documentary on Belgian television

[Bert Heyvaert]

Just saw a splendid documentary on Belgian television, covering recent work of battlefield archaeologists in Flanders, especially the prospection on Pilkem Ridge. Very interesting to see the technological means that the archaeologists use in their desktop study. And good to see people as Nicholas Saunders featured in the program as well.

It is clear that the Flemish archaeologists make up for the fact that they are understaffed, by using the latest state of the art technology. Hopefully a subtitled version of this documentary finds it way towards British channels as well.

Best,

Bert

[abn311]

I've also seen it and it was indeed interesting.

The pros recognise the role of amateur-archaeologists (not to be confused with ordinary relic hunters). Battefield archaeology was never a part of the archaeology curriculum, and they realise some amateurs have built up an expertise that can not be neglected.

The overlay of trench maps and contemporary air-photographs on modern topographical maps is clearly an interesting method to search for important spots on the battlefield. I thougth that they would also use present-day air photographs (crop marks etc.) but that is apparently not the case.

(other) Bert.

[zijde26]

I was very pleased with that splendid documentary. I wonder what will happen with the further extension.

Gilbert Deraedt

[Bert Heyvaert]

One thing seems quite sure, if they build the motorway as it is planned now, a huge excavation project will have to be put up. This might mean considerable time-loss for the constructors. The archaeologist interviewed in the program estimated that they might find up to 500 bodies. Even if they don't, it takes one archaeologis a whole working day to excavate a burial + finds, and than he's working pretty fast. The standards with the unit I worked for in England was two digging days for one burial, to proparly excavate and record the remains and the rest of the fill + the cut. A simple calculation: 500 bodies multiplied by two = 1000 digging days. Even if they only find 100, that's still half a year. Given the fact that they have quite a few workmen, I would say that proper excavation of the whole transect ( bodies, trenches, etc...) will at least delay the whole project with 8 months, maybe even a year. It seems most plausible to me that the goverment will opt for an alternative route.

regards,

Bert

[ChrisC]

Or will money talk? I personally know of admittedly less emotive areas where builders just hush up what they find because archeology costs time & money. Today's capitalists building a lucrative road link may not give a damn about the fallen. Sad but that's the world we live in.

[Bert Heyvaert]

Dear Chris,

Just to clarify my posting: an 'alternative route' doesn't necessariliy mean a transect that is vompletely different from the original one. Several options just imply a slight diversion of the motorways route, to 'save' the most important archaeological areas. It is my guess they will opt for such an option.

Even if the motorway is not built at all, the 'optimalisation' of the final exit will necessarily cut more than a hundred meters deep in the in the agricultural fields, and destroy lots of archaeology.

regards,

Bert

[BatterySergeantMajor]

Dear Chris,

Just to clarify my posting: an 'alternative route' doesn't necessariliy mean a transect that is vompletely different from the original one. Several options just imply a slight diversion of the motorways route, to 'save' the most important archaeological areas. It is my guess they will opt for such an option.

Even if the motorway is not built at all, the 'optimalisation' of the final exit will necessarily cut more than a hundred meters deep in the in the agricultural fields, and destroy lots of archaeology.

regards,

Bert

Bert

This won't be possible, every slight diversion will run through this 2nd and 3th Ypres area. The only acceptable alternative will be an improvement of the actual existing roads with ringways around the villages along the Veurne- Ieper road.

Erwin

[Aurel Sercu]

(1) This won't be possible, every slight diversion will run through this 2nd and 3th Ypres area.

(2) The only acceptable alternative will be an improvement of the actual existing roads with ringways around the villages along the Veurne- Ieper road.

(1) I agree.

(2) In theory : yes. But it sounds easier than it will turn out in practice.

Aurel

[AndyHollinger]

Just a question here ... admittedly here in the US we have fewer such sites or areas where they might be such numbers AND when we do find a burial site, it is always moved with great expense (during a renovation in downtown Dallas, they found an old Slave burial plot and it held up construction for months and cost millions to relocate. At some time the present must take over from the past. I can't imagine a square kilometer of that part of Flanders which wasn't fought over at some time during some war ... do they draw the line at WWI or the 100 years war? Is this TRULY the will of the Belgian gov't or is this because of people like us who object and the authorities aren't willing to face the "PR" ...

