Putterij
former neighbourhood in Brussels, Belgium
The Putterie (French, pronounced [pytʁi]) or Putterij (Dutch, pronounced [ˌpʏtəˈrɛi]) is a former quarter of central Brussels, Belgium. The district was centred around Saint Mary Magdalene's Church, between the Rue de la Montagne/Bergstraat, the Rue de la Madeleine/Magdalenastraat and the current Boulevard de l’Impératrice/Keizerinlaan. It was largely destroyed starting in the 1920s with the works of the North–South connection, a major railway link through central Brussels, to develop the area for Brussels-Central railway station and other modern office buildings. Many historic structures were lost in the demolition process.
Some of the area was redeveloped in the 1980s and 1990s with varying degrees of success, with buildings in the New Classical architecture and the New Brick Renaissance style, following the principles of New Urbanism and the European Urban Renaissance. The name of the street has survived to this day.
See also
Neighbourhoods in Brussels
Granvelle Palace, a demolished palace in the district
Brusselisation
History of Brussels
Belgium in the long nineteenth century
References
Citations
Bibliography
Aubry, Françoise; Vandenbreeden, Jos (1997). Horta: Art Nouveau to Modernism. New York: Harry N Abrams. ISBN 978-0-8109-6333-7.
“Putterij” enters the record as former neighbourhood in Brussels, Belgium. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Putterij, former and neighbourhood can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Putterij” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Putterij, former and neighbourhood provides the most credible route into that argument.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Nov 30, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q24886592. Authority coordinates are 50.846, 4.357. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1997.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. 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
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Putterij”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Putterij primary sources, Putterij archive and Putterij research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Putterij”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Putterij” 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.