HERITAGE REINVENTS EUROPE
A critical approach to values in archaeology, the built environment and cultural
landscape
12th EAC Heritage Management Symposium
Ename ● Belgium ● 17-19 March 2011
in collaboration with
the Government of the Province of East-Flanders and
the Institute for Public History - Ghent University
Conference organiser: Dirk Callebaut
KEY ISSUES OF THE COLLOQUIUM THEME
The process of European integration is a laborious (and never-ending?) story. The search continues
for new opportunities to bolster the ‘Europe-feeling’ and to create an affective link between citizens
and the Union.
Starting with a pragmatic idea of a common economic destiny in Europe in the 1950’s, today the cry is
for a sense of shared cultural values that will bind us together. All kinds of EU programmes exhibit this
thrust toward mutual understanding, such as the Culture 2007-2013 Programme which supports
projects “to celebrate Europe’s cultural diversity and enhance our shared cultural heritage through the
development of cross-border co-operation between cultural operators and institutions”. Also, the
European Heritage Label aims to “enhance the value and the profile of sites which have played a key
role in the history and the building of the European Union, and seek to increase European citizens’
understanding of the building of Europe”.
The question is whether or not all this is evident. Does archaeological, architectural and landscape
heritage really have sufficient instrumental leverage to promote the integration process of Europe?
Can it in fact compensate the shortfall of a common identity of the Union? Should and can we develop
a shared vision on Europe from a heritage point of view?
The new approaches highlighted in the Faro Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society
put a particular perspective on the elaboration of these questions.
With the support of the “Culture” (2007-2013) programme of The European Union
and The Flemish Government
DAY ONE:
THURSDAY 17 MARCH 2011
9.00 – 12.00
EAC General Assembly (close session for EAC members)
13.40 – 14.00:
Introduction: Katalin Wollak & Dirk Callebaut
Welcome: Jozef Dauwe, Deputy Province of East-Flanders
SESSION ONE:
14.00
14.20
14.40
15.00
15.20
15.40-16.00:
SESSION TWO:
Coffeebreak
16.00
16.20
16.40
17.00
17.20:
SESSION ONE
Ulf Ickerodt: Archaeology, Caveman, Megaliths, and the
Formation of European Identity
Marie-Hélène Corbiau: Roman roads. From the imperial
programme to the landscapes of the 21st century
Søren M. Sindbǽk: All in one boat – Vikings as European
Intercitizens
Thomas Coomans: Identity Ambivalences of Monastic
Heritage International Networks: The Case of the
Cistercians
Elizabeth Horth: Le Réseau Art Nouveau Network: an
experience of 10 years of European Collaboration
Andreina Ricci: Archaeology and today’s cities: the case
of Rome
Noel Fojut: Choosing our heritage: some examples from
Scotland
Marina Vicelja: Hidden patrimony – topoi of memory in
urban structure
Riikka Aalvik: Wrek of Vrouw Maria – a Treasure Hunt or
common European Heritage?
General discussion and summary of the day
EUROPE: THE POWER OF A COLLECTIVE IDEA
Is Europe the ‘broad faced moon’ illuminating the world, or a coincidental synthesis of
geocultural destinies? Are the Great European Stories unique in history or echoes of human
endeavour through time and space? This session will explore the meaning and significance of
some turning-point events in European history in relation to major events in World history.
How did the Western mental image of itself succeed in dominating the concept of history
throughout the world? How heritage sciences and society continuously change through their
interaction. What is the effect of the level of interaction on the changes?
- 2- 2
-
ULF ICKERODT:Archaeology, Caveman, Megaliths, and the Formation of
European Identity
Archaeologists as scientists and as associates of cultural heritage protection agencies
are, as far as their routine work is concerned, torn between the demands of academic
research and their mandate as administrative bodies. Nevertheless, they have the habit
to perceive their field of operation as pure and value free science. Despite this,
archaeological sites and artefacts have a function as social inspiration (Leitbild) and
contribute therefore to (our) social identity. The best known examples of the political
abuse of science based foundation myths are known from the German Third Reich and
Marxist countries.
Using the iconic value of prehistoric man and of megaliths as a starting point, the
socially integrating effect of relics and artefacts of the past on secular societies will be
shown. This research is based on a qualitative and quantitative study of contemporary
media (scientific publications, advertisements, art, the press, books, films, and comics)
with the aim to analyse the social framework influencing our archaeological
interpretations and the mediation of our scientific knowledge. In this paper we shall
examine the case of the “identity”-value of prehistoric man and megaliths and how their
image is used to promote social values and the effect that this has on the perception of
the past.
On a more abstract level, I wish to discuss two major questions. Firstly, who benefits
from cultural heritage management, i.e. who is it done for? And secondly, what is the
social purpose of cultural heritage management? When tackling these questions we
must keep one important aspect in mind: what responsibilities are resulting from this?
MARIE-HELENE CORBIAU:
Roman roads
From the imperial programme to the
landscapes of the 21st century
In the Roman state the development of a major road network is integrated in the
imperial policy of Augustus within the framework of the organisation of the conquered
territories. Rome can communicate with its provinces as far as their frontiers thanks to a
dense network of roads of primary importance connecting the towns, the administrative
hubs on the imperial chequerboard. This political and strategic initiative is enhanced and
completed by secondary roads and waterways servicing the whole territory. Moreover, it
includes the repair or the development of certain existing axes. This road policy is
continued by the other emperors.