When we visited the Salient, we were told by Belgian farmers that if they find a body during some farming activity, they simply mark the spot with a stick and wait till after harvest to tell the authorities about it as it would destroy their livelihood ...

Just questions.

[NIGEL]

Just to add another little ditty to the discussion, When my grandad died in 1930 who had served in WW1. He had purchased his own plot for his family to be included so it was a plot for 3. We found all the original paperwork for his grave plot purchase as we found an insurence policy which had never been cashed up. Anyway it turns out the stipulation of the grave plot sale was for "EVER ", not a 100 years or any other time limit, but for "EVER " meaning eternity. Now that should give a lawyer some thing to chew over when they want to build houses on that cemetry dont you think???

[Aurel Sercu]

Just a question here ...

(1) I can't imagine a square kilometer of that part of Flanders which wasn't fought over at some time during some war ... do they draw the line at WWI or the 100 years war? (2) Is this TRULY the will of the Belgian gov't

(3) Or is this because of people like us who object and the authorities aren't willing to face the "PR" ...

(4) When we visited the Salient, we were told by Belgian farmers that if they find a body during some farming activity, they simply mark the spot with a stick and wait till after harvest to tell the authorities about it as it would destroy their livelihood ...

Just questions.

Andy,

Glad to hear your reaction and opinion

(1) You're right of course.

(2) If "this" means : preserving the area, not extentding the motorway, the answer is : no it's not. And not the will of the large majority of the Flemish (local) people either.

(3) I'm afraid it is (partly) "because of people like us". And to be honest and straightforward : I do not belong to "us", strange as it may seem ! (I don't expect to be thanked for this, but it is my opinion. And only my personal opinion. Which does not necessarily mean : Go ahead with that motorway !)

By the way, what does PR stand for ? Public reaction ?

(4) I sounds like a little exaggeration, though it may be possible. However, if it happened frequently, I think we should know. For the remains have to be reburied, haven't they. And I cannot really remember many remains having been reburied that had not been found by the Diggers these past years.

Let me add that there are other aspects that burden the issue, maybe even more important to the general public and authorities than the historical ones. Like : money, economy, environment, road safety, farmers, the NIMBY syndrome etc.

Aurel

[frie]

Hello,

Area of Ypres,

On a lot of family-vaults you can see the inscription "grant for ever" some years ago that "for ever" became 50 years....

Burials without vault only for 5 to 10 years....

When Elverdinge-churchyard was relocated, my grandfathers tombstone was taken away, he is still buried at the same place, I dont know (no more) the exact spot. The churchyard became a lawn... But I remember him, that's more important than his grave.

[NIGEL]

Thats an interesting Frie, and if that ruling is universally applied, it will mean that the days of old graveyards will be limited to around 50 years, except for ones of national importance and those with a preservation order on them ( in a politician's home village to stop any new development ).

[Simon R]

The present always sublimates the past, but is it absolutely necessary to build yet more roads through it?

It is evident that the past has been taken over by the present simply through the evidence of our own actions - we decide and choose in the present whether to pour concrete over the Towton burial pit, chuck those Neolithic bones in the gravel crusher, sell our metal detector finds on e-bay.... the past in itself does nothing (to quote the man). It's the decisions we take today about fragments from antiquity, the moral and epistemological values we think we'd like to enunciate about these remains that matter. That's a basis for reasoning and discussion isn't it?

We should and generally do have the courage of our convictions to stand up and be counted. Isn't it our business to show people differences (to quote the other man)? Presumably we think there's (literally) a world of difference attached to these earthly remains, a different series of ideas that can illuminate the darker corners of humanity with flare, imagination and intellectual labour in the present. The aim is to look into the gaze of the gorgon and not be turned to stone by the vision.

Are farmers going out of business because of bodies? Couldn't they get subsidies and copious compensation?

New Years day and I'm feeling righteous. And hung-over.

[bkristof]

like many discussions before (like Bellewaarde) the main question stays:

Do we chose progress and development OR

Do we chose for history and preservation.

A good balance is the best thing to do i think, like the yorkshire trench.

A piece of preservation in the middle of progress on an old battlefield.

Happy new year,

kristof

[Simon R]

This issue exists in a context as Aurel outlined above and as I tried to describe. It's much more complicated than past vs present, progress vs regression - that one is especially value laden and we should seriously question what we really mean when we utter it. We should be able, through study of material remains, to be able to show different points of view that question emplaced ideas such as progress.

