CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Places & Architecture

Bispebjerg

district in Copenhagen, Denmark

Architectural plans, a scale model, maps and brass measuring instruments
Places and architectureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 16, 2026
Entity authorityQ339420
Source-derived summary

Bispebjerg, more commonly referred to as Nordvest (English: "North-West"), is one of the 10 official districts of Copenhagen Municipality in the city of Copenhagen in Denmark. Located on the northern border of the municipality, it covers an area of 5.39 km2 and a population of 40,033. More specifically, Bispebjerg refers to a smaller neighbourhood within the district, located on the Bispebjerg Hill from which it takes its name.

Geography

Bispebjerg covers an area of 5.39 km2 and has a population of 40,033, giving a population density of 7,389 per km2. The district is bounded by Gentofte Municipality to the north, Østerbro and Nørrebro to the east and south-east, Frederiksberg to the south, Vanløse and Brønshøj-Husum to the west and Gladsaxe Municipality to the northwest.

History

The name Bispebjerg is known from 1681 as Biszebierg. A windmill was built in the area in 1808. Bispebjerg belonged to the civil parish of Brønshøj but in the 1890s, the City of Copenhagen acquired large pieces of land in the area with the intention of establishing a cemetery and a hospital in the grounds. Bispebjerg was together with the rest of Brønshøj merged with Copenhagen in 1901. Bispebjerg Cemetery opened in 1903 and Bispebjerg Hospital was built between 1908 and 1913.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Bispebjerg” as district in Copenhagen, Denmark. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Bispebjerg, district and Copenhagen.

Editorial reviewA strong orientation record where physical form, institutional use and historical geography need to be read together. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1681, 1808, 1901, 1903—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Bispebjerg, district and Copenhagen providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Bispebjerg”, the useful work is to connect “district in Copenhagen, Denmark” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Place names and jurisdictional language are key evidence: both can reveal earlier catalogue descriptions and overlooked record series. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q339420. Authority coordinates are 55.709, 12.534. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1681, 1808, 1901 and 1903.

Critical limits

Modern boundaries and familiar names can conceal earlier jurisdictions or structures that do not align with the present site. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.

Best used for
  • Historic place names
  • Jurisdictional context
  • Routes into maps and plans
Verify next

Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Bispebjerg”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Bispebjerg primary sources, Bispebjerg archive and Bispebjerg research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Bispebjerg”?
  2. Which earlier names or jurisdictions may reveal additional records?
  3. What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Bispebjerg” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.