'Lies against history?'
Authors: Von der Dunk Thomas H. 
Published: July 2021

During the twentieth century a great many monumental towers and tower terminations were so severely damaged by fire, tempest or war that the question arose as to whether, and if so how, they should be rebuilt. Should it be in the exact same form as before the destruction, or should some other solution be sought? In the latter case, was a return to an earlier (putative) original version preferable to something new? And if the latter, should one opt for contemporary architecture, or was a more historicizing formal idiom desirable?
To what extent was the guideline embraced in 1917 by the government department responsible for cultural heritage (Rijksbureau voor de Monumentenzorg), which stipulated a contemporary architectural style for additions in the interests of historical honesty, actually followed in practice? In the localities themselves there was a preference for restoration of the old state, and that did eventually occur in a number of cases. On the basis of some twenty examples, this article looks for the first time at whether any clear trend can be discerned in the choices made. Of special importance in this context are the five design competitions (for the town hall tower in Leiden and for visually defining church towers in Arnhem, Zutphen, Hulst and Weert), because specific requirements could be laid down in the design brief, after which a jury was required to choose from among a series of entries and to publicly substantiate its preference.
The need to rebuild was always a given, even if, as when the entire church had been destroyed by war, it did not enjoy the highest priority. Entirely medieval towers like that of the Martini Church in Doesburg, had the greatest chance of being rebuilt in the original form. If a Gothic tower had a termination in Renaissance, Baroque or Classicist style, the decision was often informed by an aesthetic judgement: the tower termination of St Stephen’s Church in Nijmegen was considered characteristic, that of St Eusebius’ Church in Arnhem was not. The Baroque termination of the Abbey Tower in Middelburg was largely reinstated but modified to accommodate the demand for a larger carillon. In practice the dividing line lay in the middle of the seventeenth century; later terminations tended to be considered too unremarkable.
Neo-Gothic spires atop Gothic towers were always replaced. Sometimes by a reconstruction (free or otherwise) of an older termination in Renaissance or Baroque style, such as in St Christopher’s Cathedral in Roermond; in other cases with a modern, wholly new termination, as in St Willibrord’s Church in Hulst, or a slightly historicizing one, as for St Martinus’ Church in Weert. Even though undamaged by war, the cast iron spire of St James’s Church in The Hague was replaced by a spire that harked back to the original sixteenth-century spire.
In the case of Gothic towers, one option that was never really tried was a reconstruction of the original (needle) spire, either because it had never been realized, or because of a lack of reliable information. Only in the case of St Walburgis’s Church in Zutphen was this option considered, but in the end it was decided to rebuild the fire-ravaged ‘pepper pot’ spire.