121-132. DOI: 10.4000/temoigner.3449.

IFVERSEN, Jan and POZZI, Laura, 2020. European Colonial Heritage in Shanghai: Conflicting Practices. In: *Heritage & Society*. 3 May 2020. Vol. 13, no 1-2, pp. 143-163. DOI: 10.1080/2159032X.2020.1909405.

JACOBS, Dirk, VENY, Yoann, CALLIER, Louise, HERMAN, Barbara and DESCAMPS, Aurélie, 2011. The impact of the conflict in Gaza on antisemitism in Belgium. In: *Patterns of Prejudice*. September 2011. Vol. 45, n° 4, pp. 341-360. DOI: 10.1080/0031322X.2011.605845.

JACOBS, Thibault, 2018. Empreintes du Congo belge dans l'espace public bruxellois. In: *Bruxelles en mouvement* [online]. IEB. 2018. [Accessed on 7 February 2024]. Available at: https://www.ieb.be/Empreintes-du-Congo-belge-dans-l-espace-public-bruxellois

JACOBS, Thibault, 2021. Bruxelles ville congolaise : introduction. In: *Bruxelles en mouvement* [online]. Inter-Environnement Bruxelles. 2021. [Accessed on 7 February 2024]. Available at: https://www.ieb.be/Bruxelles-ville-congolaise-introduction

JAUMAIN, Serge, 2013. *Dictionnaire d'histoire de Bruxelles*. Prosopon. Bruxelles.

JAUMAIN, Serge and VAESEN, Joost, 2022. Roger Nols : un bourgmestre (in)déboulonnable ? In: *Brussels Studies* [online]. 1 May 2022. [Accessed on 22 August 2023]. DOI: 10.4000/brussels.6055. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/6055

JAUMAIN, Serge, VAESEN, Joost, BENVINDO, Bruno, BOUCHAT, Pierre, BOUSMAR, Eric, DEGRYSE, Iadine, KESTELOOT, Chantal, KLEIN, Olivier and VANRAEPENBUSCH, Karla, 2017. Regards croisés sur un Centenaire. Un premier bilan des commémorations de la Première Guerre mondiale à Bruxelles. In: *Brussels Studies* [online]. 2017. No 116. DOI: 10.4000/brussels.1576. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/1576

JOFFE, Daniela Franca and SHEPHERD, Nick, 2020. Specters of Cape Town: Heritage, Memory, and Restitution in Contemporary South African Art, Architecture, and Museum Practice. In: *Heritage & Society*. 3 May 2020. Vol. 13, no 1-2, pp. 75-97. DOI: 10.1080/2159032X.2021.1888400.

JOUTARD, Philippe, 2013. *Histoire et mémoires, conflits et alliance*. Paris: La Découverte. Collection Écritures de l'histoire. ISBN 978-2-7071-7345-4.
KERREMANS, Richard, 1990. Les monuments publics à Bruxelles et en Wallonie. In: VAN LENNEP, Jacques (dir.), *La sculpture belge au 19e siècle*. Brussels: Général de Banque. pp. 155-161.

KESTELOOT, Chantal, 2022. Léopold II et les autres. Des statues controversées dans l'espace public en Belgique. In: *Politika* [online]. 2022. [Accessed on 27 November 2023]. Available at: https://www.politika.io/index.php/fr/article/leopold-ii-autres-statues-controversees-lespace-public-belgique

KESTELOOT, Chantal, 2012. Toponymie et mémoire de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. In: *Journal of Belgian History* / *Revue Belge d'Histoire Contemporaine*. 2012. Vol. 42, no 2/3, pp. 108.

KESTELOOT, Chantal and YPERSELE, Laurence Van, 2016. Pour une analyse du phénomène commémoratif. In: *Journal of Belgian History*. 2016. Vol. 46, no 3/4, pp. 211-226.

KESTELOOT, Chantal, 2024. L'histoire au bout de la rue. Le passé dans l'espace public bruxellois. In: *Politika* [online]. Available at: https://www.politika.io/fr/article/lhistoire-au-bout-rue-passe-lespace-public-bruxellois

KNAW, 2023. *Wankele sokkels - Omstreden monumenten in de openbare ruimte* [online]. Amsterdam: KNAW. Available at: https://knaw.nl/publicaties/wankele-sokkels-omstreden-monumenten-de-openbare-ruimte

KNUDSEN, Britta Timm and KØLVRAA, Christoffer, 2020. Affective Infrastructures of Re-emergence? Exploring Modalities of Heritage Practices in Nantes. In: *Heritage & Society*. 3 May 2020. Vol. 13, no 1-2, pp. 10-31. DOI: 10.1080/2159032X.2021.1883981.