Ever since the Antiquity the Roman roads have made a strong imprint in the rural and
urban landscape because of their topographical and architectural qualities, marking all
the provinces of the empire. In various proportions and in diverse forms these lines of
force have maintained themselves throughout two millennia and their presence invites
the present countries concerned to a historical and cultural dialogue.
This lecture focuses on these three aspects.
- 3- 3
-
SØREN M. SINDBÆK: All in one Boat – Vikings as European Intercitizens
In the year 841 the Byzantine emperor Theophilus wrote the Frankish emperor Lothar
for help against a Saracen army, who had captured Crete. Byzantine imperial seals from
the same year found in three strongholds in Scandinavia suggest that similar requests
were carried to rulers among the distant Vikings, who had recently made their First
appearance in Byzantium, travelling through Russia. The appeal proved fruitless, but
less than two decades later Vikings did indeed sail the Mediterranean, perhaps in a
belated response to Theophilus’ invitation. Often construed as an exclusive
Scandinavian heritage, the Vikings are in fact one of the most encompassing images of
Europe’s early Middle Ages. As an icon for early maritime expansion, the Viking
heritage is one of pan-European and indeed global appeal. Always masters of
opportunity, the Vikings serve in contemporary discourse variously as counter-cultural
heroes, bearers of national identity or protagonists of liberal enterprise. Yet their more
appropriate place, in a perspective both of scholarship and of heritage, is along with
Frisian merchants, Croat pirates or Saracen warriors as champions of cultural models
beyond the vision of a lost Roman identity implied by the concept of a “Middle Age”.
THOMAS COOMANS: Identity Ambivalences of Monastic Heritage
International Networks: The Case of the Cistercians
The Cistercian order, founded in Burgundy in 1098, spread in a very short time over all
Europe and counted no less than 700 abbeys for men and 300 nunneries at the end of
the 13th century. Within the Western Monasticism, the Cistercian order formed a unique
structured network and was a major contribution to Europe’s religious, economic and
cultural development in the Middle Ages. Nearly all these abbeys were suppressed
during the 16th century in the countries that became protestant, and in the rest of Europe
at the end of the 18th century. Only a few Cistercian communities survived and were
able to recover their buildings. New abbeys were founded in Europe and North America
thanks to the revival of monasticism in the 19th century and the interwar period.
Nevertheless, most sites of suppressed abbeys remained private ownership and were
reused to other purposes or ruined.
This paper examines the complex and sometimes contradictory values that this
monastic heritage is carrying today. Several religious and lay international networks –
associations of owners, study centers, routes, spiritual movements, etc.– have been
founded during the two last decades in order to protect and promote different aspects of
Cistercian and Trappist heritage, including spirituality, culture and art, but also food and
alcoholic beverages. This broad spectrum leads to identity ambivalences and
sometimes to conflicts between religious ideology and tourism economy. In one word,
the ongoing process of “heritagization” based on idealized medieval networks, monastic
authenticity, and present (inter)national identity building is at a crossroad and needs
some critical reflections.
ELIZABETH HORTH:
Le Réseau Art Nouveau Network: an experience of
10 years of European Collaboration
No text available.
- 4- 4
-
SESSION TWO
THINKING ABOUT EUROPEAN HERITAGE INDUCTIVELY:
WHAT LESSONS FROM LOCAL HERITAGE?
Are we proceeding from a legalistic, ontological focus on conservation to an inspirational,
functional focus, from specimen (local character) to type (general construct)? What does the
experience at the site or museum say about relationships with the larger geo-cultural context?
Striking meaningful balances and transcending specifics.
ANDREINA RICCI: Archaeology and today’s cities: the case of Rome
Considering the various sensitivities that reveal themselves when discussing cultural
matters, especially archaeological sites spread out in a certain area, one aspect is
mostly overlooked: the significance of these sites in the imagination of the people and
their community and the way these sites contribute to the formation of a ‘collective
identity’, which is becoming more and more ‘diverse’ and ‘different.
I chose to talk about Rome because historical remains are scattered practically all over
town: from the centre of the city to the most heterogeneous fabrics at the edge of
today’s urbanisation.
Although we are dealing with the same town and the same archaeological remains
within that same town the perception of these by different local communities is not the
same at all.
That is why this city, which is so famous for its antiquity, is utterly
appropriate to reflect upon the use of the remnants of the past within a modern
diversified urban environment.
NOEL FOJUT: Choosing our heritage: some examples from Scotland
Scotland aspires to multi-culturalism, but the ways in which our cultural minorities
interact with ‘their’ heritage vary greatly. How significant are immoveable heritage
assets in the construction of modern identities? Do they help us to understand shared
links, or simply emphasise differences? Are there lessons we can learn from our
national experience which help in constructing a European heritage-based identity?

The first example is Scotland’s Celtic/Gaelic heritage, where the former
majority linguistic and cultural tradition is now reduced to a small minority tradition
which feels threatened, and which is the subject of strong political and financial
support: is there a distinctive Gaelic archaeological heritage, and if there is, does
this have any value in the construction of cultural identity?

The second example looks at links between Scotland and Poland. A long
history of small-scale population exchange was followed by a large Polish
presence in the form of troops during World War 2. This left behind a small
legacy of built heritage, and considerable numbers (including the author’s father)
who chose to settle in Scotland after the War. Today, Scotland once again
- 5- 5
-
welcomes a new generation of Polish students and workers: do these newcomers
feel any attachment to the longer established Polish community or the tangible
heritage of past connections?