That's really the antithesis of the late, great archaeologists like Pitt-Rivers - Western Europeans at the top of the pile in the present with stone-tool using natives at the bottom.

The ideas we generate about material remains go far beyond their utilitarian aspect. Is it not a battleground of ideas and morals too?

[Bert Heyvaert]

I feel the time for me has come to do what archaeologists are best at: nag that they don't have enough means.

Maybe I am not fully getting the whole picture behind the recent archaeological excavations on Pilkem Ridge, but to my humble opinion there is something seriously wrong here.

Flemish minister Van Grembergen contacted the Flemish Institute for archaeological patrimony ( IAP, now VIOE) to conduct an evaluation of the archaeological value of the treatened area.

So: archaeologists work on the order of a politician. Now don't get me wrong, the VIOE did a good job, and their work was more than necessary. But still there is something fundamentally wrong. Shouldn't it be more logical, that the plan for the motorway would pass by the VIOE, and that they themselves, in the planning phase, should decide: "yes, we think this is valuable, yes, we have to excavate, that's the amount of money we need to do it properly, let us do our job or don't built the motorway" How to fund it? simple, polluter pays.

Maybe I am biased by working under the english system... but honestly, if archaeology is not taken into acount seriously in the planning phase, and if politicians decide archaeologists' priorities, there is something seriously wrong with our system. The archaeology of the first world war is some of the most valuable archaeological heritage we have in Flanders. It is something unique! something we have that other countries do not have!!! And no, off course we can not save everything, that should never be the idea, after all people still have to live here. But shouldn't we at least try to give it the attention it deserves? It just sadenes me that an area like Boezinge has to be dug by enthusiastic volunteers. I have so much respect for their work and their dedication, but honestly, this work should have been done by professionals who have access to the latest state of the art technology. Again, this is NOT critique on the adress of the diggers, but on the flemish archaeological system

I got a bit carried away here, but that is my humble opinion

Bert

[mcderms]

The simple answer is that both the govt and construction companies need to factor in time and resources for investigation and excavation when working on the old front line. As a project manager, I recommend building links with a recognised group like the old Diggers organisation as well as the museums and relevant coroners etc. etc. and getting all these people on board and scheduled to start work within a given window of opportunity.

With all the work that is going to happen in the next few years, I am surprised that (a) the amateur groups are so opposed to expansion and that ( someone hasn't set up a professional WW1 archeaological company already.

[Simon R]

I am equally surprised that the blizzard of media interest in archaeolgoy, inumerable abseiling archaeologists, beards, jumpers, only 3 days to do it etc ad inifinitum doesn't seem to have been the prime mover some people thought it would be.

[BatterySergeantMajor]

(2) If "this" means : preserving the area, not extentding the motorway, the answer is : no it's not. And not the will of the large majority of the Flemish (local) people either.

(3) I'm afraid it is (partly) "because of people like us". And to be honest and straightforward : I do not belong to "us", strange as it may seem ! (I don't expect to be thanked for this, but it is my opinion. And only my personal opinion. Which does not necessarily mean : Go ahead with that motorway !)

Let me add that there are other aspects that burden the issue, maybe even more important to the general public and authorities than the historical ones. Like : money, economy, environment, road safety, farmers, the NIMBY syndrome etc.

Aurel

I won't tell something new to Aurel when I admit I am completely opposed to the extension of the motorway. As a consequence (and because I am convinced that Aurel is a reasonable man who is capable to accept different points of view), I will claim the inverse to what he says: yes, there is an important group who is against the A19. It all belongs to how you determine the group.

I do not know if I belong to "us".

What I know is that there are several reasons why this road should never be constructed. The archeological and emotional valour are probably reasons enough, but apart from that you can add some other important arguments: the esthetical and environmental aspects of the landscape, the absence of an integrated view on urbanisation and landscape in Flanders, the obsession of Flemish people to pour concrete everywhere (and then to paint it green and call it nature development),...

You think Yorkshire trench is a good example for future projects Christoph? I am convinced it is not. It is the cheapest way to attract tourists. Of course it has an important educational value, but it is also typical for the approach: "spend as least as possible and get the maximum out of it". Then Bayernwald is a much better example of how things should be approached. There the trenches are restorated/ renovated in their context.

