Protagonists of Urban Spatial Order in a Longue Durée Perspective: Example of the City of Luxembourg

english version of https://hdl.handle.net/10993/57412. This article examines the question of who was responsible for urban planning and urban spatial planning from the 10th to the 21st century. The institutional actors are analysed within the historical framework of political, social, economic and cultural nature. As a result, continuities in urban development will become visible, raising the question of whether these were path dependencies or the only possible option. In other words, it will be necessary to analyse the positive effects of previous development that explain why alternative paths - if there were any - were not taken. Above all, the fortress character of the city of Luxembourg will be transferable to other cities as a development path that is difficult to escape. In this respect, it is worth taking a long look into the past, also because many publications on planning history are limited to the most recent decades. For example, it can be shown that until the London Treaty of 1867, which ordered the demolition of the fortifications, the military authorities had the most lasting effect. Since then, there has been a planning rivalry between the state and city authorities, while city dwellers still have hardly any say in the matter. Whether the now widespread intertwining of the political city and state elite and private project developers is a unique feature of the European City of Luxembourg or can also be proven elsewhere,