In 1898 when the Americans colonized the Philippines, Manila was choked with slums, and plagued with bad drainage, inadequate utilities, and lacked of developed open spaces. In their effort to guide the growth of Manila, Daniel Burnham was requested by the American authorities in 1904 to come and prepare plans for the development of the city. On the 28th of June 1905, Burnham submitted his plan which had major emphasis on civic centers, axial boulevards, and landscaped parks and playgrounds. Burnham's plan is the first comprehensive plan designed for Manila. It was immediately implemented and used as an outline of the city's development and expansion throughout the American occupation. Consequently, Manila was labeled as an American city designed by Burnham who brought to the city the same prominent elements he had for Washington, Cleveland, and San Francisco.

Looking back into Burnham's background, he attempted to gain admission to Harvard and Yale between 1863 and 1867 but failed. In 1870 Burnham pursued a career in architecture without a formal education. Together with John W. Root, they formed a partnership wherein Burnham was the businessman and Root was the designer. They belong to the Chicago School of architects who designed skeleton framed tall buildings with large areas of glass in exterior walls. In February 24, 1890, they were hired as consulting architects for the Columbian World's Exposition in Chicago. In the Chicago Fair, Burnham came into contact with Frederick Law Olmsted and Charles McKim, both of whom would influence him in planning and architecture. After the Chicago Fair and despite the death of Root, Burnham continued his architectural practice and became involved in the planning of cities in the Unite States. In 1905 he proposed a masterplan for Manila.

The Manila Plan of 1905 contained planning elements featured in the earlier works of Burnham: civic center, street system, harmony in architecture, and parks. The civic center with its capitol and department buildings around a plaza is similar to what Burnham planned in the Cleveland Group Plan which was his first time to translate in reality the Court of Honor layout of the Chicago Fair into a civic center. Radial avenues originating from the government center and superimposed over the grid system is a derivative of what he had done in San Francisco. The idea of combining diagonals and grid pattern was adapted by Burnham from the 1791 L'Enfant's plan for Washington. McKim did the radial avenues radiating from Lincoln Memorial in Washington with Arc de Triomphe as his inspiration. Though he advocated classicism in architecture, Burnham recommended the Spanish style in Manila to create harmony with the buildings built previously under the Spanish period. The uniformity of architecture was also applied by Burnham in Cleveland Plan through Roman style. The concept of uniformity was a lesson he learned when he saw the uniform facade in Paris and from his direct participation in the Washington and Chicago Fair wherein Beaux-Arts graduates advocated the classicism in architecture. The parks and playgrounds connected by parkways distributed in Manila were derived from the same application he did in San Francisco. In Washington, Olmsted Jr. connected the large park areas along the boundaries of the city by parkways as a continuous linear park. Burnham lived in Chicago which had an extensive parks and parkways system by the Olmsteds. In the planning of Manila, it is clear that Burnham was using and expanding what he gained from his own planning experiences and what he learned from others.

Three stages - accumulation, emulation and innovation could be derived from Burnham's planning style starting from the early years of his career and culminating at the Manila Plan of 1905. "Accumulation" is the initial stage where he experienced and gathered his planning ideas when he participated in Chicago Fair and Washington Plan. In these same events, he encountered the Beaux-Arts architects, who instilled in him the use of classical architecture and the formal planning of order and symmetry, and the Olmsteds, from whom he learned about parks and parkways. Burnham started with little knowledge in planning, but emerged with ideas of elements needed in a city. "Emulation" is the next stage wherein he tried to imitate the works of McKim and Olmsteds which he thought to be applicable. From Chicago Fair, he got the concept of a cluster-type of civic center which he applied in Cleveland. In Washington, he was oriented with an enlarged format of a civic center which he proposed in San Francisco where the public buildings were afar but anchored to a central plaza. Also in San Francisco, it was his first attempt to apply the outer circuit boulevard and the connected parks as proposed by Olmsted Jr. in Washington. Lastly, the "innovation" stage is the application in Manila of the best derivative or the improved version of each type of elements he applied in his previous efforts. Plan by plan, Burnham expanded his understanding and his skill in handling the elements of the civic center, parks and street systems. An example is the radial roads over grid. The source was L'Enfant's Washington plan which he applied in San Francisco. Another is the outer circuit boulevard from Olmsted in Washington, which he recommended in San Francisco and Manila. The arrangement of civic center in Manila is derived from the prototype of Court of Honor, which Burnham also used in Cleveland. Thus the elements applied in the Manila Plan of 1905 were largely derived from Chicago Fair and Washington that was tested in Cleveland and San Francisco. Though he was making modifications, the three stages manifested Burnham's lack of creativity and proved his high dependence on precedents for his planning.