Finally, Scotland itself represents a minority within a larger state, the United
Kingdom, and our national heritage can feel marginalised ‘at UK level’: does the
experience of being a minority in a larger context help us to deal with our own
internal minority heritages?
MARINA VICELJA: Hidden patrimony – topoi of memory in urban structure
The paper discusses problems of urban archaeology, a growing discipline within
interdisciplinary dialogue. On the example of the city of Rijeka (Croatia) the author will
try to rise several discussion topics:

the problem of ‘hidden patrimony’ in the urban matrices – the difficulties to
perceive archaeological tradition either because it is physically hidden or badly
presented, or not recognized in the city structures. How is presentation of
archaeological patrimony and its perception guided and understood from the
perspective of local government, everyday life, different interest groups etc.;

the problem of ‘archaeological ethnography’ – necessity of migrating through
research fields and combining practices of respective traditions in order to
understand relevant contexts. This also involves the problem of perceiving and
defining ‘local tradition(s)’ vs. ‘European tradition(s)’
and the urge for better
dissemination of knowledge on the European heritage.
RIIKKA ALVIK: Wreck of Vrouw Maria – a Treasure Ship or Common
European Heritage?
Vrouw Maria was a Dutch merchant ship, who´s last voyage started in the autumn 1771
from her home harbour Amsterdam to St. Petersburg. She got lost in the storm and
sank on the rocky coast of Finland. Most of her cargo was sugar, cloth, dye stuff and
food, but then there were very precious items like paintings, mirrors, flower bulbs and
other luxuries for the Russian nobility. Some of the cargo was salvaged after the
accident, but inter alia the paintings for Catherine the II were lost in the sea. Partly
compensating for these missing artworks, there are rich archival sources left like
diplomatic correspondence between Russia and Sweden. This is why Vrouw Maria has
gained a reputation as a treasure ship. Searches for the wreck started in the 1970´s.
The finding of wreck in the Finnish Archipelago in 1999 ignited much discussion about
the status of Vrouw Maria. Who owns the wreck and the cargo, which is still inside of
her hull? Who´s history does shipwreck represent? Should the wreck be salvaged and
put into a museum? Should the wreck be excavated in situ? According to the Finnish
Antiquities Act shipwrecks sunk more than 100 years ago belong to the state. Finnish
authorities are responsible of the management and research of underwater cultural
heritage at our territorial waters.
- 6- 6
-
Seafaring is, however, international and Vrouw Maria is an excellent representative of
trade and merchant ships in the 18th century. Therefore Vrouw Maria may be regarded
as common European cultural heritage. But does one operationalise this?
17.20
GENERAL DISCUSSION & SUMMARY OF THE DAY
07.00 PM: EXCURSION
Velzeke – visit of the Provincial Archaeological Museum, which focuses on
the period from prehistory to the early Middle Ages. Followed by a reception
by pamVelzeke.
- 7- 7
-
DAY TWO:
SESSION THREE:
FRIDAY 18 MARCH 2011
9.00
9.20
9.40
10.00
10.20-10.40:
Coffeebreak
10.40
11.00
11.20
11.40
12.00-13.00:
SESSION FOUR:
13.00
14.00
14.20
SESSION FIVE:
Jana Maoikova-Kubkova: Great Moravia and the realm of
the Premyslids – the beginnings of the Czechoslovakian
myth
Dusan Kramberger: Partisan Hospital Franja reconstructed
Lore Colaert: “The Private is Political”: Exhumations of mass
graves in The Spanish Civil War and Dictatorship
Maja Musi: The heritage of war in the urban landscape of
Sarajevo. Sites of memory/mourning World War II and the
1992-1995 conflict.
Rob Van Der Laarse: Europe’s Holocaust Terrorscapes:
Mutual or dissonant heritage in East and West?
Coffeebreak
15.00
15.20
15.40
16.00
16.20
16.40
17.00:
Vladimir Goss: Toward a multi-focal vision of European
culture. Discovering the Early Slavic Cultural Landscape in
Croatia.
Thomas Meier: From landscapes in Europe to a European
landscape?
Jos Bazelmans: Nationalism, Canonical History and
Archaeology in The Netherlands
Discussion
Lunch
13.20
13.40
14.40-15.00:
Kirsty Norman: Local, regional or international? The role of
UNESCO World Heritage in changing local perceptions of
the value of heritage in the North East of England.
Véronique Lambert: ‘Lieux de mémoire’ and identity:
dangerous twins
Alexander Gramsch: Archaeology, the Public and
Europeanism. Looking out from between all stools.
Roel During: Cultural Heritage: expressing the
contradictions of “united in diversity”
Sofia Pescarin: Virtual Museums: from the Italian
experience to a trans-national
Irene Hadjisavva: European funding: a pool of opportunities
for cultural heritage
Daniël Pletinckx: Archaeology and Monuments in 3D in
Europeana
Luc Vandael: The Flemish project ‘Heritage of the Great
War’: a case study of an integrated and supported heritage
strategy
Piet Chielens: A First World War “Heritage” as a lever for
multiple processes of identification in a local, national,
European and Global perspective: the example of “De
Westhoek” (i.e. “Flanders Fields”, Belgium)
Dirk Callebaut: ‘Cradles of European Culture’: a Culture
2007-2013 project that aims to join national and European
ambitions in the heart of Europe
General discussion and Summary of the Symposium
- 8- 8
-
SESSION THREE EUROPEAN AND NATIONAL VISIONS: HOW DO WE
CONNECT EUROPEAN SPACE WITH LOCALITY-SPECIFIC
HERITAGE?
