29
Kuipers
Traditional Tools for Recording Recent Heritage
y J.A. Brinkman and
m before restoration,
oved and replaced by
4
f J.A. Brinkman and
r the refinement and
)ers, February 1996)
: Van Nelle complex
lain characteristics of
list's point of view
factory street, main
member 1999)
' the individual buil-
Nelle complex with
ues and future deve-
ae (to be conserved
ite value (additions
ons in exterior and
cular historical value
ire removal allowed)
999)
4. DOCUMENTING WAR-TIME HERITAGE
After this long introduction, referring to some activities I was involved with since 1997, I come to my main topic - about
documenting war-time heritage - for which my initial title was ‘spotting secret structures’. By now, the already mentioned
Monuments Inventory Project (MIP) has been completed. So, in the Netherlands the majority of the so-called ‘younger’ heritage
(1850-1940) has been spotted and roughly documented in a computarized database with separate hard-copy images and hundreds of
reports and thousands of completed forms. Also the succeeding Monuments Selection Project (MSP), which dealt with the selection
of the younger monuments and sites to be protetcted by state, is now almost finished, leading to an augmentation of about 10,000 to
the already 40,000 protected historic buildings and about 150 newly assigned conservation areas (to 350).
Partly, one category had been overlooked: the military structures of the mid-twentieth century. One reason was that they were not
easily accessible or visible, another reason was that military structures which still serve military purposes are regarded as ‘secret
places’ to be just known to a small incrowd. Moreover, there was the political reason that most war-time heritage was - and still is -
very sensitive.
When we defined, in the ‘80s, the last time limit of the MIP to the year 1940, we did not only take into account the 50 years rule of
our Monuments Act, but also the interruption of the Second World War. The five years of occupation caused such a trauma that it still
has a tremendous impact on the Dutch preservation policy: with regard to the war-time heritage existed a deeply rooted disapproval.
Yet, the attitude is changing, thanks to the involvement of a younger generation of researchers and a greater distance in time. Just as
the Napoleonic structures before, the dissonant heritage of the German occupation during World War II is now under study from a
preservationist’s point of view.
During the war, a building stop had been imposed for civic purposes, but many military buildings had been realised, in particular the
so-called Atlantikwall along the North seacoast, consisting of thousands of pillboxes and other structures, as well as dozens of
accommodations on the captured airfields. The remaining bunkers, partly hidden in the dunes, have fascinated the babyboom
generation at a very early stage as forbidden playing places. Later on, a new interest arose - first from biologists, because of special
animals and plants had settled in and on these abandoned structures. Just very recently, a historical interest is growing, both from
amateurs and professionals who discovered a new field for study and preservation campaigns. Today, the war-time heritage of 1940-
1945 is more and more at risk but also problematic because of both its large quantity and doubtful quality, not to speak of its
controversial ideology. Most pillboxes are now out of use and mostly in non-military hands, while the airbases of the ‘40s are still
used by the Royal Dutch Airforces, including the war-time buildings, but soon will be altered, abandoned or demolished, due to
radical plans of reorganisation and the new political situation in Europe.
KENMERKENOE ELEMENTEN EN PATRONEN IN DE KUSTZONE
KA7WUK IJMUIDEN & BOLLENSTREEK
buiienplootsen
bijzondore verkovelingopatronen
Atlantikwall
dijken on koden
kerkepad
tankgracht
zanderijvaarten/infmratiekanalen
dorpen
gemaai
kastQol(ruTnes)
kilometer
Fig. 8: Cultural Historic Value map of the coastal zone between
Katwijk and IJmuiden, including both ruins of castles, historic parks,
water structures, and the Atlantik wall (purple line) (Map: Landview,
1999)
Although the need of objective documentation is
obvious, both for planning and preservation policies,
there is hardly any budget available and so we have to
collaborate with volunteers. Therefore, the Netherlands
Department for Conservation (NDC) has initiated both
the Atlantifox’all Inventory Project in cooperation with
the historic society Menno van Coehoorn and
representatives of the former MIP/MSP teams, and the
Quick Scan Project concerning the military airbases
with the support of the Ministry of Defence and civic
partners. In both cases ‘traditional’ methods of
documenting are preferred, because of financial and
political reasons and our reports have a restricted public.
Especially for the air bases the question is not only how
to document partly hidden heritage but also how to hide
partly the documentation for too curious eyes. On the
other hand, it is very important that the available
historic information will be implemented as soon as
possible within the actual planological measures, be
cause there is an extreme pressure of land development
and building activities. For this purpose, the provinces
have developed, each on its own, the unoffical
instrument of the Cultural Historic Value Map, indi
cating valuable areas which should be respected in the
near future, including also the relicts of the Atlantikwall.
5. ATLANTIKWALL INVENTORY PROJECT
Immediately after their invasion, the German troops
began to build up a permanent defence line along the
Western European coast, which was originally called
the Neue Westwall and from 1942 on was transformed
into the Atlantikwall. The incredibly long Perlenschnur
(pearl chain) consisted of an immense series of separate
reinforcements in one line, built according to a strict
hierarchical order and using a high degree of standar
dization for which the Organisation Todt was respon
sible.