Burnham's plan for Manila symbolizes Americans' dominion over Filipinos who were resisting their colonial presence. Americans used planning and architecture to create civic order. The architecture of the public structures in American period was an instrument in colonialism. By coincidence, Burnham recommended the continuation of the Spanish style for the buildings in his plan to establish harmony with the immediate past of Manila. This was exactly followed by William Parsons, the first consulting architect responsible to implement Burnham's plan. This scenario is best described as "the transition stage" of architecture of Manila Plan of 1905. Public buildings in Spanish style were used to pacify the Filipinos throughout Parson's eight years of tenure in Philippines. After the resignation of Parsons in 1914, Ralph Doane took over and imposed the use of the classical style. His reasons were: the country had no depth in architectural history and Parsons was not creative, thus necessitated the use of classical style. This stage is considered as the "authoritarian imposition" wherein Doane strictly designed in classicism. When Doane left, his position was filled by Filipinos who were educated in American universities patterned after the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris. This phase is called the "consensual imposition" wherein Filipinos had the choice to use a different style but they willingly gave in to the classicism of their Beaux-Arts training. From hereon Beaux-Arts classicism was the established standard for all government buildings which is a departure from Burnham's original suggestion. Filipinos could have chosen the Spanish style as recommended by Burnham but they preferred Beaux-Arts classicism with reasoning that the buildings in the cities designed by Burnham were using this style of architecture.

At this point, Philippine planning and architecture could be assessed to have been influenced by Paris and Beaux-Arts. The first source of influence starts from Burnham himself. His initial ideas were derived from Chicago Fair, which was patterned by Frederick Olmsted after Paris Exposition in 1889. Burnham's parks and parkways were also influenced by Olmsted, who had witnessed the park movement in Paris in 1850s and went back to the US to design parks and boulevard system similar to Paris. The Washington project was unique in a way that it was the only city on which Burnham was involved to have its own sophisticated plan; it was done by L'Enfant in 1791 who drew his inspiration from Versailles. Burnham's Cleveland plan was patterned after Place de la Concorde. San Francisco's and Manila's street system was patterned after Paris. In addition, all the planning projects of Burnham were on improvement of cities, thus he used the reformation of Paris between 1853-1870 by Haussmann as his reference. Paris was considered by Burnham the model city. Another source was the Beaux-Arts, which started when Burnham met McKim in the Chicago Fair. It was McKim who was the major source of his understanding of Beaux-Arts principles. When the two toured in Paris while doing the Washington Plan, McKim showed him various elements of the city. From thereon, Burnham would continue to work with Ecole graduates in his city planning. He had the assistance of Edward Bennett in San Francisco and Pierce Anderson in Manila. Burnham even chose William Parsons, an Ecole graduate, to implement his plans in Manila. Ecole des Beaux-Arts was the major source of ideas by architects of that period.

Initially, the Manila Plan of 1905 had the potential to be successful: available land, competent designer and right funding. The great part of Manila was vacant and was awaiting development. Burnham chose an Ecole des Beaux-Arts graduate William Parsons, who had the training and background as consulting architect to implement his plan. Philippines was a colony of the US which had the power and finances to support the plan. But further events affected the plan, such as the change of the ruling political party in the US. The Republican Party that supported colonization lost the presidential election, and the new Democratic US president had gradually given up the colony that paved way to the Filipinization of the civil service. Parsons resigned in 1914 and other American professionals began leaving the country. The next American consulting architect concentrated on architecture over planning and also left a few years after. In 1918, US trained Filipino architects took over the responsibility but along came the economic conditions in the US. World War I in 1910s, the crash of the Wall Street in 1920s and world-wide depression in 1930s caused the Americans to withdraw its appropriation to the country, and Manila had to rely on its own small revenue. From thereon, minimal development arose from the plan: few buildings were built, a park was developed, and regular grid street system without the diagonals was opened. When US granted the country a commonwealth status, the Filipino president relocated the capital of the country elsewhere which caused detriment to the implementation of the Burnham Plan and finally stalled in 1935.What the Burnham Plan of Manila demonstrated is that a materplan needed not only a competent planner and qualified professionals but as well as a political consensus and financial backing to be fully realized.