What are the relationships between ‘Europe’ and ‘local’ on a theoretical level? How do we
cope with fluid collective and hard specific boundaries? Geo-cultural dynamics in Europe
through time and space. Using time-space dimensions evocatively in research, management,
presentation and education. Exploring windows of opportunity for a common understanding of
shared values.
KIRSTY NORMAN:
Local, regional or international? The role of UNESCO
World Heritage in changing local perceptions of the
value of heritage in the North East of England.
The North East of England is an area with a very strong sense of its own separate
history and identity within the UK. There is natural pride that the region has several
World Heritage Sites, but this has not necessarily been accompanied by an acceptance
that their heritage is one that is shared comfortably, even with adjoining regions. This
paper looks at the tension between these factors: local pride and ownership, regional
aspirations, and international recognition. Has the international accolade of World
Heritage status changed local attitudes to "their" heritage?
Hadrian's Wall WHS (now part of the Frontiers of the Roman Empire transnational
WHS), and the UK's 2011 World Heritage nomination, the 7th century AD twin
monastery of Wearmouth and Jarrow, will be used as case histories in this examination
of issues and opportunities for the development of new identities presented by the
nomination and management of locally valued sites on the basis of their international
significance.
VÉRONIQUE LAMBERT: ‘Lieux de mémoire’ and identity: dangerous twins
Every nation has its own ‘lieux de mémoire’. They are places of remembrance that
evoke a strong feeling of solidarity among the members of the nation by appealing e.g.
to a common victory (or defeat) in a distant past. This event legitimizes the existence of
the nation and also gives the nation the strength to live on. Since the disintegration of
the former Eastern bloc nations ‘lieux de mémoire’ have become frighteningly topical
again. The example of the situation in the Balkans is obvious: Serbs and Albanians
base their claims to specific territories on historical myths. These myths do not only
have a clear political function, they serve as a means towards national identification and
differentiation too. The immovable heritage also plays a part here. The battlefield of
Kosovo Polje was important for the development of Serbian nationalism. In his speech
on the occasion of the commemoration of this battle in 1389 Milosevic cleverly managed
to use these ‘lieux de mémoire’ to arouse the nationalistic feeling of the Serbs. This is
- 9- 9
-
not a unique example.
There are plenty of other cases that prove that ‘lieux de
mémoire’ and identity can turn out to be dangerous twins.
ALEXANDER GRAMSCH: Archaeology, the public, and Europeanism.
Looking out from between all stools.
Can heritage be used to create a ‚Europe-feeling‘? Should it be used that way? This
paper aims at exploring some of the issues and the actors involved in archaeological
heritage, its presentation to the public, and its political and cultural meaning. A decade
ago I have criticized attempts to create a European identity on cultural and historical
grounds as being exclusive and separative. Today I want to cast a closer look at identity
discourses on the regional level, involving excavations and monuments and their display
to the public. Archaeological heritage management is caught between two (or more)
stools: it is itself part of ‘the public’, competing with others who produce and circulate
knowledge, trying to convey its view of the past – stories which are relevant to the
present but which at the same time have to cope with criticisms of identity constructions,
nationalism and Europeanism. How do we conceptualize the relationship between
academic archaeology, heritage management, and ‘the public‘, the relationship between
knowledge production and consumption in particular, if we want to create non-exclusive
identities?
ROEL DURING: Cultural Heritage: expressing the contradictions of “united
in diversity”
National heritage, World heritage: it seems so familiar to us, but what is European
heritage? Is it a more specified category of world heritage or a broadened form of
national heritage? European heritage is supposed to unite the people of Europe. But if
cultural heritage unites people, then it also divides people. European Heritage differs in
this respect from World Heritage because its inclusiveness is based on exclusion. But
national heritage symbolises the single core understanding of nations that overlooks the
relevance of value pluralism and cultural diversity.
The Faro definition of cultural heritage claims its value as memory, identification and a
resource for creativity. Cultural heritage and identity discourses coincide in the
discussions
on European citizenship, cross
cultural
understanding, economic
specialization and tourism development. In Europe identity pluralisation is conceived of
as dangerous and is believed to require regulation by means of cultural tourism. This
shows the ideological struggle between fearing and valuing cultural diversity. This
struggle is wrapped around competing frames of culture and cultural heritage
contributing to unity and diversity. Those who believe in cultural unity pay a tribute to the
variety of cultural heritage by calling it an asset or unique selling point for societal
progress; those who believe in cultural diversity as a key characteristic of Europe speak
of “our common heritage”. This ambiguity is grounded in pluralist and universalist views
of society and functions as a feeding ground for a never ending carousel of cultural
heritage projects merely floating on the idea of European Heritage.
- 10- 1
0
VLADIMIR GOSS: Toward a multi-focal vision of European culture.
Discovering the Early Slavic Cultural Landscape in Croatia
Research in European humanities, the traditional repository of Europe’s cultural
creativity, has been marred by at least the following biases:
 mono-focality, i.e., identifying the western part of Europe as the standard locus
of cultural excellence;
 elitism, i.e., centering on ‘high culture’ (courtly, urban) at the expense of
everything else;
 national exclusivism regarding ‘secondary’ nations (Scandinavian, Slavic and
European nations of Asian origin);
 religious exclusivism that rejects forms not compatible with western European
Christianity.