KØLVRAA, Christoffer and KNUDSEN, Britta Timm, 2020. Decolonizing European Colonial Heritage in Urban Spaces – An Introduction to the Special Issue. In: *Heritage & Society*. 3 May 2020. Vol. 13, no 1-2, pp. 1-9. DOI: 10.1080/2159032X.2021.1888370.

LALLI HILLS, Adrienne and MIDDLETON, Margaret, 2023. Resisting the Colonial Imagination: The Role of Exhibition Design in the Decolonial Project. In: *American Alliance of Museums*. 26 October 2023. Available at: https://www.aam-us.org/2023/10/26/resisting-the-colonial-imagination-the-role-of-exhibition-design-in-the-decolonial-project/

LALOUETTE, Jacqueline, 2021. *Les statues de la discorde*. Paris: Passés composés. ISBN 978-2-37933-640-9.

LEBOUC, Georges, 2008a. *Des rues et des hommes à Bruxelles*. Racine.

LEBOUC, Georges, 2008b. *Histoire insolite des rues de Bruxelles*. Racine.

LEERSSEN, Joep, 2013. Notes toward a Definition of Romantic Nationalism. In: *Romantik: Journal for the Study of Romanticisms*. 3 February 2013. Vol. 2, no 1, pp. 9-35. DOI: 10.7146/rom.v2i1.20191.

LEWIS, Nicholas, 2022. *Colonial tales, trails and traces : a critical guide to understanding Belgium's colonisation of Congo and how it continues to reinforce racist stereotypes*. 1er édition. Antwerp: Uitgeverij Luster. ISBN 978-94-6058-318-6.

LIBERAS, 2021. Liberale standbeelden in Brussel. In: *Liberas* [online]. 10 March 2021. [Accessed on 21 November 2023]. Available at: https://www.liberas.eu/liberale-standbeelden-in-brussel/

LOIR, Christophe, 2022. La corniche royale. Repères géographiques & chronologiques. In: *Bruxelles Patrimoines*. 2022. Vol. 36, pp. 8-11.

MACDONALD, Sharon, 2013. *Memorylands: Heritage and Identity in Europe Today*. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-203-55333-6.
MAROGA, Kopano, 2018, 2 December. PeoPL : Colonial Haunting and Decolonial Dreams. In: *Rekto Verso*. [Accessed on 5 November 2023]. Available at: https://www.rektoverso.be/artikel/people-colonial-haunting-and-decolonial-dreams

MCGONIGLE LEYH, Brianne, 2020. Imperatives of the Present: Black Lives Matter and the politics of memory and memorialization. In: *Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights*. December 2020. Vol. 38, no 4, pp. 239-245. DOI: 10.1177/0924051920967541.

MIN, Eric, 2016. *Op stap tussen tekens. Een literaire en artistieke wandeling in de Onze-Lieve-Vrouw-ter-Sneeuwwijk*. Brussels: Vlaams Parlement, 52 p.

MOSSE, George L., 2023. *UW Press: The Nationalization of the Masses*. University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 978-0-299-34204-3.

NORA, Pierre, 1984. *Les lieux de mémoire*. 1. Paris: Gallimard. Quarto. ISBN 978-2-07-074902-7.

OOSTINDIE, Gert (éd.), 2020. *Het koloniale verleden van Rotterdam*. Amsterdam: Boom. ISBN 978-90-244-3225-7.

OSTA, Jean d', 1979. *Les rues disparues de Bruxelles*. Rossel.

OSTA, Jean d', 1986. *Dictionnaire historique et anecdotique des rues de Bruxelles*. Brussels: Legrain.

OUALI, Nouria, 2015. Les rapports de domination au sein du mouvement des femmes à Bruxelles : critiques et résistances des féministes minoritaires. In: *Nouvelles Questions Féministes*. 2015. Vol. 34, no 1.

