Exchanging Medieval Material Culture Studies on archaeology and ...

18
dries Tys
a project on the vectorisation and digitalisation of the historical
parcel structure of Bruges.
6 Archaeological legislation, management and
institutions
As soon as 1974 Frans Verhaeghe published his fi rst views on
the relation between the destruction of archaeological sites and
preventive and pro-active archaeology (supra). Th ese views look
very update still today. In between, many of the advises he formulated
in ’74 have become fact (for instance protection of sites
as archaeological monuments, the development of preventive
archaeological trajectories and the start of central databases and
inventories of archaeological sites). In Belgium, Frans Verhaeghe
played a central role in the coming about of legislation on
archaeological protection and management. Between 1985 and
1987, he was member of the National Governmental Commission
on Archaeological Legislation in Belgium. In 1987, the matter
became federalised, with the result that the legislative work had
to be redone on the regional level in Flanders, Brussels and
Wallony. Together with Professor Guy De Boe, director of the
Flemish Institute for the Archaeological Heritage (iap), Frans
prepared and wrote the fi rst legislation on archaeological management
in Flanders, on request of the ministers Waltniel, De
Batselier and Sauwens. Th e legislation was voted in June 1993
and published in September 1993. Th e legislation provided in
means of in-situ protection for sites and an instrumentarium to
start preventive ex-situ research. An archaeological council and
a permit system were to protect the quality of the archaeological
trajectories. Unfortunately the fi nancing system did not
survive the parliament. Th e most important in this legislation
was that it provided the principles for the archaeological management
in Flanders for the coming years, like the principle that
every one has the duty to protect the archaeological heritage in
his or her possession. In practice, this means that one has to
prove that one is not destroying heritage or sites when ground
works are carried out, which leads to the duty to carry out proactive
surveys and preventive excavations. What lacked in the
legislation was a covering system of fi nancing this preventive
archaeology and the means to guarantee post-excavation
research and means.
At the same time, Frans contributed also to the preparations
of the legislation for the Brussels region. One of the new institutions
that played a role in the archaeological management
was the Flemish Archaeological Council, which was presided
by Frans between 1995 and 2002. Frans was also member of
the Scientifi c Board and the Board of Directors of the iap
and of the central Committee of the (Flemish) Royal
Commission for Monuments and Landscapes (1993-2002).
Frans thus played a central role in archaeological research and
management in Flanders at the end of the 20th century.
He protected the scientifi c profi le of the iap and instigated
large-scale scientifi c projects in Raversyde and elsewhere.
25 E-mail Dave Evans to Dries Tys, 4 January 2010.
Recently, Frans has been member of the Scientifi c Board of
the Institut National de Recherches Archéologiques Préventives
(inrap) of France.
7 The communication and dispersion of ideas
and thoughts
Very important to Frans was the communication of ideas,
results and thoughts. We already mentioned the nearly 200
publications and the equal number of conference contributions.
Frans has been redaction member of International
Archaeological Journals like Post-<strong>Medieval</strong> Archaeology, Archéologie
Médiévale and the new journal <strong>Medieval</strong> and Modern
Matters. In Belgium and the Netherlands he was also redaction
member of Helinium, Corpus Middeleeuws Aardewerk, Natuur
en Techniek and Archeologie, in which he wrote innumerable
notes on medieval sites and archaeology in Flanders, reviews
of international literature and theoretical and methodological
issues and thoughts. Frans has also been interested by public
archaeology and has participated in the design of projects like
archeon in Th e Netherlands and the museums of Ename and
Walraversyde in Belgium, where he regarded archaeological
museums as experiments of Refl exive Archaeology, where ideas
interact with the public.
Frans was also the co-organiser of no less than 22 international
conferences and contributed to the success of a.o.
the mprg conferences, the Lübecker Kolloquium zur Stadtarchaeologie
im Hanseraum and the International <strong>Medieval</strong>
Congress in Leeds, but most of all he is renowned for his
organizing skills of the <strong>Medieval</strong> Europe Conference in Bruges
in 1997. Dave Evans testifi es25:
As a ceramic researcher, one of the best conferences which I ever
attended was the 1984 Bergen op Zoom mprg conference, which
Frans and others organised. Spanning two countries, and various
excursions, it was a model of conference organisation – and one
where I learnt a huge amount about Low Countries medieval pottery
production and usage. But, not only was it a success in terms
of its academic content, and the precision of its organisation: it was
also an amazing success in terms of the social life and social networking
which complemented the daytime lecture programme. It
provided a yardstick by which to judge later conferences – and
many of its successors were found wanting. Frans was to show here
early promise of what later became readily apparent at the 1997
Brugge <strong>Medieval</strong> Europe conference – that he had a real fl air for
organising highly successful conferences.
And Bruges was successful. Not only because Frans Verhaeghe
succeeded in publishing together with Guy De Boe no less than
12 conference volumes with heavy status quaestiones chapters at
the start of the conference! It was the summum of the new discipline
called <strong>Medieval</strong> Archaeology up to that moment, a discipline
of which Frans Verhaeghe had been a close witness of