Such views, albeit untenable, are still present in the united Europe. Our argument for a
multi-focal and non-exclusivist view will be supported by references to an art history
project which, in cooperation with archaeology, cultural anthropology and linguistics, has
been discovering outlines of a pre-Christian Slavic cultural landscape in Croatia, a fertile
area for such research given the multi-ethnic, multiconfessional, and multicultural nature
of the country’s history. The multi-focal and non-exclusivist approach, while correcting
old errors and biases, is:
 the key to cooperation between the natural and cultural ecology which is crucial
for defending and creatively developing the total ecology;
 a major support for studies into both negative and therapeutic roles of space by
the most up-to-date research in bio-medicine;
 an enormous help in spatial planning, involving both material and spiritual
elements.
To conclude, the correct reading of our cultural ecology and its traditional paradigms of
spiritual and physical space organization are a precious tool for creating a better
functioning environment for the united Europe, present and future.
MEIER THOMAS: From landscapes in Europe to a European landscape?
Actually the discourse on landscapes in Europe strongly emphasizes aspects of
diversity and plurality. Heritage approaches are pointing out the local and regional in
landscapes, while the ELC stresses landscapes to contribute “to the formation of local
cultures” and to be “an essential component of people’s surroundings, an expression of
the diversity of their shared cultural and natural heritage, and a foundation of their
identity.” On the other hand landscape is regarded to be an essential part of the shared
cultural heritage being itself the “source of the European collective memory”. Matters of
sharing and collectiveness in constructing a European identity, however, raise the
question whether there is anything like a European landscape beyond the plurality of
landscapes in Europe, which may be an anchor to a common European identity.
Formalistic (e.g. geographical), functionalistic (e.g. promotion of economy), discursive
(e.g. unifying concept) and essentialistic/substantialistic (e.g. historic, religious)
definitions of Europe all have fundamental shortcomings in being unsuited to fully cover
historical and actual changes of concepts of Europe and be sufficiently inclusive
- 11- 1
1
towards diversity and minorities. Current approaches therefore try to define Europe by
practice, being a specific way of dealing with diversity. This approach integrates
numerous aspects of the definitions above, especially of the discursive and
substantialistic ones, but is flexible enough to cope with change and plurality.
This paper is going to explore, whether such an understanding of Europe as specific
practice is applicable in landscape research as well.
JOS BAZELMANS:
Nationalism, Canonical History an Archaeology in The
Netherlands
‘Disappointing’ – one word that sums up the response of many Dutch archaeologists to
the historical canon commissioned by Minister Van der Hoeven of Education, Culture
and Science in 2006. The fifty ‘windows’ of the canon present an overview of ‘all of the
significant people, texts, works of art, objects, phenomena and processes that show
how the Netherlands has evolved into the country we inhabit today’. Allocated just two
windows – dolmens and the Roman Limes – the archaeology of the Netherlands is
relegated to a minor role. The historical canon triggered many reactions when it was
published. The question has been asked, and rightly so, whether the state should
present a canon that ‘supports a civilised form of Dutch identity and even Dutch selfawareness’. The benefits of debating this issue lie in the fairly broad consensus that the
project can help to represent and anchor the values underpinning our democratic
system rather than a specific Dutch identity. On this last point, however, the discussion
may have taken a new direction now that scholars and politicians are advocating a form
of ‘civilised nationalism’. Criticism has also been levelled at the fact that the canon
obstructs our view of the world beyond the Netherlands. Although some windows do
show something of European and world history, a few additional archaeological
windows would naturally have paid greater attention to the Netherlands as part of a
wider world. A look at prehistory and protohistory would have revealed that the
Netherlands, the Dutch state and the Dutch community are recent phenomena. The
Netherlands is not a natural entity, but a random product with a brief and changeable
past history. This also means that the content of the canon has no enduring value in
perpetuity. This is not the place to present the definitive missing windows for the preand protohistory of the Netherlands. But I intend to make a start. I am doing so in order
to provoke discussion, but above all to show why the story of pre- and protohistory is
both interesting and important. It gives us an initial point of reference with regard to the
diverse values contained in what at first glance appears to be an unfortunate term –
namely, ‘civilised nationalism’.
- 12- 1
2
SESSION FOUR CHALLENGED BY DUBIOUS LEGACIES: IS SOME HERITAGE
DESIRED AND OTHERS UNDESIRED?
Trails of selective memory: Now you see them, now you don’t. Should we and can we
integrate the memory, relics, places and spaces of European man-made disasters such as
two world wars, destruction of the European Jews, ethnic cleansing, civil wars in the process
of forging greater European unity? Possible benefits and limitations of ethical inclusivity.
JANA MAOIKOVA-KUBKOVA: Great Moravia and the realm of the Premyslids
– the beginnings of the Czechoslovakian myth
The Czechs and the Slovaks were united in a new state in 1918. We do not only
consider the changes that have developed in that region since the 19th century against
this background, but also the perception of the common high-medieval history. The
dynasties of Mojmir and Premysl and the names of Saint Cyril and Saint Method have
generated new interest. Attention is drawn to the Slavic past and to the sites that can
be linked to the beginning of the first political formations.
What was the role of
archaeology in the first decades of the new republic, during the Second World War and
under the communist rule?
What were the real reasons for the foundation of the
Czechoslovakian Institute for Archaeology in Prague?
