Burning a Myth

On the present-day relevance of

historical land-use practices

Bert Groenewoudt

Cultural Heritage Agency

Ministry of Education, Culture and

Science

CHeriscape Conference II Amersfoort

November 5-7, 2014

1

CLAIM Landscape history is relevant

to understanding and managing present-day

landscapes

IS IT?

Ingram, Northumberland National Park

”Without understanding and acknowledging the extent to which (landscapes) have been influenced by humans, it is difficult to evaluate the possible impacts of climate change or establish sustainable land-management and conservation strategies.”

Largely related to changing land-use practices

Historical-botanical evidence demonstrates how and why

upland landscapes have changed

Historic Land-use Assessment (HLA) project Scotland

Over the last c.200 years, many upland landscapes have suffered a decline in biodiversity

Source: Davies & Dixon: reading the Pastoral Landscape

4

[European Aeolian Sand Belt

Woodland (management)

(Hilgers 2007)

5

Human interference, right from ‘the start’

hunters-gatherers

C. 10.000 BC Beginning of the Holocene

6

C. 5000 - 4000 BC

farming

7

‘Ancient woodland’

Speulder and Sprielderbos, the Netherlands

… turns out to be overgrown arable land

Groenewoudt 2012; Neefjes & Spek 2014

9

Sachsenwald, Schleswig-Holstein (Germany)

… ‘everywhere’

(Arnold 2011)

Former field systems

Consequences:

The traces of gully erosion in ‘ancient woodland’ throughout Western Europe are the result of earlier episodes of agriculture (Gullentops 1992;

Bork et al. 1998; Vanwalleghem et al. 2003, 2005).

In the higher Pleistocene sandy areas, deforestation rapidly caused soil degradation (Stockmarr 1975, 44; Spek 1996; see also Verheyen et al. 1999).

As a result, secondary forest is very different: less dense, fewer species

More open secondary forest landscape also accommodated new species. The rather prominent position of large herbivores was the result (Zeiler & Kooistra 1998; Louwe Kooijmans 2012) rather than the cause (Vera (1997) of these conditions.

(Groenewoudt & Spek in press.)

path-dependancy

11 (Spek 1993)

settlement and fields

Why?

Drenthe, Netherlands

woodland

‘outfields’ (periphery)

‘infields’ (centre) settlement

fields Pasture

woodland

(Slicher van Bath 1963, Christiansen 1978)

13

Settlements and fields moved: Reclamation resulting in a reversal of ‘centre’ and ‘periphery’ (Spek 2004)

Woodland regeneration in (new) periphery

Explanation

How do we know? How do we know?

1. Field systems and plough soils under woodland

15

How do we know?

2

16

1. Surface kiln (Platzmeiler)

2. Pit kiln (Grubenmeiler)

3. Langmeiler

(Lipsdorf 2001)

Charcoal

kilns/ hearths

charcoal production

Implies presence of

woodland

18 Gravenhorst, Niedersachsen (NNU 1999)

Presence and perimeter of former woodland

19

Rockingham Forest (UK)

Charcoal burning 13-14th C. .

(Bond 2007) (Foard 2001)

charcoal hearths

20

Data (The Netherlands) charcoal kiln sites C. 200 BC – AD 1400

Valetta archaeology ‘harvest’

21

Iron age plough soil

Zutphen-Looërenk (Bouwmeester et al. (ed.) 2008)

Charcoal kilns intersecting and therefore post-dating arable land

Karolingian Pit kiln

22

Lomm, phase 2 (Gerrets & de Leeuwe 2011)

Late prehistoric- Roman settlement

Younger charcoal kilns: 8th-13th C.

Woodland returns

23

Iron Age settlement

charcoal kilns: 1th C. BC and

10th-12th C. AD

Veldhoven-Zilverackers (Van der Veken 2012)

24

Prehistoric deforestation/reclamation/settlement

Zutphen-Looërenk

(Bouwmeester et al. (ed.) 2008)

25

Abandonment (C. 0 BC/AD)

woodland returns

26

Reforestation demonstrated by evidence of charcoal production (9th C.) followed by, once again, deforestation/reclamation (10th C.)

(Groenewoudt 2006; Groenewoudt & Groothedde 2008)

27

(former) heathland

(former) woodland

fields

(Groenewoudt 2005)

charcoal kilns

Cycles

28

BC 500 0 500 AD

Two phases of charcoal burning

2. AD 700 – 900

1. 200 BC – AD 200

settlement

29

• Woodland • Reclamation ------------- Middle Neolithic • Reafforestation (?) • Reclamation ------------- Iron Age • Reafforestation • ? ‘200-700 hiatus’ • Reclamation ------------- 18th C.

(Van Munster 2012)

Post-Roman population decline

Combined with (other) archaeological and soil information:

30

• settlements • fields • woodland O

N T

HE M

OVE

cf. ‘shifting mosaic’ model: Gimingham 1972

Data explain:

• Location of ‘ancient woodland’

• Fields under ancient woodland

• Soil degradation and erosion

• Composition and biodiversity of present-day woodland

Forests ‘always’ part of ever changing cultural landscapes

• Human influence is ‘natural’

• Awareness essential for social support

• Historic Land-use Assessment (HLA) essential