In this study, the Manila Plan of 1905 is regarded as a "product" that went through the stages of invention, innovation and diffusion, wherein the relationship of "source" to the final "outcome" is crucial to the understanding of its formation. This research aims to determine the influences on the masterplan from inception to completion, the background of its creators and the factors that have significant effect on its realization. The present understanding about the end result of a process could be redefined once its development is carefully reviewed and analyzed that leads to the discovery that there is more than the common knowledge. Beaux-Arts classicism as the "source" was used by Burnham as reference in architecture and Haussmann's Paris as reference for his city planning. Thus, the elements of Paris are evident in Burnham's Plan - the concentric rings of boulevards in Paris are the circumferential roads; the radial avenues of Arc de Triomphe are the radial avenues originating from the government center; ovoid form of Place des Victories is the plaza of the government center; grouping of buildings in Louvre is the capitol and department buildings, Place de la Concorde is the new Luneta Park. These essential features and elements present in the plan of 1905 is the "outcome" of Burnham's ideas and design principles. Hence, simply describing Manila as an American city is a partial description because of the obvious presence of French influence through Daniel Burnham and the people behind the implementation of the Manila Plan of 1905.

本論文は、アメリカ建築家ダニエル・バーハムによって1905年立案され、その後さまざまな主体によって実行に移されたフィリピンの首都マニラ計画をバーハムの都市計画の事績と当該期の社会情勢の多角的な分析を通して明らかにし、その歴史的位置づけを行ったものである。バーハムについては従来、一定の研究蓄積があるが、本論文ではマニラ計画で大きな比重を占めることになる都市美化計画の形成と展開がはじめて一連のものとして叙述されることになり、その結果として後述するような、マニラ計画に対する既往研究で見過ごされてきた重要な事実が明らかになった。

論文は11章からなる。1~6章が序論に相当し、研究への導入、理論的枠組み、研究対象、研究の意義、研究対象の範囲、既往研究のレビューが述べられる。続く7~10章が本論に当たる。最後の11章で全体的な結論が示されている。以下、各部分の内容と研究上の到達的・意義についてみていく。

1~6章の序論に相当する部分では、本論文が歴史学的方法を用いた分析であること、したがってさまざまな史料および歴史的事実の「hermeneutics(解釈学)」がその方法上の軸になることが強調される。具体的にはマニラ計画がどのような源泉から生まれてきたものか、そしてその実現プロセスのなかで計画段階とは異なる要素がいかなる影響を与えたかを、ダニエル・バーハムの一連の都市計画の変化のなかで読み取り、その背景を浮かびあがらせることが、本論の研究意義であることが表明される。従来の研究はバーハムの都市美計画に焦点を当てた論考や断片的な都市計画に関する紹介はあったが、マニラ計画に連なるひとつながりの計画群という認識が薄く、したがってバーハム論はもとよりマニラ計画論としても不十分であった点が指摘される。

本論7章はマニラ計画の歴史的位置づけを行うための前提的考察にあてられる。アメリカでセンセーショナルな潮流を形成した都市美運動(7.1)、ランドスケープデザイン運動(7.2)、シヴィック・デザイン運動(7.3)はいずれも西ヨーロッパ、とりわけフランスのエコール・デ・ボ・ザールの建築教育を大きな源泉としている。バーハムはボ・ザール留学経験をもたないが、アメリカで数多くの様式建築に腕を振るったマッキム・ミード・アンド・ホワイト事務所のマッキムはボ・ザールに学び、本格的な古典主義建築および都市景観のアメリカへの移植に大きな役割を果たした。バーハムもまたこうした動向に敏感に反応してみずからのプロジェクトを展開させていった。本章では当時のアメリカ建築界の動向を丁寧に押さえたうえで、バーハムの個人史(7.4)および彼が手がけた数多くの都市デザイン(7.5)の全貌に迫っている。