DUSAN KRAMBERGER: Partisan Hospital Franja reconstructed
In the autumn of 1943 the construction of a clandestine hospital started in a remote
gorge Pasice in the W Slovenia . Named after the chief doctor Franja Bojc Bidovec it
gave the refuge and medical care to wounded solders and ill civilians till the end of the
WW II. Ever since, the 14 wooden cabins with more than 800 museum objects have
been carefully tended as a national monument of humanitarianism and solidarity. It was
inscribed on the UNESCO Tentative List and was awarded the European Heritage
Label. In September 2007 the site was brushed away nearly completely by heavy flood.
After thorough documentation research and study of possible conservation approach
the decision for complete reconstruction has been taken. On May 22, 2010 the work has
come to conclusion. Which are the historic values of the site? Is the monument
reconstructed or presented? Are values preserved? The place of memory vs. individual
monument.
LORE COLAERT: “The private is political”: Exhumations of mass graves of
the Spanish Civil War and dictatorship
At the tenth anniversary of the first scientific exhumation of a mass grave in Spain,
Emilio Silva, who found the body of his grandfather during that exhumation in 2000,
- 13- 1
3
stated: ‘before 2000, I had never spoken in public. Here, in the mass graves, the silence
was born. And here it was broken as well.’ Although gravesites have usually been
regarded as private spaces of mourning, the exhumations of mass graves of the
Spanish Civil War and dictatorship have recently become spaces for public
acknowledgement of truth. Victim organisations are increasingly pleading for more
public involvement of the government and judiciary. In this paper I try to analyze the
public and private, and the political and non-political aspects of mass grave
exhumations. Moreover, I argue that the framing of these exhumations as public or
private is a political act in itself. I’ll describe how during the dictatorship, the mourning
for the missing was ‘privatized’ by the public silence about the republican victims.
Although that silence has been broken recently, even in the ‘Law on Historical Memory’
of 2007 the discourse that tries to confine the exhumations to the private sphere is still
persisting. Supporters of the exhumations stress that ‘they don’t want to do politics’, and
that the wishes of the families are the most important. These wishes increasingly
include individual identification of the bodies in the mass graves. The public/private
divide is also present in the debates about what to do with the bodies once exhumed: do
they belong to the family, or to the ‘cause’ of the Republic, or to the ‘Spanish nation’?
Are the dead receiving an intimate, individual reburial, or a visible, collective one?
As Francisco Etxeberría, a forensic anthropologist in Spain, stated: ‘a mass grave only
exists from the moment it is exhumed’. From that moment onwards a close reading is
possible of the performance of the exhumation and reburial ceremony and of the
different discourses of forensic anthropologists and victim organizations, the state, the
family and other actors involved. This way we can learn how meaning is constructed
around these ‘new’ sites of memory emerging in the public sphere.
MAJA MUSI: The heritage of war in the urban landscape of Sarajevo. Sites
of memory/mourning World War II and the 1992-1995 conflict.
The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina signed at
Dayton in late 1995 provided for the establishment of a Commission to Preserve
National Monuments. It is the only institution at the state level in charge of designating
monuments of significance for the whole country, in the context of the complex
administrative and institutional geography of post-Dayton Bosnia and Herzegovina, and
against a background of still contested and competing versions of the recent past.
In the city of Sarajevo, the Commission designated 90 national monuments until now.
Yet – despite the massive presence of commemorative signs marking events and
victims of the siege – none of the items designated is a monument erected to
commemorate the 1992-1995 conflict. What are the implications of such apparent partial
forgetting? What does the “national monument” label entail in a country composed of
two largely autonomous Entities and a self-governing District?
I will present the case of two “monumental sites” in the urban landscape of the Bosnian
capital – a memorial dedicated to World War II, and one dedicated to the 1992-1995
conflict. Aim is to analyze the implications of their recognition (or lack thereof) as
national monuments, and the process of re-construction of cultural heritage vs. that of
construction of a new monument, in relation to the memorialization of the armed
- 14- 1
4
conflicts from which Bosnia and Herzegovina emerged twice as a newly-forged
state/republic.
ROB VAN DER LAARSE: Europe’s Holocaust Terrorscapes: Mutual or
dissonant heritage in East and West?
From the Second World War onwards European political integration is based on the
assumption of a common cultural heritage. Yet, does such a mutual heritage really
exist? Notwithstanding the common roots of European culture and the ongoing project
of the Enlightenment, Europe’s nation-states share a history of war and conflict.
Nonetheless, the devastating horrors of two World Wars have for the last six decades
stimulated a unique process of unification. Millions of fallen soldiers, the mass slaughter
of European civilians, and the destruction of the Jews have – as a Never Again! determined Europe’s postwar humanist identity. Politics of memory play a crucial role in
this process. Yet, I will argue that after the Fall of the Wall (1989) the assumption of the
Holocaust as a common European experience, and hence as a basic part of Europe’s
postwar identity, raises some critical objections. The Western Paradigm will be
challenged, in particular, by a deep incompatibility of opinions about the impact,
interpretation and meaning of the World Wars and the Cold War between present-day
Western and Eastern European populations. It asks for completely new interpretations,
integrating (and confronting) different European experiences during ‘the Age of
Extremes’, and a fundamental rethinking of postwar politics of memory.
- 15- 1
5
SESSION FIVE
HERITAGE PRESENTATION AND THE STORY OF EUROPE:
EXPERTS VERSUS THE PEOPLE
Who owns Europe: the policy-makers, professionals, site-owners/managers or the audience?
Whose opinion tips the scale? Each group uses a specific set of instruments access to which
is jealously guarded.