OUALI, Nouria, LANNOY, Pierre, DESAMOURY, Virginie, GUILLEAUME, Sandrine, MAYNÉ, Fanny, MERVILLE, Sophie, ODIER, Charlotte and THÉBAUX, Adèle, 2021. Les femmes dans le nom des rues bruxelloises. Topographie d'une minorisation. In: *Brussels Studies* [online]. 7 March 2021. No 154. [Accessed on 18 April 2023]. DOI: 10.4000/brussels.5376. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/5376

PEVERELLI, Tymen, 2019. *De stad als vaderland: Brugge, Leeuwarden en Maastricht in de eeuw van de natiestaat – 1815-1914*. Nijmegen: Vantilt. ISBN 978-94-6004-453-3.

PHELPS, Jess R. and OWLEY, Jessica, 2023. *Confederate Heritage Organizations and Confederate Monument Removal* [online]. SSRN Scholarly Paper. 31 juillet 2023. Rochester, NY. 4527224. [Accessed on 21 November 2023]. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=4527224

PINOJA, Letizia Gaja, 2023. L'art de décoloniser un pays sans colonies. In: *The Conversation* [online]. 26 June 2023. [Accessed on 22 September 2023]. Available at: http://theconversation.com/lart-de-coloniser-un-pays-sans-colonies-200770

PIRET, Bérengère, 2023. *Sous les cartons, l'émancipation : plongée dans les archives coloniales belges* [online]. 5 June 2023. [Accessed on 7 June 2023]. Available at: https://open.spotify.com/episode/6UiCfNwYI0cakKh89ysZpV

PIRON, Pascale, 2022. La décolonisation de l'espace public belge. In: *Commission Justice & Paix - Belgique francophone* [online]. 28 October 2022. [Accessed on 10 May 2023]. Available at: https://www.justicepaix.be/la-decolonisation-de-lespace-public-belge/

PSALTIS, Charis, CARRETERO, Mario and ČEHAJIĆ-CLANCY, Sabina, 2017. Conflict transformation and history teaching: Social psychological theory and its contributions. In: PSALTIS, Charis, CARRETERO, Mario and ČEHAJIĆ-CLANCY, Sabina, *History education and conflict transformation: Social psychological theories, history teaching and reconciliation* [online]. Palgrave Macmillan/ Springer Nature. pp. 1-34. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54681-0_1
REID, Donald Malcolm, 2019. *Contesting Antiquity in Egypt: Archaeologies, Museums, and the Struggle for Identities from World War I to Nasser*. The American University in Cairo Press.
ISBN 978-977-416-938-0. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv2ks70j9

RENES, Hans, 2022. Erfgoed moet schuren. In: *AGORA Magazine* [online]. 22 juillet 2022. Vol. 37, no 2. DOI: 10.21825/agora.85128. Available at: https://openjournals.ugent.be/agora/article/id/85128/

RICÇEUR, Paul, 2003. *La mémoire, l'histoire, l'oubli*. Paris: Ed. du Seuil. Points Série essais, 494.
ISBN 978-2-02-056332-1.

RIGNEY, Ann, 2022. Toxic Monuments and Mnemonic Regime Change. In: *Studies on National Movements* [online]. 2 August 2022. Vol. 9, no 1. [Accessed on 21 November 2023]. DOI: 10.21825/snm.85270. Available at: https://openjournals.ugent.be/snm/article/id/85270/

ROSOUX, Valérie, 2015. Après-guerre : mémoire versus réconciliation. In: *Revue Internationale de Politique Comparée*. 2015. Vol. 22, pp. 469-476.

ROSSIGNOL, Marie-Jeanne, 2017. Les statues des confédérés dans l'espace public aux États-Unis : pourra-t-on en finir avec une « mauvaise cause » ? In: *Transatlantica. Revue d'études américaines*. *American Studies Journal* [online]. 30 Decembre 2017. No 1. [Accessed on 21 November 2023]. DOI: 10.4000/transatlantica.8973. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/transatlantica/8973

ROTTGER, Rik, 2006. Capitol and capital. Het « moment Anspach » in de Brusselse urbanisatie en liberale politieke cultuur (1860-1880). In: *Stadsgeschiedenis (Hilversum)*. 1 April 2006. Vol. 1, no 1, pp. 27-51.

ROUSSO, Henry, 1987. *Le syndrome de Vichy (1944-1987)*. Le Seuil.