I can find myself in Bert's mail, and what he is writing underlines my point of view about Yorkshire trench. And then we have to admit that the Flemish minister Van Grembergen was the first to see the importance of battlefield archeology (but was not able to spend money on it).

There is still a long way to go before we will realise that we can learn something from what happens in for example Britain. A pity that everything valuable will be gone by then.

Erwin

[bkristof]

You think Yorkshire trench is a good example for future projects Christoph? I am convinced it is not. It is the cheapest way to attract tourists. Of course it has an important educational value, but it is also typical for the approach: "spend as least as possible and get the maximum out of it". Then Bayernwald is a much better example of how things should be approached. There the trenches are restorated/ renovated in their context.

Well it is better than nothing... But it is indeed what you say.

I just wanted to point out that a balance and a compromise is the best thing to do.

And offcourse nothing is black white, but sometimes people make it more difficult than it is. Suppose the politics did agree with the A19... and didn't contact GB. Would their be a problem then???

Bayernwald is offcourse superb!!!

[BatterySergeantMajor]

Why am I not astonished with such a quick reply from you Cristoph?

Erwin

[bkristof]

i am working on our website...

so why not looking on the forum now and then?

always nice to talk with you erwin.

Happy new year by the way.

[Aurel Sercu]

Erwin,

Just to say that I have read your posting. And that there are things that I understand, but other things that cannot really convince me.

But as I had promised myself not to enter a debate ...

Only this : I do not support the A19 extension, but I'm not really against it either. (There are pros and cons, and I am not an expert on environmental issues, traffic problems, agriculture, rural planning, etc.) But what I am against is some "false" arguments.

E.g. the 'enormous' numbers of missing men that are quoted from time to time ("30,000 British men fell on Pilkem on 31/07/17")

Or that the extension (3 or 4% of Pilkem Ridge area) would destroy Pilkem Ridge. Or that extending a motorway is a lack of respect to the fallen. If it is, then people who use this as an argument should never use the A19 motorway where it is now, northeast and east of Ypres : Zonnebeke, Beselare, Geluveld (Wieltje, Frezenberg, Polygon Wood). I have never met anyone who refuses to use the A19 or who feels guilty when using it because it goes right through a Great War battlefield. Of course, I know, battlefield preservation was not an issue 20 or 25 years ago. Yet ...

But I'm afraid that saying that looks like I want to rouse a debate. And I don't. Or certainly do not want to enter one.

Aurel

[dugout]

Hello everyone,

I like to reply on some things;

Shouldn't it be more logical, that the plan for the motorway would pass by the VIOE, and that they themselves, in the planning phase, should decide: "yes, we think this is valuable, yes, we have to excavate, that's the amount of money we need to do it properly, let us do our job or don't built the motorway" How to fund it? simple, polluter pays.(Bert)

I think the situation is improving, if we look at the past. The VIOE is doing a great job, and their archeologists are doing all they can, with the people and money they have. They are also not happy with the use or the work of volunteers, but is was not always the IAP or VIEO who took the decisions. From now on it will. I think we have to give the people of VIEO some credit.

Also the government / politicians have to respect and follow the law. So If they bring in an dossier to receive a building permission for a highway, the IAP –VIEO has to give their advise that is binding. So don’t worry, the necessary steps will be followed and the works will not begin without prospecting first. The Belgian law also says that to get such a building permission the government has to organize an “Openbaar Onderzoek” (public investigation). So during the 30 days of this investigation everyone, even you, can write a funded protest to the government. If your protest is acceptable and funded, they are compelled to take note of your points and give you a answer. This can force them to change the plans. So it is not all so bad. Belgian civilians also have a voice in our democratic system. I can only advise everybody to use it.

You think Yorkshire trench is a good example for future projects Christoph? I am convinced it is not. It is the cheapest way to attract tourists. Of course it has an important educational value, but it is also typical for the approach: "spend as least as possible and get the maximum out of it". Then Bayernwald is a much better example of how things should be approached. There the trenches are restorated/ renovated in their context (Erwin)

I do not have to give my opinion about Yorkshire trench or Bayernwald. I only point to a letter we received (VIEO also received that copy) from some people who helped on the Bayernwald site. They witnessed about the use of digging machines to do archeological digging and the destroying of a original shaft cap, while they said “don’t worry we will make a new one”. I wend you a copy of this letter with this message.

I watch out what new things 2005 will bring us in this subject.

Best wishes,

Kristof J.