How do we reinforce and augment traditional means of gathering, processing, assessing and
distributing heritage knowledge through e.g. demand-driven research and social
coproduction? Theory and practise.
SOFIA PESCARIN:
Virtual Museums: from the Italian experience to a transnational network
The talk will be focused on the concept of Virtual Museum and its challenge for the
future of Cultural Heritage. Virtual Museums are based on Virtual Heritage, intended as
a process and not as the simple digital representation or reproduction of a site, a
monument or an artifact.
Virtual Museums (VM) are a new model of communication that aims at creating a
personalized, immersive, interactive way to enhance our understanding of the world
around us. Although the term is used in many different contexts, the key word is
“experience”. There are several open issues that would need to be solved at
international level in the future, in order to enable the future Virtual Museums to be
really user-oriented and sustainable, to obtain the role they should have. A network of
excellence, founded under FP7 program, V-MusT.net, will try to reach this goal, trying
also to increase European competitiveness in the field, also creating quality evaluation
references.
Some exemplary case studies will be presented, developed in the last 10 years, such as
the Virtual Museum of the Scrovegni Chapel (2003), the Virtual Museum of the Ancient
Via Flaminia-multi-user application (2008), Colours of Giotto's Natural Interaction
installation (2010). Finally, results of a museum analysis on users feedback will be
presented.
Web: www.vhlab.itabc.cnr.it
IRENE HADJISAVVA: European funding: a pool of opportunities for cultural
heritage
After Cyprus accession in the European Union, Cyprus has access to various sources of
funding. Claiming part of these funds is an extremely competitive task, where
preservation of cultural heritage per se is not considered as a top priority. However, the
field of cultural heritage preservation and interpretation can benefit both directly and
indirectly from different schemes and programmes. This presentation will demonstrate
- 16- 1
6
the way that Cyprus managed to take advantage of the various schemes and promote
cultural heritage preservation. It will also present the actors of the process: the policymakers that have elaborated the schemes according to their own organisational
agenda, the professionals that have implemented the projects, the owners that have
invested but also taken advantage of the schemes for their own profit, as well as the
final users of the different projects.
How can the interests of these groups be all
accommodated within the framework programmes? How do people conceive the
European dimension of these projects? Is this idea in co ordinance to Europe’s
aspirations?
The cases to be discussed include:

EU Structural Funds (various schemes)

Agrotourism Programme (EU Structural Funds)

EEA and Norway Grants

Euromed Heritage III (RehabiMed Project)

Culture 2000 (TriMed Project)
DANIEL PLETINCKX: Archaeology and Monuments in 3D in Europeana
The Internet portal Europeana.eu is providing an ever expanding number of images,
texts and videos about European culture. This portal not only provides easy access to
vast numbers of high quality digital copies of European cultural objects but also allows
users to discover how our European culture is closely interlinked and how it has evolved
as a common entity over time, regardless of current national borders.
Europeana
provides the evidence of the existence of such a European culture, accessible through
many languages.
The CARARE project will, in the period 2010-2013, add about 2 million objects about
archaeology and monuments for exploration, education and research. It will focus on
new functionality such as georeferencing and 3D. Especially 3D is anticipated to have a
major impact on the capabilities for heritage education. It will not only allow an
unprecedented access to major archaeological sites and European landmark
monuments but also stimulate new ways of exploration, from the detail to the wide
context. Technologies such as 3D digitisation, 4D visualisation and semantic web will
support these new capabilities.
Europeana brings European cultural heritage to the living room or office of every
interested citizen. Through innovative additions to the Europeana website, CARARE
augments the exploration and educational capabilities of Europeana, that has been
launched officially in summer 2010 with 10 million objects. Only time will tell if this effort
will be able to leverage a better understanding of Europe and its culture.
LUC VANDAEL: The Flemish project ‘Heritage of the Great War’: a case
study of an integrated and supported heritage strategy.
The First World War was a turning point in history. On the eve of the centenary of the
First World War (2014-2018) Flanders has set up a unique remembrance project. The
project ‘Heritage of the Great War’ occupies a key position within this remembrance.
- 17- 1
7
Since no eye witnesses are left, the heritage of the First World War forms the last bridge
between the past and the present, and is therefore the best remedy against forgetting.
In order to embed the heritage of the First World War in a permanent and sustainable
manner, Flanders is mapping out a four-track heritage strategy consisting of:

Scientific research into WWI heritage.

Protection and spatial embedding of WWI heritage.

Developing a management vision regarding the restoration, maintenance and
opening up of WWI heritage.

Increasing the significance of WWI heritage by aiming at (international)
recognition.
Through concrete examples it will be explained in further detail how Flanders is
developing this complex and multi-tiered project into an integrated and supported
heritage strategy by establishing a process of communication and consultation as well
as a solid organisational structure.
PIET CHIELENS: A First World War “Heritage” as a lever for multiple
processes of identification in a local, national, European
and Global perspective: the example of “De Westhoek”
(i.e. “Flanders Fields”, Belgium)
The First World War left a substantial mark on Belgium and Belgian history, on many
levels and in many different ways. Almost a century later, the material and immaterial
heritage of WW1 is most present in the Western corner of Belgium. There, trench
warfare raged for four years, which turned most of its population into refugees and
destroyed the entire region. After the war, even before the local population had returned
or reconstructed the region, an international visitor flow of pilgrims and battlefield
tourists emerged that continues to this day. Today the presence of the war heritage is
most notably visible through a myriad of monuments and cemeteries, of which those
from the (former) Commonwealth are predominant. This is largely reflected in the
provenance of the war tourists.