SCHUITEMA, Jaap, RADSTAKE, Hester, VAN DE POL, Janneke and VEUGELERS, Wiel, 2018. Guiding classroom discussions for democratic citizenship education. In: *Educational Studies*. 8 August 2018. Vol. 44, no 4, pp. 377-407. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2017.1373629.

SCHÜTZ, Marine, 2020. Rewriting Colonial Heritage in Bristol and Marseille: Contemporary Artworks as Decolonial Interventions. In: *Heritage & Society*. 3 May 2020. Vol. 13, no 1-2, pp. 53-74. DOI: 10.1080/2159032X.2021.1914298.

SCOHIER, Thibaut, 2023, March 6. Quelle place pour les femmes dans l'espace public ? Interview de Apolline Vranken. In: *Revue Politique*. [Accessed on 10 April 2024]. Available at: https://www.revuepolitique.be/quelle-place-pour-les-femmes-dans-lespace-public/

SMITH, Laurajane, 2006. *Uses of heritage*. London; New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. ISBN 978-0-415-31831-0.

SNOEYS, Jasper, 2023. Gedenksteen voor slachtoffers van kolonialisme onthuld in Borgerhout : « Dialoog belangrijk, geschiedenis niet vergeten ». In: *VRT Nws*, 21 May 2023. Consulté 10 April 2024, Available at: https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2023/05/21/gedenksteen-kolonialisme-borgerhout/

SOLOMIANSKI, Alejandro, 2019. Edificaciones reveladoras. Monumentos y « lugares de memoria » : configuraciones urbanas de conflictos latinoamericanos del siglo XXI. In: *Babel. Littératures plurielles*. 1 June 2019. No 39, pp. 86-112. DOI: 10.4000/babel.6804.

SORTIR DU COLONIALISME GIRONDE [collectif], 2020. *Guide du Bordeaux colonial et de la métropole bordelaise*. Paris, Éditions Syllepse.

SPIEGELEER, Christoph De, 2020. *Le suprême hommage: De omgang met de dood van koninklijke en politieke elites in België tussen 1830 en 1940*. Asp / Vubpress / Upa. ISBN 978-90-5718-912-8.
STANARD, Matthew G., 2011. *Selling the Congo: a history of European pro-empire propaganda and the making of Belgian imperialism*. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. ISBN 978-0-8032-3777-3.

STANARD, Matthew G., 2019. *The Leopard, the lion and the cock: colonial memories and monuments in Belgium*. Louvain: Leuven University Press. ISBN 978-94-6270-179-3.

STEFFENS, Sven, 2007. La toponymie populaire urbaine hier et aujourd'hui. In: *Brussels Studies* [online]. 1 October 2007. [Accessed on 18 April 2023]. DOI: 10.4000/brussels.441. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/441

STERCKX, Marjan, 2009. Inside out: sculptures by women in the metropolitan public space (Paris, London, Brussels, 1750-1950). In: GOGGIN, Maureen Daly and TOBIN, Beth Fowkes (Eds.), *Women and things : gendered material practices*, 1750-1950 (pp. 189-204). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing.

STOLER, Ann Laura, 2013. Introduction "The Rot Remains": From Ruins to Ruination. In: *Introduction "The Rot Remains": From Ruins to Ruination* [online]. Duke University Press. pp. 1-36. [Accessed on 10 April 2024]. ISBN 978-0-8223-9585-0. Available at: https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780822395850-002/html

TARTAKOWSKY, Danielle [dir.], 2022. *Histoire de la rue: de l'Antiquité à nos jours*. Paris: Tallandier. ISBN 979-10-210-4115-8.

TILLIER, Bertrand, 2022. *La disgrâce des statues: essai sur les conflits de mémoire, de la Révolution française à Black Lives Matter*. Paris: Éditions Payot & Rivages. Histoire Payot. ISBN 978-2-228-93162-5.

TSEHAYE, Rachel Solomon and VIEILLE-GROSJEAN, Henri, 2018. Colonialité et occidentalocentrisme : quels enjeux pour la production des savoirs ? In: *Recherches en éducation* [online]. 1 March 2018. No 32. [Accessed on 10 May 2023]. DOI: 10.4000/ree.2323. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/ree/2323

TYSSENS, Jeffrey, 2022. Funerary Culture, Secularity and Symbolised Violence in Nineteenth-Century Belgium. In: *Pakistan Journal of Historical Studies*, vol. 2, pp. 62 - 88.

