Search

Theorien multipler Differenzierung haben Konjunktur. Sie teilen die Annahme, die Gegenwartsgesellschaft sei durch mehr als eine Differenzierungsachse (z. B. funktionale Differenzierung oder vertikale Ungleichheit) charakterisiert. Solche Theorien thematisieren Anregungen sozialen Wandels höchst unterschiedlich. Der Beitrag unterscheidet drei Ausprägungen: (1) Anregungen als von eher historischem Interesse; (2) als inflationärer Dauerzustand; (3) als durch spezifische Modi (Kritik/Kooperation) ermöglicht. Die evolutionär-institutionalistische Perspektive Seth Abrutyns stellt demgegenüber ein Theorieangebot dar, das multiple Differenzierung auch als Ergebnis der Gestaltungsarbeit institutioneller Entrepreneure auffasst. Sie verzahnt multiple Differenzierung und Wandel unmittelbar. Dabei stellt sie die Überzeugungsarbeit solcher Wandelarchitekten in den Vordergrund und spielt Gestaltung und Evolution nicht gegeneinander aus. Abrutyns Rekonstruktion stoppt kurz vor der Gegenwartsgesellschaft. Hieran anschließend beleuchtet der Beitrag philanthropische Organisationen als zeitgenössische institutioneller Entrepreneure. Theories of multiple differentiation have been gaining momentum. They share the assumption that contemporary society is characterized by more than one axis of differentiation (e.g., functional differentiation or vertical inequality). Such theories address the instigation of social change in very different ways. The paper distinguishes three types: (1) instigating as of more historical interest; (2) disturbance as the usual case; (3) as enabled by specific modes (critique/cooperation). In contrast, Seth Abrutyn's evolutionary institutionalist perspective presents a theoretical proposition that conceives of multiple differentiation also as the result of the formative work of institutional entrepreneurs. It directly links multiple differentiation and change. In doing so, it foregrounds the persuasive work of such change architects and does not play design and evolution off against each other. Abrutyn's reconstruction ends shortly before the present society. Following this, the article sheds light on philanthropic organizations as contemporary institutional entrepreneurs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The architect Leo von Klenze was invited by the Greek government to modify the map of Athens of the architects Stamatios Kleanthes and Eduard Schaubert in 1834. One of Klenze's major modifications concerns the separation of the market area into a commercial and an amusement part. Our recently conducted research in Greek archives brought to light documents which reveal an unknown contribution of Klenze in the establishment of a modern market in the center of Athens. The market of Athens would have included stores, apartments, green areas and a fountain and would have been realized by the French entrepreneur François Théophile Feraldi. Klenze designed a threestory building type for the stores and the apartments in Italian style. The government would have bought the building ground from private owners at a low price and would have sold it to Feraldi at the same price. The market center was finally not realized, but the drawing, which, on the basis of the new archive material, can be clearly attributed to Klenze, shows how Klenze had imagined the architectural form of the private buildings in Athens. Another novelty our research brought to light and which is discussed in our paper is a concept of the section of architects for the central market of Athens, submitted one year later, which was not implemented either. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article deals with two unknown projects made by the Swiss- Italian architect Pietro Antonio Trezzini, who was active in Russia between 1726 and 1751. According to the Commission of the Senate, in 1747 Trezzini designed a five-domed cathedral in Stavropol, for which he provided two design options. One of these projects, which was approved by Empress Elizaveta Petrovna, was realized between 1750 and 1757. In both projects, Trezzini presented the cathedral as a monumental five-domed centrally planned church, which is an integral part of Trezzini's designs. All but one of the Orthodox churches designed by the architect had five domes (we know of 13 such designs, including all the alternative versions). Although Trezzini was not a initiator of this new type of five-domed centrally planned church, his work displays the most mature and diverse development of this approach in Russian Baroque architecture. The article describes the general features of Trezzini's churches and certain individual ones as well. Trezzini's projects for five-domed churches were directly related to the revival of a traditional type of Orthodox church proclaimed by the Empress Elizaveta Petrovna. This idea was widely reflected in Russian church architecture of the time, but its concrete realisation was rather varied. An attempt is made in article to characterise this situation by briefly focusing on a comparison of Trezzini's designs and the five-domed centrally planned churches designed by other architects. The five-domed churches, which were revived in mid-18th century Russia and persistently promoted as a national and Orthodox solution, actually had nothing in common with local medieval tradition. Typologically, the five-domed Russian churches of the mid-18th century were rooted in European architecture, namely in Italian Renaissance and Central European Baroque architecture. The most important European sources of inspiration were probably St Peter's Cathedral in Rome (a project by Michelangelo), the Church of St Catherine in Stockholm and the Frauenkirche in Dresden, which the leading mid-18th century architects in Russia were undoubtedly familiar with European, primarily Italian, churches with two symmetrically placed towers on the western facade and a dome over the intersection, for example, Sant'Agnese in Agone in Rome, should also be taken into consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]