In this paper I will briefly look into the history of the official commemoration and of the
common remembrance and how they grew apart. I will then describe how in the last 30
years there has been a search for reconnecting the official and the common
remembrances, and how this process was partly made successful by a profoundly
altered view on the use of the material and immaterial culture of the war and of its
remembrance.
In the material cultural we look at objects, military and civilian, but also at the features in
the landscape (cemeteries, monuments, relics, sites of former battlefields and military
installations, visible above ground as well as archaeological, and also at the landscape
itself). In the immaterial culture we look at witness accounts, literature, music, oral
history. The introduction of “the war landscape” as an anthropological concept is crucial
for that new integral approach.
This approach proves to be very successful.
From the mid 1990s onwards new
museums, visitor attractions and events were created, making more or less consciously
- 18- 1
8
use of this approach. It created a renewed interest and visitor flow, larger than ever
before, with a huge economic impact on the entire region.
It seems strange that this success deepened an already present alienation between the
tourist and the local inhabitant. As we are challenged with even wider visitor numbers, in
the light of the centenary years 2014-2018, we must look back at the fundamental
meaning of the history of the war, its commemoration for the present communities of
“Flanders Fields” and those far beyond. I will put forward the thesis that a concept of
“Tourism Plus” and of “grass roots mobilisation” could result in a dynamic and integral
solution. At the core of this thesis is the concept of identity. We must understand and
address the importance of the history of WW1 for all layers of identification, from local to
universal, in a world where identities are crucial for the survival of its communities.
DIRK CALLEBAUT: ‘Cradles of European Culture’: a Culture 2007-2013
project that aims to join national and European
ambitions in the heart of Europe
The European Commission selected in 2010 the five year project ‘Cradles of European
Culture’ within the framework of the Culture 2007-2013 programme with a view to
promote the idea of Europe as a cultural space. The project aims to critically explore this
concept by using the territory of Francia Media during the period 850-1050 AD as the
underlying carrier of meaning and field of study. The middle part of the inheritance of
Charlemagne linked the Mediterranean with the North Sea as far as culture,
communication, technology and economy were concerned. Through its vitally important
north-south trade route it developed into the historical core of early medieval Europe.
The leitmotiv of the project is a heritage route that will run through the Netherlands,
Belgium,
France,
Italy,
Croatia,
Slovenia,
Slovakia,
Czechia,
Germany
and
Luxembourg. About 10 major heritage sites will be transformed into interpretation
centres. The selection of appropriate sites was based on the following criteria:
 the site has transnational significance and thus for European culture at large;
 at the site heritage will be scientifically studied and interpreted;
 accessing and presenting the sites will comply with the ICOMOS Charter for
the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites (in short: ICOMOS
Ename Charter).
In the Cradles of European Culture Project 20 heritage and scientific institutions,
universities and museums are co-operating. They have a unique opportunity to tell the
Story of Europe, combining scientific research and heritage presentation techniques, as
well as a Germanic, Latin and a Slavonic cultural point of view.
The ultimate challenge is to establish whether or not heritage is able to bring Europe
closer to the people!
- 19- 1
9
17.00
GENERAL DISCUSSION & SUMMARY OF THE SYMPOSIUM
17.30
PRESENTATION OF THE NEW EAC PUBLICATIONS
EAC occasional paper no. 4:
“Heritage Management of Farmed and Forested Landscapes in
Europe”
(edited by Stephen Trow, Vincent Holyoak and Emmet Byrnes)
EAC occasional paper no. 5:
“Remote Sensing for Archaeological Heritage Management”
(edited by David C. Cowley)
07.00 PM EXCURSION
Ename – visit of the Provincial Archaeological Museum, which deals with the
era from the Carolingian period till the 20th century, and the Ottonian Saint
Laurentius church. A walking dinner given by the EAC Board and Francia
Media East Flanders concludes the congress day in the Provinical Heritage
Centre.
- 20- 2
0
DAY THREE:
09.00-21.00:
SATURDAY 19 MARCH 2011
EXCURSION IN FLANDERS
The excursion relates to the congress themes of archaeology, identity formation and
war heritage.
We will visit the following locations:
Aalst: excavations of a late medieval quarter.
Kortrijk:
Museum Kortrijk 1302, an interactive and multimedia museum focusing
on the formation of myths about the Guldensporenslag (Battle of the
Spurs) on 11 July 1302, in which Flemish militias defeated an army of
French knights. The Flemish Community proclaimed the 11 July as the
official Flemish public holiday in 1973.
Diksmuide: trial trenching in the Belgian World War I frontline along the river IJzer.
Ieper (Ypres):
In Flanders Fields, an interactive and multimedia museum about
World War I. The permanent exhibition shows the events leading
up to the war, the devastation during the war years and the postwar
period.
We complete the excursion with the Last Post Ceremony under the Menenpoort
(Menin gate) in Ypres. Since 1928 the soldiers who fell in the Great War have been
honoured here at 08.00 p.m. sharp every evening (with the exception of the period
from 20 May 1940 till 6 September 1944).
- 21- 2
1
The Colloquium will be hosted in the Provincial Heritage Centre (Ename, Belgium),
recently built by the Government of the Province of East Flanders. The building is
situated in the medieval archaeological park on the banks of the River Scheldt.
Due to its archaeological, monumental and cultural landscape heritage the village of
Ename was awarded the European Heritage Label in 2007.
- 22- 2
2