Tom Frantzen Amsterdam Academy of Architecture, Amsterdam, the Netherlands 427
law that elementary geometry (the study of form) was to be a permanent ingredient
of primary school education along with language and mathematics. This Morphology
was the brainchild of the Swiss specialist in educational methods Pestalozzi, who
assumed that ‘all knowledge proceeds on the basis of number, form and word’. Besides
mathematics and language, he also propagated a subject in which elementary forms
(square, proportions of sections of a line, position of points and lines in relation
to one another) were studied. Van Dapperen, a Dutch follower of Pestalozzi, later
wrote the textbook on Form Study: Handleiding voor onderwijzers om volgens eenen
geregelden leergang kinderen te leeren opmerken, denken en spreken, toegepast op de
zamenstelling der eenvoudigste voorwerpen uit de meetkunde, bekend onder de naam
vormleer [Handbook for teachers to teach children in a systematic way to observe,
think and speak, applied to the composition of the simplest geometrical objects,
known by the name of Morphology].^6 Replace ‘children’ by ‘architecture students’ and
‘geometrical’ by ‘architectural’, and you have a handy description of Morphology for
a study guide of the Academy of Architecture Amsterdam.
In 1878 a change in the law was intended to abolish the subject, on the grounds that
most teachers did not know what Morphology was. The chapter of the dissertation
on which I have drawn for this information is entitled ‘100 years of Morphology: a
failure’. Replace ‘teachers’ by ‘architects’ and the failure is complete.
Off to Weimar, then, because this town keeps popping up in the literature on Mor-
phology. For instance, the book Inleiding tot de kennis van symbolische vormen en
van de mystiek der bouwkunst [Introduction to the knowledge of symbolic forms and
the mystique in architecture] (1948) by Jan de Boer is riddled with citations from
Goethe, who came from Weimar. In spite of, or perhaps because of the fact that this
book was evidently written from a religious perspective, it was a revelation to me.
What nobody had ever taught me when I was a student is brilliantly described here,
such as the various symbolic meanings of the square, the circle, the cross and the
triangle. The link between the mathematician and the architecture is established in
a simple way.
Mathematics, the knowledge of the absolutely certain, included the knowledge
of the genesis of the world, the mystery of the cosmos, the secret of the creation.
When this science had been recorded in measure and number, it covered the math-
ematical field of knowledge of the priest-architect. In proportion, in dimension, in
angles of gradients and in design, their buildings speak with certainty and accuracy
of an extraordinary astronomical and geometri-
cal knowledge. In the pyramids we observe the
memorial that was to bear witness to that knowl-
edge through the centuries.^7 [fig. 3]
In addition to the widely known architectural
qualities listed by Vitruvius — firmitas (solidity),
utilitas (utility) and venustas (beauty) — Jan de
Boer mentions the role of architecture as medium,
as the vocabulary with which the architect can
speak. Morphology could be a language course
for architecture students in which they learn to fig 3