VAN DAMME, Marthe and JACOBS, Dirk, 2022. UNESCO's intangible cultural heritage and its polarising nature: A case study on Aalst Carnival. In: *International Journal of Intangible Heritage*. 1 August 2022. Vol. 17, pp. 116-121.

VAN HASSEL, Marte, 2017. HET KOLONIALE MO(NU)MENT. Richting een Hedendaags Alternatief voor het Belgische Koloniale Erfgoed /.. 2017.

VANNIEUWENHUYZE, Karen, 2018. *Aangedaan van statuomanie. Het Antwerpse stadsbestuur en zijn politieke greep op de stedelijke ruimte (1830-1914)*. Antwerp: Universiteit Antwerpen, PhD thesis.

WANSINK, Bjorn, AKKERMAN, Sanne, ZUIKER, Itzél and WUBBELS, Theo, 2018. Where Does Teaching Multiperspectivity in History Education Begin and End? An Analysis of the Uses of Temporality. In: *Theory & Research in Social Education*. 2 October 2018. Vol. 46, no 4, pp. 495-527. DOI: 10.1080/00933104.2018.1480439.

YPERSELE, Laurence Van, DEBRUYNE, Emmanuel and KESTELOOT, Chantal, 2015. *Bruxelles, la mémoire et la guerre (1914-2014)*. Renaissance du livre. ISBN 978-2-507-05321-5.

NOTES

1. CALENDA, 2015. The memorial markers of the army and war: the construction of a space for memory in the EastLes marqueurs mémoriels de l'armée et de la guerre : la construction d'un
espace du souvenir dans l'Est de la France (XVIe siècle à nos jours) [online]. [text/html]. 25 November 2015. OpenEdition. [Accessed on 23 May 2024]. Available at: https://calenda.org/347945

2. Based on data from EBRU and Brussels-Capital Region heritage inventories.

3. Based on the Urbis database.

4. Organised on 14 June 2022 by BSI as part of the project to recontextualise the frescoes in the Parcours BD of the City of Brussels.

5. Urban, Inventaire du Patrimoine architectural, “Boulevard du Régent” (https://monument.heritage.brussels/).

6. Website www.armencom.be, 26 April 2022.

7. https://loudordesign.be/en/products/Brussels_Mobility/Installation/Road_victims_memorial/

8. The descriptive and exploratory approach proposed here calls for more in-depth research into the dialectic between these stakeholders – who are not (necessarily) on an equal footing – in order to fully understand the dynamics of actions and reactions in these protests with a diachronic approach. This will allow a better understanding of the evolution of protests in the Brussels memorial landscape, the reactions of the various stakeholders to these protests, and the absence of protest.

9. Parlement de Bruxelles-Capitale, Commission du développement territorial du 13 juillet 2020 portant sur les traces coloniales.

10. Exchange seminar on the recontextualisation of controversial symbols in the public space in Brussels, organised on 14 June 2022 by the Brussels Studies Institute as part of the project to recontextualise the frescoes in the Parcours BD of the City of Brussels.

11. YouTube channel “TV Nation”, videos from 9 June, 16 June, 21 October, 30 November 2020.

12. Petitions in 2020 and 2021: https://www.petitionenligne.be/pour-leopold-2; https://www.petitionenligne.be/pour_le_maintien_des_statues_de_leopold_ii;; https://www.change.org/p/la-ville-de-bruxelles-pour-le-maintien-des-statues-du-roi-leopold-ii

13. Minutes from the meeting of the “bust of Roger Nols” working group, 13 October 2022, Brussels Studies Institute [unedited]

14. PESESSE, Jean-Christophe, DEQUEKER, Camille and DE KNOP, Thibault, 2022. Faut-il déboulonner le buste de Roger Nols, ancien bourgmestre de Schaerbeek ?. In: BX1, 02 May 2022.

15. ZANA EMBALA, Mathieu, 2017. Een volk zonder geschiedenis. In: De Standaard, 14 December 2017 [online].

16. Minutes from the meeting of the “bust of Roger Nols” working group, 13 October 2022, Brussels Studies Institute [unedited]

17. RTBF, 2018. Le buste de Léopold II au parc Duden ‘déboulonné’ par des militants anti-coloniaux. In: Rtfb.be, 11 January 2018 [online].

18. LA LIBRE BELGIQUE, 2024. Un artiste belge accroche une œuvre d'art à la statue de Léopold II à Bruxelles et crée la controverse: “Une métaphore visuelle puissante”. In: La Libre, 15 April 2024 [online].