1893年のシカゴ博覧会、1896年の地中海旅行と同年のサウス・ショア・ドライブ計画、ワシントンD.C.のマクミラン・コミッション計画、1903年のクレーヴランド計画とウエスト・ポイント計画、1905年のサン・フランシスコ計画へのレポート、1909年シカゴ計画のそれぞれのプロジェクトについて、都市計画上の意図と計画要素について分析を試み、これらがいずれも1905年のマニラ計画に結実する手法の前提を成していることを説得的に解き明かした。バーハムの都市計画が都市美運動などの社会的背景とともに、一連のものとして分析しえたことによって、あらためて当該期のアメリカにおける都市計画のもつ別の側面が浮き彫りにされることになった。すなわち、あくまでその源泉はヨーロッパにありながら、アメリカ的都市の理想像が強く求められ、それに応えるかたちでマッキム・ミード・アンド・ホワイト事務所やバーハムは、アーバン・デザイン言語の開拓に迷うことなく向かうことができたということである。この指摘は本論の重要な成果のひとつということができよう。

本論8章はマニラ計画そのものの分析であり、本論文のもっとも中核にあたる部分である。スペインの植民地時代のマニラ(8.1)、アメリカ支配下に入ったマニラ(8.2)がまず概観され、ついでバーハムのマニラ計画が取り上げられる(8.4)。マニラ計画の主眼はそれまでのスペイン植民都市の小規模な都市スケールをはるかに超えた範囲を都市領域として認識し、ウォーター・フロント、公園とパークウェイ、全体の道路システム、主要建築の配置と様式、水上交通システム、保養地計画などが既存の都市の先行条件に配慮しつつ、全体として秩序と調和を示すところにあった。図8.4bで示された著者独自の分析図がマニラ計画の総合性を雄弁に物語る。マニラ計画がこのように完成度の高いものであって、単にバーハムのアメリカ諸都市の計画の引き写しでなかったこと、バーハムはきわめて慎重に既存の都市的コンテクストを読み込んでいたこと、メガロポリス化するマニラを予見した将来計画など、従来まったく見逃されていた諸事実がここにはじめて明らかにされたのである。

9章はこうしたマニラ計画が実施に移されていく段階の問題を取り扱った部分である。1905~14年のウィリアム・パーソンズ、14~18年のラルフ・ドーン時代を経て、1918年以降はアメリカで教育を受けたフィリピン人建築家たちがマニラ計画を引き継いでいく。ウィリアム・パーソンズはバーハムの計画意図を忠実に果たそうとしたがすべては実現せず、続くラルフ・ドーンは建築様式について大きな主張を行い、それまでのスペイン・コロニアルスタイルにかわって古典主義的な様式の普及に力を注ぐ。そしてフィリピン人建築家たちはドーンの方針を継承しつつ、ボ・ザール様式を積極的に採用し、最終的に1935年のマニラの姿が誕生する。マニラ計画のその後の展開については、ほとんど先行研究がなく、この部分の学術上の貢献は大である。総じて、マニラ計画のその後、バーハムの理想からは次第に遠ざかっていき、実現された部分は限定的という評価が一般的であるが、本論が明らかにしたように将来への展望を含む道路システムやウォーター・フロント計画などは、明らかにその後のマニラ成長を下敷きになっているのである。

10、11章が結章となり、すべてのバーハム計画がここにあらためて集められ、都市軸、シヴィック・センターと広場、公園、放射状道路、建築の調和の5つの側面について、(1)源泉、(2)採用、(3)適用、(4)創造の4段階の発展プロセスとして再定位されている。最後にバーハムの都市計画史上の再評価が叙述されて論を閉じる。

以上を要するに、本論文はダニエル・バーハムの1905年のマニラ計画について、その歴史的位置づけをはじめて総合的に行った意欲作であるといって間違いない。既往研究を丁寧に踏まえつつ、各章で展開される分析はきわめて論理的整合性が高く、実証レベルも高い。とりわけ、ややもすれば机上の空論的アーバン・デザインを行ったとされるバーハムがさまざまな計画案で培った都市計画手法を止揚させ、マニラ計画においてその総合性を発揮したこと、計画立案に先立って既存の都市的コンテクストが深く読み込まれていたことなどが明らかにされたことは、従来の研究史を書き換える大きな学術的貢献である。

よって、本論文は博士(工学)の学位請求論文として合格と認められる。