19. Although an unfortunate error presented him in Dutch as the Prime Minister of the Congo Free State, precisely during the colonisation by Leopold II [Goddeeris, 2021:161].

20. The work of art, entitled “Les Isolés”, will depict Patrice Lumumba, Maurice Mpolo and Joseph Okito, three Congolese politicians who were tortured and murdered on 17 January 1961 by Katangan separatists, with the support of the United States and Belgium. The inauguration of the work is planned for 2024 (see Ans Persoons' press release 18 January 2023 [online]).

21. CITY OF BRUSSELS, 2022. Square Lumumba, appel à projet artistique, mars 2022. The emphasis was on the call for projects.

22. Parlement de Bruxelles-Capitale, Commission du développement territorial – Session 2019-2020, pp.74-90 [online].
23. BIERMÉ, Maxime, 2023. Bart Van Loo: “Notre regard n’est jamais neutre”. In: *Le Soir*. 2 February 2023. Available at: https://www.lesoir.be/492929/article/2023-02-02/bart-van-loo-notre-regard-nest-jamais-neutre

24. Minutes from the meeting of the “bust of Roger Nols” working group, 13 October 2022, Brussels Studies Institute [unedited]

25. RTBF, 2018. Le buste de Léopold II au parc Duden “déboulonné” par des militants anti-coloniaux. In: *Rtbf.be*, 11 January 2018 [online].

26. LA LIBRE BELGIQUE, 2020. Un buste de Léopold II déboulonné à Auderghem: “Cela fait des années qu'on essaie de se faire entendre”. In: *La Libre Belgique*, 12 June 2020 [online].

27. LIBÉRATION, 2020. Interview Laura Nsengiyumva: “On devrait pouvoir vandaliser ces monuments avec poésie”. In: *Libération*, 08 July 2020 [online].

28. LIBÉRATION, 2020. Interview Laura Nsengiyumva: “On devrait pouvoir vandaliser ces monuments avec poésie”. In: *Libération*, 8 July 2020 [online].

29. RTBF, 2020. Accord de principe pour déplacer la statue du “Général Storms” vers l'Africa Museum. In: *Rtbf.be*, 28 May 2020 [online].

30. See, for example, the statement by Gladys Kazadi (Brussels MP) in *BX1*, 2020. Décolonisation: les politiques bruxellois prennent position face au passé colonial. In: *BX1.be*, 24 June 2020 [online].

31. https://equalstreetnames.brussels, an initiative of Open Knowledge Belgium and the group Noms Peut-Être

32. https://urban.brussels/fr/news/vers-la-decolonisation-de-l-espace-public-en-region-de-bruxelles-capitale

ABSTRACTS

Memorial markers (statues, street names, monuments, commemorations, etc.) are everywhere in Brussels, and reflect the ideological and political values of their time. Their acceptance – which has naturally evolved over time – has often led to protests. Today, these protests focus mainly on the colonialist, racist or sexist representations conveyed by these markers in the public space. This synopsis presents the main features of the memorial landscape in Brussels since 1830 and proposes a typology of intervention strategies in the face of controversial markers, according to two main lines: the place of intervention and the visibility given to the protest. Based on an analysis of interviews, focus groups, seminars and the press, this typology identifies six strategies, ranging from maintaining the status quo to the removal of the marker. The analysis of each is illustrated by examples and arguments drawn from the body of information regarding Brussels. The study is aimed both at researchers in the field of memorial studies and political decision-makers faced with the management of a controversial marker.

Omniprésents à Bruxelles, les marqueurs mémoriels, (statues, noms de rues, monuments, commémorations...), reflètent les valeurs idéologiques et politiques de leur époque. Leur appropriation qui a logiquement évolué avec le temps a souvent débouché sur des contestations. Aujourd'hui, celles-ci portent principalement sur les représentations colonialistes, racistes ou sexistes que ces marqueurs véhiculent dans l'espace public. Cette note de synthèse présente les principales caractéristiques du paysage mémoriel bruxellois depuis 1830 et propose une typologie des stratégies d'intervention face aux marqueurs contestés, en suivant deux axes : le lieu d'intervention et la visibilité accordée à la contestation. Basée sur l'analyse des discours
(entretiens, groupe de travail, séminaire) et de la presse, cette typologie identifie six stratégies qui vont du statu quo à la suppression du marqueur. L'analyse de chacune d'entre-elles est illustrée par des exemples et arguments tirés du corpus bruxellois. L'étude s'adresse tant aux chercheurs en études mémorielles qu'aux décideurs politiques confrontés à la gestion d'un marqueur contesté.

Gedenktekens (standbeelden, straatnamen, monumenten, herdenkingen...) zijn niet weg te denken in Brussel. Ze weerspiegelen de ideologische en politieke waarden die destijds heersten. De toe-eigening van gedenktekens is logischerwijs geëvolueerd met de tijd en heeft vaak geleid tot protest. Tegenwoordig houdt dergelijk protest meestal verband met kolonialistische, racistische of seksistische voorstellingen die de gedenktekens uitdragen in de openbare ruimte. Deze synthesenota presenteert de belangrijkste kenmerken van het Brusselse herinneringslandschap sinds 1830 en stelt een typologie van de strategieën ten aanzien van omstreden gedenktekens voor aan de hand van twee criteria: de plaats van de ingreep bij wijze van protest en de zichtbaarheid van het protest. Op basis van de analyse van diverse verklaringen (interviews, werkgroep en seminarie) en de pers identificeert deze typologie zes strategieën, gaande van status-quo tot verwijdering van het gedenkteken. De analyse van elk van deze strategieën wordt geïllustreerd met voorbeelden en argumenten uit het Brusselse corpus. Het onderzoek richt zich tot zowel onderzoekers in het kader van herinneringsstudies als beleidsmakers in het kader van het beheer van een omstreden gedenkteken.

## INDEX

**Mots-clés:** action public, espace public, histoire, patrimoine, toponymie

**Keywords:** public action, public space, history, heritage, toponymy

**Trefwoorden** overheidsoptreden, openbare ruimte, geschiedenis, erfgoed, toponymie

**Subjects:** 1. histoire – culture – patrimoine

## AUTHORS

### JOOST VAESEN

Joost Vaesen is a professor of contemporary history at Vrije Universiteit Brussel, attached to the Multidisciplinary Institute for Teacher Training and the Department of History. He has co-authored publications on the commemoration of World War I in Brussels and on the canon in history teaching. He recently wrote a chapter in a book on the pedagogical and didactic approach to controversial monuments in history teaching (“Sleutels tot historisch denken”, Owl Press). joost.vaesen[at]vub.be

### SERGE JAUMAIN

Serge Jaumain is a professor of contemporary history at ULB and a specialist in the history of Belgium and North America. He chaired the Brussels Studies Institute for ten years and edited the *Dictionnaire d'Histoire de Bruxelles* (Prosopon, 2013). He is the first author of two articles published in Brussels Studies on the commemoration of World War I. serge.jaumain[at]ulb.be
## IADINE DEGRYSE

Iadine Degryse has a master's degree in American history (UCM) and a second master's degree in population and development sciences (ULB) and is a researcher at the Brussels Studies Institute. Her work focuses on representations of history in the public space and the management of protests regarding memorial markers since World War II. She works on toponymy, the Parcours BD and the bust of Roger Nols, and is a member of the scientific committee at the Musée de la Ville de Bruxelles.

iadine.degryse[at]ulb.be

## DIRK JACOBS

Dirk Jacobs (1971) is a professor of sociology at Université Libre de Bruxelles. He is affiliated with the Groupe de recherche sur les Relations Ethniques, les Migrations et l'Egalité (GERME) at the ULB Institute of Sociology, and is chairman of the Brussels Studies Institute (BSI). He specialises in the study of migration and integration policies, as well as the sociology of education and urban sociology.

dirk.jacobs[at]ulb.be

## BENJAMIN WAYENS

Benjamin Wayens is a geographer and coordinates the interdisciplinary network of studies on Brussels (EBxl) at Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), the ULB-VUB Usquare OpenLab and the ULB-VUB master's degree in urban studies. Although his research on Brussels is very eclectic, he has nonetheless developed in-depth expertise in quantitative urban observation and analysis of the rationale behind the location of activities. He teaches applied geography and geomarketing and has been conducting research in this field for 20 years, with the retail trade and school systems in Brussels and Belgium as his preferred fields of study. He has also contributed to several publications on urban landscapes and their evolution.

benjamin.wayens[at]ulb.be